Michael Jordan Faced Better Competition Than LeBron James

[RogueBorg]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/michael-jordan-faced-better-competition-than-lebron-james/?addata=espn:frontpage

Can we finally lay to rest this whole 1990's era was weaker narrative? The revisionist historians in these here parts will find a way to squash this I'm sure.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Posted some of those numbers here;

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13988020&viewfull=1#post13988020

Had the Jordan haters riled up. One of those posters went as far to claim that YOU COULDN'T compare SRS across era :oldlol: Here's another REPUTABLE source doing it though. I mean, I get it. Narratives are easy to follow for casuals, but facts are facts.

[Axe]

Don't you think it can actually go both ways?

Anyway, brace yourself, for his mudslingers will raise their own objections...

[Manny98]

Using regular season net ratings to compare who faced tougher competition in the playoffs, yikes :facepalm

[ralph_i_el]

Really stupid post. It says MJ faced harder comp because his playoff opponents had a better bet rating than LeBron's. That could just mean that there were more bad teams to beat up on in the regular season...which there clearly were due to expansion. Now the game has gone truly global, so the talent has filled in all those new spots opened up by new teams.

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan's teams were vastly better than the competition by the same type of data. That is the smoke screen: talk about other teams but not the gap between the Bulls and the rest. Basketball is a relative sport between teams in the same era, not an absolute sport between teams 20 or 30 years apart.

Name a team equal or better than the Bulls in the 90's.

[Mamba4Life]

I faced better competition than Jordan back in my days in D1

[Goalgoalabc]

i think this is difficult to compare the different era's competition environment

[97 bulls]

Jordan's teams were vastly better than the competition by the same type of data. That is the smoke screen: talk about other teams but not the gap between the Bulls and the rest. Basketball is a relative sport between teams in the same era, not an absolute sport between teams 20 or 30 years apart.

Name a team equal or better than the Bulls in the 90's.

There werent any. Hence then winning 55 games minus MJ.

[Vino24]

Jeff Hornacek...














:roll::roll::roll:

[Gimmedarock]

Jordan was miles ahead of his competition. There’s no one close to him back then. Some guys were as quick but couldn’t shoot. Some guys could shoot but had no handle. Jordan was the only player back then to put everything together. I don’t think he faced any competition compared to today’s players. Everybody can shoot. Everyone can dribble. Guys are athletic and can defend. I don’t think there’s a comparison. Lebron has faced powerhouse teams. Either the Warriors or Spurs would beat the Bulls, Lakers, or Celtics of years ago. Teams are too deep without rebounding role players or shot block role players. Everyone has offense today. That wasn’t the case years ago.

[97 bulls]

I did see a conversation centered around James competition and Jordan's competition. Looking back, I honestly dont think James competition was better.

[Vino24]

I did see a conversation centered around James competition and Jordan's competition. Looking back, I honestly dont think James competition was better.

In the finals it is not disputable.

[Axe]

Duh, 3-point shooting became a common norm amongst the players today, from pg to center.

[97 bulls]

You guys need to listen to this conversation

https://youtu.be/tOk1f4niMUo

[Roundball_Rock]

There werent any. Hence then winning 55 games minus MJ.

Exactly. No other team could come close to doing that. The Bulls were the super team of their era like the Warriors were of this era. Why this big push to pretend otherwise? I don't get the insecurity about MJ. He took a good team and made it an all-time great team. That is a credit to him, not a discredit.

[RogueBorg]

Jeff Hornacek...














:roll::roll::roll:

Jason Terry
See how that works?

[RogueBorg]

There werent any. Hence then winning 55 games minus MJ.

'90-'91 Champions
'91-'92 Champions
'92-'93 Champions
'93-'94 2nd round exit
'94-'95 2nd round exit
'95-'96 Champions
'96-'97 Champions
'97-'98 Champions

See what happened?

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Jordan's teams were vastly better than the competition by the same type of data. That is the smoke screen: talk about other teams but not the gap between the Bulls and the rest. Basketball is a relative sport between teams in the same era, not an absolute sport between teams 20 or 30 years apart.

Name a team equal or better than the Bulls in the 90's.

1997 utah jazz came close but besides them nobody else. I want to say Stockton's last superstar year was 1997. Sloan cut down Stockton's minutes big time by 98 finals for some reason.

1997 finals: Jazz had a .5 worse eFG% , just .6 less in PPG

[97 bulls]

'90-'91 Champions
'91-'92 Champions
'92-'93 Champions
'93-'94 2nd round exit
'94-'95 2nd round exit
'95-'96 Champions
'96-'97 Champions
'97-'98 Champions

See what happened?

I swear you Jordan zealots make us Jordan fans look bad. Face the facts. The Bulls were a Championship Contender when Jordan left in 94. 6th best record in the NBA. Only 9 game off the best record. And that's with Pippen missing 10 games.

[Axe]

'90-'91 Champions
'91-'92 Champions
'92-'93 Champions
'93-'94 2nd round exit
'94-'95 2nd round exit
'95-'96 Champions
'96-'97 Champions
'97-'98 Champions

See what happened?
In other words, excluding other teammates they had in the team, both mj and pippen simply can't attain championship or playoff success without the other.

Without pippen, mj had a hard time getting past the the first round of the postseason where his team was pitted against higher seeds like boston because the bulls had the last seed in the east.

Without jordan, pippen couldn't lead the bulls to the best record in the east, an ecf or finals appearances alone and hence, the championship also.

I say this because i know they're both important key pieces to the 90s dynasty by this fave team of mine.

[RogueBorg]

You guys need to listen to this conversation

https://youtu.be/tOk1f4niMUo

Good listen. They break down who LeBron beat in the East (nobody) on the way to the Finals. I don't think people want to go through the scrubs on those teams. But we will if you all want to go there.

[Soundwave]

I think the last Finals against the Warriors with Durant, was unfair in LeBron's defence, that said it's like feeling bad for Dr. Frankenstein that his monster has come back to haunt him because he started the super-teaming trend in the modern era and Durant basically just threw it back in his face.

But all other series ... he wasn't really outmatched. Even the first time against the Durant Warriors the first time, he did have Kyrie that time, and like the Rockets were able to win some games. Are Harden + CP3 that much better than LeBron + Kyrie? Because that Cavs-Warriors series wasn't even competitive, the Rockets one went 7 games which is very competitive.

I think in Miami he didn't have the success with Wade and Bosh that he could have because he's not able to sacrifice his style of play to mesh with other players. It basically has to be his way or no way, he was not able to do something like Jordan did where he sacrificed a system that was tailored to his individual game in favor of the triangle offence which made the overall team better.

Even Kobe, for all the grief he takes for being selfish, he did sacrifice his game for many years to defer to Shaq. But LeBron is basically you play LeBron-ball or nothing at all, it's only extremely late in his career that he seems to realize now that he needs to specifically involve AD this time around more because he knows he's getting old.

[3ball]

The comp is close, but Jordan's teams had much higher net ratings than lebron - MJ made teams better

[RogueBorg]

The Bulls were a Championship Contender when Jordan left in 94. 6th best record in the NBA.

WHAT?! LOL

They didn't come close to winning the championship. They didn't even make the Eastern Conference Finals and they were worse in '94-'95.

[Soundwave]

I swear you Jordan zealots make us Jordan fans look bad. Face the facts. The Bulls were a Championship Contender when Jordan left in 94. 6th best record in the NBA. Only 9 game off the best record. And that's with Pippen missing 10 games.

The Atlanta Hawks won 57 games that year, better than the Bulls, were they a championship contender too? Does anyone give Atlanta any credit for that?

The Bulls had a surprisingly good season in 93-94, but it does get a bit overrated. They were not looking like a contender at all by 94-95 ... they looked like a mediocre franchise that was maybe a 8th seed until a baseball strike bailed them out of that fate.

55 wins a good season, but I also feel like it's made out as if they climbed Mount Everest, which is ridiculous as well. The Raptors are on pace for 59 wins this season, no one is really pushing all that hard for Pascal Siakim to win MVP.

[RogueBorg]

Exactly. No other team could come close to doing that. The Bulls were the super team of their era like the Warriors were of this era. Why this big push to pretend otherwise?

No one's pretending they're not, you keep pushing that, but to say the Bulls didn't play anyone or that era was weak is a joke.

[Axe]

WHAT?! LOL

They didn't come close to winning the championship. They didn't even make the Eastern Conference Finals and they were worse in '94-'95.
You're probably right about that one. In fact, a month before the '95 postseason, they were only 34-31 and struggling until mj came back.

[RogueBorg]

In other words, excluding other teammates they had in the team, both mj and pippen simply can't attain championship or playoff success without the other.

Without pippen, mj had a hard time getting past the the first round of the postseason where his team was pitted against higher seeds like boston because the bulls had the last seed in the east.

Without jordan, pippen couldn't lead the bulls to the best record in the east, an ecf or finals appearances alone and hence, the championship also.

I say this because i know they're both important key pieces to the 90s dynasty by this fave team of mine.

I'd say you're right on with this. No one player does it by themselves. Pippen was VERY important to the success of the Bulls.

[Whoah10115]

Come on man. Comparing the roster the Bulls had to the roster that Golden State had?
Even when people were acknowledging the Bulls' bench, they recognized they were pieces and pieces that were dependent on the starting lineup, which was really Jordan, Pippen and Rodman. Longley had some game but he was the starting center on that team. Harper was a terrific defender, but he wasn't a shooter, was lessened physically, and was never a point guard..and now playing one in the triangle.

Their team was similar in some ways to the Thunder with Durant and Westbrook, in that all their talent had their roles..tho the Thunder had more talent.

Come on, the Bulls were not a superteam for reasons outside of their stars. Specifically Pippen and Jordan, and especially Michael Jordan.

The rest is flat out untrue.

[Axe]

I'd say you're right on with this. No one player does it by themselves. Pippen was VERY important to the success of the Bulls.
And then we can't forget about phil jackson, as well as old man tex winter too.

[Soundwave]

I'd say you're right on with this. No one player does it by themselves. Pippen was VERY important to the success of the Bulls.

Yeah no sh*t no player in the history of the NBA ever won single handedly. As if this is news. LeBron won nothing himself, Magic won nothing himself, Kareem won nothing himself, Wilt won nothing himself, Shaq won nothing himself, Kobe won nothing himself, Duncan won nothing himself.

We know that. It doesn't mean that those player's were not driving forces on their championship teams and deserve more credit than others.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

No one's pretending they're not, you keep pushing that, but to say the Bulls didn't play anyone or that era was weak is a joke.

Exactly.

Nobody outside of '3ball' says that. They were a good team. And in '96 one of the BEST ever. Look @ some of those disparities though. A few from Lebron where his team had a CLEAR advantage. Haters don't talk about that though because "Jordan needed Pippen!!!" :oldlol:

Jordan faced tougher competition overall. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Soundwave]

The Bulls were a very good team ... but "super team" is a bit of a stretch.

A super team usually has a third option that either is a star player themselves or could be the no.1 player on some other team. Players like James Worthy (won a Finals MVP), Kawhi, Klay, Bosh, Parish or Walton are more in that mold, the Bulls never really had a 3rd player ever that good.

Rodman was a great defender/rebounder but useless when they really needed a bucket.

A "super team" should have 3 even 4 guys that can give you 20 on any given night and it not be that far out of their ability to do so.

[knicksman]

what matters is they beat a pistons team in their prime. Once you do that, it is basically over for the league. They know that jordan is the best player in the league and he finally had a team capable of winning. Theres no point in showing up. While they know that lebron is a fraud. No matter how good his teammates are, since lebron isnt the best player, they have a fighting chance. Lebron is good based on stats but jordan is the best at what matters the most for 1st options - scoring the ball.

[97 bulls]

The Atlanta Hawks won 57 games that year, better than the Bulls, were they a championship contender too? Does anyone give Atlanta any credit for that?

The Bulls had a surprisingly good season in 93-94, but it does get a bit overrated. They were not looking like a contender at all by 94-95 ... they looked like a mediocre franchise that was maybe a 8th seed until a baseball strike bailed them out of that fate.

55 wins a good season, but I also feel like it's made out as if they climbed Mount Everest, which is ridiculous as well. The Raptors are on pace for 59 wins this season, no one is really pushing all that hard for Pascal Siakim to win MVP.

By 1995, they had lost too much. But they were still on Ace to win maybe 44 games. I'd say put Grant back on nbn the 95 Bulls and they're still a mid 50 win team.

But it if it will make you feel better. The 94 Bulls without MJ were still one of the best teams in the NBA. Is that fair?

[97 bulls]

The Bulls were a very good team ... but "super team" is a bit of a stretch.

A super team usually has a third option that either is a star player themselves or could be the no.1 player on some other team. Players like James Worthy (won a Finals MVP), Kawhi, Klay, Bosh, Parish or Walton are more in that mold, the Bulls never really had a 3rd player ever that good.

Rodman was a great defender/rebounder but useless when they really needed a bucket.

A "super team" should have 3 even 4 guys that can give you 20 on any given night and it not be that far out of their ability to do so.

Id say Kukoc could've did what Bosh did. And they had Rodman who is in the Hall of Fame. Rodman was the best player on that Piston team that won 48 games in I believe 94. Harper was still capable of scoring 20 a night. His role just changed. Worthy didnt do much of anything as the leader of the Lakers in 92. Walton was an old man by the time he joined the Celtics.

The Bulls were stacked.

[Soundwave]

By 1995, they had lost too much. But they were still on Ace to win maybe 44 games. I'd say put Grant back on nbn the 95 Bulls and they're still a mid 50 win team.

But it if it will make you feel better. The 94 Bulls without MJ were still one of the best teams in the NBA. Is that fair?

For one season that doesn't hold as a guarantee that they would have maintained that every year and in fact they weren't able to hold by 95 and looked like a fairly mediocre team by then. A baseball strike basically gave the Bulls a lottery jackpot win otherwise the Orlando Magic likely become the NBA's next dynasty.

Dominique Wilkins led the Hawks to like multiple 50 or better win seasons ... does anyone give a sh*t about him? While average 26+ ppg in a lot of years to boot. ESPN even give him the time of day? Players like *that* are underrated.

If he got to play with Jordan and win multiple titles then ESPN is probably slobbering all over his jock strap.

[RogueBorg]

And then we can't forget about phil jackson, as well as old man tex winter too.

All of it, they had guys that could knock down three's, Kukoc was 6th-man of the year in '96. They were great.

[Soundwave]

Id say Kukoc could've did what Bosh did. And they had Rodman who is in the Hall of Fame. Rodman was the best player on that Piston team that won 48 games in I believe 94. Harper was still capable of scoring 20 a night. His role just changed. Worthy didnt do much of anything as the leader of the Lakers in 92. Walton was an old man by the time he joined the Celtics.

The Bulls were stacked.

Chris Bosh got the Raptors into the playoffs and had multiple 20/10 seasons ... Toni Kukoc is nowhere close to that. Bosh is closer to Pippen than Kukoc.

[warriorfan]

Chris Bosh got the Raptors into the playoffs and had multiple 20/10 seasons ... Toni Kukoc is nowhere close to that.

Bosh has the 4th highest PER out of anyone in the league in 2010.

[FKAri]

Not in the finals. But on the way there? Definitely.

[LeCroix]

Teams to lose their 'star' and only lose 2 wins next season:

-1994 Bulls

Add more thanks

[Soundwave]

Teams to lose their 'star' and only lose 2 wins next season:

-1994 Bulls

Add more thanks

Irrelevant. The Raptors lost Kawhi Leonard and have more wins this season, that doesn't mean they are a better team.

The Warriors won fewer regular season games with Durant, LeBron couldn't even make series' against those Warrior Durant teams even competitive. They were a joke.

Atlanta Hawks won 57 games in 93-94, better than the Bulls, with Dominque missing 30+ games. Does anyone remember that or heap praise upon Stacy Augmon for that? Nope.

Regular season wins especially in a small sample range don't tell you anything huge.

[Axe]

All of it, they had guys that could knock down three's, Kukoc was 6th-man of the year in '96. They were great.
Yes.

Oh, and that fat man krause, too. It shouldn't be overlooked that he contributed in forming the dynasty as well. :oldlol:

[999Guy]

93 Suns had a broken KJ and no Ceballos.

96 Sonics were missing McMillan.


Generally not too impressed with the 97 and 98 Jazz. Very top heavy and it also showed in the postseason.

Complete opposite of the 94 and 95 Rockets who had a ton of two-way depth around a monster and was absolutely better than any net rating would imply.

On the other hand the 2014 Spurs invented the resting era. And still sleep walked to 61 wins and a +8 net rating. I saw a stat showing when whole(full rotation) they were on pace to break the win record and had an net rating in double digits like golden state that year. They were better than their net rating.

91 Lakers also destroyed by injuries.

The best teams MJ faced all were injured.

92 domination of Portland was impressive however. I tend to be high on those Blazers teams.

[Soundwave]

93 Suns had a broken KJ and no Ceballos.

96 Sonics were missing McMillan.


Generally not too impressed with the 97 and 98 Jazz. Very top heavy and it also showed in the postseason.

On the other hand the 2014 Spurs invented the resting era. And still sleep walked to 61 wins and a +8 net rating. I saw a stat showing when whole(full rotation) they were on pace to break the win record and had an net rating in double digits like golden state that year. They were better than their net rating.

91 Lakers also recasted by injuries.

The best teams MJ faced all were injured.

92 domination of Portland was impressive however. I tend to be high on those Blazers teams.

93 Suns options 2-6 outscored the Bulls options 2-6. So did the Sonics in 96.

Every team has injuries, Pippen was barely able to walk by the end of the 98 Finals, Jordan was playing with a bad wrist on his shooting hand (kind of a big deal) in 93 and a foot injury in the 91 Finals also.

Rodman was a nutcase in the 97 and 98 Finals and it showed, his performances were not very good I think he went off to do some wrestling event in the middle of one of the playoffs, lol.

[LeCroix]

Exactly.

Nobody outside of '3ball' says that. They were a good team. And in '96 one of the BEST ever. Look @ some of those disparities though. A few from Lebron where his team had a CLEAR advantage. Haters don't talk about that though because "Jordan needed Pippen!!!" :oldlol:

Jordan faced tougher competition overall. Nothing more, nothing less.

What was MJs best ring?

[Axe]

93 Suns had a broken KJ and no Ceballos.

96 Sonics were missing McMillan.


Generally not too impressed with the 97 and 98 Jazz. Very top heavy and it also showed in the postseason.

Complete opposite of the 94 and 95 Rockets who had a ton of two-way depth around a monster and was absolutely better than any net rating would imply.

On the other hand the 2014 Spurs invented the resting era. And still sleep walked to 61 wins and a +8 net rating. I saw a stat showing when whole(full rotation) they were on pace to break the win record and had an net rating in double digits like golden state that year. They were better than their net rating.

91 Lakers also destroyed by injuries.

The best teams MJ faced all were injured.

92 domination of Portland was impressive however. I tend to be high on those Blazers teams.
Mind if you tell us whose dup do you belong to again? That big question is yet to be answered by you, lil' fella.

[Axe]

I like to see jordan beat 2016 warriors,a 73 win team
I like to see jordan beat 2012 thunder with 60 wins

lebron had better competion,jordan couldt even beat detroit pistions in 89 and 90 jordan sucks:lebroncry:
And your dup belongs to?

[Soundwave]

I like to see jordan beat 2016 warriors,a 73 win team
I like to see jordan beat 2012 thunder with 60 wins

lebron had better competion,jordan couldt even beat detroit pistions in 89 and 90 jordan sucks:lebroncry:

Why was Harden able to be competitive against the Durant Warriors while LeBron was somewhat of a joke?

The rest of the teams LeBron faced he had more than adequate help.

The Bulls may lose to the Durant Warriors, but it wouldn't be 1-4 and 0-4 either. The Harden Rockets were able to push the Warriors.

[LeCroix]

Why was Harden able to be competitive against the Durant Warriors while LeBron was somewhat of a joke?

The rest of the teams LeBron faced he had more than adequate help.

The Bulls may lose to the Durant Warriors, but it wouldn't be 1-4 and 0-4 either. The Harden Rockets were able to push the Warriors.

I could use a good laugh.

What was MJs best ring?

[LeCroix]

And your dup belongs to?

And your dup is?

[Soundwave]

I could use a good laugh.

What was MJs best ring?

All of them are pretty special, when you have 6 of them you can appreciate all of them.

I would say probably the first and the last and the one against Phoenix are the three top ones but embarrassing Drexler in 92 was funny too because at the time a lot of people did think he was close to Jordan.

Beating Orlando in 96 is maybe actually the sweetest one after whupping the Pistons in 91 because a lot of people said Jordan was totally done after the Magic series and the Magic bandwagon was massive. To basically destroy their dynasty before it started as revenge for '95, you can't write that any better.

Couldn't watch TV for 10 minutes without seeing a Shaq or Penny commercial back then.

[HoopsNY]

But all other series ... he wasn't really outmatched. Even the first time against the Durant Warriors the first time, he did have Kyrie that time, and like the Rockets were able to win some games. Are Harden + CP3 that much better than LeBron + Kyrie? Because that Cavs-Warriors series wasn't even competitive, the Rockets one went 7 games which is very competitive.

Correct. People act as if he should have lost. If you're the GOAT playing with other all-star players, you should be beating GS. The Rockets took them to 7 the next season, so what's his excuse? And keep in mind, Chris Paul missed games 6 and 7 in that series.

[LeCroix]

All of them are pretty special, when you have 6 of them you can appreciate all of them.

I would say probably the first and the last and the one against Phoenix are the three top ones but embarrassing Drexler in 92 was funny too because at the time a lot of people did think he was close to Jordan.

Beating Orlando in 96 is maybe actually the sweetest one after whupping the Pistons because a lot of people said Jordan was totally done after the Magic series and the Magic bandwagon was massive.

96 = See Rodman
BIG HELP

So MJ has no solid Finals wins?

[CodeBreaker]

MJ never beat a 73-win team

[Axe]

And your dup is?
You don't even know what the hell that is, homeboy.

[Soundwave]

MJ never beat a 73-win team

The Warriors beat themselves that year by playing stupid basketball. They pissed that away more than anything.

https://i.imgur.com/I3Er05F.jpg

MJ beat plenty of 50+ and 60+ win teams in his career, LeBron not so much.

[LeCroix]

The Warriors beat themselves that year by playing stupid basketball. They pissed that away more than anything.

https://i.imgur.com/I3Er05F.jpg

MJ beat plenty of 50+ and 60+ win teams in his career, LeBron not so much.

What was MJ's best finals opponent?

[HoopsNY]

The Bulls were a very good team ... but "super team" is a bit of a stretch.

A super team usually has a third option that either is a star player themselves or could be the no.1 player on some other team. Players like James Worthy (won a Finals MVP), Kawhi, Klay, Bosh, Parish or Walton are more in that mold, the Bulls never really had a 3rd player ever that good.

Rodman was a great defender/rebounder but useless when they really needed a bucket.

A "super team" should have 3 even 4 guys that can give you 20 on any given night and it not be that far out of their ability to do so.

Precisely. Round ball likes to bump this narrative that the Bulls had a "super-team". What would that make a lineup of Robinson-Elliott-Johnson-Rodman that won 62 games and lost in the WCF? Was that a "super-team"? Were the Magic with Penny-Shaq-Scott a super-team? (Scott averaged 17.5 ppg in 1995-96). Or how about Rod Strickland-Juwan Howard-Chris Webber in 1998? None of those teams were "super-teams," and neither were the Bulls.

[Axe]

MJ never beat a 73-win team
Well, they didn't have to when the bulls are that team during the 90s, monkey... i mean mugiwara, rather.

[Soundwave]

What was MJ's best finals opponent?

The Suns and there's more to winning a championship than just playing in the Finals, which of course LeBron stans don't understand because he was basically given a pass straight into the Finals for many years due to the Eastern Conference being a joke.

But believe it or not in the past you actually had to work to get to the NBA Finals and not just clown Demar Derozan.

[Soundwave]

The 73 win Warriors are overrated, they have a great regular season record, so what. They nearly got eliminated by James Harden and co. before pissing away the Finals by playing dumb basketball.

LeBron = Curry
Kyrie = Klay
Love = Draymond

Where is the massive mismatch here? If LeBron is the best player by far as his groupies claim he is then this should be a fairly evenly matched, competitive series.

We know the Durant Warriors, even when they only won 56 games was a much better team than the 73 win Warriors.

[HoopsNY]

Id say Kukoc could've did what Bosh did. And they had Rodman who is in the Hall of Fame. Rodman was the best player on that Piston team that won 48 games in I believe 94. Harper was still capable of scoring 20 a night. His role just changed. Worthy didnt do much of anything as the leader of the Lakers in 92. Walton was an old man by the time he joined the Celtics.

The Bulls were stacked.

Harper was not capable of scoring 20 a night. He was poor offensively and overrated defensively. Harper couldn't even learn the triangle offense and struggled to average 7 points. How was he going to score 20 a night?

Kukoc was nowhere near the level of Bosh. Bosh was an all-star putting up 24/10 in Toronto before he arrived in Miami, and was top 5 in PER. Kukoc did nothing after Jordan and Pippen left, so what makes anyone think he was going to be some prime star on the level of Bosh?

[LeCroix]

The Suns and there's more to winning a championship than just playing in the Finals, which of course LeBron stans don't understand because he was basically given a pass straight into the Finals for many years due to the Eastern Conference being a joke.

But believe it or not in the past you actually had to work to get to the NBA Finals and not just clown Demar Derozan.

DeMar is modern MJ so... careful with ya words

So MJs best win was a 93 Barkley?

[LeCroix]

Harper was not capable of scoring 20 a night. He was poor offensively and overrated defensively. Harper couldn't even learn the triangle offense and struggled to average 7 points. How was he going to score 20 a night?

Kukoc was nowhere near the level of Bosh. Bosh was an all-star putting up 24/10 in Toronto before he arrived in Miami, and was top 5 in PER. Kukoc did nothing after Jordan and Pippen left, so what makes anyone think he was going to be some prime star on the level of Bosh?

Literally the year prior to Chicaho he scored 20...

How do younot know that as a Bulls fan?????

[Whoah10115]

I swear you Jordan zealots make us Jordan fans look bad. Face the facts. The Bulls were a Championship Contender when Jordan left in 94. 6th best record in the NBA. Only 9 game off the best record. And that's with Pippen missing 10 games.

They weren't quite contenders. Close to being, but even tho they took us to 7 they needed that crazy Kukoc shot to avoid going down 3-0, and they never led in the series.

There was no point where we were seriously in jeopardy of losing. We went to 7 with everyone. Even lost a game in the first round. The Knicks were not a team to sweep anybody. That was pretty normal.

In 1994 we set a record for most playoff games played. Now even the first round is 7 games, but otherwise we'd still have it. Lost 1 game in the first round and the others all went to 7. And we still needed a truly monster performance from Pat, including an offensive rebound-dunk in the last few seconds, to win the next series. Just how it was.

[HoopsNY]

The 73 win Warriors are overrated, they have a great regular season record, so what. They nearly got eliminated by James Harden and co. before pissing away the Finals by playing dumb basketball.

LeBron = Curry
Kyrie = Klay
Love = Draymond

Where is the massive mismatch here? If LeBron is the best player by far as his groupies claim he is then this should be a fairly evenly matched, competitive series.

We know the Durant Warriors, even when they only won 56 games was a much better team than the 73 win Warriors.

More like:

Lebron > Curry
Kyrie > Klay
Draymond > Love

...at least for that season.

[Soundwave]

Literally the year prior to Chicaho he scored 20...

How do younot know that as a Bulls fan?????

He had massive knee issues by then and was able to shot jack on a terrible Clippers team, when he arrived in Chicago even pre-Jordan he was averaging a miserable 6-7 ppg. He was a shell of his former self by then.

[Axe]

The 73 win Warriors are overrated, they have a great regular season record, so what. They nearly got eliminated by James Harden and co. before pissing away the Finals by playing dumb basketball.

LeBron = Curry
Kyrie = Klay
Love = Draymond

Where is the massive mismatch here? If LeBron is the best player by far as his groupies claim he is then this should be a fairly evenly matched, competitive series.

We know the Durant Warriors, even when they only won 56 games was a much better team than the 73 win Warriors.
Idk why but suddenly, I'm starting to think that the overhyped 73-9 campaign of the warriors four seasons ago actually was the reason that costed them to win the championship in 2016.

[Soundwave]

More like:

Lebron > Curry
Kyrie > Klay
Draymond > Love

...at least for that season.

Either way, this should be a evenly matched series on paper.

Now when they added Durant, that is a mismatch, but the Cavs weren't even competitive even with Kyrie. The Rockets at least were competitive. Maybe Harden is better than people give him credit for, he did better against the Durant Warriors than LeBron did even with Kyrie.

[Boarman1]

In the 90's there were specialists, ie: shooters, ball handlers, and rebounders.

Nowadays all the great players can do everything, shoot, pass, handle the rock, rebound, play defense, and everything else

The skill and athleticism has definitely improved. I would say the competition compared to both MJ and LeBron is as equally competitive.

If Jordan played in the modern era, I would argue he would have increased his skill level due to the fact that the competition was increasing.

[HoopsNY]

Literally the year prior to Chicaho he scored 20...

How do younot know that as a Bulls fan?????

And? What happened when he came to Chicago? Even in the 1994-95 season without MJ there, he was incapable of scoring. And I'm not a Bulls fan. I watched the man play nearly his entire career. I watched his horrid offensive performances in the Bulls years. He was incapable on bad legs by the time he arrived in Chicago.

Keep in mind he was mostly a slasher and mid-range shooter, so the knee injury he had earlier on in his career really negatively impacted him. Couple that with having to learn the triangle offense and he was obsolete offensively.

[Soundwave]

In the 90's there were specialists, ie: shooters, ball handlers, and rebounders.

Nowadays all the great players can do everything, shoot, pass, handle the rock, rebound, play defense, and everything else

The skill and athleticism has definitely improved. I would say the competition compared to both MJ and LeBron is as equally competitive.

If Jordan played in the modern era, I would argue he would have increased his skill level due to the fact that the competition was increasing.

He would work more on his 3s which would be fine because his shot mechanics are a thing of beauty but other than that ... Jordan is more skilled than any player in the modern NBA. Kawhi Leonard is robotic and clumsy in his movements compared to a prime era Jordan and Kawhi is arguably the best overall player in the game today.

[LeCroix]

And? What happened when he came to Chicago? Even in the 1994-95 season without MJ there, he was incapable of scoring. And I'm not a Bulls fan. I watched the man play nearly his entire career. I watched his horrid offensive performances in the Bulls years. He was incapable on bad legs by the time he arrived in Chicago.

Keep in mind he was mostly a slasher and mid-range shooter, so the knee injury he had earlier on in his career really negatively impacted him. Couple that with having to learn the triangle offense and he was obsolete offensively.
:lol Really???

Youve been talking about MJ and the Bulls nonstop 346 posts, but you are 'not a fan'?

[Whoah10115]

:lol Really???

Youve been talking about MJ and the Bulls nonstop 346 posts, but you are 'not a fan'?


Why not instead respond to the Ron Harper thing?

Yaaaaaaaah.

[Soundwave]

The reason LeBron doesn't have more titles is he was not willing to accomodate Wade and Bosh's needs in Miami. It was play LeBron-ball or nothing, and Wade and LeBron were never really a great duo in that sense because LeBron wouldn't make an adjustment.

He thought it would be easy and they would just win 4/5/6 titles off talent and when that didn't happen he bailed out.

Jordan and Kobe don't get enough credit for taking individual sacrifices in their games to play a more team centric system that allowed them to win more titles. Jordan could have said "nope" to the triangle, Kobe did for several years play within a Shaq-first setup.

Only now at the tail end of his career do you see LeBron finally taking tangible steps to make sure AD is accommodated, and it took him 18 years to figure that out because he's getting old and he knows the team can't be run entirely through him anymore.

But that stubborness probably cost him multiple titles in Miami, that team should have been better than that. They never really meshed that great and I think a big reason is he was not willing to do what Jordan did in working a system that was more tailored to his teammates needs first. Had to be his style of play first and everyone else secondary.

Those Heat teams shouldn't have been losing to like a 37 year old Duncan.

[HoopsNY]

:lol Really???

Youve been talking about MJ and the Bulls nonstop 346 posts, but you are 'not a fan'?

Nope. Keep in mind, I don't start the posts. I respond to whatever is on the forum.

[Roundball_Rock]

The Bulls had a surprisingly good season in 93-94, but it does get a bit overrated. They were not looking like a contender at all by 94-95 ... they looked like a mediocre franchise that was maybe a 8th seed until a baseball strike bailed them out of that fate.

They had the second best SRS in the East, the SRS of a 42-23 win team before MJ came back. They were 11-6 after the all-star break before MJ returned. They had a slow start, injuries, and an adjustment period adding multiple new starters and losing their top 3 bigs (Grant, Cartwright, Williams) but were rolling in the second half of the season. They were starting to win a lot of games by 10+ right before MJ returned.

What you left out was it was a mediocre East where Indiana made the ECF two years in a row as a 47 and 52 win team.


1997 utah jazz came close but besides them nobody else. I want to say Stockton's last superstar year was 1997. Sloan cut down Stockton's minutes big time by 98 finals for some reason.

1997 finals: Jazz had a .5 worse eFG% , just .6 less in PPG

Utah was the second best team in terms of sustained success over the decade--it is not surprising they were the other team that had at least 2 HOF players for the entire run. Still, Utah was much less successful than Chicago. People want to pin the Finals losses on Jordan but Malone/Stockton were losing in the West every year outside of 97' and 98', and there is no guarantee they beat the Heat or Pacers if no Bulls (probably split the two IMO).



'90-'91 Champions
'91-'92 Champions
'92-'93 Champions
'93-'94 2nd round exit
'94-'95 2nd round exit
'95-'96 Champions
'96-'97 Champions
'97-'98 Champions

See what happened?

That Jordan and Grant/Rodman were important? Of course.

The Bulls without Pippen in 98' were on a 56 win pace (Bulls had a 58 win pace with Pippen in 94' as a comparison, over 72 games) and MJ gets toasted for doing it for 2/5 a season without Pippen meanwhile the 94' team gets diminished. The Bulls didn't win anything without Grant or Rodman there and they weren't going to win without Jordan or Pippen either.


The Raptors are on pace for 59 wins this season, no one is really pushing all that hard for Pascal Siakim to win MVP.

Siakam isn't a superstar but people have noted it shows Toronto was not a one man team, playoffs pending.


No one's pretending they're not, you keep pushing that, but to say the Bulls didn't play anyone or that era was weak is a joke.

So you agree the Bulls didn't play any comparable team? So what is the dispute here?


Youve been talking about MJ and the Bulls nonstop 346 posts, but you are 'not a fan'?

:roll:

[Axe]

If Jordan played in the modern era, I would argue he would have increased his skill level due to the fact that the competition was increasing.
I suppose it'd be great if they can all adjust to what the league currently is nowadays but that's only imaginable.

[97 bulls]

Chris Bosh got the Raptors into the playoffs and had multiple 20/10 seasons ... Toni Kukoc is nowhere close to that. Bosh is closer to Pippen than Kukoc.

The best Bosh was ever able to do was lead the Raptors to 47 wins. Other than that? The teams he led won 33, 27, 41, 33, and 40 games. And they tried to win. Kukoc had 1 year leading a team in which the Bulls finished with 13 wins in a strike shortened season and that team tried to lose, and intentionally didn't try to put a competitive team on the floor.

[Roundball_Rock]

They weren't quite contenders. Close to being, but even tho they took us to 7 they needed that crazy Kukoc shot to avoid going down 3-0, and they never led in the series.

There was no point where we were seriously in jeopardy of losing. We went to 7 with everyone. Even lost a game in the first round. The Knicks were not a team to sweep anybody. That was pretty normal.

1) The Kukoc shot was to avoid OT not to avoid losing.
2) Bulls never led in the series thanks to Hue Hollins' infamous "call" to decide Game 5 on the final Knicks' possession. The Bulls got robbed after having won the game on the court to earn a 3-2 lead heading to Chicago.
3) The Bulls actually outscored the Knicks over the series.
4) The Bulls led in the fourth quarter in 6 or 7 of the games. If you want to erase Kukoc you can cut that the other way with lucky bounces in close games that went New York's way.

You are making the case for why the Knicks were in jeopardy: they were good but not great and had trouble with good teams. They beat the Bulls with an assist from Hollins, beat Indiana in 94' in 7 but lost to Houston in 7 and to Indiana in 7 in 95'. They weren't a juggernaut. They were good, scrappy and won or lost depending on a few breaks here and there (if Starks makes a three they beat Houston, if Hollins doesn't intervene they likely lose to Chicago, etc.)

After New York, Chicago was the second most likely team to come out the East. That isn't being a contender? The East bracket was weird that year with the two best teams matching up in the second round instead of the ECF that year. This allowed a 47 win team to sneak into the ECF. If the teams were healthy the Bulls would be the 1 seed and it would have been NY/Atlanta in the second round and NY/CHI in the ECF.

People keep bringing up Atlanta. Atlanta's best player was Danny Manning after they traded superstar Wilkins at the trade deadline (they were a 59 win pace team before the trade, 53 win team after). You need a Pippen, Ewing, Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, or Robinson to win chips.

[97 bulls]

And? What happened when he came to Chicago? Even in the 1994-95 season without MJ there, he was incapable of scoring. And I'm not a Bulls fan. I watched the man play nearly his entire career. I watched his horrid offensive performances in the Bulls years. He was incapable on bad legs by the time he arrived in Chicago.

Keep in mind he was mostly a slasher and mid-range shooter, so the knee injury he had earlier on in his career really negatively impacted him. Couple that with having to learn the triangle offense and he was obsolete offensively.

Ron Harpers knees had nothing to do with his scoring output in Chicago. He had a hard time picking up the offense. I wish people would stop saying that. Harper got hurt in 90. When he came back while with the Clippers, he averaged 19-20 ppg per season. Over 4 years. The offenses he played in with the Clippers and Cavs were more open and uptempo.

I mean do the math. He averaged 7ppg playing 20 min a night while being the 5th option being Jordan (who has the highest usage rate ever) Pippen, and Kukoc and Longley. The Bulls just didn't need him to be a scorer. And the style of the league didnt dictate as many opportunities as he would see today and in the 80s.

[warriorfan]

The reason LeBron doesn't have more titles is he was not willing to accomodate Wade and Bosh's needs in Miami. It was play LeBron-ball or nothing, and Wade and LeBron were never really a great duo in that sense because LeBron wouldn't make an adjustment.

He thought it would be easy and they would just win 4/5/6 titles off talent and when that didn't happen he bailed out.

Jordan and Kobe don't get enough credit for taking individual sacrifices in their games to play a more team centric system that allowed them to win more titles. Jordan could have said "nope" to the triangle, Kobe did for several years play within a Shaq-first setup.

Only now at the tail end of his career do you see LeBron finally taking tangible steps to make sure AD is accommodated, and it took him 18 years to figure that out because he's getting old and he knows the team can't be run entirely through him anymore.

But that stubborness probably cost him multiple titles in Miami, that team should have been better than that. They never really meshed that great and I think a big reason is he was not willing to do what Jordan did in working a system that was more tailored to his teammates needs first. Had to be his style of play first and everyone else secondary.

Those Heat teams shouldn't have been losing to like a 37 year old Duncan.

This is all true. The Heat ended up being a huge failure and let down. They did not play up to their talent level for reasons you mentioned. When LeBron said “not one not two not three not four not five not six not seven..” People believed him. Those were the expectations for that team and they were not able to live up to them.

[Axe]

This is all true. The Heat ended up being a huge failure and let down. They did not play up to their talent level for reasons you mentioned. When LeBron said “not one not two not three not four not five not six not seven..” People believed him. Those were the expectations for that team and they were not able to live up to them.
And some analysts, as well as fans even thought that they will be enough to break 72-10 in 2013 but apparently they were just six games too short of it.

[Roundball_Rock]

Ron Harpers knees had nothing to do with his scoring output in Chicago. He had a hard time picking up the offense. I wish people would stop saying that. Harper got hurt in 90. When he came back while with the Clippers, he averaged 19-20 ppg per season. Over 4 years. The offenses he played in with the Clippers and Cavs were more open and uptempo.

What do they think the Bulls signed him for? :lol He was signed to be the second option, which they lacked in 94' because MJ retired at the last minute, and score 18-20 PPG. Grant scored 15 PPG but a lot of that was on putbacks and dunks. There wasn't much offense being run through him and he had departed anyway. Armstrong couldn't give you more than 14-15 PPG. Kukoc was a second year player who fit in well as a #3 scorer but not as a #2 on a good team.


“We pinpointed Ron as the combination scorer and defender we wanted, and he's going to fit well into our system,”

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-09-17-sp-39699-story.html

[Whoah10115]

Ron Harpers knees had nothing to do with his scoring output in Chicago. He had a hard time picking up the offense. I wish people would stop saying that. Harper got hurt in 90. When he came back while with the Clippers, he averaged 19-20 ppg per season. Over 4 years. The offenses he played in with the Clippers and Cavs were more open and uptempo.

I mean do the math. He averaged 7ppg playing 20 min a night while being the 5th option being Jordan (who has the highest usage rate ever) Pippen, and Kukoc and Longley. The Bulls just didn't need him to be a scorer. And the style of the league didnt dictate as many opportunities as he would see today and in the 80s.

Knees. He did that playing on a bad team. And he was clearly slower, regardless of what the Bulls needed from him. He struggled with the offense and they were already a good team, not the Clippers. Sorry, the knees are relevant in this context.


1) The Kukoc shot was to avoid OT not to avoid losing.
2) Bulls never led in the series thanks to Hue Hollins' infamous "call" to decide Game 5 on the final Knicks' possession. The Bulls got robbed after having won the game on the court to earn a 3-2 lead heading to Chicago.
3) The Bulls actually outscored the Knicks over the series.
4) The Bulls led in the fourth quarter in 6 or 7 of the games. If you want to erase Kukoc you can cut that the other way with lucky bounces in close games that went New York's way.

You are making the case for why the Knicks were in jeopardy: they were good but not great and had trouble with good teams. They beat the Bulls with an assist from Hollins, beat Indiana in 94' in 7 but lost to Houston in 7 and to Indiana in 7 in 95'. They weren't a juggernaut. They were good, scrappy and won or lost depending on a few breaks here and there (if Starks makes a three they beat Houston, if Hollins doesn't intervene they likely lose to Chicago, etc.)

After New York, Chicago was the second most likely team to come out the East. That isn't being a contender? The East bracket was weird that year with the two best teams matching up in the second round instead of the ECF that year. This allowed a 47 win team to sneak into the ECF. If the teams were healthy the Bulls would be the 1 seed and it would have been NY/Atlanta in the second round and NY/CHI in the ECF.

People keep bringing up Atlanta. Atlanta's best player was Danny Manning after they traded superstar Wilkins at the trade deadline (they were a 59 win pace team before the trade, 53 win team after). You need a Pippen, Ewing, Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, or Robinson to win chips.

Avoiding overtime is avoiding the loss, because they would have lost. I'm saying this because they weren't going to beat us. You can tell me about refs if you want, they weren't beating us.

Starks was coming off injury and played like hot garbage pretty much throughout the playoffs. Pre-injury and it wouldn't go 7.

Different from previous year. Starks was already the player who would go on to be an all-star the next year. Charles Smith wasn't fully ass. And the Knicks didn't have a recently traded Derek Harper who, like the other Harper, had a hard time fitting in. They had Rivers playing well and a better overall squad.

[Roundball_Rock]

You can tell me about refs if you want, they weren't beating us.

The Bulls had won that game until Hollins intervened on the Knicks' final posession.


Avoiding overtime is avoiding the loss, because they would have lost.

Speculation. The team fighting to avoid 0-2 is going to fight harder in OT, isn't it? Besides the shot went in. You can't just take it out.

Here were the outcomes in those games: NY +4, NY +5, CHI +2, CHI +12, NY +1*, CHI +14, NY +10.

Three of the NY wins were by 5 or less. The series easily could have swing the other way.

*The Hollins game. Background at https://www.espn.com/nba/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=adande_ja&page=Hollins-090529

[97 bulls]

Knees. He did that playing on a bad team. And he was clearly slower, regardless of what the Bulls needed from him. He struggled with the offense and they were already a good team, not the Clippers. Sorry, the knees are relevant


Bro. Harper was still capable of giving an NBA team 20ppg. His role changed. Period. Put him back on the Clippers and Give him 38 minutes a night does he still score 7ppg?

[Whoah10115]

Bro. Harper was still capable of giving an NBA team 20ppg. His role changed. Period. Put him back on the Clippers and Give him 38 minutes a night does he still score 7ppg?

I guess you wanna ignore the full statement?

I agree with you, to an extent (and don't give me "does he still score 7ppg" because no one here is stupid enough not to understand the minutes he's playing. Be reasonable and ask if I think he can get back to 20).

Anyway, give him 38min on the Clippers..does he get 20? Probably not. Does he get 18? Probably so. Probably a little mobe

Do they win 35 games? They do not. The Bulls were +.500.

I acknowledged the triangle in other posts, and acknowledged that he struggled with the offense in the one you quoted. Add advancing age and the loss of quickness exacerbates. I didn't say he had no knees. He was still relatively athletic, but he was more than that before, and he lost more over a few years.

Add changing teams. Changing systems. And doing all this while going from a BAD team that he had been on while they were kinda good and then when they were bad, and moving onto a team that was better than average and still had some culture.

He wasn't playing for a sub 30win team anymore.

[Whoah10115]

The Bulls had won that game until Hollins intervened on the Knicks' final posession.


Oh wait, is that the one where Scottie fouls Davis?

[Roundball_Rock]

Oh wait, is that the one where Scottie fouls Davis?

Yeah Game 5 (not the Kukoc/1.8 second game). Well, "fouls". ;)

[97 bulls]

I guess you wanna ignore the full statement?

I agree with you, to an extent (and don't give me "does he still score 7ppg" because no one here is stupid enough not to understand the minutes he's playing. Be reasonable and ask if I think he can get back to 20).

Anyway, give him 38min on the Clippers..does he get 20? Probably not. Does he get 18? Probably so. Probably a little mobe

Do they win 35 games? They do not. The Bulls were +.500.

I acknowledged the triangle in other posts, and acknowledged that he struggled with the offense in the one you quoted. Add advancing age and the loss of quickness exacerbates. I didn't say he had no knees. He was still relatively athletic, but he was more than that before, and he lost more over a few years.

Add changing teams. Changing systems. And doing all this while going from a BAD team that he had been on while they were kinda good and then when they were bad, and moving onto a team that was better than average and still had some culture.

He wasn't playing for a sub 30win team anymore.

Lol ok. So we're in agreement Harper was a 18ppg scorer under a different situation. That was my whole point. That's the case with all great teams. Full of players that are playing a role but are more capable under a different situation.

[HoopsNY]

Lol ok. So we're in agreement Harper was a 18ppg scorer under a different situation. That was my whole point. That's the case with all great teams. Full of players that are playing a role but are more capable under a different situation.

Only in the case of Harper, you're giving him way too much credit. Harper's knee injuries date back to 1990, the one that sidelined him for an extensive amount of time. After that, he wasn't the same player. His field goal % went from around 48% to the low 40s, and his efficiency numbers dropped as well.

My point about that is that when you combine age, injury (a knee injury at that), and a system that he clearly couldn't operate within, then that makes a case for inability in any circumstance. If Harper becomes the number one option, that doesn't suddenly turn him into an offensive weapon. Sorry, but I'm not buying that.

[HoopsNY]

The best Bosh was ever able to do was lead the Raptors to 47 wins. Other than that? The teams he led won 33, 27, 41, 33, and 40 games. And they tried to win. Kukoc had 1 year leading a team in which the Bulls finished with 13 wins in a strike shortened season and that team tried to lose, and intentionally didn't try to put a competitive team on the floor.

Bosh was a legit 24/11 player who could shoot a high percentage and play better defense than Kukoc. There is no comparison here.

[LeCroix]

Only in the case of Harper, you're giving him way too much credit. Harper's knee injuries date back to 1990, the one that sidelined him for an extensive amount of time. After that, he wasn't the same player. His field goal % went from around 48% to the low 40s, and his efficiency numbers dropped as well.

My point about that is that when you combine age, injury (a knee injury at that), and a system that he clearly couldn't operate within, then that makes a case for inability in any circumstance. If Harper becomes the number one option, that doesn't suddenly turn him into an offensive weapon. Sorry, but I'm not buying that.

HoopsNY

You sure seem to like Chicago Bulls a lot as a Knicks fan :lol

[HoopsNY]

HoopsNY

You sure seem to like Chicago Bulls a lot as a Knicks fan :lol

The sad part is, I have nothing but disappointment to discuss as a Knicks fan. I mean, do you remember the early 90s? Last night, I watched game 7 against Houston in the 1994 NBA finals again. How heartbreaking it was watching John Starks shoot airball after airball, miss after miss. Even as a basic basketball player in high school, everyone knew, if you were having an off night, get to the foul line. It was so gut wrenching as a child to watch that.

[HoopsNY]

The sad part is, I have nothing but disappointment to discuss as a Knicks fan. I mean, do you remember the early 90s? Last night, I watched game 7 against Houston in the 1994 NBA finals again. How heartbreaking it was watching John Starks shoot airball after airball, miss after miss. Even as a basic basketball player in high school, everyone knew, if you were having an off night, get to the foul line. It was so gut wrenching as a child to watch that.

Any fellow Knicks fans remember the infamous Frederick Weiss draft pick? :cry:

[knicksman]

The reason LeBron doesn't have more titles is he was not willing to accomodate Wade and Bosh's needs in Miami. It was play LeBron-ball or nothing, and Wade and LeBron were never really a great duo in that sense because LeBron wouldn't make an adjustment.

He thought it would be easy and they would just win 4/5/6 titles off talent and when that didn't happen he bailed out.

Jordan and Kobe don't get enough credit for taking individual sacrifices in their games to play a more team centric system that allowed them to win more titles. Jordan could have said "nope" to the triangle, Kobe did for several years play within a Shaq-first setup.

Only now at the tail end of his career do you see LeBron finally taking tangible steps to make sure AD is accommodated, and it took him 18 years to figure that out because he's getting old and he knows the team can't be run entirely through him anymore.

But that stubborness probably cost him multiple titles in Miami, that team should have been better than that. They never really meshed that great and I think a big reason is he was not willing to do what Jordan did in working a system that was more tailored to his teammates needs first. Had to be his style of play first and everyone else secondary.

Those Heat teams shouldn't have been losing to like a 37 year old Duncan.

It really comes down to alpha vs beta. Alpha dogs just have that ring or bust mentality. They dont settle for less. And not just any type of ring but a legit ring not the cheat superteam rings lebron has. Lebron just doesnt have that mentality. Hes contented with his superteam rings and stats. Hes just too pvssy to take that risk. But I dont blame him. If its worth it, its not easy. And being the best scorer in the league is much harder to attain than just being the best all around.

[BigShotBob]

Lebron went against the "great" Brandon Jennings Bucks in the first round....

The "unstoppable" Paul George, Roy Hibbert, Lance Stephenson Pacers.....

The INCOMPARABLE Demar Derozen, Kyle Lowry Raptors.....

The TERRIFYING Jason Tatum, Jaylen Brown Celtics.......

The AMAZING Al Jefferson Charlotte Hornets......

Greatest competition ever

[sportjames23]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/michael-jordan-faced-better-competition-than-lebron-james/?addata=espn:frontpage

Can we finally lay to rest this whole 1990's era was weaker narrative? The revisionist historians in these here parts will find a way to squash this I'm sure.

Another one...

[LeCroix]

Lebron went against the "great" Brandon Jennings Bucks in the first round....

The "unstoppable" Paul George, Roy Hibbert, Lance Stephenson Pacers.....

The INCOMPARABLE Demar Derozen, Kyle Lowry Raptors.....

The TERRIFYING Jason Tatum, Jaylen Brown Celtics.......

The AMAZING Al Jefferson Charlotte Hornets......

Greatest competition ever

Butler, Boozer, Noah Bulls
Boston big 3
Championship Lowry Raptors
Rose MVP, #1 defense Bulls

[97 bulls]

Bosh was a legit 24/11 player who could shoot a high percentage and play better defense than Kukoc. There is no comparison here.

**** the stats bro. What good are the stats if your team loses. I never got that logic. Bosh had 6 years to lead a team Kukoc had 1. He never had a team built around him like Bosh. The 99 Bulls were built to lose. Krause didnt want to win. They wanted to tank. Brent Barry and an old Ron Harper were his next best players. And he still had the same result as a player in Bosh who had an organizational that tried to put a contender on the Court.

You'd be one of the few people that believe that Kukoc wouldn't have been in a few tall-star games and had better stats had he had played in a different situation. Basically Bosh career before Miami.

[97 bulls]

It really comes down to alpha vs beta. Alpha dogs just have that ring or bust mentality. They dont settle for less. And not just any type of ring but a legit ring not the cheat superteam rings lebron has. Lebron just doesnt have that mentality. Hes contented with his superteam rings and stats. Hes just too pvssy to take that risk. But I dont blame him. If its worth it, its not easy. And being the best scorer in the league is much harder to attain than just being the best all around.

Alpha dogs have the best talent.

[BigShotBob]

Butler, Boozer, Noah Bulls
Boston big 3
Championship Lowry Raptors
Rose MVP, #1 defense Bulls

Boozer Bulls :roll:

Geriatric Boston Big 3 :roll:

"Legendary" Kyle Lowry :roll:

Luol Deng, Derrick Rose Bulls :roll:

[HoopsNY]

**** the stats bro. What good are the stats if your team loses. I never got that logic. Bosh had 6 years to lead a team Kukoc had 1. He never had a team built around him like Bosh. The 99 Bulls were built to lose. Krause didnt want to win. They wanted to tank. Brent Barry and an old Ron Harper were his next best players. And he still had the same result as a player in Bosh who had an organizational that tried to put a contender on the Court.

You'd be one of the few people that believe that Kukoc wouldn't have been in a few tall-star games and had better stats had he had played in a different situation. Basically Bosh career before Miami.

Because he wasn't that talented. Kukoc had a 3 pt shot and could dribble. He wasn't impressive beyond that. What did he do in Philadelphia when he got traded from Chicago? More of the same. And in the playoffs he shot poorly. That was a 49 win team that made it to the second round of the playoffs. Again, I think you're overrating Kukoc.

One player is an 11x all-star, the other one was a sixth man on any team, let alone a good team. Bosh would have continued had he not ended up with such awful health issues. You can't possibly think the two players are in any way equal, even if we assume better of Kukoc had he more playing time.

[LeCroix]

Boozer Bulls :roll:

Geriatric Boston Big 3 :roll:

"Legendary" Kyle Lowry :roll:

Luol Deng, Derrick Rose Bulls :roll:


ZVC

[97 bulls]

Because he wasn't that talented. Kukoc had a 3 pt shot and could dribble. He wasn't impressive beyond that. What did he do in Philadelphia when he got traded from Chicago? More of the same. And in the playoffs he shot poorly. That was a 49 win team that made it to the second round of the playoffs. Again, I think you're overrating Kukoc.

One player is an 11x all-star, the other one was a sixth man on any team, let alone a good team. Bosh would have continued had he not ended up with such awful health issues. You can't possibly think the two players are in any way equal, even if we assume better of Kukoc had he more playing time.
He played with a ball dominant cancer in Iverson. His best years were with the Bulls. He never got the chance like Bosh did. I mean what so impressive about good stats on a bad team? Bosh became exactly what Kukoc was on a contender. The number 3 guy. Because thats what he was. If he were good enough to lead a contender, he would've done it.

The fact is he did no better than Kukoc with much more talent and opportunities. Again, **** yo stats. Lol

[LostCause]

Jordan faced tougher competition en route to the Finals

LeBron faced tougher competition in the Finals

It’s really not that hard to understand

[Cyrus334]

Butler, Boozer, Noah Bulls
Boston big 3
Championship Lowry Raptors
Rose MVP, #1 defense Bulls

You can do better than this bruh :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Jordan faced tougher competition en route to the Finals

LeBron faced tougher competition in the Finals

It’s really not that hard to understand

Pretty much.

[Soundwave]

He played with a ball dominant cancer in Iverson. His best years were with the Bulls. He never got the chance like Bosh did. I mean what so impressive about good stats on a bad team? Bosh became exactly what Kukoc was on a contender. The number 3 guy. Because thats what he was. If he were good enough to lead a contender, he would've done it.

The fact is he did no better than Kukoc with much more talent and opportunities. Again, **** yo stats. Lol

Bosh was 4th in the league in PER and 24/11 the summer he left to Miami, c'mon get real.

He was closer to a Pippen tier player than Kukoc.

Wade + Bosh + LeBron never really had great chemistry because LeBron refused to change his game to help the other two guys, Jordan made that sacrifice to embrace the triangle even though it wasn't really beneficial to him individually.

That's the big difference between the Bulls and Heat, Jordan accepted a change in the way things were run for a more team centric approach that, if you're on a LeBron team it's his way or the highway.

Doesn't mean the Heat weren't talented though, they were, just their star player was stubborn and only wanted to play one way, the Bulls star player was willing to adapt to a system that took the ball out of his hands.

[1987_Lakers]

**** the stats bro. What good are the stats if your team loses. I never got that logic. Bosh had 6 years to lead a team Kukoc had 1. He never had a team built around him like Bosh. The 99 Bulls were built to lose. Krause didnt want to win. They wanted to tank. Brent Barry and an old Ron Harper were his next best players. And he still had the same result as a player in Bosh who had an organizational that tried to put a contender on the Court.

You'd be one of the few people that believe that Kukoc wouldn't have been in a few tall-star games and had better stats had he had played in a different situation. Basically Bosh career before Miami.

You overrate the hell out of that Bulls cast to be honest. Kukoc was a #1 option in '99, he shot 42% and led the Bulls to a 13-37 record and we all know his defense was trash. Bosh as a #1 option was a 22/10 player who shot 50%, he was putting up those numbers as a 21 year old. That is way more success than Kukoc could ever dream of. Kukoc is basically a Lamar Odom type player in terms of impact, even though I would take Odom because his defense was much better.

[LostCause]

As in-depth an analysis of their competition as you'll find

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/g8iphv/oc_jordan_v_lebron_has_lebron_actually_played/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/g95h4i/oc_jordan_v_lebron_has_lebron_actually_played/


OVERALL ANALYSIS

LeBrons played the underdog the majority of his career when facing elite teams. Jordans Finals winning teams were almost always better than their competition, but they also faced comp that was usually equal to & in a few cases better than LeBrons. Skill level of the teams surrounding MJ & Bron then comes into question (& is likely in Jordan's favor by a good amount)

Theres also the subject of Bron’s losses. Ultimately, you can’t hold it against him he’s had the bad luck of playing against some of the greatest teams ever. However, I find it egregious the degree to which his teams have been beaten in some series. Even in Jordan’s 2nd season, when the Bulls were still very much the “cocaine Bulls,” they kept their series with the 86 Celtics closer than Bron’s losses to both the 14 Spurs & 18 Warriors—and MJ’s Bulls were unarguably a worse supporting cast at the time.

In my view, the only bad loss in Jordan's career comes at the hands of the 88 Pistons, who graded out very similarly to the 88 Bulls but manhandled them pretty thoroughly. At the time, Jordan & his teammates were young & inexperienced while those Pistons teams were on the verge of their watershed moment after having fought Bird's Celtics in the East for years.

Finally, Bron has lost 3 series in which his team was better in the reg season: the 2009 ECF against the Magic, 2010 ECSF against Boston & 2011 Finals against the Mavs. Against the Mavs, he turned in what is likely the worst performance ever by a Top-5 all-time player in any Finals. He's done much to repair his reputation as a postseason performer in the years since, but the fact of the matter is players in his echelon simply don't have series that bad & its something that should remain in the discussion when trying to pinpoint LeBron's place in the NBA pantheon.

Final Verdict

LeBrons faced tougher competition, but his opponents havent been overwhelmingly better than Jordan's, contrary to popular belief—there should be more nuance to the discussion than simply saying "Jordan lost earlier in the playoffs more often," as Jordan played teams on par with LeBron's Finals opponents early in the playoffs due to strength of the Eastern Conference in the 80s. While LeBron has more impressive wins than Jordan, Jordan never lost a series in which his Bulls were the favorite, while LeBron has lost three.

Images:
Comparing their own teams (https://i.ibb.co/ykvLgMZ/krvx9yxxcev41.png)
First Round Opponents (https://i.ibb.co/nbMq1ry/pwd14vl877v41.png)
SemiFinals Opponents (https://i.ibb.co/vV6GdWm/k00conje87v41.png)
Conference Finals Opponents (https://i.ibb.co/Nxr5RR0/qr2pjzdc77v41.png)
Finals Opponents (https://i.ibb.co/chDmmfN/cf3wqgbndev41.png)
Series Wins (https://i.ibb.co/w0dJSW8/ev83kpz0dev41.png)
Series Losses (https://i.ibb.co/n105g3B/f8gvb53zcev41.png)
Toughest Competition (https://i.ibb.co/tLmqVYw/6uamlhx1cev41.png)

Conferences during Jordans career (https://i.ibb.co/tJbbhLL/kvyboq9t67v41.png)
Conferences during LeBrons career (https://i.ibb.co/zPYsncm/ljfolvzt67v41.png)

[SATAN]

Imagine Jordan with the Cavs casts :oldlol:

[RogueBorg]

Butler, Boozer, Noah Bulls
Boston big 3
Championship Lowry Raptors
Rose MVP, #1 defense Bulls

Let's put to rest Boston's Big 3 in 2010-'11 Here's their ages at the start of the playoffs.

2010-'11 Boston
Ray Allen 35 years old
Kevin Garnett 35 years old
Paul Pierce 33 years old


Here's Detroit since I KNOW you think they were old
1990-'91 Detroit
Isiah Thomas 30 years old
Joe Dumars 28 years old
Dennis Rodman 30 years old
Bill Laimbeer 34 years old
Mark Aguirre 31 years old

Any questions?

[Axe]

Let's put to rest Boston's Big 3 in 2010-'11 Here's their ages at the start of the playoffs.

2010-'11 Boston
Ray Allen 35 years old
Kevin Garnett 35 years old
Paul Pierce 33 years old


Here's Detroit since I KNOW you think they were old
1990-'91 Detroit
Isiah Thomas 30 years old
Joe Dumars 28 years old
Dennis Rodman 30 years old
Bill Laimbeer 34 years old
Mark Aguirre 31 years old

Any questions?
He wouldn't comprehend any of that. 😂

[Roundball_Rock]

I think most people can agree the LeBron teams faced tougher finals opponents and MJ teams tougher conference opponents. The question is the superiority (or lack thereof) of their teams relative to to said comp. All the available data suggests the Bulls' were the super team of their era while the Heat/Cavs were just another contender (except 2018 when they were average). Disagree with it if you want but there isn't any actual data showing otherwise.

The Heat and Cavs became lottery teams without LeBron.

Here is what SRS says for the years LeBron and Jordan made the finals or ECF. Same for KAJ through 1985:

SRS Team Ranks

Jordan: 10th, 9th, 1st, 1st, 4th, 1st, 1st, 1st
LeBron: 7th, 1st, 1st, 4th, 2nd, 7th, 6th, 4th, 7th, 14th
Kareem: 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 5th, 2nd, 4th, 3rd, 5th, 2nd

You could do the same analysis with wins or combined offensive and defensive rating or # of HOF players or whatever. No matter how you slice it the same trends will show.

[Roundball_Rock]

For further comparison, here is those teams minus LeBron or MJ.

Bulls' SRS ranks without MJ (94' and 95'): 11th, 6th

Pippen* missed 10 games in 94' and they went 4-6 without him and 5-7 total before his return. Grant* missed 12 games. When healthy they had the 5th best SRS. For 95', they were 2nd in the East behind Orlando and tied for 6th overall with Phoenix.

For LeBron's teams there was so much turnover after 10' and 18' that we can't really use those years. We can use 15', though.

Heat's SRS rank without LeBron (15'): 21st

But Bosh! Bosh! They had the SRS of a 19-33 team (i.e., a 30 win team) before Bosh's season ended, which put them in 23rd tied with three other teams.

As to Wade, he was healthier in 2015 than he was in 2014. It is disingenuous to use Wade's injury as an excuse in 2015 as if him being injured wasn't baked into the 2014 performance baseline. He simply got hurt every year.

*Pippen and Grant were durable, outside of 94'. Pippen played 81, 82, 82, 82 games in the preceding years. 79, 77, 82 thereafter. Grant 77, 81, 78, 80, 79, 81 in Chicago. He started to have issues in Orlando.

[Whoah10115]

Yeah Game 5 (not the Kukoc/1.8 second game). Well, "fouls". ;)

Pippen appeared to go between his hands, before he'd even started to come down..maybe they didn't always call it, but looked a pretty easy call for the ref to make.

Also, Jordan's Finals competition is better. LeBron had the Warriors, of course. Credit to him for an absurd win in 2016 and for doing what he did in two other series.

The two Spurs teams he lost to were also terrific, but the better on is 07 and they shouldn't have been in the Finals. Suns were better and robbed.


Lol ok. So we're in agreement Harper was a 18ppg scorer under a different situation. That was my whole point. That's the case with all great teams. Full of players that are playing a role but are more capable under a different situation.

Of course, barring something unforseen.

Even if Harper started to figure it out, he moved to PG the next year. He was still solidly athletic, as could be seen by how good a defender he had become.


And yes, Kukoc isn't as good as Bosh, but Bosh ain't Scottie Pippen. However, I do think Kukoc had the talent to be at least as good as Bosh. Not just scoring, but his all-around game, minus the defense (tho I remember that improving, substantially).

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen appeared to go between his hands, before he'd even started to come down..maybe they didn't always call it, but looked a pretty easy call for the ref to make.

They never called it then...let alone to decide a playoff game. Davis was a 83% free throw shooter and the deficit was 1. The NBA even admitted it was a mistake the following season.


Technically a player is defined as being in the act of shooting from the time he goes up for the shot until after he has landed back on the ground. Except, as even Davis admits, "That's a call you normally don't get."

Today, with concern about defenders sliding under shooters and causing injuries, it gets called more often. That wasn't the case back then, and certainly not with a playoff outcome riding on it. Steve Kerr had been hit the same way several times that year, his first with the Bulls, and never was sent to the free-throw line.

"I went to the ref every time and they said, 'It doesn't matter, the shot was released," Kerr says. "Back then it was not called. And every time I asked the ref, I got the exact same explanation: Once you release the shot it doesn't matter."

This time Davis was awarded two free throws. He made them both and the Knicks won.

After the game, Phil Jackson didn't take any questions when he addressed the media. He made one statement that lasted exactly 38 seconds. His main point: "I've seen a lot of things happen in the NBA, but I've never seen anything happen like what happened at the end of the game."

The Knicks wound up winning the series in seven games.

"Have I ever seen a single call make a difference like that?" Pippen says. "No. Never ever. It cost us the whole series."

Not only does Kerr remember that play; he remembers a play the next season, when he was hit after shooting a 3-pointer and didn't draw a foul. He asked the official why there wasn't a call.

"He said it was after the release," Kerr says. "I said, 'So was Scottie Pippen on Hubert Davis.'"

https://www.espn.com/nba/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=adande_ja&page=Hollins-090529


Also, Jordan's Finals competition is better. LeBron had the Warriors, of course. Credit to him for an absurd win in 2016 and for doing what he did in two other series.

Based on what? LeBron had two dynasties plus a OKC team with 3 future MVP's. Dallas was the only run of the mill opponent.

[Whoah10115]

They never called it then...let alone to decide a playoff game. Davis was a 83% free throw shooter and the deficit was 1. The NBA even admitted it was a mistake the following season.



https://www.espn.com/nba/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=adande_ja&page=Hollins-090529



Based on what? LeBron had two dynasties plus a OKC team with 3 future MVP's. Dallas was the only run of the mill opponent.

Dallas wasn't run of the mill, but not obvious like OKC. They had 3, so did Miami.

Bulls had that terrific Blazers team, those loaded Sonics teams (I laugh that people laugh at them because they had been chokers in the past, as if they couldn't grow up and move on), and the Jazz were a great team. They had a strong bench, Ostertag didn't suck pure balls and better than Longley, Stockton was not elite in 2nd run but still a great player, and Hornacek is damn good, plus solid Russell.

And then those Suns. That was a great team. I give you that the Warriros are the best of em, but by and large I take the Jordan opponents.

Also, Barkley is the best player either has faced, hands down. If Duncan were in his prime any of the three times LeBron played him, you'd have someone closer, but Steph isn't better than Barkley. Can talk GOAT lists or whatever, but at their best no. And Malone is in that tier.

[RogueBorg]

Based on what? LeBron had two dynasties plus a OKC team with 3 future MVP's. Dallas was the only run of the mill opponent.

What's your definition of a dynasty?

[guy]

I think most people can agree the LeBron teams faced tougher finals opponents and MJ teams tougher conference opponents. The question is the superiority (or lack thereof) of their teams relative to to said comp. All the available data suggests the Bulls' were the super team of their era while the Heat/Cavs were just another contender (except 2018 when they were average). Disagree with it if you want but there isn't any actual data showing otherwise.

The Heat and Cavs became lottery teams without LeBron.

Here is what SRS says for the years LeBron and Jordan made the finals or ECF. Same for KAJ through 1985:

SRS Team Ranks

Jordan: 10th, 9th, 1st, 1st, 4th, 1st, 1st, 1st
LeBron: 7th, 1st, 1st, 4th, 2nd, 7th, 6th, 4th, 7th, 14th
Kareem: 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 5th, 2nd, 4th, 3rd, 5th, 2nd

You could do the same analysis with wins or combined offensive and defensive rating or # of HOF players or whatever. No matter how you slice it the same trends will show.

Regular season results form expectations for the playoffs, but that basically disregards exactly what drove those regular season results in the first place.

Its pretty well documented how much Jordan brought out of his teammates all season long, not just during parts of the season and playoffs, which brought upon a consistent level of play and intensity all throughout the year. And that was a big part in what formed the culture and experience of the team even when he left them.

Meanwhile, Lebron’s teams have underperformed regularly in the regular season since he left Cleveland the first time for Miami to the point that they complained about how intense practices were and there were times in Cleveland the 2nd time around where they weren’t even practicing at all. The article itself says Cleveland was conserving their energy a lot during the season and these numbers don’t take that into account.

Jordan’s teams were better because of chemistry and discipline and probably cause Jordan > Lebron. That doesn’t mean Lebron didn’t have just as much or more talent on his teams for a large part of his career.

Lebron’s team also had continuity issues so they were always “figuring it out” during the regular season but a large part of that is due to turnover from the team due to them not winning as much and the threat of Lebron leaving and the implication that he always needs more help. That’s the only reason his teams may have not had the same ceiling to perform just as well in the regular season – but he also played in a weaker conference so that probably offsets that somewhat.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Jordan faced tougher competition en route to the Finals

LeBron faced tougher competition in the Finals

It’s really not that hard to understand

For some apparently it is.

Look @ the red-herrings being posted here. And circumstances that have nothing to do with the topic, or data.

What the OP did though is put the '90s=weak' myth to sleep. Then again, FACTS tend to have that effect.

[97 bulls]

Dallas wasn't run of the mill, but not obvious like OKC. They had 3, so did Miami.

Bulls had that terrific Blazers team, those loaded Sonics teams (I laugh that people laugh at them because they had been chokers in the past, as if they couldn't grow up and move on), and the Jazz were a great team. They had a strong bench, Ostertag didn't suck pure balls and better than Longley, Stockton was not elite in 2nd run but still a great player, and Hornacek is damn good, plus solid Russell.

And then those Suns. That was a great team. I give you that the Warriros are the best of em, but by and large I take the Jordan opponents.

Also, Barkley is the best player either has faced, hands down. If Duncan were in his prime any of the three times LeBron played him, you'd have someone closer, but Steph isn't better than Barkley. Can talk GOAT lists or whatever, but at their best no. And Malone is in that tier.

What about Magic in 91?

[ImKobe]

Jordan faced better competition in his Conference. Lebron has a slight edge in the Finals, but the Warriors did have a hobbled Curry and obviously Dray got suspended on top of Bogut & Iggy getting injured in that series. Jordan didn't face scrubs in the Finals either. Magic is greater than any player Lebron's faced in a Playoff series. Lebron beat a very young version of KD and a 37 y.o Duncan. I guess beating Curry on one leg is his greatest achievement.

[Carbine]

There werent any. Hence then winning 55 games minus MJ.

Isn't this a pretty illogical claim against Jordan?

They went from a 3 peat to a 2nd round exit losing Jordan but adding Kukoc and Kerr.

This is what should happen. Teams of that caliber aren't going to fall off the cliff losing just one player.

Jordan comes back and they go back to a 3 peat dynasty. I'm struggling to find how '94 is a mark against Jordan

[Axe]

Isn't this a pretty illogical claim against Jordan?

They went from a 3 peat to a 2nd round exit losing Jordan but adding Kukoc and Kerr.

This is what should happen. Teams of that caliber aren't going to fall off the cliff losing just one player.

Jordan comes back and they go back to a 3 peat dynasty. I'm struggling to find how '94 is a mark against Jordan
People back then probably expected that the bulls wouldn't be a playoff contender anymore after mj retired abruptly but as the '94 postseason drew near, the bulls exceeded expectations and were able to win 55 games with pip leading the team. However, 2nd round is the farthest they have reached in the playoffs that year.

[Turbo Slayer]

Jordan faced better competition in his Conference. Lebron has a slight edge in the Finals, but the Warriors did have a hobbled Curry and obviously Dray got suspended on top of Bogut & Iggy getting injured in that series. Jordan didn't face scrubs in the Finals either. Magic is greater than any player Lebron's faced in a Playoff series. Lebron beat a very young version of KD and a 37 y.o Duncan. I guess beating Curry on one leg is his greatest achievement. The 2011-12 Thunder beat down the defending champions in the 1st round, proceeded to beat down Kobe and the Lakers (It would be Kobe's last playoff series and also Lakers were preseason favorites), and beat a Spurs team. Also that "young version of KD" was 2nd in MVP voting. The Thunder had 6MOY in James Harden too.

[97 bulls]

Isn't this a pretty illogical claim against Jordan?

They went from a 3 peat to a 2nd round exit losing Jordan but adding Kukoc and Kerr.

This is what should happen. Teams of that caliber aren't going to fall off the cliff losing just one player.

Jordan comes back and they go back to a 3 peat dynasty. I'm struggling to find how '94 is a mark against Jordan

Understand bro. I'm a Jordan fan. Hes the GOAT. But these zealots like say that his team sucked outside of him. My response is they were still one of the best teams in basketball when he left. With him, they were far and away the best team.

[1987_Lakers]

Dallas wasn't run of the mill, but not obvious like OKC. They had 3, so did Miami.

Bulls had that terrific Blazers team, those loaded Sonics teams (I laugh that people laugh at them because they had been chokers in the past, as if they couldn't grow up and move on), and the Jazz were a great team. They had a strong bench, Ostertag didn't suck pure balls and better than Longley, Stockton was not elite in 2nd run but still a great player, and Hornacek is damn good, plus solid Russell.

And then those Suns. That was a great team. I give you that the Warriros are the best of em, but by and large I take the Jordan opponents.

Also, Barkley is the best player either has faced, hands down. If Duncan were in his prime any of the three times LeBron played him, you'd have someone closer, but Steph isn't better than Barkley. Can talk GOAT lists or whatever, but at their best no. And Malone is in that tier.

Disagree, I'd take 2017 Durant over any version of Barkley.

As far as who they faced in the Finals, you can't make an argument MJ faced better competition.

You can legitimately say that the worst team LeBron faced from 2012-2018 was the 2012 Thunder, and that team had 3 future MVPs. The '12 Thunder were a rich man's version of the '92 Blazers, '13 & '14 Spurs were a rich man's version of the Jazz, & the Warriors we all know are the greatest team ever.

[Roundball_Rock]

What's your definition of a dynasty?

Dynasties are usually pretty obvious to identify. The Spurs are the one odd case because they never won consecutively and their championships were spaced out. I would say sustained excellence, including multiple championships. The Warriors qualify under any definition. I think the vast majority of people would say so do the Spurs but I can see how some would dispute that.


Bulls had that terrific Blazers team, those loaded Sonics teams (I laugh that people laugh at them because they had been chokers in the past, as if they couldn't grow up and move on), and the Jazz were a great team. They had a strong bench, Ostertag didn't suck pure balls and better than Longley, Stockton was not elite in 2nd run but still a great player, and Hornacek is damn good, plus solid Russell.

And then those Suns. That was a great team. I give you that the Warriros are the best of em, but by and large I take the Jordan opponents.

You are listing flashes in the pan. The Warriors, Spurs were elite year after year. Under your definition the 11' Bulls would count as a great team too.


Also, Barkley is the best player either has faced, hands down

I would say it goes Magic, Duncan, and Durant.


If Duncan were in his prime any of the three times LeBron played him

He was in 2007.


This is what should happen. Teams of that caliber aren't going to fall off the cliff losing just one player.


Except that is exactly what happened in every other similar case...


Jordan comes back and they go back to a 3 peat dynasty

So Kerr being added is relevant but not Rodman?


I'm struggling to find how '94 is a mark against Jordan

It isn't. All it is evidence of is Jordan having a good team that he elevated to an all-time great team. For whatever reason this makes his fans insecure so they have to act like MJ played the toughest comp with little help.


The 2011-12 Thunder beat down the defending champions in the 1st round, proceeded to beat down Kobe and the Lakers (It would be Kobe's last playoff series and also Lakers were preseason favorites), and beat a Spurs team. Also that "young version of KD" was 2nd in MVP voting. The Thunder had 6MOY in James Harden too.

They also were in the WCF the prior year. People act like they came out of nowhere in 2012.

[Whoah10115]

Disagree, I'd take 2017 Durant over any version of Barkley.

As far as who they faced in the Finals, you can't make an argument MJ faced better competition.

You can legitimately say that the worst team LeBron faced from 2012-2018 was the 2012 Thunder, and that team had 3 future MVPs. The '12 Thunder were a rich man's version of the '92 Blazers, '13 & '14 Spurs were a rich man's version of the Jazz, & the Warriors we all know are the greatest team ever.

Jordan's competition was better. They were better starting lineups and tougher squads, better coached. The Blazers would have beaten the Thunder.

The 13 and 14 Spurs had no one like Karl Malone. That includes Kawhi, who is not Karl Malone, much less in 2014. Jazz are better.

See, was easy and it's all true.

Also, not a chance in any Hell or Heaven that Durant is as good as Charles Barkley. That's a big ole lol and also a truly disgusting opinion.

[Whoah10115]

You are listing flashes in the pan. The Warriors, Spurs were elite year after year. Under your definition the 11' Bulls would count as a great team too.



I would say it goes Magic, Duncan, and Durant.


It isn't. All it is evidence of is Jordan having a good team that he elevated to an all-time great team. For whatever reason this makes his fans insecure so they have to act like MJ played the toughest comp with little help.

They also were in the WCF the prior year. People act like they came out of nowhere in 2012.

I didn't count Magic because I didn't count the Lakers, as they weren't as good as the other ones.

If you take a past his prime Duncan over peak Charles Barkley then you shouldn't give me your take. Also true of Karl Malone, whose prime we already discussed before.

Duncan was not the same player after 2004 and it's pretty clear. Watched them vs Detroit last week and you could see the extra effort he had to put in to everything he got. The Duncan love stole the FMVP from Ginobili. Duncan has no legitimate argument for that award other than being Tim Duncan.

Durant is me being nice and not acknowledging the comment. That's a joke.

Also, what does perennial have to do with anything? I don't know of anyone who thinks that the Thunder came out of nowhere. They also didn't just beat the defending champs. That team lost both Kidd and Chandler.

That lockout season thru first loss to Miami Tony Parker was playing PG better than anyone in the league, including Chris Paul. Should have been 1st Team All-NBA twice, ahead of Kobe one year and Paul the next.

I don't know who said they came out of nowhere, but maybe I don't read enough of the trolls. But the Spurs, post 04, were constantly evolving. They changed their style COMPLETELY, and they even reached points where they were amongst the absolute bombers behind the line. That's the club as a whole, and not always the same team. What was consistent for a decade was the big 3, and even then Ginobili kept going from 6th man to main star (sometimes both at the same time), Parker went from lead dog to 2nd fiddle and then suddenly became a genuinely elite player for that short span.

The Suns were a terrific team year after year, and then traded for the guy that was just about the consensus #2 in the world. They won 62 games with KJ missing over 30 games and not coming back to his usual self until good bits of the Finals. He came off four consecutive All-NBA seasons (3 2nd team) in an era stacked with great guards, and followed up next season as 2nd Team All-NBA (and should have been 1st), so how is that a flash in the pan?

The Blazers made two finals in three years. Were winning 50 every year outside of a down year before a Finals run, and won 63 the year before they made the Finals. They won 50 the next year and high 40's even as Clyde declined.

The Sonics were terrific and pushed the Suns in 93. They won 63 and choked next year. Then 57 in a crowded year before disappointing against the 5th seed 48 in Lakers. Had 3 all-stars. They won 57 games the year after and 61 the year after that, with Baker for Kemp.

Jordan stans don't get upset about anything other than people re-interpreting his history for the sake of making a different argument.

[Roundball_Rock]

As far as who they faced in the Finals, you can't make an argument MJ faced better competition.

You can legitimately say that the worst team LeBron faced from 2012-2018 was the 2012 Thunder, and that team had 3 future MVPs. The '12 Thunder were a rich man's version of the '92 Blazers, '13 & '14 Spurs were a rich man's version of the Jazz, & the Warriors we all know are the greatest team ever.

Great points. Yeah, the 12' Thunder were his weakest opponents. Compare that to the Bulls' strongest opponent, probably the Jazz. The Jazz's second option scoring 10.7 PPG in the 98' finals. :oldlol:

Jordan had the superior team against inferior competition (in the finals). Why not acknowledge the reality? He did his job: the Bulls came through each time.

The closest modern parallel to Jordan and the Bulls is Brady and the Patriots. I don't see Brady fans going around saying the Patriots weren't a great team and not better than their rivals by cherry picking peak years for various teams. This is pro sports. What do people expect? One team to go 72-10 and the second best record be 49-33?


Also, not a chance in any Hell or Heaven that Durant is as good as Charles Barkley. That's a big ole lol and also a truly disgusting opinion.

He is right. 90's nostalgia often blinds us but Durant clearly will go down as the greater player.


The 13 and 14 Spurs had no one like Karl Malone. That includes Kawhi, who is not Karl Malone, much less in 2014. Jazz are better

They lacked the MVP level talent of Malone but they had 4 HOF players and the Jazz had only 2. The Jazz's second scorer, as noted earlier, averaged only 10.7 PPG. That is terrible.

[1987_Lakers]

Jordan's competition was better. They were better starting lineups and tougher squads, better coached. The Blazers would have beaten the Thunder.

The 13 and 14 Spurs had no one like Karl Malone. That includes Kawhi, who is not Karl Malone, much less in 2014. Jazz are better.

See, was easy and it's all true.

Also, not a chance in any Hell or Heaven that Durant is as good as Charles Barkley. That's a big ole lol and also a truly disgusting opinion.

Keep living in a fantasy land, better starting lineups than Curry-Klay-Durant-Green? Lol, nobody here believes that. The Thunder were basically a more talented version of the Blazers, both teams were known to falter when the game slowed down, for the Blazers they didn't have that one player who can take over games in the half court consistently and for the Thunder they played too much 1 on 1, Thunder are still more talented by a good margin. The 2014 Spurs were dominant in the playoffs, had a margin of victory of +9.3 and displayed the greatest ball movement the league had seen since the '86 Celtics, they were incredibly deep too, legit 9 man rotation. I'm taking that over the Jazz who's best player Malone was a known choker.

And if you want to compare KD and Barkley here you go.
KD's postseason: 29/8/4/ on 65 TS% | 27.6 PER
Barkley's postseason: 27/14/4 on on 55 TS% | 24.9 PER

KD was much more efficient as a scorer, Barkley has a clear edge in rebounding, but doesn't give you much defense. KD is already considered a top 3 or 4 small forward in NBA history so you thinking it's a disgusting opinion is comical to say the least.

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is the difference.

Suns win totals with Barkley (93'-96'): 62, 56, 59, 41
Suns playoff outcomes with Barkley: lost finals, lost second round, lost second round, lost first round
Sonics win totals from 1993-1998: 55, 63, 57, 64, 57, 61
Sonics playoff outcomes from 1993-1998: WCF, lost first round, lost first round, lost finals, lost second round, lost second round

Seattle was good during the season but not in the playoffs. The Suns never got past the second round after 93'. Portland was good but didn't last--after 92' they never got past the first round.

Utah was the second most consistent team of the 90's (having 2 HOF franchise players is the common denominator) but they were a poor man's version of Chicago.

How about the Warriors and Spurs?

Warriors win totals (2015-2019): 67, 73, 67, 58
Warriors playoff outcomes (15'-19'): champs, lost finals, champs, champs
Spurs win totals (2011-2017): 61, 62*, 58, 62, 55, 67, 61
Spurs playoff outcomes (11'-17'): lost first round, lost WCF, lost finals, champs, lost first round, lost second round, lost WCF

So the Spurs made 2 finals, winning one, and 4 WCF. The Warriors made 4 finals (a 5th in 2020). These teams often had the best or second best record in the NBA during these runs.

The Thunder were a lesser version of the Spurs and Warriors. They are the team that most resembles the 90's Jazz. They made 1 finals and 4 WCF from 2011-2016 with consistently high win totals. That is the point, though: OKC was the most similar to the Bulls' best finals opponent (Jazz) and they were the fifth best team of that era (Warriors, Spurs, Heat, Cavs all had better runs).

[1987_Lakers]

Here is the difference.

Suns win totals with Barkley (93'-96'): 62, 56, 59, 41
Suns playoff outcomes with Barkley: lost finals, lost second round, lost second round, lost first round
Sonics win totals from 1993-1998: 55, 63, 57, 64, 57, 61
Sonics playoff outcomes from 1993-1998: WCF, lost first round, lost first round, lost finals, lost second round, lost second round

Seattle was good during the season but not in the playoffs. The Suns never got past the second round after 93'. Portland was good but didn't last--after 92' they never got past the first round.

Utah was the second most consistent team of the 90's (having 2 HOF franchise players is the common denominator) but they were a poor man's version of Chicago.

How about the Warriors and Spurs?

Warriors win totals (2015-2019): 67, 73, 67, 58
Warriors playoff outcomes (15'-19'): champs, lost finals, champs, champs
Spurs win totals (2011-2017): 61, 62*, 58, 62, 55, 67, 61
Spurs playoff outcomes (11'-17'): lost first round, lost WCF, lost finals, champs, lost first round, lost second round, lost WCF

So the Spurs made 2 finals, winning one, and 4 WCF. The Warriors made 4 finals (a 5th in 2020). These teams often had the best or second best record in the NBA during these runs.

The Thunder were a lesser version of the Spurs and Warriors. They are the team that most resembles the 90's Jazz. They made 1 finals and 4 WCF from 2011-2016 with consistently high win totals. That is the point, though: OKC was the most similar to the Bulls' best finals opponent (Jazz) and they were the fifth best team of that era (Warriors, Spurs, Heat, Cavs all had better runs).

That's a good way to look at it, people who praise MJ's Finals opponents fail to mention that most of them consistently lost very early in the playoffs throughout the 90's with pretty much the same cast, that to me tells me they were not championship caliber teams. Just a bunch of good teams who were never good enough.

[Roundball_Rock]

That's a good way to look at it, people who praise MJ's Finals opponents fail to mention that most of them consistently lost very early in the playoffs throughout the 90's with pretty much the same cast, that to me tells me they were not championship caliber teams. Just a bunch of good teams who were never good enough.

Agreed. What they will do is cherry pick their best season. "64 win Seattle team!", "62 wins and the MVP on Phoenix!" They won't mention the broader performance of those teams in that era because it is unfavorable. If the Bulls did not exist the 90's would look like the 70's with many different champs and parity at the top. That is in fact what we saw happen when MJ was removed from the equation in 94'. Chicago, New York, Atlanta, San Antonio, Utah, Phoenix, Houston all won between 53-58 games. Seattle was the outlier but they couldn't even win a playoff series.

One of the ironies is they harp on the 94' Bulls winning 55 and losing in the second round as if those other teams' norm was vastly greater than that outcome.

What they do with MJ's opponents could be done to gas LeBron's ECF opponents. "62 wins and the MVP on Chicago!", "60 win Hawks team with 4 all-stars!", "Boston with 3 Hall of Famers!", "59 win Magic team that made the finals!", etc. MJ fans would say it is absurd to say these teams were great comp and rightfully so but that logic isn't applied to the 90's.

[Whoah10115]

Keep living in a fantasy land, better starting lineups than Curry-Klay-Durant-Green? Lol, nobody here believes that. The Thunder were basically a more talented version of the Blazers, both teams were known to falter when the game slowed down, for the Blazers they didn't have that one player who can take over games in the half court consistently and for the Thunder they played too much 1 on 1, Thunder are still more talented by a good margin. The 2014 Spurs were dominant in the playoffs, had a margin of victory of +9.3 and displayed the greatest ball movement the league had seen since the '86 Celtics, they were incredibly deep too, legit 9 man rotation. I'm taking that over the Jazz who's best player Malone was a known choker.

And if you want to compare KD and Barkley here you go.
KD's postseason: 29/8/4/ on 65 TS% | 27.6 PER
Barkley's postseason: 27/14/4 on on 55 TS% | 24.9 PER

KD was much more efficient as a scorer, Barkley has a clear edge in rebounding, but doesn't give you much defense. KD is already considered a top 3 or 4 small forward in NBA history so you thinking it's a disgusting opinion is comical to say the least.


Is reading something you do? Did I include the Warriors or acknowledge them as the exception? Exactly, so rather than immediately be smug, read, then if you have the opportunity, be smug.

More efficient scorer...so is there any 8 year stretch of Durant's career where he averaged over 1.6 points per shot attempt? Any seasons approaching a FG% of 60? Or no, despite that he's a 3point shooter and a 3point shooter in an era made to be a 3point shooter. You wanna focus on the one season? Well, the one season you're focusing on Barkley was the MVP. So focusing on it doesn't do you any good, despite the bad attempt at winning this argument over those stats.

Durant led Suns are winning a game against the Bulls...or maybe they're not winning even a game against the Bulls.

In the Finals, Durant put up some outstanding numbers...you know who I've never liked? Russell Westbrook. And his FG% is where it usually is, he wasn't averaging 6APG in either the regular season or in the Finals...but he was the Thunder's best player in the Finals. You can stick to them stats however you want, but he was better than Durant. Comparison is a failure. Also, Barkley was a 4 and averaged more assists, fewer turnovers, over 2SPG and I think he led the playoffs with his average there. They shot the same percentage. Durant gets his numbers, always. Anyone who hides behind them fails to recognize the impact.

LOL at Durant over Barkley.

[Whoah10115]

Agreed. What they will do is cherry pick their best season. "64 win Seattle team!", "62 wins and the MVP on Phoenix!" They won't mention the broader performance of those teams in that era because it is unfavorable. If the Bulls did not exist the 90's would look like the 70's with many different champs and parity at the top. That is in fact what we saw happen when MJ was removed from the equation in 94'. Chicago, New York, Atlanta, San Antonio, Utah, Phoenix, Houston all won between 53-58 games. Seattle was the outlier but they couldn't even win a playoff series.

One of the ironies is they harp on the 94' Bulls winning 55 and losing in the second round as if that wasn't the norm for those other teams. For example, Phoenix won 56 and lost in the second round that very year. New York 55 and the second round the next year.

What they do with MJ's opponents could be done to gas LeBron's ECF opponents. "62 wins and the MVP on Chicago!", "60 win Hawks team with 4 all-stars!", "Boston with 3 Hall of Famers!", "59 win Magic team that made the finals!", etc. MJ fans would say it is absurd to say these teams were great comp and rightfully so but that logic isn't applied to the 90's.

See, this is upsetting. We've had a lot of good back and forth.

I gave you entire blocks of success from these teams, and then you say cherry pick seasons. You are literally lying.

Didn't even read enough to recognize I made a mistake and said that Kidd wasn't on the Mavs a year later.

[Roundball_Rock]

I gave you entire blocks of success from these teams, and then you say cherry pick seasons. You are literally lying.

The cherry picking comment was aimed at the MJ/"90's were super competitive" crowd. I gave their performance over time with detail for the Suns and Sonics, the teams I see mentioned most often out there along with the Jazz (but the Jazz were a more legit case--just a poor man's Bulls). Go on social media it always is "64 win Sonics" or "62 win Suns" etc, nothing about their performance over the entire run.

The win total stuff doesn't tell us much. There are always going to be teams that have high win totals because they don't play the best team 82 times a year. If we apply the win total logic, the 2011 Bulls=1993 Suns. Is there a single MJ fan or 90's nostalgia person who would accept that notion?

The real question is what was their performance level over that era? The 90's had one consistent elite team. The 80's had 4 (Sixers faded but then were replaced by the Pistons). The 2000's had 2. The last decade had the Warriors, Spurs and whatever team LeBron was on as a major contender.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

See, this is upsetting. We've had a lot of good back and forth.

I gave you entire blocks of success from these teams, and then you say cherry pick seasons. You are literally lying.

Didn't even read enough to recognize I made a mistake and said that Kidd wasn't on the Mavs a year later.

I wouldn't bother with that poster. He's a clown show.

Using facts and explaining them is par for the course. But ignoring evidence then taking something you said out of context? And calling it 'cherry-picking'? That's basically the extent of his posts. Meanwhile, in that thread debating Mutombo/Pippen, he posts a gif of Pippen's help defense claiming "Mutumbo wasn't doing this!" Right because that's definitely not cherry-picking :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Is reading something you do? Did I include the Warriors or acknowledge them as the exception? Exactly, so rather than immediately be smug, read, then if you have the opportunity, be smug.

More efficient scorer...so is there any 8 year stretch of Durant's career where he averaged over 1.6 points per shot attempt? Any seasons approaching a FG% of 60? Or no, despite that he's a 3point shooter and a 3point shooter in an era made to be a 3point shooter. You wanna focus on the one season? Well, the one season you're focusing on Barkley was the MVP. So focusing on it doesn't do you any good, despite the bad attempt at winning this argument over those stats.

Durant led Suns are winning a game against the Bulls...or maybe they're not winning even a game against the Bulls.

In the Finals, Durant put up some outstanding numbers...you know who I've never liked? Russell Westbrook. And his FG% is where it usually is, he wasn't averaging 6APG in either the regular season or in the Finals...but he was the Thunder's best player in the Finals. You can stick to them stats however you want, but he was better than Durant. Comparison is a failure. Also, Barkley was a 4 and averaged more assists, fewer turnovers, over 2SPG and I think he led the playoffs with his average there. They shot the same percentage. Durant gets his numbers, always. Anyone who hides behind them fails to recognize the impact.

LOL at Durant over Barkley.

You screaming Barkley > Durant doesn't make it true. In fact you acting like it isn't even a close comparison is just making you look bad. Barkley in his prime excluding '93 never even led his team to the conference finals. Durant has had much deeper playoff runs, even if you exclude his time in Golden State. He is one of the greatest scorers in NBA history, has always been very efficient, and as his career progressed he improved his passing and defense tremendously, he has averaged over 5 apg since 2014 and peaked higher as a defensive player than Barkley.

When both were at their peaks they were similar in terms of impact, I prefer Durant. Both are considered top 5 ever at their positions.
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1916115

It's not crazy at all to feel Durant was better, but all this doesn't matter since the 2017 Warriors were 10x better than the '93 Suns.

[3ball]

.
:applause:

[3ball]

.
MJ leads lebron in:


- Comp
- Rings
- Finals record
- Stats per game
- Rate of production stats (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP)
- Accolades
- Clutch stats
- brand of ball
- many more

[ArbitraryWater]

i dont understand how he comes to this conclusion at all


even with the posted graphs lol

[Cyrus334]

Lebron played better competition in the Finals.

Jordan played better competition en route to the Finals.

Literally that simple.

[97 bulls]

You overrate the hell out of that Bulls cast to be honest. Kukoc was a #1 option in '99, he shot 42% and led the Bulls to a 13-37 record and we all know his defense was trash. Bosh as a #1 option was a 22/10 player who shot 50%, he was putting up those numbers as a 21 year old. That is way more success than Kukoc could ever dream of. Kukoc is basically a Lamar Odom type player in terms of impact, even though I would take Odom because his defense was much better.

You underrate the hell out of the Bulls. Which is why you wont respond to my argument.

Heres the difference between me and you. I value success. Wins. That's all that matters. You value stats. In your mind, youll take stats over impact because at least you can waste a bunch of time arguing excuses. What good is stats with little to no impact. Its tantamount to a horny Eunich.

Kukoc was on a team that was built to lose. The Bulls management wanted to tank. Give Kukoc better teammates and his stats improve and obviously his teams wins improve. Mainly because his skillset wasnt that of a scorer. Could Kukoc be the best player on a Championship team? No. Could he have put up good stats (say 20/7/8 at his peak) and be an Allstar 3 or 4 times over? Yes. I dont think that's overrating Kukoc.

[1987_Lakers]

You underrate the hell out of the Bulls. Which is why you wont respond to my argument.

Heres the difference between me and you. I value success. Wins. That's all that matters. You value stats. In your mind, youll take stats over impact because at least you can waste a bunch of time arguing excuses. What good is stats with little to no impact. Its tantamount to a horny Eunich.

Kukoc was on a team that was built to lose. The Bulls management wanted to tank. Give Kukoc better teammates and his stats improve and obviously his teams wins improve. Mainly because his skillset wasnt that of a scorer. Could Kukoc be the best player on a Championship team? No. Could he have put up good stats (say 20/7/8 at his peak) and be an Allstar 3 or 4 times over? Yes. I dont think that's overrating Kukoc.

With all due respect you have always had a tremendous bias towards those bulls players. Difference between you and me is that I look at things objectively, I still remember you back in the day saying Pippen was a better rebounder than Bird and how Stockton is a better PG than Magic. You devalue any past player to make your bulls player look greater than they were.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?275820-Scottie-Pippen-vs-Larry-Bird-rebounding
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?277174-Is-97-bulls-making-people-hate-Scottie-Pippen-on-ISH


Lol. Its one thing to have a roast in my honor. Call me dumb, call me a homer or biased.


But I'm not a racist. I'm sure 87 Lakers will vouch for that. I feel John Stockton is a better PG than Magic Johhnson.

[Whoah10115]

You underrate the hell out of the Bulls. Which is why you wont respond to my argument.

Heres the difference between me and you. I value success. Wins. That's all that matters. You value stats. In your mind, youll take stats over impact because at least you can waste a bunch of time arguing excuses. What good is stats with little to no impact. Its tantamount to a horny Eunich.

Kukoc was on a team that was built to lose. The Bulls management wanted to tank. Give Kukoc better teammates and his stats improve and obviously his teams wins improve. Mainly because his skillset wasnt that of a scorer. Could Kukoc be the best player on a Championship team? No. Could he have put up good stats (say 20/7/8 at his peak) and be an Allstar 3 or 4 times over? Yes. I dont think that's overrating Kukoc.

It's not overrating his talent, but it's overrating him. Ultimately, he never reached that point. His teams were built to lose, definitely agree. But he did nothing to stand out above that. He can't be argued as comparable to Bosh. Even when Bosh was putting up stats and average teams, they weren't as bad as those Bulls teams. He did more.

[3ball]

I dont think that's overrating Kukoc.




Kukoc was a superior talent to Doncic, but simply didn't play in the "ball-handler era" or have the modern handle (which is mainly the ability to reset to a "go" stance while keeping a live dribble with the same hand.. it's actually quite simple and grade school kids do it naturally just from watching every ball-handler do it on TV)

[97 bulls]

It's not overrating his talent, but it's overeating him. Ultimately, he never reached that point. His teamsbwere built to lose, definitely agree. But he did nothing to stand out above that. He can't be argued as comparable to Bosh. Even when Bosh was putting upnstats and average teams, they weren't as bad as those Bulls teams. He did more.

Yes they were as bad as those Bulls teams. What are you talking about?

Again. Most of those years that Bosh was at the helm, his teams averaged roughly 30 wins. The best he could do was lead his team to 47 wins. Kukoc wasnt that far off from that and his teams tried to lose.

[97 bulls]

Kukoc was a superior talent to Doncic, but simply didn't play in the "ball-handler era" or have the modern handle (which is mainly the ability to reset to a "go" stance while keeping a live dribble with the same hand.. it's actually quite simple and grade school kids do it naturally just from watching every ball-handler do it on TV)

You mean carry the ball

[Cyrus334]

https://i.imgur.com/FAW9dyl.jpg

[Whoah10115]

Yes they were as bad as those Bulls teams. What are you talking about?

Again. Most of those years that Bosh was at the helm, his teams averaged roughly 30 wins. The best he could do was lead his team to 47 wins. Kukoc wasnt that far off from that and his teams tried to lose.

Lockout season they were on pace for 21 wins. Next season, they won 17. 8 and 16 with Kukoc.

Raptors were better than that as a whole.

[guy]

That's a good way to look at it, people who praise MJ's Finals opponents fail to mention that most of them consistently lost very early in the playoffs throughout the 90's with pretty much the same cast, that to me tells me they were not championship caliber teams. Just a bunch of good teams who were never good enough.

That argument is extremely flawed. All that could mean is that there were bunch of teams that were more or less equal to each other regardless of if they were either all great or all weak.

For example, in a league/conference with more parity, if every team but one was worse, that one team would be extremely dominant, but they aren’t actually a better team. If in the 90s, the Jazz were what they were, but the Lakers, Blazers, Suns, Rockets, Sonics and Spurs were all significantly worse then they were, the Jazz may have made 10 straight finals losing all 6 to the Bulls and maybe winning a few while Jordan is retired. They would be considered an all-time great team. So it’s a weak observation that doesn’t really mean much. Either scenario doesn’t really tell you anything.

[97 bulls]

With all due respect you have always had a tremendous bias towards those bulls players. Difference between you and me is that I look at things objectively, I still remember you back in the day saying Pippen was a better rebounder than Bird and how Stockton is a better PG than Magic. You devalue any past player to make your bulls player look greater than they were.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?275820-Scottie-Pippen-vs-Larry-Bird-rebounding
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?277174-Is-97-bulls-making-people-hate-Scottie-Pippen-on-ISH

Bro. The numberd prove that Pippen was just as good if not better at rebounding than Bird. It's like you guys lose all common sense where the Bulls are involved.

The pace of the game was soooooo much faster in the 80s than the 90s. Why wouldn't a guy that gives 8 boards a game be able to maybe hit 9-10 with more shots going up?

It's the same dumb argument people today use when comparing stats across eras i.e. today vs the 90s (because for as much as you guys like to try, the fact that the 90s is the benchmark for all things NBA say alot), scoring is up overall stats are up 15-17% when compared to the 90s. So when I hear guys say 80s player or todays player A is better than 90s player B, because this guys stats are better, not taking into account the circumstances. Like Bird and Pippen. Pippen in 80s is easily a 24/10/8 guy in the 80s or today.

Mind you, I never said Kukoc would be the best player in the league. I said I could see him making 3-4 Allstars under a different situation. He wasn't good enough to be the best player on a Championship team. But neither is Bosh. They netted the same result minus the one year Bosh led the Raptors to 47 wins.

[Vragrant]

I like to see jordan beat 2016 warriors,a 73 win team
I like to see jordan beat 2012 thunder with 60 wins

lebron had better competion,jordan couldt even beat detroit pistions in 89 and 90 jordan sucks:lebroncry:

This is what I don't understand. MJ for some reason gets penalized for leading a dynasty team. Lebron had the chance, in fact tried to artifically construct a dynasty team in Miami to mixed results. He in fact claimed he wasn't joking and claimed the Heat will win 7/8 titles. Then he fled back to Clev. and tried to start another one, with two other allstars, but ran into the GS buzzsaw. Its a common theme with Lebron. Builds teams with multiple allstars, then when it doesn't work, or it runs its course, he'll leave the rotting husk behind and go to a new situation. But for some reason "Lebron always faces stacked teams" is a popular narrative.

[3ball]

You mean carry the ball

while shuffling the feet! (that's the reset to a "go" stance)....:applause:... (the reshuffling freezes the defender... :banana:)

It's a key move/footwork that a player needs to look fluid and seemless as a guard

Kukoc didn't have it, but had everything else to be a guard

Jordan didn't have it either, but he didn't need it (it benefits lesser athletes, aka Nash, Pierce, Doncic), and he would sometimes do it naturally just because he was already doing everything else optimally

But again, grade-schoolers nowadays learn it from watching today's ball-handlers... So I believe Kukoc would be literally a borderline top 5 player in today's game if he had this footwork and was a full-fledged guard... He could dunk from FT line and could shoot and post.. give him Doncic handle and he'd be way better than him

[RRR3]

Bro. The numberd prove that Pippen was just as good if not better at rebounding than Bird. It's like you guys lose all common sense where the Bulls are involved.

The pace of the game was soooooo much faster in the 80s than the 90s. Why wouldn't a guy that gives 8 boards a game be able to maybe hit 9-10 with more shots going up?

It's the same dumb argument people today use when comparing stats across eras i.e. today vs the 90s (because for as much as you guys like to try, the fact that the 90s is the benchmark for all things NBA say alot), scoring is up overall stats are up 15-17% when compared to the 90s. So when I hear guys say 80s player or todays player A is better than 90s player B, because this guys stats are better, not taking into account the circumstances. Like Bird and Pippen. Pippen in 80s is easily a 24/10/8 guy in the 80s or today.

Mind you, I never said Kukoc would be the best player in the league. I said I could see him making 3-4 Allstars under a different situation. He wasn't good enough to be the best player on a Championship team. But neither is Bosh. They netted the same result minus the one year Bosh led the Raptors to 47 wins.
Per 100 possessions is a great way to compare numbers from seasons where the pace was different. Bird averaged 12.5 boards per 100 possessions for his career. Pippen was at 9.5. Bird was clearly a significantly better rebounder my dude.

[97 bulls]

Lockout season they were on pace for 21 wins. Next season, they won 17. 8 and 16 with Kukoc.

Raptors were better than that as a whole.

Lol. And I'm screaming this now. THE BULLS TRIED TO LOSE!!!!!! THE MANAGEMENT DIDNT WANT THEN TO WIN!!!!! THEY WANTED THE BULLS TO TANK!!!!! HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THAT TO A FRANCHISE THAT TRIED TO PUT A CONTENDER ON THE COURT AND FAIRED SLIGHTLY BETTER??!!!!!!!!

For goodness sake the Bulls starting 5 was Kukoc, Brent Barry, olf Ron Harper, old ass Mark Bryant and Andrew Lang. I'm surprised they won that many games.

Based on Kukoc talent and skillset, you dont think his stats and record at least get to Boshs level with about the same talent?

I mean damn the Heat were terrible the year after James left and Bosh was the man again. And Bosh played in 44 games. And their record with him was 19-25. (I gotta scream again) THATS BASICALLY THE SAME DAMN RECORD THAT THE KUKOC LED BULLS HAD!!!!!!! EVEN WORSE CUZ KUKOC DIDN'T PLAY IN 6 OF THOSE BULLS LOSSES. AND BOSH HAD WADE AND DRAGIC AMONGST OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!

[97 bulls]

while shuffling the feet! (that's the reset to a "go" stance)....:applause:... (the reshuffling freezes the defender... :banana:)

It's a key move/footwork that a player needs to look fluid and seemless as a guard

Kukoc didn't have it, but had everything else to be a guard

Jordan didn't have it either, but he didn't need it (it benefits lesser athletes, aka Nash, Pierce, Doncic), and he would sometimes do it naturally just because he was already doing everything else optimally

But again, grade-schoolers nowadays learn it from watching today's ball-handlers... So I believe Kukoc would be literally a borderline top 5 player in today's game if he had this footwork and was a full-fledged guard... He could dunk from FT line and could shoot and post.. give him Doncic handle and he'd be way better than him

Wow. This is the first time I've ever seen you give someone not named Jordan credit.

[ImKobe]

Lol. And I'm screaming this now. THE BULLS TRIED TO LOSE!!!!!! THE MANAGEMENT DIDNT WANT THEN TO WIN!!!!! THEY WANTED THE BULLS TO TANK!!!!! HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THAT TO A FRANCHISE THAT TRIED TO PUT A CONTENDER ON THE COURT AND FAIRED SLIGHTLY BETTER??!!!!!!!!

For goodness sake the Bulls starting 5 was Kukoc, Brent Barry, olf Ron Harper, old ass Mark Bryant and Andrew Lang. I'm surprised they won that many games.

Based on Kukoc talent and skillset, you dont think his stats and record at least get to Boshs level with about the same talent?

I mean damn the Heat were terrible the year after James left and Bosh was the man again. And Bosh played in 44 games. And their record with him was 19-25. (I gotta scream again) THATS BASICALLY THE SAME DAMN RECORD THAT THE KUKOC LED BULLS HAD!!!!!!! EVEN WORSE CUZ KUKOC DIDN'T PLAY IN 6 OF THOSE BULLS LOSSES. AND BOSH HAD WADE AND DRAGIC AMONGST OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!

Kukoc went 13 - 31 with the 99 Bulls. Try again.

[3ball]

Lol. And I'm screaming this now. THE BULLS TRIED TO LOSE!!!!!! THE MANAGEMENT DIDNT WANT THEN TO WIN!!!!! THEY WANTED THE BULLS TO TANK!!!!! HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THAT TO A FRANCHISE THAT TRIED TO PUT A CONTENDER ON THE COURT AND FAIRED SLIGHTLY BETTER??!!!!!!!!

For goodness sake the Bulls starting 5 was Kukoc, Brent Barry, olf Ron Harper, old ass Mark Bryant and Andrew Lang. I'm surprised they won that many games.

Based on Kukoc talent and skillset, you dont think his stats and record at least get to Boshs level with about the same talent?

I mean damn the Heat were terrible the year after James left and Bosh was the man again. And Bosh played in 44 games. And their record with him was 19-25. (I gotta scream again) THATS BASICALLY THE SAME DAMN RECORD THAT THE KUKOC LED BULLS HAD!!!!!!! EVEN WORSE CUZ KUKOC DIDN'T PLAY IN 6 OF THOSE BULLS LOSSES. AND BOSH HAD WADE AND DRAGIC AMONGST OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!

If Kukoc played today with a modern handle, he'd be Doncic but with better power, post game, and get could dunk from FT line

[97 bulls]

Per 100 possessions is a great way to compare numbers from seasons where the pace was different. Bird averaged 12.5 boards per 100 possessions for his career. Pippen was at 9.5. Bird was clearly a significantly better rebounder my dude.
What about prime for prime?

[97 bulls]

Kukoc went 13 - 31 with the 99 Bulls. Try again.
Lol so an F- where the test taker never had a chance to study vs an
F where test taker had a cheat sheet. You guys are incredible. Hence why I said basically vs exactly.

[Roundball_Rock]

This is what I don't understand. MJ for some reason gets penalized for leading a dynasty team

He isn't penalized. The reason it comes up his fans go around saying MJ>LeBron or KAJ or Kobe or anyone because MJ had great team results. Further, MJ's fans will say Jordan accomplished more while having to do it with less than everybody else. This is where the pushback that Jordan had the super team of his era, etc. comes from. The case for Jordan is always about team outcomes, not Jordan the player versus other players so it is only logical to look at the team he had and compare it to the opposing teams.

[Whoah10115]

Lol. And I'm screaming this now. THE BULLS TRIED TO LOSE!!!!!! THE MANAGEMENT DIDNT WANT THEN TO WIN!!!!! THEY WANTED THE BULLS TO TANK!!!!! HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THAT TO A FRANCHISE THAT TRIED TO PUT A CONTENDER ON THE COURT AND FAIRED SLIGHTLY BETTER??!!!!!!!!

For goodness sake the Bulls starting 5 was Kukoc, Brent Barry, olf Ron Harper, old ass Mark Bryant and Andrew Lang. I'm surprised they won that many games.

Based on Kukoc talent and skillset, you dont think his stats and record at least get to Boshs level with about the same talent?

I mean damn the Heat were terrible the year after James left and Bosh was the man again. And Bosh played in 44 games. And their record with him was 19-25. (I gotta scream again) THATS BASICALLY THE SAME DAMN RECORD THAT THE KUKOC LED BULLS HAD!!!!!!! EVEN WORSE CUZ KUKOC DIDN'T PLAY IN 6 OF THOSE BULLS LOSSES. AND BOSH HAD WADE AND DRAGIC AMONGST OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!

I already acknowledged the intent to lose, as well as his talent.

What you're either not acknowledging or failing to get is that he did nothing to set himself apart.

He didn't. Bosh certainly did.

[97 bulls]

I already acknowledged the intent to lose, as well as his talent.

What you're either not acknowledging or failing to get is that he did nothing to set himself apart.

He didn't. Bosh certainly did.

Their skillset is different. Bosh is a scorer. Kukoc is a facilitator. Kukoc is is more along the lines of a Magic Pippen, or Hill. Because of that, even if you give him talent similar to Bosh, his numbers go up as well as his wins. Maybe not his scoring. But hed be much more efficient.

[Whoah10115]

He isn't penalized. The reason it comes up his fans go around saying MJ>LeBron or KAJ or Kobe or anyone because MJ had great team results. Further, MJ's fans will say Jordan accomplished more while having to do it with less than everybody else. This is where the pushback that Jordan had the super team of his era, etc. comes from. The case for Jordan is always about team outcomes, not Jordan the player versus other players so it is only logical to look at the team he had and compare it to the opposing teams.

Literally never about that.

[Roundball_Rock]

Go to any Facebook group or Twitter thread. The MJ side spends all day saying "6 rings" and "3-6" and "6-0". :oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

What about prime for prime?

I'll do you one better, prime for prime with Bird playing with significantly better rebounders on his team.

'86 Bird - 14.2 TRB% (Celtics #1 rebounding team with Parish, McHale, & Walton)
'95 Pippen - 12.5 TRB% (Bulls average rebounding team with no Grant or Rodman)

Bird is someone who went toe to toe with Moses Malone in the '81 Finals, averaging 15 boards a game. To say Pippen was a better or just as good as Bird at rebounding is just silly.:lol

[1987_Lakers]

Wow. This is the first time I've ever seen you give someone not named Jordan credit.

He's trolling. Once someone says "MJ had more help than LeBron" he will quickly discredit all his teammates.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?463287-Luka-Doncic-vs-Toni-Kukoc


FYI - Doncic's rookie stats destroy Lebron's

Doncic has all-nba upside while kukoc never did

Kukoc had a 0.07 WS/48 as #1 option in 99'

Kukoc wasn't all-star caliber.. odom was about the same offensively and a far better defender

Nice reach tho

[Roundball_Rock]

If Kukoc played today with a modern handle, he'd be Doncic but with better power, post game, and get could dunk from FT line

Damn, so MJ's fourth best player was Luka 1.0 according to 3ball?

[Axe]

I see copypasta posts from two renowned lovers with differing perspectives once again.

[LeCroix]

Show me the all nba deficits like what Lebron faced

I'l wait

Example
2016 finals
3 all nba (warriors) vs 1 all nba (cavs)

Chop chop

[knicksman]

Alpha dogs have the best talent.

More like jordan can demand high standards from his team coz he submit himself to high standards. I cant imagine lebron demanding high standards from pippen when he himself couldnt do what 1st options are expected to do which is takeover games/carry your team when it matters. And worse he wont share his stats. I can see Pippen punching his gut. Meanwhile jordan can coz hes willing to share his stats. Thats just leadership 101 and lebron isnt one. Theres a reason why unselfish players like magic/russell/duncan wins coz you cant expect teammates to give their all if youre selfish.

[Whoah10115]

Show me the all nba deficits like what Lebron faced

I'l wait

Example
2016 finals
3 all nba (warriors) vs 1 all nba (cavs)

Chop chop

Spurs beat Suns in 05. Spurs had Duncan and Suns had MVP Nash, 2nd-Team All-NBA Amare, 3rd Team Marion.


Go to any Facebook group or Twitter thread. The MJ side spends all day saying "6 rings" and "3-6" and "6-0". :oldlol:

Real basketball people don't it around talking about. And the smart ones here don't either.

MJ is best because MJ is best.

[SATAN]

knicksman is an idiot

[LeCroix]

Spurs beat Suns in 05. Spurs had Duncan and Suns had MVP Nash, 2nd-Team All-NBA Amare, 3rd Team Marion.



In the Finals playboy? keep fetchin!

[LeCroix]

knicksman is an idiot

im new here like you 2020 joiner and we already know this guy is low iq and needs meds

[knicksman]

knicksman is an idiot

Trolls are losers. But then again, you wouldnt have that username if you dont hate life.

[SATAN]

Perception. Dumb ****.

[Axe]

Trolls are losers. But then again, you wouldnt have that username if you dont hate life.
Lol forget about him. The guy has serious mental issues dealing with god himself.

[ImKobe]

Show me the all nba deficits like what Lebron faced

I'l wait

Example
2016 finals
3 all nba (warriors) vs 1 all nba (cavs)

Chop chop

2016 Finals - injuries to Seph, Bogut and Iguodala. Draymond suspension. Kyrie with huge performances in Game 5 & Game 7.

Can't compare today's rosters player for player to those in the past, since the salary cap is a lot bigger which leads to more stacked contenders. Lebron's team was stacked 1-8 as well.

[red1]

Im gone for two weeks and we already have new trolls like OP popping up like herpes.



mods there should absolutely be an IQ test before we let any new baldan stans post here. we already have our hands full with the low IQs of coach and 3ball.

[Roundball_Rock]

Who is coach?

[red1]

Who is coach?

he is a jordan stan who's posted here for years - most likely OP himself

[Roundball_Rock]

he is a jordan stan who's posted here for years - most likely OP himself

Samurai Swish/Money 23/Money Mitch 23? That guy?

[red1]

Samurai Swish/Money 23/Money Mitch 23? That guy?

yup that's coach indeed.

[Roundball_Rock]

yup that's coach indeed.

Thanks. He definitely is one of the worst MJ stans. :lol

[ArbitraryWater]

The Bulls were a very good team ... but "super team" is a bit of a stretch.

A super team usually has a third option that either is a star player themselves or could be the no.1 player on some other team. Players like James Worthy (won a Finals MVP), Kawhi, Klay, Bosh, Parish or Walton are more in that mold, the Bulls never really had a 3rd player ever that good.

Rodman was a great defender/rebounder but useless when they really needed a bucket.

A "super team" should have 3 even 4 guys that can give you 20 on any given night and it not be that far out of their ability to do so.

Everyone can be a nr.1 player on another team.

The question is, to what effect?

What is Bosh as a nr. 1 option?

If you tell me you'd rather have Bosh as 3rd option than Horace Grant, you're lying.

[Roundball_Rock]

The Bulls were a very good team ... but "super team" is a bit of a stretch.

A super team usually has a third option that either is a star player themselves or could be the no.1 player on some other team. Players like James Worthy (won a Finals MVP), Kawhi, Klay, Bosh, Parish or Walton are more in that mold, the Bulls never really had a 3rd player ever that good.

Bulls without Jordan: 55 wins
Lakers without Magic: 43 wins
Celtics without Bird: 42 wins
Heat without LeBron 37 wins

The Bulls were not the super team--everyone else was, facts be damned.
`

[WhiteKyrie]

This is what I don't understand. MJ for some reason gets penalized for leading a dynasty team. Lebron had the chance, in fact tried to artifically construct a dynasty team in Miami to mixed results. He in fact claimed he wasn't joking and claimed the Heat will win 7/8 titles. Then he fled back to Clev. and tried to start another one, with two other allstars, but ran into the GS buzzsaw. Its a common theme with Lebron. Builds teams with multiple allstars, then when it doesn't work, or it runs its course, he'll leave the rotting husk behind and go to a new situation. But for some reason "Lebron always faces stacked teams" is a popular narrative.
:applause:

Good Lord the truth. How does one get penalized for being the better player, producing more and winning more. Championships as well.

While also being the superior, more accomplished player on an individual level. The shifting of goal posts, and mental gymnastics is alarming.

[LeCroix]

2016 Finals - injuries to Seph, Bogut and Iguodala. Draymond suspension. Kyrie with huge performances in Game 5 & Game 7.

Can't compare today's rosters player for player to those in the past, since the salary cap is a lot bigger which leads to more stacked contenders. Lebron's team was stacked 1-8 as well.

Bla bla

What year did MJ beat a 3 vs 1 deficit in nba finals?

[Whoah10115]

Bulls without Jordan: 55 wins
Lakers without Magic: 43 wins
Celtics without Bird: 42 wins
Heat without LeBron 37 wins

The Bulls were not the super team--everyone else was, facts be damned.
`

Bulls weren't a super team. You can save your exaggeration to combat 3ball tho.

Also, it's boring, because you appear more intent on bringing down Jordan than propping up others.

Bulls had one elite player in Pippen, and a solid group outside of him. How in the world is that a super team? Horace Grant made one all-star team. And it was the very year you point out, which probably has nothing at all to do with Michael getting out of his way than him improving his game. And he was a fringe one, at that. Armstrong made it, I think because he was voted in as a starter by the fans (which is ridiculous).

Also, your points on Heat post LeBron aren't very good. Bosh played 79 games in James' last season, and the next played 44. Wade played 53 with LeBron, then 62 without him. Ray Allen retired. They got Dragic for a bit, Deng, and also lost Battier.

Team wasn't the same. And your only point? Has nothing to do with the question, either. He explained what a super team is, and you responded with sarcasm and saying something he never suggested.

Also, I rewatched a couple games. Bill Walton played better than Kareem.

[3ball]

Bla bla

What year did MJ beat a 3 vs 1 deficit in nba finals?

MJ would never be down 1-3 with a #2 option that was outplaying their #1 option, nor would he average 24 and 6 TO for the first 4 games like bron

[97 bulls]

I'll do you one better, prime for prime with Bird playing with significantly better rebounders on his team.

'86 Bird - 14.2 TRB% (Celtics #1 rebounding team with Parish, McHale, & Walton)
'95 Pippen - 12.5 TRB% (Bulls average rebounding team with no Grant or Rodman)

Bird is someone who went toe to toe with Moses Malone in the '81 Finals, averaging 15 boards a game. To say Pippen was a better or just as good as Bird at rebounding is just silly.:lol

That is one season. 1. Lol. McHale was a ahitty rebounder for a PF. My point still stands.

[97 bulls]

Bulls weren't a super team. You can save your exaggeration to combat 3ball tho.

Also, it's boring, because you appear more intent on bringing down Jordan than propping up others.

Bulls had one elite player in Pippen, and a solid group outside of him. How in the world is that a super team? Horace Grant made one all-star team. And it was the very year you point out, which probably has nothing at all to do with Michael getting out of his way than him improving his game. And he was a fringe one, at that. Armstrong made it, I think because he was voted in as a starter by the fans (which is ridiculous).

Also, your points on Heat post LeBron aren't very good. Bosh played 79 games in James' last season, and the next played 44. Wade played 53 with LeBron, then 62 without him. Ray Allen retired. They got Dragic for a bit, Deng, and also lost Battier.

Team wasn't the same. And your only point? Has nothing to do with the question, either. He explained what a super team is, and you responded with sarcasm and saying something he never suggested.

Also, I rewatched a couple games. Bill Walton played better than Kareem.

Were the 2nd 3pt Bulls a Super Team? How super can a team be if they suck when their best player leaves?

[Whoah10115]

Were the 2nd 3pt Bulls a Super Team? How super can a team be if they suck when their best player leaves?


Interesting question...I have no idea. Jordan got isolated a lot the next two seasons. And the 97 Bulls started out like 12-0 and like 18-1 or something if I remember. They were trashing everybody.

25-3 then 34-4. 42-5 then 49-6.

His average was 30.9 and then he just started getting all the attention. Rodman was not as reliable either, and less of a defender. And in the playoffs he was a lot lesser. Pippen was starting to get hurt too much.

But they went out and got Rodman...Jordan and Pippen came up thru the team. Don't know if that constitutes a super team. Not even like the Lakers who got lucky with drafting Magic and he was that good out of the gate, then somehow got to draft Worthy. Or even the Spurs, who lucked out like nobody's business getting Duncan (tho Robinson declined a lot during the lockout).

[LeCroix]

Bulls without Jordan: 55 wins
Lakers without Magic: 43 wins
Celtics without Bird: 42 wins
Heat without LeBron 37 wins

The Bulls were not the super team--everyone else was, facts be damned.
`

'hello' 9 11 ?

yes hi, id like to report a murder i witnessed thank you

[LeCroix]

MJ would never be down 1-3 with a #2 option that was outplaying their #1 option, nor would he average 24 and 6 TO for the first 4 games like bron

what
year
did
mj
beat
a
3
to
1
all
nba
deficit
in
the
finals
like
lebron
did
in
2016
?

[Axe]

Bulls without Jordan: 55 wins
Lakers without Magic: 43 wins
Celtics without Bird: 42 wins
Heat without LeBron 37 wins

The Bulls were not the super team--everyone else was, facts be damned.
`
Nice dodge not including the spurs the year after duncan's retirement.

[LeCroix]

what
year
did
mj
beat
a
3
to
1
all
nba
deficit
in
the
finals
like
lebron
did
in
2016
?

anyone ?

[knicksman]

Bulls without Jordan: 55 wins
Lakers without Magic: 43 wins
Celtics without Bird: 42 wins
Heat without LeBron 37 wins

The Bulls were not the super team--everyone else was, facts be damned.
`

Since you love srs so much

bulls without jordan srs = 2.87
bulls with jordan = 10.07

heat srs before lebron = 1.99
heat srs with lebron and bosh = 6.76:oldlol:

heat peak srs = 7.03
lakers kobe peak srs = 7.34:oldlol:

As the saying goes, work smart instead of work hard. Focus only on what matters(scoring) rather than do everything. Leaders arent judge by how much they have done. They are judge by results. So move on. Lebron will always be a loser and jordan/kobe are winners.

[Roundball_Rock]

what
year
did
mj
beat
a
3
to
1
all
nba
deficit
in
the
finals
like
lebron
did
in
2016
?

He can't because Jordan was the one on, not playing against, those type of teams. :lol

[warriorfan]

Since you love srs so much

bulls without jordan srs = 2.87
bulls with jordan = 10.07

heat srs before lebron = 1.99
heat srs with lebron and bosh = 6.76:oldlol:

heat peak srs = 7.03
lakers kobe peak srs = 7.34:oldlol:

As the saying goes, work smart instead of work hard. Focus only on what matters(scoring) rather than do everything. Leaders arent judge by how much they have done. They are judge by results. So move on. Lebron will always be a loser and jordan/kobe are winners.

High iq post

[SATAN]

How is a New York Knicks fan gonna call other people losers? :oldlol: :facepalm

[knicksman]

How is a New York Knicks fan gonna call other people losers? :oldlol: :facepalm

looks like satan got triggered with what ive said yesterday.

[LeCroix]

How is a New York Knicks fan gonna call other people losers? :oldlol: :facepalm

Dude wasnt even born when knicks last won in 73' :oldlol: