Saberestar wrote:bwgood77 wrote:Saberestar wrote:Different eras, but I think the Rockets with Olajuwon was not a great team. They had an amazing player in Olajuwon and solid role players around him and they got Drexler later, but before getting him look at their roster... it wasn't THAT good.
I agree about the Mavs and Spurs from 2005-2008. Those were tough teams.
Their defense was tough. Olajuwon obviously, but Vernon Maxwell, Robert Horry and Otis Thorpe were tough too. Then they had solid 3 pt shooters at the time to surround Hakeem with and Cassell, Brooks, Elie and some other solid bench players.
They took out Stockton and Malone in 5 in the WCF after we took them to the finals and then a Knicks team that had battled the Bulls tough the prior year in the finals. In 95 we should have won, but they just hung in there and beat us, and had Drexler then...then knocked out a tough Spurs team in 7 in the WCF and swept Shaq and Penny in the finals.
Teams were tougher back then, at least then the injury riddled teams of last year and this year. Just tough comparisons.
It doesn't feel like you were watching then or perhaps in early SSOL days.
I know perfectly those teams, the Rockets-Knicks Finals were one of the worst Finals ever. Edit: I talk about their skills and overall talent, the games from the Finals were really interesting.
Yeah, tough defense with a lot of contact was allowed then and players were less skilled than now, a lot of big guys were on every team's bench.
That Rockets team had a lot of players playing minutes worse than Mikal Bridges or Crowder. Sam Cassell that early in his career was not better than Cam Payne. Come on...that roster didn't have any borderline All Star. Olajuwon was amazing but that roster was seriously one of the worst ever to win a Championship IMO.
There is not one team in the NBA right now that feels to me as tough as the Rockets felt then. I remember fearing them after we went to the finals. I did not feel like we could beat them in 94 and then we surprisingly went up 2-0 on the road. I did not think we could beat them in 93 either but thought we could beat Seattle so was happy Seattle knocked out Houston.
You are right that was a horrible finals..not because the teams were bad but because the Rockets were like the 05 Spurs..a tough physical defensive team with 3 pt shooting along with a legendary interior scorer, so they were not exactly exciting and the Knicks had built their teams to be physical and beat the Bulls and others by being tough and physical...with tough defense. So you had these two unexciting teams in the finals and it went 7..it was a lot like the 05 finals actually. Not an exciting one to watch.
This was a team I thought was very tough (the Suns) because in 90 we had taken out MVP Magic's Showtime Lakers but lost to a tough Portland team in the WCF as KJ got hobbled, after losing to the Lakers in the WCF the year before in 89. I felt that teams in 90 would have beaten the Pistons in the finals. I think we actually swept them that year.
Anyway, then we added Barkley. In 95 I did think we were better than Houston but blew it. Those Suns teams were deep. You had guys like Manning, Ceballos, Eddie Johnson, Perry, Chambers, off the bench.
You may not think much of those Rockets as a team to lose to in the western conference, but I think they'd kill the Clippers with George, Reggie Jackson and company. We would probably hang with them ok as we did there and we took them to 7 both years and should have beaten them in 95, but these were the NBA champs with Olajuwon in his prime with solid role players playing their roles to perfection...tough defense. They were similar to the 2005 Spurs...or maybe a later version considering they had Horry, but more in his prime years...and Otis Thorpe had been an all star. Vernon Maxwell was tough, Kenny Smith solid...a career 40% 3 pt shooter, a rarity those days.
Cassell was a rookie I think but he got hot in those playoffs and averaged like 13 and 7 against us while shooting 50% from 3.
It's hard to compare eras though. It would be easy to argue that most teams these days could beat most teams those days because teams have turned it into a #s game and advanced stats and mostly just take 3s or go to the rim, so a more efficient team will always win provided they don't turn it over a bunch or allow tons of offensive boards. But the rules have also made it easier too.
So I'm speaking in relative terms as well. Could this team beat the 93 Jordan Bulls? We were probably a bad defensive play on a Paxson 3 from beating that team...I know we had one more game but it was game 7 at home..pressure would have been on the Bulls after being up 2-0 and 3-1 (like we lost to the Rockets in 95)...our team was only more experienced and improved in 94 and especially 95...Houston was just a tough matchup.
This team now might be Houston but I think that team could have beaten Houston in 95 more often than not if they played 100x. But I think that Suns team had far more experience, depth and star power. Those guys had all played in the playoffs for years...deep into the playoffs.