For the record I think the '99 team lost because they had a game literally stolen by the refs, and that is a HUGE deal. That's the difference between winning and losing a series.
Edit - ANd not that is important, I do think the 97-98 team was better than the 99 team. Defense matters, and the 98 team was great defensively. The 99 team wasn't..
Last edited by mattie; 11-08-2013 at 03:33 PM.
Find me on the internets @mattiecolin
97 equals up on the Bulls with 5 mins left ECF game 7 and Smits loses a jump ball to Pippin. Utah would have fell in the Finals to the Pacers. 99/00 was Pacers losing to Shaq and Kobe in 6, where Shaq fouls out and McKey leaves Kobe open in OT for the shot that won the game 3? of the Finals. If you beat the Bulls in '97, you beat Utah. If you win game 3 in 2000 you're up 2-1 and beat the Lakers, I'm convinced. Tough either way. Both of those teams were on the verge of change and at the maximum of their games, THIS team is yet to get there. Pretty exciting. I hope in 7 or 19 months this isn't even a consideration, the banners will tell the tale.
though the 2000 squad made the finals, the 98 squad remains the standard in my book. we still had A.D plus, rik was able to score much better because his feet hadn't gone to crap yet. those 2 factors alone elevate the 98 bunch over the finals team.
now the 98 team against this year's squad?
well, i hate to sound indecisive but, i haven't yet seen enough of a sample size to give much of an evaluation. in fact, i won't have enough of one until i see the entire reg. & postseason play out in order to be fair as possible. we still have no idea how granger will do this year which could make an already deep team even deeper.
i suppose i might give the 98 team the edge but this team has the potential to pass them i believe.
Last edited by clownskull; 11-08-2013 at 03:55 PM.