Remove this Banner Ad

Unstoppable moves

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Andre Miller's full court ally-oop lobs to Melo...
Anything MJ does
The Ron Artest brawl
Jermaine O Neal's finishing slider punch of DOOM
Dwayne Wade doing a 1-2 punch with the referees

Impossible to stop...
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

diablo14 said:
gimme a break man, those sides i mentioned had at least 4 all stars at all times, and minimum 2 HOF's.
Click to expand...

I fail to see the problem Crow-mo.

I asked him to name the 4, per side, at all times throughout the decade - he didn't.

You came gallivanting in like a wispy little school girl on her first day of ballet claiming I got pwned, explain how.
 
Because you're focusing on a trivial issue and taking it literally instead of looking at the bigger picture.
 
Thewlis Dish said:
Because you're focusing on a trivial issue and taking it literally instead of looking at the bigger picture.
Click to expand...

ill be honest and say that i have got it wrong on two counts. i should not have said at ALL times. one, the pistons had only 3 all stars for most of the first half of the 80's, but when they were a genuine contender had 4, and sometimes five. two, the rockets had as few as two all stars and as many as five during the 80's. actually the rockets had more allstars on their roster in 1988 (5)when they lost in the first round, than they did when they made the NBA finals in 1986 (2).

having overstated slightly, after doing a bit of follow up research, i have decided that in relation to RJ's original premise i shall do a more in depth look at various teams from the 80's and compare their strength to various teams of the 90's.

what im going to be looking at is all star games and awards won by players during their careers and during their times with the clubs in question relative to the periods discussed. i'll also be looking at their relative impacts in seasons they were at the club. for example bob mcadoo played allstar ball in the 70's and was an MVP. He played for the pistons before isiah arrived (when we totally stank), went to the lakers an was a pivotal member of a title there, but then also played a handful of games for the celtics, with minimum impact, during a year they made the finals.

the other thing ill be looking at is the michael influence. take a player like bj armstrong, who was an allstar in his time in chicago, then went to other less succesful teams supposedly at the height of his powers and did not improve his game to any great extent. whereas when michael retired scottie pippen raised his game to another level. the reverse of that is a guy like mark aguirre, who was a 20+ ppg player at dallas, but averaged less after we traded for him as he accepted a lesser role in the team in order to get a ring.

admittedly i think RJ is trying to say i was inferring they had four allstars IN THE ACTUAL GAME each year, which is not what i was saying. however i was still wrong about the ALL TIMES bit as has been showed above. this is why im going to break it down as much as i can, so people can make a decision on my original challenge that the competition was tougher in the 80's than the 90's.
 
rick James said:
Oh that old chestnut... I disagree.

New York, Utah, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio and Orlando during the 90's were easily the match of the sides in the 80's.

Take the Pistons for example, they had a great back court in Isaiah and Joe, and a great defensive PF in Rodman but compare that to say, Orlando who had Shaq/Penny/Horace/Anderson or Utah with Eaton (great defensive C)/Malone/Stockton or Ewing/Mason/Starks or KJ/Majerle/Barkley.

I just don't buy it that the competition was that much better. Certainly not better to the point that it somehow makes the Lakers achievements equal to, let alone better than, the Bulls.
Click to expand...

It's not even comparable mate. There was a huge lack of good teams in the mid 90's. With the increase in the number of teams you ended up having some dominant teams and the rest being just plain crap.

Read and learn Rick.

http://pweb.netcom.com/~bjalas/basketball/bulls/duhbulls.htm

But Most importantly for you Rick

-Dennis Rodman said:
"We could not have won 70 games playing against 1980's teams."
Click to expand...
 
rick James said:
I would happily accept you as being correcft if you could just make a compelling argument as to why the 80's was SO much better that somehow the 80's Lakers are considered better than the 90's Bulls.
Click to expand...

The argument was run and won a few years back, even Jod23 agreed that 80's was a stronger era than the 90's. It's not up to us to prove it to a newbie, it's the newbie's responsibility to do some research.
 
great stuff there borgsta. that was a really interesting read. im still going to put together a bit of research myself that looks more at individual players and their contributions.

interesting that the fellow who wrote that article said even the 92 bulls were better than the 96 bulls. after i had a preliminary look at the numbers this was something that jumped straight out at me. id even say the 93 bulls were also quite possibly better

heres what i found

92 bulls (MJ, pippen, armstrong, h.grant, cartwright) - 5 allstars, combined games - 24 (of which mj and pip make up 21) v portland - 6 allstars (drexler, duckworth, buck williams, cliff robinson, ainge, porter) combined games 20 of which drexler played 10.

which means apart from the HOFer, clyde, and the two future HOFers, mj and scottie, the bulls other allstars averaged one allstar game each (keep in mind also that bill cartwright played his allstar game in his rookie year of 1980), the blazers other allstars averaged 2.

in 93 the bulls allstar numbers were the same. the phoenix suns had 6 allstars (barkley, chambers, k.j, majerle, ainge and ceballos) for a total of 23 allstar games. take out HOF barkley with 11 on his own, and that again means the suns other allstars also averaged more than 2 allstar games each. (ceballos was selected in 95, but did not play due to injury).

fast forward to 1996, and the bulls had three allstars (MJ, scottie and rodman) for a total of 23 allstar games. but the opposition has fallen away. seattle had 4 allstars (payton, kemp, hersey hawkins and detlef schrempf) for a total of 19 allstar games.

in 1997, the bulls added a half a season from 9 time allstar and HOFer robert parish, but in 1998 went back to their 1996 numbers. the jazz did not change in either of those years. apart from future HOFers malone and stockton, the jazz had only one time allstar jeff hornacek. all up this meant a total of 24 allstar games.

so in those jazz series we basically had 4 HOFers contributing all but 3 of the allstar games. im not including the chief in the 96 series because he didnt play a single minute of gametime, and only saw 18 minutes of action during the entire playoff series full stop.

so its interesting to see how much it has fallen away. i notice it didnt drop off as markedly after the four expansion teams in the late 80's, but fell away rapidly when the two canadian teams came in.

one thing hasnt changed tho. every finals team for the period has at least one HOFer (or definate future HOFer) in it. that is of course if people agree with me that gary 'the glove' payton will make it one day.
 
GP is a lock for the Hall, he just has to retire first which he won't do.
 
how long have the fans been voting on All-Star spots though?

Was that teh same practice in the 80's? Cause thesedays it's highly unlikely you will ever get three or four from the same side in the game - the logistics of the voting process are massively against it occurring.

Wasn't it just selected by the NBA in the 80's?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

rick James said:
how long have the fans been voting on All-Star spots though?

Was that teh same practice in the 80's? Cause thesedays it's highly unlikely you will ever get three or four from the same side in the game - the logistics of the voting process are massively against it occurring.

Wasn't it just selected by the NBA in the 80's?
Click to expand...

Pistons had 5 last year and it also isn't necessarily in the same all star game.
 
rick James said:
how long have the fans been voting on All-Star spots though?

Was that teh same practice in the 80's? Cause thesedays it's highly unlikely you will ever get three or four from the same side in the game - the logistics of the voting process are massively against it occurring.

Wasn't it just selected by the NBA in the 80's?
Click to expand...

no. for example, in the 1989 all star game there was an outcry because fans voted in AC Green ahead of the mailman who only made it courtesy of the coaches selection.
 
rick James said:
I fail to see the problem Crow-mo.

I asked him to name the 4, per side, at all times throughout the decade - he didn't.

You came gallivanting in like a wispy little school girl on her first day of ballet claiming I got pwned, explain how.
Click to expand...

because you're hanging onto semantics like it means something - all that means is you don't understand the issue. you have nothing except trivialities.

that's like jumping on someone's spelling because the point owns you.
 
DEVO said:
The argument was run and won a few years back, even Jod23 agreed that 80's was a stronger era than the 90's. It's not up to us to prove it to a newbie, it's the newbie's responsibility to do some research.
Click to expand...

welcome to RJ's world. he'll be asking you to compile a top 10 list of newbies soon :D
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom