I agree. Because I've had debates about the Russell/Wilt issue as well. And that debate is just about what you are referring to. So, yes. I know what you talk about. Wilt won with an "individualistic" way (2 rings), Russell won in a "team" way (11 rings). Jordan seemed to be somewhere in the middle. He dominated in a individualistic way, and on a team way (6 rings). One note. Magic had two Hofers with his team in 83-88, responsible for 3 of his rings. Worthy and Kareem. And the rest of the team weren't actually pushovers. As far as Bob Costas quote... "I believe Bob Costas said it best when he said MJ was probably the best player ever but probably the most overrated ever as well due to the media." ...I believe that the title "best player" title go and and hand with the media hype. They can't be separated. Because before Jordan, Wilt and Russell were "hyped" just as much. Even so, when talking about the "top" guys, there's some truth to the "hype." Just like Tiger.
No, I didn't. Everyone gets worse when they get older (except maybe Reggie or Karla). You were complaining about Jordan being "old" and "slowed down" in 96-98, and saying that of course he couldn't do as well as he did before. Fine, I agree. Makes sense. Then you turn around and say "And how good was Scottie Pippen without MJ? You tell me, he played for us." In a word: huh? Pippen was the exact same age when he played for us as Jordan was in 96-98. Where's the disclaimer that Pippen was "old" and "slowed down?" Double standard? I think so. "Miraculously?" You have to be joking, there's just no other explanation for this statement. Pip went from a team where he was the 2nd scoring option to a team where he was the third scoring option, so his PPG dropped by 4.6. Big freaking deal. Less PPG does not all of a sudden prove that he sucks without Jordan. That statement is just plain idiotic.
Pippen wasn't the reason that Bulls finally got over Pistons and reached another level. The reason was Phil Jackson. Jackson changed MJ's game and taught him to trust his teammates, at least in the first 3 quarters. Acutally Jackson was the only man MJ trusted and respected in the whole Bulls franchise. Without Phil Jackson, MJ would have never won a ring. Without Pippen, well....if he had a guy like Joe Durmas, Gary Payton or Drexler, he'd definitely have a couple of titles as well.
Let's talk about your first arguement. You said Jordan would have only won 2 titles without Pip, I'll give you another name: Wilt Chamberlain. The guy can average 50 PPG, get 100 points a game, lead the league in scoring 7 (YES 7) consequtive seasons. How many titles did he win relative to his talent? Then you talked about MJ not being rusty, he shot 41.1%, which is more than 9% (YES 9%) LOWER than his career average and 4% lower he's worst full season. What part of he was playing lesser competition in that year's playoffs don't understand? Do you know when's the first year the Charlotte Hornets made the playoffs? MJ was rusty that year that's why he couldn't carry them over the hurdle. Not to mention he IS getting old. When he was young, he was AIR. He can shoot (or dunk) 54% in a season. In 1996-98, he couldn't, so his FG% basically dropped every year since 1994. Let's talk more about MJ. He's the third highest scorer in NBA history. His 30.12 PPG goes on as best in history. Just how good was he? As I said, after 94, he's no longer his airness. He was doing jumpers, and still shoots over 46%. Also, as Davids already mentioned, he's won everything, which brings to moot your point that he can't win alone. As for Dream, I would gladly place him among the top 10 ever, but no he did not win alone. I'm quoting you when I say you said that Otis Thorpe was an all-star calibre player. So if according to your logic that MJ can't win anything without Rodman (that he is not a role player), then Dream didn't win without OT either. And if you say Rodman is better thatn Otis , why do you think 95 Rockets can beat 96 Bulls? Also, you argued that MJ was not old/rusty (and basically he just suck), then what happened to Dream in 1996? Why couldn't he help the Rockets make it 3peat? And that's with 2 other HoFer on his team too. Heaven forbid should you say he just sucked that season. Jordan can't win without Pip? You keep bringing up the same point. Can Dream win without OT, Kenny, MadMax and in second year, Clyde? Utah got 2 of the 50 greatest basketball players ever that looked as good playing as 40 years old as 20 somethings, how many titles did they win? You think it's THAT easy winning a title?
The guy guarding MJ for Charlotte was Hersey Hawkins, the same Hawkins who checked MJ as a Sonic. As I've said 100 times, I could care less about MJ's regular season stats in 95, his postseason stats in 95 were on par with the rest of his career which undermines and kills the rusty argument, except only in the minds of the staunchest Jordan worshippers. The competition excuse is a really weak copout. The Magic were the same dang group of Shaq, Penny, Nick, and Dscott in 95 as they were in 96. Your arguments are now getting simply desperate. How the hell does Hakeem + Otis = MJ + Rodman PLUS Pippen?????? No one in their right mind would say that Hakeem had a better supporting cast in 94 than MJ did in any of his titles or that Houston did a better job surrounding Hakeem with talent than Chicago did with MJ. -If Jordan is so unbelievably incredible, why did the Bulls win 2 less games in 94 without "his airness?" than in 93. Just answer that rather than listing out Jordan's scoring averages. It's a simple question and your silence on the matter speaks volumes. -Also, just who in the hell were the 2 other HOFers hakeem couldn't lead to the title in 96? Clyde Drexler and Sam Cassell? Do you even know who was on the Rockets in 96?
Sooo....um....Jordan wasn't that good? Hmmm. Ok...thanks. What's your point? That Jordan was SUPPOSED to lead the Bulls to the 95 Finals? Again, what don't you understand about the word "TEAM?" How about "chemistry?" Are you going to suggest that the 94/95 Rockets never had team chemistry? Do you realize how important that is?
C'mon, in 94 and 95 somebody had to come out of the western conference and it was us and lets say the bulls came out of the east; we would definately come out on top w/ a ring because we had the best overall record against the bulls. Now dont forget in 95 we had Olajuwon and Drexler, 2 real 50 greatest players of all time, and Chicago only had 1 real 50 greatest player of all time. PiPpen is a joke to be in there, just becuz he played w/ MJ! plus Hakeem was definately feelin' it in 95 w/ 27 a game, best in his career.!! top that. Drexler, i think, would have given jordan a tuff time. They were rivals. \ Olajuowon and Drexler definately had chemistry, and they both new how to handle the bulls.
O yea, i went to the rockets vs. bulls game here in houston in 97, and by the way the rockets won 106 to 88, w/o Barkley! i have it on tape
-Show me so much as 1 place where I said Jordan wasn't that good. The point is that the theory that Jordan was simply too rusty in 95 lacks merit based on his performance. The point is: Why does a team lose the God of basketball and win 2 less games the next year, esp when the Jordan lovers love to minimize pippen's contributions to the titles? Is anyone going to even attempt to answer that one? If the guy was 90-95% of the reason for that team's success, why do they win 55 games in 94 without him ever stepping on the court? The 95 Bulls team did not have the interior presence to win and thus was killed by Shaq. They had crap at PF and C that year and that is moreso the reason they lost than Jordan's "rustiness." -In any case, even if the Rockets had beaten the Bulls one of the years in the 90's, the media and Jordan lovers would have somehow put an asterisk on it and made some lame excuse. When the media idolizes a player or team so much, there's always a built-in excuse for when that team loses. -Case in point: even though the rockets beat LA 4-1 in the 86 WCF, if you go to most BBS boards on the net or read media coverage of that series, all you'll read is how much of a fluke the rockets and the sampson shot were, not that Houston dominated the entire series. The media will always tilt things to favor its favorites like the Lakers and Bulls and diminish what smaller market, less marketable stars accomplish.
Cato=Bum... That's because you are saying. "Hey, look! He scored x points ppg, in 93 and near the same in 95, thus = he should have won a championship." That's just crazy. STATS don't win championships. But you are thinking they do. The are only a measure of *measurable* actions on the court. They do not represent an end all, be all determining factor of winning a championship!!! Again, you are forgetting that being with the team, learning their tendencies and gaining chemistry is just as important as putting up good numbers individualistically. Numbers alone don't give you a lock-in to a Finals appearance or a title. That's just silly. The fact is, the Magic were just a better TEAM...TEAM!!!!! I repeat again, TEAM!!!!!!!! than the 95 Bulls. Get it? When people say that "Jordan is God." Most people are just suggesting that he was a great player! Not that he's really a "god." Some people might blindly just say that he's a "god." But ignore those fans. Take them with a grain of salt. Those "fans" might be 12 year old kids that really never saw Jordan's career. So of course they will embellish. Again, with the "god" part. Stop thinking in literal terms. "God like" is just an expression. Here's you, "If he's such a *God of basketball* then why doesn't he walk on water!" As far as Pippen...well, I'm not one of those people that claim that Pippen "sucked." Some Pippen haters do. And some Jordan lovers are fueling that thought. Pippen is in a catch-22. He's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. What that means is, he was on a team that helped win 6 titles. But at the same time he played with one of the best player in NBA history, thus he'll always be looked at as a player that was just riding the coattails of that great player. People will overlook how really good Pippen was individualistically. I mean, statistically (94 and 95) he was very good: 21.5ppg, 8rpg, 5.5apg, and 3.0spg! That's All-Star numbers if you ask me. So, this crap that Pippen "sucked" is not true. Next... Regarding the "57 wins in 93" and "55 wins in 94" issue. Listen carefully.... How many titles did the core group of players from 93-94 win? The core-group of players had won THREE rings! They were practically the same team, minus Jordan. That team, with/and without Jordan, went through trial by fire. They've been through the battles. They've won and lost together. They been in the trenches. They knew each other, had camaraderie, and chemistry. That team, with Armstrong, Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, Paxton were hungry for a 4th ring. But then Jordan "retired." What was left? A pretty good team! A very good team. But a team that lost their leader. Even then they were able to get 55 wins. That should show you how *good* that TEAM was (w/out) their leader, not how "not great" Jordan was (like you seem to be claiming). But it's the leader that gets you over the hump. They didn't have that. In 94-95, the team was in rebuilding mode. They brought in new players but were not expecting Jordan to come back. They were restructuring. In that turmoil Jordan came back with 17 games left. And he had to work with a ragged line-up. He had to work with what he got. Add the fact that the team chemistry was lacking the results was getting beat by a better TEAM: Magic. The following year the adjustments were made and they were ready. Yes. There is truth to that. Like I said, they were in rebuilding mode... They did need a triple headed Center (three man rotation) that could take fouls. They also needed someone that could replace Ho Grant. And that's what they did the next year (95-96). But, again that is not the only reason, those of which I've stated above. Chemistry was lacking. And that's only something you can gain by being around your teammates for a long period of time. Something that couldn't easily be recreated as they had with the 91-94 core group of players. They had to start from scratch and build a new chemistry with all new players except for Pippen. See, you are saying. "Hey, if Jordan was so good, he should have beat Shaq by himself!" Please!!! Players need TEAMS, Ya know!?!?! It's the difference between merely having a good season, with great stats, versus actually being able to get "over the hump" with those last second crucial shots (star players). That's why Pippen couldn't lead this team past the Knicks. He didn't have that extra push to get over the hump (Jordan). I disagree. If Jordan didn't retire, and we beat his 94 team, it would have elevated the the Rockets credentials. But, at the same time, you have to be able to stay on top, and if the Rockets failed to get to the Finals the following year, they would have been looked on as "one-hit-wonders." There's a difference between a team that wins a title here or there. And a team that is a DYNASTY. The Rockets were never a dynasty. Jordan and Phil galvanized their team into one. Thus, more fans will watch them. Yep. This is true. But there is a reason for that. In 1986, the Rockets still never won a title. They didn't have a reputation/tradition (not like the Lakers/Celtics, or even Sixers). The fans around the nation liked to watch the Lakers and Celtics go at it. The Rockets were looked at as "spoilers." They were looked at as "pesky." They were from a small market, that is true. But small market doesn't equate to = the media will never like you. The players that you have on your team determine how much clout that will have and how much attraction you will get. Hakeem was never a media hound. He never really liked to be in the lime-light. He wasn't a very good interviewer. He didn't know the English language very well and spoke in broken English. People and media didn't relate to him. He was an enigma. American wasn't ready for a "Foreigner NBA player." Not like today. Back then Magic, Worthy, Kareem, Riley, Bird, McHale and K.C. Jones all were open with the media and were very interesting to listen to. They fostered that national interest off-court, and proved it on-court. Today the Rockets have "clout." Yao Ming has brought in International attention (much more accepted today). And that creates national buzz too. But, Yao Ming, NEEDS Steve Francis. Yao is an attraction, but he too dislikes the media (like Hakeem; the humble giant). He too doesn't speak very good english. Francis brings in that "clout" and "flash" that attracts media attention. The current Rocket team has more clout than any other Rocket team. Yao, Francis, Mobley, Griffin, and Posey are all recognized as talented. And Francis is the spokesman. That's just the off-court issues. They also have to prove it on-court too. I think you forget that the NBA *IS* entertainment. I also think you are walking around with a *chip* on your shoulder about the Rockets. Let it go. The current Rockets team should prove the past wrong. We have a tradition now. And the city of Houston as become a type of "basketball" mecca, in a way. You are trying to "force" people to like the Rockets and your trying to do it by discrediting the Bulls (Jordan), Lakers, Celtics, or whomever you can think of. Wrong method.
You're kidding me right? My arguments getting desperate? OK, so the same guy covered MJ in both years. When's the last time MJ was single covered? Even if he was, let's say MJ goes off for his usual 30, Charlotte can have maybe 2 players scoring 15 points, Seattle would have 3. See the diff? Seattle have more players to make up for the damage MJ did. The Magic were the same players, but with an older and more experience Shaq. You also just killed your own argument. If MJ wasn't rusty, then why does an older (and less effective MJ) be able to lead his team over the Magic while ironically he can't when he just came back, since it was the same Magic team. MJ wasn't rusty? He shot 41.1% in the regular season. If he shot like 44%, which is still 5% below his career average. What happened in the playoffs? He elevated his game, like he always does, which is why he's so good. But if you actually watched some of his games that year other than Rockets ball, you would be able to tell he's not the same. I'm sure you think MJ just magically purposely shot lower in the regular season to prove how great he is. With the 3 HoFer on the Rockets, I was talking about 1996-97, when the Rockets had Dream, Clyde and Barkley. That's just to prove how skewed your arguments are. Since you said why can't MJ win a title if he's so good, why can't Dream win with 2 better players? That 55 win season, I don't know too many dynasties that just disappears from one season to the next. That result is somewhat surprising and I'm willing to give you that. But what about next season? Care to tell me why the Bulls only managed 47 wins? Fact is, the Bulls record would have gotten worse and worse until they rebuild. You conveniently points out that I didn't answer the 55 win question, what about my several basic questions I have asked in close to 10 posts now? 1. If MJ sucks as much as you do why do people think he's so good? 2. Why is it that the only seasons where Dream did very well were the two that MJ pulled the disappearing job? Coincidence? 3. If better players are just supposed to win the title, why can't Dream win with Clyde and Charles?
Interesting compare. I take something into consideration out of court.(Because all teammates were even in total, IMO.) 1st is volition of core player-leader of the team, especially in the finals. MJ was the God of the NBA, he had 3peat rings, he know well how to control the game and make the whole teammates as one unit. He was unconquerable at his prime. Dream has no experience in finals. 2nd is the head coach. PJ can even won another 3peat rings, what about RT? Although both are great, there is gap between PJ and RT. 3rd is the organization. Rockets supported the players and coach in all respects, while MJ and PJ felt sad about Bulls managerment. Rox player could play with full energy, how about Bulls players? It¡¯s hard to say which will win ¡®94,¡¯95 titles if MJ were not retired, but Bulls may had little advantage.
So in your warped little mind "the only 2 years Hakeem olajuwon played very well are the 2 years MJ disappeared." All this statement proves is that you are simply an idiot. Yeah, the reason Hakeem destroyed HOF centers like Ewing, Shaq, and Drob in 94-95 had nothing to with his assortment of post moves, athleticism, and will to win, but only to do with the fact that your God was playing baseball. That's brilliant logic. Yeah, Hakeem pretty much sucked as a bball player and only really played well the 2 years MJ was gone. Do you even have a brain? Do you even realize that Hakeem made the finals before God ever did, in only his 2nd year as a pro? Hakeem was past his prime in 96-97, dude was 34 years old at that point. You put him in his prime with Charles and Clyde and that team would have won several titles. Also, that team lost in part due to a Malone bearhug on Drexler and a Barkley injury in 98. Not everyone can get the Jordan rules platinum treatment from the officials. I guess you have to be God to get that. Perhaps the NBA should just disband since God is gone?
My warped little mind? Why don't you just admit you're a moron. You said Dream wasn't in his prime when he played with Clyde and Charles, yet you ignore every other fact (which you called excuses) when MJ didn't win. Oh wait he did, but you said he did it with Pip. Btw, Dream played in the league when MJ dominated in 91-93; Dream was in the league when MJ killed in 96-98, yet you somehow find no corrolation that the only 2 years Dream dominated the league is when MJ WAS OUT. Credits where it's due, I said I would gladly place Hakeem as 1 of the top 10 and he's my hero, cuz I'm a Rockets fan, but to put him on the same level is just crazy. Why wouldn't Hakeem be able to beat MJ if he's the better player. Notice I'm using your logic here, because you basically said 1 player can beat a great team. DRob and Ewing ARE just second rate centers. Are they HoFers? Absolutely, but who you know would place them on the same level as MJ, Dream, Russell, Wilt and Magic? You don't compare DRob and Ewing with MJ because MJ CAN DO MUCH MORE. In fact, just to show how flawed your logic is, you said 95 Rockets can beat 96-98 Bulls, then you tried to prove Dream is the better player than MJ, so you turned around and said MJ had the much better team. You know what, I'm even willing to give you a draw on this one, THAT DREAM = MJ, which nobody else seems to think. If so and MJ had the better team, why do you think 95 Rockets can beat 96-98 Bulls? Talking out of your ass? Btw, YOU STILL HAVEN'T ANSWERED MY 3 BASIC QUESTIONS.
Just fyi... I don't believe that. The biggest killer of champions is complacency and boredom. If Jordan didn't retire, we would have had a chance to prove it in 94. But it's not as easy as just saying we'd beat them. We'd have to prove it. We'll never know.
By the way, both of you need to stop calling each other "morons" or "dumb." It's only inflammatory, and ruins the debate.
wow that was a lot to read.. I must really be that bored at work. No one's questioning Jordan's greatness or saying that he isn't a great player. Saying he's the best EVER is an opinion... Homer or not. Comparing Jordan to past greats or Hakeem is not a direct proportion. Jordan does what he does as a SG, Hakeem, Wilt, Kareem, etc did what they did as a Center. There are two sides to an argument and as sad as it is, the main attitude towards a debate is to overly inflate one's side to the story. Jordan did have his chances to win without another star. 87/88/89 before Pippen fully developed into a star. They lost all 3 years to Detroit. If anyone ever read "The Jordan Rules, "anyone should agree that despite all of Jordan's criticisms about the book, the point made was that Jordan couldn't do it alone. So that God stuff needs to stop (before I get spammed here, let me say it ahead of time that I do believe the 95 Rockets have a good chance of being on par to the latter Bulls Championship teams) I didn't like some of the Bulls argument earlier with Thorpe/ Grant because even though they're both PF, they couldn't be more different. Jordan needed inside defense in order to create fast break opportunities. He needed to trust his teammates whether it's Pippen, Paxson, Kerr, Armstrong, Buechler, or any other minimum wage players. The one stat I really wanted to see was Jordan's assist production during the 95 playoffs. Or better yet, Bull's turnover totals that postseason. Team chemistry had a LOT to do with it, but sad to say, the Rockets those 2 championship years also had some of the best team chemistry I've ever seen. Believe it or not, they had their share of fast breaks. You have to had gotten some the way Dream blocks the shots towards his teammates. Dream dominated other centers in the same manner that Jordan dominated other SGs. Jordan and the Bulls claimed that they would've hated to play the Rockets because they dominate where the Bulls are weak. Inside defense while the Bulls play more of a man on man defense hugging the opposition SGs/ SFs/ and at times, PFs. Rodman would've had problems guarding Dream based on a few of the following reasons. Rodman guarded Malone/ Zo/ Kemp/ etc well because Rodman can bump and get into their heads. Dream brings a variety of moves into the game that doesn't always include bumping and grinding. Dream also has the height advantage and plays a sound game. Grant wouldn't hold him down well either and neither would Cartwright regardless of how many elbows he has. Both the bulls and the rockets team emphasized huge on defense. The teams would play close games and you would bet it'll come down to Jordan and Hakeem making plays for themselves and their teammates. But I wouldn't doubt it if they would take it to 7 games each year if they both make it there. Bulls never met the Rockets/ and vice versa. Jordan wouldn't let the Bulls lose. The Rockets wouldn't lose either in 95. Back to Thorpe/ Grant (I'm already regretting bringing this back up) I would somehow have to disagree that the Rockets are better off with Grant. houston plays a spacing sort of offense that pulls to the 3 point line. Having Grant playing the 18 foot jump shot would allow the (before zone defense) opponents to defend the 3 point shot easier. I won't get into that as much, but if it's too hard to understand, just draw it out and place the PF position around the top of the arc instead of down low. Hakeem has an unbelievable acknowledgement of the court and can sense the double teams coming from anywhere at the court. You double team from the Pf position and Thorpe does what he does best. Get his hands on the pass and get the easy shot / or get open with the attention shifted to Hakeem and get a nice offensive rebound and a jam. Grant would definitely fit better with the Bulls. There were speculations that Grant can run down the court faster than ANY Bull during the first 3 peat. Grant's style would work with Chicago because he won't plug up the middle and stop the penetration offense that Jordan brings from time to time. If "Effectiveness" is the term, you really can't compare the two except to what each brings to the team. OT was some sort of a motivator and an enforcer in a team where the "leader" isn't as outspoken. Grant, according to MANY sources, was a scapegoat that took the heat of many situations to keep the team together. I'll leave it at that... however, plz do NOT take one sentence of my entire post and twist the words to make your own argument as I've seen time after time already. I saw this post earlier.. about Hakeem > Longley, etc > etc , etc > etc... That really kinda made me laugh based on the idea that this is 5 on 5.. not 1 on 1 on 1 on 1 on 1 on .... whatever. Might as well compare the bench that way too... You can't really compare Horry to Rodman in the same way that you can't compare the things I said earlier. Harper in Chicago wasn't all that impressive stats wise, but it's what he brought. Houston brought a lot of clutch shooting during it's championship years. I also saw a post earlier about how teams would've done this if not for that. If the Rockets didn't get a shot from Kenny Smith in game 1 against Orlando, it might have been different. If cassell missed the 3 pointer against the Knicks , it might very well be different... Maxwell game 7... Elie game 7 kiss of death, Stockton 1997 game 6, Hakeem Tip in game 1 against Orlando, Nick Anderson missed Free Throws... now on to the Bulls... Paxson game 5 against Lakers, 2 missed shots that would've won it for Lakers in game 3 and 4.. Bulls could've been down 3-1. Paxson again game 6 against Phoenix, Kerr time after time, Jordan's layup against Phoenix in game 4, I can go on and on. These teams won when it counted... when pitted against each other, I honestly think it would've been close. well i gotta get off work now... but in all, I am just trying to say that people should take a look at ALL the facts so it wouldn't sound like everyone's talking to themselves by taking a sentence or two out of the other's words and put a whole new meaning towards it. And the name calling.. lol I won't get into it
i just wanna say that stats cannot win this argument, you can't just say that this person scored 0.5 points more or rebounded a couple more points or whatever the case may be. Winning championships comes down to one thing, how well the team executes down the stretch. Any team making it to the finals is a good team, the litmus test is how well the team executes in the 4th quarter, that's what separates dynasties from also-rans. Keeping this in mind, there is no doubt that Houston COULD have beaten the BULLS, but if the series is played out 10 times or 100 times, the rockets would definitely WIN less than the BULLS. Because the BULLS proved time and again they could execute when it counted, 6 rings, where as the rockets have a less robust record, only 2 rings. In terms of the mechanics of the matchup, hakeem would score over 40ppg for sure, but that by itself is no guarantee of victory. It would be very interesting indeed. But the question remains this, in a close game, with 2 minutes to go in the 4th quarter, scores are tied, do you go with the Jordan led bulls or the hakeem led rockets, personally i think the Bulls would win and thus would lean towards the Bulls in a series.
With 2 minutes left in the 4th quarter of a game 7 I would rather have Hakeem who would be checked by Longley, Cartwright, or Wennington, the Jordan who would be checked by Drexler, Maxwell, or Elie.
