MJ Vs. Drake?

[Mavs4Life]

Silly Drake

phpBB [video]

[Dee.]

They won't win 73 games. Ever.

[Phraynk]

fucking EVER.

[Andrew]

I don't see them winning 73 games either. If topping the 70 win mark was that easy, it would've happened more than once. I wouldn't rank a team as the best ever based on what they could potentially do either but hey, it's all in fun to promote the game and its historical content.

[bowdown]

fuck off Drake.

[The Greatest10]

such a lame team for the heat to win 73, they could not even top bulls in winning the east conference title, there only good when it comes to name but game they would never reach as high as 72 wins, ur Heat team is crap, MJ: bring it hahahah now youre talking come on bring on the heat drake

[qfrmcpt310]

Only way a team can EVER match or surpass the 96' Bulls are these 2 things:

1.Unmatched talent level- This team would have to be obviously better than EVERYONE in the league, and by a wide margin. Meaning they would probably 2+ All-Stars, who also are 2 of the best defenders in the NBA(how many of today's "great" players are beasts on 'D' besides a select 4 or 5?), and one of them would have to be the best player in the NBA...

2.Ridiculous amount of focus and commitment to defense- Just the thought of having to bring it EVERY night for 6 months sounds daunting for me, let alone being w/o family, the travel, weather, injuries, etc.
That combined with the fact the team would have to be similar to the 08' Celtics on defense, I just don't see it happening anytime soon.

[_Steve_]

It would much depend on which adjustments Heat will make in the next few seasons. But to be honest, despite I think that off all current NBA teams the Heat are the team most likely to get 70 wins in a single season, it's not very likely that it could happen. It would mean that they'd manage sweeps against about 2/3 of all NBA teams...

[Andrew]

1.Unmatched talent level- This team would have to be obviously better than EVERYONE in the league, and by a wide margin. Meaning they would probably 2+ All-Stars, who also are 2 of the best defenders in the NBA(how many of today's "great" players are beasts on 'D' besides a select 4 or 5?), and one of them would have to be the best player in the NBA...

Not necessarily; top to bottom, the '96 Bulls probably weren't the most talented team in the league that season. It does help greatly that their top three guys where MJ, Pip and The Worm and the rest of the core rotation were at the very least solid players who could fill a role and play within the system. To equal or best that record, I think a team has to at least have comparable talent to the other top teams in the league with stars at the top who are driven and unwilling to coast at any time.

There have been teams that have come close and on paper have had ample talent on the roster to have had a good shot at it in the first place, but they haven't been able to avoid the slumps that the '96 Bulls did. Those losses can add up quickly, especially late in the season with fatigue and injuries take their toll; anyone who doesn't have just three or four losses at the All-Star break is not in good position to break the record.

[_Steve_]

[...]Those losses can add up quickly, especially late in the season with fatigue and injuries take their toll; anyone who doesn't have just three or four losses at the All-Star break is not in good position to break the record.

I think you pointed out the relevant aspects. Statistically you simply can't avoid injuries and if they come at the wrong time they might even cost you the title (see C-Webb and KG)...

[Andrew]

The interesting thing is the '96 Bulls did have some key players miss a significant number of games and were one of the oldest teams in the league that year. Regular starters Rodman and Longley missed 18 and 20 games respectively, while Pippen missed five games. Only two players played in all 82 games...of course, one of them was Michael Jordan, which helps.

[_Steve_]

Luck favors the prepared. As you've already mentioned, MJ had a good supporting cast which means he had also good solid bench players including the Croation Sensation who could jump in as a starter.

[fjccommish]

The Bulls were by far the most talented team in the league that season. Player by player they may not have been, but they were as far as effective on court talent.

For example, some other team may have had better scorers deeper into the starting five, but so what? The Bulls had the exact pieces they needed to fill important roles. The team was built better than any team in NBA history.

[Andrew]

It depends how you define "most talented". They were the most well-oiled machine that played the best basketball that season, but on paper their roster was not the most talented outside its top three or four players.

[shadowgrin]

phpBB [video]

The Celtics fans are hilarious in that vid.
"Bird didn't need to dunk, he laid it up like a real man."
"Larry Bird doesn't blow out his back redoing his mom's driveway we are a dynasty!"

Does anyone notice, the one team that doesn't belong in this debate? Drake and the Miami Heat. What the fuck have they won?
coliwood

[iPrototype]

"Bird didn't need to dunk, he laid it up like a real man."

Brian Wilson speaks, everybody listens.

[qfrmcpt310]

at the vid.

The 96 Sonics were loaded as well, but to me that 96 Bulls team was just unmatched. Throw in the drive they had after what happened in 95', and we all know how competitive MJ was, that team wasn't going to be stopped. Now, with that said, if this goes into a debate about best team ever and not wins, the 87 Lakers, 86 Celtics, 96 Bulls, and 72 Lakers probably standout above others.

[Phraynk]

BAHAHAHAH,

Mark Cuban's reaction to drake!