Incessant media comparisons between '16 GSW and '96 CHI
Comments
-
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
The Bulls never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. The Warriors would be a bigger shock to the Bulls' than the Bulls would be to the Warriors.greenblood said:
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
dnc said:
The Bulls never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. The Warriors would be a bigger shock to the Bulls' than the Bulls would be to the Warriors.greenblood said:
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
Fine, Jordan and Pippen never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. And if you think Big Smoove had Curry/Thompson range I can't help you.RaceBannon said:dnc said:
The Bulls never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. The Warriors would be a bigger shock to the Bulls' than the Bulls would be to the Warriors.greenblood said:
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
Sounds like you're back tracking. Which story do you want to stick with?dnc said:
Fine, Jordan and Pippen never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. And if you think Big Smoove had Curry/Thompson range I can't help you.RaceBannon said:dnc said:
The Bulls never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. The Warriors would be a bigger shock to the Bulls' than the Bulls would be to the Warriors.greenblood said:
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
The Bulls had three of the greatest defenders of all-time in Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman. Ron Harper was no slouch defensively either.dnc said:
The Bulls never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. The Warriors would be a bigger shock to the Bulls' than the Bulls would be to the Warriors.greenblood said:
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
They would be just fine beyond 25 feet.
-
IMO the difference between the two teams is the same argument I would use on any NBA basketball game.
Whoever #23 is on, that is the team I am taking.
It would be fascinating to watch Jordan on Curry and Pippen on Thompson.
Granted the bulls wouldn't be allowed to hand check and be physical on D versus the Warriors, but can you imagine what MJ could do into league offensively not being able to d up on him.
What would he avg. under today's rules per game? Over under would be 37. -
The 96 Bulls won the title and the Warriors haven't won it this year. I'm right.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
-
Warriors would beat da BullsRaceBannon said:
Sounds like you're back tracking. Which story do you want to stick with?dnc said:
Fine, Jordan and Pippen never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. And if you think Big Smoove had Curry/Thompson range I can't help you.RaceBannon said:dnc said:
The Bulls never had to guard anybody 25 feet from the rim. The Warriors would be a bigger shock to the Bulls' than the Bulls would be to the Warriors.greenblood said:
Matchups matter. I think the physicality of the 1996 Bulls in their era would cause major problems for a smaller team like Golden State. Under today's rules, the Bulls couldn't get away with that kind of play.dnc said:
They're being compared to the 96 Bulls, not the entire Bulls dynasty. No question GS needs at least three more titles before you can even think of comparing dynasties. But comparing one season to one Bulls season is fine. And this team would beat the 96 Sonics, even with 96 rules. Which means they'd take the Bulks to 7 at the very least. I think they'd beat them.PurpleJ said:It's a stupid debate until Golden State wins a few more titles. Go compare the Bulls to someone who's won like they have already. Like LA or the Celtics. Not saying I don't think Golden State can get there but it's a stupid comparison at this time.
Nuff said
