ShotCreator wrote:No chance they lose in 98. Stockton was finished being a dominant player after the knee injury. Even if high level in low minutes.
Nash was at the peak of his powers. Chicago didn’t have a defense quite built to deal with Nash’s strengths. Slow bigs, lack of elite foot speed. Makes Stocktons performance that much more disappointing. And a clear signal to the drop-off from 97. Chicago was even better in 97.
By the end of the 98 series they would’ve butchered Chicago in all those screen sets.
Sloan would’ve used Nash more like D’Antoni did than Donnie. And they really wouldn’t have had a choice.
As I mentioned previously, I certainly agree that 07' Nash was superior to 98' Stockton, but I'm not sure I agree with Chicago being ill-equipped to handle the former. You don't think that even older Pippen, Jordan, Harper had the skill set to defend Nash? That they lacked elite foot speed? I didn't include Rodman as he longer could guard 1s and 2s, but certainly could manage screens. The Bulls struggled with small, high speed guards, but I don't think 07' Nash was amazingly fast - rather he had incredible endurance, handles, shooting, and BB IQ. And while the 98' Bulls weren't Riley Knicks physical, Nash certainly was going to take a beating that would have been impossible post the 04' rule changes. I think Nash was plenty tough enough to take it (Robert Horry), but it would slow him down. As for Sloan changing his system? I'm not seeing any chance of that. Utah played in a much faster system prior to Jerry becoming head coach, afterwards what you saw is what you were going to get regardless of if it's Nash, Stockton, or Deron Williams. I'll agree that 07' Nash certainly gives Utah a better shot, but it's by no means a beat down of the Bulls.