2001 Lakers V 1996 Bulls but with Peak Kobe

[SlimShady83]

Kobe, Kobe, Kobe ... ... ...

[JRoy]

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

How many top 3 all time players did that LAL team beat?

Just one: Prime Duncan

How many "top 3 all-time" players did that 1996 Bulls team play in the playoffs, by the way?

The Lakers also played (and swept) teams with:

David Robinson
Chris Webber
Peja Stojaković
Vlade Divac
Rasheed Wallace
Scottie Pippen
Arvydas Sabonis

Not saying the Lakers would definitely beat them, but comparative strength of schedule wouldn't be my argument of choice.

TD is not an all time top 3 player.

Jordan is.

[taikibansei]

How many top 3 all time players did that LAL team beat?

Just one: Prime Duncan

How many "top 3 all-time" players did that 1996 Bulls team play in the playoffs, by the way?

The Lakers also played (and swept) teams with:

David Robinson
Chris Webber
Peja Stojaković
Vlade Divac
Rasheed Wallace
Scottie Pippen
Arvydas Sabonis

Not saying the Lakers would definitely beat them, but comparative strength of schedule wouldn't be my argument of choice.

TD is not an all time top 3 player.

Jordan is.

Duncan is top-5 career at the lowest--I've seen a number of good posters here argue that he's top-3 (or even the GOAT). Also, Shaq that season is arguably a top-3 peak (not career), and Kobe was just rounding into his prime. When did Jordan ever beat such competition? Certainly not in 1996 (when Jordan was arguably past his prime).

[mastermixer]

If you played this like a video game, I think the Lakers take it by running everything through Shaq. The Bulls had trouble with dominant big men and there was no one more dominant than 2000s shaq.

If egos get in the way and the Lakers don’t play to their strengths, the Bulls would punk them.

[LakerLegend]

Bulls and not close.

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

Why is it not a defensible position? Also, how can you say the ‘96 Bulls never beat anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs? The ‘96 Bulls BEAT SHAQ IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic - ECF) The ‘97 and ‘98 Bulls beat the same Utah team that demolished the Shaq / Kobe Lakers 4-1 and 4-0. The 2000 Lakers were a 4th quarter Blazers choke job away from elimination and the 2002 Lakers needed the refs and a thousand FT’s to get by Sacramento. The Lakers were a shaky 3-peat team if there ever was one. In 2001, Iverson and a bunch of bums took game 1 off of the Lakers in LA. Those Shaq / Kobe teams lost twice to Utah, lost to San Antonio, lost to Detroit and SHOULD have lost to Portland and Sacramento. The ‘96 Bulls would do just fine. I can see then winning this matchup 4-1 or 4-2.

96 magics 3rd best player was injured and/or out the whole series. What do the 97 and 98 lakers have to do with anything?

[taikibansei]

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

Why is it not a defensible position? Also, how can you say the ‘96 Bulls never beat anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs? The ‘96 Bulls BEAT SHAQ IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic - ECF) The ‘97 and ‘98 Bulls beat the same Utah team that demolished the Shaq / Kobe Lakers 4-1 and 4-0. The 2000 Lakers were a 4th quarter Blazers choke job away from elimination and the 2002 Lakers needed the refs and a thousand FT’s to get by Sacramento. The Lakers were a shaky 3-peat team if there ever was one. In 2001, Iverson and a bunch of bums took game 1 off of the Lakers in LA. Those Shaq / Kobe teams lost twice to Utah, lost to San Antonio, lost to Detroit and SHOULD have lost to Portland and Sacramento. The ‘96 Bulls would do just fine. I can see then winning this matchup 4-1 or 4-2.

96 magics 3rd best player was injured and/or out the whole series. What do the 97 and 98 lakers have to do with anything?

Should we remind him that the '95 Magic with Shaq BEAT JORDAN IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic -Eastern Conference Semifinals)?

[benson13]

I'm going Bulls.

Even at 33, Jordan was better than Kobe Bryant at any age. Kobe would have wanted the challenge of guarding Mike, and he would have worn himself out. Don't forget, Kobe wanted Iverson in the 2001 Finals, and he was lit up so bad in game one that Tyronn Lue got a big contract from the Wizards the next season. Combine that with Chicago's having three competent to good perimeter defenders, and you're staring straight into a tough series for Kobe.

Shaq is the scary thing here. He absolutely demolished the Spurs. The combination of the havoc he caused inside and the hot shooting of Fisher and Fox meant there was nothing San Antonio could do, and Kobe played great that series himself. That said, the version of the Bulls in question had a simple method for dealing with dominant bigs. Try the two big white guys or Rodman with help. Shaq had a dominant series against Chicago in the 96 ECF, and the Bulls still won in a sweep.

Jordan, Harper, and Pippen were better defensively than any group Kobe, Fisher, and Fox faced in 01.

[JM00n69]

The problem here isn't prime Kobe, I'm sure the barrage of Pippen and Jordan guarding him would slow him down significantly. And no one on that LAL team could effect MJs production. But Shaq then was having the most dominant peak of any player ever. Would be a very interesting 7 game series to watch.Problem is they both had the same HC

[tsherkin]

2000 Lakers got pushed to 6 by an even worse Pacers team.

2000 != 2001. That's probably a good place to start.

Kobe had taken strides, they weren't playing Glen Rice, and the Pacers gave the Bulls a 7-games in 1998, so I don't know if you want to yark on them too hard...

1998 Bulls != 1996 Bulls

So we could probably just discard the Pacers angle altogether. This thread is about 1996 vs 2001, not 1998 vs. 2000, though that might be an interesting discussion as well.

Agreed, it's best not to worry too much about teams other than the 96 Bulls or the 01 Lakers, absolutely.

Why is it not a defensible position? Also, how can you say the ‘96 Bulls never beat anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs? The ‘96 Bulls BEAT SHAQ IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic - ECF)

96 Shaq wasn't the same as 01 Shaq, I thought that was clear. And he didn't have Horry spacing for him in those years, either.

The ‘97 and ‘98 Bulls beat the same Utah team that demolished the Shaq / Kobe Lakers 4-1 and 4-0. The 2000 Lakers were a 4th quarter Blazers choke job away from elimination and the 2002 Lakers needed the refs and a thousand FT’s to get by Sacramento. The Lakers were a shaky 3-peat team if there ever was one. In 2001, Iverson and a bunch of bums took game 1 off of the Lakers in LA. Those Shaq / Kobe teams lost twice to Utah, lost to San Antonio, lost to Detroit and SHOULD have lost to Portland and Sacramento. The ‘96 Bulls would do just fine. I can see then winning this matchup 4-1 or 4-2.

Meantime, 97 and 98 are other seasons, with rosters of varying quality for Shaq's Lakers.

I can see an argument for the 96 Bulls winning; I did, after all, call it a tight, 7-game series.

The idea that this isn't close is what I find ludicrous with the 01 Lakers squad. It's just not an accurate assessment of matchups or styles or ability at all.

[Rust_Cohle]

2000 != 2001. That's probably a good place to start.

Kobe had taken strides, they weren't playing Glen Rice, and the Pacers gave the Bulls a 7-games in 1998, so I don't know if you want to yark on them too hard...

1998 Bulls != 1996 Bulls

So we could probably just discard the Pacers angle altogether. This thread is about 1996 vs 2001, not 1998 vs. 2000, though that might be an interesting discussion as well.

Agreed, it's best not to worry too much about teams other than the 96 Bulls or the 01 Lakers, absolutely.

Why is it not a defensible position? Also, how can you say the ‘96 Bulls never beat anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs? The ‘96 Bulls BEAT SHAQ IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic - ECF)

96 Shaq wasn't the same as 01 Shaq, I thought that was clear. And he didn't have Horry spacing for him in those years, either.

The ‘97 and ‘98 Bulls beat the same Utah team that demolished the Shaq / Kobe Lakers 4-1 and 4-0. The 2000 Lakers were a 4th quarter Blazers choke job away from elimination and the 2002 Lakers needed the refs and a thousand FT’s to get by Sacramento. The Lakers were a shaky 3-peat team if there ever was one. In 2001, Iverson and a bunch of bums took game 1 off of the Lakers in LA. Those Shaq / Kobe teams lost twice to Utah, lost to San Antonio, lost to Detroit and SHOULD have lost to Portland and Sacramento. The ‘96 Bulls would do just fine. I can see then winning this matchup 4-1 or 4-2.

Meantime, 97 and 98 are other seasons, with rosters of varying quality for Shaq's Lakers.

I can see an argument for the 96 Bulls winning; I did, after all, call it a tight, 7-game series.

The idea that this isn't close is what I find ludicrous with the 01 Lakers squad. It's just not an accurate assessment of matchups or styles or ability at all.

Someone else mentioned 2000 Lakers hence why I brought them up. 2001 faced the weakest batch of teams of the 3 Laker winning sides from that era.

[JRoy]

Just one: Prime Duncan

How many "top 3 all-time" players did that 1996 Bulls team play in the playoffs, by the way?

The Lakers also played (and swept) teams with:

David Robinson
Chris Webber
Peja Stojaković
Vlade Divac
Rasheed Wallace
Scottie Pippen
Arvydas Sabonis

Not saying the Lakers would definitely beat them, but comparative strength of schedule wouldn't be my argument of choice.

TD is not an all time top 3 player.

Jordan is.

Duncan is top-5 career at the lowest--I've seen a number of good posters here argue that he's top-3 (or even the GOAT). Also, Shaq that season is arguably a top-3 peak (not career), and Kobe was just rounding into his prime. When did Jordan ever beat such competition? Certainly not in 1996 (when Jordan was arguably past his prime).

Cool opinion.

[taikibansei]

TD is not an all time top 3 player.

Jordan is.

Duncan is top-5 career at the lowest--I've seen a number of good posters here argue that he's top-3 (or even the GOAT). Also, Shaq that season is arguably a top-3 peak (not career), and Kobe was just rounding into his prime. When did Jordan ever beat such competition? Certainly not in 1996 (when Jordan was arguably past his prime).

Cool opinion.

Thanks. Your opinion is also quite nice.

[Hair Jordan]

Why is it not a defensible position? Also, how can you say the ‘96 Bulls never beat anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs? The ‘96 Bulls BEAT SHAQ IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic - ECF) The ‘97 and ‘98 Bulls beat the same Utah team that demolished the Shaq / Kobe Lakers 4-1 and 4-0. The 2000 Lakers were a 4th quarter Blazers choke job away from elimination and the 2002 Lakers needed the refs and a thousand FT’s to get by Sacramento. The Lakers were a shaky 3-peat team if there ever was one. In 2001, Iverson and a bunch of bums took game 1 off of the Lakers in LA. Those Shaq / Kobe teams lost twice to Utah, lost to San Antonio, lost to Detroit and SHOULD have lost to Portland and Sacramento. The ‘96 Bulls would do just fine. I can see then winning this matchup 4-1 or 4-2.

96 magics 3rd best player was injured and/or out the whole series. What do the 97 and 98 lakers have to do with anything?

Should we remind him that the '95 Magic with Shaq BEAT JORDAN IN THE PLAYOFFS (Bulls vs Magic -Eastern Conference Semifinals)?

Sure, he beat Jordan after an 18 month lay off and 17 just regular season games after he returned. Ho Grant played in game 1 of the ECF when Orlando lost by 38 so it’s not like his absence made any difference. The fact Chicago got 2 games off of Orlando was actually impressive. Jordan gave away game 1 and Chicago blew a late lead in game 6. The following year when Jordan was at full strength and the Bulls added a PF - you know the rest

[JRoy]

Duncan is top-5 career at the lowest--I've seen a number of good posters here argue that he's top-3 (or even the GOAT). Also, Shaq that season is arguably a top-3 peak (not career), and Kobe was just rounding into his prime. When did Jordan ever beat such competition? Certainly not in 1996 (when Jordan was arguably past his prime).

Cool opinion.

Thanks. Your opinion is also quite nice.

Exactly.

My dad can beat up your dad nonsense.

[1993Playoffs]

The team with Shaq. He’s way better than 96 MJ and/or peak Kobe.

[taikibansei]

Cool opinion.

Thanks. Your opinion is also quite nice.

Exactly.

My dad can beat up your dad nonsense.

This being a discussion board where people share their opinions, after all.

[Mbrahv0528]

Why is there so much hand waving of the Bulls ability to guard Shaq when Dennis Rodman was arguably one of the best defenders of Shaq that Shaq ever faced?

The Bulls win this in 6.

Sent from my SM-S938U using RealGM mobile app

[Capn'O]

I'm taking whoever had the best coach.

I'm taking whoever gets Ron Harper

[Capn'O]

Bulls and not close.

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1996-nba-eastern-conference-finals-magic-vs-bulls.html

Spoiler:

I know Shaq was on a different level under Jackson but those Magic teams were similarly built to Jackson's Lakers and Magic Shaq was just nasty. Hell, they even had Horace Grant.

[Handlez]

Kobe, at his peak, had some of the most mesmerizing playoff series I've ever seen. 2010 vs the Suns is one of the greatest displays of shot making I've ever witnessed. 34, 7, and 8 on 52%, 43%, and 88%.

That Kobe?

I got the Lakers.