Charley Rosen's at it again

Da Realist:

he's at it again. one thing you can say is, whether you agree or disagree, he brings it. it's tough
to argue with him, but i do have a couple of things here that i do disagree with. it'll be interesting to see what you guys think.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4350680

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4796682

Waldini:

I was just reading this as you sent this email. Yea he's definitely bringin it and he's not playing favorites. Almost everybody (he kinda let Bird and McHale off) is getting their weaknesses put out on the living room floor. The only dispute I have with the list is the low ranking of the 86-87 Lakers. Yea, I know that defense was not forte but when they needed a stop, they got a stop. I am anxious to see what the top 5 looks like. I know the 96 Bulls and 83 Sixers are in the top 3......

Da Realist:

that's EXACTLY what i was thinking! how could the '87 lakers be so low? i don't think charley is going to have the '96 bulls on there. they were good, but they weren't even the best bulls team. i think any of the 91-93 teams would have beaten 96. but i'll wait to see what he says.

my guess for the rest of the list to be (in no particular order)

92 chicago bulls
72 los angeles lakers
83 philadelphia 76'ers
86 boston celtics
85 los angeles lakers

Waldini:

You are the first Bulls fan I know to say that. I thought the 92 Bulls were one of the COLDEST teams I witnessed watching. Yea they struggled slightly in the Eastern Conf Finals but when it mattered, they broke out the whippin stick on ya....

Now Realist, you know he is going to put the 96 Bulls near the top just b/c they were the only team to win 70 games. He's a big Celtics buff so I say the 86 Celts come 2nd. I would love to hear his reasons why the 85 Lakers are better than the 87 Lakers especially since he cant stand McAdoo.

Da Realist:

nah, this guy is the least PC columnist i know. i don't think he'll put the '96 team. he wouldn't be
swayed by the record because he'll note that the league was watered down. i'm still having a hard time believing he put the '87 lakers on the LOWER TIER of champions. and why the hell is the '50 minneapolis lakers one of his 13 best? c'mon, man. that wonder bread team probably couldn't beat the harlem globetrotters back then. but being that i wasn't alive back then forces me to cede that particular argument.

not only is he going to have to pick 5 teams from the 5 i mentioned earlier, but the '77 portland
trailblazers, '67 philadelphia 76'ers (who held the record the 96 bulls later broke) along with 96-98 bulls. the thing to remember is the teams he doesn't pick fall below the 13 that he did. so let's say, for example, he does not choose the '80 lakers. what he's basically saying is that the '80 lakers could not beat the '94 houston rockets (no. 12), even though they beat a LOADED philadephia 76er team in the finals. good luck, charley.