GOAT TEAM TOURNAMENT #5 92 Bulls v. #12 87 Lakers

[penbeast0]

Highest rated of MJ's Bull's 3-peats v. highest rated Showtime Lakers.

Each player will be considered to be as dominant against his opponents as he was the year that he played (ie. if you are just going to say the more modern team wins, don't bother to participate). And EACH MATCHUP WILL FEATURE THE RULES, REFEREES, AND EQUIPMENT OF THE OLDER TEAM. This doesn't mean that Steph Curry will be called for carrying each time he tries to dribble, just assume that his handle is proportionately as good relative to the era as it is relative to his own. So, in 65, if you think he has the best handle in today's league, you can assume he has the best handle of that era; if he's roughly average for starting PGs of today's league in terms of that one aspect, you can assume he is roughly average for starting PGs of that era. This hopefully will eliminate a bit of the recency bias. Health is as it was, if a player was 75% during the playoffs that year, assume he's only 75% now, this is a playoff tournament, not a regular season seeding.

One last thing. VOTES WITHOUT ANALYSIS (or with what in my personal subject opinion is stupid analysis) WONT BE COUNTED.

1992 Chicago Bulls

PG John Paxson
SG Michael Jordan
SF Scottie Pippen
PF Horace Grant
C Bill Cartwright

G BJ Armstrong
F/C Scott Williams

The most efficient offensive team in the NBA and a pretty good defense, ranking 4th/27. Obviously Michael Jordan is the key here, averaging 30/6/6 on .579 ts% while Scottie Pippen averages 21/8/7 on .555ts% and Horace Grant goes for 14/10/3 on .666ts%. In the playoffs, Jordan upped his scoring to 35ppg while both Pippen and Grant's averages fell so there may be some hero ball issues. On the other hand, it's Michael Jordan. No one else on the team did much with starting center Bill Cartwright averaging 5 rebounds and 6th man BJ Armstrong averaging just under 10ppg. The whole team pretty much ignored the 3 with no player averaging 2 3PA in a game, relying on slashing and pull up midrange jumpers. (They did have 3 point specialist Craig Hodges off the bench but he only played about 8mpg during the playoffs.) Phil Jackson v. Pat Riley is a great coaching matchup.

1987 Los Angeles Lakers

PG Magic Johnson
SG Byron Scott
SF James Worthy
PF AC Green
C Kareem Abdul Jabbar

G Michael Cooper (played more minutes than AC Green in the playoffs)
C/F Mychal Thompson
F/C Kurt Rambis

Also the most efficient offensive team in the league (edging the 92 Bulls in Ortg by just a hair) and good but not great defensively at 7th/23. Michael Cooper off the bench is their only real 3 point shooter but he plays nearly as much as the starters. Much more balanced scoring than the Bulls with Cooper and the starters all averaging in double figures. This is older Kareem, he had given over primacy on the team to Magic although he still scored over 19 ppg in the playoffs (with Magic and Worthy over 20). Very good depth (unlike the Bulls) with Cooper and Mychal Thompson, a former #1 pick who was a very solid big man play Rambis to come in for fouls and toughness. Magic is always a mismatch for anyone but Pippen and Jordan are both terrific defensive players with the size to match up and Paxson/Armstrong can cover Scott/Cooper which is a good matchup for LA but not a disaster.

Should be a great matchup.

[penbeast0]

I think I go with the Lakers here. Two reasons: (1) Depth, the Lakers both used their bench more and had more talent on their bench, and (2) Multiplicity of weapons, offenses where there are multiple points of attack like the Lakers are more resilient to good defense than offenses which are unipolar like the Bulls.

[pandrade83]

Wow - a truly great team is going to go home early.

I don't think there's any material rule changes that apply so let's just get right to it.

Let's take the starting point of the '91 Finals and look at the incremental gains the Lakers make.

-Better versions of Magic & Worthy & (especially) Scott - who was worthless in the series. Those upgrades are worth a game easily, MAYBE 2. Worthy was also hampered by injuries which doesn't take place this go-round.
-Upgrade in front court quality & Depth (KAJ & Thompson > Divac/Rookie Campbell)
-Big Upgrade in Cooper in the backcourt vs. the minutes of Teagle & Tony Smith
-Downgrade in PF spot - I'd take Perkins > Green

Those are rather substantial upgrades - the big question is - is it enough?

The better health of Scott & Worthy here puts more pressure on Chicago's perimeter defense & forces them to work more. Additionally, Cooper should - at the very minimum - be able to stop MJ from having one of, if not the GOAT Finals. Furthermore, quality centers were able to score against Chicago's centers & I think Kareem & Thompson would be able to have their way inside. The loss of Sam Perkins does have an impact - Perkins had a strong Finals performance against Chicago & gave the Lakers valuable spacing in the halfcourt game.

I think this is as close as it gets - the HCA tiebreaker swings it for me as I view this as a tight matchup. Give me the Bulls in a highly entertaining 7 game series.

[trex_8063]

Ooo, tough one.....

Magic certainly creates some mis-match problems [as always]; I think you NEED to cover him with either Jordan or Pippen. But that means trying to "hide" Paxson/Armstrong on Byron Scott ("hide" in parentheses, as Scott was no easy cover in his own right); honestly I could see that being a key match-up right there. And if you put Pippen on Magic, Jordan gives up some size to Worthy (not that he hasn't done similar before; even remember him guarding Divac temporarily in the '91 Finals). Not impossible for the Bulls to match-up against, as they have versatile defenders in Pippen/Jordan/Grant. Just potentially problematic, mostly in how Paxson/BJ are able to contain Scott. Again, I feel that could be the crucial match-up; I think Scott needs to have a good series for the Lakers to win, at any rate.

Chicago was so good on both sides of the ball, though: #1 offense (and of similar quality here as the '87 Lakers), #4 defense. They won the title on a pretty tough road [except for the 1st round] to get there, too. otoh, they weren't exactly "world eaters" against their tougher opponents. In fact, they went just 12-7 in the final three rounds, and never faced anyone quite as good as the '87 Lakers. So this is definitely tough.

I guess I'll tentatively side with the '92 Bulls on the basis of better depth (they routinely went 10-11 deep in their roster, whereas the Lakers only went 8 deep) and the presumed HCA. Very close though.

...rest of the post is off topic, replied in PM

[Dr Positivity]

Bulls in 7

The Bulls have a dominant defense and having that perimeter defense matches up with the Lakers well as they did in 91. While the Lakers have the deeper team Kareem lost a step this year and Thompson is no longer very good (.071 WS/48, -3.6 BPM). Ultimately I will go from the Lakers improvements in 87 vs 91 not being enough to overcome the Bulls

[Johnlac1]

The nineties Bulls could have beaten any of the great eighties teams in the finals.
They just wouldn't have won as many titles as they did in the nineties.
For one thing the Bulls would have had to through the eastern conference gauntlet before they ran into the Showtime Lakers.
Good luck with that.
There's a reason Jordan didn't start winning titles until the nineties. The teams the Bulls faced in the finals in the nineties simply weren't comparable to the great eighties teams.

[Jiminy Glick]

I am going with the Lakers because they have a deeper roster. If the Bulls want to win they would have to give Armstrong more minutes. Cooper can defend Jordan. I think Magic, Scott, Worthy, Kareem, Green, and Cooper is a better 6 than Paxson, Armstrong, Jordan, Pippen, Grant, and Cartwright. These teams are close but I will go with the Lakers. Another reason is I like their post offense, Magic, Worthy, and Kareem are going to be a lot to handle. Kareem is their go to low post scorer and the Bulls don't have that type of player. The Bulls beat the Lakers in 1991 but they didn't have Kareem and Cooper. I am going with the Lakers in 6 games. The 1992 NBA finals went 6 games and the the Lakers are way better than the Blazers so if the Bulls are to win it is definitely going 7 games but I don't see the Bulls winning.

Watch on YouTube

[WestGOAT]

Vote for the Lakers (1) advantage in the match-ups (Magic and Kareem overwhelm Paxon and Cartwright, while the Chicago have the better wings, the Lakers' can hold their own defensively) (2) better bench.

[Blackmill]

Bulls in 7

The Bulls have a dominant defense and having that perimeter defense matches up with the Lakers well as they did in 91. While the Lakers have the deeper team Kareem lost a step this year and Thompson is no longer very good (.071 WS/48, -3.6 BPM). Ultimately I will go from the Lakers improvements in 87 vs 91 not being enough to overcome the Bulls

About the bold, it seems you're inferring how the '87 Lakers would compare to the '92 Bulls based on their '91 matchup, but I don't think that's straightforward to do.

1. Both Worthy and Byron were injured during the '91 series. Worthy had an ankle injury going into the series. It obviously limited his impact, which was already less than in '87, and he didn't play at all after game 3. Byron Scott went out after game 4 but I can't remember what the injury was.

2. Dunleavy's offense featured less PnR and player movement than Riley's. Instead, it relied much more on Magic posting up, which made the offense more predictable and burdensome on Magic. This led to a couple close games where the Lakers were ahead or tied late in the 4th but had their offense (and defense) fall apart due to fatigue.

3. Cooper is a significant step up from Byron as a primary defender on Michael. While Cooper wasn't a starter, he did play nearly 30 minutes a game, and spent time as Michael's defender during the 80s.

I don't know who would win but I don't think there's much to glean from the outcome of the '91 finals.

[Jiminy Glick]

Cooper was coming off 3 straight years of greater than 7 assists per 36. He was a damn good player. He may even be the best player to put on Jordan ever though there are some others like Payton and Leonard that are good options.

I don't know how many of his minutes he spent on Jordan but Jordan is below his career average in terms of efficiency in terms of fg% against the Lakers. In the 1987 season Jordan had some struggles in terms of efficiency against the Lakers. Cooper actually won his Defensive Player of the Year award this season.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id1_hint=Michael+Jordan&player_id1_select=Michael+Jordan&player_id1=jordami01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=michael+cooper&player_id2_select=Michael+Cooper&player_id2=coopemi01&idx=players

[iggymcfrack]

Definitely the Bulls. They had a lot more reason to cruise through the regular season coming off a championship, but they still had a significantly better SRS at 10.07. The Lakers cruised through their conference playoffs easier but that was mostly due to the weaker competition. The 3 teams they faced out West had the following SRSes: -1.14, -2.54, 0.08. The BEST team they faced out West was the 39-43 Sonics. When they got to the Finals, they beat a good team in 6 just like Michael and the Bulls. Plus if you’re looking for more X-factors, Bulls have HCA and the most clutch superstar of all-time. Seems clear-cut to me.

[Jiminy Glick]

I'll be really surprised if the Bulls win this. People are underestimating how good Kareem was still in 1987. The Bulls don't have the defense to defend him either. Cooper on Jordan is huge. Also Magic or Worthy will have to be guarded by Jordan and while he can they have a size advantage on him. So I see the Lakers dominating down low. Because of that I see them winning. If this was the 1996 Bulls they would have a better chance but even that series went 6 games. Magic, Worthy, and Kareem as a group are also better scorers than Jordan, Pippen, and Grant as a group.

[penbeast0]

The nineties Bulls could have beaten any of the great eighties teams in the finals.
They just wouldn't have won as many titles as they did in the nineties.
For one thing the Bulls would have had to through the eastern conference gauntlet before they ran into the Showtime Lakers.
Good luck with that.
There's a reason Jordan didn't start winning titles until the nineties. The teams the Bulls faced in the finals in the nineties simply weren't comparable to the great eighties teams.

Not sure from this response who you are voting for.

[Jiminy Glick]

Bump, don't we still need another vote for this? I find this particular matchup very interesting. This would the toughest finals matchup the Bulls ever had.

[CodeBreaker]

Going with the Lakers. Even with the GOAT on Bulls, Lakers have much more talent, depth, and advantages on match ups.

[iggymcfrack]

I keep seeing people bring up depth as an advantage for the Lakers. Isn’t depth less important in one winner-take-all series? If the Bulls managed to outscore the opposition by more during the regular season even without said depth, then doesn’t that mean they should have even more of an edge on the Lakers in the playoffs when the rotations shorten up and the starters play bigger minutes? In the 1987 playoffs the Lakers had 7 guys average more than 13 minutes.

Jordan >> Magic
prime Pippen >>> 39-year old Kareem
Grant = Worthy

These are the key matchups that really matter. Lakers will get a decent edge with their 4-7 guys but it’s nowhere near enough to make up for the talent at the top.

[WestGOAT]

I keep seeing people bring up depth as an advantage for the Lakers. Isn’t depth less important in one winner-take-all series? If the Bulls managed to outscore the opposition by more during the regular season even without said depth, then doesn’t that mean they should have even more of an edge on the Lakers in the playoffs when the rotations shorten up and the starters play bigger minutes? In the 1987 playoffs the Lakers had 7 guys average more than 13 minutes.

Jordan >> Magic
prime Pippen >>> 39-year old Kareem
Grant = Worthy

These are the key matchups that really matter. Lakers will get a decent edge with their 4-7 guys but it’s nowhere near enough to make up for the talent at the top.

But those are not the real match ups though?

Jordan is not going to guard Magic, most likely Pippen, but what happens to Paxon if Jordan picks up Worthy (who has 3 inches on Jordan) or Byron Scott? He is a major liability on the defensive end. Similar issues with Kareem, the Bulls will need to double him to stop him.
The Lakers on the other hand match-up better defensively with Chicago’s best offensive weapons, Worthy/Scott/Cooper (DPoY in 1987) might not stop Jordan/Pippen, but they will fare better than Paxon and Cartwright. They can also use Worthy/Rambis on Grant.

[iggymcfrack]

I keep seeing people bring up depth as an advantage for the Lakers. Isn’t depth less important in one winner-take-all series? If the Bulls managed to outscore the opposition by more during the regular season even without said depth, then doesn’t that mean they should have even more of an edge on the Lakers in the playoffs when the rotations shorten up and the starters play bigger minutes? In the 1987 playoffs the Lakers had 7 guys average more than 13 minutes.

Jordan >> Magic
prime Pippen >>> 39-year old Kareem
Grant = Worthy

These are the key matchups that really matter. Lakers will get a decent edge with their 4-7 guys but it’s nowhere near enough to make up for the talent at the top.

But those are not the real match ups though?

Jordan is not going to guard Magic, most likely Pippen, but what happens to Paxon if Jordan picks up Worthy (who has 3 inches on Jordan) or Byron Scott? He is a major liability on the defensive end. Similar issues with Kareem, the Bulls will need to double him to stop him.
The Lakers on the other hand match-up better defensively with Chicago’s best offensive weapons, Worthy/Scott/Cooper (DPoY in 1987) might not stop Jordan/Pippen, but they will fare better than Paxon and Cartwright. They can also use Worthy/Rambis on Grant.

Bulls certainly don’t need to double 39 year old Kareem. Cartwright should be just fine. I’m sure Paxson will be fine against Byron Scott too. If you have Scott vs. Paxson on one end and Jordan vs. Scott on the other, the Bulls are gonna score a lot more points over the course of the game. Again all those supposed weaknesses for the Bulls defensively didn’t keep them from finishing 4th in the NBA in DRtg and 3.7 points better than average. The Lakers were 7th and 1.8 points better than average. So the Bulls have the superior defense and they have plenty of people to cover the Lakers’ stars. I’m not seeing what the problem is.

[Jiminy Glick]

I keep seeing people bring up depth as an advantage for the Lakers. Isn’t depth less important in one winner-take-all series? If the Bulls managed to outscore the opposition by more during the regular season even without said depth, then doesn’t that mean they should have even more of an edge on the Lakers in the playoffs when the rotations shorten up and the starters play bigger minutes? In the 1987 playoffs the Lakers had 7 guys average more than 13 minutes.

Jordan >> Magic
prime Pippen >>> 39-year old Kareem
Grant = Worthy

These are the key matchups that really matter. Lakers will get a decent edge with their 4-7 guys but it’s nowhere near enough to make up for the talent at the top.

In terms of offense:
Jordan and Magic are close in overall offense
Kareem > Pippen, scoring numbers are close but Kareem in the low post is a better scoring option, No Cartwright wont be enough look how well Kareem played in the 1987 nba finals against that Celtics frontcourt
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1987-nba-finals-celtics-vs-lakers.html
Worthy > Grant

Watch on YouTube

Game 1 of the 1987 NBA finals: 33/9/10

Watch on YouTube

Then the Lakers still have Scott who put up similar scoring numbers to Pippen. So there is more scoring depth. Also Cooper was coming off of 3 straight seasons of averaging over 7 assists per 36 and was shooting 3's at about 39% so Cooper was actually a high quality offensive player. Also AC Green might be able to give similar production to Grant. The Lakers are going to be very deadly in transition and the low post. And Jordan will have to guard either Magic or Worthy who are bigger than him. The Bulls are a really good matchup for the Lakers.

[penbeast0]

Bump, don't we still need another vote for this? I find this particular matchup very interesting. This would the toughest finals matchup the Bulls ever had.

Since these are the 16 greatest champions in NBA history, I'd be surprised if ANY of these matchups aren't the toughest opponent any of these teams ever faced.