Can the 96 Bulls beat 19 Warriors in a 7-game series?

Same answer as before, and always:

90's Rules: Bulls
10's Rules: Warriors
 
3>2 is a product of rule changes, and a different culture, generally speaking, in the NBA. It's not as if no one figured out how to shoot trays by the 90's; it was simply just a less efficient way to score.

Even still, team ball > iso ball. The Warriors, who have good ball movement, movement without the ball, and chemistry, are the exception in today's league.

Hardly anybody could shoot 3's back in the 90's. These days you can't even get on the court if you can't shoot. The level of shooting skill in the league today is so far beyond the 90's. The game evolved. And you are right it is a totally different basketball culture.
 
I think it goes 7 - Jordan’s easily the best player in the series and the Warriors have never seen 3 defenders like MJ, Scottie, and the Worm. Unfortunately GS probably wins due to 3’s, it just boils down to math. If they played with no 3 point line the Bulls sweep

I like this answer. I think the Bulls win because they are the best defensive team ever and can really guard the perimeter, but you have a point.
 
In order for this to be a fair comparison, you'd have to take the bulls best season (72 wins), and then have the previous season's MVP join them, which was the Spurs' David Robinson.

Then, you need to give the Bulls the equivalent of Demarcus Cousins. Which, for this argument, I think Dominique Wilkins is a good fit. Demarcus Cousins is ranked as the 23rd best player in 2017, and Dominique Wilkins was ranked as the 29th best player of the 90's. Now you can argue those rankings if you want, but they are close enough for our purposes. What we're comparing are 2 pretty damn good players who have both torn their achilles, and will not be as good as they were, but will still be pretty damn good.

So yeah. 96 Bulls with David Robinson and post-achilles Dominique Wilkins vs. the 2019 Warriors. I think the Bulls take it.

source for ranks:
https://www.si.com/nba/2017/09/13/top-100-nba-players-2018-kyrie-irving-john-wall-damian-lillard
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1342439-legends-of-the-nba-25-best-players-of-the-90s#slide1
 
They “almost wilted” by going 4-2 against the second best player of all time along with Kyrie?

They wilted by taking that same player to game 7 and not losing until the very last moment?

They dodged a bullet by Chris Paul being out, but “they wilted” with Draymond missing time?

Maybe give them some credit for the caliber of opponents theyre racking up championships against? Or do you think the Bulls did it against similar competition every year?

Golden State has shown vulnerability, and that Bulls team never did. They are the best team of all time, in all sports, and it’s not even close. The GOAT player period, the GOAT perimeter defender and the GOAT defender period, all in one team.

And they did beat really great teams, as listed in the post above.

If the 73 win team had won the title, with the addition of Kevin Durant afterwards, maybe this would be a discussion, but it’s really not at this point. If Golden State wins this year, then we can talk about dinasty.
 
This statement would be relevant if they played against the same teams during the same era.

That's the only way to somehow compare: within their respective contexts. Otherwise, you can't even discuss.
 
In order for this to be a fair comparison, you'd have to take the bulls best season (72 wins), and then have the previous season's MVP join them, which was the Spurs' David Robinson.

Then, you need to give the Bulls the equivalent of Demarcus Cousins. Which, for this argument, I think Dominique Wilkins is a good fit. Demarcus Cousins is ranked as the 23rd best player in 2017, and Dominique Wilkins was ranked as the 29th best player of the 90's. Now you can argue those rankings if you want, but they are close enough for our purposes. What we're comparing are 2 pretty damn good players who have both torn their achilles, and will not be as good as they were, but will still be pretty damn good.

So yeah. 96 Bulls with David Robinson and post-achilles Dominique Wilkins vs. the 2019 Warriors. I think the Bulls take it.

source for ranks:
https://www.si.com/nba/2017/09/13/top-100-nba-players-2018-kyrie-irving-john-wall-damian-lillard
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1342439-legends-of-the-nba-25-best-players-of-the-90s#slide1
That’s kind of beautiful, but I said in a previous thread that the Bulls might could win one game. That’s before Cousins. But just the Jordan nut huggers will say anything
 
Can the 96 Bulls beat 19 Warriors in a 7-game series?

Warriors when healthy would sweep Jordan and his boys imo.

YES In 6 games as would the great 86 Cetls beat the Warriors. Magic's best teams would win too. 1986 Celts were the best team in single season history
 
That's the only way to somehow compare: within their respective contexts. Otherwise, you can't even discuss.

Yes you can. You look at each player's individual skill set and come to a conclusion. For example Ron Harper was a good defender, long limbs... I think he would be able to shut Curry down. MJ was unstoppable on offense, I don't think Clay would be able to slow him down etc etc. Illustrating how the Warriors fared against the Rockets last season would be a pointless endeavor
 
Yes you can. You look at each player's individual skill set and come to a conclusion. For example Ron Harper was a good defender, long limbs... I think he would be able to shut Curry down. MJ was unstoppable on offense, I don't think Clay would be able to slow him down etc etc. Illustrating how the Warriors fared against the Rockets last season would be a pointless endeavor
So let’s do this and make all the Bulls sound great and the Warriors sound sub par.
 
The Bulls lost 2 games that year to the Pacers who lead by Reggie Miller. And the 98 Bulls were taken 7 games by the Pacers. So we have something to go by Pacers were a bad match-up for them. Only team to give them trouble. The Warriors are the Pacers on steroids.
 
The Bulls lost 2 games that year to the Pacers who lead by Reggie Miller. And the 98 Bulls were taken 7 games by the Pacers. So we have something to go by Pacers were a bad match-up for them. Only team to give them trouble. The Warriors are the Pacers on steroids.

The '98 Bulls were one of the weakest championship Bulls team. The last of their great championship runs.

I will grant you that Indiana was one of the few teams that gave the Bulls more problems in the 2nd trio of championships run. They didn't meet in the playoffs in 96 or 97 but in the regular season Indiana faced off against the Bulls 4 times (win 2 lost 2) but the following year they got swept by the Bulls 0-4. Pacers were more successful compared to others in playing with the Bulls in that era but that just means they won a bit more but still lost overall. There are no versions of Reggie Miller's Pacers that can beat the best Bulls team.
 
Last edited:
Bulls amazing defenders struggled to shut down Miller but itt they shut down klay and curry and Durant easily lol

They wouldn’t know how to guard the 3 point line. Kerr would outcoach his old team and himself. Would be epic
 
Bulls amazing defenders struggled to shut down Miller but itt they shut down klay and curry and Durant easily lol

They wouldn’t know how to guard the 3 point line. Kerr would outcoach his old team and himself. Would be epic

LOL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997–98_Chicago_Bulls_season

Check the playoffs stats yourself. Reggie Miller was great but not even close to unstoppable - pedestrian at times considering his superstar status. He never outdid Jordan in any of those games. So I am not sure what you are smokin' about the Bulls not being able to handle Reggie Miller...
 
Known Degenerate and big dick pip would bully the hell out of Staph and Ranch lmao. Klay would have to drop 60 a couple of games for them to win lmao
 
Golden State has shown vulnerability, and that Bulls team never did. They are the best team of all time, in all sports, and it’s not even close. The GOAT player period, the GOAT perimeter defender and the GOAT defender period, all in one team.

And they did beat really great teams, as listed in the post above.

If the 73 win team had won the title, with the addition of Kevin Durant afterwards, maybe this would be a discussion, but it’s really not at this point. If Golden State wins this year, then we can talk about dinasty.

You make it sound like the Bulls were unbeatable. The pistons beat the hell out of them until they got over the bump. The Knicks would have beat them had Starks not gone cold. Indiana took them to 7 games. Heat took them to 7. The Sonics took them to 6 with an injured Payton. The Bulls were not close to as dominate in the playoffs as the Warriors. 2000 and 2001 Lakers teams probably were more dominating than even the warriors come playoffs.
 
You make it sound like the Bulls were unbeatable. The pistons beat the hell out of them until they got over the bump. The Knicks would have beat them had Starks not gone cold. Indiana took them to 7 games. Heat took them to 7. The Sonics took them to 6 with an injured Payton. The Bulls were not close to as dominate in the playoffs as the Warriors. 2000 and 2001 Lakers teams probably were more dominating than even the warriors come playoffs.

We are talking about specific teams in specific years here. 96 Bulls x 19 warriors. I mentioned the 73 win team because they broke the bulls record, but their strongest team will be the 2019 team. Let’s see if they win it all like we think they will.

But those East teams were very strong and tough, more than anything the Warriors have been facing. The 2000s Lakers actually might be better than these Warriors, I agree.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top