here, he said BOTH were tainted: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...t=AkerP2m87V7svR8YglESj3K8vLYF?urn=nba-291327
No there not tainted , peopple will look at them that way just as they say the two houston ones were. For Once I agree with Lebron this shouldnt be an issue. Anybody could have gotten hurt ,so for me they wont even if Miami wins it all. FYI GO THUNDER LOL
every championship that didn't have jordan or wilt chamberlain playing in the league is tainted. every championship is tainted.
Unless you beat the Rockets in the Finals or beat them in the playoffs and go on to win in the NBA Finals, it's tainted in my books!
should not have an astreick..but it should be noted, the amount of injuries which have cost devastating impacts to championship contenders..likely due to the insane schedule.
Sure the rockets championship run was tainted with coverage of OJ Simpson driving his white Bronco. Still pissed about that.
It's only an asterisk to fans of those teams that went down. Nobody talked about how the championships of 2008 and 2009 were tainted when McGrady or Yao went down. But when it's a market like a Chicago "OH HELL NAW. **** IS TAINTED, BRUH." All hell breaks loose.
I'm glad you found this to support what i'm about to say... So logic would say that all of the championships that were won in 94, 95, and from 99 and on should all have asterisks and should be considered "tainted" because MJ's not in the league anymore.
Actually, it should be the other way around. Six of Phil Jackson's championships were tainted because he couldn't have won it if not for MJ. You know, come to think of it. This logic of "Tainted Championship" is fantastic. It can be applied to so many things. Genius.
If anything, this year should mean slightly more. Only the strong survive in a season where teams are playing 6 games in 8 nights, playing back-to back-to back, and in a year when everyone is getting hurt.
The 2012 championship will always have an asterisk after it for the fact that it was a shortened season of 66 games. Doesn't matter if it was a rough season and teams played back-to-backs all season long. It's still not a full NBA season. So if LeBron gets his first ring it will always count for a little less. And Phil Jackson is a prick, "When Jordan played we always won the championship". Well you never faced the Rockets in the Finals homeboy. I guarantee they would have smoked the Bulls in either 1994 or 1995 if that had been the match up.
By Phil's logic, only the championships between 1984 and 2003 (excluding '94,'95, '99, '00' 01) count. That means that Phil won 7 championships (6 with Jordan plus one with LA). Which means Phil did not break the record for most champions.
I'm sorry but having lived in cities outside Houston I can tell you for sure that most casual NBA fans know nothing about the 95' playoffs more than the facts that the Rockets won it and Shaq lost. Oh and they know that Jordan just "un-retired" that year and hence the Bulls were "not at full strength".
