lol. i'm sure michael would have taken pippen over a "dominant low post presence aka rasheed wallace" any day
I agree. But sheed is not a dominant players, but you cant say that the pistons had no low post presense at all.
Jordan was the reason why I started to watch basketball when I was 9 and I STILL BELIEVE HE'S THE GREATEST PLAYER (had to put that in caps before people think I'm riding Kobe's sack). His shooting was uncanny and still really hasn't been matched by any shooting guard for the past 10 years. BUT: 1. 1990-1991 Bulls: 7th in defense 1991-1992 Bulls: 4th in defense 1992-1993 Bulls: 7th in defense This was when they had a frontline of Cartwright, Grant and Pippen. The OP and people younger than 20 might think of this as a joke line but they were DAMN good. Don't believe me? Look up Pippen's and Grant's stats/PER during this three peat 1995-1996 Bulls: 1st in defense 1996-1997 Bulls: 4th in defense 1997-1998 Bulls: 3rd in defense Luc Longley and "some other douches" came along...like Pippen, Toni Kukoc, and Dennis Rodman? Here's something to educate the ignorant: Pippen: During this run, Pippen never had a PER lower than 20 and averaged 20/6/5 as Jordan's sidekick. Rodman: During this threepeat, he led the league in offensive rebounds two out of the 3 years. He led the league in rebounding all three years. Kukoc: The Waiter's PER during this threepeat was a ridiculous 19.3 and he did this as a sixth man most of the time. Of course I could actually step away from the stats and actually tell you how badass all three players were during the Bulls threepeat run but that would blow your mind. 2. Outside of Shaq and Olajuwon, the centers you listed and their respective teams wouldn't have been able to match up with the Bulls at all. Shaq's Magic got outdone badly because no one outside of O'Neal and (some nights) Penny showed up. Nick Anderson was still curled up in the corner sucking his thumb, crying about 4 free throws, and Dennis Scott's long range game by this time was leaving him faster than that stupidass part he had on the front of his forehead. Ewing's Knicks would rather muscle up their opponents rather than actually put the ball into the hoop. Malone....if you don't know how much Karla likes to conveniently fade in and out during the postseason, then you really need to get off the internet and read some basketball history books. Jordan's team might not have had a dominating center but his supporting cast wasn't ****e either. In fact, I would say Jordan had probably the best supporting cast in the past 20 years. He dominated the way he always does but if he didn't have a Pippen, a Grant, a Rodman, a Kerr, a Hodges, or a Paxson, Jordan wouldn't have ended up with 6 rings. The reason why many of us "veteran Rockets fans" believe that Olajuwon and co would have beaten the Bulls is because the Rockets would have matched up VERY well with Chicago, not because we feel like Houston was a superior team. If you don't believe in matchups, ask Dirk how he feels about Golden State.
Horace Grant was better at defense and rebounding then offense. If the Rockets had an elite scorer I'd take Grant over Scola any day considering Scola is a terrible defender.
scola never averaged double digits in rebounding. he was a big part of their defense down low for the first 3-peat and rodman was a big part during the 2nd 3-peat. dont be like kobe fans and underrate important players that contributed to the teas success.
Great post!! I never thought that I would ever see the day when a great post like this would be made. Repped if I could.
Somewhere along the way, this turned into a series of debates LOL. My main point in this thread was to simply point out the obvious. Jordan won his titles with no dominant inside players. Yes, I agree he had an outstanding cast who played defense. And no, I am not comparing horace grant to luis scola, although someone asked if scola averaged a double figure rebounding. He might have last season after the landry trade. If you want to take this a step further and clairfy, how many NBA dynasties (3+ champions) were accomplished without a low post presense? Hopefully that will clarify a little.
Jordan never had to compete against Robinson and Dream in the playoffs and only had to go up against Shaq twice and lost one of them. Furthermore, I feel like Malone is out of place with the other back to the basket post up players you have listed like chamberlain, pau, robinson etc. Also out of all of those players Jordan had the best supporting cast easily. Dream one a ring without a single all star to back him up and i find that to be WAY more impressive than winning without a post up presence. Not just being a homer but Dream doesn't get enough respect. Let's not forget that Dream was competing and making it to finals way before MJ was. If Ralph doesn't get hurt we might be talking about Dream and his 6 or 7 rings. It's not his fault the Rockets struggled to put other all star caliber players around him for most of his career. Dream's 93-94 ring will always be the most impressive championship for a player IMO.
Kobe is a lot easier to hate than MJ... end of story. Although I must admit I am with the group that say 'MJ is better because he did it with less and in a lot tougher era'.
What did you expect when you made a thread that pretty much had you on Jordan's lap? Your underlining intention was to derride Kobe's championships because he's played with Shaq and Gasol. No one is going to say Kobe won it all by himself because it'd be stupid to say so, even Kobe would think so. But you insinuated that Jordan won it all without a big man and "some other douches" when, just like I had pointed out, your revisionist story telling told otherwise. Hell, I could say Isaiah Thomas and the Pistons won without a DOMINANT big man either and they did it twice. There's another "exception to the rule" When you refer a player X as a "poor man's Player Y" you are referring that player X does things similar to Player Y but at a lower rate/efficiency. If you want to take this a step further and clarify, how many NBA dynasties were accomplished without having at least two All-Stars? It doesn't matter what position they play. If they were one of the, if not THE, best at their position during that championship (as Pippen could have arguably been considered during that 2nd three peat), it doesn't matter whether he's a center or not. They had who I consider to be one of the Top 3 rebounders of all time on that team. Jordan was better simply because he was a better shooter, a better defender, a better intimidator, and a better competitor. When you start using TEAM accomplishments (i.e. championships) to differentiate who's the better player, you're going to be losing grip on reality.
Jordan did not do it with less. When he left the Bulls there were 3 Bulls in the all star game that next year. The second time around he still had Pippen, arguably the greatest rebounder of all time in Dennis Rodman who was also a hell of a low post defender, and a great 6th man in Tony Kukoc
Wow, please everyone get a grip. There is too much thinking going on. Simply put, most teams win a championship with a low post big guy. There are some exceptions, but very few. All dynasties include a big guy, save for MJ and the bulls. Thats why IMO he is the best. Maybe thats what I should have started this thread with. I am not trying to emphasize or forget any other talking points, just pointing this one out.
Let me make this simpler for you. Switch Kobe and MJ. Do you think that the bulls would win 6? Or another way of saying it. Who has/had the better supporting cast? Is gasol better than pippen? was shaq better than pippen? Of course my underlining intention was to derride kobes rings. In case i didnt make it clear, I hate the lakers lol. dont take these things to seriously man, your gonna blow a gasket
So by your reasoning, Jordan is the best is because instead of winning with a dominant center, he won with a Hall of Famer at small forward, a Sixth Man of the Year small forward, and a seven-time rebounding champion power forward and 6 championship teams that never got out of the Top 10 in offense and defense...yep, winning without a dominant big man for Jordan was pretty damn hard.
Did I say I thought Kobe was a better player? Are you seriously, SERIOUSLY, comparing centers with small forwards? And are you SERIOUSLY comparing two players (kobe/gasol and kobe/shaq vs. Jordan/Pippen) without taking into consideration the rest of the their respective teams? Because if this "simpler" explanation is your way of proving Jordan is better, then I'd suggest you watch more NBA games and take notice that there's 10 players on the court and not 4. If Fisher and Horry were never Lakers, Shaq and Kobe wouldn't have as many rings as they do now. Same can be said about Jordan without his teammates. It's just if you're going to make a pretty "no ****, Sherlock" statement like "MJ is better than Kobe", at least do so comparing their individual game. My goodness. I'm trying to teach you something here, young padawan.
Kobe would get at least 4 rings with those teams and it's possible that he could have got all 6. Those Bulls teams were real good and Kobe does enough of the stuff that Jordan did to get them by.
Jordan is the better because statistically he is more superior than kobe. You said it yourself, and in case you missed it, it was up on the game last night comparing MJ and Kobe stats. He is also better because Kobe had/has a better supporting cast. And for the seventh time, I am not saying jordan didnt have help. He did. I am just saying that kobe played with a better supporting cast. Let it go already.
