i'm sure we all will have some serious questions/comments after reading his top 5 teams of
Whoa Nellie! Where is the 83 Sixers squad? ANd what's his beef with Pippen? I dont remember him being arrogant towards the media and fans in his day. He basically is giving the 92 Bulls team (besides MJ, Grant, Pip) no love but everyone on the 96 team was a beast. And where are the 86 Celtics?? They were better than the.....
Sorry, too many other questions to ask right now :-)
The biggest question is what happened to scoring? How do you average 121 pts a game? How could a team average 106 pts and be the 16th highest scoring team one year, then 10 years later a team avg 100 pts and is #3:) Like Big said, "things done changed!"
1) just a thought... charley doesn't hide the fact that he and phil jackson are friends. is it a
coincidence that 3 teams coached by jackson and 1 team that jackson played on all made his list of 13? don't get me wrong, all of the teams he listed are good, but there were several he didn't list that were good too.
2) patrick ewing. he said patrick was one of the most overrated players of all time. he also said the 94 houston rockets are the 12th best team in history, but the knicks led by patrick stretched them to 7 games. he said the 92 bulls are the 4th best team in history, but the knicks let by patrick stretched THEM to 7 games. what does this say about patrick?
3) speaking of overrated. didn't he list chamberlain as a "loser" who happened to win a couple of rings? well, he also listed that "loser" as an important cog on the 3rd and best teams of all time. is he really a loser?
4) this isn't fair, but i might as well get the ball rolling. could the 94 rockets really beat the 86
celtics? could the 50 minneapolis lakers really beat the 85 los angeles lakers? could they even beat the 2005 san antonio spurs? it's always unfair to compare teams from different eras, but it sure is interesting to see what people think.
Good points, but Rosen would counter by saying that stretching wasn't good enough. He should've beaten them. I may be one of the few people without the last name Ewing, that don't think he was overrated. Like I said before, he lost to the G.O.A.T. There's no shame in that.
Look at those Knick teams. Not exactly the '85 Lakers. He got them as far as he could...
I'm still trippin the 83 Sixers are not on that list....And note he does not include the recent Spurs or Pistons championship teams. I wonder how he would rank those squads against previous champs.
Patrick, Chuck B, Stockton, Malone were all victims of playing against his Airness during his dominant years. I'm shocked at how fast Malone has gone from being the greatest PF ever to an overrated player who only looked good b/c of Stockton
like i said, it's hard comparing different teams and all that. i don't even like comparing players from different eras or even different positions. jordan is my favorite player of all time, but i've never said he's the greatest. how could you measure something like that? how can someone measure jordan against a totally different player, like say...magic johnson? both were winners, so that's nil. both were great leaders, so that's nil. the only difference is stats. but how do you compare stats for 2 totally different players? jordan was more explosive and physically
dominant, but magic had better court vision. how do you measure this?
anyway, i pretty much let people say what they want because you can't prove or disprove anything when there are so many differing factors affecting things. there is no control group. it'll be one thing if you can take the 67 sixers and apply the same forces to them to prepare them to play in 1996 against the bulls. better treatment, better diets, better workout regimens on the plus side but fat tv contracts, guaranteed money and free agency on the negative. then we could see who's better. or apply 1965 standards to the 2001 lakers and let's see them play bill russell's celtics. anything other than this is opinion. interesting, but still opinion.