Maybe because it was 31/31 when I made that post. And that's still a wide difference from yout thread. You can't seriously be this slow. Maybe you need some coffee or to go to to bed and power back up. Edit: Oops, 33/32 for the Bulls now. I could boast, but I realize how dumb that would make me look since the vote update could change quickly, like say the next minute or two (this goes for this response of yours and the post right before it).
No, you are assuming people are voting for the Bulls simply because they are the Bulls. Quite a convenient thing for you to believe, considering which side of the aisle you are on. I mean, it couldn't have anything to do with knowing the team had 3 of the top defenders at their positions in league history once they find out who the team was. LMAO
............youve said about 3 times now you need name recognition to be the reason why your team team wins. That GED educated reasoning has already been shot down, sadly you keep right on with it. You lost son, time to man up and pay. Until I see you've done so, I'll just keep laughing it up that some kid thought he knew basketball and decided to let a few hundred people how lacking he is in knowledge.
Considering you used zero stats to back up anything you've said...... hahahahahaha of course you're using 100% team recognition. Oh my god, this getting on the pathetic side of funny here.
How in the world can you expect to get any viable results out of the poll, Icehouse?! It is just a convenience sample, which is subject to heavy bias.
Because he's basing his poll strictly on name recognition, using the old 'well if it's the 90's Bulls they must have been the best because MJ was on the team' thought process. Although that seems blatantly obvious, he doesn't seem to be catching on. Luckily there's another poll on here that doesn't degrade itself to simple team names, it gives comparable stats for one to judge. Go check it out, you'll see people who base their opinions on facts and not name on the jerseys overwhelmingly choose one of the two teams.
it's tough because pippen and jordan could get serious at the 2 and 3. But Harper was a shell of his former self. At that era, the point guards were not as good as they are now. So Harper had the "Derek Fisher" type of luxury. Luc Longley was a joke and Bill Wellington was 5 fouls. Wallace and Wallace I believe were defensive teams year in and out. This is Tayshawn at his peak, not the "skinny Tayshawn" as we know wouldn't last 2 minutes with a Lebron James or a heavy 3 equivalent. Hamilton was undersized IMO but playing against Twizzler Reggie Miller was fine. Billups was good in that system. Piston's by 3 hairs.
Thank you, another person who took the time to actually go through the lineup to see which team would be better defensively. He didn't even need the 19 out of 20 stats that would back up his claim to make that call.
I actually think we have some very educated basketball fans on this board that can vote objectively and not let their bias get in the way. And the thread is asking about the Pistons and Bulls. Now I would expect some heavy bias if I were asking about the Rockets (our team) or some team we beat (to make our road appear tougher). But the Pistons and Bulls? This isn't a Jordan/Bull worshipping joint.
Short version: "I expect the results to show that people like the 90's bulls more than the boring 2004 Pistons, I will not bother them with stats or numbers"
The exact same thread was made on Realgm (probably also by Icehouse) and EVERYONE is answering the Pistons.
Good analysis. However, Harper was not a shell of himself defensively. He was one of the main reasons they were so good defensively, because he routinely held the #2 perimiter threat and you still had to deal with Jordan checking someone. The Bulls centers were jokes, yet their frontline held their own against very legit Centers in the postseason. Let's just use 1996 as an example. Round 1: Mourning - 18/6 on 49% shooting, down from 23/10 on 52% in the season. They swept the Heat. Round 2: Ewing - 23/11 on 47%, which was basically what he put up during the season. They beat NY 4-1. Round 3: Shaq - 27/11 on 64%, up from 27/11 on 53% in the season. They swept the Magic and held them to 83, 88, 67 and 101 points. This was a team that averaged 104.5 during the season and had scored 112, 92, 101, 117, 120, 103, 99, 96 in the postseason (7-1 record) before they got to Chicago. That's as impressive as you can get as far as legit centers in a postseason. And as far as the PG's not being as good then as they are now (it's late and don't feel like breaking down their numbers): 1996 - Tim Hardaway, Penny and Gary Payton
You are twisting my words, or you simply don't understand what I meant by "statistical reality." Obviously if you pick specific stats in certain situations they can be misleading. It doesn't take a genius to know that. However telling me which defense is better, based only on you watching, is stupid. I trust my judgement over yours based on watching teams, and I still believe the Pistons defense was superior. But because I can't simply dismiss your viewpoints, They must be quantified into something That is irrefutable. Statistics. The "statistical reality" isn't one stat nitpicked to mislead. I consider it taking into account every statistic that I can get my hands on and taking in as many viewpoints as my human brain can comprehend, and then basing my conclusions on that. I'm only saying that I would trust a mountain of statistics sorted through and analyzed along with my knowledge of the game and watching both teams play, rather than a mass poll on who thought what defense was better. If everyone that voted in both polls used this method to come to conclusions, the poll results would be exactly the same. However they are not, which means people either randomly voted for 2 different teams, or that they completely disregard statistics in your thread, either of which I don't believe is the correct way to assess a basketball defense. you could say there is "more than meets the eye" when it comes to basketball.
While I like the defense the pistons played, they also played at a slower pace vs the old school bulls. The 1st 3 peat bulls wearbeastly defensively. When they scored and put that fullcourt trap on with horace grant on the inbounds guy, they really disrupted offenses.
Slower pace yet still averaged more blocks/steals than the Bulls. That should only strengthen the argument the Pistons are better defensively.
Yes comparing defenses only works when one of the teams was far and away greater at offense and the resultant blowouts/bench player minutes.
Well first of all, I never told you my opinion is based solely on me watching. I told you that I think we have intelligent posters here who know ball and aren't influenced by the name on the jersey. As far as everything else that you noted, I would typically agree if we weren't comparing 2 teams from two completely different era's, playing under different rules (as far as statistical realities go). I never told you, or anyone, to dismiss statistics. I said stats don't always tell the whole story, which is why it's misleading to not include teams. For example with the Bulls and Pistons, stats don't tell you that the 96 Bulls had better defenders at PG, SG, SF and PF, along with 4 legit 7 footers (Longley, Wennington, Salley, Edwards). Or do you disagree that the Bulls were better defensively at 4 spots (IMO the only debate is Billups vs Harper)? Matchups and who is playing does matter in basketball, and not mentioning the "who" isn't telling the whole story. And that has nothing to do with living off name or rep. It has everything to do with the Bulls players (starters at least) being better defenders than their counterparts. And you also didn't answer my question. Do you think Lebron is better than Larry Bird? "Statistical reality" says that he is (higher stats in everything but rebounds, and a higher PER). but would it make much sense to do a comparison and just list their stats without telling who the players were? With all that being said, it appears that I was wrong and more folks think the 04 Pistons were better defensively.
