Re: Sports Ilustrated Fred Taylor: Bulls Dynasty Greater Than Celtics

[D Parker <danp@town.ipswich.ma.us>]

On Sat, 23 May 1998, Way Of The Ray wrote:

> <P><B>What do you consider to be a greater accomplishment: the
> Bulls' (probably) six titles in eight years, which would
> have been eight straight if Jordan hadn't temporarily
> retired, or the Celtics' run of eight in a row in the '60s?
> I would have to say the Bulls' run has to be ranked higher.
> The players are better, the travel schedule more grinding,
> and one thing that is often forgotten is the playoffs are
> much longer than in the earlier
> era.</B>
> 
> <br><I>&#151;Mark Hodge, Greenville,
> S.C.

Poor Mike.  The travel schedule is more grinding today?  Yeah, those
team-owned jets really suck.  With their customized seats, flight
schedules, meals, etc., you've gotta wonder how some poor schlep from the
60s could put up with that.

Perhaps he never heard about players taking the (gasp!) train to games in
the 50s, with wake up calls at ungodly hours, stopping at greasy spoon
joints just to have something in your stomach.  I wonder what Jordan's
reaction would have been to being barred from sleeping in a hotel in
the south, and the team having to pack their bags and look for somewhere
else to stay?  When was the last time Shaq rode on a plane that had to
land in a corn field?

> <P>I'd have to agree with you, Mark. I think what the Bulls
> have achieved is more impressive, even though they are not
> necessarily a better team than the old Celtics. Boston was
> so deep in talent that future Hall of Famers like John
> Havlicek came off the bench for a while. There's no way Chicago has ever
> had that kind of depth.

Okay, this seems a little better thought out.  This is comparing the feats
of the two teams (their title runs, with regards to the era they played
in) rather than compaing the talents of the teams straight up against each
other (Boston by a landslide).

What is, of course, convenient is that they are comparing a hypothetical
six of eight by the Bulls (Utah could spoil the party, folks) against
eight straight by the Celtics.  But it wasn't just eight straight - it was
eleven in thirteen years.  If you are so willing to grant the Bulls their
two year gap, why leave out the bookends of the Celtic/Russell dynasty?
Well duh... because then it's not even worth arguing anymore.

> <P>Another thing to consider, besides all the factors you
> mentioned, is that if those Celtics teams had played today,
> it's hard to see how they could have been kept intact the
> way they were 30 years ago. Bill Russell, Bob Cousy,
> Havlicek, Sam and K.C.
> Jones&#151;can you imagine what the Celtics' payroll would have
> been like if they were playing these days? Boston would
> surely have lost players to free agency the way teams do
> today. Who knows if the Celtics could have kept their run
> going under those
> circumstances? What would have happened if, say, the St. Louis Hawks had
> come along and offered Russell big free-agent money, or if
> one of the Joneses had decided he wanted to go to a team
> where he could be the star? While the Celtics were
> definitely one of the
> greatest dynasties in sports history, doing it under today's
> conditions, which make it so much harder to keep a nucleus
> intact, gives the Bulls a slight edge, in my
> opinion.

One word: Expansion.

Gee, how do you suppose the Bulls would fare if we trimmed the NBA down
to, say, eight teams like there were in the 60s?  Each team would easily
be ten deep.  Maybe Chicago would still have won a bunch of titles, but I
think you could kiss those 72 win seasons good bye.  I mean, c'mon, the
Celtics had to face Chamberlain like eight or nine times each year in the
regular season.

Plus a guy like Rodman would have been killed in the 60s.  Those guys used
to go headhunting with very little punishment by the refs or the league.
Imagine Wayne "The Wall" Embry laying out Rodman with a good pick.
Rodman's elbows and grabbing would net him an elbow in the teeth... and no
one would care.  Finally, there's no way Jordan would be protected the
way he is today.

No disrespect to what the Bulls have done, but there only about halfway to
matching the Celtics dynasty.

Dan