LOL thats weak. I think that was disproven when pippen went to other teams like the rockets and didn't do crap.
Did I hear you just say Drexler was broken down? He averaged 22 ppg, 5.7 rebs, 5.1 assists, and 1.8 steals per game in 94-95 with Portland and 21.4, 7.0, 4.4, and 1.77 with Houston. That's broken down?? Even till his last season, he was an 18 pt, 5 reb, 5 assist guy. Anyway, the ultimate proof of Jordan's greatness was he was great before Pippen and he was great after. With Pippen, teams still focused on Jordan. Hmm... wonder if that helped Pipsqueak's stats any? Naaa. Despite the fact the entire opposing team knew he was going to score and the fact they threw their entire team at him trying to stop him, he still beat them. Do I think Pipsqueak's contribution to the Bulls may be understated? Sure. But it's only because he had greatness playing next to him. Sorry Pip, but without Jordan you would be an underachieving clown that couldn't step it up. Jordan was the heart, the spine, and the force behind the Bulls. As for the Shaq-Kobe comparison to Jordan-Pippen. Pippen, Shaq, and Kobe are on the same playing field for the most part - Jordan is on another planet.
Ali has been voted the most recognized face in sports worldwide. To say the "only reason people even think nicely of him is that he got sick" is showing that you can't judge objectively. People worldwide respected him and admired him. I remember when I went overseas the first time as a kid, nobody knew my heros (Earl Campbell, Bum Phillips, Calvin Murphy, etc.) except for two : Bruce Lee and Mohammed Ali. Back then this was a village of people I talked to that didn't even have running water, but they knew Bruce and they knew Ali. lol. Leon Spinks? lol. Yeah, ok. I loved Ali the person and the fighter. He stood up for what he believed in and gave up a lot for what he believed in. It takes a lot for someone that famous to take a stand like that. As for Ali vs. Jordan, Ali was the greater figure simply because he did it on an athletic and social level. One of the knocks against Jordan has always been he never used the acclaim and power he had for much in the way of humanitarian or social efforts. Whether or not this is true, I don't know, but then I also don't think it matters. He is what he is first and foremost - one of the greatest basketball players. It just so happens he may not have used that tool for much other than winning rings and endorsements (again, who knows?).
People bash Jordan because: *of his "treatment" by the refs/NBA/Stern/etc *he had the best sidekick in NBA history *the NBA/Stern helped turned him into an American Icon are the same people 11-12 years ago that were awestruck by his play. Some of have been reading too many articles that makes you forget about the way he played. Sure he was mostly flashiness in his first couple of years in the NBA, but you cannot tell me that his shooting touch was fabricated. I don't get why, lately it seems, people keep dogging on the guy like he's Kobe. Dr. of Dunk brought up some valid points..even better than the ones that the writer of the article brought up. Heck, I don't know what his main purpose for writing that article was. Was he trying to prove that MJ isn't the greatest? If so, he failed. Was he trying to prove SOMEONE ELSE was better than Jordan? Failed again. Bringing up HIS OWN OPINION that he's a 'basketball historian' just because he's been in contact with an NBA great don't hold that much water. I bet if I was in contact with Kenny Smith or Chucky Brown or Sam Cassell, they, too, would say the greatest player they ever played with was Hakeem (i.e. there's biasness everywhere).
I know Drexler was still good... look at my freakin' username. I love the guy. But Drexler of 1995 was NOT as good as the Pippen of Chicago's title years. Jordan helped Pippen's stats? Then how come Pippen had one of the best statistical seasons EVER, for ANY player, when Jordan was gone? Jordan was "great before Pippen and great after?" Let's see... he rode Worthy's coattails freshman year in college. Didn't go anywhere in the tournament after that. He compiled a 2-9 playoff record before Pippen arrived. Then after Pippen, he twice failed to make the playoffs in one of the weakest conferences of all time (and yes, I admit he was waaaay past his prime). Where's this greatness before and after Pippen you speak of? I'm not saying Pippen did great without Jordan either, but he got farther in the playoffs with the Bulls and the Blazers than Jordan ever did by himself. And, for anyone who has forgotten, I'm merely trying to point out how dependent on Pippen Jordan was for those titles. I still think Jordan is probably a top-10 player all-time, but I just don't think the worship of this guy should be so widespread.
I know we've had this discussion before. Jordan needed Pippen to provide some good defensive play and score some points. Russell, due to his good-but-not-great offensive ability, usually needed three teammates to put up MORE points than him in a season. Don't really see how you can say Jordan needed more support.
Actually, I don't think he was saying Jordan wasn't the greatest; his point was if you say Jordan is the greatest, that is just an opinion, not a provable fact. The writer even says that Jordan may have been the greatest, but something like that is hard to quantify. The article is more about the fallacy of people stating an opinion as fact, rather than truly trying to rank Jordan's place among the basketball legends.
Ok, so we've gone from "broken down" to "good" ... that's quite a leap. Look at Pipsqueak's stats throughout his career. That stat line that I put for Drexler for that year was arguably better than any statline Pipsqueak put up that year or after. And short of possibly rebounding, was better than any Pipsqueak put up prior. You are underrating Drexler's value and skills. He was underrated because of Jordan. Drexler was the 2nd best 2-guard that hardly anybody ever heard from and his career did not crater during the championship years, and the numbers bear this out. He wasn't broken down and he wasn't good, he was damn good on a team with a great player. Just like Pippen was damn good on a team with one of the greatest of all time. That's like me asking you why the year before Pippen came to the Bulls, Jordan put up 37 points, 5 rebs, 4.6 assists, and 2.88 steals per game. Was he just excited that Pippen may be on his team the following year? Oh please, try to keep it in the NBA frame of reference. I mean, how far back do you want to go? "Jordan must completely suck - he couldn't make his high school team". Also, have you ever noticed how many players from systems like NC are playing within the system as opposed to trying to excel individually? Why do Duke players do so well in college, but tend to stink in the pros? So you're comparing an elder Pippen with a young Jordan still trying to find his niche? I'll leave the "after Pippen" comment unscathed since you admitted the guy was way past his prime by that time. If you equate greatness to simply playoffs and championships, then you can dismiss a lot of Hakeem's career, Barkley's career, Ewing's career, etc. If you don't think putting up 37, 5, and 5 is greatness, I don't know what to say. He was the only guy on the team for the most part, defenses keyed on him, and they came nowhere close to stopping him. If you don't think one of the legends of the game (Larry Bird) calling him "God disguised as Michael Jordan" is greatness, you don't get it. If you don't think one of the 5 or so best players ever to play the game (Magic Johnson) saying he was the best speaks volumes, then you'll never be convinced. Not as convincing, but Iverson and Barkley have said similar things. None of them ever interjected their statements with a "but if it hadn't been for Pippen...". Why? Because Jordan was a great player with or without Pippen. Could he win titles by himself without Pippen? Probably not, although it's definitely not out of the question since he matured so much as he got older, but to deny his greatness as one of the 2 or 3 greatest of all time is asinine.
You only put Jordan in the top 10? If you don't put the guy at #1, at least you should have him at #2 or 3 to even be considered sane. Based on some of the things you've said, don't take this the wrong way but I honestly think you're either crazy or just messing with us. If you want, i'll let you borrow my Jordan DVD's watch them all and then come back and perhaps your opinion will have changed?
I had this debate in another thread. Ali, came along at a perfect time to change the world. Civil Rights, Vietnam, there were a lot of issues to speak on in his day. Just like this article tries to make discredit some of Jordan's greatness by timing, I could say the same thing about Ali. O.J. Simpson had a legacy opposite of Ali's just because he tried to "get along". In other words, just being himself created a legacy because he is known as the first black athlete truly accepted by white americans. Its all about timing. That's part of greatness.
I don't think they're using Magic's word as bond or as an etched-in-stone type of deal but rather a litmus test on Jordan's greatness. Magic himself is easily one of the top 10 players ever IMO and if he and Bird can come up with the same conclusions, then of course people will take notice. Wasn't this the same year that Pippen sat himself out because Phil drew up a play for Kukoc instead? He compiled a 2-9 playoff record before Pippen arrived. I think Phil Jackson and Tex Winter had a bit more to do w/ getting Jordan past the Pistons than Pippen did Then after Pippen, he twice failed to make the playoffs in one of the weakest conferences of all time (and yes, I admit he was waaaay past his prime). Where's this greatness before and after Pippen you speak of? I'm not saying Pippen did great without Jordan either, but he got farther in the playoffs with the Bulls and the Blazers than Jordan ever did by himself. You basically just killed that whole attempt at making a point. You admit that he's "waaaay past his prime" and yet you're asking us where was his greatness? Are you talking about the Pre-Pippen Jordan that averaged 28 points as a rookie and 37 a year before Pippen arrived or are you talking about the Post-Pippen Jordan that came back, at the age of 38, and averaged 23/5/5? And, for anyone who has forgotten, I'm merely trying to point out how dependent on Pippen Jordan was for those titles. I still think Jordan is probably a top-10 player all-time, but I just don't think the worship of this guy should be so widespread You think, if Pippen wasn't trade to the Bulls and had stayed on the Seattle Supersonics, he would have been just as good as he was with Jordan? The Triangle Offense, the whole Chicago Bulls team, was built around Jordan and Pippen. And even if you don't think he's the GOAT, there's no 'probably' that he's one of the top 10 players of all time. He just is.
Besides Pippen, who would you consider a great player that Jordan won championships with? Do you remember what an uncontrollable personality Rodman was before Jordan?
This is what I pointed out earlier. Jordan's leadership forced his teammates to play better. Only MJ's force of will could have gotten Rodman to tone it down enough for 3 more championships. IMO, it this is intangible, more than stats or number of total championships, that separates MJ from the other great players.
How's that? A broken-down Drexler is "good." More than good, in fact. Where did I say otherwise? I was only making the point that Hakeem was pretty much the #1, #2, and #3 reason we won both those titles. Yeah, Drexler played out of his mind a lot of the time and singlehandedly saved us against Utah, but Hakeem had just won a title the year prior with no second star at all. You're never gonna get me to believe Drexler made as big an impact on the Rockets as Pippen made on the Bulls. I hate what Pippen did to the Rockets, and I love Drexler to death, but that's still what I think. I only threw the college reference in there because I know about five different people would've come back at me and said "but he won without Pippen in college" if I didn't. I know we're talking about the NBA; don't pay it any mind if you don't want to. Here's where the definition of "greatness" makes things difficult. From what I could see, we were talking about "greatness" in terms of winning. Jordan never even got out of the first round without Pippen. Ever. Greatness in terms of individual play? Yes, 37 points is greatness. But Pippen's stats in 1995 are some of the best for any player ever. That was also "greatness." So how does 37 points prove Jordan is the best ever, while Pippen's similarly astounding play proves nothing? Why? Pippen then was something like Kirilenko is today, except on roids, and that's scary. ...and that bolded bit is pretty much all I've been trying to say the whole time. My points are still these: Pippen is never given enough credit, and Jordan is not one of the top 3 greatest ever beyond doubt. This is exactly what that article was about. "Man, you must be crazy if you don't think Jordan is top 3." Give me a break. Personally, off the top of my head, I'd rather have Wilt, Oscar, Bird, Magic, and Hakeem over MJ. A few others are debatable for me, like Russell or Kareem. The funny thing about this is that if it were Jordan, people would've said it was his "competitive fire" or something like that, and praised him even more. Fine, but I don't. As I already said to DoD, sure his stats without Pippen were great. But Pippen's stats without Jordan were great, too. Pippen is one of two players to lead his team in all five statistical categories for a season. Jordan certainly was never able to do that. And through all this, neither one of them won anything without the other. So what's your point? Yep. Or at least damn close. I think Jordan's top 10 all time. But since there is no set criteria for "greatness" (hence many misunderstandings in this conversation), there's no "just is" either.
