Is 2010-11 Miami Heat better than MJ's '96 Bulls?

[pranchiz]

---

the 2010-11 Miami Heat haven't proven anything yet.... as of today they haven't won a single game either

[icon_king]

they will be bannered by lebron "the choker" james

[pollybusngiw]

Miami Heat 2010-2011---> speculation (fact)
Bulls '96 ----> proven 'n tested (fact)

[makie]

The main concern of the 2010-2011 Miami Heat as for now is their lack of chemistry. The 2010-2011 season hasn't started yet so no matter how good Miami really looked on paper, they still haven't proven anything yet.

First, it took almost a decade for Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen to play together before winning 72 games in 1996. Chicago already had a really good chemistry on that one. Jordan and Pippen are no where far than LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh but the difference that Chicago had was a much better support (aside from chemistry). Chicago had Ron Harper, Dennis Rodman, Toni Kukoc, and Steve Kerr, Miami have Mike Miller, Eddie House, and a whole bunch of fragile big men. How good Chicago really is? Harper was averaging about 20 a game before playing for Chicago, Rodman was a rebounding champion, Kukoc is contributing about 14-16 points a game, and Kerr was a very reliable shooter (just to name a few of Chicago's very valuable support). With the exception of Rodman and maybe Kukoc, they were just being overshadowed by Jordan and Pippen. Miami? Miller is bringing in good numbers but haven't proven a lot. Apart from being a decent shooter, he's average. House is a clutch performer and for me, he's the best apart from LeBron, Wade, and Bosh.

Second is that Miami's roster is unbalanced. The way I see it, it's something like this for Pat Riley: "We now have James, Wade, and Bosh, we'll just pick anybody to fill in the void roster spots". Zydrunas Ilguaskas is a 7'3 brittle as glass center, Jamaal Magliore is about a decade away from his lone All-Star stint, and a bunch of guys who all looked good because of Dwyane Wade last season (speaking of Mario Chalmers and maybe Udonis Haslem too). Miami is huge on paper but these bigs will be bullied around by Dwight Howard and the Celtics gang of giants and that would include Chris Bosh defensively.

Maybe 2 or 3 seasons more Miami could be a 70-win season team but for now, 64-67 wins is more realistic. Not unless if they make some serious trades during the season and further beef up their roster, the chances of making it to the finals isn't that good.

The 72-10 1995-96 Chicago is way better than a 0-0 2010-2011 Miami Heat (at least for now).

[XyRuz]

dli ko agree ani..
kng sa roster tngale mas better kong e.compare ky 3 superstars mn jud. din sa bulls 2 superstar ra pero 1 legendary player MJ..
and bside ang bulls proven na ila ka strong team.
unya ang miami? wla pa jud tawn cla 3 nka prove.. bsan mapareha ni sa cavs ha.. pila ka years cla ng.expect na ma champ pero wla jud tawn nka champ.. semi-final ra kutob kausa ra cla nka duwa og finals which is 0-4 pa jud sa spurs..

[edgeknife]

these are only based on papers... but for me, i doubt if maka 72 wins ang heat ani... but i give the heat the benefit of the doubt kay wala paman mag start ang season...

[Rioko]

we.ll still see..

[Mr. BrokenHearted]

well, its my opinion! hehehe.. but i do believe that the bulls are the team ever in the history of NBA

i agree with that but how about the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers

[radiostar]

they need to prove themselves first.. then diha rata compare

[XyRuz]

i agree jud ko kng mka kuha cla ato 72-10 na record mka ingon ko mka compare na cla sa bulls sauna