[ESPN] “Vegas: '17 Warriors would be favored over 72-10 Bulls team”

[Stifle]

The way the game is officiated as of today would favor a team that is built for today's game, like the Warriors. The Bulls would be favored if the game were officiated as they were in the 90's. Both teams were built perfect for the era they played in.

[RogerGodahell]

Almost a completely different game now with the amount of 3's that are being put up. I don't necessarily think it makes today's players better. I'm not a huge fan of centers jacking up 3's. Driving to the hoop is a much higher percentage shot with a chance of contact for a foul and free throws. I've seen some ugly games where teams keep trading brick 3 after brick 3 instead of attacking the hoop for easier points. Players don't like to box out much anymore either. Old school players would kill them on the defensive end/rebounds and basic fundamentals imo.

[Hamburglar]

If both teams are in the same era, Durant will join Bulls, end of this controversy

[exitmusicblue]

My money’s on Vegas > BO.

[Round Mound]

Originally Posted by Stifle

The way the game is officiated as of today would favor a team that is built for today's game, like the Warriors. The Bulls would be favored if the game were officiated as they were in the 90's. Both teams were built perfect for the era they played in.

This.

[mc1]

Originally Posted by k13

They would have lost to Houston if not for Chris Paul Injury.
Barely favored over them.

Did you even read the article? It mentioned 16-17 Warriors vs 95-96 Bulls. This year's team is 17-18, no?

So many lazy people, cant even read.

[RYBOWSKI97]

Hilarious wouldnt of beaten houston in 16...barely beat houston this year but better than the bulls team with 3 hof players. lol

[dasiegel]

I love how some people think it depends on the rules. It doesn't. Under the old rules guys like Curry, Klay and KD could still use the pick and roll and they could still shoot the lights out. Under the new rules Jordan, Harper, Pippen and Rodman would still be nightmares defensively.

Whoever you decide to pick would adapt to and work with the rules that were assigned. Lineups, handchecking, hard fouls, etc would be adjusted to by either team.

[DubsAstrosBama]

Originally Posted by CoolG

Once again Vegas is wrong
Bulls in 5-6

Does anybody actually watch ESPN anymore ?
I don’t think I’ve watched any program other than a game in 3-4 years

And you would lose all of your money when the Warriors win in 5. Vegas loves guys like you.

[seabass97166]

Will there be hand checking allowed like in the 90s?

If yes, I will take the Bulls.

If no, I will take the Bulls for less $

[Harper]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

jordan, pippen and rodman were utterly relentless on d. there isnt a single player in the league currently that would know what hit them when a real defender put on the pressure. this hypothetical is complete nonsense and a joke to the history of the game.

Plus you have Ron harper at 6’6” playing defense at guard. bulls would go “small” with kukoc on the floor instead of luc against the warriors as well bc they have no dominant Center. Rodman could guard any Center warriors had. That small lineup has no players shorter than 6 6

[elee712]

Everyone is an expert at what will happen when it cant he proven.

Warriors would surrender after game 1 when they lose 150-22

[TWard]

[RogerGodahell]

[jick]

If you say Bulls beat Warriors in 5 or 6, are you saying the Warriors would lose to the Jazz and Sonics of that era in 7?

[Skybox]

Which rules we going by?

90's ... when you could actually play defense & put your hand on an offensive player outside the lane? Or ...

Now ... when you're not allowed to touch another player & the game has become a three pointer & dunk contest ?

[Skybox]

Originally Posted by dasiegel

I love how some people think it depends on the rules. It doesn't. Under the old rules guys like Curry, Klay and KD could still use the pick and roll and they could still shoot the lights out. Under the new rules Jordan, Harper, Pippen and Rodman would still be nightmares defensively.

Whoever you decide to pick would adapt to and work with the rules that were assigned. Lineups, handchecking, hard fouls, etc would be adjusted to by either team.

It would very much be dependent on the rules

IMO great players would be great players in any era but Curry would not be allowed just to stand at the three point line & chunk shots ... he would be muscled, hand checked for about 60 feet of the floor

I will agree that KD's game probably wouldn't be affected too much but both Curry & Thompson's would be vastly different & IMO less effective

Much, much different game back then

[starfox]

Originally Posted by RogerGodahell

Almost a completely different game now with the amount of 3's that are being put up. I don't necessarily think it makes today's players better. I'm not a huge fan of centers jacking up 3's. Driving to the hoop is a much higher percentage shot with a chance of contact for a foul and free throws. I've seen some ugly games where teams keep trading brick 3 after brick 3 instead of attacking the hoop for easier points. Players don't like to box out much anymore either. Old school players would kill them on the defensive end/rebounds and basic fundamentals imo.

Spectacular point. I have the Bulls winning. As someone earlier mentioned, you have to make Golden State take the ball out (from behind the opponent's basket). You do this by making shots. The Bulls would be smart enough not to shoot 30 3s in any game of the series (no team has ever shot 3s like the Warriors of today). Instead, the Bulls would run their offense and take the best shot. Golden State has nobody that can stop Jordan from getting 35. Nobody on either team would outrebound Rodman. You can always count on Pippen to give you a "full day's work," even if he only ends up with 16 points. Cleveland lost to Golden State for two main reasons: 1) lack of shot makers, and 2) getting sucked into trying (and failing) to match Golden State's 3-point shooting. The Bulls aren't getting sucked into that. Bulls in 6, possibly 5. Most people picking the Warriors to win are probably 30 or less years old and think things of today are normally better than things of yesteryears. Well, the 72 - 10 Bulls were not normal.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[starfox]

Originally Posted by Harper

Plus you have Ron harper at 6’6” playing defense at guard. bulls would go “small” with kukoc on the floor instead of luc against the warriors as well bc they have no dominant Center. Rodman could guard any Center warriors had. That small lineup has no players shorter than 6 6

Another good point made.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[starfox]

And to expound a little on my point: the Warriors have been beating the Cavs in the Finals because the Cavs couldn't knock down enough open shots. The Bulls specialized in getting players that were average or below average from other teams like Luc Longley, Steve Kerr, and Randy Brown to play well. If there was anything the role players from the 72 - 10 Bulls could do, it was stay focused and knock down open shots. This is not even a debate for me. You have to make Golden State work all game long. Since this Warriors team has been formed, and made better with the addition of Durant, only Houston (2018), San Antonio (2017), and Cleveland (2016 to a degree; Draymond Green lost the series for the Warriors) made them work for an entire game. I'm not saying the 72 - 10 Bulls were impossible to beat, but become better educated on your basketball history before just blurting out an answer.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Round Mound]

With so many big-time analysts on BO, I think we should call the NBA HQ, so that they make a poll, hand it over to you, and just give the trophy to whoever you decide

You must all be very rich with all the money you make by betting on games