One thing about the Chris Bosh. I'm sorry about all the Pansy jokes I made about the guy but when it's all said and done, he is currently Dirk's heir apparent but also a better defender and post player.
Outside of the notion of creating better defenses with greater, I completely disagree with your statement. In one sense, like the NFL, the wing players are taller, faster, and a bit stronger, while scheme are slightly given that illegal defenses are allowed and bigs cannot camp out in the paint. People, like to highlight and scream about how easy wing players have it, now on offense, because you cannot body them up. Yet, you still see teams holding opponents to under 94 ppg and under 43%...all of the rules designed to take defenses. Most of all, there were a league full of crappy defensive teams and only about 5-7 teams had what we call a great all-star center. As an entire league, I actually agree many defenses would be just as terrible or worse. If we are talking Miami, SA, or 07-11 Celtics (even the 03-08 Pistons), then these teams would be even more dominant, than now, possibly. If more physical play is allowed. Look at the Bulls, nothing close to great big man or shot blocker, yet they were the greatest defensive team of the 1990s and of all team. I could even throw in Seattle, Utah, and Indiana. Very perimeter-centric teams on offense and defense, oddly enough those are the teams that the great couldn't beat...there's an issue of talent, coaching, and execution. Teams...had Mutombo, Mourning, and Olajuwon didn't necessarily have the best defensive teams...like offense, it takes an entire team. On the same token, it helps make a defense great. I thought New York had a great defense, because of versatile defenders and overall defensive execution, not simply, because of Ewing. Oakley could guard two position (later on it was Camby), while Mason could guard three and having Starks/Harper/Ward/Rivers (Sprewell/Childs/Houston, later). They could shut teams down with good schemes and brutality. Yet, their defenses were never as good as the Bulls on defense. Because, even without a great center, their players were athletic, versatile... and could shutdown teams down on the perimeter.
If you take Jordan off of the Bulls.. and you take Lebron off of the Heat... I think The Heat would beat the Bulls.
The way I see it: Bulls- number of players who are capable of gaining significant playing time AND helping to win championships with more than one team: Kerr, Harper, Horace Grant, Dennis Rodman, Will Perdue, Robert Parish, John Salley (yeah yeah, I guess you can't count his Lakers stint) Heat: errmm Ray Allen
But the MJ back then, didnt conspire with pippen, horace grant, n rodman to join together n play on the same team... That throws all the arguments off the whole time.
he didn't need to conspire with pippen. the bulls got the 5th overall pick when jordan missed 64 games with a broken foot and the bulls went 30-52 (still made the playoffs, how bout that eastern conference huh?).
Yes, I know... Clue #1: One of the controversial calls in NBA history. Clue #2: The Pacers beat the Magic and Hawks...to play who? The Bulls only reached ECF, twice without MJ. Once before he arrived in (1981) and (2011). A few times in the 70s, when they played in the West.
