Which Laker Championship Team was the best?

197219801985198719882001Tough question eh?

 

87'When you have 3 starters that could be MVPs then your team is unstoppable. Magic and Kareem ar possibly in the NBA top 5 players ever and you cant stop that. Magic will burn you with his passes. Kareem will dominate in th post. Worthy will do evrything else. Scott Wil hit a 3 there was to much talent and high basketball high Q's on that team

 

I have to agree with pinoy. Worthy as a third option? Crazy! They would still be unstoppable.

 

1987.Maybe 1972...maybe.

 

Im surprised nobody has mentioned 2001, 15-1 in the playoffs...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC @ Sep 11 2006, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Im surprised nobody has mentioned 2001, 15-1 in the playoffs...</div>I think their regular season record is turning people off. They were dominant in the playoffs though.

 

How come you didnt list the 3 or so championships that George Mikan led them to. :no3: No respect for the past, Tony..I'll say '85. Magic, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, James Worthy, Bob McAdoo and Byron Scott. That is a pretty sick team.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Sep 12 2006, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How come you didnt list the 3 or so championships that George Mikan led them to. :no3: No respect for the past, Tony..I'll say '85. Magic, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, James Worthy, Bob McAdoo and Byron Scott. That is a pretty sick team.</div> I don't even need to see game tape of them to know they couldn't even touch the 87 lakers. Actually I do have have some highlights of that team and I'm convinced they couldn't even stay with 2001 lakers.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Melo061 @ Sep 11 2006, 06:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't even need to see game tape of them to know they couldn't even touch the 87 lakers. Actually I do have have some highlights of that team and I'm convinced they couldn't even stay with 2001 lakers.</div>I know that they dont compare to the other championship teams, but atleast name all the championship era's for a choice.

 

I'm saying 2000 or 2001 just because those are two playoffs I saw. 2000 was so fun to watch, some thrilling 7 gamers. 2001 was dominating, we didn't lose one game except the first game against Philly in the finals.good memories.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Blaze @ Sep 11 2006, 09:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm saying 2000 or 2001 just because those are two playoffs I saw. 2000 was so fun to watch, some thrilling 7 gamers. 2001 was dominating, we didn't lose one game except the first game against Philly in the finals.good memories.</div>Same, I'm putting "best" in a different perspectiveTbh, I didnt really see hardly any of the 80's lakers... I've seen revivals on NBA tv and reading stuff but watching it live was one of my best experiences

 

Chick Hearn said he'd never seen a laker team play at a higher level of excellence then the lakers in the 2001 playoffs [particularly the last 2 games of the spurs].

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Melo061 @ Sep 13 2006, 07:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Chick Hearn said he'd never seen a laker team play at a higher level of excellence then the lakers in the 2001 playoffs [particularly the last 2 games of the spurs].</div>Yeah, but that's relative, I don't know if the 2001 Lakers would have played that well against the 1985 or 1987 Celtics.

 

1972, man. They had Wilt Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor, Gail Goodrich, Jerry West, Jim McMillian and Happy Hairston. I mean, the 1980s Lakers were cool and all, but the 1972 Lakers took down the New York Knicks in the Finals. Also, they had a 33 game-winning streak. Top that, punks. A record of 69-13? Damn! Okay, the Bulls had 72-10, but did they have 33 game-winning streaks? No? That's what I thought. End of discussion.

 

Hey, since we are talking about winning streaks, how about the 2000 Lakers? They had a 16 game win streak, a 19 game win streak and an 11 game win streak all in the same season! And if they hadn't have lost the Wizards in OT, they would have won 31 straight.

 

Yeah, the 2000 Lakers were good, but I still give my vote to the 1972 Lakers. One thing for certain is that the 1972 Lakers didn't have to rely on just two guys to do everything for them. The 2000 Lakers expect Kobe and Shaq to do pretty much everything. That's a lame excuse for a team. That's somewhat the reason why I don't give the Chicago Bulls much credit for winning as a team. It was mostly MJ and Pippen. Of course, Kobe & Shaq did give the team what they wanted, which happened to be a championship ring (three total later on)! However, I don't like it when one or two players are given all the pressure to carry a team on their back. That's why teams like the Minnesota Timberwolves can't get into the playoffs any more. The 1972 Lakers had a variety of players to pass the ball to.

 

Good point. Everybody on that 72 squad each had their own jobs. Wilt played D, Rebounded and threw outlet passes. Jerry West, passed the ball more, Goodrich Shot the lights out, Happy Hairston helped out Wilt on the boards, McMillan added a good post game with a sweet midrange game and a nice baseline jumper.That team had an incredible fast break.

 

Though the 1972 Lakers had an insane fastbreak, I still like the "Showtime" Lakers' fast break the most. They practically perfected the alley-oop dunks.Note: "Showtime" Lakers consisted of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson and James Worthy, just to name a few.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Illosophee @ Sep 16 2006, 11:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Though the 1972 Lakers had an insane fastbreak, I still like the "Showtime" Lakers' fast break the most. They practically perfected the alley-oop dunks.Note: "Showtime" Lakers consisted of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson and James Worthy, just to name a few.</div>I think we know

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Melo061 @ Sep 15 2006, 06:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think we know </div>Yeah, Ilosophee has a tendency to post really obvious things, he's a good poster though.