The question was debated on espn radio a few days ago. They said Michaels Bulls in a landslide. I didn't agree. Jordan: Pippen Ho Grant Rodman Paxon Kerr Armstrong Kukoc Ron Harper LeBron: Wade Bosh Birdman Ray Allen Chalmers Mike Miller Haslam Rashard Lewis Their argument against the Heat was: Wade was not a natural #2 Bosh is barely an all-star Allen is too old (tell that to the Spurs) Mike Miller was always hurt (that guy hit like six 3's with one shoe on)
Why only list his last three rings? what about the roster for the first three? Michael Jordan Scottie Pippen B. J. Armstrong Bill Cartwright Horace Grant Stacey King John Paxson Will Perdue Scott Williams Craig Hodges Dennis Hopson Cliff Levingston Lebron had the better surrounding cast What about Hakeems 96-97' team? Hakeem Drexler Barkley Mario Elie Eddie Johnson Kevin Willis Brent Price Sam Mack Matt Booollard and the great Matt Maloney
Wade vs pippen - Old wade is probably the level of pippen Horance = current bosh I would say the rest of the cast is comparable. I would say the bulls had better defenders.
The year after Jordan first retired, his supporting cast won 55 games without him. They won 57 games with Jordan the year before.
Is that really a good argument? There were a lot of new rotational players on the 1994 team with whom Jordan never played (Kukoc, Kerr, Longley, Wennington, Meyers).
so, kukoc was pretty much just as good as bosh, but he spend his prime playing 6th man / 4th best player on the bulls. when he was a top 3 player on a team he averaged around 37mpg/18ppg/6rpg. bosh put up better numbers for a career, but he was also looked at as the #1 guy for many years, and given the green light to shoot as much as he wanted. in mia, he's #3 and averaging similar to what kukoc did around the same age and the same role at the same position. you can also make the case that pippen and wade are of similar talent levels. kerr and ray allen are similar. harper and chalmers as well. both teams have limited role playing centers. but the bulls had one more all-star... rodman. and until the heat win 72 games, i think the bulls have the better overall team.
It needs to be pointed out that the '96 Bulls won 72 games and is easily the best team ever. So it's somewhat why bother comparing lessor teMs to his Also. Grant and rodman never played together so why list then both. The first three teas did have kukoc either. And paxson and Kerr never played together. The first three tittles were easily a weaker supporting cast to Miami
PJ >>>>>>>>> Spoelstra. That's the biggest difference. The current Heat supporting cast players would look good AF in PJ's triangle. With that said the Heat have a much better supporting cast top to bottom.
Miami and it's not even remotely close. Chris Bosh was a 25pt a game scorer prior to Miami. Take him and Ray Allen, who's the best 3pt shooter in the history of the NBA, and you have 3 superstars and the best shooter possibly ever. LBJ has the best supporting cast ever
Bosh could be a lot better than he is and Ray Allen is underrated right now. I really don't think Spoelstra gets the most out of that team on the offensive end. But head to head... the Bulls blow this Miami team out of the water. Pippen on an older Wade, especially if playing with the Bulls' era NBA rules... Pippen would shut him down. Rodman would also cause problems for Bosh. Plus, Harper and Jordan could also spend some time on Wade when Kukoc was on the floor and Pippen can switch and guard bosh at any time.
That point was more or less saying if you take Jordan off they would still be good. If you take LeBron off the Heat they are getting bounced in the first round best case scenario.
A team is never going to just stay with exactly the same personnel from year to year. And each player doesn't play at the same level from year to year. Yes, the 1994 team is different than the 1993 team, but if the 1993 supporting cast with a few additions could win 55 games without Jordan, the core of that supporting cast must not be so bad, no? Out of the guys you listed, none of them were really Allstars, especially not that year. Kukoc was probably the most talented among them but he was just a rookie. Kerr, Longley, Wennington, Meyers were career role players. Besides, most of these guys also remained parts of MJ's supporting cast upon his return. And it's not hard to imagine that second run supporting cast having a 50+ win season without MJ, too. Still got Pippen, swapped out Grant for Rodman, more experienced Kukoc, Longley taking Cartwright's place, Ron Harper (a 20 ppg guy with LAC) and Kerr spelling Paxson/Armstrong.
Also. Grant and rodman never played together so why list then both. The first three teas did have kukoc either. And paxson and Kerr never played together. The first three tittles were easily a weaker supporting cast to Miami[/QUOTE] I was referring to the Bulls cumulative talent.
Do you know the stats of ron harper with the clippers? Horace grant was a great role player (as was rodman in the 2nd threepeat). Also paxson and later kerr were also great shooters In the 1.5 years jordan was away the bulls were still a great team. I am not saying the bulls had a better supporting cast. But saying it isn't close is very shortsighted and i imagine you weren't watching the nba in the 90s.
For 1993 and 1994, Pippen/Grant/Armstrong had very similar stats, so its not like any of them significantly stepped up their games. Myers/Kerr/Kukoc weren't on the 1993 team, and each averaged 24 mpg for the 1994 team. By referring to them as "a few additions" your marginalizing their contributions. Yes, Kukoc was a rookie, but he was a 25 year old rookie who was one of the best players in Europe. And who cares if the other were career role players? They can still make a difference. The Rockets 09-10 team had nothing but career role players, and we still won 42 games. Ok, without Jordan they're a 50+ win team. With Jordan, they're a 70+ win team. What's your point?
-The point is that Jordan's supporting cast was quite good. How many wins would the Miami Heat have this year if Lebron sat out the whole season? 45? 50? More? I would say that the strength of the rosters around the stars are comparable. -This is not about Jordan vs. Lebron, it's about the rest of the Bulls vs. the rest of the Heat. - Comparing regular season wins for teams like the Bulls and Heat (and the Shaq-Kobe Lakers) are a bit pointless sometimes. A lot of it just depends on how motivated each team is to rack up regular season wins as oppose to saving its strengths for the playoffs. Often older teams, especially after they've had a few exhausting runs to the titles, would opt for the latter. -25 year old Toni Kukoc had an .497 TS%, and a 100 ORtg, both are subpar. Talented guy, but he was clearly still adjusting to the NBA game. -Longley, Kerr, Myers, etc., contributed but if one team can find all of these guys in the same offseason, it's not exactly like they are difficult talent to find in the market.
But why not talk about the converse: MJ and his supporting cast won 72 games in 1996. Why can't Lebron even come close to that?
