Michael Jordan 86-90 vs 95-98?

[keepinitreal]

Do you guys think Michael Jordan was better between 1986-1990 or 1995-1998?

I didn't get to see much of MJ back in the 1980s (too young), but I would guess (just from a couple of games, stats, and highlights) that he was better at that point in time.

What's interesting to me is that people will mostly just use his championships from 1996-1998 (and 1991-1993) as "evidence" to show how great he is, and not even mention his greatness from the 80s... while I'm the kind of person who would rather point to the late 80s than late 90s if I was going to talk about how great he was of a player

[HighFlyer23]

86-90 and its not even close

[Indian guy]

I would still take 2nd 3peat MJ, despite the gap in numbers. More skilled, more ability to take over on command, more equipped at getting his numbers without alienating teammates, better game manager(knowing when to attack and when to facilitate) and the intangibles one gains through years of experience. If you give 86-90 and 95-98 similar casts, I'd say 95-98 MJ would have a better win %.

95-98 MJ was ridiculously good. He was more skilled than ever while still retaining 85% of his game-athleticism. He'd easily be the best player in the league today.

[bwink23]

88-93 = absolute Michael Jordan peak.

[asd]

baby jordan was an athletic freak!

he was certainly better at entertaining and putting on a show, at least.

[SwooshReturns]

I would still take 2nd 3peat MJ, despite the gap in numbers. More skilled, more ability to take over on command, more equipped at getting his numbers without alienating teammates, better game manager(knowing when to attack and when to facilitate) and the intangibles one gains through years of experience. If you give 86-90 and 95-98 similar casts, I'd say 95-98 MJ would have a better win %.

95-98 MJ was still ridiculously good. He'd easily be the best player in the league today.
This ...

Even though I take '90, '91, '92, '93 Jordan over '95, '96, '97, '98 Jordan due to aggressiveness, peak physicality combined with pretty much the same skill set. Plus he was a champion while still being MEAN. '95 - '98 MJ had will power, but was a lot more mellow.

But '95 - '98 is definitely better than '86 - '90, IMO.

For the reasons you stated precisely. And as you said '95 - '98 MJ would still be best in the league.

Skilled, mental tenacity, gets his w/o alienating teammates, but physically could still do anything athletically he wanted even though he was between 75% to 80% the athlete he was at his PEAK physically.

Meaning he could still get to the basket at will ...

[bwink23]

When trying to split up Michael Jordan's....their are advantages and disadvantages on both sides. Comparing one or the other is like splitting hairs overall.

[SwooshReturns]

edit

[SwooshReturns]

When trying to split up Michael Jordan's....their are advantages and disadvantages on both sides. Comparing one or the other is like splitting hairs overall.
Nah ... '90 - '93 MJ is clearly PEAK and ultimately best version of MJ.

He combines all the best elements of '85 - '89 Jordan, with all the best elements of '95 - '98 Jordan ... while having NONE of the weaknesses both share.

'90 - '93 Jordan is the best player of all-time.

I've seen players as good or better than Jordan of '85 - '89, and I've seen as good or better players than Jordan of '95 - '98 (albeit not many)

[bwink23]

Nah ... '90 - '93 MJ is clearly PEAK and ultimately best version of MJ.

He combines all the best elements of '85 - '89 Jordan, with all the best elements of '95 - '98 Jordan ... while having NONE of the weaknesses both share.

'90 - '93 Jordan is the best player of all-time.

I've seen players as good or better than Jordan of '85 - '89, and I've seen as good or better players than Jordan of '95 - '98 (albeit not many)


Remember i'm that guy who posted 88-93 = absolute peak michael jordan earlier :rockon:

[SwooshReturns]

Remember i'm that guy who posted 88-93 = absolute peak michael jordan earlier :rockon:
I'm just saying it's not even CLOSE to splitting hairs. It's just a testement to how great MJ is when three different versions of himself could all be considered the greatest player of all-time ... but one of them is heads and shoulders above ALL.

Kobe (2006 - 2010)
LeBron James (2009 - Now)
Shaq (2000 - 2002)

Are players I argue are as good or clearly better than '95 - '98 MJ.

There are quite a few players I'd rank up there w/ MJ of '85 - '89.

D. Wade (2006 - Now) is better than that version for example.

But MJ from '90 - '93 can't EVEN be touched.

Amazing considering he left at his peak for two seasons. We could've added two more years to that stretch.

After the '95 playoffs, his hops, athleticism, insane speed and quickness was all but gone (yet still was better than damn near EVERYONE else) ...

Seriously, watch MJ attack the basket in the '95 series v.s. Orlando. Getting by Penny and Nick Anderson off the dribble at will, dunking on Shaq and Horace Grant.

[NumberSix]

This is not even remotely close. You're basically asking Prime MJ years or declining MJ years

[bwink23]

I'm just saying it's not even CLOSE to splitting hairs. It's just a testement to how great MJ is when three different versions of himself could all be considered the greatest player of all-time ... but one of them is heads and shoulders above ALL.

Kobe (2006 - 2010)
LeBron James (2009 - Now)
Shaq (2000 - 2002)

Are players I argue are as good or clearly better than '95 - '98 MJ.



There are quite a few players I'd rank up there w/ MJ of '85 - '89.

D. Wade (2006 - Now) is better than that version for example.

But MJ from '90 - '93 can't EVEN be touched.

Amazing considering he left at his peak for two seasons. We could've added two more years to that stretch.

After the '95 playoffs, his hops, athleticism, insane speed and quickness was all but gone (yet still was better than damn near EVERYONE else) ...

Seriously, watch MJ attack the basket in the '95 series v.s. Orlando. Getting by Penny and Nick Anderson off the dribble at will, dunking on Shaq and Horace Grant.



I thought he was talking 86-90 vs. 95-98??? :confusedshrug:


By the way, i'm 35 and living near the Chicagoland area all my life watching Bulls games. Your not telling me anything.

[SwooshReturns]

This is not even remotely close. You're basically asking Prime MJ years or declining MJ years
Not really, he's gauging ascension MJ v.s. declining MJ ... and the answer is easily declining MJ. Better player overall, hands down. The guy in the MIDDLE of that span however, is absolutely UNTOUCHABLE.

Peak MJ was like the best of Kobe, Wade, and LeBron rolled up into one.

The skill set, footwork, mid range / long range (not quite the range) of prime Kobe.

The attacking, quickness, off the dribble moves, and aggressiveness of prime Dwyane Wade.

The statistical dominance, durability, finisher at the rim, and full court impact as well "cool likeable generational factor" of prime LeBron James.

Combined w/ superior defensive capabilities than all of them, as well as being MORE CLUTCH than any of them could hope to be. (hi, LeBron stans ... this DOES exist)

MJ from '90 - '93 is a basketball player equivalent to a PERFECT STORM.

[SwooshReturns]

I thought he was talking 86-90 vs. 95-98???
He is ... and the answer is obviously '95 - '98 MJ.


By the way, i'm 35 and living near the Chicagoland area all my life watching Bulls games. Your not telling me anything.
I know I'm not teaching you anything ... I just like talking great players, Jordan in particular.

:oldlol:

[War Machine]

That is a tough question. I think his prime was when he won his first couple of titles. In the beginning, Jordan was a straight killing machine, you couldn't stop him, however as he got older and matured a bit, his clutch really started to kick in, and that's when he really became a powerhouse.

[97 bulls]

Lol you guys trying to differentiate between one person 5 years apart. As was said by another poster. A player doesn't change much athletically barring injury. I wouldn't even say he was worse in his early years. He just didn't have the team to support him. And doug collins didn't use him right.

[SwooshReturns]

A player doesn't change much athletically barring injury. I wouldn't even say he was worse in his early2000s years. He just didn't have the team to support him.
:facepalm

:roll: :roll: :roll:

I know you can't be this dumb. That was a subliminal push for Jordan's supporting cast, no? Or you're really considering MJ of the 2002 and 2003 season at 39 and 40 years old is a measuring stick of his value as a player compared to the different versions MJ 1.0 or MJ 2.0 of his career? Give me a break.

MJ wasn't even 75% of the player he was from '95 - '95 in 2002, and 2003.

Come on, that just straight ridiculous.

And over the course of a long career, even without injury, athleticism certainly fluctuates.

Just look at the difference of 2010 LeBron to 2011 LeBron to 2012 LeBron (he's improved athletically from where he was in 2011, but still not as athletic as 2010)

[97 bulls]

Why do you guys stop at a season? Why not pick his best/peak/prime/absolute, month, or week, or game. Or whatever other nonsense you guys want to throw in.

Not that it would even matter, but jordan said in an interview during the 96 season that he had lost about 5% of his athletcism. And during the 93 finals game 5, jordan said he was fatigued. Or during the 92 finals, jordan was pulled by jackson due to fatigue. And im sure you guys don't remember that jordan had to be talked into joining the dreamteam cuz he needed time to recoupe for the uppcomming season. But im sure none of this stuff matters. You guys would argue with jordan himself by saying, but michael, you avg 33 pts in 91.

[97 bulls]

:facepalm

:roll: :roll: :roll:

I know you can't be this dumb. That was a subliminal push for Jordan's supporting cast, no? Or you're really considering MJ of the 2002 and 2003 season at 39 and 40 years old is a measuring stick of his value as a player compared to the different versions MJ 1.0 or MJ 2.0 of his career? Give me a break.

MJ wasn't even 75% of the player he was from '95 - '95 in 2002, and 2003.

Come on, that just straight ridiculous.

And over the course of a long career, even without injury, athleticism certainly fluctuates.

Just look at the difference of 2010 LeBron to 2011 LeBron to 2012 LeBron (he's improved athletically from where he was in 2011, but still not as athletic as 2010)
Actually, that was a huge typo. I meant just his early years 80s

[97 bulls]

:facepalm

:roll: :roll: :roll:

I know you can't be this dumb. That was a subliminal push for Jordan's supporting cast, no? Or you're really considering MJ of the 2002 and 2003 season at 39 and 40 years old is a measuring stick of his value as a player compared to the different versions MJ 1.0 or MJ 2.0 of his career? Give me a break.

MJ wasn't even 75% of the player he was from '95 - '95 in 2002, and 2003.

Come on, that just straight ridiculous.

And over the course of a long career, even without injury, athleticism certainly fluctuates.

Just look at the difference of 2010 LeBron to 2011 LeBron to 2012 LeBron (he's improved athletically from where he was in 2011, but still not as athletic as 2010)
Fluctuate is a great term to use. I've believed that no version of jordan was infinatly better than the others barring 02 and 03.

[SwooshReturns]

Actually, that was a huge typo. I meant just his early years 80s
I can tell you have NEVER been an athlete if you don't feel athleticism can fluctuate through a player's life.

I played ball growing up, still play pick up to this day ... and I can ASSURE you I felt differences both in strengths and weaknesses athletically at different stages of my life.

18

22

24

and now 26, starting to feel a lot different and notice significant body changes.

[SwooshReturns]

Fluctuate is a great term to use. I've believed that no version of jordan was infinatly better than the others barring 02 and 03.
And you'd most certainly be wrong. But you're no Jordan expert, and you love to prop up players he played with to absurd levels. Stick to being a 1997 Bulls expert.

Leave the Jordan evaluations to the big boys who know their stuff.

Like: myself, OldSchoolbball, Da_Realist, catch24, Fatal9 and the like ...

[Round Mound]

88-93 = absolute Michael Jordan peak.

This

[eliteballer]

No way in hell pre 88 Jordan is better than 95-97 Jordan

[NumberSix]

Not really, he's gauging ascension MJ v.s. declining MJ ... and the answer is easily declining MJ. Better player overall, hands down.
If you think 2nd 3peat MJ was anywhere near 87-90 MJ, there's absolutely nothing you can say to convince me that you actually watched Jordan back then. It's a ridiculous comparison. Reading about him and watching highlight clips isn't good enough. If you didn't actually watch these games, you just don't get it.

[SwooshReturns]

If you think 2nd 3peat MJ was anywhere near 87-90 MJ, there's absolutely nothing you can say to convince me that you actually watched Jordan back then. It's a ridiculous comparison. Reading about him and watching highlight clips isn't good enough. If you didn't actually watch these games, you just don't get it.
From an individual perspective, I agree with you. But it's a team game, right? 2nd 3 peat Jordan's skill set and intangibles, as well as IQ set him apart from '85 - '89 Jordan. Better team player, by far. He can get his without disrupting an offense to go into ISO ball. '90 - '93 MJ is a different comparison entirely, as I said the best version of a player I have ever seen.

[TheBigVeto]

86-90 and its not even close

This.
The 95-98 Jordan relied too much on the ref's help.

[andgar923]

I think the reason people put so much stock on 95-98 MJ is because he won. But that's mostly because his team was better, not necessarily MJ.

if you gave MJ an equal caliber of teammates in 86-90, he might win a title or two during that span. No team could stop 'him'.

The difference between Kobe, Wade and Bron is that unlike them, MJ often didn't lose because he didn't perform, but because his team did. MJ would murder teams on his own, but he didn't have the help to beat them in a series. Give him better teammates, and he more than likely wins more than half of his series during that span.

Teams would concentrate on stopping MJ and only him. He was their 1st, 2nd and 3rd option and he still manages to put up huge numbers and at times make it look easy.

Mj's jumper may have been better in 95-98 (not as much as some make it seem), but he was killling people with his speed and overall athleticism.

[eliteballer]

I think the reason people put so much stock on 95-98 MJ is because he won. But that's mostly because his team was better, not necessarily MJ.

if you gave MJ an equal caliber of teammates in 86-90, he might win a title or two during that span. No team could stop 'him'.

The difference between Kobe, Wade and Bron is that unlike them, MJ often didn't lose because he didn't perform, but because his team did. MJ would murder teams on his own, but he didn't have the help to beat them in a series. Give him better teammates, and he more than likely wins more than half of his series during that span.

Teams would concentrate on stopping MJ and only him. He was their 1st, 2nd and 3rd option and he still manages to put up huge numbers and at times make it look easy.

Mj's jumper may have been better in 95-98 (not as much as some make it seem), but he was killling people with his speed and overall athleticism.


LOL.....he played like trash against the pistons, knicks, sonics, and heat in plenty of series

[SwooshReturns]

I think the reason people put so much stock on 95-98 MJ is because he won. But that's mostly because his team was better, not necessarily MJ.

if you gave MJ an equal caliber of teammates in 86-90, he might win a title or two during that span. No team could stop 'him'.

The difference between Kobe, Wade and Bron is that unlike them, MJ often didn't lose because he didn't perform, but because his team did. MJ would murder teams on his own, but he didn't have the help to beat them in a series. Give him better teammates, and he more than likely wins more than half of his series during that span.

Teams would concentrate on stopping MJ and only him. He was their 1st, 2nd and 3rd option and he still manages to put up huge numbers and at times make it look easy.

Mj's jumper may have been better in 95-98 (not as much as some make it seem), but he was killling people with his speed and overall athleticism.
That's a really solid point. The highlighted especially. Sometimes even I forget he had a terrible cast, pre Pippen becoming an actual all star caliber player in 1990.

Watch game highlights from this performance ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPVCJkW4uaU

Sick.

[andgar923]

LOL.....he played like trash against the pistons, knicks, sonics, and heat in plenty of series

Yet he still was the best player.

Can we say the same for Kobe?

Btw...

I see you have a bit of a reading comprehension.

MJ WON vs the teams you mentioned (except the Pistons early on). When he did lose, it wasn't because of his play or leadership.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

LOL.....he played like trash against the pistons, knicks, sonics, and heat in plenty of series

Blasphemy. Everyone knows Michael Jordan never had bad games or even missed a shot. Every game he lost was an illusion glaring from his bald head.

[SwooshReturns]

LOL.....he played like trash against the pistons, knicks, sonics, and heat in plenty of series
The two with best case for "trash" is his Finals @ 33 years old v.s. Seattle (amazing wing defenders Payton, McMillian, etc.)

And @ 34 years old v.s. Miami Heat (best defensive team not named the Bulls)

Jordan didn't shoot well v.s. the Knicks in '93 (again the best defensive team not named the Bulls), but he did everything else EXTREMELY well.

He NEVER had a bad series against the Pistons.

[eliteballer]

96/97 Jordan still had a lot of athleticism(because he only played 8 seasons of pro ball before 96)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1mcuyoOWB8&t=6m17s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu-9-c2sUoY
(for comparisons sake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm7I96kIcNU)

and he didnt have this kind of footwork pre 96:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3WLup0ithY&feature=fvwrel&t=4m36s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4&t=9m45s


Then you had in the improved strength, refined fadeaway/jumper etc.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

None of those series did he play like trash. the two with best case for "trash" is his Finals @ 33 years old v.s. Seattle (amazing wing defenders Payton, McMillian, etc.)

And @ 34 years old v.s. Miami Heat (best defensive team not named the Bulls)

Jordan didn't shoot well v.s. the Knicks in '93 (again the best defensive team not named the Bulls), but he did everything else EXTREMELY well.

He NEVER had a bad series against the Pistons.

Why is there so much nitpicking? Why can't it be "He played poorly." Why is there a "but" that cancels out the negative? Lol.

I mean there are facts there but why add all the shit in parenthesis?

[SwooshReturns]

and he didnt have this kind of footwork pre 96
He had that kind of footwork in his peak from '90 - '93.

He didn't need to rely on the footwork and post game as much cause he beat people with his first step whenever he wanted.

[andgar923]

96/97 Jordan still had a lot of athleticism(because he only played 8 seasons of pro ball before 96)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1mcuyoOWB8&t=6m17s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu-9-c2sUoY
(for comparisons sake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm7I96kIcNU)

and he didnt have this kind of footwork pre 96:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3WLup0ithY&feature=fvwrel&t=4m36s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Jjl9_ZDY4&t=9m45s


Then you had in the improved strength, refined fadeaway/jumper etc.

He was far more athletic before this season, and he had the footwork pre 96.:facepalm

MJ was still amongst the strongest players pound for pound, and while he did have the fadeaway he didn't need it.:pimp:

He used the fadeaway more later in his career to escape double and triple teams, when he was younger he just drove past them, no need for a fadeaway.

[SwooshReturns]

I mean there are facts there but why add all the shit in parenthesis?
Because the dumb accusation is he played poorly purely off FG% ... I watch the games, and there is other things besides scoring going on. Jordan didn't play like "trash" at all in the Knicks series.

And even when he was "trasy" (if you consider it that) he was still EASILY and ALWAYS the best and most productive player on the floor. Trashy to me is a great player playing well below expectations and not being the best player on the floor consistently.

Many consider Kobe's 2008 performance to be trashy. Do I? No. Was it disappointing? Very. He was still clearly the best player on the floor wearing a Lakers uniform in that series. Same goes for 2010. Disappointing? Sure, certainly not epic or legendary. Trashy? Hardly. LeBron's 2011? THAT is a trashy performance.

Now do you understand, dip shit?

Lettuce be reality, you and eliteballer are touchy because of Kobe's numerous "perceived" trashy playoff and Finals series, so you need to over emphasize and call certain MJ series trashy to overcompensate for your insecurities in regards to Kobe's resume.

You're not fooling anyone with a brain, kiddo.

[eliteballer]

Jordan has a couple series where he shot like CRAP against the Pistons, and one against the Bucks

also.....show me examples of pre 96 footwork that comes even CLOSE to those two moves:oldlol:

[SwooshReturns]

show me examples of pre 96 footwork that comes even CLOSE to those two moves
'93 ... that's just one example. I could find a lot more, but you still wouldn't conceit.

4:25

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdDb32m2EsM

[SwooshReturns]

He was far more athletic before this season, and he had the footwork pre 96.:facepalm

MJ was still amongst the strongest players pound for pound, and while he did have the fadeaway he didn't need it.:pimp:

He used the fadeaway more later in his career to escape double and triple teams, when he was younger he just drove past them, no need for a fadeaway.
Gets it.

:pimp:

[eliteballer]

'93 ... that's just one example. I could find a lot more, but you still wouldn't conceit.

4:25

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdDb32m2EsM


Not close....his body is stationary. Kobe was doing that same move at 22:facepalm

[juju151111]

Jordan has a couple series where he shot like CRAP against the Pistons, and one against the Bucks

also.....show me examples of pre 96 footwork that comes even CLOSE to those two moves:oldlol:
Mj didn't have a bad series against the pistons. It was Pippen and Grant choking in the crucial deciding gms in 89 and 90. I will post Mj post moves from around 89-93 hold on. Also Mj shot bad against the knicks because of a risk injury, but he still showed up in crucial gms in that series offensively and defensivly. 93 series against the knicks was Mj playing his best defense ever. It was crazy.

[eliteballer]

:facepalm Hell i just noticed he moved his pivot foot on that move too

[Da_Realist]

86-90 MJ was a better highlight, but 95-98 MJ was a better player. I say that for one major reason -- from 86-90 he had to dominate the ball to dominate the game. He didn't perfect his off the ball movement until sometime between the 89 and 90 seasons. Once he perfected that, he was a threat with or without the ball. So, in other words, he was a threat every second he was on the basketball court -- and so were his teammates.

Although no team could stop him in the late 80's, teams could minimize his team because his style of play at that time didn't allow other players to help him (not that he had players that capable the first few years, but still). If you replace MJ with the 86-89 versions on the late 90's Bulls teams, they aren't as good even as he breaks all kinds of records. They'd be good, but not 72-10 good. (btw, 90 Jordan is about as perfect a player as you're going to see).

I like how hoopsencyclopedia puts it in one of his videos -- Before he was the greatest player of all time, he was the most exciting player of all time.

Has there ever been a more exciting player than the early version of Michael Jordan? The kind of artistry he brought to the stage every night was not to be missed. I always cringe when people dismiss this version because he didn't win. Early MJ was like Michael Jackson from his Thriller days. He was more phenomenon than basketball player. He got better as a basketball player as he aged, but not as a phenomenon. He did things on the basketball court that you just weren't supposed to see happen. Kobe copied a lot of late 90's MJ's moves and I doubt we'll ever see a perimeter player as perfect as the 1st 3peat MJ but I really REALLY doubt we'll ever see another guard bring it like the late 80's MJ brought it.

Every other version of MJ picked his spots. Early 80's MJ only had one setting on his motor -- full blast. Look at the 92 ECF Game 7 vs Knicks when MJ went all out. Imagine that being every single game. That was the late 80's MJ.

We would have missed out as basketball fans had that earlier version not existed. And at the end of the day, basketball is supposed to be enjoyable...and nothing was more enjoyable than watching that guy go out there and lay it on the line every night.

[SwooshReturns]

Not close....his body is stationary. Kobe was doing that same move at 22:facepalm
The hell are you talking about ... the body isn't stationary, he's moving. We're talking about footwork, correct?

Can you find me an example, the way I so quickly did for you?

And if he was ... that means what exactly ??? Kobe's not far off from Jordan in regards to footwork. Kobe clearly influenced much of his game off Jordans.

That's not the defining difference between the quality of players they are ... in regards to the footwork I mean.

There have been plenty of players with elite footwork who have graced the league. Hell, Kevin McHale had ridiculous footwork. Hakeem ... the list continues.

[SwooshReturns]

:facepalm Hell i just noticed he moved his pivot foot on that move too
Yes, he moves it slightly. I can find similar examples of Kobe making a ridiculous move, that upon closer inspection and not in real time shows a clear cut shuffle of the feet or something of that nature.

[eliteballer]

The hell are you talking about ... the body isn't stationary, he's moving. We're talking about footwork, correct?

Can you find me an example, the way I so quickly did for you?

And if he was ... that means what exactly ??? Kobe's not far off from Jordan in regards to footwork. Kobe clearly influenced much of his game off Jordans.

That's not the defining difference between the quality of players they are ... in regards to the footwork I mean.

There have been plenty of players with elite footwork who have graced the league. Hell, Kevin McHale had ridiculous footwork. Hakeem ... the list continues.

His body is stationary when his moving on his pivot he just jukes left and right ..it doesnt compare at all to the moves I posted(especially the Heat one) because in the Knicks move hes contorting his whole body spining 360 faking the guy, leaning in and in the Heat move he breaks into his footwork off a dribble where he's faking the defender left and right before he even starts the footwork. the coordination isnt comparable.

As for young Kobe doing the same move as Jordan(where Jordan moved his pivot foot):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmPgtxa78aw&t=2m51s

[juju151111]

Not close....his body is stationary. Kobe was doing that same move at 22:facepalm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc6k9LTTJa8 I have more but I would have to look through long ass vids.

[Nevaeh]

Michael Jordan 86-90 vs 95-98?

95-98 MJ easily. Like I mentioned in another thread, late 90s MJ had the ability to make his opponents screen their own teammates out of a defensive double team play, to the point where they crashed into each other. While the teammates are fumbling and bumbling, late 90s MJ is already scoring.

Won't mention the Fade Away to scoop shots, baseline turn arounds, dunks that put opponents on their backs regularly, and back cuts from either side of the lane for easy dunks and lay-ups.

[Odinn]

88-90 Jordan > 95-98 Jordan >>> 86-88 Jordan

[Nevaeh]

88-90 Jordan > 95-98 Jordan >>> 86-88 Jordan

Just curious Odinn. Where does 91-93 Jordan fit in IYO?

[Odinn]

Just curious Odinn. Where does 91-93 Jordan fit in IYO?
Better than 88-90 span because he was more fundamentally sounding player, he knows better the game.
Better than 95-98 span because he lost some serious athleticism compared to his early years. (Not saying his athleticism wasn't impressive, it was impressive because of his age.)

[Cali Syndicate]

88-90 Jordan > 95-98 Jordan >>> 86-88 Jordan


Just about to post this.

Way too late.

Edit: Not that late.

[ThaRegul8r]

The two with best case for "trash" is his Finals @ 33 years old v.s. Seattle (amazing wing defenders Payton, McMillian, etc.)

McMillan was injured with a herniated disk in his back, and played 51 minutes total in the series.


Already an underdog against the Bulls, the Sonics were at a real disadvantage when a herniated disk in McMillan's back limited him to just six minutes in Game 1, and no action at all in Games 2 and 3.

Can we please not be disingenuous here? I find it annoying when it's necessary to point out stuff like this, which immediately raises my suspicion when fans of players conveniently omit pertinent facts. I've seen too many of these people.

[pauk]

86-91 > 93-98

That was the most entertaining Jordan for me....

I think 95-98 was not the best Jordan.... 1988-92 was the best Jordan.... he won championships not because he got better, but because his team got better...

[Nevaeh]

Just about to post this.

Way too late.

Edit: Not that late.

As much as I loved 86-90 MJ, If he had the same mentality (based on teammate history) I'd be afraid that he would isolate his teammates, based on his ability, just because he could.

Late 90s MJ would make everyone feel more involved in the game, while still "getting his". If your teammates aren't engaged (even on basic "touches"), you can forget about them playing hard.

[Dragonyeuw]

I've come to appreciate the 95-98 Jordan more than the younger, prime version. He was kind of like the grandmaster at that point, perhaps not as physically gifted but his skills and mental game were so sharp at that point.

[bwink23]

Jordan had great footwork pre-96....he just didn't have to put it on full display. To me, it's choosing between the versions is kind of like "pick your poison." I'm an 88-93 Jordan guy. Jordan was clearly showing his age and wear in 1998. Jordan longest and most consistent dominance was pre-96. But either version was lethal. Older Jordan obviously just couldn't maintain it game-to-game due to age.

[Owl]

baby jordan was an athletic freak!

he was certainly better at entertaining and putting on a show, at least.
You're right. This guy was the GOAT
http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/haroldminerMIAMI.jpg


Seriously though, the 80's model is more talented, athletic, agile etc. So if you're picking "I'm back" MJ you have to do it based on either or both of the following reasons
1) He was smarter when he was older.
2) He was a better teammate when he was older.

My opinion would be that 1) certainly isn't enough to outweigh the athleticism gap. 2) Is a bigger issue but it's hard to tell if he was a bad (or worse than he later became) teammate because the teammates were bad, or whether his attitude was intrinsic at that point.

It depends on who else you have, I'd generally lean towards 80's MJ but would maybe take the later model if I had other good scorers.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Kobe (2006 - 2010)
LeBron James (2009 - Now)
Shaq (2000 - 2002)

Are players I argue are as good or clearly better than '95 - '98 MJ.

Kobe was never as good as '96 and '97 Jordan. '98 Jordan he was better than for a couple of years - I wouldn't include 2010 there, though.


There are quite a few players I'd rank up there w/ MJ of '85 - '89.

D. Wade (2006 - Now) is better than that version for example.

No way is Wade better than '87-'89 Jordan. 37/5/4/3/1.5/48% FG/56% TS followed by 35/6/6/3/1.6/54% FG/60% TS/DPOY/MVP followed by 33/8/8/3/1/53% FG/61% TS and an insane 35/7/8/3/1/51% FG/59% TS postseason. No way.

[D-Wade316]

No way is Wade better than '87-'89 Jordan. 37/5/4/3/1.5/48% FG/56% TS followed by 35/6/6/3/1.6/54% FG/60% TS/DPOY/MVP followed by 33/8/8/3/1/53% FG/61% TS and an insane 35/7/8/3/1/51% FG/59% TS postseason. No way.
I think he is referring to Wade's game, which is the most similar to young Jordan's game.

[OldSchoolBBall]

LOL.....he played like trash against the pistons, knicks, sonics, and heat in plenty of series

And yet, in stark contrast to say, Kobe, Jordan - even in his worst series - always played better than his second and third options. So not only were his poorer playoff series much less frequent than Kobe's, but save for one series, he was always more productive and efficient than his second/third option offensively. This is very different from a guy like Kobe, whose poor series are more frequent and who has frequently been less efficient than his second/third options.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Jordan has a couple series where he shot like CRAP against the Pistons, and one against the Bucks

Uhh, how about no?

1988 Conference Semis - 27.4 pts/8.8 reb/4.6 ast/2.0 stl/.6 blk/49% FG
1989 Conference Finals - 29.7 pts/5.5 reb/6.5 ast/2.0 stl/.5 blk/46% FG
1990 Conference Finals - 32.1 pts/7.1 reb/6.3 ast/2.1 stl/.6 blk/47% FG
1991 Conference Finals - 29.8 pts/5.3 reb/7.0 ast/2.3 stl/1.8 blk/54% FG

Where are the "couple of series where he shot like CRAP"?

[97 bulls]

While I don't think one can say which jordan was better, id choose 96-98. Id sacrifice a little athleticism for team play and more expireience and intelligence. The best way to sum up the slight difference is two plays.

Play 1. It was the 91 finals, game 3. After vlade divac makes a layup, jordan takes the ball full court and shoots a floater over the outstretched arm of divac. Notice his demeanor. It was as if he willed the shot in. For those that don't remember here's the play.

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=TEuycHgYq5k


Play 2. During the 97 finals, game 6. The bulls are on the bench. Everyone knows who's getting the ball. Jordans sitting on the sideline calmly, sipping gatorade, as if he was sitting in his living room watching TV. Notice the stark contrast in his demeanor. So collected, so laid back. The confidence, he been there he's done that. Id rather have that version. He even knows how utahs gonna defend him. Here's kerr talking about it with the vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2BlOTeoZVE

[Da_Realist]

While I don't think one can say which jordan was better, id choose 96-98. Id sacrifice a little athleticism for team play and more expireience and intelligence. The best way to sum up the slight difference is two plays.

Play 1. It was the 91 finals, game 3. After vlade divac makes a layup, jordan takes the ball full court and shoots a floater over the outstretched arm of divac. Notice his demeanor. It was as if he willed the shot in. For those that don't remember here's the play.

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=TEuycHgYq5k


Play 2. During the 97 finals, game 6. The bulls are on the bench. Everyone knows who's getting the ball. Jordans sitting on the sideline calmly, sipping gatorade, as if he was sitting in his living room watching TV. Notice the stark contrast in his demeanor. So collected, so laid back. The confidence, he been there he's done that. Id rather have that version. He even knows how utahs gonna defend him. Here's kerr talking about it with the vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2BlOTeoZVE

But wasn't the 91 Finals when he averaged like 13 assists per game? Didn't Pippen, Grant and Paxson all have a great series even as MJ was dominating? That one play you posted doesn't mean MJ wasn't smart enough to maximize his teammates potential. It was just one play.

[97 bulls]

But wasn't the 91 Finals when he averaged like 13 assists per game? Didn't Pippen, Grant and Paxson all have a great series even as MJ was dominating? That one play you posted doesn't mean MJ wasn't smart enough to maximize his teammates potential. It was just one play.
I never said he wasn't smart enough. I said he was much more experienced. More cerebral. Even more confident. I wasn't even talking about the two plays as much as I was referring to jordans actions in two intense high pressure situations.

In 91, phil had to tell him to get the ball to paxson. In 97, he told kerr to be ready cuz im gonna get you the ball.

Like I said in an earlier post, im convinced the versions we saw of jordan had more to do with his teammates abilities instead of a lack of whatever be it athleticism, or experience or skills.

[bwink23]

While I don't think one can say which jordan was better, id choose 96-98. Id sacrifice a little athleticism for team play and more expireience and intelligence. The best way to sum up the slight difference is two plays.

Play 1. It was the 91 finals, game 3. After vlade divac makes a layup, jordan takes the ball full court and shoots a floater over the outstretched arm of divac. Notice his demeanor. It was as if he willed the shot in. For those that don't remember here's the play.

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=TEuycHgYq5k


Play 2. During the 97 finals, game 6. The bulls are on the bench. Everyone knows who's getting the ball. Jordans sitting on the sideline calmly, sipping gatorade, as if he was sitting in his living room watching TV. Notice the stark contrast in his demeanor. So collected, so laid back. The confidence, he been there he's done that. Id rather have that version. He even knows how utahs gonna defend him. Here's kerr talking about it with the vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2BlOTeoZVE


:facepalm ....Michael Jordan had team play down pat by 1990.

[Nevaeh]

:facepalm ....Michael Jordan had team play down pat by 1990.

Not totally he didn't. He still had trust issues with his teammates, where if things weren't going perfect, he would immediately go into "Take Over" mode. Phil Jackson had to stay on him about not leaving the Triangle and keeping his eyes open for his teammates.

[bwink23]

Not totally he didn't. He still had trust issues with his teammates, where if things weren't going perfect, he would immediately go into "Take Over" mode. Phil Jackson had to stay on him about not leaving the Triangle and keeping his eyes open for his teammates.


Michael Jordan never lost "Take-over mode" EVER....he just didn't need it as regularly as he did during the second 3-peat....he trusted his teammates all the way up until Game 7 of the 1990 Eastern Finals when they took a fat dump on the couch.

[Da_Realist]

I never said he wasn't smart enough. I said he was much more experienced. More cerebral. Even more confident. I wasn't even talking about the two plays as much as I was referring to jordans actions in two intense high pressure situations.

In 91, phil had to tell him to get the ball to paxson. In 97, he told kerr to be ready cuz im gonna get you the ball.

Like I said in an earlier post, im convinced the versions we saw of jordan had more to do with his teammates abilities instead of a lack of whatever be it athleticism, or experience or skills.

How many passes to Steve Kerr did MJ make in Game 6 of the 98 Finals?

With Pippen hurt, the Bulls needed someone to step up and take over...and he did. I could cherry pick this game (1 assist) and then compare it to Game 5 of the 93 ECF vs NYK where Jordan had 14 assists, including the game winning assist to BJ Armstrong to say he was more unselfish during the 1st 3peat. Which would be misleading.

Just like the point you were trying to make using your 2 examples.

[stephanieg]

'80s Jordan was an alien who regularly broke the laws of physics.

'90s Jordan was just a really good basketball player.

[tobethdope]

even considering the pre-title mj to be better than the other one is laughable imo; he pretty much won 6 titles in a row, he became the ultimate winner, he just didnt lose; the fact that and the way how he did that makes him goat; do u guys even know how unlikely it is to win 6 titles in a row even if u are an overwhelming favourite? no other player cud have done this...
besides, the team did perform better when he got a better cast, pretty much as u wud expect, so teammates are probably no argument in determining which mj version was the best, as well as the fact that he might have won titles with better casts earlier, says little to none to that matter, too

[97 bulls]

How many passes to Steve Kerr did MJ make in Game 6 of the 98 Finals?

With Pippen hurt, the Bulls needed someone to step up and take over...and he did. I could cherry pick this game (1 assist) and then compare it to Game 5 of the 93 ECF vs NYK where Jordan had 14 assists, including the game winning assist to BJ Armstrong to say he was more unselfish during the 1st 3peat. Which would be misleading.

Just like the point you were trying to make using your 2 examples.
Then cherry pick away. I could show a multitude of videos showing mjs athleticism in his mid 30s. Even an interview where the man himself says hes lost about 5% of his athleticism. But you'd still say he was much more athletic during the first threepeat.

The difference to me between the early 90s jordan and mid 90s jordan was that he was a willing team player who picked his spots.

[Da_Realist]

The difference to me between the early 90s jordan and mid 90s jordan was that he was a willing team player who picked his spots.

Was the same way in the early 90's

Let's look at some of his important games during the first threepeat

91
Averaged 7 asts vs Detroit in the ECF
Averaged 11 asts vs LA in the NBA Finals

92 Finals
The night he hit 6 treys in the first half, he also netted 11 asts. The next game, he had 10.

93
The two most important games of the Knicks series -- In game 3, he got 11 asts and in game 5, he got 14 asts (including the game winning ast) along with a triple double

Narrowly missed a triple double in the Finals because he "only" got 9 asts in Game 1. In Games 5 and 6, he got 7 asts each. Even more impressive was game 6 -- they all came in the first 3 quarters because his teammates were playing scared throughout all of the 4th.

If that ain't being a willing team player, I don't know what is.

[Nevaeh]

Was the same way in the early 90's

Let's look at some of his important games during the first threepeat

91
Averaged 7 asts vs Detroit in the ECF
Averaged 11 asts vs LA in the NBA Finals

92 Finals
The night he hit 6 treys in the first half, he also netted 11 asts. The next game, he had 10.

93
The two most important games of the Knicks series -- In game 3, he got 11 asts and in game 5, he got 14 asts (including the game winning ast) along with a triple double

Narrowly missed a triple double in the Finals because he "only" got 9 asts in Game 1. In Games 5 and 6, he got 7 asts each. Even more impressive was game 6 -- they all came in the first 3 quarters because his teammates were playing scared throughout all of the 4th.

If that ain't being a willing team player, I don't know what is.

Great points Da Realist

I think 97 Bulls got side tracked a bit, when he brought early 90s Jordan into the debate. Now, if he stuck to 86-90 Jordan not being as good as 95-98 Jordan, then I can see his point.

[Da_Realist]

Great points Da Realist

I think 97 Bulls got side tracked a bit, when he brought early 90s Jordan into the debate. Now, if he stuck to 86-90 Jordan not being as good as 95-98 Jordan, then I can see his point.

Yeah, we got sidetracked a little bit. There was no one like him throughout his whole career. Only when he was with the Wizards could you miss a game and not feel like you might have missed something special. And even then, you weren't sure. Just like Magic said, "he could go 1-10, but that one shot may be the greatest shot you ever saw".

[bizil]

Yeah, we got sidetracked a little bit. There was no one like him throughout his whole career. Only when he was with the Wizards could you miss a game and not feel like you might have missed something special. And even then, you weren't sure. Just like Magic said, "he could go 1-10, but that one shot may be the greatest shot you ever saw".

Great point! I feel MJ during his Wizards days was still an All Star caliber SF. Particularly when u look at the all around aspects of the game. I even feel MJ deferred some because he was originally on the executive side of things. So i'm sure he was teaching the players and trying to let them grow when he came back. MJ's last two years at 39 and 40 were career type years for many guys who have been former All Stars in the past. Many guys would kill to put up 23 points, 5 assists, and 6 boards for a year! Or hell even 20 points, 4 dimes, and 6 boards like he did his final year. And MJ still played very good D on top of it.