Coach's Corner

by Andy "Coach" Cotton

Ever since Chicago blew past the '72 Lakers and their best ever record of 69-13, the debate has raged. Are the Bulls (72-10) the best team ever? Statistically, their record says yes. Is it so? Let's look at five other teams: the '66 Sixers (68-13); '72 Lakers; '86 Celtics (67-15); and the '92 Bulls (67-15); usually included on the "best ever" list, position by position, and see if we can come to a conclusion.

Center: It came as a surprise to find one name on two different "greatest ever" teams. The name is Wilt Chamberlain. Since Chamberlain was a little before my time, I tend to underrate him. I figured he played back in the old days, when everyone was white. Chamberlain was just a guy, I thought, who dunked the ball over everyone. Chamberlain, a four-time MVP, holds about every basketball record imaginable -- most points, most minutes played, most games over 50 points, most rebounds, most, most, most. Chamberlain takes up a page and three-quarters in the record book.

According to my Dad, Chamberlain was awesome. Were he playing today, Chamberlain, at 7'1", 275 lbs., would be the biggest starting center in the league. He possessed the agility of a cat, the stamina of a mule and strength of Samson (not Ralph!). At age 30 in 1966, Chamberlain was in his prime. He averaged 24 ppg (third in the league). He was first in field goal percentages. Incredibly, for a center, he was third in assists and first, as always, in rebounding. His rebounding average, of over 24 per game, is all the more astonishing when you consider Dennis Rodman, considered a maniac on the boards, averages under 19. Later, at age 36, he led the Lakers in minutes played, still pulled down 19 rpg and scored 15 ppg. The man was a giant. There's no point mentioning other centers. Advantage: Whoever had Wilt.

Point Guard: The '86 Celtics featured a good guard in Dennis Johnson (15 ppg). Wilt's '66 team had the great Hal Greer (22 ppg). The Lakers had all-time greats, Gail Goodrich and Jerry West. Since they both averaged 25 ppg, I don't know who's the point and who's the shooter. West also led the league in assists. None of the Bulls' teams had much of a center or a real point guard. Advantage: Lakers. Shooting Guard: But the Bulls do have a fellow named Jordan. Advantage: Chicago.

Power Forwards: This is a tough pick. All possessed a strong, tough, big forward who could rebound and, except Rodman, score. Philadelphia had big Lucious Jackson. Chicago '92 had Horace Grant, and in '96, Rodman. The Lakers had a tandem of Jim McMillian and Happy Hairston. For the best all-around player, I go with Kevin McHale. McHale scored 22 ppg and rebounded and added 137 blocked shots. Grant revolutionized the position with his defensive speed. Rodman's the most unusual. The contributions of each of these players was vital to their team's success.

Small Forward: Though the 'Sixer's Chet Walker was a fine player, he comes in third on this list. For all-around players, you'd be hard pressed to choose between Larry Bird and Scottie Pippen. Bird's been gone so long, he's become fuzzy. Let's bring him back in focus. In '86, he was third in the league in scoring, 7th in rebounding, 9th in steals and #1 in free-throw shooting. He led his team in minutes played and, very odd for a forward, assists. He, as Jordan to Chicago, defined the Boston Celtics. Pippen is a similar all-court player. Certainly the best in the game today. In a game of one-on-one, I'd take Pippen. As a leader and catalyst who makes teammates better than they are, it's Bird, hands down.

Bench: The 'Sixers and Lakers were not deep teams. They went about seven deep. The Celtics had a productive bench with Bill Walton and Scott Wedman, but they too were not very deep. Both Chicago teams had a deep and productive bench. Kukoc, Paxon, Livingston, Perdue, Wennington, and Kerr would win a lot of games on their own. Advantage: Chicago.

Intangibles: A great team is dominated by a great player, not just statistically. A player with something karmic: something wild and mean: something indescribable: something unquenchable: a demonic drive which rubs off on teammates, makes the whole much better than the parts. For all of Chamberlain's obvious greatness, he was, for much of his career, considered a loser. His Philadelphia teams were regularly dominated by the Russell's Celtics. In fact, the 'Sixer team was smack in the middle of a surreal, and certainly never to be repeated again, Celtic championship streak of 11 titles in 13 years. Wilt did not make others better. Of this group, only two do, Bird and Jordan.

My anal/compulsive attempt at a ra-tional rundown has, naturally, failed abysmally. In the end, it's a matter of opinion. Here's mine: Looking at the Laker team, which until this year was considered the best, I don't know how they did it. West and Goodrich at 6'2", 175 lbs., were small by today's standards. The forwards were average. Wilt was at the end of his career. They seem the weakest of the bunch. The 'Sixers had the best starting team, four of whom were in the top 20 in scoring. With the lack of depth, either Bull or Celtic team wear them down. The '92 Bulls vs. '86 Celtics would have been some match; Jordan and Bird, both in their prime, Grant battling McHale, Paxon, and Ainge trading bombs on the perimeter. But who's gonna guard Pippen? I like Chicago there.

These teams are generally considered the best. This is unfortunate. In our win/loss oriented society we look too much at a glitzy record and say, "They're the best." Surely, those Celtic teams of the Fifties and Sixties were the very definition of a "great team." The Bucks of the early Seventies, the Magic-Kareem teams, they all deserve consideration.

Sportsfans, you've been watching the best and, due to free-agency, probably the last great team ever. This is Chicago's fourth championship in six years. They have two clubs on the best-ever list, though only two players (guess who) remain from '92. The Bulls won 72 games this year, losing only 10. They swept through the minefield of the playoffs losing only three. They're the only team ever to have two players the caliber of Jordan and Pippen, both in their primes, for their entire careers. And finally, there's Jordan. There's never been anyone like him. His intangibles, beyond his obvious skills, are paralleled by only one player: Bill Russell.

I hope you appreciated what you saw this year. The Chicago Bulls, 1996. They were the best that ever was. n