Most people would choose the Celtics of the 50's and 60's, and I can hardly go against that, they won 11 out of thier 16 total championships and 8 in-a-row at that.
What I mean is take every player in the Celtic and Bulls championship years, match up head to head, which team would have of won more championships (and please eliminate the fact that both teams are in the same conference, I know that)
3) To me I would choose the Bulls, and not just b/c of the whole, "I want to be like Mike theme." But if u really look at the Bulls over all height and talent I truly believe that the Celtics would have not stacked up offensively, but probably defensively.
2) The overall team consisted of players like Ron Harper, Steve Kerr, Horace Grant, B. J. Armstrong, John Paxson, Toni Kukoc, and Dennis Rodman. although their not part of the 50 greatest club they added thier big time shots, blocks, or free-throws.
1) Come on, "Jordan and Pippen"
2007-10-05 16:54:48 · 5 answers · asked by Amo la pallacanestro 5 in Sports ➔ Basketball
It's hard to compare the two. Not only was the game a lot different back then, but Boston had most of the league's talent of that era.
2007-10-06 11:02:00 · answer #1 · answered by JimDog5575 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dynasty-era Celtics huh? Every player you say. LOLZ!
Russell
Cousy
Sharman
Ramsey
Heinsohn (6'11 PF/C)
Lovellete (7'0, 290lbs backup center)
Havlicek
Sam Jones
KC Jones
Bailey Howell
Satch Sanders
Don Nelson
Give the oldies all the benefits of a modern team and the Bulls are sorely outmatched. This team has multiple lockdown defenders in every position and offensively the Celtics will blitz them with their fastbreak and has 10 guys averaging double digits. They got clutch performers, offensively and defensively in Russ, Hondo, Heinsohn, Ramsey and Sam. What could the Bulls team populated with stiffs do against a team with loaded with Hall of Famers?
Teamwork? Nope sorry, the 60's Celtics were the epitome of teamwork. On a normal NBA season, they have 6-7 guys averaging in double digits. And if history is a judge, the Celtics have never lost a series against a team lead by a sharpshooting, clutch shooting, lockdown defender (yes im looking at you "Mr. Clutch" Jerry West).
2007-10-06 00:02:57 · answer #2 · answered by MyKill 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tough to compare eras, of course, but the Celtics won 11 titles in 13 years in addition to eight in a row. They had a ton of Hall of Famers in the lineup, and remember that Bill Russell never lost a seventh game.
You'd have to think the Bulls would have a physical advantage because of the gap in years -- a strong forward was 6-6 in the 1960's -- but the Celtics would be a handful for anyone.
2007-10-05 17:00:48 · answer #3 · answered by wdx2bb 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
One can only wonder what the Bulls could have done is MJ didn;t retire.
People choose the celtics for the same reason they choose the Yankees and the Canadiens. These were teams that dominated sports in the 50s and that memory is still strong
2007-10-05 18:22:13 · answer #4 · answered by Experto Credo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is impossible to compare teams with that much time passing between them. I would say that you left out three teams that could have been very competitive with these two and you could also build a case that two of them were dynasties as well.
The 1980's Lakers and Celtics. For one year the 76ers of Moses Malone and Julius Erving.
2007-10-05 17:40:28 · answer #5 · answered by John M 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋