The forgotten team: 1993 New York Knicks

[WorldWarriors]

Best defensive team of the 90's, but they were dreadful offensively - 6th worst in the NBA. And a team that inept at putting the ball in the hole was never going to win a championship. Pretty sad for Ewing that the best NY could ever give him as a 2nd option was Starks.

I always felt bad that Ewing couldn't get a ring. He was so talented.

I couldn't figure John Starks. He'd be super good one game and totally riding the short bus the next.

I remember him doing something stupid and I thought Oakley was gonna kill him dead right there on the court.

[sdot_thadon]

Best defensive team of the 90's, but they were dreadful offensively - 6th worst in the NBA. And a team that inept at putting the ball in the hole was never going to win a championship. Pretty sad for Ewing that the best NY could ever give him as a 2nd option was Starks.

Pretty much sums it up. Major roadblock for so many teams over the years. I honestly think Starks was my first time seeing a guy that should have been 3rd option or lower pose as 2nd option. Mj was close to going to NY later in his career, that would have been a crazy tough team to beat.

[3ball]

Jordan shot 40% in that series. Same % as LeBron in last seasons Finals.

Compare the difference in defense above where both players have the ball the same spot - night and day, due to spacing..

Lebron benefited from weakside spacing, which draws help defenders to the weakside, and therefore furthest away to help on strongside action.. Otoh, MJ didn't have any weakside spacing, so all defenders remained on strongside and closest to help on strongside action.

3ball knows he can't blow Jordan for that series cause Pippen played better.

MJ broke the series open in Game 4 with 54 points.

Remember, in addition to no-spacing, the NBA had legal paint-camping back then, so players like MJ couldn't penetrate anytime they wanted like players today - in this particular series, the Knicks sealed the paint.. So MJ scored 54 points in Game 4 on ALL JUMPSHOTS..

You guys think I'm bullshitting, but it's true - he dropped 54 on all jumpshots, because he knew that was the only way to have a big game.. Fortunately, he had the CAPACITY within his game to accomplish this (he was a great shooter):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoVMIZWS_-A

LeBron in last seasons Finals.

The difference is that Lebron is an unsophisticated, Shaq-type player because he relies on running people over rather than skill.. Accordingly, his basic approach was FIGURED OUT halfway through the Warriors series, exactly like he was against Dallas in 2011 (losing the 2-1 lead the same way)..

This is just like Shaq, whose stacked Magic were figured out by Houston in 1995 Finals, while his stacked Lakers were swept by Utah in 1997 and 1998, and crushed by Detroit in 2004 Finals.

Otoh, MJ is a smart player with far greater capacity to adjust, so HE was the one figuring out the other team and adjusting halfway through the series.
.

[sdot_thadon]

Compare the difference in defense above where both players have the ball the same spot - night and day, due to spacing..

Lebron benefited from weakside spacing, which draws help defenders to the weakside, and therefore furthest away to help on strongside action.. Otoh, MJ didn't have any weakside spacing, so all defenders remained on strongside and closest to help on strongside action.



MJ broke the series open in Game 4 with 54 points.

Remember, in addition to no-spacing, the NBA had legal paint-camping back then, so players like MJ couldn't penetrate anytime they wanted like players today - in this particular series, the Knicks sealed the paint.. So MJ scored 54 points in Game 4 on ALL JUMPSHOTS..

You guys think I'm bullshitting, but it's true - he dropped 54 on all jumpshots, because he knew that was the only way to have a big game.. Fortunately, he had the CAPACITY within his game to accomplish this (he was a great shooter):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoVMIZWS_-A



The difference is that Lebron is an unsophisticated, Shaq-type player because he relies on running people over rather than skill.. Accordingly, his basic approach was FIGURED OUT halfway through the Warriors series, exactly like he was against Dallas in 2011 (losing the 2-1 lead the same way)..

This is just like Shaq, whose stacked Magic were figured out by Houston in 1995 Finals, while his stacked Lakers were swept by Utah in 1997 and 1998, and crushed by Detroit in 2004 Finals.

Otoh, MJ is a smart player with far greater capacity to adjust, so HE was the one figuring out the other team and adjusting halfway through the series.
.

On the other hand, MJ was a small player who couldn't get the same buckets Lebron and Shaq could so it's a moot point....

[LAZERUSS]

The 55-27 Bulls lost a close and controversial seven game series against the 56-26 Knicks (losing game seven in NY.) And, had Grant and Pippen not missed a combined 22 games, they likely would have won 60+ games. Which would have been HUGE...since they won ALL THREE games on their home floor.

A simply amazing accomplishment by a team that was missing it's best player from the year before.

[3ball]

55-27 Bulls (in 1994)

The regular season doesn't show how good a team is - the postseason does..

Let's use Kareem as an example: the Lakers showed they were capable of winning 60 games without Kareem in 1990 and 1991.. But they weren't capable of even 1 championship, despite being capable of winning 5 with him... It's a massive decline for a team to go from 5 ring capability to no-ring capability.

MJ had an even greater impact than Kareem - at least Kareem's teams could still make the Finals without him - MJ's team couldn't even get past the 2nd Round!!!

The Bulls were a 3-peat team with MJ in 1993, but only a 2nd Round team without MJ in 1994.. The fall from 3-peat to 2nd Round is the biggest 1-season decline ever when a star leaves the team.

Of course, MJ had the GOAT impact on bad teams too - Doug Collins' 6th seeded Bulls would've been lottery without MJ in 1989, instead of ECF and 1 season away from starting a 3-peat..

No one has ever taken a team from lottery to 3-peat.. Not even Bill Russell (his Celtics were in conference finals the year before he got there).

[LAZERUSS]

The regular season doesn't show how good a team is - the postseason does..

Let's use Kareem as an example: the Lakers showed they were capable of winning 60 games without Kareem in 1990 and 1991.. But they weren't capable of even 1 championship, despite being capable of winning 5 with him... It's a massive decline for a team to go from 5 ring capability to no-ring capability.

MJ had an even greater impact than Kareem - at least Kareem's teams could still make the Finals without him - MJ's team couldn't even get past the 2nd Round!!!

The Bulls were a 3-peat team with MJ in 1993, but only a 2nd Round team without MJ in 1994.. The fall from 3-peat to 2nd Round is the biggest 1-season decline ever when a star leaves the team.

Of course, MJ had the GOAT impact on bad teams too - Doug Collins' 6th seeded Bulls would've been lottery without MJ in 1989, instead of ECF and 1 season away from starting a 3-peat..

No one has ever taken a team from lottery to 3-peat.. Not even Bill Russell (his Celtics were in conference finals the year before he got there).

Haven't read this reply before.

BTW, Kareem had been a non-factor in his last two seasons, and even with a worthless Kareem, Magic won a title, and carried the other team to the Finals.

[3ball]

MJ was a small player who couldn't get the same buckets Lebron and Shaq could so it's a moot point....

MJ scored far more buckets that Shaq and Lebron can't score, than the other way around..

But keep seeking out the exception to the rule - by doing so, you prove the existence of said rule.

In this case, the rule says MJ is the the GOAT scorer and capable of figuring out any defense - see Game 4 of 1993 ECF when he scored 54 points on all jumpshots because that was the only way to have a big game against the Knicks all-time level defense..

Only a player with the required skill capacity can do this... In this case, the required skill capacity was being a great shooter that could get 50 on all jumpshots against possibly the goat defense.. That's what was needed in 1993 to beat the prime Knicks, so that's what MJ did.

[ProfessorMurder]

92 was the better team in my opinion. I loved those teams. Gritty, rough, looked like football players.

Here's my old mix for the Knicks:

Early 90s Knicks

[LAZERUSS]

You keep harping on "side-kicks"...

well, your Kareem had a Finals of 13-4 .414, and in that same series, a game seven of 4 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 3 rebs, and 5 PFs.

And yet, Magic carried that team to a title over a team that MJ couldn't beat until they fell apart.

[3ball]

well, your Kareem had a game seven of 4 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 3 rebs, and 5 PFs.

And yet he drew the series-deciding foul on Laimbeer on the last possession of Game 7, to literally WIN the series.

Again, the Lakers weren't capable of even 1 championship without Kareem, despite being capable of winning 5 with him... It's a massive decline for a team to go from 5-ring capability to no-ring capability.

Of course, MJ had an even greater impact than Kareem - at least Kareem's 5-time champs could still make the Finals without him.. Otoh, MJ's 6-time champs couldn't even get past the 2nd Round without him!!!

[sdot_thadon]

MJ scored far more buckets that Shaq and Lebron can't score, than the other way around..

But keep seeking out the exception to the rule - by doing so, you prove the existence of said rule.

In this case, the rule says MJ is the the GOAT scorer and capable of figuring out any defense - see Game 4 of 1993 ECF when he scored 54 points on all jumpshots because that was the only way to have a big game against the Knicks all-time level defense..

Only a player with the required skill capacity can do this... In this case, the required skill capacity was being a great shooter that could get 50 on all jumpshots against possibly the goat defense.. That's what was needed in 1993 to beat the prime Knicks, so that's what MJ did.

Nah bro, nah.

The difference is that Lebron is an unsophisticated, Shaq-type player because he relies on running people over rather than skill..*

Like I said Mj couldn't play the game they way they did/do. Don't be upset. Different people have different bodies.

[LAZERUSS]

And yet he drew the series-deciding foul on Laimbeer on the last possession of Game 7, to literally WIN the series.

Again, the Lakers weren't capable of even 1 championship without Kareem, despite being capable of winning 5 with him... It's a massive decline for a team to go from 5-ring capability to no-ring capability.

Of course, MJ had an even greater impact than Kareem - at least Kareem's 5-time champs could still make the Finals without him.. Whereas, MJ's 6-time champs couldn't even get past the 2nd Round without him!!!

BETTY WHITE would have put up a better series than KAJ did in '88. It was THE worst series EVER by a GOAT. Plain-and-simple.
And if KAJ, who was imply HORRIFIC the entire series, gets credit for winning the series on ONE play...then you had better admit that Paxson won the '92 Finals.

Of course, Magic took the Lakers to records of 63-19 and then 58-24 and the Finals, without Kareem, and with a roster that would go 43-39 and then 39-43 after Magic retired.

Meanwhile, without MJ, the '94 Bulls go 55-27, and had Grant and Pippen not missed 22 games, would surely have won 60+ games...which would have given them HCA in the playoffs, and likely a title.

BUT, then MJ comes back the very next season, plays 17 games, is fully refreshed for the playoffs...and takes that same EXACT roster, sans Grant...down in the second round, to a team that would get swept by the 47-35 Rockets in the Finals.

MJ had to ADD ANOTHER HOFer, to a roster that had won 55 games without him...to win his next three Finals.

Again...MJ played with, BY FAR, the most stacked rosters in the watered-down 90's. Teams that could challenge for a title without him.

[sdot_thadon]

The regular season doesn't show how good a team is - the postseason does..

Let's use Kareem as an example: the Lakers showed they were capable of winning 60 games without Kareem in 1990 and 1991.. But they weren't capable of even 1 championship, despite being capable of winning 5 with him... It's a massive decline for a team to go from 5 ring capability to no-ring capability.

MJ had an even greater impact than Kareem - at least Kareem's teams could still make the Finals without him - MJ's team couldn't even get past the 2nd Round!!!

The Bulls were a 3-peat team with MJ in 1993, but only a 2nd Round team without MJ in 1994.. The fall from 3-peat to 2nd Round is the biggest 1-season decline ever when a star leaves the team.

Of course, MJ had the GOAT impact on bad teams too - Doug Collins' 6th seeded Bulls would've been lottery without MJ in 1989, instead of ECF and 1 season away from starting a 3-peat..

No one has ever taken a team from lottery to 3-peat.. Not even Bill Russell (his Celtics were in conference finals the year before he got there).

Wrong again bro, that distinction belongs to Russell. By far. The celtics went from 11 titles in 13 years and 12 Finals appearances in 13 years, with an 8 peat in there somewhere to missing the playoffs.
Reading is fundamental.

[3ball]

Like I said Mj couldn't play the game they way they did/do.. Different people have different bodies.

MJ ran people over people too.. At an elite level - he ran through Barkley on the series-clinching play of the 1993 Finals (seen above)

But he that's not ALL he could do.

He could score many other ways too... more ways than any player ever.