What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Jordan's Bulls vs the Warriors of the past 3 years (1 Viewer)

Galileo said:
And they all put up around 30 per game.  You honestly think Jordan is 15-20 per game better than these guys?
Click to expand...
Jordan played 11 full seasons with the Bulls and won the scoring title in 10 of them.  He was in the low 30s in an era designed for centers to dominate scoring and a lot less freedom of movement.  I wouldn't be so bold to say Jordan would average 45-50, but averaging high 30s with occasional outbursts approaching 50 wouldn't be out of the question.

The difficult thing to project is if Jordan would have been a good 3PT volume shooter since he played in an era when teams didn't shoot many.  Steph Curry pretty much shot as many threes the last two seasons as Jordan did his entire Bulls career.

 
STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:
Like most, I usually choose to ignore you. But you keep responding so I get to keep owning you. 
Click to expand...
You usually choose to ignore me but you just said you've been paying attention to my posts for 10 years. So not only is your reading comp poor but you aren't exactly an analytical kind of guy either. Sad. 

Ps, Jordan would still be amazing in this era. 

 
I said this in the NBA thread and I will repeat it here.  Jordan put up crazy numbers during a time where defenders were allowed to harass offensive players far more than today, even the intensity of how hard the fouls were back then were exponentially greater than that of today,  there were far more defensive oriented teams in the league back then than there are today--and the league was filled with far more rim protecting big men than there are today.   Jordan was getting to the rim in keys that are far more congested than they are today.   Jordan would absolutely beast in if he was in his prime playing in the NBA today. 

Today's NBA rule changes has led to changes in the actual game.  The game has essentially phased out big men that occupy space in the key and has went to a style that favors stretch 4's and 5's.  This is why today's NBA is essentially layups and 3 pointers on offense.  The stretch 4's and 5's also pull their defenders away from the basket--and current hand checking and foul rules give offensive ball handlers an advantage over their defenders.   These changes to the game have clearly benefited a player like Steph--and I do think that his game would suffer if he were to play back when the rules weren't so advantageous to his game.  I also think that defensive minded players like Pippen and Rodman could bother KD's game if allowed to play with the physicality of the rules back then.  This is why the answer is dependent on which era the game was played--and what the rules are.  The notion that modern day teams would beat teams from previous eras based solely on athleticism alone is ridiculous.  Basketball is a sport were the victor is largely dependent on chemistry, playing intelligently and how one teams playing style matches up against anothers. While athleticism might be one small factor--it certainly is not a major factor here.  Curry and Klay are not superior world class athletes--but they are both damn good basketball players.   If I had choose a winner--I'd go with the Bulls.  I think that Phili Jackson would come up with ways to run the Warriors off of the 3pt line and force them to try to beat them with 2's playing a more physical brand of basketball.  I think this style would favor the Bulls slightly.  However, if the parameters are that they play today with todays softer rules--I could very well understand how many would pick the Warriors to win because they were essentially constructed for today's NBA style.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Premier said:
The steph curry would struggle to be an all-star in the 90s shtick is my favorite. :lmao:  Terry Porter made multiple all-star teams in the 90s. 

Some of you dorks really need to get over your childhood. Jordan was amazing but the NBA in the 90s kinda sucked. The league is so much better now. 
Click to expand...
Yeah, two "super" teams sure is great 

 
Premier said:
You usually choose to ignore me but you just said you've been paying attention to my posts for 10 years. So not only is your reading comp poor but you aren't exactly an analytical kind of guy either. Sad. 

Ps, Jordan would still be amazing in this era. 
Click to expand...
Link to me saying I've been paying attention to you for 10 years? 

Have another Twinkie. 

 
jvdesigns2002 said:
I said this in the NBA thread and I will repeat it here.  Jordan put up crazy numbers during a time where defenders were allowed to harass offensive players far more than today, even the intensity of how hard the fouls were back then were exponentially greater than that of today,  there were far more defensive oriented teams in the league back then than there are today--and the league was filled with far more rim protecting big men than there are today.   Jordan was getting to the rim in keys that are far more congested than they are today.   Jordan would absolutely beast in if he was in his prime playing in the NBA today. 

Today's NBA rule changes has led to changes in the actual game.  The game has essentially phased out big men that occupy space in the key and has went to a style that favors stretch 4's and 5's.  This is why today's NBA is essentially layups and 3 pointers on offense.  The stretch 4's and 5's also pull their defenders away from the basket--and current hand checking and foul rules give offensive ball handlers an advantage over their defenders.   These changes to the game have clearly benefited a player like Steph--and I do think that his game would suffer if he were to play back when the rules weren't so advantageous to his game.  I also think that defensive minded players like Pippen and Rodman could bother KD's game if allowed to play with the physicality of the rules back then.  This is why the answer is dependent on which era the game was played--and what the rules are.  The notion that modern day teams would beat teams from previous eras based solely on athleticism alone is ridiculous.  Basketball is a sport were the victor is largely dependent on chemistry, playing intelligently and how one teams playing style matches up against anothers. While athleticism might be one small factor--it certainly is not a major factor here.  Curry and Klay are not superior world class athletes--but they are both damn good basketball players.   If I had choose a winner--I'd go with the Bulls.  I think that Phili Jackson would come up with ways to run the Warriors off of the 3pt line and force them to try to beat them with 2's playing a more physical brand of basketball.  I think this style would favor the Bulls slightly.  However, if the parameters are that they play today with todays softer rules--I could very well understand how many would pick the Warriors to win because they were essentially constructed for today's NBA style.  
Click to expand...
Very well stated.  I've often felt that Kawhi is basically what Pippen would've been if given his own team.  

Related question: what happens to Olajuwon placed in today's game?  

 
Premier said:
The steph curry would struggle to be an all-star in the 90s shtick is my favorite. :lmao:  Terry Porter made multiple all-star teams in the 90s. 

Some of you dorks really need to get over your childhood. Jordan was amazing but the NBA in the 90s kinda sucked. The league is so much better now. 
Click to expand...
I watched a LOT of Timberwolves basketball in the 1990s.  Steph Curry would have had many 30-point nights against the lower half of the league then.  But we can't assume he'd be playing with a bunch of other offensive juggernauts all moving around with the goal of getting an open three-pointer.  I also question Curry's output would be the same during those whistle-swallowing playoff games of the era given how much he cries and moans if someone breathes on him hard.  He also strikes me as a guy who can't take what he dishes out, so I could imagine him having the occasional 6-for-23 night when Payton or Blaylock start talking trash at him when he gets off the bus at the arena and never stop.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
I watched a LOT of Timberwolves basketball in the 1990s.  Steph Curry would have had many 30-point nights against the lower half of the league then.  But we can't assume he'd be playing with a bunch of other offensive juggernauts all moving around with the goal of getting an open three-pointer.  I also question Curry's output would be the same during those whistle-swallowing playoff games of the era given how much he cries and moans if someone breathes on him hard.  He also strikes me as a guy who can't take what he dishes out, so I could imagine him having the occasional 6-for-23 night when Payton or Blaylock start talking trash at him when he gets off the bus at the arena and never stop.
Click to expand...
The guy who was born about twelve years too early, who would have thrived in a much less contact era, is Vince Carter 

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
I watched a LOT of Timberwolves basketball in the 1990s.  Steph Curry would have had many 30-point nights against the lower half of the league then.  But we can't assume he'd be playing with a bunch of other offensive juggernauts all moving around with the goal of getting an open three-pointer.  I also question Curry's output would be the same during those whistle-swallowing playoff games of the era given how much he cries and moans if someone breathes on him hard.  He also strikes me as a guy who can't take what he dishes out, so I could imagine him having the occasional 6-for-23 night when Payton or Blaylock start talking trash at him when he gets off the bus at the arena and never stop.
Click to expand...
Different league then so he wouldn't be the same player, but his range would play in any era imo. 

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
I watched a LOT of Timberwolves basketball in the 1990s.  Steph Curry would have had many 30-point nights against the lower half of the league then.  But we can't assume he'd be playing with a bunch of other offensive juggernauts all moving around with the goal of getting an open three-pointer.  I also question Curry's output would be the same during those whistle-swallowing playoff games of the era given how much he cries and moans if someone breathes on him hard.  He also strikes me as a guy who can't take what he dishes out, so I could imagine him having the occasional 6-for-23 night when Payton or Blaylock start talking trash at him when he gets off the bus at the arena and never stop.
Click to expand...
Skimmed this post and at first I thought it was about your mom.

 
Protocols of Stringer Bell said:
Very well stated.  I've often felt that Kawhi is basically what Pippen would've been if given his own team.  

Related question: what happens to Olajuwon placed in today's game?  
Click to expand...
Thank you for the compliment.  If Olajuwon was playing in his prime today--I personally think the dude could be an efficient triple double threat--along with probably being in the top 3 in the league in block per game---and possibly top 10-15 in steals per game.  For a big man--he was pretty swift and had some of the best footwork that I have ever seen. In todays era--where the best defensive big man might be Gobert--I see no opposing player really giving him a hard time on offense.  I could seriously see him easily averaging  or exceeding. 22+ pts, 10+ rebounds, 5-7 assists, 2-3 blocks, and 1.5 steals per game.  I also think that he could easily surpass that if he was the only great player on a team (similar to how Westbrook has it in OKC).  

 
shader said:
Jordan had a higher fg% than Curry.  What does the "ultimate superstar treatment" mean?

My guess is that the ones arguing against Jordan were all 5 or 6 (or younger) when he retired and honestly have no idea what they are talking about.

The idea that the modern basketball player is somehow more evolved and explosive than the basketball player from the 1990s is absurd.
Click to expand...
Jordan was 28% from three when the line wasn't moved in.  He wouldn't fit into today's evolved game where you can have your stiffs stand at the arc and the defenders were forced to stay a zone away.  I was 32 when he retired so you can blow that guess out your ###.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
Jordan played 11 full seasons with the Bulls and won the scoring title in 10 of them.  He was in the low 30s in an era designed for centers to dominate scoring and a lot less freedom of movement.  I wouldn't be so bold to say Jordan would average 45-50, but averaging high 30s with occasional outbursts approaching 50 wouldn't be out of the question.

The difficult thing to project is if Jordan would have been a good 3PT volume shooter since he played in an era when teams didn't shoot many.  Steph Curry pretty much shot as many threes the last two seasons as Jordan did his entire Bulls career.
Click to expand...
The lack of movement was because teams could occupy the help by standing.  It helped the offense to isolate a dominate guard just as easily as a dominant post.

Jordan was horrible from 3.  28% behind todays line.

 
Short Corner said:
The lack of movement was because teams could occupy the help by standing.  It helped the offense to isolate a dominate guard just as easily as a dominant post.

Jordan was horrible from 3.  28% behind todays line.
Click to expand...
Yeah.  Except in the finals he was 37% from behind the arc. 

 
Unless the Bulls are the ones time-traveling, and you give them at least two or three years of prep time to take advantage of developments in the game, the Warriors sweep and win each game by at least 20.

 
Here's an idea for those who think the Bulls could possibly win:

We have several sports in which the results are quantifiable.  Pick one where there's been no major rule change that would inhibit performance, compare the average performance of the top 100 or so athletes in 1996 to the current day, and lemme know what you find.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Here's an idea for those who think the Bulls could possibly win:

We have several sports in which the results are quantifiable.  Pick one where there's been no major rule change that would inhibit performance, compare the average performance of the top 100 or so athletes in 1996 to the current day, and lemme know what you find.
Click to expand...
I found the Bulls would still win.

 
I found all of this information in the IPvsIP stat line.

In general, in the Imaginary Past versus Imaginary Present competitions, the Imaginary Past players and teams always come out on top.

The metric is a little complicated so I won't bother trying to explain.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Unless the Bulls are the ones time-traveling, and you give them at least two or three years of prep time to take advantage of developments in the game, the Warriors sweep and win each game by at least 20.
Click to expand...
The goal posts keep moving in this thread, but let's assume the bolded (say, Jordan came out in '04 instead of '84 and the rest of that team went pro respectively). Who wins?

 
Like others have said, the rules are the defining factor here. The Bulls had 3 of the top 20 defenders of all time. Jordan on Curry, Pippen on Klay and Rodman on Durant would be an epic matching of great fire power vs. great defenders. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
Here's an idea for those who think the Bulls could possibly win:

We have several sports in which the results are quantifiable.  Pick one where there's been no major rule change that would inhibit performance, compare the average performance of the top 100 or so athletes in 1996 to the current day, and lemme know what you find.
Click to expand...
Here was a really cool Ted talk on this exact subject.  It's kind of an argument for both sides

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger/transcript

 
Short Corner said:
The lack of movement was because teams could occupy the help by standing.  It helped the offense to isolate a dominate guard just as easily as a dominant post.

Jordan was horrible from 3.  28% behind todays line.
Click to expand...
And yet Jordan didn't play in an offense that did that.  At least 80% of the time, at least 80% of the teams ran a two-man game on one side of the court with the other three standing still as far away as the illegal defense rules of the time let them.  But once Jackson and Winter took over at CHI, they installed the triangle offense with a lot of movement and improvisation.  It worked because of the personnel they had, but they were running stuff hardly any other teams were.

There was a time when Jordan held the record for most three-pointers made in an NBA Finals game.  Had Jordan grown up in an era where the three-point line was standard would he have been better at shooting them since he would have practiced them more, or was it a genuine weakness?

 
Uruk-Hai said:
The goal posts keep moving in this thread, but let's assume the bolded (say, Jordan came out in '04 instead of '84 and the rest of that team went pro respectively). Who wins?
Click to expand...
Dunno enough about styles and officiating changes and whatnot, but in a simplified analysis I'd still say the Warriors. The teams are about equal in terms of their ability relative to the average NBA team, but the Warriors are dominating a league with a much larger talent pool given all the international entries and the longer careers due to early entry and medical improvements and whatnot.

 
Protocols of Stringer Bell said:
Here was a really cool Ted talk on this exact subject.  It's kind of an argument for both sides

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger/transcript
Click to expand...
Good stuff.

Improvements in peak performance are only one of three reasons I think modern teams would bury teams from 20 years ago. The second is talent pool like I said above. The third is that there are many more opportunities for innovation in a complex team sport than in a simple sport like track or swimming where's there's only so much you can do in terms of strategy or technique.

 
Warriors might have a chance if it was Mini-Jordan.

Full-size Jordan in a sweep.  The man had a ruthlessness and a drive to win that is simply not present in today's athletes.  He would have found a way.  And if the Bulls were losing at halftime, he probably would have choked Kerr, so Warriors have no coach...

 
There's a pretty good player to look at if you want to see what S.Curry would have looked like in the 90s.  His dad.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yo Mama
2024 NBA Playoffs Contest!!!!!
2 3
Replies
113
Views
1K
Gally
G
Senor Schmutzig
Chicago Winter Sports Trifecta Coming Up! - Help wanted
Replies
2
Views
278
Senor Schmutzig
Senor Schmutzig
Yo Mama
NBA 2023-2024 In-Season Tournament Challenge - Yo Mama Said Knock You Out!
2 3 4
Replies
186
Views
4K
Yo Mama
Yo Mama

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top