|
>>>Jazz had 2 top 50 players at their peaks. >>> >>Malone & Stockton were in their mid-30s, Stockton was a 12/8 >>guy, Malone was Malone, Hornacek was a spot up shooter & the >>rest of the core was Adam Keefe, Greg Foster, Howard Eisley, >>Ostertag & Byron Russell. >> >>Were they more a problem on a court than Durant, Westbrook & >>Harden with Ibaka swatting shots inside? >> >>I don't think so.....not even a little bit. >You think they'd be scared of Ibaka inside? Zach Randolph ate >him for breakfast. You don't think Karl Malone would do twice >as much damage? > Karl Malone was gonna run that same pick-and-roll he always did.
Karl Malone was one of the most easily frustratable, least clutch great players there ever was & he was that team's only All-Star.
Sorry, those teams weren't that good.
They won a war of attrition in the late 90's West is all.
Durant/Westbrook/Harden outscores Malone/Stockton/Hornacek by a wide-ass number.
>And it's not about the talent. uh, yes, it is.
talent is always the biggest factor.
The biggest issue with OKC was >in the half-court defense and half-court execution. Utah would >pick and roll that team to death, and they would have no >answer. On the other end, their offense would revolve around >Durant and Westbrook taking turns how to figure out what to >do. Once one of them went cold it'd be over. > There was three of them last year.
And Utah had nobody that could defend any of them.
The difference in their respective atleticism, talent & offensive firepower is so vast I'm mad you're making me waste my time telling you.
>It's not even about the talent on the court. It's about the >talent on the bench. Sloan would teach Brooks such a lesson > >>>Sonics had one HOF & another who looked like he was on his >>>way. >>> >>They were a mentally weak team who never put it all >together. >Wait, what? >That team held Jordan to his worst Finals in his career. dude, it was 3-0.
That only looked like a series after the fact.
They >choked twice (against Golden St. and Denver), but it took 44 >and 24 from Sir Charles and Olajuwon to knock them out the >playoffs. The year they made the Finals, they had to deal with >a 72 win Bulls squad. Mentally weak is a stretch > Mentally weak. Always were, nothing you wrote there has changed my mind. Payton I loved but he was a hot-head, Matt Maloney dropped 26 on his ass in that Houston series because he was stubborn. Kemp's issues were well-documnted. As are George Karl's playoff collapses.
>>>Blazers were a great team. >>> >>First of all, I only included the last three-peat but even >>still, no the Blazers were not a great team. >> >>They were a good team, they were basically the same level of >>team Rick Adelman was as a coach. >> >>And this wasn't even one of their best years. >> >>They won the same amount of games as the Knicks did this >>year. >> >> >>>Suns might be the weakest of that bunch. >> >>Nope. Suns were actually the best team the Bulls beat. >The Suns would wreck OKC AND Dallas as well. SA is the only >team that could probably hang with them or Utah
Suns are the only team that you could make an argument about for me, luckily I only said second three-peat anyway.
|