Gaze must have misunderstood the question.

Not convinced by the argument for the 2013 Breakers, either. I wouldn't even have them as the best of the Breakers' three-peat teams.

I remember the feeling I got when North Melbourne and South East Melbourne merged to form Victoria Titans and how the Magic were getting D-Mac... ultimately it lead to grand final losses and nothing more significant and their roster was only 8-9 deep but my memory of all that was that they'd be unstoppable and I've never felt like a team would be so dominant again.

I think the Sydney Kings and even Melbourne United suffer from the fact that the competition is so strong so their dominance will be greatly reduced and perception will decrease as season progresses.

It's a fun argument but will beaten grand final sides ever be thought of as being great ie West Sydney Razorbacks that lost in 5 games, had that been different could they be remembered more favourably?
Same with North Melbourne Giants of 1995, won game 1 and lost the remaining 2 but they were great and Chris Jent was an incredible talent.

WTF?
How can a team, that is yet to play a game, be regarded as the greatest in History?

As for Gaze, is he now making fun of his own stupidity by deliberately talking shit?

2007 Bullets definitely the most stacked, and I feel the most dominant.

But for mine, it would be the 2014 Wildcats with Ennis, and Beal at his best.

I don't understand the hate on Gaze, The Tigers came back that year after losing to Magic on 92.

Naming a team as best ever before a game is even played is over the top.
Melbourne are a good chance to win in 18/19.
Though not the best team I remember Tigers in 97 were near bottom of the ladder before swapping Jarvis Lang for Marcus Timmons they would go on to win title that year.

Of the 8 championships Perth has won, Boti picks the worst one of them all as the best of all time?

Did he forget that the 15-13 wildcats had the worst regular season record in history to win a title, beating a 15-13 Hawks team that was probably one of the worst opponents in a GF and they only won it on the back of Adelaide's stunning choke and end of season recruit in Bryce Cotton.

Although in his write up he barely mentions that team at all, which is odd.

86 36ers and 2007 Bullets are hard to split.

I didn't see the 36ers, but the numbers are ridiculous, so I'll go with them by a hair.


1997 Tigers aren't far off either. Gaze, Copeland, Bradtke and Timmons all in their primes- nice! Won 17 games in a row, I think it was? Including one 111-74 walloping of the Magic in Game 1 of the finals.

For the Wildcats are best performing team was 91, went 26-5 for the season.

They would have to be in top 3 teams IMO.

I'll always have fond memories of the 86 36ers. Great players and such an exciting team to watch every time they hit the floor.

Depends on how you define greatest of all time.
For mine, that implies comparatives across time, which makes it hard on the older teams. Yes, they dominated the leagues of their day, but how do they stack up against modern teams.

Why the hate on Gaze? Because he named a team that finished 2nd and won the GF in, at best, "controversial" fashion.
Not disputing that they won the championship that year, but to say they are the greatest of all time is laughable.

"The 1995 Perth Wildcats were a pretty good side"
Yes, for the 90's they were stacked. Smashed the Giants in the first quarter of the GF, ran the bench for the last, went on to beat Real Madrid.

The 2012/13 season was strong. Gold Coast, the 3rd placed team from the year before, had just dropped out and most of their players went to other clubs in the league.

most likely 1986 36ers , arithmetically speaking...

won all games by big margins .... history became a lie 2 games 'lost' on time clock errors

The 1995 Perth Wildcats were a pretty good side:
Cattalini, Crawford, Fisher, Grace, Hansen, Stewart, Trahair, Vlahov

The 2012/13 season was strong. Gold Coast, the 3rd placed team from the year before, had just dropped out and most of their players went to other clubs in the league.

The team the Breakers had when they first won a championship is deceiving on paper as we have seen a much larger body of work from Abercrombie and Pledger so we immediately think 'wow they are deep' but they were still getting minor minutes and weren't stars Yet and that is why all these arguments are fun because when we look back retrospectively we look at a players career as a whole and whether they were a star or not and their best season won't necessarily be that championship year.

That is why I feel it should go on gut instinct and who you feared the most when you were playing them next.

That's why I say a Brian Goorjian led Magic team are mine without giving specific year as they were awesome in 1993 and by 1995/96 they had Anstey, McKinnon, Smith, Drmic coming through and it clouds how great they were as they were stacked and stealing court time from each other.

I agree that the Breakers had most success in the worst period in NBL history. Hard to know how to place them.

Depending on the criteria used, I'm not sure that is such an outrageous statement. The 1980s and 1990s saw more teams with less quality local talent, resulting in diluted talent on teams. The dominance of imports can be a good indicator of this, with the lack of depth of local talent allowing for some ridiculously dominant imports. There have obviously been times when it was easier to attract top talent due to exchange rates, season timing etc, but generally speaking, the quality of imports in the 1980s and early 1990s wasn't so much different to later periods.

Doesn't depth matter? Gaze's choice, the 1993 Tigers, had Gaze and Copeland in prime form, alongside near-prime Bradtke, with an average import in Simmons, with very little depth beyond that. As awesome as the Gaze-Copeland duo was, you then look at the 5th starter and bench with Giddey, Sibling, Gordon and Whitehead who may not even make rosters these days. That's just about their whole team listed, an 8 player rotation listed. The others on the roster simply wouldn't make a 2000s+ roster.

I can't judge the 1986 36ers, just know about their dominance, but what was the standard of competition at that time?

Pretty good standard if my memory serves me well
brisbane had loggins sengstock bruton and etc....

I've been watching since 1979. 2011-2016? I wish I could forget. The Breakers only had to contend with Perth. Everyone else was too busy trying not to go bankrupt.

"The 95 Wildcats started strong, but the were only six and a half deep"

They had Cattalini and Stewart on the bench, that's a kick-arse 7-man rotation.

In 1995 Hansen was used as an injury replacement for Scott Fisher, thereby playing on the same team as Cattalini.

But did he once score 4 touchdowns in a High School game?

Wrong again, Cattalini was in his third season, and was already playing big minutes, as part of a 4-man frontcourt rotation.

But you didn't, you had to be a smart arse and claim "Cattalini and Hansen were never on the same team."