Evidence that Hakeem and Akeem whipped Jordan's Bulls

Kobe couldn't even take Reggie Miller to school or Paul Pierce.

 

Show me the evidence. Mike was good but it's more about luck, team work, and team Jordan/NBA that fantasized his status. Kobe at his best is a better everything than Jordan. I know deep down inside Jordan knows this as well. Plus now he's got a complete team to win more rings than Jordan. A Kobe at his prime is > than a Jordan at his prime. Are you gonna tell me the Black Mamba would get schooled by Air Jordan? And I'm sure if Jordan hurt his finger as much as Black Mamba, he would hang it up for the season.

 

WOW.

 

And you know what, Orlando Tmac at his best without the "b**** Fits" would probably be > Black Mamba or Air Jordan. All that length plus everything else Tracy had/has would pose a problem for any 2-Guard that ever played. But to bad he's just washed up trash now.

 

Damn you're teaching me more and more about a bizarro-world NBA every time you post. Please continue.

 

Paul Pierce outplayed Kobe in the finals in 2008 with a busted knee.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2000_finals.html

Reggie averaged 24 ppg on 41% while Kobe averaged 16 ppg on 38%.

In Jordan's career no player in any series whether it was his teammate or player on the team ever averaged more than him in a series.

 

Kobe has never led the league in any stat other than scoring and that was only twice.
Jordan led in it 10x.

Also MJ led in PER 7x, Win Shares 9x and did so in the playoffs 6-7 times as well.

And before you say those stats are weak, then why is it guys like Kareem, Wilt and Shaq have all led in it 5x as well?

 

Kobe>Jordan??

 

Hands down the dumbest post I have ever read on these forums thus far with regard to an NBA opinion/knowledge. I certainly hope that you aren't a Rocket fan because your idiocy in this topic is truly profound and indirectly taints this whole fanbase. Go watch the WNBA because clearly someone with your intellectual rigor should only be allowed to watch 5'11 women miss layups for a living.

 

The regular season is a tuneup for the playoffs. Nobody cares about what happen in the regular season. If the rockets would have beat the bulls in the playoffs, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

Jerry do you believe Jordan was a competitive guy? Do you think he didn't care about losing regular season games? Did it not matter to him?

Do you think he didn't care about being dominated by another team whether in the regular season or playoffs? Do you think his competitive nature would allow for that?

 

This is why we need a negative rep!

Such an stupid post!

Its why its called "CLUTCH CITY" its why the forum you are its called "CLUTCHFANS"

because in clutch time the rockets got up, and won those championships, when a lot of people thought they were done, and btw phoenix were 3-1 in 95 if you didnt know, (probably you started watching basketball 5 years ago).

 

Always love this post. That's what I'm talking about! If anything, we hated the Sonics in the early 90's. That's when I started watching the Rockets! Always will be a Rockets fan til I'm pushing daisies 6 ft deep!

 

Let's be clear: you do not know any more about the truth, which is not even the correct word to use, than anybody else. If you're seriously trying to make an argument that because team A was beat by team B, and then team B was beat by team C, that this logically means that team C would beat team A, then you really are exposing yourself for the idiot that most of have figured you are. This entire post was NOT predicated on which team was the best in any given year- it goes without saying, even though this can almost be debated, as well, that the team left standing with the championship trophy was the best team that year (although I'm here to tell you that if the Giants-Patriots Super Bowl gets played another 9 times out of 10, I'd predict the Patriots as victors in almost every other one).

But, I'm willing to accept that the best team in any given year is the one that wins the championship. What you fail to understand, given your limited knoweldge of logic and probability, is that there is certainly a precedent for saying that the Rockets could have most certainly beaten the Bulls in the playoffs. I believe two factors have to be considered:

1. Head-to-head matchups in the regular season (yes, there is ample evidence that success against a team in the regular season can translate to success against same team in the playoffs- unless you believe that Don Nelson pulled out the bubbling cauldron before GS' matchup with Dallas in the 2007 playoffs and had his 3 witches- Davis, Jackson, and Barnes- put a spell on the Mavericks). Sure, you can find evidence to the contrary- Houston-San Antonio in 1995 is one example- but you can also find a ton of examples in which regular season success translates to similar post-season results.

2. The team in question should at least be a playoff-caliber if not a championship-caliber team. I think it's very reasonable to include this as a determining factor- the team in question should at least have indicated that they had the ability to win playoff series- which rules out a team like Toronto against the Bulls in 1996. Because the Rockets clearly demonstrated the ability to win playoff series, it is not unreasonable to assume that they would be able to replicate this against the Bulls.

Although you have presented some interesting food for thought (more lima beans than Porterhouse Steak, but that's OK), you have continued to bog down your argument in this logical fallacy of "Well, Houston didn't make it that year, and the Bulls did, therefore the Bulls would have of course beaten them. This goes back to your A-B-C argument, which in your case is actually a big heaping dose of F-A-I-L. You have no more basis to conclude that the Bulls would have beaten the Rockets head-to-head in a playoff series than Keanu Reeves has for a future Oscar nomination. Your points are bereft of even the most basic, fundamental laws of logic, so much so that you'd be better off using ad hominem arguments and just removing yourself from this thread altogether to save yourself further embarrassment.

But you know what your greatest crime is? You've let down Houston Rockets nation. Olajuwon. Horry. Smith. Petruska. Cureton. Jent. Elie. Brown. Cassell. Thorpe. Maxwell. Herrera. Drexler. Tomjanovich. Berry. These players and coaches, who gave their all every single night, who overcame some of the greatest odds of any team to win 2 championships outright (and don't start on your "Jordan only played less than half a season in 1995"- there's a reason the Rockets went 47 and 25, and it wasn't due to lack of talent or hard work, it was spelled I-N-J-U-R-I-E-S), who represented this great city of Houston like no other team had before, EARNED THE RIGHT TO BE GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT!!! You didn't even wait for the bird to crow 3 times, you Judas'ed us the first chance you got. You slapped us with a Benedict and followed up with an Arnold. You Rosenberged your way into the Houston Rockets Fan Hall of Shame. And you're the one who has to live with it. May the Almighty and the Basketball Gods have mercy on your soul. As much as you have disappointed us, we will pray for your speedy recovery.

 

Since both teams never made it to the Finals at the same time, we'll never know what would have happened. But I will say it would have been the greatest finals matchup of all times. Screw lakers vs celtics. It would have been the best guard vs the best center and both teams had great role players.

 

It's amazing that nobody in pro-Rockets faction bothers to check the head-to-head records in the above post. I guess they are just content with beating up Jerry36.

1. The expansion Raptors never swept the championship Bulls during the 2nd 3-peat. Chicago's records vs Toronto were 3-1, 3-1, 4-0.

2. It's a stretch to say the Knicks regularly beat the championship Bulls. Chicago swept (4-0) NY in '91, '92, '98, won 3-1 in '96, tied 2-2 in '97, lost 1-3 in '93. The '93 season could be a good argument for you as the Bulls beat the Knicks in EC finals in a tight series.

3. The Pacers were tied with the Bulls twice (2-2 in '96 and '98) and but were swept in '97.

4. Ron Harper was no longer with the Cavs in the 1st 3-peat. You must be thinking about '89 when they swept the Bulls 6-0 in the regular season but lost 2-3 in the 1st round EC playoffs to the Bulls. However, the Bulls were still 2 years away from their first title. In '93 the Cavs did post a 3-2 record in the regular season and get swept by the Bulls in the playoffs.

What's interesting is, although nobody else seems to notice, that in Bulls' 1st 3-peat the Spurs had the exact records vs the Bulls as the Rockets: 2-0, 1-1, 2-0. Coincidence? Probably not. Think David Robinson. While you are correct that regular season head-to-head results are not necessarily indicative of playoff outcomes, the circumstantial evidences are quite overwhelming that the 1st 3-peat Bulls team would have had lots of troubles had they met a WC team led by a dominant center in the finals.

 

Great breakdown. Fair points that need to be conceded.

The the sake of debate, though, it's not fair to say Chicago could step it up while Houston couldn't in a playoff head-to-head. Of course, Chicago was able to beat their other opponents while we got hung up with the Sonics.

Ultimately I think the points that need to be made have been made:
The Rockets championships are legit.
The Bulls championships are legit.
We'll never know how they would've matched up.

The end.