Jump to content

Is God Mode Brady the most terrifying figure in sports?


Kay z

Recommended Posts

Just now, Plat2 said:

You can keep saying it doesn't make it true. You had a lot of strong teams in the 90s. Jazz had Stockton and Malone to HOFs, Blazers had Drexler and Porter, Sonics had Kemp and Payton, Suns had Barkley and Majerle, Rockets had Olajuwon and Drexler, the Knicks were tough, these are not just fodder teams....this was not a weak era.

You also gotta consider there was hand checking during this time. Let's see how all these offensive powerhouses today fare with hand checking.

Besides Jordan's Bulls name a single team in the 90's that people would rank higher than. 

1. The Showtime Lakers in the 80's

2. The Bird Celtics in the 80's

3. The Current Golden State Warriors

4. The Miami Heat from 2011-2014

5. The Shaq/Kobe Lakers in the early 2000's. 

6. The Popovitch Spurs overall in teh 2000's. 

7. The Bad Boy Detroit Pistons in the late 80's

8. The Big 3 Celtics from 2008-2011

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

The Pistons and Lakers didn't have dominant bigs in the late 80s and they won the last 4 titles before the Bulls' 1st 3-peat.

Kareem Abdul Jabbar wasn't a dominant big? Bill Laimbeer wasn't dominant, but he was very much a key figure to that team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

Is that why they lost in 6 games to the Magic?

I get that, but I feel like missing the entire season the chemistry won't be as good as it should have been if he played in the season. He might have looked good individually but the chemistry with his teammates wasn't good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Plat2 said:

You can keep saying it doesn't make it true. You had a lot of strong teams in the 90s. Jazz had Stockton and Malone to HOFs, Blazers had Drexler and Porter, Sonics had Kemp and Payton, Suns had Barkley and Majerle, Rockets had Olajuwon and Drexler, the Knicks were tough, these are not just fodder teams....this was not a weak era.

You also gotta consider there was hand checking during this time. Let's see how all these offensive powerhouses today fare with hand checking.

The bolded is irrelevant when talking about how good teams were in their own eras.

As for your 1st point.

Quote

 

That's his point.  Watered down means there weren't a lot of truly great teams, but good teams built around 1 elite player.

-The Spurs were only a great team for 1 season before Duncan got there
-The Rockets were built around 1 elite player in Olajuwon for the first few seasons, then traded for Drexler and Barkley, and then lost them both.  Hakeem went god mode for the first title and the finally got  2nd good player in Drexler for the 2nd
-The Knicks' 2nd best player for most of the decade was John Starks...John Starks
-The Suns were relevant for 3 seasons
-The Heat were relevant for 3 seasons
-The Magic were relevant for 2 seasons
-The Blazers were relevant for 2 seasons
-I agree with the Sonics and the Jazz

There were plenty of good teams, but that's because talent was spread out AKA watered down.  Some people prefer this and I understand that, but because of that the teams with even just 2 great players stood out.  I mean if John Starks, Terry Porter, Terry Cummings/Sean Elliott, Otis Thorpe, etc. were the 2nd best player on teams today, that team is winning 45 games, 1st round fodder, and a huge portion of the fan base is screaming to blow it up.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ET80 said:

I'll concede on Kareem, but Magic was 2nd in MVP voting that year, so I'm not going to concede on that side of it. And it was 4-1, so it wasn't close - Bulls walked on Magic and James Worthy that series.

Please - Iets not try to paint Johnson's retirement due to some declining skill. His retirement was simply because he was HIV positive. He was still a key member of that 1992 Dream Team.

So the Lakers lost arguably the best player they had. Even if you don't concede that Magic wasn't a shell of himself, he certainly was not prime Magic, you pretty much have to concede that. He was not the same guy he was in the 80's. Very good, but Jordan did not go through peak Magic. He was not going through the "showtime Lakers". He was going through at best a watered down version of the Lakers on their last legs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ET80 said:

Kareem Abdul Jabbar wasn't a dominant big? Bill Laimbeer wasn't dominant, but he was very much a key figure to that team.

You mean when he was 39 and 40 years old?  Haha, no.  Kareem was not even close to dominant.  He could barely move and didn't play defense.  He wasn't even close to being dominant.  Granted, he could still score with his sky hook, but he averaged 15 PPG and 6 RPG across those 2 seasons.

Are you really relying on Bill Laimbeer as a point for dominant bigs being the only way to compete?  I guess Horace Grant was a dominant big, so the Bulls didn't break any molds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Plat2 said:

I get that, but I feel like missing the entire season the chemistry won't be as good as it should have been if he played in the season. He might have looked good individually but the chemistry with his teammates wasn't good enough.

This is a bull**** excuse.  They didn't have the horses to compete with that Magic team after losing Horace Grant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lancerman said:

True. And they had no chance against the Celtics that year. 

But if that Showtime Lakers team isn't able to keep up with Olaijuwon in 86, I'm certain that the 92-95 iteration would have been a much tougher to compete against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, seminoles1 said:

You mean when he was 39 and 40 years old?  Haha, no.  Kareem was not even close to dominant.  He could barely move and didn't play defense.  He wasn't even close to being dominant.  Granted, he could still score with his sky hook, but he averaged 15 PPG and 6 RPG across those 2 seasons.

Tell that to @lancerman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ET80 said:

But if that Showtime Lakers team isn't able to keep up with Olaijuwon in 86, I'm certain that the 92-95 iteration would have been a much tougher to compete against.

I don't think they would have beat the 85 Celtics that year regardless, and they certainly weren't beating the 86 Lakers a year later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...