Are the 1986 Celtics the most overrated team

[Niquesports]

I don't think repeating should have any relevance when judging the merits of a Team in any given year. Every year should essentially be judged on it's own legs irrespective of what happened the year before or after.

I agree to a point. The 86 Celtics didnt do anything really special its not like they won 69 or 72 games its not like they beat another all time great team in the finals or won 34 games in a row sometimes you have to take the whole year in and look at it. Many question the Rockets 2 ships because MJ was not 100% I dont rate the 83 Sixers as a top 5 team because they couldn't match there performance the next year. If you want to say a team had a great year thats fine but to rank them as a Great team you have to look at how they did over a course of more than just one year.

[magnax1]

2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons and 2005 Spurs all beat the 96 Bulls.

I love how you put the worst of the spurs 4 championship teams and an average championship team in the 04 pistons.

Keep up the stupidity.

[Harison]

'86 Celtics are the GOAT team. It was extremely strong, stacked with talent and well balanced team who could beat pretty much any team in NBA history. '67 Sixers come close, after them -'72 Lakers and '96 Bulls.

Plenty of discussions on this thread:
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtop...e8a998abf82474

[1987_Lakers]

'86 Celtics are the GOAT team. It was extremely strong, stacked with talent and well balanced team who could beat pretty much any team in NBA history. '67 Sixers come close, after them -'72 Lakers and '96 Bulls.

Plenty of discussions on this thread:
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtop...e8a998abf82474

Hey I know you. I also post in realgm.

[Harison]

Hey I know you. I also post in realgm.

Nice, familiar face

[97 bulls]

I agree to a point. The 86 Celtics didnt do anything really special its not like they won 69 or 72 games its not like they beat another all time great team in the finals or won 34 games in a row sometimes you have to take the whole year in and look at it. Many question the Rockets 2 ships because MJ was not 100% I dont rate the 83 Sixers as a top 5 team because they couldn't match there performance the next year. If you want to say a team had a great year thats fine but to rank them as a Great team you have to look at how they did over a course of more than just one year.

great post nique. its also hypocritical to dismiss the bulls accomplishments by saying they werent dominant. even though the 97 version was on a pace to outdo the 96 version until injuries hit them hard. and they still won the championship. 87 lakers is a joke poster.

[G.O.A.T]

This post isnt a knock of how Great a team they were but many times people post that the 86 Celtics are the Greatest Team of all time. I question if they are even the best Celtic team ever.There was a team in that same era that was much more sucessful than they were and dont get half the credit The Showtime Lakers. ITs hard for me to rank a team as a All TIme Great if they dont repeat thats the sign of a Great team. Now true maybe they might have had a Great year but All Time Great team they dont even make the Top 5 this is just more of the Larry Legend Hype Top 5 player of all time yes but by far the GOAT Hype Player

My argument is and always will be: If an argument can be made for something being the greatest of all-time, it is impossible for it to be overrated becasue #1 all-time is as high as you can be rated.

[Niquesports]

My argument is and always will be: If an argument can be made for something being the greatest of all-time, it is impossible for it to be overrated becasue #1 all-time is as high as you can be rated.

I respect your opinion as always but sometimes you have to look at the facts. If people went on and on and said the 67's 76ers were the best team of the 60's wouldn't you say hold up. Sure they had a great year they had a great team but the core of that team wasnt better than the Celtics. So I guess my point is if two great teams face up the better team may win more but the other team is gonna win at least once back to my comparison of boxing Frazier did beat Ali once.

[JohnnySic]

still think the 87 Celtics were a nice team despite the injuries

I guess people need "first hand" expereince; people simply cannot understand things before their time.

The '87 Celtics were a shadow of the '86 team. their 2 principle subs, Bill Walton and Scott Wedman, both missed essentially the whole season. They were left with nothing but scrubs on the bench. KC Jones was forced to run the starters into the ground, with lasting devastating effetcts.

- Bird developed his bad back that year
- McHale broke his foot and was never the same player
- Dennis Johnson was playing on a sprained ankle, and Robert Parish on 2 sprained ankles, by the Finals

As a Celtics fan, I'm amazed the Lakers did not sweep them, give the weight of all their problems.

[Niquesports]

I guess people need "first hand" expereince; people simply cannot understand things before their time.

The '87 Celtics were a shadow of the '86 team. their 2 principle subs, Bill Walton and Scott Wedman, both missed essentially the whole season. They were left with nothing but scrubs on the bench. KC Jones was forced to run the starters into the ground, with lasting devastating effetcts.

- Bird developed his bad back that year
- McHale broke his foot and was never the same player
- Dennis Johnson was playing on a sprained ankle, and Robert Parish on 2 sprained ankles, by the Finals

As a Celtics fan, I'm amazed the Lakers did not sweep them, give the weight of all their problems.

Jordan played a hellva of a game with the flu he had to almost be carried off the floor
Isiah could barley walk and stilled performed
Reed limped onto the floor when noone thought he could play.

ITs an old saying if you step on the floor there are no excuses.
At that point Walton wasnt gonna be much help anyway and Wedman was no match for Cooper so it wouldnt have made a difference its not like Wedman or Walton was gonna slow down Worthy

[JohnnySic]

At that point Walton wasnt gonna be much help anyway and Wedman was no match for Cooper so it wouldnt have made a difference its not like Wedman or Walton was gonna slow down Worthy

Clearly spoken like someone who never watched them play.

Walton gave the Celtics a whole new dimension as he could pass, robound, do it all. He spelled McHale and Parish and his presence meant that Greg Kite was relegated to 12th man. The equivalent of say Lamar Odom on the current Lakers.

Wedman was a shooter/scorer who could make shots from anywhere. Think Rip Hamilton. Only reason he didn't start was because of Larry Bird. Wedman filled in for the injured McHale for about 20 games and averaged close to 20 ppg.

You dont lose your 2 best subs and not see the effect.

[G.O.A.T]

I respect your opinion as always but sometimes you have to look at the facts. If people went on and on and said the 67's 76ers were the best team of the 60's wouldn't you say hold up. Sure they had a great year they had a great team but the core of that team wasnt better than the Celtics. So I guess my point is if two great teams face up the better team may win more but the other team is gonna win at least once back to my comparison of boxing Frazier did beat Ali once.

I think it's a very good point, but it's two different things really. The greatest team of all-time is either the 1990's Bulls or the 1960's Celtics because those cores won title after title after title like no one else has even come close to.

But the greatest single season is another thing. Using the palindrome champions (67 76ers) as an example, they were the only team on the decade to beat the Celtics in a series and did so 4-1. An exponentially greater accomplishment in a single series then any other of the decade. The also won a then record 68 games in the regular season. More then any Celtic team with Russell would.

The point is their greatness over a single season exceeded that of Boston's in any single season that decade. The greatest team of the decade is easily the Celtics, but the greatest season of the decade is probably the 1967 Philadelphia 76ers championship.

Likewise the Celtics of 1986 epitomize greatness isolated in a single season. The 1980's were the most competitive decade in NBA history in my opinion and that of many others. The Celtics and Lakers were the obvious elite teams, but the 76ers were still very strong in the early part of the decade as were the Rockets throughout the first half of the decade and the Pistons in the last half of the decade. Plus the emergence of individual stars like Jordan, Barkley, Drexler, King, Wilkins, Malone, Stockton, Hakeem and Ewing made it ultra-competitive every night. The '86 Celtics in perhaps the single most competitive season of the decade were the perfect storm. Winning a decade best 67 games and losing just three times in 18 playoff games are exceptional achievements. Also remember how healthy they were. None of the top eight missed more then 10 games due injury. Only McHale missed more then five. Bird and Walton played in 162 of 164 possible games. Bill Walton was healthy!
Having four hall-of fame front line players and another finals MVP in Dennis Johnson and the premier perimeter shooting guard of the 80's in Ainge in the backcourt is pretty exceptional and really unprecedented.

As always a pleasure talking hoops with you.

[Niquesports]

Clearly spoken like someone who never watched them play.

Walton gave the Celtics a whole new dimension as he could pass, robound, do it all. He spelled McHale and Parish and his presence meant that Greg Kite was relegated to 12th man. The equivalent of say Lamar Odom on the current Lakers.

Wedman was a shooter/scorer who could make shots from anywhere. Think Rip Hamilton. Only reason he didn't start was because of Larry Bird. Wedman filled in for the injured McHale for about 20 games and averaged close to 20 ppg.

You dont lose your 2 best subs and not see the effect.

Well sorry I did watch them play
maybe its you that only saw highlights

Hurt or healthy Wedman wasnt better or more effective than Cooper
and hurt or healthy Walton wasn't better than Thompson at that point in there career.SO I dont get your point.

[Niquesports]

I think it's a very good point, but it's two different things really. The greatest team of all-time is either the 1990's Bulls or the 1960's Celtics because those cores won title after title after title like no one else has even come close to.

But the greatest single season is another thing. Using the palindrome champions (67 76ers) as an example, they were the only team on the decade to beat the Celtics in a series and did so 4-1. An exponentially greater accomplishment in a single series then any other of the decade. The also won a then record 68 games in the regular season. More then any Celtic team with Russell would.

The point is their greatness over a single season exceeded that of Boston's in any single season that decade. The greatest team of the decade is easily the Celtics, but the greatest season of the decade is probably the 1967 Philadelphia 76ers championship.

Likewise the Celtics of 1986 epitomize greatness isolated in a single season. The 1980's were the most competitive decade in NBA history in my opinion and that of many others. The Celtics and Lakers were the obvious elite teams, but the 76ers were still very strong in the early part of the decade as were the Rockets throughout the first half of the decade and the Pistons in the last half of the decade. Plus the emergence of individual stars like Jordan, Barkley, Drexler, King, Wilkins, Malone, Stockton, Hakeem and Ewing made it ultra-competitive every night. The '86 Celtics in perhaps the single most competitive season of the decade were the perfect storm. Winning a decade best 67 games and losing just three times in 18 playoff games are exceptional achievements. Also remember how healthy they were. None of the top eight missed more then 10 games due injury. Only McHale missed more then five. Bird and Walton played in 162 of 164 possible games. Bill Walton was healthy!
Having four hall-of fame front line players and another finals MVP in Dennis Johnson and the premier perimeter shooting guard of the 80's in Ainge in the backcourt is pretty exceptional and really unprecedented.

As always a pleasure talking hoops with you.

Great post and if we want to look at it that way then I would have to say the 83 Sixers were the best team FO Fo Four . I think what makes me say the Boston team is overrated is the Walton factor. Many say they had 4 HOF and a should be in Dj but at that time Walton wasnt a HOF playing level he was just a very good back up big man.The way Philly went through the playoffs and then sweeping the lakers is much more impressive than Boston letting a Good but not Great Rockets team win 2 games

[Harison]

Jordan played a hellva of a game with the flu he had to almost be carried off the floor
Isiah could barley walk and stilled performed
Reed limped onto the floor when noone thought he could play.

ITs an old saying if you step on the floor there are no excuses.
At that point Walton wasnt gonna be much help anyway and Wedman was no match for Cooper so it wouldnt have made a difference its not like Wedman or Walton was gonna slow down Worthy

Are you really comparing flu game with someone who had BROKEN foot? Its admirable and impressive when someone overcomes minor obstacles (food poisoning, dislocated finger, flu, etc), but its entirely different when major injuries happen, and to more than one main player. You cant out-will that, regardless who you are.