There is one reason why Michael Jordan is the greatest of all-time

[TheTruth11]

His mind.

His mind which lead to relentless determination and will to win. Heart! He had it.... and you can't teach it.

Lebron will go down as one of the greatest of all time. But thus far, I have not seen this quality from him. Put MJ on the Cavs and they win that series. Or atleast take the Celts to a game 7.

Kobe is close but Kobe failed to show up a few times as well when they should have won it all. MJ never failed to deliver. The most fierce and ferocious competitor the game has ever known with the possible exception of one Bill Russell.

[Funnyfuka]

and scottie pippen, and phil jackson, and steve kerr, and horace grant, and rodman...

[magnax1]

and scottie pippen, and phil jackson, and steve kerr, and horace grant, and rodman...
So hes the best individual player ever because of the players he played with?

[RazorBaLade]

His mind.

His mind which lead to relentless determination and will to win. Heart! He had it.... and you can't teach it.

Lebron will go down as one of the greatest of all time. But thus far, I have not seen this quality from him. Put MJ on the Cavs and they win that series. Or atleast take the Celts to a game 7.

Kobe is close but Kobe failed to show up a few times as well when they should have won it all. MJ never failed to deliver. The most fierce and ferocious competitor the game has ever known with the possible exception of one Bill Russell.

kobe never had the team Mj had. MJ had everything u could want thats why hes the greatest... Kobes been the closest and Lebron is not even close yet imo

[Micku]

MJ was obsessed with winning. That is probably the reason why he was so good. He never stopped trying to improve his game because he wanted to be perfect. He always wanted to destroy his opponents. That's not secret. But MJ has failed a lot of times to win it all. Basketball is a team sport. Like KG said, no matter how good the player is, you are only a piece to the puzzle.


kobe never had the team Mj had. MJ had everything u could want thats why hes the greatest... Kobes been the closest and Lebron is not even close yet imo

Well, Phil Jackson likes bigs. He prefer bigs. I think he feels like his system is more complete with bigs. Kobe's team is probably one of the most talented teams in the NBA. They have balance, but they don't have the competitiveness nature to destroy their opponents.

[Harison]

His mind.

His mind which lead to relentless determination and will to win. Heart! He had it.... and you can't teach it.

Lebron will go down as one of the greatest of all time. But thus far, I have not seen this quality from him. Put MJ on the Cavs and they win that series. Or atleast take the Celts to a game 7.

Kobe is close but Kobe failed to show up a few times as well when they should have won it all. MJ never failed to deliver. The most fierce and ferocious competitor the game has ever known with the possible exception of one Bill Russell.
Completely agree, and I have no doubt in my mind Jordan would have won with these Cavs against Celtics.

[TAZORAC]

Jordan on the cavs wouldn't have won the series, they caves don't have another player who can create their own shot.

[Amil23]

Jordan on the cavs wouldn't have won the series, they caves don't have another player who can create their own shot.
Mo and Jamison can

[IcanzIIravor]

So hes the best individual player ever because of the players he played with?

He didn't become a consistent winner until he had better talent around him and a strong willed coach who brought a winning mindset and system with him. Lebron has some talent around him, but he needs that strong willed and talented coach with a system.

[zizozain]

yes one reason :
ESPN

[AK47DR91]

I think everybody is overrating Jordan's supporting cast. Aside from Pippen, the rest were role players and this includes Rodman. Rodman was a role player, a great one in rebounding and defending!

The thing is, they knew how to play their role.

I would say 70% of the Bulls success was because of Jordan. Th other 30% goes to Pippen, supporting cast and coaching staff.

You'll think that Pippen, Phil and the supporting cast would have been beaten Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, etc without Jordan?

In fact, I believe the Knicks took out the Bulls in '94 when MJ was playing minor league baseball.

Jordan from 1986-1998 is/was the greatest player of all-times. He didn't win any championships in the late 80's but his greatness was already there.
He dropped 63 on Bird and the Celtics at the old Boston Garden. His team lost but his greatness was there.

Jordan's talented supporting cast only added championship to his greatness. They didn't make him great because he was already great.

[Manute for Ever!]

kobe never had the team Mj had. MJ had everything u could want thats why hes the greatest... Kobes been the closest and Lebron is not even close yet imo

MJ never had a decent centre by his side his whole career. Just saying...

[Collie]

MJ never had a good centre by his side his whole career. Just saying...

To be fair, Cartwright and Bison Dele, even Luc to some extent, were pretty serviceable.

[BFRESH44]

Gotta agree.

Jordan went to the Finals 6 times, and he was not denied a single time.

That sh*t is still incredible to me, even today.

[Alhazred]

I think everybody is overrating Jordan's supporting cast. Aside from Pippen, the rest were role players and this includes Rodman. Rodman was a role player, a great one in rebounding and defending!

The thing is, they knew how to play their role.

I would say 70% of the Bulls success was because of Jordan. Th other 30% goes to Pippen, supporting cast and coaching staff.

You'll think that Pippen, Phil and the supporting cast would have been beaten Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, etc without Jordan?

In fact, I believe the Knicks took out the Bulls in '94 when MJ was playing minor league baseball.


Roundball is going to chew you out when he reads that. Just thought I should warn you now.

[Poodle]

the bulls cast were all role players. like a bunch of glorified matt bonner's. you're an idiot if you think MJ had players of gasol, odom, bynums caliber combined. even pippen and kukoc don't make up for kobe's supporting cast relatively speaking.

MJ had the will of fire. i agree its what separates him from lebron in this series, MJ would have made better decisions and passes for easier buckets. lebron just doesn't have that fire all of the time like MJ did, and kobe has a little bit of it but not on MJ's level at all.

theres no overrating MJ, considering he could be the greatest athlete ever. not just NBA, and a lot of that has to do with his will.

[Collie]

One thing about MJ, specifically during the championship years, was that he never ever let you down. Guys like Mike Tyson, Kobe, even Tiger Woods seemed human at times, but MJ always pulled the rabbit out of the hat. He was like a real superhero, who even if he lost at the start, always won in the end.

[alexandreben]

His mind.
MJ never failed to deliver. The most fierce and ferocious competitor the game has ever known with the possible exception of one Bill Russell.
No one is never failed to deliver, growing up with ESPN will get you that thought... don't forget MJ failed in 1995, the Bulls was killed by Magic; even Russell lost twice, one to Bob Petit and the other one to Wilt, don't you forget that dude, MJ is not God and certainly he is not the greatest player of all time, he definitely is in the discusion of the GOAT joining Wilt, Russell and KAJ.

[Manute for Ever!]

One thing about MJ, specifically during the championship years, was that he never ever let you down. Guys like Mike Tyson, Kobe, even Tiger Woods seemed human at times, but MJ always pulled the rabbit out of the hat. He was like a real superhero, who even if he lost at the start, always won in the end.

Spot on. :cheers:

[asdf1990]

One thing about MJ, specifically during the championship years, was that he never ever let you down. Guys like Mike Tyson, Kobe, even Tiger Woods seemed human at times, but MJ always pulled the rabbit out of the hat. He was like a real superhero, who even if he lost at the start, always won in the end.

this is what the NBA will never see again, the way the current NBA is cultured, the players care too much about their image now "oh if i take 30 shots and miss 20 i am gonna look so bad so i might as well keep passing." As much as i dislike kobe its gonna be a sad day when he leaves the NBA cuz he is the last player left in the NBA who isn't afraid to go 10-30, who isn't scared to take the last shot. Talent will always be there but the Mental toughness/heart in the players is on a steep decline, Lebron showed this today.

[monkeypox]

Marketing and timing.

[monkeypox]

Marketing and timing.

[Manute for Ever!]

Marketing and timing.

And this why I hardly ever come into the NBA forum anymore

[Dbrog]

the bulls cast were all role players. like a bunch of glorified matt bonner's. you're an idiot if you think MJ had players of gasol, odom, bynums caliber combined. even pippen and kukoc don't make up for kobe's supporting cast relatively speaking.

MJ had the will of fire. i agree its what separates him from lebron in this series, MJ would have made better decisions and passes for easier buckets. lebron just doesn't have that fire all of the time like MJ did, and kobe has a little bit of it but not on MJ's level at all.

theres no overrating MJ, considering he could be the greatest athlete ever. not just NBA, and a lot of that has to do with his will.

SMH :hammerhead:

Yes, his team was filled with people who should be 3rd string or in the D-League. The amount of Jordan hyperbolizing on this board has gotten out of hand. Pippen + kukoc < Pau + Bynum? :no: :banghead:

[AK47DR91]

Derek Fisher only >>>> Kerr, Paxson, Cartwright, Wennington and BJ Armstrong combined.

With exception to Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc the rest of Jordan's teammates were scrubs.

And Ron Harper wasn't much of a player either once he left the Clippers.

[RazorBaLade]

MJ never had a decent centre by his side his whole career. Just saying...

Kobe never had someone who can take over a game by himself like Jordan did when he wasn't playing great. Kobe knows that its all on him, we saw what happens when Pau is trusted to make a clutch play (not counting the putback layup, but I mean if he even choked that..) Good bigs are great to have but having someone that can create his own offense is greater. I mean Pippen would be top 50 on the list of the biggest hater of all time, gasol at this point is not top 50 on the list of biggest laker fan.

[RazorBaLade]

Derek Fisher only >>>> Kerr, Paxson, Cartwright, Wennington and BJ Armstrong combined.

With exception to Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc the rest of Jordan's teammates were scrubs.

And Ron Harper wasn't much of a player either once he left the Clippers.

they shouldnt allow computers in padded rooms

[Force]

lol @ Kobe not ever having a good team around him. LOL. Replace Jordan with Kobe and they aren't winning 6 years and he's not winning 6 MVPs. Replace Kobe with Jordan to play with Shaq and they won't have very many bare fingers left.

[RazorBaLade]

lol @ Kobe not ever having a good team around him. LOL. Replace Jordan with Kobe and they aren't winning 6 years and he's not winning 6 MVPs. Replace Kobe with Jordan to play with Shaq and they won't have very many bare fingers left.

Jordan and Shaq would have collapsed before 3 years. Kobe on Bulls have a better chance at 6 rings than Jordan and Shaq have at 3. Jordans ego is bigger than Kobe's. Shaq started flipping out when Kobe was being praised as the NEXT michael jordan, can you imagine how he'd be if announcers were telling him he's the 2nd option? And prime jordan WOULD want to be the 1st option.

[raptorfan_dr07]

Kobe never had someone who can take over a game by himself like Jordan did when he wasn't playing great. Kobe knows that its all on him, we saw what happens when Pau is trusted to make a clutch play (not counting the putback layup, but I mean if he even choked that..) Good bigs are great to have but having someone that can create his own offense is greater. I mean Pippen would be top 50 on the list of the biggest hater of all time, gasol at this point is not top 50 on the list of biggest laker fan.

Good God, this forum is infested with morons. I really think it's time for me to move on maybe to RealGM. I heard they have good discussion over there. Kobe has nobody who can take the game over if he isn't playing great? Then WHAT THE F*CK WAS GASOL DOING IN THE ENTIRE FIRST ROUND???? You know, when Kobe was busy chucking up shots and playing BAD. How could the Lakers have won that series with the GREAT Kobe Bryant playing so poorly? I mean his team is nothing but scrubs who need him to dominate every single game to even have a chance at winning. Not even Kobe agrees with you morons. He said during that series that the beauty of his team is that he doesn't have to score 45-50 points anymore because he has other OPTIONS. Players who CAN score and impact the game if he's playing poorly. Don't EVEN get me started on Shaq years. Yeah, you're right, Kobe's NEVER had a player who can take over and win games when Kobe's having an off night. If you really believe that BS, then more power to you. It's late, I'm going to bed, and I've sh*tted on enough of you Kobe trolls tonight. I had a feeling if the Cavs lost tonight, the Kobe trolls would be out in full force, but I didn't expect it to be this bad.

[RazorBaLade]

Good God, this forum is infested with morons. I really think it's time for me to move on maybe to RealGM. I heard they have good discussion over there. Kobe has nobody who can take the game over if he isn't playing great? Then WHAT THE F*CK WAS GASOL DOING IN THE ENTIRE FIRST ROUND???? You know, when Kobe was busy chucking up shots and playing BAD. How could the Lakers have won that series with the GREAT Kobe Bryant playing so poorly? I mean his team is nothing but scrubs who need him to dominate every single game to even have a chance at winning. Not even Kobe agrees with you morons. He said during that series that the beauty of his team is that he doesn't have to score 45-50 points anymore because he has other OPTIONS. Players who CAN score and impact the game if he's playing poorly. Don't EVEN get me started on Shaq years. Yeah, you're right, Kobe's NEVER had a player who can take over and win games when Kobe's having an off night. If you really believe that BS, then more power to you. It's late, I'm going to bed, and I've sh*tted on enough of you Kobe trolls tonight. I had a feeling if the Cavs lost tonight, the Kobe trolls would be out in full force, but I didn't expect it to be this bad.

Game 2, 5 and 6 gasol sure played better than kobe :roll: and at the end of the game it was always kobe or else they lost, no one on the lakers can do it in high pressure situations consistently except fisher and thats only a shot or 2. At the end of the game its always through kobe, but jordan had the luxury of it being through pippen once in a while.

At the end of games only kobe can take over. Gasol chokes. Shaq can't even play the end of games in case they foul you idiot.

PS: if not for game 6 tip in, gasol would have been destroyed for having such a bad game and it'd be another game he choked in. Funny how that goes unnoticed.

now don't get me wrong, gasol is amazing for the lakers and for kobe, but kobe has never had help at the end of the shot clock or at the end of the game. Period.


edit: I re-read my post, I apologize, I didn't include that I was talking about end of game situations. It's kind of obvious to me that "take game over" means during clutch situations but oh well.

[CeoTypeDoe619]

Good God, this forum is infested with morons. I really think it's time for me to move on maybe to RealGM. I heard they have good discussion over there. Kobe has nobody who can take the game over if he isn't playing great? Then WHAT THE F*CK WAS GASOL DOING IN THE ENTIRE FIRST ROUND???? You know, when Kobe was busy chucking up shots and playing BAD. How could the Lakers have won that series with the GREAT Kobe Bryant playing so poorly? I mean his team is nothing but scrubs who need him to dominate every single game to even have a chance at winning. Not even Kobe agrees with you morons. He said during that series that the beauty of his team is that he doesn't have to score 45-50 points anymore because he has other OPTIONS. Players who CAN score and impact the game if he's playing poorly. Don't EVEN get me started on Shaq years. Yeah, you're right, Kobe's NEVER had a player who can take over and win games when Kobe's having an off night. If you really believe that BS, then more power to you. It's late, I'm going to bed, and I've sh*tted on enough of you Kobe trolls tonight. I had a feeling if the Cavs lost tonight, the Kobe trolls would be out in full force, but I didn't expect it to be this bad.


bye bye sir :oldlol: :oldlol:

[ginobli2311]

Game 2, 5 and 6 gasol sure played better than kobe :roll: and at the end of the game it was always kobe or else they lost, no one on the lakers can do it in high pressure situations consistently except fisher and thats only a shot or 2. At the end of the game its always through kobe, but jordan had the luxury of it being through pippen once in a while.

At the end of games only kobe can take over. Gasol chokes. Shaq can't even play the end of games in case they foul you idiot.

PS: if not for game 6 tip in, gasol would have been destroyed for having such a bad game and it'd be another game he choked in. Funny how that goes unnoticed.

now don't get me wrong, gasol is amazing for the lakers and for kobe, but kobe has never had help at the end of the shot clock or at the end of the game. Period.


edit: I re-read my post, I apologize, I didn't include that I was talking about end of game situations. It's kind of obvious to me that "take game over" means during clutch situations but oh well.

I'm pretty sure that 18 rebounds and 9 points on 11 shots is not a really bad game. What the **** are you talking about. Kobe had it going offensively and Gasol didn't get many shot opportunities....so instead he busted his ass on defense and the boards. He played great defense all game and completely dominated the glass....just like he did with the game winning put back.

You do understand that a lot more goes into winning basketball games that scoring points right?

But i do agree with your post. Kobe can coast for the majority of games because the lakers team is good that regardless of how kobe plays usually they have a chance to win in the last 5 minutes and that is when kobe can take over. Unfortunately......other stars don't have that. The stats show that Lebron is far superior in the clutch than Kobe anyway....but you really do answer the entire debate in your post.

Meaning:

A team is not going to win if it relies on one player to do the majority of the heavy lifiting throughout the game a la Lebron. Gasol grabbing those 18 boards as a huge part of the victory. I think it is fair to say that if he only gets 13 of those that the Lakers lose game six.

Kobe is an amazing player that i have in the top 15 all time. so its not like i dont think he's truly great. but he played like crap for the majority of the thunder series....and it was his teammates that that picked him up and carried more of the load when he was off. How can you debate that? Everyone here flames artest....yet he absolutely shut down durant. without that....the lakers would have been in big big trouble and would have most likely lost the series. its that simple....

kobe is not perfect. neither is lebron. the play like crap sometimes. it happens. its ok to admit it.

[Johnni Gade]

Another dickriding thread.

[R.I.P.]

Jordan and Shaq would have collapsed before 3 years. Kobe on Bulls have a better chance at 6 rings than Jordan and Shaq have at 3. Jordans ego is bigger than Kobe's. Shaq started flipping out when Kobe was being praised as the NEXT michael jordan, can you imagine how he'd be if announcers were telling him he's the 2nd option? And prime jordan WOULD want to be the 1st option.

Haha Jordan and Shaq could have been hilarious. The insane worker Jordan with fatty Shaq.

Jordan: It

[RazorBaLade]

[QUOTE=R.I.P.]Haha Jordan and Shaq could have been hilarious. The insane worker Jordan with fatty Shaq.

Jordan: It

[Alhazred]

Jordan and Shaq would have collapsed before 3 years. Kobe on Bulls have a better chance at 6 rings than Jordan and Shaq have at 3. Jordans ego is bigger than Kobe's. Shaq started flipping out when Kobe was being praised as the NEXT michael jordan, can you imagine how he'd be if announcers were telling him he's the 2nd option? And prime jordan WOULD want to be the 1st option.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v654/heffem/blog/posts/2007/08-august/06-lold/i-lol-d.jpg

[Floppy]

and scottie pippen, and phil jackson, and steve kerr, and horace grant, and rodman...
:roll:

****ing kids

[Gotterdammerung]

Another reason nobody mentioned so far:

The # of times Michael Jordan had homecourt advantage in the playoffs:
23.

The # of times MJ won with homecourt advantage in the playoffs:
23.

Never mention Lebron in the same sentence as Michael Jordan ever again. :no:

[guy]

Although I don't think Lebron is completely to blame, LOL @ everyone that prematurely tried to say Lebron was better then Jordan was through this stage of their careers.

[TheTruth11]

No one is never failed to deliver, growing up with ESPN will get you that thought... don't forget MJ failed in 1995, the Bulls was killed by Magic; even Russell lost twice, one to Bob Petit and the other one to Wilt, don't you forget that dude, MJ is not God and certainly he is not the greatest player of all time, he definitely is in the discusion of the GOAT joining Wilt, Russell and KAJ.

Captain obvious here. Obviously we all know that MJ did not win a championship until his 7th year in the league. And that in his first year back from retirement they lost once (Orlando). But that was not the true MJ. He was rusty and severely lacking in pieces. What is implicit within my post is that MJ never failed WHEN HE WAS SUPPOSED TO WIN IT ALL.

When MJ had a few pieces.... when everyone picked MJ's team as having a good shot at winning it all - they won it all.

The guy never once failed to deliver when expected to win.

...

[Bodin]

To be fair, Cartwright and Bison Dele, even Luc to some extent, were pretty serviceable.

What does that even mean?!? Sounds like you're a Sociology major.

[Roundball_Rock]

I would say 70% of the Bulls success was because of Jordan. Th other 30% goes to Pippen, supporting cast and coaching staff.

You'll think that Pippen, Phil and the supporting cast would have been beaten Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, etc without Jordan?

In fact, I believe the Knicks took out the Bulls in '94 when MJ was playing minor league baseball..

SMH at this. Without Mr. "70%" the shift between the Knicks-Bulls in 94' versus 93' was a play or two here and there. Google Hue Hollins...Plus, since MJ retired at the last possible minute the Bulls had to replace him with a D-League scrub who was out the NBA for the previous 2 seasons. Imagine that team with a legit NBA starter; hell even a legit NBA 7th man at SG!


The amount of Jordan hyperbolizing on this board has gotten out of hand.

He is now to basketball fans what Reagan is to conservative Republicans: not a historical figure like he should be but a demigod with a panpoly of myths surrounding him. Even things Jordan/Reagan did are things "X would never do" (i.e. amnesty for illegals in 86', having 5 losing seasons); things they did not do are things they "did" (compromise, win with scrubs, etc.).


With exception to Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc the rest of Jordan's teammates were scrubs.

And? The same could be said about any elite team from the 90's. MJ's team was 2 games from the 1 seed without him and 51-21 when Pippen played (#2 in the league behind Seattle!). Enough said.

I don't see how Kobe is relevant to this thread but, while Kobe has no top 20 of all-time teammate like Jordan did, Kobe's team as a whole is more stacked than Jordan's. He has no Pippen but more options overall. Plus, his current team is more stacked relative to the L than Jordan's best teams.

Regarding MJ never having an elite center, and? You don't need that when you have the two best perimeter players of the era on the same team!

[Soothsayer]

SMH at this. Without Mr. "70%" the shift between the Knicks-Bulls in 94' versus 93' was a play or two here and there. Google Hue Hollins...Plus, since MJ retired at the last possible minute the Bulls had to replace him with a D-League scrub who was out the NBA for the previous 2 seasons. Imagine that team with a legit NBA starter; hell even a legit NBA 7th man at SG!



He is now to basketball fans what Reagan is to conservative Republicans: not a historical figure like he should be but a demigod with a panpoly of myths surrounding him. Even things Jordan/Reagan did are things "X would never do" (i.e. amnesty for illegals in 86', having 5 losing seasons); things they did not do are things they "did" (compromise, win with scrubs, etc.).



And? The same could be said about any elite team from the 90's. MJ's team was 2 games from the 1 seed without him and 51-21 when Pippen played (#2 in the league behind Seattle!). Enough said.


Irrelevant. That 94 team had already added both Kerr and Kukoc, and the 93 team had coasted a bit during the regular season after the Olympics for both Pippen and Jordan.

Put Jordan on that 94 team coming off a championship, with Grant, Pippe, And ADDING Kerr and Kukoc, and we are talking 70 wins or so.

[Roundball_Rock]

Irrelevant. That 94 team had already added both Kerr and Kukoc, and the 93 team had coasted a bit during the regular season after the Olympics for both Pippen and Jordan.

That is irrelevant. 55 wins. Even if we accept that with Jordan they would win 70 the fact is they remained an elite team without him. How can this be? They were scrubs, right? :roll:

Kerr averaged something like 3 points a game against the Knicks and was Orlando's 12th man the previous year. Kukoc played only 18 minutes a game and put up 9/4/3 in the playoffs. Is the argument that adding these players equals Mr. "70%"? That is strange...

[Soothsayer]

That is irrelevant. 55 wins. Even if we accept that with Jordan they would win 70 the fact is they remained an elite team without him. How can this be? They were scrubs, right? :roll:

Kerr averaged something like 3 points a game against the Knicks and was Orlando's 12th man the previous year. Kukoc played only 18 minutes a game in the playoffs. Is the argument that adding these players equals Mr. "70%"? That is strange...


No, it's not irrelevant at all. 92, before the olympics, same team won 67, pretty much maxed out. 93 team coasted through the regular season. Added Kerr (GOAT 3PT shooter whom Jordan set up many a time), and Kukoc (soft, but very versatile), and both players thrived in the bulls system with Jordan.

If MJ never retired, no Pete Myers, but they keep grant, pippen, and add Kerr and Kukoc, you are looking at 70+ wins and another ring. Easy.

[Soothsayer]

That is irrelevant. 55 wins. Even if we accept that with Jordan they would win 70 the fact is they remained an elite team without him. How can this be? They were scrubs, right? :roll:

Kerr averaged something like 3 points a game against the Knicks and was Orlando's 12th man the previous year. Kukoc played only 18 minutes a game and put up 9/4/3 in the playoffs. Is the argument that adding these players equals Mr. "70%"? That is strange...

Scrubs? I never said that. They were a championship team with good pieces and players who knew their roles to perfection. They were a 2nd round team with a very talented, but questionable leader in Pippen

[Poodle]

SMH :hammerhead:

Yes, his team was filled with people who should be 3rd string or in the D-League. The amount of Jordan hyperbolizing on this board has gotten out of hand. Pippen + kukoc < Pau + Bynum? :no: :banghead:


thing is people reinvent pippens greatness like crazy. its so retarded to me, and kukoc's legacy is crazy overrated also.

back then pippen was not considered a top 5-10 player, only after the fact does he get on these all time top 50 lists with a bunch of idiots reinventing the 80's. Pau would be equivalent to a Karl Malone back then, considering Pau is a top 3 PF iin this league today. Bynum could easily be a top 3 Center in the league today also. Pippen was barely arguably in the top 5, and only the D whores put him on that lvl, but he just wasn't one of those top players until the year where MJ was hurt and he started to carry them but that happened sort of late, and definitely not throughout his career. kukoc was just a good player, never a superstar, and its just dumb how twisted their greatness has been exaggerated in hindsight.

its a joke to me people try to downplay MJ while hyping Pippen/Kukoc. i swear only the biggest retards will do that, because if you actually watched bball back then and have a half decent memory of it, MJ was on a completely different lvl than everyone else. Pippen wasn't close to Magic, bird, or MJ lvls, and he wasn't even on the tier right below them, altho i'm not saying he wasn't really good in his own right. just not the all time great superstar a lot of idiots and D whores have reinvented him in hindsight :rolleyes:

i mean players like malone, payton, duncan, the admiral, etc. were all easily better than pippen. so yeah relatively speaking kobe has a way better supporting cast than MJ did. MJ just made everyone around him better, and once they became that triangle machine the PJ's system carried them a lot too. but player for player superstar talent wasn't there for MJ like it is for Kobe today period.

[Poodle]

Kobe never had someone who can take over a game by himself like Jordan did when he wasn't playing great. Kobe knows that its all on him, we saw what happens when Pau is trusted to make a clutch play (not counting the putback layup, but I mean if he even choked that..) Good bigs are great to have but having someone that can create his own offense is greater. I mean Pippen would be top 50 on the list of the biggest hater of all time, gasol at this point is not top 50 on the list of biggest laker fan.


you're an idiot. for the affect Pau has had since joining the lakers, and the amount of easy baskets and rebs they really shouldn't be getting if they didn't have Pau or even Bynum(let alone odom), saying what you just said is completely retarded.

and its not like there is room for other chuckers on that team with kobe there :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Poodle]

Jordan and Shaq would have collapsed before 3 years. Kobe on Bulls have a better chance at 6 rings than Jordan and Shaq have at 3. Jordans ego is bigger than Kobe's. Shaq started flipping out when Kobe was being praised as the NEXT michael jordan, can you imagine how he'd be if announcers were telling him he's the 2nd option? And prime jordan WOULD want to be the 1st option.

please stfu. you have no clue wtf you're talking about.

[Poodle]

[QUOTE=R.I.P.]Haha Jordan and Shaq could have been hilarious. The insane worker Jordan with fatty Shaq.

Jordan: It

[Poodle]

Although I don't think Lebron is completely to blame, LOL @ everyone that prematurely tried to say Lebron was better then Jordan was through this stage of their careers.


lebron is a better physical specimen but athletically they're very arguable. MJ just had the will of fire. OP's right, its what separates him from almost everyone else, even the old timers that people pretend are GOAT.

[Poodle]

SMH at this. Without Mr. "70%" the shift between the Knicks-Bulls in 94' versus 93' was a play or two here and there. Google Hue Hollins...Plus, since MJ retired at the last possible minute the Bulls had to replace him with a D-League scrub who was out the NBA for the previous 2 seasons. Imagine that team with a legit NBA starter; hell even a legit NBA 7th man at SG!



He is now to basketball fans what Reagan is to conservative Republicans: not a historical figure like he should be but a demigod with a panpoly of myths surrounding him. Even things Jordan/Reagan did are things "X would never do" (i.e. amnesty for illegals in 86', having 5 losing seasons); things they did not do are things they "did" (compromise, win with scrubs, etc.).



And? The same could be said about any elite team from the 90's. MJ's team was 2 games from the 1 seed without him and 51-21 when Pippen played (#2 in the league behind Seattle!). Enough said.

I don't see how Kobe is relevant to this thread but, while Kobe has no top 20 of all-time teammate like Jordan did, Kobe's team as a whole is more stacked than Jordan's. He has no Pippen but more options overall. Plus, his current team is more stacked relative to the L than Jordan's best teams.

Regarding MJ never having an elite center, and? You don't need that when you have the two best perimeter players of the era on the same team!


hope you're not saying pippen was the 2nd best perimeter player of the 80's?

[LA_Showtime]

His mind.

His mind which lead to relentless determination and will to win. Heart! He had it.... and you can't teach it.

Lebron will go down as one of the greatest of all time. But thus far, I have not seen this quality from him. Put MJ on the Cavs and they win that series. Or atleast take the Celts to a game 7.

Kobe is close but Kobe failed to show up a few times as well when they should have won it all. MJ never failed to deliver. The most fierce and ferocious competitor the game has ever known with the possible exception of one Bill Russell.

Actually, he abandoned his team to go play baseball.

[Poodle]

That is irrelevant. 55 wins. Even if we accept that with Jordan they would win 70 the fact is they remained an elite team without him. How can this be? They were scrubs, right? :roll:

Kerr averaged something like 3 points a game against the Knicks and was Orlando's 12th man the previous year. Kukoc played only 18 minutes a game and put up 9/4/3 in the playoffs. Is the argument that adding these players equals Mr. "70%"? That is strange...


it was because they had that swagger with MJ leading them, and knew the triangle. they were a GREAT team. but you put ANY of them on any other team as individuals and their stock would plummet.

talking more the kerr's, paxson's, longley's, wenningtons, etc. even horace is pretty overrated since he was just an above average role player. not star at all. only in hindsight and D whores as usual love to reinvent the past. they'll probably do it with Artest 10 years from now too putting him on the 50 greatest of alltime. bet.

[bdreason]

I would have loved to see this forum after Jordan got SWEPT by the Celtics, TWICE.


"Michael Jordan is a mental midget, he'll never be a champion!!!"

:roll:

[Collie]

I would have loved to see this forum after Jordan got SWEPT by the Celtics, TWICE.


"Michael Jordan is a mental midget, he'll never be a champion!!!"

:roll:

Did anyone criticize Durant for losing to the Lakers, who weren't as good as those multiple champion Celtics? Yeah, but that's because he had a bad series, but the criticism was few and far between, and because it was only his 3rd year.

Now think about Jordan's 86 and 87 Bulls, who had nobody as good as Westbrook as a 2nd star (Druggy Woolridge was probably the closest they had to a 2nd star) getting swept by the Celtics, BUT he averaged about 40 ppg against one of the best teams in NBA history, including breaking the NBA record for playoff points. That's a 2nd and 3rd year Jordan, mind you.

The only thing you'll be reading is how he'd be the future GOAT (And oh, he was a huge underdog against those Piston teams, but still managed to take them 6 and 7 games, with freaking Sam Vincent as their second best scorer) - the same team that SWEPT the Lakers in the Finals)

MJ always won when he was expected to. Always.

[D-nugz]

kobe never had the team Mj had. MJ had everything u could want thats why hes the greatest... Kobes been the closest and Lebron is not even close yet imo

:roll:

[Soothsayer]

I would have loved to see this forum after Jordan got SWEPT by the Celtics, TWICE.


"Michael Jordan is a mental midget, he'll never be a champion!!!"

:roll:

Big difference. Celts were one of, if not the best team in the league at the time and were highly favored over Jordan's Bulls, who were not exactly "stacked" at the time.

Jordan NEVER lost as a favorite in the playoffs.

[Jasper]

kobe never had the team Mj had. MJ had everything u could want thats why hes the greatest... Kobes been the closest and Lebron is not even close yet imo
must be a kobe fan.

[Jasper]

Shit I just realized , it's close to the NBA championship and new threads of how great Kobe is compared to Jordan was will come out of the woodwork.

Jasper - stay out of MJ Kobe threads till October .....

[magnax1]

One of the thing that stands out to me about Jordan is he won against teams with obviously more talented supporting casts. How often does that happen? Rick Barry did it, and I don't really know of another. Walton did too now that I think of it, and probably one or two other I forgot. The point is it doesn't happen often. Barely ever.

[t-rex]

I think everybody is overrating Jordan's supporting cast. Aside from Pippen, the rest were role players and this includes Rodman. Rodman was a role player, a great one in rebounding and defending!

The thing is, they knew how to play their role.

I would say 70% of the Bulls success was because of Jordan. Th other 30% goes to Pippen, supporting cast and coaching staff.

You'll think that Pippen, Phil and the supporting cast would have been beaten Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, etc without Jordan?

In fact, I believe the Knicks took out the Bulls in '94 when MJ was playing minor league baseball.

Jordan from 1986-1998 is/was the greatest player of all-times. He didn't win any championships in the late 80's but his greatness was already there.
He dropped 63 on Bird and the Celtics at the old Boston Garden. His team lost but his greatness was there.

Jordan's talented supporting cast only added championship to his greatness. They didn't make him great because he was already great.


Actually Jordan's supporting cast is probably the most UNDERRATED IN NBA HISTORY.


Below is some factual info in regard to Jordan's supporting cast that I posted in another thread a few days ago.


Jordan and the Bulls won the title in 1993.

The Bulls won 57 games that year.

Before the 1994 season, Jordan retired. This is gives us a real good "apples to apples" comparison as to just how good Jordan's supporting cast really was.

The following year without Jordan (1994), the Bulls with Pippen, Grant etc. won 55 games and still advanced to the second round of the playoffs. There was only a 2 game difference between the Bulls in 1993 vs 1994 even without the remarkable Jordan.


Here is a look at how Bulls (without Jordan) faired in 1994 against the compeition that included some HOF all time great players.




Here are the records of some notable teams in 1994.


Houston Rockets 58-24- Hakeem Olajuwon is in the prime of his career. He is voted MVP and Defensive Player of the Year. He is regarded as the best player in the world. He is MVP of the NBA finals.



New York Knicks 57-25- Patrick Ewing is in the prime of his career. So is John Starks. Pat Riley is the head coach. Yet they are only 2 games better than the Jordanless Bulls.



Phoenix Suns 56-26- Charles Barkley is in the prime of his career. He was MVP of the league last year.



San Antonio Spurs 55-27-David Robinson is in the prime of his career. He leads the NBA in scoring at 29.8 points per game. Rodman is at his peak too. He leads the NBA in rebounding at 17.3 per contest.



*******Chicago Bulls 55-27- No Jordan, no problem. With Pippen, Grant and Head coach Phil Jackson the Bulls have no problem hanging with the NBA

[Soothsayer]

[QUOTE=t-rex]Actually Jordan's supporting cast is probably the most UNDERRATED IN NBA HISTORY.


Below is some factual info in regard to Jordan's supporting cast that I posted in another thread a few days ago.


Jordan and the Bulls won the title in 1993.

The Bulls won 57 games that year.

Before the 1994 season, Jordan retired. This is gives us a real good "apples to apples" comparison as to just how good Jordan's supporting cast really was.

The following year without Jordan (1994), the Bulls with Pippen, Grant etc. won 55 games and still advanced to the second round of the playoffs. There was only a 2 game difference between the Bulls in 1993 vs 1994 even without the remarkable Jordan.


Here is a look at how Bulls (without Jordan) faired in 1994 against the compeition that included some HOF all time great players.




Here are the records of some notable teams in 1994.


Houston Rockets 58-24- Hakeem Olajuwon is in the prime of his career. He is voted MVP and Defensive Player of the Year. He is regarded as the best player in the world. He is MVP of the NBA finals.



New York Knicks 57-25- Patrick Ewing is in the prime of his career. So is John Starks. Pat Riley is the head coach. Yet they are only 2 games better than the Jordanless Bulls.



Phoenix Suns 56-26- Charles Barkley is in the prime of his career. He was MVP of the league last year.



San Antonio Spurs 55-27-David Robinson is in the prime of his career. He leads the NBA in scoring at 29.8 points per game. Rodman is at his peak too. He leads the NBA in rebounding at 17.3 per contest.



*******Chicago Bulls 55-27- No Jordan, no problem. With Pippen, Grant and Head coach Phil Jackson the Bulls have no problem hanging with the NBA

[jlauber]

Irrelevant. That 94 team had already added both Kerr and Kukoc, and the 93 team had coasted a bit during the regular season after the Olympics for both Pippen and Jordan. The previous season, the same team had won 67 games.

Put Jordan on that 94 team coming off a championship, with Grant, Pippen, And ADDING Kerr and Kukoc, and we are talking 70 wins or so.

IRRELEVANT? Kerr replaced Paxson, and Kukoc replaced Jordan...and the results were nearly identical. The Bulls won a title in '93, and were within a couple of points of beating a team in a game seven, that would lose a close game seven to the Rockets in the 94 Finals.

I can't think of ONE team that had more talent than the the Bulls in their six titles. And MJ's 95 Bulls were beaten by a Magic team that would get swept by the Rockets.

Look, if MJ is going to get the credit for the six rings, then he should get the blame for playing on FIVE losing teams in his career, too.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I can't think of ONE team that had more talent than the the Bulls in their six titles.

Then you're not thinking hard enough. These teams had equal or superior talent:

'91 Pistons
'92 Knicks, Blazers, Cavs
'93 Suns, Knicks, Cavs
'96 Magic, Sonics
'98 Pacers

Hell, even teams that went out early like the '97 Hawks (Blaylock/Laettner/Smith/Deke) and '98 Nets (Cassell/Seikaly/Gatling/Gill/Williams/Kittles) had a lot of talent.

[Soothsayer]

IRRELEVANT? Kerr replaced Paxson, and Kukoc replaced Jordan...and the results were nearly identical. The Bulls won a title in '93, and were within a couple of points of beating a team in a game seven, that would lose a close game seven to the Rockets in the 94 Finals.

I can't think of ONE team that had more talent than the the Bulls in their six titles. And MJ's 95 Bulls were beaten by a Magic team that would get swept by the Rockets.

Look, if MJ is going to get the credit for the six rings, then he should get the blame for playing on FIVE losing teams in his career, too.


Kukoc didn't replace Jordan. Pete Myers did. The bulls added the GOAT 3PT shooter in Kerr, and a versatile, albeit soft big man in Kukoc. Keeping Grant for rebounding and defending PF and the occasional center, and keeping Pippen to help defend the perimeter...and with MJ younger than in 96....yeah, you are talking an EPIC year in terms of wins....IF the Bulls decide not to coast through the regular season like they did in 93.

I'm guessing both Pip and Jordan would have rested some in the offseason, vs. 92 with the Olympics. So 94, adding Kerr, Kukoc, to a championship team ALREADY capable of 67 wins....yeah, you are looking at a good possibility of 70 wins.

[jlauber]

Then you're not thinking hard enough. These teams had equal or superior talent:

'91 Pistons
'92 Knicks, Blazers, Cavs
'93 Suns, Knicks, Cavs
'96 Magic, Sonics
'98 Pacers

Hell, even teams that went out early like the '97 Hawks (Blaylock/Laettner/Smith/Deke) and '98 Nets (Cassell/Seikaly/Gatling/Gill/Williams/Kittles) had a lot of talent.

Oh sure...if you take MJ out of the picture. Of course, you could say the same thing for Shaq on his Laker title teams, or Kobe on his titles team, or Magic on his Laker teams, or Russell on his.

There is not ONE team on your list that any more talent...PERIOD.

[Soothsayer]

Then you're not thinking hard enough. These teams had equal or superior talent:

'91 Pistons
'92 Knicks, Blazers, Cavs
'93 Suns, Knicks, Cavs
'96 Magic, Sonics
'98 Pacers

Hell, even teams that went out early like the '97 Hawks (Blaylock/Laettner/Smith/Deke) and '98 Nets (Cassell/Seikaly/Gatling/Gill/Williams/Kittles) had a lot of talent.


No doubt man. Many of the teams Jordan faced had superior talent to what he had for a supporting cast. Jordan was often the difference, and WHAT a difference. :cheers:

[jlauber]

Kukoc didn't replace Jordan. Pete Myers did. The bulls added the GOAT 3PT shooter in Kerr, and a versatile, albeit soft big man in Kukoc. Keeping Grant for rebounding and defending PF and the occasional center, and keeping Pippen to help defend the perimeter...and with MJ younger than in 96....yeah, you are talking an EPIC year in terms of wins....IF the Bulls decide not to coast through the regular season like they did in 93.

I'm guessing both Pip and Jordan would have rested some in the offseason, vs. 92 with the Olympics. So 94, adding Kerr, Kukoc, to a championship team ALREADY capable of 67 wins....yeah, you are looking at a good possibility of 70 wins.

THAT explains why the Bulls had nearly the same record in '94. I always felt that Myers was a HOFer too.

[Soothsayer]

THAT explains why the Bulls had nearly the same record in '94. I always felt that Myers was a HOFer too.

Actually, it's pretty obvious why the 93-94 team had nearly an identical record to the 92-93 team. Once again, that 94 team had already added both Kerr and Kukoc to a championship team, and the 93 team had coasted during the regular season after the Olympics for both Pippen and Jordan. The previous season, the same team had won 67 games.

Put Jordan on that 94 team coming off a championship, with Grant, Pippen, And ADDING Kerr and Kukoc, and we are talking 70 wins or so, vs. 55 without him.

[jlauber]

Actually, it's pretty obvious why the 93-94 team had nearly an identical record to the 92-93 team. Once again, that 94 team had already added both Kerr and Kukoc to a championship team, and the 93 team had coasted during the regular season after the Olympics for both Pippen and Jordan. The previous season, the same team had won 67 games.

Put Jordan on that 94 team coming off a championship, with Grant, Pippen, And ADDING Kerr and Kukoc, and we are talking 70 wins or so, vs. 55 without him.

I am not disputing that MJ's presence would PROBABLY have led to another championship. BUT, the FACT remains that the Bulls were a LOADED team, withOUT him.

Jordan never carried a GOOD team to a title. Hell, he played on FIVE losers in his career. How come Kareem, D. Robinson, Bird, and Wilt, could take last-place teams to instant contenders...but Jordan could not?

[NBASTATMAN]

Roundball is going to chew you out when he reads that. Just thought I should warn you now.


Roundball compared Gasol to Marion ... That is funnnnyyyy:roll:

[Soothsayer]

I am not disputing that MJ's presence would PROBABLY have led to another championship. BUT, the FACT remains that the Bulls were a LOADED team, withOUT him.

Jordan never carried a GOOD team to a title. Hell, he played on FIVE losers in his career. How come Kareem, D. Robinson, Bird, and Wilt, could take last-place teams to instant contenders...but Jordan could not?

The Bulls that Jordan had led and helped create were a championship, battle tested squad, with a nice squad in 93-94. But to say that they were only 2 game worse "without Jordan" is silly, considering Jordan already led the same squad that won 57 games in 1993 to 67 wins the previous year.

Plus, once again, the bulls added both Kerr and Kukoc who contributed a combined 50 minutes per night in the 93-94 season. Add Jordan to that, and you are looking at 70 or so wins in 93-94 vs. 55 without him.

Other than that, Jordan's career can stand on it's own and nothing really needs to be said to defend it.

[EastCaliChillin]

[QUOTE=t-rex]Actually Jordan's supporting cast is probably the most UNDERRATED IN NBA HISTORY.


Below is some factual info in regard to Jordan's supporting cast that I posted in another thread a few days ago.


Jordan and the Bulls won the title in 1993.

The Bulls won 57 games that year.

Before the 1994 season, Jordan retired. This is gives us a real good "apples to apples" comparison as to just how good Jordan's supporting cast really was.

The following year without Jordan (1994), the Bulls with Pippen, Grant etc. won 55 games and still advanced to the second round of the playoffs. There was only a 2 game difference between the Bulls in 1993 vs 1994 even without the remarkable Jordan.


Here is a look at how Bulls (without Jordan) faired in 1994 against the compeition that included some HOF all time great players.




Here are the records of some notable teams in 1994.


Houston Rockets 58-24- Hakeem Olajuwon is in the prime of his career. He is voted MVP and Defensive Player of the Year. He is regarded as the best player in the world. He is MVP of the NBA finals.



New York Knicks 57-25- Patrick Ewing is in the prime of his career. So is John Starks. Pat Riley is the head coach. Yet they are only 2 games better than the Jordanless Bulls.



Phoenix Suns 56-26- Charles Barkley is in the prime of his career. He was MVP of the league last year.



San Antonio Spurs 55-27-David Robinson is in the prime of his career. He leads the NBA in scoring at 29.8 points per game. Rodman is at his peak too. He leads the NBA in rebounding at 17.3 per contest.



*******Chicago Bulls 55-27- No Jordan, no problem. With Pippen, Grant and Head coach Phil Jackson the Bulls have no problem hanging with the NBA

[jlauber]

The Bulls that Jordan had led and helped create were a championship, battle tested squad, with a nice squad in 93-94. But to say that they were only 2 game worse "without Jordan" is silly, considering Jordan already led the same squad that won 57 games in 1993 to 67 wins the previous year.

Plus, once again, the bulls added both Kerr and Kukoc who contributed a combined 50 minutes per night in the 93-94 season. Add Jordan to that, and you are looking at 70 or so wins in 93-94 vs. 55 without him.

Other than that, Jordan's career can stand on it's own and nothing really needs to be said to defend it.

Finally, we are getting somewhere. Jordan HELPED, and HAD help. He was NO miracle worker. Was he a great player? Of course he was...top-5 in MY book. BUT, the fact that he went 1-9 in his first three playoff appearances (ok...him, and his TEAM)...and struggled for his first six seasons...and did not win a title without Pippen and a supporting cast of Grant, Paxson, Cartwright...and later with Pippen, Rodman, Kerr, Kukoc, and Harper...tells me all I need to know. He led great rosters to titles. BUT, he never led good, or average, or mediocre rosters anywhere close to a title.

[NBASTATMAN]

I am not disputing that MJ's presence would PROBABLY have led to another championship. BUT, the FACT remains that the Bulls were a LOADED team, withOUT him.

Jordan never carried a GOOD team to a title. Hell, he played on FIVE losers in his career. How come Kareem, D. Robinson, Bird, and Wilt, could take last-place teams to instant contenders...but Jordan could not?


dROB did not take a last place team to instant contender.. They added drob, cummings and some other piece that season... The others showed their true worth.. Maybe Bird, wilt, and Kareem should all have a case over MJ... Considering they all won titles as the main man as well...

[Soothsayer]

Finally, we are getting somewhere. Jordan HELPED, and HAD help. He was NO miracle worker. Was he a great player? Of course he was...top-5 in MY book. BUT, the fact that he went 1-9 in his first three playoff appearances (ok...him, and his TEAM)...and struggled for his first six seasons...and did not win a title without Pippen and a supporting cast of Grant, Paxson, Cartwright...and later with Pippen, Rodman, Kerr, Kukoc, and Harper...tells me all I need to know. He led great rosters to titles. BUT, he never led good, or average, or mediocre rosters anywhere close to a title.

"Jordan had help". That's simply a platitude, a truism for every player who every played organized basketball. Ergo, pointless statement.

Jordan did as much to contribute to his teams' success as anyone ever has, and he did it year after year.

1-9 irrelevant considering he joined a horrid 27 win bulls team and was facing a vastly superior team in the Celts and Bucks. Jordan's early bulls team were not exactly stacked. Meanwhile, Bird was playing with multiple HOFers, as was Magic. So once again, really pointless.

Jordan simply LED teams to more titles than Bird, Magic, and all his contemporaries. Hence Magic's admonition, "There's Michael...and then there's the rest of us."

[Soothsayer]

Finally, we are getting somewhere. Jordan HELPED, and HAD help. He was NO miracle worker. Was he a great player? Of course he was...top-5 in MY book. BUT, the fact that he went 1-9 in his first three playoff appearances (ok...him, and his TEAM)...and struggled for his first six seasons...and did not win a title without Pippen and a supporting cast of Grant, Paxson, Cartwright...and later with Pippen, Rodman, Kerr, Kukoc, and Harper...tells me all I need to know. He led great rosters to titles. BUT, he never led good, or average, or mediocre rosters anywhere close to a title.

Before Jordan won his first ring over Magic and the Lakers in 91, nobody was going gaga over the talent on the Bulls. You would never hear anybody proclaim, "Wow, look at all the talent the bulls have, amazing Jordan can't win with them!". The consensus was that Jordan had an up-and-coming Pippen, and then some nice ROLE PLAYERS, whom Jordan eventually led to a ring in 91. After that, the rest is history. :cheers:

[Roundball_Rock]

:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.


Actually Jordan's supporting cast is probably the most UNDERRATED IN NBA HISTORY.


Below is some factual info in regard to Jordan's supporting cast that I posted in another thread a few days ago.


Jordan and the Bulls won the title in 1993.

The Bulls won 57 games that year.

Before the 1994 season, Jordan retired. This is gives us a real good "apples to apples" comparison as to just how good Jordan's supporting cast really was.

The following year without Jordan (1994), the Bulls with Pippen, Grant etc. won 55 games and still advanced to the second round of the playoffs. There was only a 2 game difference between the Bulls in 1993 vs 1994 even without the remarkable Jordan.


Here is a look at how Bulls (without Jordan) faired in 1994 against the compeition that included some HOF all time great players.




Here are the records of some notable teams in 1994.


Houston Rockets 58-24- Hakeem Olajuwon is in the prime of his career. He is voted MVP and Defensive Player of the Year. He is regarded as the best player in the world. He is MVP of the NBA finals.



New York Knicks 57-25- Patrick Ewing is in the prime of his career. So is John Starks. Pat Riley is the head coach. Yet they are only 2 games better than the Jordanless Bulls.



Phoenix Suns 56-26- Charles Barkley is in the prime of his career. He was MVP of the league last year.



San Antonio Spurs 55-27-David Robinson is in the prime of his career. He leads the NBA in scoring at 29.8 points per game. Rodman is at his peak too. He leads the NBA in rebounding at 17.3 per contest.



*******Chicago Bulls 55-27- No Jordan, no problem. With Pippen, Grant and Head coach Phil Jackson the Bulls have no problem hanging with the NBA’s elite. Remarkably they finish tied with the Spurs despite a career year by Robinson and Rodman. And they are just 3 games behind the Rockets who won the NBA title with Olajuwon who was MVP and DPY. So, is Scotty Pippen still a nobody?******** Jordan's supporting cast won just 2 less games without him when comparing the Bulls of 1993 to the Bulls of 1994.


Utah Jazz- 53-29- Two all time great players are in the prime of their careers for this team. This includes Karl Malone who is often regarded as the greatest Power Forward in NBA history. Stockton led the NBA in assists that year with 12.6 per game. Yet they finished 2 games behind the Bulls (minus Michael Jordan).



Orlando Magic-50-32- Shaq was not quite in his prime yet. But the Magic were just one year away from a NBA finals appearance. With Shaq, Dennis Scott and Penny Hardaway, they were 5 games worse than the Bulls playing without Jordan.




The more you research this, the better Jordan’s supporting cast gets. I don’t see how the issue of star players carrying otherwise bad teams to the NBA finals is even debatable.


The fact is Jordan's supporting cast was a 55 win team without him. Jordan's supporting cast alone ranked was easily among the best teams in the NBA.

Can we say the same for Kobe's Lakers?

Would this year's Cavs win 55 games without Lebron.


The Bulls were legit NBA title contenders without Jordan. This is indisputable evidence as to how strong Jordan's supporting cast truly was. And it provides further evidence that the notion of one great player carrying his team to a championship is largely a myth. Even when we take an accurate look at the supporting cast of the great Michael Jordan.



The thread with more info can be found here.


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=174444

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year. I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?


1-9 irrelevant considering he joined a horrid 27 win bulls team and was facing a vastly superior team in the Celts and Bucks.

Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')

[ginobli2311]

Finally, we are getting somewhere. Jordan HELPED, and HAD help. He was NO miracle worker. Was he a great player? Of course he was...top-5 in MY book. BUT, the fact that he went 1-9 in his first three playoff appearances (ok...him, and his TEAM)...and struggled for his first six seasons...and did not win a title without Pippen and a supporting cast of Grant, Paxson, Cartwright...and later with Pippen, Rodman, Kerr, Kukoc, and Harper...tells me all I need to know. He led great rosters to titles. BUT, he never led good, or average, or mediocre rosters anywhere close to a title.

I think everyone here is confusing things. The Bulls no doubt had a very good squad without Jordan. But they went from winning the title to losing in the 2nd round. To say Jordan is just top 5 is insane. Its not all about rings....let me say that again.....ITS NOT ALL ABOUT RINGS.

I am so sick and tired of hearing this debate going back and forth when everyone only factors in rings. Its much more about what kind of player you were. If Jordan had only won 3 titles.....most people would still consider him the best to ever play. Jordan averaged 33 points 6 boards and 6 assists for his career in the playoffs and was one of the ten best defenders the league has ever seen. He just brought his game up to another level compared to the other greats to play......bird/magic have no case against jordan whatsoever. Kareem has a legit argument for the GOAT....but that is about it. Its not just about rings....its about how well you play the game first and foremost. You can't discount any titles for a player that is clearly the alpha dog/leader of the team....its really hard to win in the NBA and if you lead a team to a title you deserve big time credit. Factor in that Jordan was able to accomplish what he did without a legit post presence in a defensive era much more difficult on perimeter player and you will start to realize why most consider him the best ever. If Jordan played his career over the last decade he would have easily averaged 38 points a game in the playoffs on the same number of shots because he would have been impossible to guard without fouling.

These players do not play in a vacuum. Are you going to penalize Magic for winning with Kareem or vice versa? Shaq for winning with Kobe or vice versa? Come on guys. MJ was the best 2 way player of all time. One of the 3 best offensive players ever and one of the 10 greatest defensive players ever. He's easily one of the two best players ever.

[plowking]

The OP sounds like a homo.

[Roundball_Rock]

But they went from winning the title to losing in the 2nd round.

Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...

[Soothsayer]

:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.



:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year. I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?



Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')

Pulling numbers out of MJ's rear? Hardly. The 92 bulls has already won 67 games. Add Kukoc and Kerr to the mix. You are looking at the 96 team which won 72 games, with Grant subbed for Rodman, and a younger, better Jordan.

70 games is highly plausible and certainly not pulled out of anyone's ass, least of all simply because you said so.

[ginobli2311]

Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...

Ok. Let me explain it better. The Bulls had a 0% chance to win the title without MJ. With MJ they would have been the favorites in both 94 and 95 if he had not retired. Just stop it. The Bulls had an under-rated supporting cast....i agree with that....but you aren't factoring in the difference between the regular season and playoffs. Ask Cavs fans about the difference.

But even so. The Bulls championship teams had less talent overall than the pistons, lakers, celtics teams that were winning titles before MJ.

I have been saying it for weeks on here.....YOU NEED A REALLY REALLY GOOD TEAM AND GOOD COACHING TO WIN A NBA TITLE.

MJ was no exception to that rule.....but he had less help than most stars historically and he still won 6 titles and never lost in the finals as his team's best player. That is very impressive and something that no other player i can think of can match.

[Soothsayer]

:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.



:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year. I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?



Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')

You'll give Jordan a break the year that he missed nearly the entire season with a broken foot? Wow, how magnanimous of you. :)

Jordan joined a franchise without a history of success like the lakers and celtics had. The bulls were perennial losers. The culture of success had long since been ingrained in Boston and LA. MJ built that shit from the ground up.

[Soothsayer]

Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...

Wrong. When Pippen was out half the season, in 97-98, the bulls won 62 games, not 55. Quit posting misinformation.

[Orlando Magic]

Actually Jordan's supporting cast is probably the most UNDERRATED IN NBA HISTORY.


Below is some factual info in regard to Jordan's supporting cast that I posted in another thread a few days ago.


Jordan and the Bulls won the title in 1993.

The Bulls won 57 games that year.

Before the 1994 season, Jordan retired. This is gives us a real good "apples to apples" comparison as to just how good Jordan's supporting cast really was.

The following year without Jordan (1994), the Bulls with Pippen, Grant etc. won 55 games and still advanced to the second round of the playoffs. There was only a 2 game difference between the Bulls in 1993 vs 1994 even without the remarkable Jordan.


Here is a look at how Bulls (without Jordan) faired in 1994 against the compeition that included some HOF all time great players.




Here are the records of some notable teams in 1994.


Houston Rockets 58-24- Hakeem Olajuwon is in the prime of his career. He is voted MVP and Defensive Player of the Year. He is regarded as the best player in the world. He is MVP of the NBA finals.



New York Knicks 57-25- Patrick Ewing is in the prime of his career. So is John Starks. Pat Riley is the head coach. Yet they are only 2 games better than the Jordanless Bulls.



Phoenix Suns 56-26- Charles Barkley is in the prime of his career. He was MVP of the league last year.



San Antonio Spurs 55-27-David Robinson is in the prime of his career. He leads the NBA in scoring at 29.8 points per game. Rodman is at his peak too. He leads the NBA in rebounding at 17.3 per contest.



*******Chicago Bulls 55-27- No Jordan, no problem. With Pippen, Grant and Head coach Phil Jackson the Bulls have no problem hanging with the NBA’s elite. Remarkably they finish tied with the Spurs despite a career year by Robinson and Rodman. And they are just 3 games behind the Rockets who won the NBA title with Olajuwon who was MVP and DPY. So, is Scotty Pippen still a nobody?******** Jordan's supporting cast won just 2 less games without him when comparing the Bulls of 1993 to the Bulls of 1994.




Utah Jazz- 53-29- Two all time great players are in the prime of their careers for this team. This includes Karl Malone who is often regarded as the greatest Power Forward in NBA history. Stockton led the NBA in assists that year with 12.6 per game. Yet they finished 2 games behind the Bulls (minus Michael Jordan).



Orlando Magic-50-32- Shaq was not quite in his prime yet. But the Magic were just one year away from a NBA finals appearance. With Shaq, Dennis Scott and Penny Hardaway, they were 5 games worse than the Bulls playing without Jordan.




The more you research this, the better Jordan’s supporting cast gets. I don’t see how the issue of star players carrying otherwise bad teams to the NBA finals is even debatable.


The fact is Jordan's supporting cast was a 55 win team without him. Jordan's supporting cast alone ranked was easily among the best teams in the NBA.

Can we say the same for Kobe's Lakers?

Would this year's Cavs win 55 games without Lebron.


The Bulls were legit NBA title contenders without Jordan. This is indisputable evidence as to how strong Jordan's supporting cast truly was. And it provides further evidence that the notion of one great player carrying his team to a championship is largely a myth. Even when we take an accurate look at the supporting cast of the great Michael Jordan.



The thread with more info can be found here.


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=174444

Wow, that's a lot of rambling about regular season records, while nearly ignoring the playoffs. :roll:

Surely, if you have learned anything this post season, it's that the regular season means relatively little.

[Soothsayer]

:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.



:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year. I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?



Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')

Thank you for admitting that Kerr and Kukoc were ROLE PLAYERS. Jordan won his first 3 rings with just pippen and a bunch of role players. He won his last 3 rings with Pippen, Rodman, and a bunch of role players. :)

Those were 2 key role players on the 72 win team in 96. Add them to the 92 team (same as 93), which MJ had already led to 67 wins and you are looking at a clear possibility of 70+ wins.

[Roundball_Rock]

Wrong. When Pippen was out half the season, in 97-98, the bulls won 62 games, not 55. Quit posting misinformation.

Their winning percentage was on par with a 56 win team without him for half a season (maybe they should have replaced him with Pete Myers? :oldlol: ). This is reasonable speculation based on what the team did. I didn't pull out numbers from nowhere and say they would have won 75 if he played all year.


70 games is highly plausible

:oldlol: There is a reason it only happened once. The 97' Bulls>the 94' Bulls and could not win 70.


The Bulls had a 0% chance to win the title without MJ.

:wtf: Obviously you did not watch in 94'. They were battling for the #1 seed all year and would have had it without Pip's injury early in the season and they were robbed against the Knicks in the playoffs and the Knicks came within 1 shot of a ring. To say they had "no shot" is ridiculous. 94' was a very competitive year and the Bulls were right in mix.


With MJ they would have been the favorites in both 94 and 95 if he had not retired.

Jordan did play in 95' and his team lost in the second round (legitimately) this time.


The Bulls championship teams had less talent overall than the pistons, lakers, celtics teams that were winning titles before MJ.

And? One word: dilution. The championship teams this decade generally have had less talent than the 90's Bulls. Look at the Spurs teams.


You'll give Jordan a break the year that he missed nearly the entire season with a broken foot?

Well, they were only 9-9 when he played and were swept in the playoffs...


Jordan joined a franchise without a history of success like the lakers and celtics had. The bulls were perennial losers. The culture of success had long since been ingrained in Boston and LA. MJ built that shit from the ground up.

You sound like Da_Realist...

If the claims made about MJ are accurate none of this would be necessary. His record would suffice yet MJ fans to this day diminish his teammates incessantly.

[Soothsayer]

Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...

If Jordan LEAVING abruptly before the 93-94 season left the bulls in a lurch, his RETURNING EVEN MORE ABRUPTLY in the 94-95 season left a lot to be sorted out for a team built around Pippen. Jordan did not exactly mesh completely with that team and was, as both Pippen and Phil mentioned after the playoffs, not exactly in prime basketball shape.

[ginobli2311]

If Jordan LEAVING abruptly before the 93-94 season left the bulls in a lurch, his RETURNING EVEN MORE ABRUPTLY in the 94-95 season left a lot to be sorted out for a team built around Pippen. Jordan did not exactly mesh completely with that team and was, as both Pippen and Phil mentioned after the playoffs, not exactly in prime basketball shape.

agreed. its idiotic to pretend like the bulls were firing on all cylinders going into the playoffs in 95.

also....a big LOL at anyone that thinks the Bulls team in 94 had any chance at all to win a title. No way in hell guys....not even a chance. The playoffs are different than the regular season.....why is this concept so hard to understand?

[Soothsayer]

Their winning percentage was on par with a 56 win team without him for half a season. This is reasonable speculation based on what the team did. I didn't pull out numbers from nowhere and say they would have won 75 if he played all year.

No, it is not reasonable. You said when Grant left, the bulls went from 55 to 45 wins, not mentioning that record would have been worse had MJ not returned. To falsify the bulls 97-98 record to suit your purposes is very disingenuous at best. The bulls went from 69 to 62 wins with Pip missing half the season and Jordan playing at 34-35 years old with a torn ligament.


:oldlol: There is a reason it only happened once. The 97' Bulls>the 94' Bulls and could not win 70.

yes, but the one time it DID happen, the players were VERY similar to what they would have been on a 93-94 bulls team with a younger, better Jordan on it, who had ALREADY led a team to 67 wins. 70 is quite reasonable.



:wtf:




Jordan did play in 95' and his team lost in the second round (legitimately) this time.

yes, Jordan played...after having just returned from retirement and not in prime basketball shape, nor having meshed with a team built around pippen.



And? One word: dilution. The championship teams this decade generally have had less talent than the 90's Bulls. Look at the Spurs teams.

Mere opinion. Many would disagree. Once again, nobody was talking about the "talent" on the bullls other than Jordan and an up and coming Pippen, before the bulls won the ring. Jordan won with Pippen and a bunch of role players 91-93.



Well, they were only 9-9 when he played and were swept in the playoffs...



You sound like Da_Realist...

Who?

[Roundball_Rock]

If Jordan LEAVING abruptly before the 93-94 season left the bulls in a lurch, his RETURNING EVEN MORE ABRUPTLY in the 94-95 season left a lot to be sorted out for a team built around Pippen. Jordan did not exactly mesh completely with that team and was, as both Pippen and Phil mentioned after the playoffs, not exactly in prime basketball shape.

They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.


LOL at anyone that thinks the Bulls team in 94 had any chance at all to win a title. No way in hell guys....not even a chance. The playoffs are different than the regular season.....why is this concept so hard to understand?

Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was? The Bulls were considered legit title contenders that year by everyone, although MJ fans like to revise history today.

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?

[Soothsayer]

Their winning percentage was on par with a 56 win team without him for half a season (maybe they should have replaced him with Pete Myers? :oldlol: ). This is reasonable speculation based on what the team did. I didn't pull out numbers from nowhere and say they would have won 75 if he played all year.



:oldlol: There is a reason it only happened once. The 97' Bulls>the 94' Bulls and could not win 70.



:wtf: Obviously you did not watch in 94'. They were battling for the #1 seed all year and would have had it without Pip's injury early in the season and they were robbed against the Knicks in the playoffs and the Knicks came within 1 shot of a ring. To say they had "no shot" is ridiculous. 94' was a very competitive year and the Bulls were right in mix.



Jordan did play in 95' and his team lost in the second round (legitimately) this time.



And? One word: dilution. The championship teams this decade generally have had less talent than the 90's Bulls. Look at the Spurs teams.



Well, they were only 9-9 when he played and were swept in the playoffs...



You sound like Da_Realist...

If the claims made about MJ are accurate none of this would be necessary. His record would suffice yet MJ fans to this day diminish his teammates incessantly.

Not sure what "claims" you're referring to, but Jordan's career resume obviously stands on its own and convinces many that he is GOAT, or darn close. He certainly doesn't need me or anyone else defending him. I simply enjoy the debate. :cheers:

[ginobli2311]

They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.



Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was?

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?


Yes. I watched every second of the NBA playoffs that year. No team is ever going to win a title with Pippen as their best player. Sorry. 0% chance mate.

[Soothsayer]

They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.

Yes, Jordan, retired for a year and a half, and not in basketball shape, could still put up good stats. But as Lebron knows, good stats aren't what it's about. Jordan had not formed chemistry with that team and was not in basketball shape.



Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was?

The Bulls were considered legit title contenders that year by everyone.

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?

No players wins "by himself", so no, Jordan never had a chance to win "by himself". He won as the LEAD dawg, contributing hugely to his teams' success 6 times in 6 tries, never once losing to an underdog.

Unprecedented.

[Horde of Temujin]

Bulls were one bad call from the finals without Jordan

He was the one that put them over the top, he willed them to win

[Soothsayer]

Bulls were one bad call from the Eastern conference finals without Jordan

Corrected.

[t-rex]

Corrected.


If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks that year, it would have been a shocking upset if the Pacers had knocked them off in the ECF. If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks, they would have been heavy favorites to return to the finals.



Question?



If I take Lebron off the Cavs, do they win 55 games and advance to the second round of the playoffs? Are they legit title contenders?

If not, then you must conclude Lebron's supporting cast is not as good as Jordan's.

Neither is Kobe's.

[jlauber]

I think everyone here is confusing things. The Bulls no doubt had a very good squad without Jordan. But they went from winning the title to losing in the 2nd round. To say Jordan is just top 5 is insane. Its not all about rings....let me say that again.....ITS NOT ALL ABOUT RINGS.

I am so sick and tired of hearing this debate going back and forth when everyone only factors in rings. Its much more about what kind of player you were. If Jordan had only won 3 titles.....most people would still consider him the best to ever play. Jordan averaged 33 points 6 boards and 6 assists for his career in the playoffs and was one of the ten best defenders the league has ever seen. He just brought his game up to another level compared to the other greats to play......bird/magic have no case against jordan whatsoever. Kareem has a legit argument for the GOAT....but that is about it. Its not just about rings....its about how well you play the game first and foremost. You can't discount any titles for a player that is clearly the alpha dog/leader of the team....its really hard to win in the NBA and if you lead a team to a title you deserve big time credit. Factor in that Jordan was able to accomplish what he did without a legit post presence in a defensive era much more difficult on perimeter player and you will start to realize why most consider him the best ever. If Jordan played his career over the last decade he would have easily averaged 38 points a game in the playoffs on the same number of shots because he would have been impossible to guard without fouling.

These players do not play in a vacuum. Are you going to penalize Magic for winning with Kareem or vice versa? Shaq for winning with Kobe or vice versa? Come on guys. MJ was the best 2 way player of all time. One of the 3 best offensive players ever and one of the 10 greatest defensive players ever. He's easily one of the two best players ever.

So,, Jordan was one of the three best offensive players ever, and one of the ten best defensive players ever...and that makes him at least #2. Who is #1?

How about this...

Defensive WIN-SHARES...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_season.html

Yes, Russell and his 11 rings is easily the best ever...BUT, who is #2 based on that list? Why, it is CLEARLY a guy by the name of Chamberlain.

Or a career list, in which Russell, Kareem (longevity), Olajuwon...and then Chamberlain. Where does MJ appear? #21.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_career.html

How about Offensive Win Shares in a Career? Kareem (longevity), then Wilt.MK is 4th behind Oscar.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ows_career.html

Single-Season Offensive Win-Shares?

Kareem, then Wilt.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ows_season.html

How about Single-Season Win Shares? Kareem, then Wilt, several times over...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_season.html

Career? Kareem (longevity), then Wilt, K. Malone, and finally Jordan at #5.

Here are some more ratings. and the explanation:

http://www.databasebasketball.com/about/aboutstats.htm

"*** Efficiency is a new stat the NBA developed in 2002. It is calculated using the following formula: (pts*100)/((fta*.44) + fga + to - oreb)
Since Efficiency is calculated on a per game basis, it is good at seeing how well a particular player has performed, regardless of the number of games that the player has played during that season. For an estimate of a players value to his team for the entire season, Approximate Values can be used.

Approximate Value (AV)

Approximate Value (AV) was developed by Dean Oliver. You can read more about this formula and more at this website: http://www.powerbasketball.com/theywin2.html

Here is a quick synopsis of AV values


Credits= PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-FG MISSED-FT MISSED-TO

AV= Credits^(3/4)/21

The Value Approximation Method was a major task to come up with, taking me about two months to finally arrive at satisfactory results. The plan for the method was to end up with a scale of integers between 0 and about 20 rating players, with 10 representing an 'average' player. It was to be based upon several standards a player was to meet in order to gain points of approximate value. The whole thing was modeled on Bill James' Value Approximation method for baseball. As James did, I assigned verbal descriptions to ranges of scores in order to see if the method produced results that matched general descriptions of players. Those descriptions are as follows:



A score of about twenty indicates an exceptional MVP season.
A score of seventeen or eighteen indicates a strong MVP candidate or an ordinary MVP season.
A score of sixteen indicates an MVP candidate.
A score of fifteen indicates a definite All-Star who is a marginal MVP candidate.
A score of fourteen indicates a probable All-Star.
A score of thirteen indicates a marginal All-Star.
A score of twelve indicates a very fine season; an All-Star candidate.
A score of eleven indicates an above average regular; an excellent player playing about 1800 minutes.
A score of ten indicates an average regular or a very good sixth man.
A score of nine indicates an average regular or a good sixth man.
A score of eight indicates a fair regular or an average sixth man.
A score of six or seven indicates an average bench player or a good player playing under 1500 minutes.
A score of four or five indicates a player who plays about 1000 minutes and who doesn't deserve many more.
Scores of three or less usually indicate players who are unimpressive in limited playing time.
Before the '73-74 season, steals (STL), blocks (BLK), and turnovers weren't kept as official stats. In the credits formula for player seasons before '73-74, those stats are just omitted as they tend to cancel each other out to some degree when included anyway. "



How about EFF?

Whoa! Wilt in a LANDSLIDE! (He has the top-SEVEN seasons)

http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadersseason.htm?stat=eff&lg=n

How about EFF in a Career? Chamberlain ROUTS the field, and MJ comes in at #8.

How about AV ratings? Single season...Chamberlain CRUSHES EVERYONE...SEVEN of the Top-8 seasons (Kareem at #7 on that list)

http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadersseason.htm?stat=av&lg=n

AV Career? Kareem is #1 but it is based on longevity...and Wilt is #2. Jordan is #8.

[jlauber]

How about the NBA Record Book...

Incidently this site is INCORRECT. It lists Wilt with 72 records. In ACTUALITY, it is somewhere around 130. BUT, for purposes of this discussion...it will do...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Career_achievements_of_Wilt_Chamberlain

[COLOR="DarkRed"]"Chamberlain is holder of 72 NBA all-time records, 63 of which he holds by himself.[18] Among his records are several which are regarded as virtually unbreakable, such as averaging 22.9 rebounds for a career or 50.4 points in a regular season, scoring 100 points or 55 rebounds in a single game, scoring 65 points or more fifteen times, 50 or more points 118 times.[14][6] During Chamberlain's time, defensive statistics like blocks and steals had not been recorded yet. However, according to Jack Ramsay, "Harvey (Pollack) said he used to tell one of his statisticians to keep track of Wilt's blocks in big games... One night, they got up to 25".[19]

[edit] NBA scoring records
See also: List of National Basketball Association top individual scoring season averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association top rookie scoring averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association players with 60 or more points in a game
See also: List of individual National Basketball Association scoring leaders by season
NBA Record - Most Points Per Game in a season (50.4 in the 1961-62)
Chamberlain also holds the next two highest with 44.8 in 1962-63 and 38.4 in 1960-61.
NBA Record - Most Points in a season (4,029 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next highest with 3,586 in 1960-61
NBA Record - Most Points Scored in a Game (100 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most Points Scored in a Half (59 in the 2nd half vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most 50 Point Games in a season (45 times in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 30 in 1962-63. No other player has had more than 10.
NBA Record - Most 40 Point Games in a season (63 times in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 52 in 1962-63. Michael Jordan holds third with 37 in 1986-87.
NBA Record - Most Consecutive Seasons Leading League in Points Per Game (7)
Record shared with Michael Jordan.
NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 60 Point Games (32 times)
Kobe Bryant is in second place with 5.
NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 50 Point Games (118 times)
Michael Jordan is in second place with 31.
NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 40 Point Games (271 times)[20]
Michael Jordan is in second place with 173.
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 50 Point Games (7 times from December 16, 1961-December 29, 1961)
Chamberlain also holds the next three longest with 6 in 1962, 5 in 1961, and 5 in 1962
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 40 Point Games (14 times from December 8, 1961-December 30, 1961 and also 14 times from January 11, 1962-February 1, 1962)
Chamberlain also has the next most with 10 from November 9, 1962 through November 25, 1962
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 30 Point Games (65 from November 4, 1961-February 22, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next two longest streaks with 31 in 1962 and 25 in 1960.
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 20 Point Games (126 from October 19, 1961-January 19, 1963)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 92 from February 26, 1963 through March 18, 1964.
NBA Record - Most points per game by a rookie (37.6 in 1959-60)
NBA Record - Most points by a rookie (2,707 in 1959-60)
NBA Record - Most points by a rookie in a game (58 on January 25, 1960 and 58 on February 21, 1960)
NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 20,000 Points (499 achieved in 1966)
Michael Jordan, at 620 games, took the second fewest games.
NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 25,000 Points (691, achieved on February 23, 1968 against the Detroit Pistons)
Michael Jordan, at 782 games, took the second fewest games.
NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 30,000 Points (941, achieved on February 16, 1972 against the Phoenix Suns).
NBA Record - Most consecutive seasons leading the league in field goals made (7 from 1959-60 through 1965-66)
Shared with Michael Jordan
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a season (1,597 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next three spots with 1,463 in 1962-63, 1,251 in 1960-61, and 1,204 in 1963-64
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a season (3,159 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next four highest with 2,770, 2,457, 2,311, and 2,298.
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a Game (36 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next highest with 31, and is tied (with Rick Barry) at third with 30
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Game (63 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next two most with 62 and 60.
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a Half (22 in the 2nd half vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Half (37 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962 (2nd half)
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Quarter (21 in the 4th quarter vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most Free Throws Made in a Game (28 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Record shared with Adrian Dantley
NBA Record - Most seasons leading the NBA in free throw attempts (9)
NBA Record - Most consecutive seasons leading the NBA in free throw attempts (6 from 1959-60 through 1964-65)
NBA Record - Most Free Throws Attempted in a season (1,363 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain also holds the next four spots with 1,113, 1,054, 1,016, and 991.
NBA Record - Most Free Throws Attempted in a Game (34 vs. the St. Louis Hawks on February 22, 1962)
Chamberlain also holds second place with 32 on March 2, 1962.
NBA Playoff Record - Most points by a rookie in a game (53 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 14, 1960)
Pulled down a rookie playoff record 35 rebounds in the same game.
Chamberlain also scored 50 as a rookie against the Boston Celtics on March 22, 1960.
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goals in a seven game series (113 vs. the St. Louis Hawks in 1964)
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goals in a game (24 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 14, 1960)
Record shared with John Havlicek and Michael Jordan
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a game (48 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 22, 1962)
Record shared with Rick Barry
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a half (25 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 22, 1962)
Record shared with Elgin Baylor and Michael Jordan
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a three game series (104 vs. the Syracuse Nationals in 1960)
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a five game series (159 vs. the Syracuse Nationals in 1962)
NBA All-Star Game Record - Points in a game (42 in 1962)
NBA All-Star Game Record - Field goals in a game (17 in 1962)
Record shared with Michael Jordan and Kevin Garnett
NBA All-Star Game Record - Field goals in a half (10 in 1962)
NBA All-Star Game Record - Free throw attempts in a game (16 in 1962)
Chamberlain also holds the second most attempts in an All-Star Game with 15 in 1960.
[edit] Other selected scoring facts
2nd highest career scoring average (30.06)

[jlauber]

Continuing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Career_achievements_of_Wilt_Chamberlain

[COLOR="DarkRed"]"NBA rebounding records
See also: List of National Basketball Association top individual rebounding season averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association top rookie rebounding averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association players with 40 or more rebounds in a game
NBA Record - Career Total Rebounds (23,924)
NBA Record - Career Rebounds Per Game (22.9)
NBA Record - Most seasons leading the league in rebounds (11)
NBA Record - Most seasons with 1,000 or more rebounds (13)
NBA Record - Rebounds Per Game in a season (27.2)
Chamberlain also holds the next two highest averages with 27.0 in 1959-60 and 25.7 in 1961-62)
NBA Record - Total Rebounds in a season (2,149 in 1960-1961)
Chamberlain also holds the next six highest totals.
NBA Record - Rebounds in a game (55, Philadelphia Warriors vs. Boston Celtics, November 24, 1960)
NBA Record - Most rebounds per game by a rookie in a season (27.0)
NBA Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a season (1941)
NBA Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a game (45 on February 6, 1960)
Chamberlain, as a rookie, also grabbed 43 rebounds in one game, 42 in two others, and 40 in another.
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a playoff game (41 against the Boston Celtics, on April 5, 1967).
Game 3 victory in the Eastern Division finals.
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a half (26 against the San Francisco Warriors on April 16, 1967)
Also an NBA Finals record.
NBA Playoff Record - Highest rebounding average in a playoff series (32.0 in a five game series against the Boston Celtics in 1967).
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 5-game playoff series (160 against the Boston Celtics in 1967).
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 6-game playoff series (171 against the San Francisco Warriors in 1967).
Also an NBA Finals record for a 6-game series.
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 7-game playoff series (220 against the Boston Celtics in 1965).
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a game (35 against the Boston Celtics on March 22, 1960)
Scored a then-playoff record 53 points (still a rookie record) in the same game (a game 5 victory).
NBA All-Star Game Record - Most career rebounds in the NBA All-Star game (197).
NBA All-Star Game Record - Most rebounds in a half (16 in 1960).
Record shared with Bob Pettit
[edit] Other selected rebound facts
2nd most consecutive seasons with 1,000+ rebounds (10)

[BlueandGold]

yes one reason :
ESPN

this




but for real though MJ is the greatest

[juju151111]

They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.



Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was? The Bulls were considered legit title contenders that year by everyone, although MJ fans like to revise history today.

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?
So i should listen to you instead of Phil jackson and Pippen about Mj in 98. This is a hard choice. I tell you that.:wtf:

Last time i checked the Knicks were in the finals.. They had no chance in hell of winning.

[juju151111]

If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks that year, it would have been a shocking upset if the Pacers had knocked them off in the ECF. If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks, they would have been heavy favorites to return to the finals.



Question?



If I take Lebron off the Cavs, do they win 55 games and advance to the second round of the playoffs? Are they legit title contenders?

If not, then you must conclude Lebron's supporting cast is not as good as Jordan's.

Neither is Kobe's.
LMFAO Gasol,Odom,Fisher, and bynum are you stupid?? MJ>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kobe Taking LJ off the cavs is a joke through.

[juju151111]

So,, Jordan was one of the three best offensive players ever, and one of the ten best defensive players ever...and that makes him at least #2. Who is #1?

How about this...

.
How about 6>2:lol

[jlauber]

How about 6>2:lol

You're absolutely right...

The REAL order of greatness...

Russell with 11 rings, Sam Jones with 10, KC Jones (yep...a greater player than MJ) with 8, Havlicek with 8, and Horry with 7.

Of course, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, and several other are well behind KC Jones, too. Oscar and West...well, you could probably come up dozens of players who have at least two rings...which means, of course, that they are superior players to them.

[Timmy D for MVP]

You're absolutely right...

The REAL order of greatness...

Russell with 11 rings, Sam Jones with 10, KC Jones (yep...a greater player than MJ) with 8, Havlicek with 8, and Horry with 7.

Of course, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, and several other are well behind KC Jones, too. Oscar and West...well, you could probably come up dozens of players who have at least two rings...which means, of course, that they are superior players to them.

This counter argument would make sense is all said players were "the man" on their championship teams.

[juju151111]

You're absolutely right...

The REAL order of greatness...

Russell with 11 rings, Sam Jones with 10, KC Jones (yep...a greater player than MJ) with 8, Havlicek with 8, and Horry with 7.

Of course, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, and several other are well behind KC Jones, too. Oscar and West...well, you could probably come up dozens of players who have at least two rings...which means, of course, that they are superior players to them.
Mj has the combination of all those things, which is why he is the Goat. Don't be mad at me for stating the facts.

[alexandreben]

Mj has the combination of all those things, which is why he is the Goat. Don't be mad at me for stating the facts.
KAJ had the combination of all those things too, tell me why you pick MJ over KAJ...

[Glide2keva]

Pay no attention to roundball and jlauber. They have an agenda of discrediting Jordan at any given opportunity.

It's really sad that they stoop to such lengths to stretch the truth.

From someone who was there for every game from the 1993 finals to 1996 I can give a better perspective of those teams.

1993 - the Bulls weren't exactly the favorites goinginto the playoffs as everyone was picking the Suns. The suns had the best record at 62-20 that year with Barkley as the MVP of the league. The Bulls weren't even favored to beat the Kncks that year and had lost the first two games of the series before roaring back to take the next four straight in mostly close and tightly contest games.

The Bulls vs. Suns finals had the suns as the favorites to win it all. But the Bulls jumped out to a quick 3-0 series lead and never looked back. That Bulls team had MJ and Pippen as their best players and everyone else played a role. That's not spin, that's the truth.

1994 - This team was VASTLY different than the championship '93 team. They didn't simply replace Jordan with Pete myers. They added Steve kerr to and already deadly deep threat team in paxson and Armstrong. They added 2 bill wennington who was a stretch the floor center in a time where centers didn't take jumpshots from 19' out. They drafted Corey Blount whom they figured would replace grant. Last but not least was the addition of Toni kukoc. 6' 11" SF who could shoot, pass, drive the lane and create his own shot. Gone were the non contributing scrubs from the 1993 squad. This was a good team and they fought for each ofthos 55 wins. They didn't coast like 1993 team did. They struggled early in November posting a losing record that month. In December they started to gel and gain traction and posted a winning record that month. Each win they got was a battle. We all know the playoff screw job. And I do beliefs that they would've handled the pacers and rockets
that year as they had done so in the regular season. Therockets would have had the best chance to beat them though.

1995 - Horace Grant bolts for Orlando and the bulls are left without a starting pf. This squad was wierd. They had just added luc longley to replace bill Cartwright. Jud buechler was brought in for what reason I'll never know and they added some other players that weren't really any good. The core of pippen, kukoc, kerr, and Armstrong was still in tact and they weren't as good as the year before. In January Jordan starts showing up to bulls practices and played with them but couldn't fully participate as he wasn't an active player. The bulls started playing better in games and winning a little more. After the all star break the rumors start flying that Jordan is returning and the buzz builds momentum. Then on march 19 the fax comes through with two words "I'm back" and he was. But he was different, he was bulky, and had a flat jumpshot. He was also a little slower than we were used to seeing. In his words he had a baseball player's body and not one for basketball as they used different muscle groups. He played in the last 19 games of the season (not the full season as some would lead you to believe) and the Bulls were good again. They handled Charlotte (hornets) and lost to Orlando. Why? Because they still had no answer for pf forward and grant abused them, add the deadly 3-point shooting of Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott with shaq and penny, that was an amazing squad that went on to be swept by the rockets in the finals.

1996 - to solve the pf problem, bulls management takes a huge gamble in bringing in the games greatest rebounder in Dennis rodman. No real major tweaks were made to the team as they were set at pretty much ever position. Well we all know what happens after that.

In short the bulls didn't always have stacked teams. They did however have the perfect mix of chiefs and Indians. Everyone knew their roles and executed them to perfection. This isn't a slight on any one player as I look at these teams as a whole and not try to diminish players for the sake of an agenda.

[crisoner]

So hes the best individual player ever because of the players he played with?

Yes because Basketball is a team sport. I think Jordan himself will be the first to tell you that.

To answer the this thread Jordan is the GOAT because of two things....he's talent on the b-ball court which changed that game and Nike. We all know about his talent..mindset..skill...etc. But Nike...think about it has any pro athlete before Jordan been marketed that way to reach the masses like him? I'm talking about Jordan the brand right now. Jordan the brand is about as legendary as Jordan the ball player. Think about it....his retro kicks are legendary today still selling for $$$$. His logo when you see it you know what it is.

[juju151111]

KAJ had the combination of all those things too, tell me why you pick MJ over KAJ...
KAJ wasn't the man for 2 of his chips.

[jlauber]

Pay no attention to roundball and jlauber. They have an agenda of discrediting Jordan at any given opportunity.

It's really sad that they stoop to such lengths to stretch the truth.

From someone who was there for every game from the 1993 finals to 1996 I can give a better perspective of those teams.

1993 - the Bulls weren't exactly the favorites goinginto the playoffs as everyone was picking the Suns. The suns had the best record at 62-20 that year with Barkley as the MVP of the league. The Bulls weren't even favored to beat the Kncks that year and had lost the first two games of the series before roaring back to take the next four straight in mostly close and tightly contest games.

The Bulls vs. Suns finals had the suns as the favorites to win it all. But the Bulls jumped out to a quick 3-0 series lead and never looked back. That Bulls team had MJ and Pippen as their best players and everyone else played a role. That's not spin, that's the truth.

1994 - This team was VASTLY different than the championship '93 team. They didn't simply replace Jordan with Pete myers. They added Steve kerr to and already deadly deep threat team in paxson and Armstrong. They added 2 bill wennington who was a stretch the floor center in a time where centers didn't take jumpshots from 19' out. They drafted Corey Blount whom they figured would replace grant. Last but not least was the addition of Toni kukoc. 6' 11" SF who could shoot, pass, drive the lane and create his own shot. Gone were the non contributing scrubs from the 1993 squad. This was a good team and they fought for each ofthos 55 wins. They didn't coast like 1993 team did. They struggled early in November posting a losing record that month. In December they started to gel and gain traction and posted a winning record that month. Each win they got was a battle. We all know the playoff screw job. And I do beliefs that they would've handled the pacers and rockets
that year as they had done so in the regular season. Therockets would have had the best chance to beat them though.

1995 - Horace Grant bolts for Orlando and the bulls are left without a starting pf. This squad was wierd. They had just added luc longley to replace bill Cartwright. Jud buechler was brought in for what reason I'll never know and they added some other players that weren't really any good. The core of pippen, kukoc, kerr, and Armstrong was still in tact and they weren't as good as the year before. In January Jordan starts showing up to bulls practices and played with them but couldn't fully participate as he wasn't an active player. The bulls started playing better in games and winning a little more. After the all star break the rumors start flying that Jordan is returning and the buzz builds momentum. Then on march 19 the fax comes through with two words "I'm back" and he was. But he was different, he was bulky, and had a flat jumpshot. He was also a little slower than we were used to seeing. In his words he had a baseball player's body and not one for basketball as they used different muscle groups. He played in the last 19 games of the season (not the full season as some would lead you to believe) and the Bulls were good again. They handled Charlotte (hornets) and lost to Orlando. Why? Because they still had no answer for pf forward and grant abused them, add the deadly 3-point shooting of Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott with shaq and penny, that was an amazing squad that went on to be swept by the rockets in the finals.

1996 - to solve the pf problem, bulls management takes a huge gamble in bringing in the games greatest rebounder in Dennis rodman. No real major tweaks were made to the team as they were set at pretty much ever position. Well we all know what happens after that.

In short the bulls didn't always have stacked teams. They did however have the perfect mix of chiefs and Indians. Everyone knew their roles and executed them to perfection. This isn't a slight on any one player as I look at these teams as a whole and not try to diminish players for the sake of an agenda.


My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's, and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.

[alexandreben]

Pay no attention to roundball and jlauber. They have an agenda of discrediting Jordan at any given opportunity.

It's really sad that they stoop to such lengths to stretch the truth.

From someone who was there for every game from the 1993 finals to 1996 I can give a better perspective of those teams.

1993 - the Bulls weren't exactly the favorites goinginto the playoffs as everyone was picking the Suns. The suns had the best record at 62-20 that year with Barkley as the MVP of the league. The Bulls weren't even favored to beat the Kncks that year and had lost the first two games of the series before roaring back to take the next four straight in mostly close and tightly contest games.

The Bulls vs. Suns finals had the suns as the favorites to win it all. But the Bulls jumped out to a quick 3-0 series lead and never looked back. That Bulls team had MJ and Pippen as their best players and everyone else played a role. That's not spin, that's the truth.

1994 - This team was VASTLY different than the championship '93 team. They didn't simply replace Jordan with Pete myers. They added Steve kerr to and already deadly deep threat team in paxson and Armstrong. They added 2 bill wennington who was a stretch the floor center in a time where centers didn't take jumpshots from 19' out. They drafted Corey Blount whom they figured would replace grant. Last but not least was the addition of Toni kukoc. 6' 11" SF who could shoot, pass, drive the lane and create his own shot. Gone were the non contributing scrubs from the 1993 squad. This was a good team and they fought for each ofthos 55 wins. They didn't coast like 1993 team did. They struggled early in November posting a losing record that month. In December they started to gel and gain traction and posted a winning record that month. Each win they got was a battle. We all know the playoff screw job. And I do beliefs that they would've handled the pacers and rockets
that year as they had done so in the regular season. Therockets would have had the best chance to beat them though.

1995 - Horace Grant bolts for Orlando and the bulls are left without a starting pf. This squad was wierd. They had just added luc longley to replace bill Cartwright. Jud buechler was brought in for what reason I'll never know and they added some other players that weren't really any good. The core of pippen, kukoc, kerr, and Armstrong was still in tact and they weren't as good as the year before. In January Jordan starts showing up to bulls practices and played with them but couldn't fully participate as he wasn't an active player. The bulls started playing better in games and winning a little more. After the all star break the rumors start flying that Jordan is returning and the buzz builds momentum. Then on march 19 the fax comes through with two words "I'm back" and he was. But he was different, he was bulky, and had a flat jumpshot. He was also a little slower than we were used to seeing. In his words he had a baseball player's body and not one for basketball as they used different muscle groups. He played in the last 19 games of the season (not the full season as some would lead you to believe) and the Bulls were good again. They handled Charlotte (hornets) and lost to Orlando. Why? Because they still had no answer for pf forward and grant abused them, add the deadly 3-point shooting of Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott with shaq and penny, that was an amazing squad that went on to be swept by the rockets in the finals.

1996 - to solve the pf problem, bulls management takes a huge gamble in bringing in the games greatest rebounder in Dennis rodman. No real major tweaks were made to the team as they were set at pretty much ever position. Well we all know what happens after that.

In short the bulls didn't always have stacked teams. They did however have the perfect mix of chiefs and Indians. Everyone knew their roles and executed them to perfection. This isn't a slight on any one player as I look at these teams as a whole and not try to diminish players for the sake of an agenda.
Problem is people always AUTOMATICALLY thought Jordan is the GOAT without thinking, and the rest of the candidate AUTOMATICALLY out of the GOAT discussion; how can that be???!!!

People neglect Bill Russell had the most impact to the game and neglect his effort and his 11 rings which's FAR more than Jordan's, and also I doubt Jordan's MIND is stronger than Bill Russell's, and giving the criteria of "With and without you" theory, Bill Russell was FAR more important player than Jordan to their teams, the 1995 Bulls had proved that;

KAJ has combination of rings and personal awards and honours just like Jordan did, how can he be left out of the GOAT discussion?

Wilt Chamberlain has 2 rings, and he wrote the "NBA record book" like his own "diary book", how can he left out of the GOAT discussion too?

[alexandreben]

KAJ wasn't the man for 2 of his chips.
Without KAJ, Magic will never got the chance of reaching the ring, just like Kobe and Shaq, Wade and Shaq..

[Leviathon1121]

My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's, and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.

But that is not a fact, that is your opinion. Why are you trying to pass it off as a fact? Pretty much everyone thought the 92 Blazers were more talented then the Bulls.

[jlauber]

But that is not a fact, that is your opinion. Why are you trying to pass it off as a fact? Pretty much everyone thought the 92 Blazers were more talented then the Bulls.

Yeah right. Chicago went 67-15 that year, while the Blazers went 57-25.

[imdaman99]

kobe never lost to a team that wasn't better than his. what do you mean when they should have won it all? i'm sorry but :

those spurs were better than the lakers, duncan was inhuman that year.

those pistons had a great team defense and were relentless with their bench.

the suns were just better from 1-12. so what if hes the best player in that series? he was the best but the suns had the next 8 top players in that series (yeah i randomly said 8 lol)

the celtics were a great team with great team defense. they threw so many bodies on him, plus the lakers size was neutralized. which is prob what will happen again but this team the lakers have a great defender they can put on pierce to prevent him from going off. im sorry but luke walton and sasha and radmanovic all had their turns getting burned by pierce and allen lol

yeah it seems like im making excuses, but i dont excuse kobe for putting up sh*tty performances. while he may have cost the lakers a game here or game there in them series, the lakers were outmatched in all of them. but whatever, im sure mj beat better teams all the time right. oh wait they never had enough competition and everyone else in that era was mentally weak, and im a knicks fan and i admit they might have thought they could compete but mentally MJ would demoralize them.

[juju151111]

My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's, and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.
ohh yea those Amazing Bulls team of the 1991 where they wasn't the favorites. In 1992 they called Blazers the more "talented team"

[Birmingham1955]

goat

[Soothsayer]

If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks that year, it would have been a shocking upset if the Pacers had knocked them off in the ECF. If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks, they would have been heavy favorites to return to the finals.



Question?



If I take Lebron off the Cavs, do they win 55 games and advance to the second round of the playoffs? Are they legit title contenders?

If not, then you must conclude Lebron's supporting cast is not as good as Jordan's.

Neither is Kobe's.

Whether it would have been an upset if the Pacers beat the bulls in the conference finals or not, it is simply fallacy to state that the bulls were "one bad call" away from "making it to the finals".

Injuries happen, upsets happen, the Pacers had already upset the Magic in the first round, and the 57 win Hawks in the 2nd round! :)

Additionally, the "bad call" happened in game 5, not game 7, meaning the Bulls would not have necessarily even closed out the series if they had gotten that call! hah.

So no, a bad call did not prevent the 93-94 bulls from making the finals. Quit posting misinformation.

"If I take Lebron off the Cavs, do they win 55 games and advance to the second round of the playoffs? Are they legit title contenders?"

Irrelevant. The cavs are not 3 time defending Champions, who then added key role players in Kerr (the GOAT 3PT shooter), or Kukoc (a very versatile big man). So you are comparing apples and oranges.

Jordan and Pippen had both played in the 92 olympics after winning 67 games the year before. The 92-93 bulls coasted through the regular season, not as concerned with winning as many games as they could have otherwise done, much like the Lakers in the early 2000s.

The 93-94 bulls added both Kerr and Kukoc to a team coming off of 3 championships, and won 55 games. Put Jordan on that squad and you are looking at a good shot at 70+ wins.

[Soothsayer]

So,, Jordan was one of the three best offensive players ever, and one of the ten best defensive players ever...and that makes him at least #2. Who is #1?

How about this...

Defensive WIN-SHARES...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_season.html

Yes, Russell and his 11 rings is easily the best ever...BUT, who is #2 based on that list? Why, it is CLEARLY a guy by the name of Chamberlain.

Or a career list, in which Russell, Kareem (longevity), Olajuwon...and then Chamberlain. Where does MJ appear? #21.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_career.html

How about Offensive Win Shares in a Career? Kareem (longevity), then Wilt.MK is 4th behind Oscar.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ows_career.html

Single-Season Offensive Win-Shares?

Kareem, then Wilt.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ows_season.html

How about Single-Season Win Shares? Kareem, then Wilt, several times over...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_season.html

Career? Kareem (longevity), then Wilt, K. Malone, and finally Jordan at #5.

Here are some more ratings. and the explanation:

http://www.databasebasketball.com/about/aboutstats.htm

"*** Efficiency is a new stat the NBA developed in 2002. It is calculated using the following formula: (pts*100)/((fta*.44) + fga + to - oreb)
Since Efficiency is calculated on a per game basis, it is good at seeing how well a particular player has performed, regardless of the number of games that the player has played during that season. For an estimate of a players value to his team for the entire season, Approximate Values can be used.

Approximate Value (AV)

Approximate Value (AV) was developed by Dean Oliver. You can read more about this formula and more at this website: http://www.powerbasketball.com/theywin2.html

Here is a quick synopsis of AV values


Credits= PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-FG MISSED-FT MISSED-TO

AV= Credits^(3/4)/21

The Value Approximation Method was a major task to come up with, taking me about two months to finally arrive at satisfactory results. The plan for the method was to end up with a scale of integers between 0 and about 20 rating players, with 10 representing an 'average' player. It was to be based upon several standards a player was to meet in order to gain points of approximate value. The whole thing was modeled on Bill James' Value Approximation method for baseball. As James did, I assigned verbal descriptions to ranges of scores in order to see if the method produced results that matched general descriptions of players. Those descriptions are as follows:



A score of about twenty indicates an exceptional MVP season.
A score of seventeen or eighteen indicates a strong MVP candidate or an ordinary MVP season.
A score of sixteen indicates an MVP candidate.
A score of fifteen indicates a definite All-Star who is a marginal MVP candidate.
A score of fourteen indicates a probable All-Star.
A score of thirteen indicates a marginal All-Star.
A score of twelve indicates a very fine season; an All-Star candidate.
A score of eleven indicates an above average regular; an excellent player playing about 1800 minutes.
A score of ten indicates an average regular or a very good sixth man.
A score of nine indicates an average regular or a good sixth man.
A score of eight indicates a fair regular or an average sixth man.
A score of six or seven indicates an average bench player or a good player playing under 1500 minutes.
A score of four or five indicates a player who plays about 1000 minutes and who doesn't deserve many more.
Scores of three or less usually indicate players who are unimpressive in limited playing time.
Before the '73-74 season, steals (STL), blocks (BLK), and turnovers weren't kept as official stats. In the credits formula for player seasons before '73-74, those stats are just omitted as they tend to cancel each other out to some degree when included anyway. "



How about EFF?

Whoa! Wilt in a LANDSLIDE! (He has the top-SEVEN seasons)

http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadersseason.htm?stat=eff&lg=n

How about EFF in a Career? Chamberlain ROUTS the field, and MJ comes in at #8.

How about AV ratings? Single season...Chamberlain CRUSHES EVERYONE...SEVEN of the Top-8 seasons (Kareem at #7 on that list)

http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadersseason.htm?stat=av&lg=n

AV Career? Kareem is #1 but it is based on longevity...and Wilt is #2. Jordan is #8.


EFF is irrelevant. It doesn't take Pace of Play into account.

[Soothsayer]

How about the NBA Record Book...

Incidently this site is INCORRECT. It lists Wilt with 72 records. In ACTUALITY, it is somewhere around 130. BUT, for purposes of this discussion...it will do...
COLOR]

And Jordan holds 70 NBA records, what's your point? Unlike Wilt, many of Jordan's records are in the playoffs:

Holds NBA Finals records for:

Finals MVP honors (6)
named MVP in each Finals appearance
scoring average, single-series (41.0 ppg)
set in the 1993 NBA Finals vs. the Phoenix Suns
consecutive games, 20 or more points (35, June 2, 1991-June 14, 1998)
only player to score 20 or more points in all games, career (min. 15 games)
Jordan scored at least 20 in all 35 of his Finals performances
consecutive games, 40 or more points (4, June 11-18, 1993)
points, one half (35)
set in 1st half vs. the Portland Trail Blazers, June 3, 1992
field goals made, one half (14)
did so twice; vs. Portland, June 3, 1992 and vs. Phoenix, June 16, 1993
shared with Isiah Thomas
consecutive field goals made (13)
set vs. the Los Angeles Lakers on June 5, 1991
free throws made, quarter (9)
shared with Frank Ramsey
three point field goals made, one half (6)
set vs. the Portland Trail Blazers, June 3, 1992
shared with Kenny Smith
scoring 30 or more points in all games of series
set in the 1993 NBA Finals vs. the Phoenix Suns
shared with Elgin Baylor, Rick Barry, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal
points, 6-game series (246)
set in the 1993 NBA Finals vs. the Phoenix Suns
field goals made, 6-game series (101)
set in the 1993 NBA Finals vs. the Phoenix Suns
steals, 5-game series (14)
set in the 1991 NBA Finals vs. the Los Angeles Lakers
highest assists average not by a point guard, single-series (11.4 apg)
set in the 1991 NBA Finals vs. the Los Angeles Lakers

Holds NBA Playoff Records for:

points per game average, career (33.45)
points, career (5,987)
points, single postseason (759, 1992)
also ranks 5th (680, 1998) and 6th (666, 1993)
50 point games (8)
40 point games (38)
30 point games (109)
20 point games (174)
consecutive games, 15 or more points (179)
scored 15 points or more in every career playoff game
consecutive games, 20 or more points (60)
June 2, 1989 - May 11, 1993
points in a game (63)
set vs. the Boston Celtics, April 20, 1986
averaged 43.7 ppg, 5.7 apg, and 6.3 rpg for the three games series against the Boston Celtics
points in a 3-game series (135)
set in the 1992 First Round vs. the Miami Heat
points in a 5-game series (226)
set in the 1988 First Round vs. the Cleveland Cavaliers
field goals attempted, career (4,497)
field goals made per game, career (12.2)
field goals made in a game (24)
set vs. Cleveland Cavaliers on May 1, 1988
shared with Wilt Chamberlain and John Havlicek
field goals attempted, half (25)
set vs. Cleveland Cavaliers on May 1, 1988
shared with Wilt Chamberlain and Elgin Baylor
field goals made in a 3-game series (53)
set in the 1992 First Round vs. the Miami Heat
field goals made in a 5-game series (86)
set in the 1988 First Round vs. the Cleveland Cavaliers
field goals made in a 6-game series (101)
set in 1993 NBA Finals vs. the Phoenix Suns
consecutive field goals made (13)
set vs. the Los Angeles Lakers on June 5, 1991
free throws made, career (1,463)
free throws made, quarter (13)
blocks by a guard, career (158)
free throws made per game, rookie (12.0)
free throws attempted per game, rookie (14.5)

Holds NBA All-Star Game records for:

points, career (262)
field goals made, career (110)
field goals made, game (17)
shared with Wilt Chamberlain and Kevin Garnett
field goals attempted, career (233)
field goals attempted, game (27)
shared with Rick Barry
steals, career (37)
blocked shots, half (4)

Holds NBA regular season records for:

All-Defensive First Team honors (9)
shared with Gary Payton
Player Efficiency Rating, career (27.91)
points per game average, career (30.12)
consecutive games scoring in double-digits (866)
seasons leading the league in points per game average (10)
consecutive seasons leading the league in points per game average (7, 1986-87 through 1992-93)
shared with Wilt Chamberlain
Appears on the All-time top 100 list of most points per game in a season a record 9 times.
seasons leading the league in total points (11)
Appears on the All-time top 100 list of most points in a season a record 11 times.
seasons leading the league in field goals made (10)
consecutive seasons leading the league in field goals made (7)
shared with Wilt Chamberlain
seasons leading the league in field goals attempted (9)
seasons leading the league in steals per game (3)
highest Game Score on record
64.6 at the Cleveland Cavaliers on March 28, 1990
free throws made, one half
20, against the Miami Heat on December 30, 1992
free throws attempted, one half
23, against the Miami Heat on December 30, 1992
free throws made, one quarter (shared)
14, against the Utah Jazz on November 15, 1989, and against the Miami Heat on December 30, 1992
free throws attempted, one quarter (shared)
16, against the Miami Heat on December 30, 1992
steals, one half (8)
shared with 11 players
oldest player to score 50 points in one game (51 points, 7 rebounds, aged 38 years, 315 days)
against the New Orleans Hornets, December 29, 2001
oldest player and only player at age 40 or older to score 40 points in one game (43 points, 10 rebounds)
against the New Jersey Nets, February 21, 2003
scored 40 or more points 3 times, in his final year
scored 30 or more points 9 times, in his final year
scored 20 or more points 42 times, in his final year
blocked shots by a guard, season (131, 1987-88)
blocked shots by a guard, career (893)

[Soothsayer]

KAJ had the combination of all those things too, tell me why you pick MJ over KAJ...


KAJ has 6 rings....but only 2 finals mvps.

[alexandreben]

KAJ has 6 rings....but only 2 finals mvps.
Wilt Chamberlain only has one FMVP, and Bill Russell has NONE.

[Soothsayer]

My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's, and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.


No, Jordan did not play with the most talented cast in the 90s...far from it. Most of Jordan's cast were good role players.

[Soothsayer]

My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's, and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.

You don't use "just rings", you don't use "just domination", or "just stats", you use EVERYTHING simultaneously, and Jordan simply has the best combination of stats per possession, rings he LED his team to, skill, domination, peak play, playoff and finals performances, awards, records, and impact on the game, of anyone to ever play.

[SFMF]

That guy again... he always sucks Wilt's dick.

[Leviathon1121]

Yeah right. Chicago went 67-15 that year, while the Blazers went 57-25.

Although it was a little while ago, I am pretty sure I remember there being quite a lot of talk in the papers and on TV about how the Blazers were the more talented team and were going to dethrone the Bulls.

You being the great historian you are though, I did expect something better then "Bulls had a better record, ahahahahaahahhahahah"

[Roundball_Rock]

No, Jordan did not play with the most talented cast in the 90s...far from it. Most of Jordan's cast were good role players.

:roll: t-rex, with an assist from the 94' Bulls, demolished this myth earlier in this thread. Facts are facts. Imagine, say, the Spurs without David Robinson. Oh wait. We saw the Spurs without D-Rob in 97'. They were a 25ish win team, not a team 2 games away from the #1 seed despite numerous injuries. Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Barkley (his Suns were strong but in 94' WITH Barkley they won only 1 more game than the Bulls did with Jordan being replaced by a D-Leaguer!), and even Malone would have killed for Jordan's "scrubs."

Jordan had a chance to win with scrubs, remember? He had another opportunity to do so in 99', fresh off his second MVP in three seasons, but quit because Scottie and Phil left and he--for whatever reason (take a guess :lol )--refused to play without them.

[Soothsayer]

:roll: t-rex, with an assist from the 94' Bulls, demolished this myth earlier in this thread. Facts are facts. Imagine, say, the Spurs without David Robinson. Oh wait. We saw the Spurs without D-Rob in 97'. They were a 25ish win team, not a team 2 games away from the #1 seed despite numerous injuries. Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Barkley (his Suns were strong but in 94' WITH Barkley they won only 1 more game than the Bulls did with Jordan being replaced by a D-Leaguer!), and even Malone would have killed for Jordan's "scrubs."

Jordan had a chance to win with scrubs, remember? He had another opportunity to do so in 99', fresh off his second MVP in three seasons, but quit because Scottie and Phil left and he--for whatever reason (take a guess :lol )--refused to play without them.

No, he did not. If your measure of "talent" is a team winning 55 games, than there were FAR more "talented" teams in the 90s than MJ's supporting cast.

Plus, again, the 94 bulls were a 3 time championship squad who THEN added both Kerr and Kukoc to the mix. MJ did not play with either Kerr or Kukoc during his 91-93 ring seasons, thus, further diminshing the talent level Jordan played with vs. the 94 squad.

"Scrubs"....looks like YOU are the only one using this term. I used the term "role players" which Steve Kerr agrees with. MJ was surrounded by players, other than Pippen, who knew their roles well, and played them very well.

Before MJ's first ring in 91 nobody was talking about the immense wealth of talent on the Bulls other than an up and coming Pippen, and of course, Jordan himself.

Jordan and Pippen won with role players who knew and played their roles well.

And the Jordan's teammates certainly were not even close to the most talented team in the league in the 90s.

[Soothsayer]

:roll: t-rex, with an assist from the 94' Bulls, demolished this myth earlier in this thread. Facts are facts. Imagine, say, the Spurs without David Robinson. Oh wait. We saw the Spurs without D-Rob in 97'. They were a 25ish win team, not a team 2 games away from the #1 seed despite numerous injuries. Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Barkley (his Suns were strong but in 94' WITH Barkley they won only 1 more game than the Bulls did with Jordan being replaced by a D-Leaguer!), and even Malone would have killed for Jordan's "scrubs."

Jordan had a chance to win with scrubs, remember? He had another opportunity to do so in 99', fresh off his second MVP in three seasons, but quit because Scottie and Phil left and he--for whatever reason (take a guess :lol )--refused to play without them.


Wow, you clearly are either ignorant or forgot why the bulls were broken up. Reinsdorf and the boys did not want to continue paying Jordan and Pip sky high salaries when they were clearly past their primes. Phil, Jordan, and Pip all had been talking about this since 1997 and, no, Phil and Pippen did not decide to leave first, only to have Jordan "follow" them by leaving the bulls. Quit posting misinformation.

[Roundball_Rock]

No, he did not. If your measure of "talent" is a team winning 55 games, than there were FAR more "talented" teams in the 90s than MJ's supporting cast.

Such as? As t-rex showed, the Bulls WITHOUT Jordan did about as well as the other superstar's of that era WITH them.

The Knicks? 57 wins and needed Hue Hollins to beat the Bulls.

Spurs? 55 wins with Robinson and out in the first round.

Jazz? 53 wins.

Magic? 50 wins.

Rockets? 58 wins.

Suns? 56 wins.

If you broaden it to the entire 90's then you could cite the 95' and 96' Magic and that is about it. The Sonics were chronic underachievers, aside from 96', and had no bench. The Suns from 1993-1995 look good on paper but history showed that even with Barkley they were on par with the Bulls sans Jordan in 94'.

Talent does not by itself win games. The real question is how good a team is at winning and Jordan's "supporting cast" (a shameful term Jordan introduced to the basketball lexicon) was better than any other of the 90's. If you want to look at raw talent then the Jazz of recent years are a juggernaut with a borderline superstar in Deron Williams, an all-NBA caliber player in Boozer, two other all-star caliber players in AK-47 and Okur as well as other good players such as Harpring and Millsap. Yet what has that team achieved? No one 15 years from now is going to say Williams had a great "cast."

The real question is why ONLY MJ fans insist on diminishing his teammates. You don't see Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and Kobe fans do it. Among the top 10 only fans of the "clear GOAT" do this en masse. Strange...


no, Phil and Pippen did not decide to leave first, only to have Jordan "follow" them by leaving the bulls.

:oldlol: at acting as if MJ retiring was a coincidence that had nothing to do with Pippen and Jackson. Jordan publicly announced numerous times that he would not come back unless both Pippen and Jackson were retained during the three-peat years. Once it was clear Jackson and Pippen would be gone, Jordan was out as well. To be fair, what would the point of going, at best, 45-37 be for Jordan? The only purpose would be to win without Pippen/Jackson but Jordan knew...


the bulls were broken up. Reinsdorf and the boys did not want to continue paying these Jordan and Pip sky high salaries when they were clearly past their primes.

Ignorance? Pip's sky high salary? He was the 122nd highest paid player in the NBA at $3 million in 1998. How could a "Jordan fan" who watched MJ in the 90's be unaware of this basic fact that came up so often in the saga of the 90's Bulls?


MJ was surrounded by players, other than Pippen, who knew their roles well, and played them very well.

And? You act as if Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson and co. were surrounding by the Dream Team. Only Jordan and Malone had the luxury of having a second best player who was a superstar for several seasons (Shaq had prime Penny for 2 years). Hakeem had Thorpe until he was 33 or 34. Ewing had Starks. :roll: Robinson had Rodman, who caused chemistry problems in San Antonio and was a mere role player according to you. Quit putting Jordan's team out of context. It is no coincidence Jordan went from winning nothing to winning 6 rings in 7 seasons.


Before MJ's first ring in 91 nobody was talking about the immense wealth of talent on the Bulls other than an up and coming Pippen, and of course, Jordan himself.

This is misleading. His team was indeed underrated--until Jordan retired 2 days before training camp (nice timing MJ! Another reason he is the clear GOAT :bowdown: ) and the Bulls proved their worth in 94'. They were so underrated most people had them missing the playoffs that year. Even Phil Jackson predicted a 42-40 record, because he assumed Jordan was worth 15-20 wins. What relevance then is the view of the team in 1991 when they were underrated for several more years until Jordan left? If Jordan never quit his "cast" would have forever been underrated. Fortunately, other than MJ fans, most people--especially those who saw the Bulls without MJ in action in 94'--realize how great a "cast" that was. No other "cast" in the 90's, other than the 96' Magic, could have remained elite without their best player.

[Glide2keva]

Wow, you clearly are either ignorant or forgot why the bulls were broken up. Reinsdorf and the boys did not want to continue paying these Jordan and Pip sky high salaries when they were clearly past their primes. Phil, Jordan, and Pip all had been talking about this since 1997 and, no, Phil and Pippen did not decide to leave first, only to have Jordan "follow" them by leaving the bulls. Quit posting misinformation.
That's what he does.

He posts a lot of misinformation because most of ISH posters weren't watching basketball back then, so they can only go on hearsay.

1999 was the lockout season, and the Bulls were in the middle of contract disputes with MJ, Pippen and Phil Jackson.

Pippen was dealt in a sign and trade (wich was implemented in the new CBA) with the houston rockets, he got a big chunk of change and was sent packing. Jerry Riensdorf was not going to pay MJ another $30Million per season, and MJ wasn't playing without Phil Jackson, so the dynasty was broken up and they started this "Organizations Win Championships" and not players in their eyes.

Plus, they wanted to fast track the handing over of the team to Toni Kukoc, which is the reason they brought him over in the first place. It was to be his team when MJ retired. They wound up trading him to the Bucks anyway.

Of course this fact will be overlooked and dismissed.

This whole thing brought on 12 years of bad luck to the Bulls and they are just now starting to recover. No big name free agents would come here because of how they treated MJ and the dynasy.

[Soothsayer]

Such as? As t-rex showed, the Bulls WITHOUT Jordan did about as well as the other superstar's of that era WITH them.

The Knicks? 57 wins and needed Hue Hollins to beat the Bulls.

Spurs? 55 wins with Robinson and out in the first round.

Jazz? 53 wins.

Magic? 50 wins.

Rockets? 58 wins.

Suns? 56 wins.

If you broaden it to the entire 90's then you could cite the 95' and 96' Magic and that is about it. The Sonics were chronic underachievers, aside from 96', and had no bench. The Suns from 1993-1995 look good on paper but history showed that even with Barkley they were on par with the Bulls sans Jordan in 94'.

Talent does not by itself win games. The real question is how good a team is at winning and Jordan's "supporting cast" (a shameful term Jordan introduced to the basketball lexicon) was better than any other of the 90's. If you want to look at raw talent then the Jazz of recent years are a juggernaut with a borderline superstar in Deron Williams, an all-NBA caliber player in Boozer, two other all-star caliber players in AK-47 and Okur as well as other good players such as Harpring and Millsap. Yet what has that team achieved? No one 15 years from now is going to say Williams had a great "cast."

The real question is why ONLY MJ fans insist on diminishing his teammates. You don't see Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and Kobe fans do it. Among the top 10 only fans of the "clear GOAT" do this en masse. Strange...



:oldlol: Jordan publicly announced that he would not come back unless both Pippen and Jackson were retained during the three-peat years. Once it was clear Jackson and Pippen would be gone, Jordan was out as well. To be fair, what would the point of going, at best, 45-37 be for Jordan? The only purpose would be to win without Pippen/Jackson but Jordan knew...

No, they did not. The 94 bulls, having added both kerr and kukoc, won 55 games and had a 2nd round exit. MANY teams in the 90s had as good or better records, and went further in the playoffs.

Thus, your point fails for lack of evidence.
91 Lakers more talented, 91 blazers more talented, 91 celts debatably
92 Blazers and Cavs more talented, as well as Jazz
93 Suns, Knicks, and Sonics more talented
94 knicks, Houston, seattle, phoenix more talented
95 Magic, spurs, utah, suns, sonics more talented
96 Spurs, Sonic, Magic more talented
97 Heat, Hawks, Jazz, Sonics, Lakers more talented
98 Jazz, Lakers, Spurs, Pacers more talented
99 tough to tell with incomplete season, but at least the spurs

[Soothsayer]

Such as? As t-rex showed, the Bulls WITHOUT Jordan did about as well as the other superstar's of that era WITH them.

The Knicks? 57 wins and needed Hue Hollins to beat the Bulls.

Spurs? 55 wins with Robinson and out in the first round.

Jazz? 53 wins.

Magic? 50 wins.

Rockets? 58 wins.

Suns? 56 wins.

If you broaden it to the entire 90's then you could cite the 95' and 96' Magic and that is about it. The Sonics were chronic underachievers, aside from 96', and had no bench. The Suns from 1993-1995 look good on paper but history showed that even with Barkley they were on par with the Bulls sans Jordan in 94'.

Talent does not by itself win games. The real question is how good a team is at winning and Jordan's "supporting cast" (a shameful term Jordan introduced to the basketball lexicon) was better than any other of the 90's. If you want to look at raw talent then the Jazz of recent years are a juggernaut with a borderline superstar in Deron Williams, an all-NBA caliber player in Boozer, two other all-star caliber players in AK-47 and Okur as well as other good players such as Harpring and Millsap. Yet what has that team achieved? No one 15 years from now is going to say Williams had a great "cast."

The real question is why ONLY MJ fans insist on diminishing his teammates. You don't see Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and Kobe fans do it. Among the top 10 only fans of the "clear GOAT" do this en masse. Strange...



:oldlol: at acting as if MJ retiring was a coincidence that had nothing to do with Pippen and Jackson. Jordan publicly announced numerous times that he would not come back unless both Pippen and Jackson were retained during the three-peat years. Once it was clear Jackson and Pippen would be gone, Jordan was out as well. To be fair, what would the point of going, at best, 45-37 be for Jordan? The only purpose would be to win without Pippen/Jackson but Jordan knew...



Ignorance? Pip's sky high salary? He was the 122nd highest paid player in the NBA at $3 million in 1998. How could a "Jordan fan" who watched MJ in the 90's be unaware of this basic fact that came up so often in the saga of the 90's Bulls?



And? You act as if Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson and co. were surrounding by the Dream Team. Only Jordan and Malone had the luxury of having a second best player who was a superstar for several seasons (Shaq had prime Penny for 2 years). Hakeem had Thorpe until he was 33 or 34. Ewing had Starks. :roll: Robinson had Rodman, who caused chemistry problems in San Antonio and was a mere role player according to you. Quit putting Jordan's team out of context. It is no coincidence Jordan went from winning nothing to winning 6 rings in 7 seasons.



This is misleading. His team was indeed underrated--until Jordan retired 2 days before training camp and the Bulls proved their worth in 94'. They were so underrated most people had them missing the playoffs that year. What relevance then is the view of the team in 1991?

"Talent itself does not win games."

No kidding.
And Jordan's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding both Kerr and Kukoc, WON 55 games and could not make it out of the 2nd round.

Thus, that team is not nearly the most talented of the 90s. Not even close.

Not diminishing his teammates, just accepting reality.

[Soothsayer]

Such as? As t-rex showed, the Bulls WITHOUT Jordan did about as well as the other superstar's of that era WITH them.

The Knicks? 57 wins and needed Hue Hollins to beat the Bulls.

Spurs? 55 wins with Robinson and out in the first round.

Jazz? 53 wins.

Magic? 50 wins.

Rockets? 58 wins.

Suns? 56 wins.

If you broaden it to the entire 90's then you could cite the 95' and 96' Magic and that is about it. The Sonics were chronic underachievers, aside from 96', and had no bench. The Suns from 1993-1995 look good on paper but history showed that even with Barkley they were on par with the Bulls sans Jordan in 94'.

Talent does not by itself win games. The real question is how good a team is at winning and Jordan's "supporting cast" (a shameful term Jordan introduced to the basketball lexicon) was better than any other of the 90's. If you want to look at raw talent then the Jazz of recent years are a juggernaut with a borderline superstar in Deron Williams, an all-NBA caliber player in Boozer, two other all-star caliber players in AK-47 and Okur as well as other good players such as Harpring and Millsap. Yet what has that team achieved? No one 15 years from now is going to say Williams had a great "cast."

The real question is why ONLY MJ fans insist on diminishing his teammates. You don't see Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and Kobe fans do it. Among the top 10 only fans of the "clear GOAT" do this en masse. Strange...



:oldlol: at acting as if MJ retiring was a coincidence that had nothing to do with Pippen and Jackson. Jordan publicly announced numerous times that he would not come back unless both Pippen and Jackson were retained during the three-peat years. Once it was clear Jackson and Pippen would be gone, Jordan was out as well. To be fair, what would the point of going, at best, 45-37 be for Jordan? The only purpose would be to win without Pippen/Jackson but Jordan knew...



Ignorance? Pip's sky high salary? He was the 122nd highest paid player in the NBA at $3 million in 1998. How could a "Jordan fan" who watched MJ in the 90's be unaware of this basic fact that came up so often in the saga of the 90's Bulls?



And? You act as if Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson and co. were surrounding by the Dream Team. Only Jordan and Malone had the luxury of having a second best player who was a superstar for several seasons (Shaq had prime Penny for 2 years). Hakeem had Thorpe until he was 33 or 34. Ewing had Starks. :roll: Robinson had Rodman, who caused chemistry problems in San Antonio and was a mere role player according to you. Quit putting Jordan's team out of context. It is no coincidence Jordan went from winning nothing to winning 6 rings in 7 seasons.



This is misleading. His team was indeed underrated--until Jordan retired 2 days before training camp (nice timing MJ! Another reason he is the clear GOAT :bowdown: ) and the Bulls proved their worth in 94'. They were so underrated most people had them missing the playoffs that year. Even Phil Jackson predicted a 42-40 record, because he assumed Jordan was worth 15-20 wins. What relevance then is the view of the team in 1991 when they were underrated for several more years until Jordan left? If Jordan never quit his "cast" would have forever been underrated. Fortunately, other than MJ fans, most people--especially those who saw the Bulls without MJ in action in 94'--realize how great a "cast" that was. No other "cast" in the 90's, other than the 96' Magic, could have remained elite without their best player.


Nobody said Jordan leaving had nothing to do with Pippen and Phil. All would have stayed had Reinsdorf ponied up the cash. He didn't, they left.

However, you could just as easily say Phil and Pippen left because Jordan was not there, vs. the other way round.

Thus, your statement that Jordan left BECAUSE Phil and Pippen left is silly.

[Soothsayer]

Such as? As t-rex showed, the Bulls WITHOUT Jordan did about as well as the other superstar's of that era WITH them.

The Knicks? 57 wins and needed Hue Hollins to beat the Bulls.

Spurs? 55 wins with Robinson and out in the first round.

Jazz? 53 wins.

Magic? 50 wins.

Rockets? 58 wins.

Suns? 56 wins.

If you broaden it to the entire 90's then you could cite the 95' and 96' Magic and that is about it. The Sonics were chronic underachievers, aside from 96', and had no bench. The Suns from 1993-1995 look good on paper but history showed that even with Barkley they were on par with the Bulls sans Jordan in 94'.

Talent does not by itself win games. The real question is how good a team is at winning and Jordan's "supporting cast" (a shameful term Jordan introduced to the basketball lexicon) was better than any other of the 90's. If you want to look at raw talent then the Jazz of recent years are a juggernaut with a borderline superstar in Deron Williams, an all-NBA caliber player in Boozer, two other all-star caliber players in AK-47 and Okur as well as other good players such as Harpring and Millsap. Yet what has that team achieved? No one 15 years from now is going to say Williams had a great "cast."

The real question is why ONLY MJ fans insist on diminishing his teammates. You don't see Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and Kobe fans do it. Among the top 10 only fans of the "clear GOAT" do this en masse. Strange...



:oldlol: at acting as if MJ retiring was a coincidence that had nothing to do with Pippen and Jackson. Jordan publicly announced numerous times that he would not come back unless both Pippen and Jackson were retained during the three-peat years. Once it was clear Jackson and Pippen would be gone, Jordan was out as well. To be fair, what would the point of going, at best, 45-37 be for Jordan? The only purpose would be to win without Pippen/Jackson but Jordan knew...



Ignorance? Pip's sky high salary? He was the 122nd highest paid player in the NBA at $3 million in 1998. How could a "Jordan fan" who watched MJ in the 90's be unaware of this basic fact that came up so often in the saga of the 90's Bulls?


And? You act as if Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson and co. were surrounding by the Dream Team. Only Jordan and Malone had the luxury of having a second best player who was a superstar for several seasons (Shaq had prime Penny for 2 years). Hakeem had Thorpe until he was 33 or 34. Ewing had Starks. :roll: Robinson had Rodman, who caused chemistry problems in San Antonio and was a mere role player according to you. Quit putting Jordan's team out of context. It is no coincidence Jordan went from winning nothing to winning 6 rings in 7 seasons.



This is misleading. His team was indeed underrated--until Jordan retired 2 days before training camp (nice timing MJ! Another reason he is the clear GOAT :bowdown: ) and the Bulls proved their worth in 94'. They were so underrated most people had them missing the playoffs that year. Even Phil Jackson predicted a 42-40 record, because he assumed Jordan was worth 15-20 wins. What relevance then is the view of the team in 1991 when they were underrated for several more years until Jordan left? If Jordan never quit his "cast" would have forever been underrated. Fortunately, other than MJ fans, most people--especially those who saw the Bulls without MJ in action in 94'--realize how great a "cast" that was. No other "cast" in the 90's, other than the 96' Magic, could have remained elite without their best player.


Do your homework. Pippen was demaning a LOT more money heading into the 98-99 season. They had pip locked up at 2-3 mill per year from 92-98 and he was woefully underpaid. He was demanding a LOT more money, which Reinsdorf did not want to pay. Pippen eventually signed for $11 million with Houston, nearly quadrupling his previous salary.

[Roundball_Rock]

1999 was the lockout season, and the Bulls were in the middle of contract disputes with MJ, Pippen and Phil Jackson.

Pippen was dealt in a sign and trade (wich was implemented in the new CBA) with the houston rockets, he got a big chunk of change and was sent packing. Jerry Riensdorf was not going to pay MJ another $30Million per season, and MJ wasn't playing without Phil Jackson, so the dynasty was broken up and they started this "Organizations Win Championships" and not players in their eyes.

So what exactly do you disagree with me saying? Jordan also would not play without Pippen, as you know since he said so publicly numerous times. Why didn't you post that? :eek:

:oldlol: at these MJ fans acting as if 99' was when the management-players/Jackson dispute started. Talk about misinformation and misleading younger posters! There was doubt as to whether the team would be brought back for 98' as well and MJ was on record demanding both Pippen and Jackson being retained or he would retire.


The 94 bulls, having added both kerr and kukoc, won 55 games and had a 2nd round exit. MANY teams in the 90s had as good or better records, and went further in the playoffs.

Thus, your point fails for lack of evidence.
91 Lakers more talented, 91 blazers more talented, 91 celts debatably
92 Blazers and Cavs more talented, as well as Jazz
93 Suns, Knicks, and Sonics more talented
94 knicks, Houston, seattle, phoenix more talented
95 Magic, spurs, utah, suns, sonics more talented
96 Spurs, Sonic, Magic more talented
97 Heat, Hawks, Jazz, Sonics, Lakers more talented
98 Jazz, Lakers, Spurs, Pacers more talented
99 tough to tell with incomplete season, but at least the spurs

Which of those teams were missing their best player? We are talking about "supporting casts." Thanks in advance.


And Jordan's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding both Kerr and Kukoc, WON 55 games and could not make it out of the 2nd round.

Yes, and Pippen's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding the clear GOAT Jordan himself, could not make it out the 2nd round in 95'! Oh knowes!

:oldlol: at how MJ fans never mention how MJ screwed the team by retiring at the last minute. The team had the worst "starting" SG in the league and still remained elite. Imagine if MJ retired over the summer and the Bulls had legit starters at all 5 positions.

Kukoc? 9/4/3 as a rookie in the playoffs in 18 minutes. Kerr? 3.5 ppg in the playoffs. :lol at acting as if 94' Kukoc and Kerr were the same guys they later became.


. Pippen was demaning a LOT more money heading into the 98-99 season. They had pip locked up at 2-3 mill per year from 92-98 and he was woefully underpaid. He was demanding a LOT more money, which Reinsdorf did not want to pay. Pippen eventually signed for $11 million with Houston, nearly quadrupling his previous salary.

And your point is? Pippen had been demanding that kind of raise (to a superstar salary) for years. You make it seem as if 99' was a sea change in that regard. What changed was he became a free agent that year but the Bulls were almost broken up the previous year. We all knew it. Sports Illustrated had a "Last Stand" issue during the 98' season. Jackson called it the "Last Dance." It was a near run thing that the team was brought back for 98' and there was little chance it would be back in 99'.


However, you could just as easily say Phil and Pippen left because Jordan was not there, vs. the other way round.

Except that is factually incorrect. Pippen left for financial reasons, not Jordan. Jordan--per his own words--simply was not coming back if Jackson and Pippen weren't there, regardless of what he was paid.

[Soothsayer]

Such as? As t-rex showed, the Bulls WITHOUT Jordan did about as well as the other superstar's of that era WITH them.

The Knicks? 57 wins and needed Hue Hollins to beat the Bulls.

Spurs? 55 wins with Robinson and out in the first round.

Jazz? 53 wins.

Magic? 50 wins.

Rockets? 58 wins.

Suns? 56 wins.

If you broaden it to the entire 90's then you could cite the 95' and 96' Magic and that is about it. The Sonics were chronic underachievers, aside from 96', and had no bench. The Suns from 1993-1995 look good on paper but history showed that even with Barkley they were on par with the Bulls sans Jordan in 94'.

Talent does not by itself win games. The real question is how good a team is at winning and Jordan's "supporting cast" (a shameful term Jordan introduced to the basketball lexicon) was better than any other of the 90's. If you want to look at raw talent then the Jazz of recent years are a juggernaut with a borderline superstar in Deron Williams, an all-NBA caliber player in Boozer, two other all-star caliber players in AK-47 and Okur as well as other good players such as Harpring and Millsap. Yet what has that team achieved? No one 15 years from now is going to say Williams had a great "cast."

The real question is why ONLY MJ fans insist on diminishing his teammates. You don't see Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and Kobe fans do it. Among the top 10 only fans of the "clear GOAT" do this en masse. Strange...



:oldlol: at acting as if MJ retiring was a coincidence that had nothing to do with Pippen and Jackson. Jordan publicly announced numerous times that he would not come back unless both Pippen and Jackson were retained during the three-peat years. Once it was clear Jackson and Pippen would be gone, Jordan was out as well. To be fair, what would the point of going, at best, 45-37 be for Jordan? The only purpose would be to win without Pippen/Jackson but Jordan knew...



Ignorance? Pip's sky high salary? He was the 122nd highest paid player in the NBA at $3 million in 1998. How could a "Jordan fan" who watched MJ in the 90's be unaware of this basic fact that came up so often in the saga of the 90's Bulls?



And? You act as if Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson and co. were surrounding by the Dream Team. Only Jordan and Malone had the luxury of having a second best player who was a superstar for several seasons (Shaq had prime Penny for 2 years). Hakeem had Thorpe until he was 33 or 34. Ewing had Starks. :roll: Robinson had Rodman, who caused chemistry problems in San Antonio and was a mere role player according to you. Quit putting Jordan's team out of context. It is no coincidence Jordan went from winning nothing to winning 6 rings in 7 seasons.



This is misleading. His team was indeed underrated--until Jordan retired 2 days before training camp (nice timing MJ! Another reason he is the clear GOAT :bowdown: ) and the Bulls proved their worth in 94'. They were so underrated most people had them missing the playoffs that year. Even Phil Jackson predicted a 42-40 record, because he assumed Jordan was worth 15-20 wins. What relevance then is the view of the team in 1991 when they were underrated for several more years until Jordan left? If Jordan never quit his "cast" would have forever been underrated. Fortunately, other than MJ fans, most people--especially those who saw the Bulls without MJ in action in 94'--realize how great a "cast" that was. No other "cast" in the 90's, other than the 96' Magic, could have remained elite without their best player.

Already been over this. The 94 bulls were a 3 time championship team, battle tested many times over. Add to this mix both Kerr and Kukoc.

The 92-93 bulls had coasted through the regular season to 57 wins after both Pippen and Jordan had played in the 92 olympics. In the 91-92 season the same team had won 67 games.

Add to that mix, a rested Pippen and Jordan for the 93-94 season, plus adding Kerr and Kukoc, and you are lookikng at a good possibility of 70+ wins.
Without Jordan, 55 wins and a 2nd round exit.

[Soothsayer]

That's what he does.

He posts a lot of misinformation because most of ISH posters weren't watching basketball back then, so they can only go on hearsay.

1999 was the lockout season, and the Bulls were in the middle of contract disputes with MJ, Pippen and Phil Jackson.

Pippen was dealt in a sign and trade (wich was implemented in the new CBA) with the houston rockets, he got a big chunk of change and was sent packing. Jerry Riensdorf was not going to pay MJ another $30Million per season, and MJ wasn't playing without Phil Jackson, so the dynasty was broken up and they started this "Organizations Win Championships" and not players in their eyes.

Plus, they wanted to fast track the handing over of the team to Toni Kukoc, which is the reason they brought him over in the first place. It was to be his team when MJ retired. They wound up trading him to the Bucks anyway.

Of course this fact will be overlooked and dismissed.

This whole thing brought on 12 years of bad luck to the Bulls and they are just now starting to recover. No big name free agents would come here because of how they treated MJ and the dynasy.

Yeah, I'm noticing that. The lack of knowledge or honesty by some on this board is disturbing to say the least.

[Soothsayer]

So what exactly do you disagree with me saying? Jordan also would not play without Pippen, as you know since he said so publicly numerous times. Why didn't you post that? :eek:

:oldlol: at these MJ fans acting as if 99' was when the management-players/Jackson dispute started. Talk about misinformation and misleading younger posters! There was doubt as to whether the team would be brought back for 98' as well and MJ was on record demanding both Pippen and Jackson being retained or he would retire.



Which of those teams were missing their best player? We are talking about "supporting casts." Thanks in advance.



Yes, and Pippen's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding the clear GOAT Jordan himself, could not make it out the 2nd round in 95'! Oh knowes!

:oldlol: at how MJ fans never mention how MJ screwed the team by retiring at the last minute. The team had the worst "starting" SG in the league and still remained elite. Imagine if MJ retired over the summer and the Bulls had legit starters at all 5 positions.

Kukoc? 9/4/3 as a rookie in the playoffs in 18 minutes. Kerr? 3.5 ppg in the playoffs. :lol at acting as if 94' Kukoc and Kerr were the same guys they later became.


I just wrote that Pippen and Jordan and phil had been openly talking about this since 1997. Yes, there WAS doubt that the team would be brought back for the 97-98 season. MJ was working on 1 year contracts.

[Soothsayer]

So what exactly do you disagree with me saying? Jordan also would not play without Pippen, as you know since he said so publicly numerous times. Why didn't you post that? :eek:

:oldlol: at these MJ fans acting as if 99' was when the management-players/Jackson dispute started. Talk about misinformation and misleading younger posters! There was doubt as to whether the team would be brought back for 98' as well and MJ was on record demanding both Pippen and Jackson being retained or he would retire.



Which of those teams were missing their best player? We are talking about "supporting casts." Thanks in advance.




Yes, and Pippen's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding the clear GOAT Jordan himself, could not make it out the 2nd round in 95'! Oh knowes!

:oldlol: at how MJ fans never mention how MJ screwed the team by retiring at the last minute. The team had the worst "starting" SG in the league and still remained elite. Imagine if MJ retired over the summer and the Bulls had legit starters at all 5 positions.

Kukoc? 9/4/3 as a rookie in the playoffs in 18 minutes. Kerr? 3.5 ppg in the playoffs. :lol at acting as if 94' Kukoc and Kerr were the same guys they later became.


Irrelevant. You said that MJ's teammates were the most talented in the league and used the 94 bulls as an example. MJ's "supporting cast", after winning 3 rings, and adding both Kerr and Kukoc won 55 games and were expelled in the 2nd round. That is far from the "most talented" of the 90s.

[Soothsayer]

So what exactly do you disagree with me saying? Jordan also would not play without Pippen, as you know since he said so publicly numerous times. Why didn't you post that? :eek:

:oldlol: at these MJ fans acting as if 99' was when the management-players/Jackson dispute started. Talk about misinformation and misleading younger posters! There was doubt as to whether the team would be brought back for 98' as well and MJ was on record demanding both Pippen and Jackson being retained or he would retire.



Which of those teams were missing their best player? We are talking about "supporting casts." Thanks in advance.



Yes, and Pippen's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding the clear GOAT Jordan himself, could not make it out the 2nd round in 95'! Oh knowes!

:oldlol: at how MJ fans never mention how MJ screwed the team by retiring at the last minute. The team had the worst "starting" SG in the league and still remained elite. Imagine if MJ retired over the summer and the Bulls had legit starters at all 5 positions.

Kukoc? 9/4/3 as a rookie in the playoffs in 18 minutes. Kerr? 3.5 ppg in the playoffs. :lol at acting as if 94' Kukoc and Kerr were the same guys they later became.



And your point is? Pippen had been demanding that kind of raise (to a superstar salary) for years. You make it seem as if 99' was a sea change in that regard. What changed was he became a free agent that year but the Bulls were almost broken up the previous year. We all knew it. Sports Illustrated had a "Last Stand" issue during the 98' season. It was a near run thing that the team was brought back for 98' and there was little chance it would be back in 99'.



Except that is factually incorrect. Pippen left for financial reasons, not Jordan. Jordan--per his own words--simply was not coming back if Jackson and Pippen weren't there, regardless of what he was paid.


Couldn't make it out of the 2nd round in 95? Irrelevant. Jordan had been retired for a year and a half, and was out of basketball shape.

[Soothsayer]

So what exactly do you disagree with me saying? Jordan also would not play without Pippen, as you know since he said so publicly numerous times. Why didn't you post that? :eek:

:oldlol: at these MJ fans acting as if 99' was when the management-players/Jackson dispute started. Talk about misinformation and misleading younger posters! There was doubt as to whether the team would be brought back for 98' as well and MJ was on record demanding both Pippen and Jackson being retained or he would retire.



Which of those teams were missing their best player? We are talking about "supporting casts." Thanks in advance.



Yes, and Pippen's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding the clear GOAT Jordan himself, could not make it out the 2nd round in 95'! Oh knowes!

:oldlol: at how MJ fans never mention how MJ screwed the team by retiring at the last minute. The team had the worst "starting" SG in the league and still remained elite. Imagine if MJ retired over the summer and the Bulls had legit starters at all 5 positions.

Kukoc? 9/4/3 as a rookie in the playoffs in 18 minutes. Kerr? 3.5 ppg in the playoffs. :lol at acting as if 94' Kukoc and Kerr were the same guys they later became.



And your point is? Pippen had been demanding that kind of raise (to a superstar salary) for years. You make it seem as if 99' was a sea change in that regard. What changed was he became a free agent that year but the Bulls were almost broken up the previous year. We all knew it. Sports Illustrated had a "Last Stand" issue during the 98' season. It was a near run thing that the team was brought back for 98' and there was little chance it would be back in 99'.



Except that is factually incorrect. Pippen left for financial reasons, not Jordan. Jordan--per his own words--simply was not coming back if Jackson and Pippen weren't there, regardless of what he was paid.


Kerr and Kukoc in the 93-94 season played a combined 50 minutes per game--strong contributors, adding 20 ppg, 6 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 steals and half a block, and with Kerr shooting lights out.

[Soothsayer]

So what exactly do you disagree with me saying? Jordan also would not play without Pippen, as you know since he said so publicly numerous times. Why didn't you post that? :eek:

:oldlol: at these MJ fans acting as if 99' was when the management-players/Jackson dispute started. Talk about misinformation and misleading younger posters! There was doubt as to whether the team would be brought back for 98' as well and MJ was on record demanding both Pippen and Jackson being retained or he would retire.



Which of those teams were missing their best player? We are talking about "supporting casts." Thanks in advance.



Yes, and Pippen's teammates, coming off 3 rings, adding the clear GOAT Jordan himself, could not make it out the 2nd round in 95'! Oh knowes!

:oldlol: at how MJ fans never mention how MJ screwed the team by retiring at the last minute. The team had the worst "starting" SG in the league and still remained elite. Imagine if MJ retired over the summer and the Bulls had legit starters at all 5 positions.

Kukoc? 9/4/3 as a rookie in the playoffs in 18 minutes. Kerr? 3.5 ppg in the playoffs. :lol at acting as if 94' Kukoc and Kerr were the same guys they later became.



And your point is? Pippen had been demanding that kind of raise (to a superstar salary) for years. You make it seem as if 99' was a sea change in that regard. What changed was he became a free agent that year but the Bulls were almost broken up the previous year. We all knew it. Sports Illustrated had a "Last Stand" issue during the 98' season. Jackson called it the "Last Dance." It was a near run thing that the team was brought back for 98' and there was little chance it would be back in 99'.



Except that is factually incorrect. Pippen left for financial reasons, not Jordan. Jordan--per his own words--simply was not coming back if Jackson and Pippen weren't there, regardless of what he was paid.

Wrong. The reason Pippen was not staying was because management did not want to pay him. They didn't want to pay Jordan $30million again either considering he would be 36 the next season. They didn't want to continue to pay Phil either. If management had ponied up, the same team would have been there again.

[Roundball_Rock]

Irrelevant. You said that MJ's teammates were the most talented in the league and used the 94 bulls as an example.

I've never said that. What I have long said is he had the best "supporting cast" of any superstar in the 90's.


MJ's "supporting cast", after winning 3 rings, and adding both Kerr and Kukoc won 55 games and were expelled in the 2nd round. That is far from the "most talented" of the 90s.

Name "supporting casts" who could do even that in the 90's without their best player? Thanks in advance.



Couldn't make it out of the 2nd round in 95? Irrelevant. Jordan had been retired for a year and a half, and was out of basketball shape.

:lol He averaged 32/7/5 on 48% while taking 25 shots a game in 42 minutes in the 95' playoffs.


Kerr and Kukoc in the 93-94 season played a combined 50 minutes per game--strong contributors, adding 20 ppg, 6 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 steals and half a block, and with Kerr shooting lights out.

Yeah--and they disappeared in the playoffs when it counted. Again, 9/4/3 in 18 minutes from Kukoc and 3.5 ppg from Kerr in the playoffs yet the Knicks (with Ewing) still needed Hue Hollins to "win"!

Plus, Cartwright and Paxson were banged up in 94'. Cartwright played only 5 minutes in the Cleveland series. Why don't MJ fans mention this? The only key players on all cylinders on the playoffs were Pippen, Grant, and Armstrong.


The reason Pippen was not staying was because management did not want to pay him.

You failed to grasp what "financial reasons" meant.


If management had ponied up, the same team would have been there again.

For all three yes, but if they gave MJ $33 million and did not retain Jackson and Pippen we all know--even though you may say otherwise--MJ would not have come back.

Again, why is all this (diminishing MJ's teammates) necessary if the claims about MJ are accurate?

[NuggetsFan]

Personally I have Jordan as the GOAT because of combination. He has the best combination of statistics\dominance\awards\rings\skill. Usually people will use Russel over MJ for winning\Wilt over MJ because of statistics\dominance and what that proves is you have to use more than 1 player to debunk MJ's case for GOAT. Clearly when looking at the best ever you have to combine everything and when you do that MJ has the best case. 6 finals appearances and 6 FMVP's? Insane. There is always going to be a player that tops him in one area like Wilt\Kareem\Russel but IMO I don't think there's a player that has the combination.

[Roundball_Rock]

e has the best combination of statistics\dominance\awards\rings\skill. Usually people will use Russel over MJ for winning\Wilt over MJ because of statistics\dominance and what that proves is you have to use more than 1 player to debunk MJ's case for GOAT.

Kareem says hi. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3698567#post3698567

I can see one saying MJ>KAJ but the notion that any broad combination inevitably leads to concluding MJ=GOAT is a ridiculous myth. Also, Russell and Wilt have cases that revolve around one or two things but they are pretty big things. Wilt>Jordan in every area other than winning and he had the misfortune of playing in the same era as the GOAT dynasty. Russell has 11 rings in 12 healthy seasons and 13 overall. His team sucked before him and after him. They didn't win 55 games without him. They missed the playoffs after he retired. Jordan has a case for GOAT but it is not a scientific fact as some allege.

[NuggetsFan]

Kareem says hi. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3698567#post3698567

Where does Kareem have the edge?. I seriously think some haters look down apon how crazy it is that Jordan made it the finals 6 times and was the best player every single time. Like I said I value the combination but the fact of being the BEST player no argument on 6 championship teams holds alot of weight for me anyways.

Russel lacks the offensive dominance of MJ and Wilt lacks the success. See how you had to use 2 players to try and debunk the combo of Jordan? Jordan had the success and was dominent on both ends(clearly not close to Russel on defense tho).

Kareem has a case and clearly alot of other players do. I'm not saying they don't. It's all opinion when it's close like that. Just my opinion

[Soothsayer]

I've never said that. What I have long said is he had the best "supporting cast" of any superstar in the 90's.


Irrelevant. I don't believe we have another superstar who led his team to 3 rings, then retired, and had his team add 2 very good roleplayers in order to compare. Jordan's supporting cast was not the "most talented" by any stretch of the imagination. Other than Pippen, they were role players who played their roles well.


Name "supporting casts" who could do even that in the 90's without their best player? Thanks in advance.



:lol He averaged 32/7/5 on 48% while taking 25 shots a game in 42 minutes in the 95' playoffs.

Yes, Jordan, even out of basketball shape, was a phenomenal athlete and basketball player. That's why he came back when he did. Yet the fact that he was not in basketball shape affected his game, as Phil, Pip, and Jordan attested to. Stats do not equate with basketball success. Just ask LBJ.



Yeah--and they disappeared in the playoffs when it counted. Again, 9/4/3 in 18 minutes from Kukoc and 3.5 ppg from Kerr in the playoffs yet the Knicks (with Ewing) still needed Hue Hollins to "win"!

They produced 20 ppg, 6 assists, 6 rebounds, 2 steals and a block on very good combined shooting. That helped the bulls achieve the 55 wins that you attribute to Jordan's "supporting cast". Kerr and Kukoc had not been a part of Jordan's supporting cast, yet they accounted for 1/5th of the bulls points that year.

Kukoc hardly "disappeared" in the playoffs. He posted a 21.9 PER, just behind Pippen's 22.8.

Plus, Cartwright and Paxson were banged up in 94'. Cartwright played only 5 minutes in the Cleveland series. Why don't MJ fans mention this? The only key players on all cylinders on the playoffs were Pippen, Grant, and Armstrong.

Cartwright was old and banged up during the season as well, posting only a 10.1 PER, good for 12th on the team. LOL.


You failed to grasp what "financial reasons" meant.

No, I grasp quite well what "financial reasons" mean.



For all three yes, but if they gave MJ $33 million and did not retain Jackson and Pippen we all know--even though you may say otherwise--MJ would not have come back.

How do you know? Have you interviewed Jordan and asked him? For all you know, Jordan WOULD have come back had he been paid what he had been paid over the last few years. But in reality, none of those 3 wanted to come back if any of those 3 were not coming back.

Again, why is all this (diminishing MJ's teammates) necessary if the claims about MJ are accurate?

None of it is "necessary". Jordan doesn't need "defending" as I've said many times, but this sure is fun for me, because I enjoy the debate. Jordan's career resume has already convinced most people that he is GOAT or darn close.

[Soothsayer]

Kareem says hi. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3698567#post3698567

I can see one saying MJ>KAJ but the notion that any broad combination inevitably leads to concluding MJ=GOAT is a ridiculous myth. Also, Russell and Wilt have cases that revolve around one or two things but they are pretty big things. Wilt>Jordan in every area other than winning and he had the misfortune of playing in the same era as the GOAT dynasty. Russell has 11 rings in 12 healthy seasons and 13 overall. His team sucked before him and after him. They didn't win 55 games without him. They missed the playoffs after he retired. Jordan has a case for GOAT but it is not a scientific fact as some allege.

Russell was only dominant one way. Jordan dominant both ways.
Kareem and his 6 rings....with only 2 finals mvps...say hi.
Wilt and his lack of rings compmared to Jordan, and his decreased playoff performance and records say Hi.

Jordan: dominated on BOTH ends of the court, always won as the lead dog, upped his performance in the playoffs and finals, and has as nearly as many playoff records as regular season! GOAT.

[Soothsayer]

Where does Kareem have the edge?. I seriously think some haters look down apon how crazy it is that Jordan made it the finals 6 times and was the best player every single time. Like I said I value the combination but the fact of being the BEST player no argument on 6 championship teams holds alot of weight for me anyways.

Russel lacks the offensive dominance of MJ and Wilt lacks the success. See how you had to use 2 players to try and debunk the combo of Jordan? Jordan had the success and was dominent on both ends(clearly not close to Russel on defense tho).

Kareem has a case and clearly alot of other players do. I'm not saying they don't. It's all opinion when it's close like that. Just my opinion

You hit the nail on the head. It takes 3 separate players to match the combined success of Jordan. That alone shows you that he is GOAT.

[laronprofit9]

Lebron James is the equivalent of a 87-89 Michael Jordan right now.

Excellent statistical production. Top PER. Great rediculous All-Around Numbers. However, still question about him being the best since they both haven't won a championship yet at their respective points in their careers. Amazing Athleticism that gives them great numbers. They can play without getting tired, and can consistently put up great all around numbers with ease.

Kobe Bryant is the equivalent of a 96-98 Michael Jordan right now.

Puts up great, but not Amazing Stats(a.k.a. Lebron or Jordan 87-89). Athleticism has clearly declined from earlier in their careers. Can put up big games, but since they are older they have to pick and choose when to so they don't over exert themselves. However has championship experience. Clutch. Competitive. Veteran Experience. To get the job done when it counts. Both are trying to do another 3-peat.

Lebron James = 87-89 Michael Jordan
Kobe Bryant = 96-98 Michael Jordan

I doubt either of them reach Michael's true peak which 91-93 (First 3-Peat). There was no player that was more perfect. Clutch. Championship Experience. Great Stats. Everything

MJ 91-93 combined what he had in 87-89 and 96-98 together. AKA he was a mix of Lebron and Kobe right now.

[Leviathon1121]

You guys are going to give Roundball arthritis, slow it down a bit :oldlol:

[Soothsayer]

Lebron James is the equivalent of a 87-89 Michael Jordan right now.

Excellent statistical production. Top PER. Great rediculous All-Around Numbers. However, still question about him being the best since they both haven't won a championship yet at their respective points in their careers. Amazing Athleticism that gives them great numbers. They can play without getting tired, and can consistently put up great all around numbers with ease.

Kobe Bryant is the equivalent of a 96-98 Michael Jordan right now.

Puts up great, but not Amazing Stats(a.k.a. Lebron or Jordan 87-89). Athleticism has clearly declined from earlier in their careers. Can put up big games, but since they are older they have to pick and choose when to so they don't over exert themselves. However has championship experience. Clutch. Competitive. Veteran Experience. To get the job done when it counts. Both are trying to do another 3-peat.

Lebron James = 87-89 Michael Jordan
Kobe Bryant = 96-98 Michael Jordan

I doubt either of them reach Michael's true peak which 91-93 (First 3-Peat). There was no player that was more perfect. Clutch. Championship Experience. Great Stats. Everything

MJ 91-93 combined what he had in 87-89 and 96-98 together. AKA he was a mix of Lebron and Kobe right now.

Excellent post and excellent points. :applause:
Jordan nearly maintained his statistical domination, while leading his team to 3 rings 91-93. At one time, he was the best offensive and defensive player in the league. He dominated both ends. He scored nearly at will. He got others involved. But he contributed as much to his teams' success as any player ever has, and did so while never losing on the biggest stage in 6 tries, and never losing to an underdog.

Unprecented.

[AirJordan&Magic]

Russell was only dominant one way. Jordan dominant both ways.
Kareem and his 6 rings....with only 2 finals mvps...say hi.
Wilt and his lack of rings compmared to Jordan, and his decreased playoff performance and records say Hi.

Jordan: dominated on BOTH ends of the court, always won as the lead dog, upped his performance in the playoffs and finals, and has as nearly as many playoff records as regular season! GOAT.

Utfanatic whatsup bro? Lol......To be fair, though I personally have Jordan as my Goat and Kareem at 1b, Kareem was every bit as dominant & skilled on both ends as a big man, as Jordan was as a wing player.

Also, I think the finals mvp award edge should be taken into context.

Everyone knows that Kareem was the real finals mvp for the 1980 Nba finals, and he has a legit case as the 1982 finals mvp as well (though Magic was amazing).

Also Kareem was the best player in the 1984 Nba finals (the Lakers might have won had it not been for Magic's choke job) and by far the most dominating player in the 1974 finals averaging 32.6 ppg 12.1 rpg 5.4 apg on 52% shooting (Oscar Robertson had a bad to mediocre series and choked in critical moments).

Kareem was the best player on that Lakers team with Magic from 1980-1985 (Their first 3 championships).
He was their leading scorer, rebounder, leader, and their defensive anchor. The finals mvp doesnt take away from what Kareem was to that team.

[Soothsayer]

Utfanatic whatsup bro? Lol......To be fair, though I personally have Jordan as my Goat and Kareem at 1b, Kareem was every bit as dominant & skilled on both ends as a big man, as Jordan was as a wing player.

Also, I think the finals mvp award edge should be taken into context.

Everyone knows that Kareem was the real finals mvp for the 1980 Nba finals, and he has a legit case as the 1982 finals mvp as well (though Magic was amazing).

Also Kareem was the best player in the 1984 Nba finals (the Lakers might have won had it not been for Magic's choke job) and by far the most dominating player in the 1974 finals averaging 32.6 ppg 12.1 rpg 5.4 apg on 52% shooting (Oscar Robertson had a bad to mediocre series and choked in critical moments).

Kareem was the best player on that Lakers team with Magic from 1980-1985 (Their first 3 championships).
He was their leading scorer, rebounder, leader, and their defensive anchor. The finals mvp doesnt take away from what Kareem was to that team.

I feel you, and I respect Kareem immensely. I alterate between having him #2, #3, or #4, but I can't overlook the 6 titles with only 2 finals mvps. We would obviously view MJ differently had he only gotten 2 finals mvps out of 6 rings.

But you are right, Kareem dominated both ways, and has everything you would want for GOAT...save for only 2 finals mvps. IMO, you just have to factor it in when a player is only the best player on his own team for half of his rings or less. But much love to Cap!