Originally Posted by guy
Who said anything about stats? And he never put up Laimbeer numbers. Laimbeer averaged a double-double for many years, and he did it for championship teams. Brian Williams' best statistical seasons, which is also when he was starting, happened on losing teams. And who cares about how much talent he had? I'm talking about what actually happened. Once again, your basing it on potential. Did he contribute to the 97 Bulls championship? Yea sure he did, but he wasnt one of their best players or close to it like you seem to imply. When talking about how great the Bulls dynasty was, Brian Williams should be one of the last guys anyone mentions.
you just said "who said anything about stats" and then talk about laimbeers stats. , cuz thats what your compring the two on and not the situations each player had to play in.look at the whole body of work not just stats do you think that if he (williams) started his whole career he would average a double doubleor close to it? and also he was an upgrade from longley if i were to rate him on a 1 10 scale id give him a 7 laimbeer an 8.5. remember he didnt play the whole season with any team and came to the bulls rusty and went straight to the playoffs and had a crash course in the triangle.
when i compare team to team i go by if they were at full strength injury free and try to make things equalized as far as pace and the time each team played. the reason why i do this this way is because there are so many variables in sports that nothing is cut n dry. so when i compare teams i dont include if kareem had an ankle sprain or pippen had a back injury or if williams played 9 games and was rusty.