I liked '96-'98 better, even though MJ was not as exciting post-retirement as he was pre-retirement. He still was one hell of a player and led the '96 Bulls to the best regular season record ever of 72-10. But those points aside, the main reasons I like the Bulls of '96-'98 better are: 1. They beat on the two Rocket killers, the Sonics and Jazz. 2. We got to be entertained by the freak show that is Dennis Rodman.
I think the 96-98 was better, because of the challenge. Yeah, I know they had a few struggles in the first three titles. However, that team had a young and athletic Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen, along with Horace Grant in his prime, etc. 96-98 saw them go through a lot more. Jordan didn't have the quickness he once had. Pippen had that back injury for several seasons. Rodman was like a timebomb on the court. The 96 season (72 wins) was pure dominance, but the last two seasons were what marked the Bulls legacy. Those Jazz teams were very good-- one actually had homecourt-- and the Bulls couldn't merely beat them with physical talent and dominance the way they had always beaten so many teams. It came down to execution in the final minutes. Some games they lost, but when things were finally starting to tilt against them, their experience and clutch play overcame their weaknesses. Remember Jordan's game winning three at Utah the night he was sick? To me, the 91-93 teams did exhibit some characteristics of the later teams, but IMO they won more off the fact that they were just better than everyone else. The 96-98 teams were challenged by a lot of teams, but always found a way to win. I think that was a more remarkable run.
