72-10 Bulls Vs. 66-16 Celtics

[LarBrd33]

I think you're underrating Pippen, or underrating MJ.  The gap between Jordan and Ray is huge, whereas the gap between Pierce an Pippen, if there's a gap at all, is very close.

Ok lets assume this game between the Celts and Bulls happens in TODAYS NBA(ticky tack fouls etc.) How many players back in that era could have gotten to line as much as Pierce does now? Pippen was a good defender because he didnt allow other SFs to post him, he was too big for that. But to say he had the lateral quickness to stay in front of pierce is nonsense. MJ is MJ. He probably would have guarded Ray Allen, but Jordans style of D, he gambles too much. That would leave Ray with a couple of WIDE open jumpers. Im not comparing our players to their players individually. Im comparing how we matchup.

Overall I still say we are wayyy too athletic and Defensive minded to allow the Bulls to beat us. I would say it would take all 7 games but we would still come out on top in the end.

Sidenote:Pippen is an alltime great, but his reputation is a TEE-BIT inflated because he played with THE ALL TIME GREAT. just my honest opinion.


Read this after posting:

There are no true shutdown defenders anymore, there are guys that are capable but the fact you can't touch a guy added with floor spacing and three point shooting being such a well defined art now (don't forget the 3 pt line was shorter that season) teams like the Bulls who locked down with individual defenders would be exploited, that would apply to Michael as well. Saying he'd shut down Ray makes no sense, they couldn't shut down John Starks or Reggie Miller half the time, you can't just shut down a shooter when you have two other guys on the floor that command a double team, common sense.

NUFF SAID!

Actually I think the fact that Pippen played with Jordan made him pretty freakin underrated. 

Nobody likes to talk about this... but remember when Jordan "retired" for the first time?

They won 57 games in 92-93 and wrapped up their 3rd championship.  Jordan retired and Pippen was left all alone.  Did the Bulls fall apart and go into lotto mode?  Nah... Pippen lead them to 55 wins.   2 less.   What would happen if Bron left the Cavs?...   Has Paul Pierce ever lead a team to 55 wins by himself?... nah... he did win 49 with Walker though... once.

In that 93-94 season, Pippen averaged 22 points, 8.7 rebounds, 5.6 assists and 2.9 steals on 49% shooting.   They lost in 7 games to the Knicks in the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Pippen was a superstar.  You stick him with Jordan and you get 6 titles and a season where they win 72 games.

Note:  I'm certainly not knocking Jordan.  Jordan was most definitely the greatest player of all time... and anyone who compares Kobe to him is a FOOL.  But... it's just interesting to know that Jordan never had a winning season without Scottie in 5 attempts. 

84-85 = 38 wins
85-86 = 30 wins
86-87 = 40 wins

Then Pippen joins the bulls in 87-88 and they win 50.

Jordan post Pippen with the Wizards (I know this is unfair):

01-02:  37 wins
02-03:  37 wins


Pippen without Jordan:
93-94:  55 wins
94-95:  47 wins

Pippen on the Rockets:
98-99 (31 wins and 17 losses)

And his next 4 season with the Blazers:
59 wins, 50 wins, 49 wins, 50 wins 
  
Pippen was a winner, baby!

[TerreHaute]

I have to take the Bulls based soley on Micheal Jordan (I almost threw up upon typing this). This would be a close series, probably going the full 7 games. There's only one player I would pick over Jordan in a game 7 (Russell). The problem for me is that this series is a strength/strength series. In other words, the strengths of our beloved Celts are the same strengths the Bulls had. The difference then, is Jordan. Especially in a 7 game series.

In contrast, the 86-87 Celts (or the 87-88 Lakers for that matter) had huge strengths that the Bulls simply couldn't match up against in any fashion, which overcomes the Jordan advantage.

[dark_lord]

rondo vs harper- slight advantage CHI, only due to consistently and veteran leadership.  however if rondo plays consistently and aggressively, give us the advantage

ray vs mj- advantage overwhelming CHI

pierce vs pippen- advantage CHI

kg vs rodman- advantage BOS...however rodman would definately impact kg's performance

perk vs longly- i say this is a wash. both do things well but have flaws. they are good at different things.


benches- i say it is close.  celts have more bench players that are able to step in and contribute, however CHI has a shorter bench that play their roles to perfection. 



my decision....i really cant say.  if push comes to shove, i give CHI a slight advantage.  however, i could definately see BOS winning. in any event, the series would be classic and likely 7 games.

homecourt advantage would likely determine the winner.

[drza44]

I think what it boils down to is this...  that Bulls defense would have been as tough for us to deal with as the Pistons and Cavs defense were.   However... their offense was greater than any team we faced.   LeBron went for 35, 32 and 45 points against us in his last 3 games while averaging 26.7 points, 6.4 rebounds and 7.5 assists for the 7 game series.  But LeBron isn't MJ and LeBron didn't have a Scottie Pippen with him.   If Bron was able to come within 5 points of beating that Celtic team seemingly by himself... surely the 72 win Bulls team would have no trouble dealing with us.

A couple of things:

1) One big difference between the '96 Bulls and the '08 Celtics was championship experience.  As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, great players just get some "It" factor from having won a title that makes them much tougher in the playoffs from then on.  I believe that "It" factor was the difference, for instance, between the '00 Lakers struggling a bit in the playoffs and the '01 Lakers going 15-1.  So to me, the more interesting comp would be that '96 Bulls team against the current Cs, but we can't really discuss that due to jinx-age so I'll table that.

2) In response to the above quote, I think the same would hold true in reverse.  Namely, this Celtics team has a defense as strong as any that the Bulls faced but with better offense.  Those Bulls never faced an opponent with two wings as skilled as Pierce and Ray, especially in conjunction with a big man like KG.  This is key, because it affects how the Bulls would have approached the Cs.  Against teams with one dominant wing Pippen would take him out of the equation, and Jordan could generally help off the man he was guarding and create havoc by either playing the passing lanes or helping out on the opposing big.  Against the Cs, both Pippen and Jordan would have had to concentrate fully on Paul and Ray, which would have left Harper 1-on-1 on Rondo (and quick, penetrating PGs were Harper's kryptonite at that point in his career) and Rodman 1-on-1 on KG.  Rodman is the kind of defender that KG hates: shorter than him, quick, and pesky.  By the same token, if Worm had to guard him completely without help KG wins that war.

That's two potential mismatches that those Bulls never really had to face.  On the flip side, Rondo would have HAD to be in aggressive/scoring Rondo mode, because if not Jordan would guard him and play off of him like Kobe did, but likely much more effectively.  Combine that with the Bulls having championship swagger that the Cs lacked...it'd have been interesting.

[LarBrd33]

I think what it boils down to is this...  that Bulls defense would have been as tough for us to deal with as the Pistons and Cavs defense were.   However... their offense was greater than any team we faced.   LeBron went for 35, 32 and 45 points against us in his last 3 games while averaging 26.7 points, 6.4 rebounds and 7.5 assists for the 7 game series.  But LeBron isn't MJ and LeBron didn't have a Scottie Pippen with him.   If Bron was able to come within 5 points of beating that Celtic team seemingly by himself... surely the 72 win Bulls team would have no trouble dealing with us.

A couple of things:

1) One big difference between the '96 Bulls and the '08 Celtics was championship experience.  As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, great players just get some "It" factor from having won a title that makes them much tougher in the playoffs from then on.  I believe that "It" factor was the difference, for instance, between the '00 Lakers struggling a bit in the playoffs and the '01 Lakers going 15-1.  So to me, the more interesting comp would be that '96 Bulls team against the current Cs, but we can't really discuss that due to jinx-age so I'll table that.

2) In response to the above quote, I think the same would hold true in reverse.  Namely, this Celtics team has a defense as strong as any that the Bulls faced but with better offense.  Those Bulls never faced an opponent with two wings as skilled as Pierce and Ray, especially in conjunction with a big man like KG.  This is key, because it affects how the Bulls would have approached the Cs.  Against teams with one dominant wing Pippen would take him out of the equation, and Jordan could generally help off the man he was guarding and create havoc by either playing the passing lanes or helping out on the opposing big.  Against the Cs, both Pippen and Jordan would have had to concentrate fully on Paul and Ray, which would have left Harper 1-on-1 on Rondo (and quick, penetrating PGs were Harper's kryptonite at that point in his career) and Rodman 1-on-1 on KG.  Rodman is the kind of defender that KG hates: shorter than him, quick, and pesky.  By the same token, if Worm had to guard him completely without help KG wins that war.

That's two potential mismatches that those Bulls never really had to face.  On the flip side, Rondo would have HAD to be in aggressive/scoring Rondo mode, because if not Jordan would guard him and play off of him like Kobe did, but likely much more effectively.  Combine that with the Bulls having championship swagger that the Cs lacked...it'd have been interesting.

drza... our offense isn't that good.  It was only the 9th best offense in the NBA last year.   That Bulls were able to handle the Sonics and Jazz pretty well and those teams were better than the Celtics offensively.

The 96 Bulls were the best defensive AND offensive team at the time. 

I'm not saying we don't have offensive weapons.  Pierce/KG and Ray are obviously talented scorers.  But our offense wasn't and isn't the best in the NBA and it wouldn't have been then.

[dark_lord]

drza... our offense isn't that good.  It was only the 9th best offense in the NBA last year.   That Bulls were able to handle the Sonics and Jazz pretty well and those teams were better than the Celtics offensively.

The 96 Bulls were the best defensive AND offensive team at the time. 

I'm not saying we don't have offensive weapons.  Pierce/KG and Ray are obviously talented scorers.  But our offense wasn't and isn't the best in the NBA and it wouldn't have been then.

this is an excellent point.  i think the bulls have a chance to contain us and force us into being a jumpshot team, which never bolds well for us.

[drza44]

I think what it boils down to is this...  that Bulls defense would have been as tough for us to deal with as the Pistons and Cavs defense were.   However... their offense was greater than any team we faced.   LeBron went for 35, 32 and 45 points against us in his last 3 games while averaging 26.7 points, 6.4 rebounds and 7.5 assists for the 7 game series.  But LeBron isn't MJ and LeBron didn't have a Scottie Pippen with him.   If Bron was able to come within 5 points of beating that Celtic team seemingly by himself... surely the 72 win Bulls team would have no trouble dealing with us.

A couple of things:

1) One big difference between the '96 Bulls and the '08 Celtics was championship experience.  As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, great players just get some "It" factor from having won a title that makes them much tougher in the playoffs from then on.  I believe that "It" factor was the difference, for instance, between the '00 Lakers struggling a bit in the playoffs and the '01 Lakers going 15-1.  So to me, the more interesting comp would be that '96 Bulls team against the current Cs, but we can't really discuss that due to jinx-age so I'll table that.

2) In response to the above quote, I think the same would hold true in reverse.  Namely, this Celtics team has a defense as strong as any that the Bulls faced but with better offense.  Those Bulls never faced an opponent with two wings as skilled as Pierce and Ray, especially in conjunction with a big man like KG.  This is key, because it affects how the Bulls would have approached the Cs.  Against teams with one dominant wing Pippen would take him out of the equation, and Jordan could generally help off the man he was guarding and create havoc by either playing the passing lanes or helping out on the opposing big.  Against the Cs, both Pippen and Jordan would have had to concentrate fully on Paul and Ray, which would have left Harper 1-on-1 on Rondo (and quick, penetrating PGs were Harper's kryptonite at that point in his career) and Rodman 1-on-1 on KG.  Rodman is the kind of defender that KG hates: shorter than him, quick, and pesky.  By the same token, if Worm had to guard him completely without help KG wins that war.

That's two potential mismatches that those Bulls never really had to face.  On the flip side, Rondo would have HAD to be in aggressive/scoring Rondo mode, because if not Jordan would guard him and play off of him like Kobe did, but likely much more effectively.  Combine that with the Bulls having championship swagger that the Cs lacked...it'd have been interesting.

drza... our offense isn't that good.  It was only the 9th best offense in the NBA last year.   That Bulls were able to handle the Sonics and Jazz pretty well and those teams were better than the Celtics offensively.

The 96 Bulls were the best defensive AND offensive team at the time. 

I'm not saying we don't have offensive weapons.  Pierce/KG and Ray are obviously talented scorers.  But our offense wasn't and isn't the best in the NBA and it wouldn't have been then.

Again, it's about match-ups.  It's ironic in a way, because Jordan made a whole generation of young players want to grow up and be like him which led to guys like Paul and Ray.  Because in that time, the dominant teams just didn't have multiple wings like them.  Those Bulls teams went through wing combos like Drexler/Kersey, Majerle/Dumas, Hawkins/Schremph, Starks/Mason, Hornacek/Russell, Miller/Mullin etc.  There were never two truly elite/versatile wings like Pierce and Ray that would require the entirety of Pippen's and Jordan's attention.  This is key, because the Bulls' defense was built around the two elite wing defenders both taking out their men while also playing great help defense (similar to how the Cs are built around KG and Perk neutralizing the middle then giving a lot of help to the wings).  That would have made these Cs a tougher matchup for them on defense than they generally faced, again, assuming we get "good Rondo".

And on the other end of the court (which I didn't really mention before), the Cs defense is built ideally to defend those Bulls.  Neither Longley nor Rodman were offensive threats, which would have allowed KG and Perk to focus even more on helping out on dribble penetration from Jordan or Pippen than they were against the Lakers (where Gasol and Odom are legit offensive options).  And Harper wasn't a big three-point threat, which means that Rondo could have also been more aggressive as a help defender than he was when he had to deal with Fisher or Vujacic.  Kukoc would have had to play a big role, as his perimeter scoring may have tied KG to him and helped break down the Cs defense.

Bottom line, I just think the Cs match up very well with them.  That doesn't necessarily mean they'd win (as the Bulls obviously had their own aces to work with), but I think it'd mean a very good series.

[KG Living Legend]

Tp Drza. That's what I'm Talking About.

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

For what it's worth, I ran a whatifsports.com simulated 7 game series twice, once with Boston home and once with Chicago home. 2-3-2 home/away format applies NBA Finals style

First series, Chicago home:

Bulls went up 3-1 and Boston won the next two.
Game 7 in Chicago: 106-95 Bulls win Jordan 25 pts

Series MVP: Scottie Pippen (25 pts, 12 rbs, 8 ast in Game 7)


Second series, Boston home:

Bulls up 3-1 again, Boston wins game 5 and 6 again
Game 7 in Boston: 106-89 Bulls win Jordan 28 pts

Series MVP: Scottie Pippen again (13 pts, 9 rebs, 6 ast Game 7)

Thought it might be interesting.

[LarBrd33]

I think what it boils down to is this...  that Bulls defense would have been as tough for us to deal with as the Pistons and Cavs defense were.   However... their offense was greater than any team we faced.   LeBron went for 35, 32 and 45 points against us in his last 3 games while averaging 26.7 points, 6.4 rebounds and 7.5 assists for the 7 game series.  But LeBron isn't MJ and LeBron didn't have a Scottie Pippen with him.   If Bron was able to come within 5 points of beating that Celtic team seemingly by himself... surely the 72 win Bulls team would have no trouble dealing with us.

A couple of things:

1) One big difference between the '96 Bulls and the '08 Celtics was championship experience.  As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, great players just get some "It" factor from having won a title that makes them much tougher in the playoffs from then on.  I believe that "It" factor was the difference, for instance, between the '00 Lakers struggling a bit in the playoffs and the '01 Lakers going 15-1.  So to me, the more interesting comp would be that '96 Bulls team against the current Cs, but we can't really discuss that due to jinx-age so I'll table that.

2) In response to the above quote, I think the same would hold true in reverse.  Namely, this Celtics team has a defense as strong as any that the Bulls faced but with better offense.  Those Bulls never faced an opponent with two wings as skilled as Pierce and Ray, especially in conjunction with a big man like KG.  This is key, because it affects how the Bulls would have approached the Cs.  Against teams with one dominant wing Pippen would take him out of the equation, and Jordan could generally help off the man he was guarding and create havoc by either playing the passing lanes or helping out on the opposing big.  Against the Cs, both Pippen and Jordan would have had to concentrate fully on Paul and Ray, which would have left Harper 1-on-1 on Rondo (and quick, penetrating PGs were Harper's kryptonite at that point in his career) and Rodman 1-on-1 on KG.  Rodman is the kind of defender that KG hates: shorter than him, quick, and pesky.  By the same token, if Worm had to guard him completely without help KG wins that war.

That's two potential mismatches that those Bulls never really had to face.  On the flip side, Rondo would have HAD to be in aggressive/scoring Rondo mode, because if not Jordan would guard him and play off of him like Kobe did, but likely much more effectively.  Combine that with the Bulls having championship swagger that the Cs lacked...it'd have been interesting.

drza... our offense isn't that good.  It was only the 9th best offense in the NBA last year.   That Bulls were able to handle the Sonics and Jazz pretty well and those teams were better than the Celtics offensively.

The 96 Bulls were the best defensive AND offensive team at the time. 

I'm not saying we don't have offensive weapons.  Pierce/KG and Ray are obviously talented scorers.  But our offense wasn't and isn't the best in the NBA and it wouldn't have been then.

Again, it's about match-ups.  It's ironic in a way, because Jordan made a whole generation of young players want to grow up and be like him which led to guys like Paul and Ray.  Because in that time, the dominant teams just didn't have multiple wings like them.  Those Bulls teams went through wing combos like Drexler/Kersey, Majerle/Dumas, Hawkins/Schremph, Starks/Mason, Hornacek/Russell, Miller/Mullin etc.  There were never two truly elite/versatile wings like Pierce and Ray that would require the entirety of Pippen's and Jordan's attention.  This is key, because the Bulls' defense was built around the two elite wing defenders both taking out their men while also playing great help defense (similar to how the Cs are built around KG and Perk neutralizing the middle then giving a lot of help to the wings).  That would have made these Cs a tougher matchup for them on defense than they generally faced, again, assuming we get "good Rondo".

And on the other end of the court (which I didn't really mention before), the Cs defense is built ideally to defend those Bulls.  Neither Longley nor Rodman were offensive threats, which would have allowed KG and Perk to focus even more on helping out on dribble penetration from Jordan or Pippen than they were against the Lakers (where Gasol and Odom are legit offensive options).  And Harper wasn't a big three-point threat, which means that Rondo could have also been more aggressive as a help defender than he was when he had to deal with Fisher or Vujacic.  Kukoc would have had to play a big role, as his perimeter scoring may have tied KG to him and helped break down the Cs defense.

Bottom line, I just think the Cs match up very well with them.  That doesn't necessarily mean they'd win (as the Bulls obviously had their own aces to work with), but I think it'd mean a very good series.

Eh i'll just chalk that up as homerism.  Pierce is solid.. top 20 player in the league right now.   Ray is a streaky shooter, but still effective at his age. 

Jordan is the greatest player of all time.   Pippen is one of the greatest players of all time. 

I'd say it'd come down to KG, but as we've already discussed... Boston's offense isn't even the best offense in the league today.  We're talking about maybe the 10th best offense in the NBA.   We can talk like homers about how awesome KG/Ray and Pierce is... but frankly the Celtic offense isn't that great.   Boston's success is all about defense.

The point is... Chicago offensively would be like no team the Celtics faced.  And defensively they were on a par with the Pistons and Cavs (a team that came 5 points from beating us).   The Celtics would have been defensively on the Bulls level, but not as powerful of an offensive team as the Sonics and Jazz teams that the Bulls took care of.

I just want to ask the people slanting towards the 08 Celtics in this debate...   Do you also think that the 08 Cavs could beat the 96 Bulls?  Cuz frankly that Cavs/Celtics series was a tossup.  The ball bounces a few different ways and LeBron ends up beating the Celtics by himself.   Surely you believe that the 96 Bulls would dominate the Cavs, right?  Well then they'd dominate the Celtics too...   

[Moranis]

That Bulls team was a force like very few ever.  I mean they swept a 60 win Shaq led Magic team in the ECF.  They lost 3 playoff games, the C's lost 3 playoff games to the Hawks alone.  And the Hawks weren't even as good as the Miami Heat team the Bulls swept 3-0 in their opening round.  I'd take the Knicks the Bulls beat 4-1 over the Cavs that pushed the C's to 7.  That Orlando team would have dominated the Pistons.  I do however think the Lake Show was better than Seattle, but Seattle definately would have given the Lakers a run for their money.  

And people discounting the defense of the Bulls are crazy.  Not only was the team defense among the best ever, they had the best individual defensive players in the league at the SG, SF, and PF positions (and you can make a strong case that MJ and Rodman are the greatest defenders from their position in league history, and Pippen is probably among the top 5 at the SF position).  Rodman would have completely taken KG out of his element.  I mean people forget that Rodman could legitimately guard 4 positions and do so at an extremely high level.  He would have had no trouble guarding KG in the paint or on the perimeter.  Pippen would have just physically overwhelmed Pierce on both ends of the floor.  MJ on Ray Allen isn't even close.  Ron Harper and Stever Kerr were more than capable PG's and the Longley/Wennington combination could have easily handled Perkins.  The C's would have no one on the bench capable of guarding Kukoc.  The C's, like Seattle, probably would squeek 2 out, but the outcome of the series would never be in doubt.  The Bulls were just better.

[Edgar]

have to give the edge to jordans Bulls.
a last second shot in last second from MJ
and history....

[ACF]

That Bulls team was a force like very few ever.  I mean they swept a 60 win Shaq led Magic team in the ECF.  They lost 3 playoff games, the C's lost 3 playoff games to the Hawks alone.  And the Hawks weren't even as good as the Miami Heat team the Bulls swept 3-0 in their opening round.  I'd take the Knicks the Bulls beat 4-1 over the Cavs that pushed the C's to 7.  That Orlando team would have dominated the Pistons.  I do however think the Lake Show was better than Seattle, but Seattle definately would have given the Lakers a run for their money.  

And people discounting the defense of the Bulls are crazy.  Not only was the team defense among the best ever, they had the best individual defensive players in the league at the SG, SF, and PF positions (and you can make a strong case that MJ and Rodman are the greatest defenders from their position in league history, and Pippen is probably among the top 5 at the SF position).  Rodman would have completely taken KG out of his element.  I mean people forget that Rodman could legitimately guard 4 positions and do so at an extremely high level.  He would have had no trouble guarding KG in the paint or on the perimeter.  Pippen would have just physically overwhelmed Pierce on both ends of the floor.  MJ on Ray Allen isn't even close.  Ron Harper and Stever Kerr were more than capable PG's and the Longley/Wennington combination could have easily handled Perkins.  The C's would have no one on the bench capable of guarding Kukoc.  The C's, like Seattle, probably would squeek 2 out, but the outcome of the series would never be in doubt.  The Bulls were just better.

TP for being real/not being a homer.
I think you are very right.

[guava_wrench]

For what it's worth, I ran a whatifsports.com simulated 7 game series twice, once with Boston home and once with Chicago home. 2-3-2 home/away format applies NBA Finals style

First series, Chicago home:

Bulls went up 3-1 and Boston won the next two.
Game 7 in Chicago: 106-95 Bulls win Jordan 25 pts

Series MVP: Scottie Pippen (25 pts, 12 rbs, 8 ast in Game 7)


Second series, Boston home:

Bulls up 3-1 again, Boston wins game 5 and 6 again
Game 7 in Boston: 106-89 Bulls win Jordan 28 pts

Series MVP: Scottie Pippen again (13 pts, 9 rebs, 6 ast Game 7)

Thought it might be interesting.

I ran a sim too. The healthy 2006-2007 Celtics beat the 2007-2008 Celtics, 112-105. I even made the Celts from last year were the home team. KG was clearly player of the game though.

Nice website!

[albert]

I know this is the C's vs. the Bulls but people should read this article about the Lakers matching up with them.

link

Sacramento Kings assistant coach Randy Brown knows what a 70-win NBA team looks like.

He was on one.

...

"Of course Phil [Jackson] is down there, but they are a little more talented than we were when I played for the Bulls," Brown said. "At the same time, the NBA is getting some parity. There are a lot of teams out there that are good ... hopefully if they stay injury free, maybe they can get there.

Yet more reasons to get ready for the 12/25 game...