NBA Tournament of Champions: First Round (Part 1)

Something I don’t understand: the “we need to stop comparing players and teams to each other and just appreciate them” line of thinking. My counter: can’t we do both?

It’s fun to debate MJ vs. LeBron and argue about the ’96 Bulls vs. the ’17 Warriors, and we can do it in a way that is appreciative of the unique talents of everyone involved. Besides, determining the best players and teams is the fundamental purpose of sports. That’s why we crown champions.

Enter the Tournament of Champions. It’s a 64-team bracket of NBA champions to determine the best team of all-time. Some ground rules:

• Teams play by the rules of the higher seed’s era. This affects the existence of a 3-point line, the width of the lane and even the way the game is refereed.
• All outcomes are decided on the premise that the lower-seeded team is put in a time machine and transported to the higher seed’s era. This means that if the 90s Bulls play the modern-day Warriors, arguments like “Jordan would’ve shot more 3s if he played today” are not considered.
• We’re assuming each team has a week off between winning the NBA championship and beginning the Tournament of Champions.
• Each series is best-of-seven with a 2–2–1–1–1 homecourt format.
• The teams are seeded by regular-season record. I scrapped the teams who won titles prior to the shot-clock era. Apologies to the ’47 Warriors, ’48 Bullets, ‘49–’50 Lakers, ’51 Royals and ‘52-’54 Lakers, but you suck and would’ve lost in the first round anyway. That leaves us with 65 teams, so the ’78 Bullets — the shot-clock era champion with the worst regular-season record (44–38) — are gone, too.
• Click here to view the full bracket.

The plan is to write every Friday with the pieces becoming more in-depth as we advance deeper into the tournament. As you’ll see below, some of these early matchups aren’t exactly competitive.

Quadrant 1

(1) 1996 Chicago Bulls vs. (16) 1958 St. Louis Hawks

Point me to the guy who has a prayer of even sniffing MJ.

’96 Bulls win, 4–0.

(8) 1963 Boston Celtics vs. (9) 1959 Boston Celtics

The ’63 Celtics are deeper and pack a more potent punch on offense. MVP Bill Russell advances to the second round.

’63 Celtics win, 4–2.

(4) 1960 Boston Celtics vs. (13) 2001 Los Angeles Lakers

Bill Russell is the third-best player ever and the greatest defender of all-time, but he has a snowball’s chance in hell of guarding Shaq. Our first upset!

’01 Lakers win, 4–0.

(5) 1965 Boston Celtics vs. (12) 2010 Los Angeles Lakers

This series is closer than ’96 Bulls-’58 Hawks, but the same idea applies. This sets up a Shaq-led 2001 Lakers against a Kobe-led 2010 Lakers in the second round.

’10 Lakers win, 4–0.

(3) 2000 Los Angeles Lakers vs. (14) 2006 Miami Heat

Shaq vs. Shaq. Wade vs. Kobe. Get your popcorn ready.

On one hand we have Shaq at his zenith, when he routinely crammed defenders through the hoop like middle school nerds into a locker. Flanking the MVP was 21-year-old Kobe, who averaged 22 points per game and made All-NBA Second Team and All-Defense First Team. On the other side is 33-year-old Shaq (All-NBA First Team) and 24-year-old Dwyane Wade (27–6–7, All-NBA Second Team). Each duo closely mirrors the other, making for a compelling series.

It’s clear that 2000 Shaq is the best player on the floor. His mental approach finally matched his immense physical gifts in this season, forming a human hurricane who tossed up 30–14 in his sleep. Even so, the Heat have the second- and third-best players. Kobe is a top-10 guy in the league, but he’s still a year away from truly becoming Kobe. A slight advantage goes to the Heat’s supporting cast, too; Miami’s seventh-leading scorer averaged more points per game than L.A.’s fourth-best scorer.

That’s a long way of saying this series is evenly-matched, with a slight edge to Miami. But the difference comes down to two things: Apex Shaq and homecourt advantage.

’00 Lakers win, 4–3.

(6) 1988 Los Angeles Lakers vs. (11) 1994 Houston Rockets

I’m afraid Hakeem Olajuwon, the MVP in ’94, might be charged with elder abuse for the things he’d do to 40-year-old Kareem in this series. Hakeem and Otis Thorpe (10.6 rebounds per game) would shred the Lakers on the glass as poor Kareem applied WD-40 to his creaking joints.

Still, L.A. has prime Magic and a deep cast of supporting talent. The Lakers are more malleable to any style of play; they can take Kareem out and unleash Showtime, or they can slow things down and dump it to the old man for the ‘ole reliable skyhook. Again, star power and homecourt advantage plays a major factor. I’ll take Magic on his home turf in Game 7.

’88 Lakers win, 4–3.

(7) 1962 Boston Celtics vs. (10) 2019 Toronto Raptors

Bigger, faster, stronger. So goes the evolution of basketball.

’19 Raptors win, 4–0.

(2) 1992 Chicago Bulls vs. (15) 1956 Philadelphia Warriors

What’s the over/under for Jordan’s scoring average this series? Hmm. 50? We have to factor in the fact that he won’t play the fourth quarter in any game. Maybe not even the third quarter. Sure, let’s go 50.

’92 Bulls win, 4–0.

Quadrant 2

(1) 1972 Los Angeles Lakers vs. (16) 1995 Houston Rockets

The Lakers have a few factors working against them, namely age. Elgin Baylor hung ’em up nine games into the season, Wilt is 35 and on his last legs and Jerry West is in the midst of his last great season.

L.A.’s record is inflated because of its NBA-record 33-game win streak, which was enabled by overexpansion and cocaine. Basically, the Lakers aren’t quite as good as their seed indicates.

So while West and Chamberlain are historically greater than Olajuwon and Drexler, I’m not sure they’re better players in a vacuum. (This hurts because I love West.)

It’s UMBC all over again!

’95 Rockets win, 4–2.

(8) 1970 New York Knicks vs. (9) 1961 Boston Celtics

Are you tired of reading about the 60s Celtics yet? Get used to it — we still have a few more left.

This iteration of the Celtics finished last in the NBA in offensive rating (88.7). If they struggled to score in 1961, how are they going to get buckets against the top-rated defense of 1970? One less Celtics team remains.

’70 Knicks win, 4–2.

(4) 2009 Los Angeles Lakers vs. (13) 1974 Boston Celtics

Everyone, meet Don Nelson (global). He’s the only man in history to have his free-throw form described as “shocking.” You think he or any of his teammates could stick Kobe?

’09 Lakers win, 4–0.

(5) 1989 Detroit Pistons vs. (12) 1973 New York Knicks

This series would be more interesting if Willis Reed’s knees weren’t cooked. Hobbled knees wouldn’t stop him from decking Bill Laimbeer at least twice, though, so who’s the real winner here?

’89 Pistons win, 4–0.

(3) 1971 Milwaukee Bucks vs. (14) 1979 Seattle SuperSonics

Fact: you can’t name a single player from the 1979 Seattle SuperSonics. That’s because they were one of the rare teams to win the title without a true star. We know that star power wins out in the NBA, and the Bucks have Kareem and Oscar.

’71 Bucks win, 4–1.

(6) 1984 Boston Celtics vs. (11) 2012 Miami Heat

Larry Bird, fresh off claiming his first of three-straight MVPs, squaring off against LeBron, who had just earned his third MVP in four years. Sign me up for that.

The key factor in this series is 3-point shooting. Bird led Boston with a whopping 0.9 3-point attempts per game, and he connected at a paltry 24.7 percent clip. The Heat, by contrast, made 5.6 3s per game. (5.6 is hilariously low by today’s standards, but still: the Heat are basically starting every game up by 15.)

Boston can dig into that deficit by dominating the glass. The Celtics had an incredible frontcourt of Bird (6'9), Kevin McHale (6'10) and Robert Parish (7'1). That trio dwarfs Miami, which regularly played Chris Bosh at center.

The Heat’s mathematical advantage is too great to overcome.

’12 Heat win, 4–2.

(7) 1991 Chicago Bulls vs. (10) 2018 Golden State Warriors

Back-to-back great series in the first round!

My first instinct was the Bulls, fresh off their first title, would be hungrier than the Warriors, in the dog days of their dynasty, and thus would win. That, plus it’s really, really, really hard to go against prime Jordan. But then you look a little deeper.

The Warriors’ third option was Klay Thompson, for my money the second-greatest shooter of all-time. (What kind of sense does that make, by the way?) The Bulls’ third option was Horace Grant, who averaged 12.8 points per game. Golden State simply has more horses.

Golden State rotates Thompson and Andre Iguodala on Jordan, loads up help and forces anyone else to beat them with long 2s. The Warriors can also take solace in their overwhelming 3-point edge.

’18 Warriors win, 4–2.

(2) 2015 Golden State Warriors vs. (15) 1957 Boston Celtics

Curry might be burned at the stake on claims of witchcraft for the magic he pulls off in this matchup. The stage is set for ’18 Warriors against ’15 Warriors in the second round.

’15 Warriors win, 4–0.