Michael Jordan 1997 Playoff Run

[BigBalla44]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.

[NBASTATMAN]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.


The only senior citizen playing out of his mind at this point is Jason kidd.. He shut down both kobe and lebron at 38 yrs young.. :applause:
THAT SHIT IS EPIC..

[Carbine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.

His mastery of his post-game and face up game is beautiful to watch.

[lefthook00]

Jesus...so f*cking good.

It's exactly how Kobe tries to play today(if Kobe had more of a quick-strike mentality) with Wade-like slashing mixed in. He is like the damn Energizer bunny.

It's funny to see him battle the defenders with his off hand.

MJ and Dr. J are the only wing players I've ever seen that could palm the ball mid-dribble and dunk it without using the other hand to secure the grip.

[lefthook00]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.

I feel like it's the other way around. Watching current Kobe Bryant is like watching a senior citizen version of 96-98 MJ.

[KenneBell]

After watching Kobe's 2010 playoff run it's pretty funny to see how similar but different their games are. Contrary to popular belief, they really aren't used in the same roles in the triangle from what I see.

[DuMa]

nice video.

[Samurai Swoosh]

After watching Kobe's 2010 playoff run it's pretty funny to see how similar but different their games are. Contrary to popular belief, they really aren't used in the same roles in the triangle from what I see.
Agreed. Similar, but very different.

Jordan attacks.

Kobe bombs people from deep.

Both are :pimp:

The thing I love about MJ's game here, he understood how to give and go, pass and cut, as another means to attack a defense.

Look at him DOGGING the hell out of Calbert Cheney and Rod Strikland. Two pretty good guards, I might add.

[Alan]

MJ and Dr. J are the only wing players I've ever seen that could palm the ball mid-dribble and dunk it without using the other hand to secure the grip.
Actually Carter is (well, mostly was) doing this too.

[necya]

Jesus...so f*cking good.

It's exactly how Kobe tries to play today(if Kobe had more of a quick-strike mentality) with Wade-like slashing mixed in. He is like the damn Energizer bunny.

It's funny to see him battle the defenders with his off hand.

MJ and Dr. J are the only wing players I've ever seen that could palm the ball mid-dribble and dunk it without using the other hand to secure the grip.

penny hardaway did it a lot too, big big hands here !

[Theoo's Daddy]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[KenneBell]

Actually Carter is (well, mostly was) doing this too.
yup. Things like that make me kind of sad that Vince didn't really maximize what he had.

[Ruutu]

watching this...just wow!

[97 bulls]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.
What you see on thi video is the greatest basketball player ever. And why I feel jordan was at his best during the second threepeat. Its clear that he was still the best athlete on the floor. So the non-sense that this version of jordan wasn't as good as any other version is nothing short of comical. He blew past defenders and got to the rim before the help was able to arrive. And in most cases, the help was mourning, mutombo, or 7'7 muresan. Look at how often he put his defender in the popcorn machine. He still was able to dunk on centers. I also feel he was a better ball-handler too. Not in a way of being spectacular, but as a form of function. And what this video doesn't show is how he was able to use and play off of the rest of the team. I just think he was the total package. I remember da-realist posting something in which jordan said he lost a few pounds in 97 in order to get back some of his quickness that he lost from lifting weights in baseball.

I think if you were to grade the different facets of basketball, jordan was oveerall at his peak at this time. I see his attributes like this

On a 1-10 scale with 10 being best

Atheleticism 9
Jumpshot 10
Awareness 10
Maturity 10
Skill 10
Jumpshot 10
Defense 8
Clutch 10

And I see 1st 3peat jordan as

Athleticism 10
Jumpshot 8
Awareness 9
Maturity 7
Skill 9
Jumpshot 8
Defense 10
Clutch 10

[andgar923]

What you see on thi video is the greatest basketball player ever. And why I feel jordan was at his best during the second threepeat. Its clear that he was still the best athlete on the floor. So the non-sense that this version of jordan wasn't as good as any other version is nothing short of comical. He blew past defenders and got to the rim before the help was able to arrive. And in most cases, the help was mourning, mutombo, or 7'7 muresan. Look at how often he put his defender in the popcorn machine. He still was able to dunk on centers. I also feel he was a better ball-handler too. Not in a way of being spectacular, but as a form of function. And what this video doesn't show is how he was able to use and play off of the rest of the team. I just think he was the total package. I remember da-realist posting something in which jordan said he lost a few pounds in 97 in order to get back some of his quickness that he lost from lifting weights in baseball.

I think if you were to grade the different facets of basketball, jordan was oveerall at his peak at this time. I see his attributes like this

On a 1-10 scale with 10 being best

Atheleticism 9
Jumpshot 10
Awareness 10
Maturity 10
Skill 10
Jumpshot 10
Defense 8
Clutch 10

And I see 1st 3peat jordan as

Athleticism 10
Jumpshot 8
Awareness 9
Maturity 7
Skill 9
Jumpshot 8
Defense 10
Clutch 10

Sounds about right.

[97 bulls]

:oldlol:

Such an idiot.

It's clear as day Jordan from '90 - '93 is vastly superior.
What did you think about my attributes list?

[97 bulls]

Sounds about right.
Wow andgar, I just knew you would attack me for not putting down all 10s.

[inclinerator]

2nd 3 peat jordan skill level was off the charts

[andgar923]

Doesn't matter because it doesn't take into account things like stamina, competition. There is no way in hell late 90's Jordan is the best version of MJ. Dude you continually say the dumbest things. '97 Bulls are the best Bulls team, George Muhresean was a "defensive beast", MJ int he late 90's was better than he was in the PRIME of his career.

Can you be more remedial?

Good points.

Although I see some of 97 Bulls' points, there are other factors to consider (like you stated).

MJ's role changed during the 2nd 3peat. He wasn't asked to carry the same load on a nightly basis. While hew as the center of their offense, he was more or less a plug in man, filling in any holes the Bulls needed to fill in. Of course, this was a result of MJ's age (to conserve his energy), and Pip's maturity as a player as well. But even then, with injuries and to be honest, a not so stellar cast, he was still asked to cary much more of a load than I'm sure Phil or MJ intended him to do.

[andgar923]

Wow andgar, I just knew you would attack me for not putting down all 10s.

I've never stated that MJ was perfect. Even in some of the lists that I've made where I ranked certain skills, they looked very similar to this.

I have however, consistently emphasized MJ's ability to maximize his talents and prevent the defense from exposing his weaknesses.

[inclinerator]

7:03 mark was insane

[97 bulls]

Doesn't matter because it doesn't take into account things like stamina, competition. There is no way in hell late 90's Jordan is the best version of MJ. Dude you continually say the dumbest things. '97 Bulls are the best Bulls team, George Muhresean was a "defensive beast", MJ int he late 90's was better than he was in the PRIME of his career.

Can you be more remedial?
I've already backed off that defensive beast statement. I admiit I took that too far. But muresan was able to alter shots using his 7'7 height.

But I stand by the rest of what I stated. I really don't remember. Time during the 2nd threepeat when I saw that jordan looked gas to the point that I could say stamina was a problem. Aside from utah. But along with denver is notrious for having thin air and thus making it touggh for incoming teams wind. I though jordan looked gassed in 92 during game 6 though. And jackson thought as much. And thus sat him down late in the 3rd.

And I don't get the competiton arugument. What was wrong with the teams the bulls played during the second 3pt? All the champions had 2 hof caliber players, a solid 3rd guy, and good role players. And they had strong records. And most of all, they were defensively sound.

[97 bulls]

Good points.

Although I see some of 97 Bulls' points, there are other factors to consider (like you stated).

MJ's role changed during the 2nd 3peat. He wasn't asked to carry the same load on a nightly basis. While hew as the center of their offense, he was more or less a plug in man, filling in any holes the Bulls needed to fill in. Of course, this was a result of MJ's age (to conserve his energy), and Pip's maturity as a player as well. But even then, with injuries and to be honest, a not so stellar cast, he was still asked to cary much more of a load than I'm sure Phil or MJ intended him to do.
Ok I was right with you until you said the cast wasn't stellar. They were stellar, 2 hofers, one of the best 6th men ever, the alltime leader in 3pt%. They just didn't play welll or were injured. And that's honestly nothing new. Plenty of all-time great teams have played bad. The difference is that the bulls could win ugly by leaning on their defense. And the pace of the nba at that time didn't allow for big numbers by alot of players.

[sekachu]

Agreed. Similar, but very different.

Jordan attacks.

Kobe bombs people from deep.

Both are :pimp:

The thing I love about MJ's game here, he understood how to give and go, pass and cut, as another means to attack a defense.

Look at him DOGGING the hell out of Calbert Cheney and Rod Strikland. Two pretty good guards, I might add.


The combination of footwork, toughness and able to read the defense that make him unstoppable. Nice video thanks

[cteach111]

i was able to watch the 1996 Playoff Run video, but the stream keeps downloading too slow on the 1997 one :( :(

[OldSchoolBBall]

7:03 mark was insane

Thought I was the only one who noticed that. He did that double-pump and adjustment on jumpers so many times in his career. Did it a minute or so after that shot again as well. Amazing concentration and body control.

[andgar923]

Ok I was right with you until you said the cast wasn't stellar. They were stellar, 2 hofers, one of the best 6th men ever, the alltime leader in 3pt%. They just didn't play welll or were injured. And that's honestly nothing new. Plenty of all-time great teams have played bad. The difference is that the bulls could win ugly by leaning on their defense. And the pace of the nba at that time didn't allow for big numbers by alot of players.

When compared to other champions, they weren't stellar.

Outside of Pip, Rodman and at times even Toni, they weren't great.

[Vragrant]

Jordan always had impeccable skills and a deadly jumpshot. Its just that he relied on those skills more in the second threepeat so it becomes magnified even more.

Like Jordan said, "You can't be an acrobat every night" or something to that effect. Its one of the reasons Jordan relied on his post game so much later on. Jordan had a post game from at least 1990.

[97 bulls]

When compared to other champions, they weren't stellar.

Outside of Pip, Rodman and at times even Toni, they weren't great.
I don't see why, they contributed just like that of any other champions lower level players. Go look at luc longleys stats for the 96 championship. Or the big shots steve kerr made during their runs. Or how jason caffey stepped in for dennis rodman and the bulls didnt miss a beat. Ron harpers ability to play good defense helped take alot of pressure of jordan and pippen. And their stats when adjusted are just as good as other champions. There reaally is no reason for you to say the bulls role player weren't as stellar as other champions.

[andgar923]

I don't see why, they contributed just like that of any other champions lower level players. Go look at luc longleys stats for the 96 championship. Or the big shots steve kerr made during their runs. Or how jason caffey stepped in for dennis rodman and the bulls didnt miss a beat. Ron harpers ability to play good defense helped take alot of pressure of jordan and pippen. And their stats when adjusted are just as good as other champions. There reaally is no reason for you to say the bulls role player weren't as stellar as other champions.

I still think that compared to other champions, the supporting cast is weaker by comparison. I might be wrong, but I'm sure stats back me up on this one.

At least in recent memory, the Lakers' squads almost always had some of the best benches in the league. The Spurs also had balanced teams, Houston had more balanced teams, etc. I might be off.

Hell... I'll take the current champs' squad >>> the Bulls'

[chazzy]

At least in recent memory, the Lakers' squads almost always had some of the best benches in the leagueNah

Hell... I'll take the current champs' squad >>> the Bulls'
Dirk's cast over 96-98 Jordan's cast?

[DuMa]

Mike's 97 run was a lot better than his 96 and obviously better than 98 run. but i wouldnt put the 97 run near his 91-93 runs. it was 2 different players.

[AlphaWolf24]

I still think that compared to other champions, the supporting cast is weaker by comparison. I might be wrong, but I'm sure stats back me up on this one.

At least in recent memory, the Lakers' squads almost always had some of the best benches in the league. The Spurs also had balanced teams, Houston had more balanced teams, etc. I might be off.

Hell... I'll take the current champs' squad >>> the Bulls'

actually "stats" prove that the 90's Bull's were one of the most stacked teams ever..

[97 bulls]

I still think that compared to other champions, the supporting cast is weaker by comparison. I might be wrong, but I'm sure stats back me up on this one.

At least in recent memory, the Lakers' squads almost always had some of the best benches in the league. The Spurs also had balanced teams, Houston had more balanced teams, etc. I might be off.

Hell... I'll take the current champs' squad >>> the Bulls'
I strongly disagree. The best way to show how strong their bench was is through how the team performed when key players went down. The fact is the bulls were essentially the same team from 94 to 98. Cartwright and paxson rarely played. They were replaced with kerr and longley. And without jordan, the bulls won 55 games as you know. Withour rodman for 30 games the bulls plugged in caffey and went on to win 69 games, and when pippen went down for half the season, the bulls still had a 23-11 record if I remember correct. If that's not depth I don't know what is.

Even statistically, if your comparing the bulls stats to the 80s champions then you must qulify them by the differences in the league. For instance, luc longley was a 10 and 6 guy as the fourth scores and in only 25 minutes of play per night. As a comparison, kareem (and understand that im not trying to imply luc longley is on the same level as jabaar), avg 17/6 in about 30 min per. In a faster paced offense.

[Da_Realist]

I feel like it's the other way around. Watching current Kobe Bryant is like watching a senior citizen version of 96-98 MJ.

My thoughts exactly

[Da_Realist]

Mike's 97 run was a lot better than his 96 and obviously better than 98 run. but i wouldnt put the 97 run near his 91-93 runs. it was 2 different players.

I think 97 is comparable all things considered, but 91-93 was clearly more dominant. I think that's the difference. It is arguable that 96-98 MJ was a "better" player, depending on your criteria (I don't agree, but it's arguable), but clearly 91-93 MJ was more dominant. THAT is inarguable.

[NugzHeat3]

I think 97 is comparable all things considered, but 91-93 was clearly more dominant. I think that's the difference. It is arguable that 96-98 MJ was a "better" player, depending on your criteria (I don't agree, but it's arguable), but clearly 91-93 MJ was more dominant. THAT is inarguable.
By better do you mean more skilled? I would agree then.

Being more skilled should be differentiated from being better, however.

In a head to head match up, 91-93 MJ would dominate the older version. 96-98 MJ wouldn't have much difficulty scoring in the post though due to being heavier and his complete mastery of the fadeaway.

[97 bulls]

By better do you mean more skilled? I would agree then.

Being more skilled should be differentiated from being better, however.

In a head to head match up, 91-93 MJ would dominate the older version. 96-98 MJ wouldn't have much difficulty scoring in the post though due to being heavier and his complete mastery of the fadeaway.
If the two were playing one on one sure the younger jordan would win. But on a basketball team, the older jordan was better. I think the problem is some of these jordan fans refuse to differentiate between the two. I loved the fact that jordan became a willing passer. I love that he trusted his teammates and had confidence in their abilities. And admonished them too. I just got the feeling that from 91-93 he really believed that he was the sole reason for the bulls success. Or better yet HAD to be the sole reason for their success. It seemed like the 96-98 version didn't need to be that deliberate offensively and allowed the game to come to him.

[catch24]

Pretty sure '91 Jordan, who averaged a whopping 11 assists in the Finals, "trusted his teammates" no differently than any of the other 90's teams.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Pretty sure '91 Jordan, who averaged a whopping 11 assists in the Finals, "trusted his teammates" no differently than any of the other 90's teams.
Thank you ... that was the point, he learned how to play selflessly by 1991 and his teammates were finally ready to step up into the spotlight. LOL @ '97 Bulls talking reckless as usual. Probably never even watched the prime version of Jordan and the Bulls. It's not like prime version of Jordan didn't have great basketball skills akin to '96 - '98 with a great equilibrium of individual dominance, athleticism, skills, and team mind set.

:facepalm

[gengiskhan]

watching this...just wow!

Exactly how I felt. His game was so smooth & complete btw 32-35 age. Its incredible.

Bullets were excellent defensively.
Hawks were very good defensively.
Heat were the best defensive team in the NBA & one of the single best defensive teams in NBA History.

MJ was just a notch above prime kobe, prime wade, young lebron. clearly. His movements, jab step, head fake, shoulder fake all these are lacking in kobe & wade.These are the little things that MJ gets so much seperation from defense despite full physical hand checking defense.

Its not just about great MJ footwork. Its about how he eluded defense if not force the defense to commit silly fouls by inviting them for 3 pt play opportunity.

MJ by 1996 had the ultimate "mastery" of the perimeter game. Inside, outside, mid range, long range, post up, low post.

this man had it all.

"uncomparable Michael Jordan" as Walt Fraizer like to describe MJ in his color commentary

[Da_Realist]

By better do you mean more skilled? I would agree then.

Being more skilled should be differentiated from being better, however.

In a head to head match up, 91-93 MJ would dominate the older version. 96-98 MJ wouldn't have much difficulty scoring in the post though due to being heavier and his complete mastery of the fadeaway.

That's part of it. When I say "better", I mean he was better able to integrate his game into the team's fabric. His post game was phenomenal from both wings. He recognized and took advantage of defensive weaknesses better. He utilized his teammate's strengths a little better and was able to pick and choose his spots. I think this version of Jordan would have an easier time playing with different types of teammates than the previous version(s).

1st 3peat Jordan was just a force of nature. Too much talent, too much drive, too much competitiveness to be the team player the 2nd 3peat Jordan was. He was like Michael Jackson during his Thriller days. Even when he sung with other stars (We Are The World, Say Say Say, State of Shock) he was that guy. He couldn't fade in the background even if he tried. Same with Jordan. His talent was just too much to perfectly integrate into a team setting like most other people. He carried the same mindset as the 2nd 3Peat Jordan (fill in the holes) but he was just able to do so much more at such a high rate of productivity and for so long he left his teammates and coaches sitting there without much to do. There wasn't much of a need for Toni Kukoc from 91-93 because John Paxson was enough. He didn't need Ron Harper's defensive prowess, Rodman's/Caffey's/Brian William's rebounding or that strong 96-98 bench on the 1st 3Peat team. Jordan, an emerging Pippen, Horace Grant and some nice parts were enough. He was capable of playing the best 5 minutes of basketball you ever saw. He had other Dream Team-ers in awe. Opposing players would ask him for his shoes while competing against him. Legends were saying he was the best they'd seen.

Jordan had to lose some of that to fit in better with his team. And he did. He was deadly in the 2nd 3Peat but the 1st 3Peat Jordan was a different player and it's really not that fair of a comparison.

[catch24]

Thank you ... that was the point, he learned how to play selflessly by 1991 and his teammates were finally ready to step up into the spotlight. LOL @ '97 Bulls talking reckless as usual. Probably never even watched the prime version of Jordan and the Bulls. It's not like prime version of Jordan didn't have great basketball skills akin to '96 - '98 with a great equilibrium of individual dominance, athleticism, skills, and team mind set.

:facepalm

Well it is '97 Bulls :oldlol:

As far as skills are concerned, circa '96-98 MJ was a slightly better jumpshooter/threat from 3PT (due to the line being shortened of course but more importantly, he took more). Mike just couldn't get around his defenders regularly like he did during the first 3-peat. Both versions were immensely skilled; one just used a different part of their skillset more than the other(s) as a result of age.

[Da_Realist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.

Damn, he was quick. I kept wondering if he sped up the video. Amazing at 34 years old :bowdown:

[97 bulls]

Pretty sure '91 Jordan, who averaged a whopping 11 assists in the Finals, "trusted his teammates" no differently than any of the other 90's teams.
But there is a difference as a form of function. The 96-98 jordan maximized every aspect of basketball. Not just drive anf kick. Like what he did in the 91 finals. So sure the 11 assists were amazing. But just look at it this way, if jordan was that type of player, why did phil jackson have to implore him to continue to get the ball to paxson who was routinely being left open? That why you can't just solely look at stats. For what ever reason, the coach had to tell jordan to pass the friggn ball. Fortunately for us he did it. And he honestly probably could've done it on his own. But why do it if you didn't have to? And just to show how far jordan had come, remember the last play of the 97 finals. Jordan knew what utah was gonna do and told kerr to be ready. Sure he wasn't quite that player that just blew past and then rose over everybody. I just think he evolved to the point that he realized he didn't need to. Which is what I think you guys are missing.

[97 bulls]

That's part of it. When I say "better", I mean he was better able to integrate his game into the team's fabric. His post game was phenomenal from both wings. He recognized and took advantage of defensive weaknesses better. He utilized his teammate's strengths a little better and was able to pick and choose his spots. I think this version of Jordan would have an easier time playing with different types of teammates than the previous version(s).

1st 3peat Jordan was just a force of nature. Too much talent, too much drive, too much competitiveness to be the team player the 2nd 3peat Jordan was. He was like Michael Jackson during his Thriller days. Even when he sung with other stars (We Are The World, Say Say Say, State of Shock) he was that guy. He couldn't fade in the background even if he tried. Same with Jordan. His talent was just too much to perfectly integrate into a team setting like most other people. He carried the same mindset as the 2nd 3Peat Jordan (fill in the holes) but he was just able to do so much more at such a high rate of productivity and for so long he left his teammates and coaches sitting there without much to do. There wasn't much of a need for Toni Kukoc from 91-93 because John Paxson was enough. He didn't need Ron Harper's defensive prowess, Rodman's/Caffey's/Brian William's rebounding or that strong 96-98 bench on the 1st 3Peat team. Jordan, an emerging Pippen, Horace Grant and some nice parts were enough. He was capable of playing the best 5 minutes of basketball you ever saw. He had other Dream Team-ers in awe. Opposing players would ask him for his shoes while competing against him. Legends were saying he was the best they'd seen.

Jordan had to lose some of that to fit in better with his team. And he did. He was deadly in the 2nd 3Peat but the 1st 3Peat Jordan was a different player and it's really not that fair of a comparison.
This is all im saying. I just don't think he had to have those super heroic nights like he did before. And the league was differnt then too. Adjusted for pace, jordans avg would be higher when compared to the 80s.

[97 bulls]

Well it is '97 Bulls :oldlol:

As far as skills are concerned, circa '96-98 MJ was a slightly better jumpshooter/threat from 3PT (due to the line being shortened of course but more importantly, he took more). Mike just couldn't get around his defenders regularly like he did during the first 3-peat. Both versions were immensely skilled; one just used a different part of their skillset more than the other(s) as a result of age.
See how hypocritical you are? What happened to "I only go by what happened, not what ifs"? See how you out context into jordans 3pt shot? Which is true. But when I tried to put scottie pippens situation into context you only want to talk definates. At least try to act unbiased.

[catch24]

See how hypocritical you are? What happened to "I only go by what happened, not what ifs"? See how you out context into jordans 3pt shot? Which is true. But when I tried to put scottie pippens situation into context you only want to talk definates. At least try to act unbiased.

That is what happened though. He "settled" because he didn't have the speed/athleticism to get by defenders he once had.

Not sure what you're talking about.

And in response to your other post - 'driving and kicking' or 'passing out of the post' (a la MJ from '96-98), it doesn't matter, it's the fact he decided to be a passer and trust his teammates. Watch here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daaTrM7kLvs) to refresh your memory. His teammates, the media, his peers, and Coach Jackson all conceded Jordan, that year, got it.

Think of it this way. You put '96-98 Jordan on any of those Bulls teams from '91-93 and they aren't winning the same number of titles. Remember, it took some of the most historic playoff and Finals Performances from peak/prime Jordan to get by the likes of NY, Cleveland, LA, PHX, and Portland. Jordan from '91-93 could walk into a weaker league (additionally weaker Bulls teams), and completely obliterate that time frame, posting higher averages (remember, hand-checking was critiqued in '93) while retaining the same number of rings, and possibly more accolades. From '91-98, he was always a willing passer - it just depended on who was around him at the time.

[97 bulls]

That is what happened though. He "settled" because he didn't have the speed/athleticism to get by defenders he once had.

Not sure what you're talking about.

And in response to your other post - 'driving and kicking' or 'passing out of the post' (a la MJ from '96-98), it doesn't matter, it's the fact he decided to be a passer and trust his teammates. Watch here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daaTrM7kLvs) to refresh your memory. His teammates, the media, his peers, and Coach Jackson all conceded Jordan, that year, got it.

Think of it this way. You put '96-98 Jordan on any of those Bulls teams from '91-93 and they aren't winning the same number of titles. Remember, it took some of the most historic playoff and Finals Performances from peak/prime Jordan to get by the likes of NY, Cleveland, LA, PHX, and Portland. Jordan from '91-93 could walk into a weaker league (additionally weaker Bulls teams), and completely obliterate that time frame, posting higher averages (remember, hand-checking was critiqued in '93) while retaining the same number of rings, and possibly more accolades. From '91-98, he was always a willing passer - it just depended on who was around him at the time.
Jordan still was impossible to stop. Did you even watch the video. Are you watching the replies? He was literrally faking guys out their jocks. Dunking on mourning and mutombo, using his strength in the post. As well as blowing by people. And I know your not trying to say defenses were better in the early part of th 90s. Cuz they weren't. And all I read from you is nonsense as to how the league was weaker. How show me. Cuz expansion doesn't make the league weak. Especially in a time in which basketball was at its pinnacle and with the infusion of european players. You see how im able to say what I feel and then show why I say it? Not like you and this nonsense about how the league is weaker. Show me how? Show me a team that won a fair amoint of game with players that weren't good. Or a team that got into the finals with a sub 500 record or a player that scored a certain amount of ppg that shouldn't have cuz they weren't that good. Show me why you say the league was weak. Don't just say it. show me how expansion hurt the leagues talent.

And the bulls were much better during the second 3pt. Let's just exclude jordan.

Pippen 96-98 > Pippen 91-93
Rodman > Grant
Kerr = Paxson
Longley = Cartwright
Kukoc > Hodges wayyyyyyyyy better
B. Williams > S. Williams
Caffey > King
Wennington = Perdue
Harper = Armstrong

[catch24]

Jordan still was impossible to stop. Did you even watch the video. Are you watching the replies? He was literrally faking guys out their jocks.

I own the DVD; of course I "watched it". Not sure you have though; completely dismiss the evidence presented via verbatim.


And I know your not trying to say defenses were better in the early part of th 90s.

The '92/93 Knicks and '93 Cavs > any defense Jordan faced during the 2nd threepeat. Get real.


Cuz expansion doesn't make the league weak.

The majority of players thought differently.


Show me how?

Kid... '91-93 Jordan would eat those Sonics and Jazz teams alive (Hornacek and Russell trying to defend a peak-version of MJ... lmao). The 96-98 Knicks just weren't as good as the early 90's versions; same with the Cavs.

Knicks '91/92/93
Pistons
Sixers
Cavaliers '92/93
Suns
Lakers
Blazers

>>>

Knicks '96
Hornets
Pacers
Heat
Magic
Jazz
Sonics

It's not even close. The competition the early Bulls saw were tougher, grittier, and better offensively than any of those from the late 90's. Educate yourself. Jordan had more help during the 2nd threepeat, but by no means was he "better". He may have been more skilled (as a shooter), may have been more more mature (obviously), but in all other aspects of the game he regressed.

I know your game (propping up the '96-98 teams because Pippen had more of a role, whereas Jordan practically dominated teams during the 1st threepeat single handedly to titles). Funny sh*t :oldlol:

[catch24]

This thread needs OSB's perspective... pronto! :lol

[Bring-Your-Js]

This thread needs OSB's perspective... pronto! :lol

Indeed.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I agree with Da Realist's post below, by and large.

Ultimately, the question of who the better player is can be answered objectively by providing each with equally talented supporting casts. And I think there's no way that '96-'98 Jordan beats '91-'93 Jordan with an equal cast in a playoff series.

Lastly, '96-'98 Jordan was not THAT much better a shooter than '91-'93 Jordan if at all. I guess there's some incremental improvement, but not leaps and bounds. Sports Illustrated was already calling MJ the best jumpshooter in the league by 1991, and he only got better in '92 and '93.


That's part of it. When I say "better", I mean he was better able to integrate his game into the team's fabric. His post game was phenomenal from both wings. He recognized and took advantage of defensive weaknesses better. He utilized his teammate's strengths a little better and was able to pick and choose his spots. I think this version of Jordan would have an easier time playing with different types of teammates than the previous version(s).

1st 3peat Jordan was just a force of nature. Too much talent, too much drive, too much competitiveness to be the team player the 2nd 3peat Jordan was. He was like Michael Jackson during his Thriller days. Even when he sung with other stars (We Are The World, Say Say Say, State of Shock) he was that guy. He couldn't fade in the background even if he tried. Same with Jordan. His talent was just too much to perfectly integrate into a team setting like most other people. He carried the same mindset as the 2nd 3Peat Jordan (fill in the holes) but he was just able to do so much more at such a high rate of productivity and for so long he left his teammates and coaches sitting there without much to do. There wasn't much of a need for Toni Kukoc from 91-93 because John Paxson was enough. He didn't need Ron Harper's defensive prowess, Rodman's/Caffey's/Brian William's rebounding or that strong 96-98 bench on the 1st 3Peat team. Jordan, an emerging Pippen, Horace Grant and some nice parts were enough. He was capable of playing the best 5 minutes of basketball you ever saw. He had other Dream Team-ers in awe. Opposing players would ask him for his shoes while competing against him. Legends were saying he was the best they'd seen.

Jordan had to lose some of that to fit in better with his team. And he did. He was deadly in the 2nd 3Peat but the 1st 3Peat Jordan was a different player and it's really not that fair of a comparison.

[97 bulls]

Lkdj
I own the DVD; of course I "watched it". Not sure you have though; completely dismiss the evidence presented via verbatim.
Im talking about the video the OP posted.


The '92/93 Knicks and '93 Cavs > any defense Jordan faced during the 2nd threepeat. Get real.



The majority of players thought differently.
Which players? Who said or what player that were playing during that time, said that the mid 90s teams were weak? And not the hating 80s players that saw the bulls destroying records on their way to championships. Its a generational thingj, the 60s player feel they were better than the 70s the 70s the 80s, the 80s/90s etc


Kid... '91-93 Jordan would eat those Sonics and Jazz teams alive (Hornacek and Russell trying to defend a peak-version of MJ... lmao). The 96-98 Knicks just weren't as good as the early 90's versions; same with the Cavs.

Knicks '91/92/93
Pistons
Sixers
Cavaliers '92/93
Suns
Lakers
Blazers

>>>

Knicks '96
Hornets
Pacers
Heat
Magic
Jazz
Sonics

It's not even close. The competition the early Bulls saw were tougher, grittier, and better offensively than any of those from the late 90's. Educate yourself. Jordan had more help during the 2nd threepeat, but by no means was he "better". He may have been more skilled (as a shooter), may have been more more mature (obviously), but in all other aspects of the game he regressed.
This I think we agree on. I just prefer 96-98 jordan, cuz im more in to fundamentals. The disagreement is whether or not he was better. To me he was. My view is that granted he wasn't the athlete he was earlier, he still was an amzing athlete. In the ops clip, he routinely had his defenders baffled and was clearly 2 steps faster than the people defending him.

I know your game (propping up the '96-98 teams because Pippen had more of a role, whereas Jordan practically dominated teams during the 1st threepeat single handedly to titles). Funny sh*t :oldlol:
And I have no game, or agenda. I pulled for all the 90s bulls hard every year. But in my opinion, you do have an agenda. Your a laker fan. You feel if you can show people that the early championship bulls werent as good as you beloved lakers, cuz all they had was jordan.

[catch24]

What those "players" said was true. Admit it.


Lkdj
And I have no game, or agenda. I pulled for all the 90s bulls hard every year. But in my opinion, you do have an agenda. Your a laker fan. You feel if you can show people that the early championship bulls werent as good as you beloved lakers, cuz all they had was jordan.

What would I benefit doing that? The '91 Lakers weren't even a team I enjoyed in contrast to the run-and-gun 80's teams.

Shaq is my favorite player of all-time. Your favorite player is Pippen; you can continue putting on a front deflecting your motive, but anyone that has a thinking brain can see what you're doing. I'm literally laughing at how hard you're trying.

[Micku]

What you see on thi video is the greatest basketball player ever. And why I feel jordan was at his best during the second threepeat.

I think if you were to grade the different facets of basketball, jordan was oveerall at his peak at this time. I see his attributes like this

On a 1-10 scale with 10 being best

Atheleticism 9
Jumpshot 10
Awareness 10
Maturity 10
Skill 10
Jumpshot 10
Defense 8
Clutch 10

And I see 1st 3peat jordan as

Athleticism 10
Jumpshot 8
Awareness 9
Maturity 7
Skill 9
Jumpshot 8
Defense 10
Clutch 10

To each his own. I actually felt that Jordan had a better jumper back in his 1st threepeat. He was skillful with the post moves in his second and used more fadeways, but Jordan was still pretty good in the post during his 1st threepeat and I thought he was a better jump shooter, especially since he was capable of doing more things to get open when he was younger. And most of his shots were jumpers, and he shot at a higher % back then in comparison to second peat Jordan.

Plus Jordan in the 1st peat was a better playmaker. He was more flashy with his handling skill and second peat Jordan was better in the post.


Not too sure about his maturity though. Depends what you mean by that I guess. Cuz Jordan was pretty rough in both threepeats I think.

[gengiskhan]

Mike's 97 run was a lot better than his 96 and obviously better than 98 run. but i wouldnt put the 97 run near his 91-93 runs. it was 2 different players.

this

'91-'93 MJ was the greatest player the game has ever seen in his peak. could do anything. no defense could contain him. His physical powers were at his peak.

'95-'98 MJ was the master of the game. knew how to use triangle offense to his advantage. Knew his limitation because of loss of peak years & loss of athleticism. Was very patient & adapted better to what defenses gave him.

'91-'93 MJ vs '95-'98 MJ would be the greatest contest ever. I still bet on '93 MJ to win it though.

[Da_Realist]

I agree with Da Realist's post below, by and large.

Ultimately, the question of who the better player is can be answered objectively by providing each with equally talented supporting casts. And I think there's no way that '96-'98 Jordan beats '91-'93 Jordan with an equal cast in a playoff series.

Lastly, '96-'98 Jordan was not THAT much better a shooter than '91-'93 Jordan if at all. I guess there's some incremental improvement, but not leaps and bounds. Sports Illustrated was already calling MJ the best jumpshooter in the league by 1991, and he only got better in '92 and '93.

I'm reading the new book on ESPN, Those Guys Have All The Fun, and here's a passage I think is relevant...

Rece Davis (Sportscaster): When people from local markets would call me and ask, "What do I need to do to improve?" I would tell them, "Don't try to be Keith (Olbermann); he's a genius. He's the artist you can't copy. If you want to watch delivery, tone, mannerisms, watch Dan (Patrick). He's a textbook."

This is how I feel about 91-93 Jordan vs 96-98 Jordan. 91-93 Jordan was the artist you can't copy. He was a genius...left hand or right hand, with or without the ball, on the wing or down low, offense or defense. Part of his genius was that he broke the rules (which pissed off a lot of the status quo). I read the same thing about Picasso. Picasso knew all the rules of painting but his genius was that he broke those rules so masterly. Anyone else break those rules and they lose the foundation of being a painter, basketball player or whatever IT is. 91-93 Jordan was able to dominate a big man's game from the wing on both sides of the ball. (In fact, moreso in a lot of cases because you couldn't keep the ball out of his hands. I saw Hakeem destroy Seattle in the playoffs (1993 Game 6) but the Sonics forced Mad Max to shoot the last shot and he missed. You couldn't have done that with Jordan.) It shouldn't have been possible to score that much and still be that efficient. It shouldn't have been possible to score that much and still play defense as well as he did. It shouldn't have been possible to lead the league in scoring and still win title after title after title. A 6'6" guard had everyone in the league scared to challenge him. You just can't replicate that.

96-98 Jordan is more like Dan Patrick. Textbook. Jordan dominated but he followed the rules more closely. His scoring went down, he allowed the offense to flow through him and he more readily allowed other players to pick up the slack. In essence, he was a better team player. He picked his spots and knew when to conserve energy. He knew when to attack, when to defer and when he sensed a big moment, he seized it. Very Bird-like, in a sense.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I'm reading the new book on ESPN, Those Guys Have All The Fun, and here's a passage I think is relevant...

Rece Davis (Sportscaster): When people from local markets would call me and ask, "What do I need to do to improve?" I would tell them, "Don't try to be Keith (Olbermann); he's a genius. He's the artist you can't copy. If you want to watch delivery, tone, mannerisms, watch Dan (Patrick). He's a textbook."

This is how I feel about 91-93 Jordan vs 96-98 Jordan. 91-93 Jordan was the artist you can't copy. He was a genius...left hand or right hand, with or without the ball, on the wing or down low, offense or defense. Part of his genius was that he broke the rules (which pissed off a lot of the status quo). I read the same thing about Picasso. Picasso knew all the rules of painting but his genius was that he broke those rules so masterly. Anyone else break those rules and they lose the foundation of being a painter, basketball player or whatever IT is. 91-93 Jordan was able to dominate a big man's game from the wing on both sides of the ball. (In fact, moreso in a lot of cases because you couldn't keep the ball out of his hands. I saw Hakeem destroy Seattle in the playoffs (1993 Game 6) but the Sonics forced Mad Max to shoot the last shot and he missed. You couldn't have done that with Jordan.) It shouldn't have been possible to score that much and still be that efficient. It shouldn't have been possible to score that much and still play defense as well as he did. It shouldn't have been possible to lead the league in scoring and still win title after title after title. A 6'6" guard had everyone in the league scared to challenge him. You just can't replicate that.

96-98 Jordan is more like Dan Patrick. Textbook. Jordan dominated but he followed the rules more closely. His scoring went down, he allowed the offense to flow through him and he more readily allowed other players to pick up the slack. In essence, he was a better team player. He picked his spots and knew when to conserve energy. He knew when to attack, when to defer and when he sensed a big moment, he seized it. Very Bird-like, in a sense.

Another great post, and great analogy. :applause:

[catch24]

I'm reading the new book on ESPN, Those Guys Have All The Fun, and here's a passage I think is relevant...

Rece Davis (Sportscaster): When people from local markets would call me and ask, "What do I need to do to improve?" I would tell them, "Don't try to be Keith (Olbermann); he's a genius. He's the artist you can't copy. If you want to watch delivery, tone, mannerisms, watch Dan (Patrick). He's a textbook."

This is how I feel about 91-93 Jordan vs 96-98 Jordan. 91-93 Jordan was the artist you can't copy. He was a genius...left hand or right hand, with or without the ball, on the wing or down low, offense or defense. Part of his genius was that he broke the rules (which pissed off a lot of the status quo). I read the same thing about Picasso. Picasso knew all the rules of painting but his genius was that he broke those rules so masterly. Anyone else break those rules and they lose the foundation of being a painter, basketball player or whatever IT is. 91-93 Jordan was able to dominate a big man's game from the wing on both sides of the ball. (In fact, moreso in a lot of cases because you couldn't keep the ball out of his hands. I saw Hakeem destroy Seattle in the playoffs (1993 Game 6) but the Sonics forced Mad Max to shoot the last shot and he missed. You couldn't have done that with Jordan.) It shouldn't have been possible to score that much and still be that efficient. It shouldn't have been possible to score that much and still play defense as well as he did. It shouldn't have been possible to lead the league in scoring and still win title after title after title. A 6'6" guard had everyone in the league scared to challenge him. You just can't replicate that.

96-98 Jordan is more like Dan Patrick. Textbook. Jordan dominated but he followed the rules more closely. His scoring went down, he allowed the offense to flow through him and he more readily allowed other players to pick up the slack. In essence, he was a better team player. He picked his spots and knew when to conserve energy. He knew when to attack, when to defer and when he sensed a big moment, he seized it. Very Bird-like, in a sense.

:cheers:

Amazing post, TJ

[Da_Realist]

Another great post, and great analogy. :applause:


:cheers:

Amazing post, TJ

Thanks. :cheers: I guess what I'm trying to say is...a talent like Michael Jordan only comes along every blue moon. I'm glad he broke the rules a bit and didn't always play the "right way" or at least the way most other successful players had to play to win. During that 3-4 year peak we saw some of the best guard play we're ever going to see because he broke the rules. Shooting over double teams, jump shots fading away from the basket (it's a bad shot unless you master it), driving to the hole challenging the interior defense, going all out on defense when he's the only real offensive threat on the team, scoring 30 points a game, developing a workout routine when everyone thought he'd lose his quickness advantage, etc all went against conventional wisdom. It was obvious he was good enough. He was making it up as he went along. Neo from The Matrix. You just have to ride that as long as you can.

The problem is that he was so good (to the Bulls, to the league and to the game of basketball) that we want another one. Now you have little copycat Picasso's breaking the rules without having the total package Jordan had. In our desire to create another Jordan, we don't realize that Jordan was an anomaly. Now every wing player wants to score 25+ points, feel the need to guard the opponents best player and always take the clutch shots at the end of the game or they "failed" or "aren't playing the way they should play". You're never going to get another Picasso. Just like in other fields, there are and will be other supremely talented basketball players but the next transcendent player won't play anything like Michael Jordan. Why? Because now the exception has become the rule. Rule = To be the best, you must play like Michael Jordan did. But as I explained to you, the next guy to grab our attention like Jordan did will know how to break the rule.

[gengiskhan]

Da Realist

NBA is now in post-modern era. Its impossible to produce another player-athlete of MJs calibre.

MJs was truly an anomaly. Even his NCAA career didnt predict what kind of monster he will develop into.

thus the 3rd pick overall after Hakeem & rightly so. But MJ goes on to beat Hakeem who himself had a damn good rookie yr for ROY honors

Remember the famous statement " a scoring leader cannot be a champ"

MJs fundamentals were off the charts thanks to dean smith & UNC program. He just cut loose right from the rookie year displaying his superathletic ability along with Magic, Bird like fundamentals.

NBA will never produce another Jordan. Its just impossible. It takes atleast 2 yrs of NCAA to understand this game & develop that court vision & Bball IQ.

Even if next true MJ is there. He'll skip NCAA & this will be his demise. & will run after quick millions he can make as an 18 yrs old rookie on a piss poor nba franchise.

[Nevaeh]

Thanks. :cheers: I guess what I'm trying to say is...a talent like Michael Jordan only comes along every blue moon. I'm glad he broke the rules a bit and didn't always play the "right way" or at least the way most other successful players had to play to win. During that 3-4 year peak we saw some of the best guard play we're ever going to see because he broke the rules. Shooting over double teams, jump shots fading away from the basket (it's a bad shot unless you master it), driving to the hole challenging the interior defense, going all out on defense when he's the only real offensive threat on the team, scoring 30 points a game, developing a workout routine when everyone thought he'd lose his quickness advantage, etc all went against conventional wisdom. It was obvious he was good enough. He was making it up as he went along. Neo from The Matrix. You just have to ride that as long as you can.

The problem is that he was so good (to the Bulls, to the league and to the game of basketball) that we want another one. Now you have little copycat Picasso's breaking the rules without having the total package Jordan had. In our desire to create another Jordan, we don't realize that Jordan was an anomaly. Now every wing player wants to score 25+ points, feel the need to guard the opponents best player and always take the clutch shots at the end of the game or they "failed" or "aren't playing the way they should play". You're never going to get another Picasso. Just like in other fields, there are and will be other supremely talented basketball players but the next transcendent player won't play anything like Michael Jordan. Why? Because now the exception has become the rule. Rule = To be the best, you must play like Michael Jordan did. But as I explained to you, the next guy to grab our attention like Jordan did will know how to break the rule.


Great Post Da Realist.

I think what made Mike special, setting aside the athletic ability and everything, is that he knew specifically where the "kill points" were during a game, meaning he knew when to go for a steal, when to lay it up, or when to go for a dunk to demoralize a team.

It's so subtle these games within the game that you sometimes might miss them. One of the things I remember Jordan's dad saying is that he always knew how to "play possum", where it would look like he wasn't doing much, but when you look up, he's already got 20 pts, 4 rebounds, a block and 2 steals before the 1st half is even finished.

Only a few players have mastered the ability of knowing when to rely on teammates and win to take over a game. Jordan was simply the best at it. Re-watch game 6 during the 4th qtr of the 93 finals. NO ONE would accuse MJ of Ball Hogging, or "forcing the issue" during that game. Had that been the case he would've forced up the game's final shot, which he didn't do.

The Picasso analogy is a very fitting one for those who were rooting for, and against MJ back in the day. As I would say during the early 90s, Jordan was just "Too Good". :oldlol:

[StarJordan]

Remember the famous statement " a scoring leader cannot be a champ"

Isn't that generally true still? In the past decade how many times has team with the scoring champ won the championship as well?

[KenneBell]

Isn't that generally true still? In the past decade how many times has team with the scoring champ won the championship as well?

Shaq was 1st in '00, 3rd in '01, 2nd in '02. Kobe was 3rd in '09 and 4th in '10. He Kobe had his '08-'10 team in '06 and '07, he might have been able to win both. Not like it matters, these guys are about winning.

[StarJordan]

Shaq was 1st in '00, 3rd in '01, 2nd in '02. Kobe was 3rd in '09 and 4th in '10. He Kobe had his '08-'10 team in '06 and '07, he might have been able to win both. Not like it matters, these guys are about winning

So the answer is only once in last 10 years?

[KenneBell]

So the answer is only once in last 10 years?
Yessir.

[Da_Realist]

But there is a difference as a form of function. The 96-98 jordan maximized every aspect of basketball. Not just drive anf kick. Like what he did in the 91 finals. So sure the 11 assists were amazing. But just look at it this way, if jordan was that type of player, why did phil jackson have to implore him to continue to get the ball to paxson who was routinely being left open? That why you can't just solely look at stats. For what ever reason, the coach had to tell jordan to pass the friggn ball. Fortunately for us he did it. And he honestly probably could've done it on his own. But why do it if you didn't have to? And just to show how far jordan had come, remember the last play of the 97 finals. Jordan knew what utah was gonna do and told kerr to be ready. Sure he wasn't quite that player that just blew past and then rose over everybody. I just think he evolved to the point that he realized he didn't need to. Which is what I think you guys are missing.

He was passing out of the post as early as 1990.

Here's a small sample from the 91 season.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlq1Vh3RjwI

[STATUTORY]

that was some :roll: defense being played in that vid


mike did his thing tho

[97 bulls]

He was passing out of the post as early as 1990.

Here's a small sample from the 91 season.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlq1Vh3RjwI
I never said he didn't pass out of the post. I said he was much better basketball player. I agree he was more dominant earlier in his career, but as a fundamental basketball player, I feel he was better in the later stages of his career. Think of prime shaq as 91-93 jordan and prime olajuwan as 96-98 jordan.

[bwink23]

If the two were playing one on one sure the younger jordan would win. But on a basketball team, the older jordan was better. I think the problem is some of these jordan fans refuse to differentiate between the two. I loved the fact that jordan became a willing passer. I love that he trusted his teammates and had confidence in their abilities. And admonished them too. I just got the feeling that from 91-93 he really believed that he was the sole reason for the bulls success. Or better yet HAD to be the sole reason for their success. It seemed like the 96-98 version didn't need to be that deliberate offensively and allowed the game to come to him.

You OBVIOUSLY never seen MJ prior to 1996...Please refrain from your ill-informed opinions of MJ. You're way the hell off.

[gengiskhan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4

Awesome video. It's like watching a senior citizen version of Kobe Bryant. Very cool story bro.

But 1997 MJ had much better hand-eye coordination, skillset offensively & defensively with & without the ball than prime peak Kobe Bryant.

think of it this way.

1997 MJ is 150%-175% of prime peak Kobe.

Obviously that Percentage decreased in 1998 MJ.

[tmacattack33]

Nice video. I forgot how much MJ used to palm the ball and use it to his advantage.

And why don't players today do it as much? Were his hands freakishly big for a perimeter player?

[bwink23]

Nice video. I forgot how much MJ used to palm the ball and use it to his advantage.

And why don't players today do it as much? Were his hands freakishly big for a perimeter player?


Lots of players can palm the ball, but you also need some silly grip strength to do what MJ did.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww2d_o0N62w

Here Jordan gets whacked on the arm and still finishes the facial dunk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxnXqaNqPms

Here as well....He had huge, strong hands.

[Vertical-24]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

That was a freakin' basketball orgasm. The poise, eloquence, scoring arsenal, Basketball IQ, and raw basketball skill of Michael Jordan is too incredible. Well past his athletic/physical prime and still easily the most dominant player in the league. Incredible.

All at 34 years old.

Classic, thanks for sharing. :applause: