98 Bulls vs 09 Lakers- Would it be close in a 7 game series?

tysonironmike · Post #1 » by **tysonironmike** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:27 am

Been a lurker for a long time but finally decided to take the plunge, fellow Laker fans, Do you think this would be a close series? Where would the advantages lie for the Lakers? I think if we had Bynum at 100% and Gasol switched on, we could give it a really good shake. Thoughts?

Doormatt · Post #2 » by **Doormatt** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:19 am

Would it be close? I mean, relatively. The bulls would definetly win because MJ>Kobe and Pippen>Gasol, and Rodman would really bother Gasol, more so than Howard. it would be a decent series though. The bulls were a well oiled championship machine, while the lakers were playing with an immense hunger to win, so they were sort opposites in a sense.

I'm gonna say it would go to 6 games.

tysonironmike · Post #3 » by **tysonironmike** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:44 am

You think Rodman would defend Gasol better than Howard? I am not quite sure, I think a healthy Bynum would be the X factor for us, MJ>Kobe definitely, but it would still be a great matchup, I think it goes to 6 games too and the Bulls win it, still finding it hard to count out the Lakers completely, we'd have a glimmer of a hope if it went to 7.

MambaTime · Post #4 » by **MambaTime** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:10 am

It comes down to the role players in this series I think. Whichever bench plays well, I think that determines the series.

Doormatt · Post #5 » by **Doormatt** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:37 am

Rodman is just much more physical and dirty than Howard, which seems to bother Gasol more than anything. Hes also just a better post defender. You also have to remember that Lewis saw a good chunk of time on Gasol as well, whereas Rodman would be mostly matched up with Pau, and occasionally odom.

Bynum at that point wasn't the hustle/defensive player he was last year either, nor was he a consistent scorer. Even if he was healthy, he's not gonna make much of a difference.

The problem, imo, is the lakers don't match up that well to the bulls. They can throw pippen/MJ at Kobe, and Rodman at Gasol/Odom, and limit them very effectively. Remember most of our role players like ariza and fisher were thriving because kobe/pau were beasting and drawing so much attention. Of course Kobe/Pau will still get theirs, but they'll have to work much harder, and the role players will suffer imo.

Doormatt · Post #6 » by **Doormatt** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:43 am

Fwiw I don't think 98 MJ is that much better than 09 Kobe. They're really close imo. It's just MJ has Pippen helping him on the perimeter while Kobe has Ariza as his best perimeter defender. MJ can conserve much more energy for offense while Kobe has to really clamp down, which will likely hurt him on the other end.

TylersLakers · Post #7 » by **TylersLakers** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:55 pm

2009 Kobe is better than 1998 Jordan.

Post #8 » by **snaquille oatmeal** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:31 pm

so many variables is hard to say. would they use the 98 or the 09 rules? would teams be allowed to play a season under those rules to get used to those rules? who would Phil coach? would Kobe and MJ get into a peeing contest and make it personal? when you think about things like that anything can swing it either way regardless of which is the better team (even though I think the Bulls would win).

Anklebreaker702 · Post #9 » by **Anklebreaker702** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:50 pm

Doormatt wrote:Rodman is just much more physical and dirty than Howard, which seems to bother Gasol more than anything. Hes also just a better post defender. You also have to remember that Lewis saw a good chunk of time on Gasol as well, whereas Rodman would be mostly matched up with Pau, and occasionally odom.

Bynum at that point wasn't the hustle/defensive player he was last year either, nor was he a consistent scorer. Even if he was healthy, he's not gonna make much of a difference.

The problem, imo, is the lakers don't match up that well to the bulls. They can throw pippen/MJ at Kobe, and Rodman at Gasol/Odom, and limit them very effectively. Remember most of our role players like ariza and fisher were thriving because kobe/pau were beasting and drawing so much attention. Of course Kobe/Pau will still get theirs, but they'll have to work much harder, and the role players will suffer imo.

Agree with most of this doormat but it all depends on what you try to exploit. Pau would be an absolute non factor in that series with Rodman's tactics. So if you want any chance Bynum has to be the key. Remember the Bulls used 1 good Center & 2 below average centers to create a 3 headed monster. Non of which would do anything with Drew.

So you would have to try that match up. Kobe & Michael cancel each other out. Michael would play the game smarter which woe give him the edge over Kobe. Where I see we would have an advantage is Ron Ron would lock Pippen up & that's where the Bulls would begin to have trouble.

Also LO. If he came to play would give them headaches. He could guard whoever & they would have no one for him when in with Pau. Rodman couldn't guard them both.

Doormatt · Post #10 » by **Doormatt** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:22 pm

TylersLakers wrote:2009 Kobe is better than 1998 Jordan.

08 Kobe is better than 98 MJ, I don't agree with 09. Without looking at the stats, i feel they were nearly identical offensively, but Jordan was more consistent on defense, and utilized his post game more effectively, and more often. Jordan was also better at elevating himself in the playoffs no matter the round. 09 is definetly kobes best finals though, so that should be considered as well.

Gek · Post #11 » by **Gek** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:46 pm

Did the 1998 Bulls have Horace Grant? If they did, then easily. If not then get back to me.

Doormatt · Post #12 » by **Doormatt** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:58 pm

The bulls let go of Grant after the first threepeat, right before MJ's first retirement.

I checked the numbers and Rodman had the lowest Drgt and led the bulls in defensive WS which confirms my memory of him being a great defender that year. not that it's the best indicator of defense, but it gives you a good idea of how good he was that year.

Gek · Post #13 » by **Gek** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:38 pm

Bulls. Talk about the last year of the threepeat that Horace was still around.

Anklebreaker702 · Post #14 » by **Anklebreaker702** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 11:47 pm

G=K wrote:Bulls. Talk about the last year of the threepeat that Horace was still around.

The Bulls elevated to the next level once they got Rodman. I'd take my chances with a Rodmanless BUlls

Gek · Post #15 » by **Gek** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 2:10 am

Anklebreaker702 wrote:
G=K wrote:Bulls. Talk about the last year of the threepeat that Horace was still around.

The Bulls elevated to the next level once they got Rodman. I'd take my chances with a Rodmanless BUlls

I meant compare the 98 Bulls team to that Lakers team. Horace wins.

Doormatt · Post #16 » by **Doormatt** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:06 am

Lol wut

Anklebreaker702 · Post #17 » by **Anklebreaker702** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:19 am

G=K wrote:
Anklebreaker702 wrote:
G=K wrote:Bulls. Talk about the last year of the threepeat that Horace was still around.

The Bulls elevated to the next level once they got Rodman. I'd take my chances with a Rodmanless BUlls

I meant compare the 98 Bulls team to that Lakers team. Horace wins.

ok im lost

Gek · Post #18 » by **Gek** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 6:20 pm

Anklebreaker702 wrote:ok im lost

98 bulls vs 2001 lakers led by Horace grant. Could have sworn he was on the 02 team at least.

Doormatt · Post #19 » by **Doormatt** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:36 pm

Grant was only on the lakers for 1 year (2001), and then we replaced him with Rice, im pretty sure.

TruSkool · Post #20 » by **TruSkool** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:37 pm

the bulls