NBA '17

[Jockey]

I'm a Bulls homer, but this is correct. The Bulls were just as good offensively, better defensively and much better at rebounding. And they had a better bench.

Gotta disagree. Pakuni.

The Bulls were never this good offensively. They never had 2 of the top 5 offensive players in the league to go along with 2 other all-stars and one of the better 6th men ever. The Bulls had MJ, who could do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted, Pippen who is a top 50 all-timer and then a bunch of one dimensional guys.

Defensively. each team had/has 3 elite defenders, so I would rank them about even on that end of the floor.

As a matter of fact, I put the '96 Bulls at #3 all-time. I also think the '86 Celtics (5 Hall of Famers on the team) were better.

[MU82]

It's an interesting discussion - and a natural one, too.

Top of my head, I was going to say those Bulls wouldn't keep up with today's Warriors because they didn't have the 3-point shooting. But then I looked it up and the 1995-96 Bulls shot .403 from behind the arc while this year's Warriors shot .383. I have to admit I was pretty surprised by that! Jordan, never considered a big-time 3-point threat, shot .427, better than ANY of this season's Warriors. That was stunning to me.

But then I realized that the 3-point distance was shorter then than it is now. In 1997-98, the first year the line was moved back to where it is now, the Bulls shot .323. And Michael shot - yikes! - .238.

So I don't know if that would have been the difference or not if one could transport the 95-96 Bulls to now, but it certainly might have been.

The Bulls would have had the best player in the world, of course (just as Cleveland does now), but Durant and Curry wouldn't have been far behind, and both are better than Pippen was. Green is a modern-day Rodman - not quite the rebounder but 10x the offensive threat. Kukoc and Iguodala were/are similar. Thompson is twice the player Harper was.

Those Bulls, led by Jordan, had a single-mindedness I have not seen very often. From the first game of the season, they were laser-focused on the title. And there was no resting. Jordan played 82 games.

Always fun discussions. I'd probably give the Warriors the slight advantage in a 7-game series. Having said that ... during Jordan's prime, betting against him in the Finals - where he was 6-0 - was a terrific way to lose money.

[MerrittsMustache]

Gotta disagree. Pakuni.

The Bulls were never this good offensively. They never had 2 of the top 5 offensive players in the league to go along with 2 other all-stars and one of the better 6th men ever. The Bulls had MJ, who could do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted, Pippen who is a top 50 all-timer and then a bunch of one dimensional guys.

Defensively. each team had/has 3 elite defenders, so I would rank them about even on that end of the floor.

As a matter of fact, I put the '96 Bulls at #3 all-time. I also think the '86 Celtics (5 Hall of Famers on the team) were better.

Team-wise, the Bulls weren't quite as good as the Warriors offensively but if you think they were "about even" defensively then you either didn't watch the Bulls or you "misremembered" just how good they were . Jordan and Pippen were two of the best defenders in history and those two plus Rodman were all NBA All-Defensive 1st Team that season and Ron Harper was probably deserving as well.

True, the '86 Celtics did have 5 HOFers but Bill Walton at that stage was not playing anywhere near a HOF level, not to mention he was inducted based primarily on his college career. The 2010-11 Celtics had at least 4 future HOFers in Allen, Pierce, Garnett and Shaq, plus Rondo has an outside shot at the HOF. Does that make them an all-time team?

[ATL MU Warrior]

Which era of officiating would this theoretical matchup be played under?  The answer to that would decide the outcome. 

[wadesworld]

The Bulls would have the best player between the 2 teams but the Warriors would have the next 2 best and 4 of the next 5 best players.

The difference between the Bulls defense and the Warriors defense would be no more than the difference between the Warriors offense and the Bulls offense.  The Warriors defense is incredibly underrated.  When KD is playing defense the way he has been the past 2 years and he's only your 4th best defensive player, your defense is pretty dang good.  Green would be the best defensive player between the 2 teams and while Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman are better than Iggy, Klay, and Durant, the difference isn't as big as Bulls fans want it to be.  Klay can continue to shoot horribly like he has and it doesn't matter one bit because he can completely take the opposition's best guard out of the game.  If Green wasn't on the Warriors Iggy would be looked at as one of the best defenders in the league.  Their defense is really good.  They were 2nd in defensive rating in the regular season (0.2 behind the Spurs) and the best in Playoff defensive rating this year.

[Pakuni]

Gotta disagree. Pakuni.

The Bulls were never this good offensively. They never had 2 of the top 5 offensive players in the league to go along with 2 other all-stars and one of the better 6th men ever. The Bulls had MJ, who could do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted, Pippen who is a top 50 all-timer and then a bunch of one dimensional guys.

Bulls team Ortg = 115.2.
Warriors team Ortg = 115.6.
Doesn't seem to be all that different to me.
Now, if you want to say the Warriors are a better shooting team, I'll give that to you. But in terms of putting the ball in the basket, relative to pace (which was much slower 20 years ago), they're pretty much equal.

Who are you labeling one of the best 6th men ever? Iguodala? His numbers this year pale compared to what Kukoc did as 6th man in '96, when he won the 6th Man Award (something no one on the Warriors roster has done).

Defensively. each team had/has 3 elite defenders, so I would rank them about even on that end of the floor.

Well, again, the numbers don't support this. The Bulls had a better defensive rating, were significantly better at defensive rebounding, created more turnovers and did a better job of keeping opponents from the free throw line.

[GGGG]

Statistically this is kind of fun to talk about, but the Bulls would have never seen anything like Golden State back in their day.  No team shot this much from deep, this well, and from multiple positions.  So while they obviously were a great defensive team, they did so in a league with a slower pace and lack of this many outside threats.

So the real question is, could they have adapted to Golden State? 

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Haven't seen anyone discuss matchups but 96 Bulls would be matchup hell for the Warriors.

Defensively Jordan would give Curry fits, Harper was a 6'7" PG and would have no issues with Klay's height, Pippen arguably the best wing defender of all time against Durant would be fun as all hell, Rodman and Draymond are a wash, while Zaza and Luc, are what they are.

[Pakuni]

Statistically this is kind of fun to talk about, but the Bulls would have never seen anything like Golden State back in their day.  No team shot this much from deep, this well, and from multiple positions.  So while they obviously were a great defensive team, they did so in a league with a slower pace and lack of this many outside threats.

So the real question is, could they have adapted to Golden State?

Well, that's ultimately impossible to answer (but fun to debate).
The flip side to that argument is that Golden State has never had to deal with a team with the kind of perimeter length possessed by the '96 Bulls, which may very well have given the Warrior shooters fits.

[MerrittsMustache]

The Bulls would have the best player between the 2 teams but the Warriors would have the next 2 best and 4 of the next 5 best players.

The difference between the Bulls defense and the Warriors defense would be no more than the difference between the Warriors offense and the Bulls offense.  The Warriors defense is incredibly underrated.  When KD is playing defense the way he has been the past 2 years and he's only your 4th best defensive player, your defense is pretty dang good.  Green would be the best defensive player between the 2 teams and while Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman are better than Iggy, Klay, and Durant, the difference isn't as big as Bulls fans want it to be.  Klay can continue to shoot horribly like he has and it doesn't matter one bit because he can completely take the opposition's best guard out of the game.  If Green wasn't on the Warriors Iggy would be looked at as one of the best defenders in the league.  Their defense is really good.  They were 2nd in defensive rating in the regular season (0.2 behind the Spurs) and the best in Playoff defensive rating this year.

Green a better defender than Jordan and Pippen?! Is this your anti-Chicago bias coming through again? You can't actually believe that.

[MerrittsMustache]

Statistically this is kind of fun to talk about, but the Bulls would have never seen anything like Golden State back in their day.  No team shot this much from deep, this well, and from multiple positions.  So while they obviously were a great defensive team, they did so in a league with a slower pace and lack of this many outside threats.

So the real question is, could they have adapted to Golden State?

The Bulls would have more easily adapted to the current NBA than GS would adapt to the old school NBA.

[GGGG]

Green a better defender than Jordan and Pippen?! Is this your anti-Chicago bias coming through again? You can't actually believe that.

It's not an extremely outlandish statement.  Green is very good.  But Pippen and Jordan are among the best defenders of all time. 

[wadesworld]

Green a better defender than Jordan and Pippen?! Is this your anti-Chicago bias coming through again? You can't actually believe that.

No, it's not.  Jordon won a single DPOY award in his 15 year career.  Pippen won 0 DPOY awards in his career.  Green is in his fifth season as a professional and might win his first DPOY award this year (one of 3 finalists for the award).  Draymond can guard anything from the 1 (on a switch, you aren't just going to match him up with the one but he can definitely guard them) to the 5.  He's as versatile of a defender as I've seen at any level of basketball.

[GGGG]

No, it's not.  Jordon won a single DPOY award in his 15 year career.  Pippen won 0 DPOY awards in his career.  Green is in his fifth season as a professional and might win his first DPOY award this year (one of 3 finalists for the award).  Draymond can guard anything from the 1 (on a switch, you aren't just going to match him up with the one but he can definitely guard them) to the 5.  He's as versatile of a defender as I've seen at any level of basketball.

That's because in the 1990s, the NBA kept giving the award to rim protecting centers.  Only one non-center won the award for over a decade - Gary Payton.

Jordan was nine times first team all defense.  Pippen eight times (and two times second team.)

[MUBurrow]

The Bulls would have more easily adapted to the current NBA than GS would adapt to the old school NBA.

Disagree that its a matter of adaptation - I think they're mutually exclusive. In a hypothetical game, if the Warriors found themselves trying to adjust to the old school NBA, they would lose. Similarly, if the Bulls found themselves trying to open things up as much as GSW, they would lose.

Ultimately, this is a total bar debate. I guess I'd throw my lot in with GSW while acknowledging that may be recency bias, because the current NBA had to theoretically prove competitively superior or the old school NBA would still be current NBA.

[🏀]

If the 1996 Bulls played the 2017 Warriors in a seven game series, the Bulls would win in 6.

After adjusting to style/game plan back and forth, ultimate talent would take over. The '96 Bulls are vastly more talented. If the game is called in 1996 officiating, it's even easier for the Bulls to win, even Steve Kerr acknowledged that last year.

[wadesworld]

If the 1996 Bulls played the 2017 Warriors in a seven game series, the Bulls would win in 6.

After adjusting to style/game plan back and forth, ultimate talent would take over. The '96 Bulls are vastly more talented. If the game is called in 1996 officiating, it's even easier for the Bulls to win, even Steve Kerr acknowledged that last year.

Back when Harrison Barnes was shooting 5-36 over the last 3 games of the NBA Finals and Kevin Durant was sitting at home in OKC.

[🏀]

Back when Harrison Barnes was shooting 5-36 over the last 3 games of the NBA Finals and Kevin Durant was sitting at home in OKC.

Agree. Bulls would've swept the 2006 Warriors. Durant makes this team on their level.

[wadesworld]

Agree. Bulls would've swept the 2006 Warriors. Durant makes this team on their level.

Kerr did say at the time that it'd come down to a Curry 3 at the buzzer and nobody knows if it'd go in if it was played on Pluto. Add Durant and I don't think it gets to that 3 at the buzzer.

Jeff Van Gundy has also been saying this team is by far the best ever and has been up close and personal for both teams.

[Spotcheck Billy]

I am surprised the story about reporters smelling weed in Cleveland's locker room after game 2 hasn't been mentioned here.

[wadesworld]

I am surprised the story about reporters smelling weed in Cleveland's locker room after game 2 hasn't been mentioned here.

Probably because it surprises nobody out there.

[Jockey]

It's an interesting discussion - and a natural one, too.

Top of my head, I was going to say those Bulls wouldn't keep up with today's Warriors because they didn't have the 3-point shooting. But then I looked it up and the 1995-96 Bulls shot .403 from behind the arc while this year's Warriors shot .383. I have to admit I was pretty surprised by that! Jordan, never considered a big-time 3-point threat, shot .427, better than ANY of this season's Warriors. That was stunning to me.

But then I realized that the 3-point distance was shorter then than it is now. In 1997-98, the first year the line was moved back to where it is now, the Bulls shot .323. And Michael shot - yikes! - .238.

A couple of good points. All of us can see quite quickly that GS is a better 3 point team than the Bulls. Not only are they much better, but they shoot a heck of a lot more threes than the Bulls.

Steve Kerr was the only guy on the Bulls team that was considered a three point shooter and almost all that he took were wide open threes set up by Jordan or Pippen going to the hoop.

We remember Bird as being a great three-point shooter - and he was. But he never even took 1/3 of the 3-point attempts in a season that Curry has in the last 5 years since he has been healthy. As others have pointed out it is a different game now.

[wadesworld]

Hand. Down. Man. Down.

[Jockey]

Hand. Down. Man. Down.

I said GS in 5 before the series started, but I see no road to a victory for the Cavs. They can't play better than tonite.

[wadesworld]

I said GS in 5 before the series started, but I see no road to a victory for the Cavs. They can't play better than tonite.

Agreed.  I don't know what the opening line for game 4 is but I would put down money on the Warriors to cover.