black francis
Well-Known Member
Kukoc/Pippen/Jordan could have been considered a superteam back in his day
2 Hall of Famers and one of the best European players ever
2 Hall of Famers and one of the best European players ever
Remember in his prime when all people expected the Bulls to win every year lol really hypocritical to say something like this
At least now you have the:
GSW - best team
Cavs - team that has the best player
Spurs - when healthy proved to be able to beat the warriors (with a HOF coach)
OKC - newly formed super team
Then the Rockets, Celtics who have talents.
Jordan in the 90s had what?
Bulls - best team
with the best player
with a great coach
and the rest had great talents but we all knew they were no match for what the Bulls have
Barring an injury to Curry or Durant, there prolly is only one.I guess trash wasn't the right word but IMO there are currently 3 or maybe 4 teams who can win the title
I've got no problem with a super team that did it mostly through the draft. It's the free agents that all pile on and pick 1 team that I think is pathetic.
The league has never been so top heavy and it's never been this full of trash at the bottom.
Durant's faultHowever Ewing didn't leave the Knicks and join the Bulls because he couldn't get by Jordan.
And I don't think Jordan is whining, just making a comment that's what the current NBA has become. Pretty sure he knows the NBA a little better than all of us.
Actually, it has been this top heavy. In the 80's, it was the Lakers, Celtics, Sixers and that was pretty much it.
For a good chunk of the 90's, it was MJ's Bulls and that was pretty much it.
Early 2000's? Lakers and Spurs. Not much else.
C's are essentially a new team.The league in the 90s had way more superstars per team than now I disagree. Some of these teams now have jack. The bottom is bad. And the top has 2 legit teams, sorry I'm not buying the Celtics can hang with the Warriors. Celtics did shit last year dam near got beat by the Bulls
The league in the 90s had way more superstars per team than now I disagree. Some of these teams now have jack. The bottom is bad. And the top has 2 legit teams, sorry I'm not buying the Celtics can hang with the Warriors. Celtics did shit last year dam near got beat by the Bulls
C's are essentially a new team.
And I don't really think they're better tbh. People get excited over change.
lol. No they didn't. It was pretty much just like it is now. There was the Bulls and everyone was chasing them because they were that much better. Now it's the Warriors sitting in the Bulls spot.
The bottom of the league in the 90's was just as bad as it is now.
Lol. Look at the playoffs last year. It was pathetic in both the West and East. Oh but the Cavs and Warriors were sooooo good
I guess trash wasn't the right word but IMO there are currently 3 or maybe 4 teams who can win the title
I don't like coming across as a hater. But I am.I think the Celtics are the only chance the East has to dethrone the Cavs. I think Kyrie struggles being the man unless he gets everyone involved. But is he that kind of PG? You and I are old school bball Schmitty and it's just a different Eastern conference. Not the black and blue we knew
Didn't know Spurs and OKC are considered dumpster here.Trash was the right word. It's Cavs/Warriors and then the dumpster. Don't let the offended people sway you.
I don't like coming across as a hater. But I am.
Less and less guys that bang and play borderline "dirty". (Why I love Draymond.)
The old Eastern Conference ball was how I was taught and what i saw. Not just me being coached, but watching and working County League and playing pick up ball. It was the game I knew. Across cultures and everything.
Feel like an old man yelling at clouds sometimes. (Im with you on Boston being the only other option. Washington just isn't quite there. Kyrie better enjoy being the man, Gordo is no BronBron.)