What if Magic didnt retire in 1991?

[97 bulls]

There was nagging injuries, yes, as there is for any team that deep into the season. This isn't like we're talking about the 2013 Bulls, were they are missing multiple top five pieces entirely, including their absolute best player.

Their best players were still on the floor, so there is absolutely no excuses.

The Bulls were better teams by then, yes. I think you're underrating the '91 Sixers honestly. And even underrating the '91 Pistons.

I take the '91 Pistons on championship experience alone, over the '92 Knicks and '92 Cavaliers. They knew HOW to beat the Bulls.

1993 is when they faced the absolute toughest competition. Even from the 1st round forward it was quality competition.

In order for the Bulls Championships to have credibility, they have to beat 100% healthy teams with five hofers, from the first round on. They all must have either Magic or Bird on them. Every team mustve won no less than 60 games, and it must be in a six team league.

[97 bulls]

There was nagging injuries, yes, as there is for any team that deep into the season. This isn't like we're talking about the 2013 Bulls, were they are missing multiple top five pieces entirely, including their absolute best player.

Their best players were still on the floor, so there is absolutely no excuses.

The Bulls were better teams by then, yes. I think you're underrating the '91 Sixers honestly. And even underrating the '91 Pistons.

I take the '91 Pistons on championship experience alone, over the '92 Knicks and '92 Cavaliers. They knew HOW to beat the Bulls.

1993 is when they faced the absolute toughest competition. Even from the 1st round forward it was quality competition.

Something must be said for the fact that the Lakers and Pistons could only win ONE GAME against the Bulls in 91. And that was on a last second three point shot by Sam Perkins. And mind you, that wasnt the best Bulls team

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

There was nagging injuries, yes, as there is for any team that deep into the season. This isn't like we're talking about the 2013 Bulls, were they are missing multiple top five pieces entirely, including their absolute best player.

Of course. But they're still to be accounted for.

A healthy Showtime Lakers vs a healthy '91 Bulls would have been a dream matchup. Either team could have won.

That's really all I'm saying.

The Bulls were better teams by then, yes. I think you're underrating the '91 Sixers honestly. And even underrating the '91 Pistons.

I take the '91 Pistons on championship experience alone, over the '92 Knicks and '92 Cavaliers. They knew HOW to beat the Bulls.

That's absurd and you know that. Those '92 and '93 Knicks were ****ing murder. The '91 Pistons, who were NOT the same team they were a year prior, would have been out-classed and toughed by Riley's Knicks.

NY in 6 games MAX.

Nah. I don't think I'm underrating the Sixers. They won just 44 games. Barkley carried them practically the entire year. Nobody seriously thought they would give Chicago trouble, nevermind pull off an upset.

1993 is when they faced the absolute toughest competition. Even from the 1st round forward it was quality competition.

Agreed.

[SamuraiSWISH]

In order for the Bulls Championships to have credibility, they have to beat 100% healthy teams with five hofers, from the first round on. They all must have either Magic or Bird on them. Every team mustve won no less than 60 games, and it must be in a six team league.

Oh. Is that because of the bitterness of us winning 6 rings in 8 years, dominating an entire decade? Is this the stipulation due to resentment because we were just that great? The only times we didn't bring home gold when our best player was on hiatus taking swings at curveballs, while mourning his deceased father?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The Bulls and MJ get far and away the most love on ISH. Chillout bros.

[juju151111]

In order for the Bulls Championships to have credibility, they have to beat 100% healthy teams with five hofers, from the first round on. They all must have either Magic or Bird on them. Every team mustve won no less than 60 games, and it must be in a six team league.

Exactly, and Bird or Magic never faced the best bulls teams either.

[Nevaeh]

I so wanted to see a healthy Laker team be able to go up against the MJ led Bulls in 1991, but if I am being honest, you would have to have turned the clock back about 4 years to get the Lakers at their peak. The peak Showtime Lakers against the 90's Bull would have been epic. The 1991 Lakers were not really the peak Showtime Lakers. Magic was slowing down already, and was beginning to show his age.

As for not retiring, it is a shame that he did because he was still a great player and fun to watch. My opinion is that the Lakers with Magic (if he didn't retire at the time he did), may have made some noise, but I honestly think the days of that noise being the popping of champagne in mid to late June were behind them.

The Showtime Lakers were the team of the 80's, and the Bulls were the team of the 90's. Two all time dynasties that were simply not destined to collide when both were at or near their greatest potential. Such is life.

Yeah, that's basically the cycle of the game and always have been. You still see peeps posting about how epic things would be with a prime Wilt going up against kareem, for example. And I'm sure Spurs fans are doing "what ifs" after this past year's Finals.

In the case of the 91 Bulls, however, they weren't facing a washed up Laker team at all. It was the Lakers who were facing a hungry, focused prime MJ (with a peaking Pip) who was fed up with the stigma of being a high flying loser year after year, and him hearing how he could never measure up to "team player" Magic.

The "what if" game is always fun to play in the context of sports though. I sometimes wonder how things would be had Buster Douglas not knocked out Mike Tyson back in the day, or if Ali was never banned from Pro Boxing during his prime.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Hes not gonna outshine Jordan, he lost to Jordan's Bulls in 1991 anyway. But he definitely could've led the Lakers to more finals trips, potential victims are Blazers, Suns and Rockets.

[Champ]

The Celtics also had a lot of potential in the 90-91 season and were the best team in the league up until mid-January, when they lost Bird for a month, and then McHale for another month after that.

They were 29-5 before the injury bug bit them, and had a nice mix of young players and vets, with good depth.

[TheBigVeto]

He would've been owned by Bobby Hurley on regular basis.

[KG215]

Possible case with Worthy. With Scott? He was going to do shit with PEAK Mike? Dude would get shit on just like he did in the '91 Finals. They would have faired better, but old ass Kareem or healthy Worthy probably pushes the series to 6, off chance of 7. I don't think they beat the '91 Bulls. That defense was swarming, and ridiculous.

Well, except for game 3 where it took Jordan going coast to coast in the final seconds and making a pull-up jumper over Divac just to force OT. I mean that was just the GOAT doing his thing, and he dominated OT and they won the game, but they were really damn close to going down 1-2 in that series with games 4 and 5 still in LA.

[305Baller]

Well, except for game 3 where it took Jordan going coast to coast in the final seconds and making a pull-up jumper over Divac just to force OT. I mean that was just the GOAT doing his thing, and he dominated OT and they won the game, but they were really damn close to going down 1-2 in that series with games 4 and 5 still in LA.

GAME 3 "AIR" Highlights

[KG215]

GAME 3 "AIR" Highlights

I didn't say anything at first because I couldn't remember if it was the same game, but Marv Albert mentioning he was just 2/8 from the floor at one point in the second half reminded me. I think they may have even fallen behind by double digits at one point late in the 3rd quarter or early 4th. I know there was one game where they were behind by around 15 or 16 in the second half and the Lakers looked like they were cruising to a win before the Bulls came back and won. Don't know if it was game 3, but if it was, and Jordan hadn't hit the clutch shot to force OT and then taken over in OT, what happens the rest of the series?

And could you imagine if ISH were around then? Jordan going something 2-for-8 or 2-for-9 in the second half of a Finals game while his team fell behind 1-2 in the series? The place would explode over something like that.

[Smoke117]

[QUOTE=pauk]The reason Magic retired was because of lack of knowledge about HIV, not just from his side, but from everybody else, especially in the league at that time.... Magic said himself that if he knew what he (and everybody else) found out later he would have stayed.... you can read more about that here: http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...because-of-hiv

He came back in 1996, 32 years old, dropping 15-7-6 of the bench as a Forward with limited minutes, per minute he was as efficient as much of his prime career.... [I]"The other time I came back, I got a cut, and I saw the fear. So I said I don

[Element]

97 Bulls is right, everybody talks about the Bulls facing old, injured competition to discredit the Bulls but there's no talk about the Lakers facing 3 40 win teams and then facing an injured Celtics team in the finals. Be consistent.

Why are these standards only applied to those Bulls teams? Notice how it's mostly Laker fans saying this? Bet they don't want to talk about the Celtics key injuries in 2009 and 2010 tho.

Oh dont worry about us LA fans lol

Its not like Bynum and Ariza were injured in 08
Or 2010, Kobe playing with a torn ligament on his right (!) index fingerand a knee that had to get drained multiple times throughout the PO, or Bynum again being injured

Rasheed Wallace came up bigger in game 7 than Scrubkins did throughout his collective Finals minutes

Who cares about 09? Its like saying what if Kobe wasnt injured in the 03 playoffs? 4-peat? It didnt happen, LA had Bostons number all year and hypotheticals are useless. What if Duncan wasnt injured in 00? Does LA ever form a dynasty? Noone cares