What if the Bulls traded Jordan in 1988?

[Da_Realist]

Interesting. Is there a single person on ISH who considers Bird the GOAT? He is always in the conversation but does anyone ever place him first?

Achievements, especially winning matters in historical evaluation of sports figures. Maybe this is wrong but that is just the way it is. Why do you think every top 10 all-time NBA player has a ring? The same holds true in other sports as well. Why was A Rod winning a ring such a big deal? A Rod would still be A Rod with or without a championship. What about Elway? Past his prime Elway winning 2 rings with Terrell Davis made him a better playe? No, but 2 Super Bowl championships look a lot better than being 0-3 in the Super Bowl. Of course, the best example of this is Dan Marino. 0 rings and his case for being the GOAT QB is very weak.

I don't know about ISH, but I know many fans (not just Celtics fans) that think Larry Bird is the best player ever. Most of ISH probably never saw him play so this might be a moot question.

[Roundball_Rock]

So now MJ wouldn't have won ANY???

Not with the Clippers. I mentioned Jordan/Harper/Manning earlier. With MJ there the Clippers would never acquire a 20 ppg scoring SG like prime Harper. Jordan/Manning would have been enough???? If he got traded he probably would, but that would depend on where he got traded. What would be possible destinations for him? You would have to consider a team with a dominant scorer would not want MJ due to chemistry issues. You can't have two 30 ppg scorers on the same team. Among top 90's teams that makes Houston, Orlando, San Antonio, Phoenix, and Utah unlikely. If they had a franchise SG like Drexler or Miller would they remain loyal or go for the upgrade with MJ? Of course, the Pacers would not be the Pacers without Smits.

The only top team that could work with MJ would be the Knicks--IF Ewing was willing to accept reducing his scoring to around 20 ppg. They could pull the trigger, acquire Jordan but if Ewing was disgruntled the pairing wouldn't work as you would think he would then demand a trade.

Another intriguing possibility would be Charlotte. It was an expansion team and acquiring the local hero would be a marketing dream for them. Add in the fact that the local hero is the best player in the league and it would be the GOAT marketing opportunity. Charlotte would have two good young players in Johnson and Mourning who would be willing, in theory, to defer to MJ. They also had some good role players like Mugsy. However, Mourning and LJ clashed. Could they handle a 30 ppg superstar?

Even if Ewing went to NY or Charlotte he would have to face a Pippen/Richmond/KJ/Smits/Kukoc juggernaut (assuming Grant left anyway) just to get out the East.

The Bulls were not trading for those 3 players IN THEIR PRIMES. They were trading for them before they were relevant. What's to say they would have turned out the same?

What do you mean? KJ became great in his second season (20 ppg, 12 apg). Richmond developed on a similarly offensively stacked team with prime Mullin and Tim Hardaway. If he developed there why couldn't he do so with Pippen/KJ? Pippen scored less than Mullin and Hardaway is comparable to Johnson.

I don't know about ISH, but I know many fans (not just Celtics fans) that think Larry Bird is the best player ever. Most of ISH probably never saw him play so this might be a moot question.

Yeah, but surely many ISH'ers saw him.

You said you could see Bird as the GOAT. How? Did you ever see Mikan, Russell, Wilt, and prime Kareem play contemporaneously?

This would've been after the 1988 season, Jordan's 4th season and first MVP season. Brand was great, but he was far from a top 3 player in the league like Jordan was.

The best player in the eyes of the Bulls. The idea was to build a team. They believed that MJ would never be more than a one man show. This may have happened but fortunately Phil Jackson got MJ to buy into the team concept. The book is interesting. MJ is constantly complaining about his teammates. His teammates are constantly complaining about MJ complaining about them and hogging the ball. They'll say things like how can they step up if they never get the ball? On top of this there were players clashing with management over contracts and Jordan clashing with Krause, Jackson. At one point Reinsdorf had to meet with MJ to get him to stop criticizing Krause and his teammates. MJ himself was considering asking for a trade because he believed he could never win with the Bulls.

It was fortuitous the Bulls won in 91'. MJ thought he could never win with the Bulls (bad management, bad teammates in his eyes). The Bulls thought they could never win with MJ. If they came up short again in 91' who knows what would have happened in 92'. Would MJ have demanded a trade? What could they have gotten for him? Where would MJ have wound up?

[guy]

It is comparable. Richmond should be a HOFer but he may not get in because he played on pathetic lottery teams during his prime. Who was a better SG than him in the 90's? Obviously MJ, perhaps Drexler. Who else? He was top 3 at his position. Compare that to Allen. Where does Allen rank among 00's SG's? Kobe, Wade, and prime Carter are/were better. Roy arguably is too, but Roy came along after Allen was out of his prime.

Well the 00's SG's are better then the 90's SG's overall due to the plethora of great swingmen that came along at the time. So just cause Richmond might be the 3rd best in the 90s, while Allen is worse relative to the 00s, that doesn't mean Richmond>Allen.

Pippen=KG

No they're not. KG is better, but its close enough so I'm not going to go through another war of words with you about Pippen.

Johnson>Pierce, although KJ lacks Pierce's longevity. Johnson made 4 all-NBA second teams. Pierce has made only one.

No. Like you said, KJ lacks Pierce's longevity. Pierce is a lock for the HOF, KJ is not. No way is KJ better.

You also have to consider age. These guys would get together when they were young, not when they were all past their prime. Plus, they would have Smits and Oakley or Grant with them in the starting 5, not Perkins and Rondo. Pippen/KJ/Richmond is comparable to KG/Pierce/Allen but Pippen/Richmond/Johnson/Smits/Grant>KG/Pierce/Allen/Rondo/Perkins.

Well I did, thats why I said they could win multiple titles. I don't think the Celtics will another one, but I'll still take the 08 Celtics over any version of those hypothetical Bulls, although it would be a great and close matchup.

I don't see how it was lopsided. If anything the Bulls would be better pulling this off. Yeah, at the time dealing the best player in the league for two draft picks and a first year 9/2/6 player in KJ was lopsided on paper but look at how good Richmond, Johnson, and Smits wound up being. Given that it would be a good trade. Which lineup is stronger?

Grant
Pippen
Cartwright
Jordan
Paxson

Or

Grant
Pippen
Smits
Richmond
Johnson

Grant=Grant
Pippen=Pippen
Smits>>>Cartwright
Richmond<<Jordan
Johnson>>>Paxson

LOL @ you being so confident that they would be better off. So you're really that confident that they would've won 6 titles or more? Sorry thats a joke.

And either way, if the Bulls management would've known exactly how good Rik Smits and Mitch Richmond became, it wouldn't be as lopsided (but still lopsided). BUT THEY DIDNT. They didn't even know if those guys would be available to pick. The trade wasn't Jordan for Smits and Richmond, it was Jordan for two draft picks, where they had prospects in mind but they didn't know if they would be availabe to pick and they didn't know if those prospects would be as great as they're hoping (which is the case with about 90% of draft picks.) Like I said for the millionth time I need to read the book, but trading the reigning MVP who is only 25 years old for those very uncertain and risky assets would be considered the dumbest move ever at the time (and maybe even now if things didn't work out for the Bulls.)

[Da_Realist]

You said you could see Bird as the GOAT. How? Did you ever see Mikan, Russell, Wilt, and prime Kareem play contemporaneously?

I said I thought Bird has as much a case as anybody. How? Just watch a few of his games. He was that good.

[Cyclone112]

Pippen=KG
Johnson>Pierce

Seriously? Hopefully some Boston fans will come in here and start bashing you.

It's funny how you can't accomplish trashing MJ in your other threads with KAJ so now you resort to 20 year old unrealistic hypotheticals

[Knoe Itawl]

Boy this Roundball Rock dude is annoying. Typing long winded essays of "what if" scenarios all in an attempt to detract from Jordan. The funniest thing is that he says Jordan wouldn't have won any titles or won less titles away from Pippen as if it's FACT, which it isn't. Guess what? Jordan played on the Bulls, he got all the titles, got all the awards and that's that. I could write longwinded essays about how Kobe wouldn't have ONE title without Shaq, and without being a whiner who forced a trade, but what's the point? What if scenarios can be interesting at times, but you go on and on and on as if you're hypotheticals are facts.

TMac three + titles with prime Shaq
DWade three + titles with prime Shaq
LeBron three + titles with prime Shaq
Prime AI, 2 or more titles with prime Shaq
Kobe zero titles without whining his way to LA + Shaq
Kobe zero titles as the team leader without lopsided, ridiculous trade by Memphis

and on and on and on and on.

It must really annoy you that so many people consider Jordan the GOAT, and I've never understood that. Look at the guy's resume (oh that's right, people like you know the resume is impeccable so you have to take little shots at it by trying to nitpick things here and there). Even if someone doesn't think he's goat, which is certainly their right, only an idiot would think he has no claim to the title. Only and idiot would think media hype has ANYTHING to do with it. Media hype is Kobe Bryant getting credit for 3 Shaq dominated titles as if he was equal. Name any other players with Jordan's resume? I thought so. Therefore, even if you don't think he's GOAT, to devote so much time to trying to knock him down a peg just shows the mindstate of those that attempt to do it. At the very LEAST he has an argument for being GOAT. Jordan detractors kill me because they try to hide behind this veil of "just trying to offer a different view" or whatever but in reality the man, and his legend makes them burn slow. You'll deny it, of course, but your actions say otherwise. That's why, despite your attempts at allegedly providing "thought provoking discussion on the Jordan legend!", most of your threads are worthless.

[kshutts1]

What do you mean? KJ became great in his second season (20 ppg, 12 apg). Richmond developed on a similarly offensively stacked team with prime Mullin and Tim Hardaway. If he developed there why couldn't he do so with Pippen/KJ? Pippen scored less than Mullin and Hardaway is comparable to Johnson.

What I meant is that you can't just assume all else will stay the same. Who you play with, for, etc, all change who you are as a player (something Jordan fans and Pippen fans alike fail to realize when discussing the merits of either player). You can not just assume that you can change nearly all of the variables, and the end result remains the same. On the same token, another variable that you neglected to mention was the draft picks.. who says those are the players picked? that the Bulls get those picks/players? etc..

I can agree with you that it's likely that the players would each turn out pretty close to what they were, it is not a given, and you must allow room for error, etc.

I will say that IF the players in question turned out to be the exact same, then the Bulls would be more talented, but I am unsure they would win the same amount. Jordan's drive to win is.... pretty high, and quite contagious.

[kshutts1]

Seriously? Hopefully some Boston fans will come in here and start bashing you.

It's funny how you can't accomplish trashing MJ in your other threads with KAJ so now you resort to 20 year old unrealistic hypotheticals

Uh... I hope someone comes in to educate me, as well, as I agree about those two comparisons. The ONLY claim Pierce has over KJ is longevity, but since we're not talking about winning titles until KJ is 40... it's kinda irrelevant. When healthy, KJ was a better player than Pierce is, IMO. KJ was arguably the best PG in the league when healthy... and that's with Stockton and Isiah in the league! Pierce has never been the best SG/SF in the league.. always right around 3rd....

[Roundball_Rock]

Well the 00's SG's are better then the 90's SG's overall due to the plethora of great swingmen that came along at the time. So just cause Richmond might be the 3rd best in the 90s, while Allen is worse relative to the 00s, that doesn't mean Richmond>Allen.

You would agree that Richmond is at least comparable to Allen?

No they're not. KG is better, but its close enough so I'm not going to go through another war of words with you about Pippen.

KG probably was. When I say "=" I don't mean they are 100% the same. I just mean they are close.

No way is KJ better.

Prime KJ>Pierce. Prime KJ was a beast. Has Pierce ever even been a top 10 player? Pierce had the better career but Johnson was the better player.

I'll still take the 08 Celtics over any version of those hypothetical Bulls, although it would be a great and close matchup.

If you are talking about winning in a given year then maybe the KG/Pierce/Allen Celtics have a case but when you factor in age than Pippen/Richmond/Johnson/Smits/Grant> the Celtics big 3. The former would have a decade's window to win a ring. The Celtics had 2 years and this year may be their last real shot.

So you're really that confident that they would've won 6 titles or more?

Who would have been better than them? Remember, MJ retired in 94'. This squad wins in 94'. 95' is questionable. If they kept Oakley instead of Grant they would be favorites in 95'. If they kept Grant and he left they would be weak rebounding-wise and vulnerable. At the time Oakley was proven, Grant wasn't so it is more likely they would have kept Oak. These are 2 championships they could have won with this team that they didn't with MJ. So even if they lost in 2 of the 6 Jordan-era title years they would still reach 6.

And either way, if the Bulls management would've known exactly how good Rik Smits and Mitch Richmond became, it wouldn't be as lopsided (but still lopsided). BUT THEY DIDNT. They didn't even know if those guys would be available to pick.

Krause was very high on Smits. The Clippers had the #1 and #6 picks, and Chicago the #11. They could have had one of them with the #1. Richmond went 5th. They could have swapped the #5 and #6 in a trade to get Richmond. Them taking Smits would be easy. Richmond would take a little work. If Golden State didn't trade their pick Hersey Hawkins and Dan Majerle (who Krause also loved) would be all-star level SG's available. With Smits there would be no need to take Perdue with the #11 pick. Rod Strickland would be available as a PG at that point. So under this alternate scenario:

PF Oakley or Grant
SF Pippen
C Smits
SG Hawkins or Majerle
PG Strickland or Johnson

This team would still be a championship team good enough for multiple titles. Without Richmond, though, I don't think 4-5 or even more rings would be possible. The above team would have all-star level players at all starting positions but only one or two superstar (one if they couldn't get KJ).

trading the reigning MVP who is only 25 years old for those very uncertain and risky assets would be considered the dumbest move ever at the time

I agree with that. I was surprised when I read it. I can understand why they wanted to trade MJ but to trade him for picks would be dumb. If you were going to trade him do it for another superstar plus a role player and/or a draft pick. I.e.: Jordan for Ewing with a role player and a first round pick.

Keep in mind it was the Clippers he made the offer, not the Bulls, but the Bulls did seriously consider it.

[Roundball_Rock]

Boy this Roundball Rock dude is annoying. Typing long winded essays of "what if" scenarios all in an attempt to detract from Jordan. The funniest thing is that he says Jordan wouldn't have won any titles or won less titles away from Pippen as if it's FACT, which it isn't.

RIF: Reading Is Fundamental. I said Jordan would not have won with the Clippers. If he got traded he probably would have won a ring or two, depending on where he went.

Interesting. This is to detract from Jordan? Where were your complaints regarding the "Hakeem/Drexler/Jordan in Houston" thread (a very similar scenario based on trading a superstar and draft picks)? That was a great what if; this is a "bad" one. Was Hakeem/MJ/Drexler an attempt to detract from Pippen or even Hakeem (Hakeem=2 rings, MJ there=total domination)? Why is there so much hypocrisy from MJ fans? MJ may have benefited from one set of rules for him and another for the rest of the team on the Bulls but it is absurd to extend that special treatment vis-a-vis MJ to internet message boards.

TMac three + titles with prime Shaq
DWade three + titles with prime Shaq
LeBron three + titles with prime Shaq
Prime AI, 2 or more titles with prime Shaq
Kobe zero titles without whining his way to LA + Shaq
Kobe zero titles as the team leader without lopsided, ridiculous trade by Memphis

I agree with what you are saying, although you have to factor in timing and ag. Wade and Lebron would not be in the NBA until Shaq was past his prime and they would not yet be in theirs. Prime AI and Shaq? Multiple rings. AI was the league leader in scoring by 99'. Shaq/AI would probably win every ring from 1999-02 and maybe even beyond that if the team stayed together. 04' would be a good opportunity as would 05'. The caveat is would AI be willing to share the ball with Shaq?

Even if someone doesn't think he's goat, which is certainly their right, only an idiot would think he has no claim to the title.

Of course he has a claim to it. Don't you notice that even his biggest detractors never have him lower than 5th all-time?

Only and idiot would think media hype has ANYTHING to do with it.

That is a naive statement. Why do you think every sport's GOAT happened to be around in the past 20-25 years? The answer is they benefit from the most recent hype and benefit from people having fresher memories of them.

Name any other players with Jordan's resume?

Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Shaq, Bird, Magic, Duncan.

most of your threads are worthless.

How many Jordan threads have I posted? Second, why read worthless threads? That is idiotic, no?

I said I thought Bird has as much a case as anybody. How? Just watch a few of his games. He was that good.

How? How can you compare his case to that of Mikan, Russell, Wilt, and Kareem?

[AirJordan23]

[Blzrfn]

A Bulls team with KJ, Mitch, Smits, Oak Tree, and Pip? Interesting. That team would have won a few rings, but not the six that they won in the 90's.

As for MJ in Clipperland, I don't know if he would have wanted to stay there for too long. Sterling doesn't care about winning. He probably would have left for the Knicks as a FA, and him and Ewing would have teamed for a few rings.

[guy]

Who would have been better than them? Remember, MJ retired in 94'. This squad wins in 94'. 95' is questionable. If they kept Oakley instead of Grant they would be favorites in 95'. If they kept Grant and he left they would be weak rebounding-wise and vulnerable. At the time Oakley was proven, Grant wasn't so it is more likely they would have kept Oak. These are 2 championships they could have won with this team that they didn't with MJ. So even if they lost in 2 of the 6 Jordan-era title years they would still reach 6

Who would have been better then them? Hard to tell, but even on paper (which is all we have) they definitely wouldn't have been the clear cut favorites every single year, as opposed to the Jordan-Hakeem-Drexler trio you mentioned earlier and what the actual Bulls were in most of their title seasons. Are you forgetting that KJ was injury-prone, and this will probably be exposed even more with the Bulls having to go through the most physical teams in the league such as the Pistons and/or Knicks for possibly 6 straight postseasons (which they did for 7 straight postseasons from 88-94)? Where is the evidence that Mitch Richmond doesn't shrink in the playoffs against some of the better teams? By no fault of his own, he never played more then 2 rounds in the playoffs, and only played in 3 postseasons in his prime. Who's to say he would've been a consistent threat every year in deep playoff runs? Who's to say Rik Smits would've been as effective as the 4th option on a team as opposed to the 2nd option he was in Indiana? There's way too many variables here for players that have way too many question marks and weren't that great in the first place (in KJ's case-in certain stages of his career). To assume they would've had equal or better success is really ridiculous.

[Rake2204]

The Jordan thing is a fun hypothetical but I wonder how close it came to actually going down.

The "what-if" I always like to think about is David Robinson's scenario with the San Antonio Spurs. San Antonio selected Robinson in 1987 knowing he'd have to serve two years in the Navy before playing. Robinson also had the unique opportunity of not signing with the Spurs, waiting a year from the moment he was drafted, then signing with a team of his choice.

Now, Robinson turned around the Spurs franchise instantaneously and eventually played a hefty role in a pair of championships, but can you imagine Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, or Isiah and Joe getting a young David Robinson (24 and 12 in his rookie year) to play along their side? John Paxon, Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Horace Grant, David Robinson? That would have been something.

[A.M.G.]

Let's be real, they almost certainly would not have won any championships.