FLASHBACK: When Jordan and the Bulls Put the "1" in 1-9

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Many of us are aware that Michael Jordan was 1-9 in the playoffs before the arrival of Scottie Pippen. Fewer are aware of the one game Jordan won without Pippen. It was game 3 in 1985 against the Bucks. It was a close game, the Bulls won by just 2 points.

What is most interesting about this game is the final 7 seconds. The Bucks are inbounding the ball with 7 seconds left down 2 to the Bulls. The inbounder throws a terrible pass that is intercepted by a Bulls player and thrown ahead to Jordan for a wide-open, point-blank fastbreak layup with about three seconds to go to clinch the game. Jordan somehow misses. "I can't believe it, I have the chance to win the game" once announcer put it. The Bucks then narrowly miss a game-winning heave.

Michael Jordan very well could have been 0-9 without Pippen.



https://youtu.be/i0tD6EJfeFY?t=7059

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Jordan/Pippen are the goat duo. Jordan wanted nothing to do with basketball once Pippen left him after 1998. Jordan knew he needed Pippen as that ultimate intangibles guy.

Kawhi can win a ring with Lowry or have a washed up supporting cast with spurs and demolish LeBron.

[Phoenix]

Jordan/Pippen are the goat duo. Jordan wanted nothing to do with basketball once Pippen left him after 1998. Jordan knew he needed Pippen as that ultimate intangibles guy.

Kawhi can win a ring with Lowry or have a washed up supporting cast with spurs and demolish LeBron.

He can also lose to 7'1 Brian Windhorst as the season long favorite. And dont bore us with depressed sidekicks and Mickey mouse bubbles, nobody cares about these silly excuses.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

He can also lose to 7'1 Brian Windhorst as the season long favorite. And dont bore us with depressed sidekicks and Mickey mouse bubbles, nobody cares about these silly excuses.

Bubble mickey mouse backboard and depressed sidekicks are the facts. Still leads all players in GmSc. No other player in history would of done better in Kawhi's shoes.

[SouBeachTalents]

Bubble mickey mouse backboard and depressed sidekicks are the facts. Still leads all players in GmSc. No other player in history would of done better in Kawhi's shoes.
I can think of plenty of players that can do better than 14 points on 6/22 in Game 7

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Jordan/Pippen are the goat duo. Jordan wanted nothing to do with basketball once Pippen left him after 1998. Jordan knew he needed Pippen as that ultimate intangibles guy.

Kawhi can win a ring with Lowry or have a washed up supporting cast with spurs and demolish LeBron.

Tim Duncan was the best player on the 2014 Spurs.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

I can think of plenty of players that can do better than 14 points on 6/22 in Game 7

They would have lost before that. Kawhi single handedly won them 2 games.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Tim Duncan was the best player on the 2014 Spurs.

All the evidence says you're wrong. Kawhi had higher BPM/VORP over Tim Duncan, finals MVP over Duncan, kawhi averaged 24PPG to Duncan's 12PPG in the final 3 wins of season. The lineup data says Kawhi was better as well, if you wanted to use that.

[Phoenix]

Bubble mickey mouse backboard and depressed sidekicks are the facts. Still leads all players in GmSc. No other player in history would of done better in Kawhi's shoes.

Kawhi playing like shit in game 7 is also a fact. Paul George's mental state being an issue doesnt mean Kawhi himself couldnt have gone down guns a' blazing instead of like a bitch. And now it comes out why the Clippers failed. Poor leadership, team doesnt like preference treatment of its stars, chemistry issues that a better leader could have weathered.

[Phoenix]

I can think of plenty of players that can do better than 14 points on 6/22 in Game 7

Jamal Murray got 40 in the same game. We dont even need to look at past greats to see who performs better, you had a third year player shit all over Kahwi when it counted. Hell, Toronto put up a better fight against Boston in game 7. Kawhi was better off staying with them.

[Phoenix]

They would have lost before that. Kawhi single handedly won them 2 games.

All of the accolades for success, none of the blame for failure. Kawhi himself doesnt seem to have any sense of accountability, so it should be no surprise one of his nutball stans exhibits the same behaviour.

[SouBeachTalents]

They would have lost before that. Kawhi single handedly won them 2 games.
Kawhi really wasn't anything out of this world in that Nugget series. Even before Game 7 he was averaging 26/9/6 on on 59TS%, a good series no doubt, but honestly pretty standard for a superstar. The likes of Kobe, Wade, Durant, Curry etc. could've easily duplicated that performance and even played better

[SouBeachTalents]

Jamal Murray got 40 in the same game. We dont even need to look at past greats to see who performs better, you had a third year player shit all over Kahwi when it counted. Hell, Toronto put up a better fight against Boston in game 7. Kawhi was better off staying with them.
He can obv still easily win a chip with the Clippers, but as things look right now he'd be in better shape for winning titles in Toronto. Much better coaching and teamwork, those Raptors players seem like they're a tight knit group, the polar opposite of what the Clippers are. Plus he'd be playing in the significantly easier conference

[Phoenix]

He can obv still easily win a chip with the Clippers, but as things look right now he'd be in better shape for winning titles in Toronto. Much better coaching and teamwork, those Raptors players seem like they're a tight knit group, the polar opposite of what the Clippers are. Plus he'd be playing in the significantly easier conference

The Clips def have the manpower but all year long it feels like they were smelling their own farts. Hyped to win all season long and they played like a team that just felt they could switch it on whenever they wanted. The starting lineup had hardly any time to jell, starting with Kawhi and PG. They played, what, 30 games together or something like that during the season? I see Kawhis introverted personality as a stumbling block to their success. If you have a guy like that as your best player then you need like a Draymond Green type alongside him. Lowry was the emotional and spiritual anchor on the Raptors that allowed Kawhi to just play his game and in retrospect may be a bit underappreciated as a leader.

[TheGoatest]

Reminder:

Those 1985 Milwaukee Bucks went on to get swept in the 2nd round
By a team that went on to lose 4-1 in the conference finals
To a team that went on to lose in the finals

He managed to pull off one measly playoff win against the weakest link in the playoffs before the arrival of Pippen.
And this was when he had a guy who averaged 22.9 points on .554 shooting as his #2 option and a guy who averaged 16.0 points in 26.6 minutes as his #3 option.

[Roundball_Rock]

And this was when he had a guy who averaged 22.9 points on .554 shooting as his #2 option and a guy who averaged 16.0 points in 26.6 minutes as his #3 option.

Since MJ stans so PPG is the sole measure of how good a player was, wouldn't that mean those were his best "cast" since the #2/#3 options combined for 39 PPG? :confusedshrug: Pippen/Grant peaked at 35. Rodman didn't score at all. If you want to count Kukoc instead, Pippen/Kukoc peaked at 33 with MJ (38 before MJ came back in 95').

[And1AllDay]

Reminder:

Those 1985 Milwaukee Bucks went on to get swept in the 2nd round
By a team that went on to lose 4-1 in the conference finals
To a team that went on to lose in the finals

He managed to pull off one measly playoff win against the weakest link in the playoffs before the arrival of Pippen.
And this was when he had a guy who averaged 22.9 points on .554 shooting as his #2 option and a guy who averaged 16.0 points in 26.6 minutes as his #3 option.

yiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiikes

[starface]

In fairness to MJ, I wouldnt exactly say he “choked” on that missed game-clinching layup.

I think he just had money on the Bucks.

[And1AllDay]

In fairness to MJ, I wouldnt exactly say he “choked” on that missed game-clinching layup.

I think he just had money on the Bucks.

:lebronamazed: !!!!

[AlternativeAcc.]

yiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiikes

+1

[HoopsNY]

Reminder:

Those 1985 Milwaukee Bucks went on to get swept in the 2nd round
By a team that went on to lose 4-1 in the conference finals
To a team that went on to lose in the finals

He managed to pull off one measly playoff win against the weakest link in the playoffs before the arrival of Pippen.
And this was when he had a guy who averaged 22.9 points on .554 shooting as his #2 option and a guy who averaged 16.0 points in 26.6 minutes as his #3 option.

Nice try. Milwaukee lost to a Sixers team that had Moses, Mo Cheeks, Toney, Barkley, Bobby Jones, and Dr. J. That's 6 HOF'ers, with the exception of Toney if not for injuries.

You're reducing how elite the Eastern Conference was back then. Pressey, Cummings, and Moncrief were all great players. Milwaukee won 59 games but you expect an 8th seed to take it to 5 games (back then they played up to 5 for the 1st round), let alone win it?

Take a look at each sidekicks.

Chicago
Woolridge: 22.9/5.6/1.8 (No All-Star selections, no MVP votes, no All-NBA selections, Terrible Defender & Playmaker)
Dailey: 16.0/2.6/2.4 (No All-Star selections, no MVP votes, no All-NBA selections, no All-Defensive selections)

*It's worth noting that Dailey came off the bench that year, but he was a career bench player.

Milwaukee
Moncrief: 21.7/5.4/5.2 (All-Star, All-NBA, MVP votes, All-Defensive)
Pressey: 16.1/5.4/6.8 (All-Defensive, MVP vote getter, great playmaker)

Not to mention, Cummings was just as good if not a better player than Jordan in 1985.

All of this to diminish MJ's legacy, when LeBron wasn't even in the playoffs his first two seasons in the league in a weaker Eastern Conference?

I can't believe you guys take yourselves seriously.

[Shooter]

Reminder:

Those 1985 Milwaukee Bucks went on to get swept in the 2nd round
By a team that went on to lose 4-1 in the conference finals
To a team that went on to lose in the finals

He managed to pull off one measly playoff win against the weakest link in the playoffs before the arrival of Pippen.
And this was when he had a guy who averaged 22.9 points on .554 shooting as his #2 option and a guy who averaged 16.0 points in 26.6 minutes as his #3 option.

Pathetic

[Roundball_Rock]

So MJ stans always complain about a lack of "help", pointing to PPG (even though in 2 of 3 years MJ missed 65-82 games the Bulls had a top 10 offense, in the other they were at the league average). He gets 23 PPG from his #2 option and 16 PPG from his #3 option. That too is "no help"? :lol

There literally is nothing his teammates could do that MJ stans would call "help." Top 5 in MVP? No help. All-NBA in half a season? No help. 55 wins with Pete Myers? No help. 72-10? No help. It was all MJ--lottery team without him! Etc.

He lost with a "cast" that could score but could not defend and PPG isn't everything as MJ learned. The Bucks were better. When MJ got a cast that could score and provide elite defense, he won. Is this that hard to say?

[HoopsNY]

So MJ stans always complain about a lack of "help", pointing to PPG (even though in 2 of 3 years MJ missed 65-82 games the Bulls had a top 10 offense, in the other they were at the league average). He gets 23 PPG from his #2 option and 16 PPG from his #3 option. That too is "no help"? :lol

There literally is nothing his teammates could do that MJ stans would call "help." Top 5 in MVP? No help. All-NBA in half a season? No help. 55 wins with Pete Myers? No help. 72-10? No help. It was all MJ--lottery team without him! Etc.

He lost with a "cast" that could score but could not defend and PPG isn't everything as MJ learned. The Bucks were better. When MJ got a cast that could score and provide elite defense, he won. Is this that hard to say?

Of course it isn't. I don't make those claims, others do. So why are you using lines of my argumentation when I never made the claim that you stated at the end?

The game isn't just scoring. There are tons of other elements involved like playmaking, defending, rebounding, team chemistry, leadership, etc.

That "team" was filled with cocaine addicts that lacked the will, drive, defense, rebounding, playmaking, etc. Milwaukee wasn't just a "better" team. They were far superior.

[SATAN]

Wtf was that excuse for a layup? It looked like he could have just slammed it. MJ would have been crucified if Twitter were around back then. Would have ruined his career.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Nice try. Milwaukee lost to a Sixers team that had Moses, Mo Cheeks, Toney, Barkley, Bobby Jones, and Dr. J. That's 6 HOF'ers, with the exception of Toney if not for injuries.

You're reducing how elite the Eastern Conference was back then. Pressey, Cummings, and Moncrief were all great players. Milwaukee won 59 games but you expect an 8th seed to take it to 5 games (back then they played up to 5 for the 1st round), let alone win it?

Take a look at each sidekicks.

Chicago
Woolridge: 22.9/5.6/1.8 (No All-Star selections, no MVP votes, no All-NBA selections, Terrible Defender & Playmaker)
Dailey: 16.0/2.6/2.4 (No All-Star selections, no MVP votes, no All-NBA selections, no All-Defensive selections)

*It's worth noting that Dailey came off the bench that year, but he was a career bench player.

Milwaukee
Moncrief: 21.7/5.4/5.2 (All-Star, All-NBA, MVP votes, All-Defensive)
Pressey: 16.1/5.4/6.8 (All-Defensive, MVP vote getter, great playmaker)

Not to mention, Cummings was just as good if not a better player than Jordan in 1985.

All of this to diminish MJ's legacy, when LeBron wasn't even in the playoffs his first two seasons in the league in a weaker Eastern Conference?

I can't believe you guys take yourselves seriously.

I'm sorry but no. The Bulls made the playoffs in 85-87 winning 38 (actually made 7th seed), 30, 42 games. Lebron missed in 04-05 winning 35 and 42. East was more top heavy but at least equally trash in terms of depth.

[HoopsNY]

I'm sorry but no. The Bulls made the playoffs in 85-87 winning 38 (actually made 7th seed), 30, 42 games. Lebron missed in 04-05 winning 35 and 42. East was more top heavy but at least equally trash in terms of depth.

Nonsense. You can't compare the East then to the East between 2003-05. Throwing that aside, you're acting as if Chicago should have won 1 game, let alone 2 or the entire series. Get real man.

[Roundball_Rock]

I'm sorry but no. The Bulls made the playoffs in 85-87 winning 38 (actually made 7th seed), 30, 42 games. Lebron missed in 04-05 winning 35 and 42. East was more top heavy but at least equally trash in terms of depth.

LeBron also joined a 17 win team out of high school. What happened? 35 wins year one, then 42, then 50. By year four they were in the NBA finals.

MJ joined a 27 win team as a polished college player who learned under Dean Smith, an all-time great coach. What happened? 38 wins, 30 (9-9 with MJ), 40. (Imagine what a high school MJ would be doing with that team.) The Bulls didn't improve until the coaching and roster improved.

In other words, the Bulls after three years of Jordan were exactly where they were his first year. LeBron had the Cavs from 17 to 50 wins during the same time frame.

If MJ is the GOAT, why is he being compared to a high school player?

[Shooter]

Wtf was that excuse for a layup? It looked like he could have just slammed it. MJ would have been crucified if Twitter were around back then. Would have ruined his career.

He wouldve quit

[HoopsNY]

LeBron also joined a 17 win team out of high school. What happened? 35 wins year one, then 42, then 50. By year four they were in the NBA finals.

MJ joined a 27 win team as a polished college player who learned under Dean Smith, an all-time great coach. What happened? 38 wins, 30 (9-9 with MJ), 40. (Imagine what a high school MJ would be doing with that team.) The Bulls didn't improve until the coaching and roster improved.

In other words, the Bulls after three years of Jordan were exactly where they were his first year. LeBron had the Cavs from 17 to 50 wins during the same time frame.

If MJ is the GOAT, why is he being compared to a high school player?

More deception. No context at all. Just random plug and plays as if to say if you swap places, you get better results from LeBron.

The 2003-04 Cavs had Davis/Boozer/Ilgauskas.

Davis only played 22 games as it was clear this was LeBron's team, but Davis averaged 21/5/6 PPG just the year prior. There are only so many shots going around and Davis was not a great teammate and also had issues with Paul Silas.

Boozer was a second year player putting up 16/11 on 52%. He eventually became an excellent player but certainly was no slouch given his role on the team.

Ilgauskas was an all-star in 2003 putting up 17/8 on 44% with 2 blocks. LeBron arrived and his numbers dropped a little (as expected). He ended up giving them 15/8 on 48%. But the following year he was an all-star again.

Now here is the thing, you have to adjust for pace. The game had slowed down considerably from 1985 to 2004. So while Woolridge and Dailey's offensive numbers look nice, you have to adjust for pace (102 Pace/111 PPG in 1985, 90 Pace/93 PPG in 2004) and consider Dailey's bench role.

Woolridge PER 100: 30/8/2/1/1
***Dailey PER 100: 29/5/4/2/0

Dailey's PER 100 are inflated because he played just 26 minutes a game. You mentioned this to me about Robinson in the other thread. Does this suddenly not count?

Boozer PER 100: 24/18/3/2/1
Ilgauskas PER 100: 26/14/2/1/4

So the production is close while Boozer/Ilgauskas were far better defensive players. Take your pick (which obviously goes to Boozer/Ilgauskas), but at least provide some context to this simpleton logic that you always seem to support.

And none of this even factors in the comparison of the Eastern Conference.

[HoopsNY]

More deception. No context at all. Just random plug and plays as if to say if you swap places, you get better results from LeBron.

The 2003-04 Cavs had Davis/Boozer/Ilgauskas.

Davis only played 22 games as it was clear this was LeBron's team, but Davis averaged 21/5/6 PPG just the year prior. There are only so many shots going around and Davis was not a great teammate and also had issues with Paul Silas.

Boozer was a second year player putting up 16/11 on 52%. He eventually became an excellent player but certainly was no slouch given his role on the team.

Ilgauskas was an all-star in 2003 putting up 17/8 on 44% with 2 blocks. LeBron arrived and his numbers dropped a little (as expected). He ended up giving them 15/8 on 48%. But the following year he was an all-star again.

Now here is the thing, you have to adjust for pace. The game had slowed down considerably from 1985 to 2004. So while Woolridge and Dailey's offensive numbers look nice, you have to adjust for pace (102 Pace/111 PPG in 1985, 90 Pace/93 PPG in 2004) and consider Dailey's bench role.

Woolridge PER 100: 30/8/2/1/1
***Dailey PER 100: 29/5/4/2/0

Dailey's PER 100 are inflated because he played just 26 minutes a game. You mentioned this to me about Robinson in the other thread. Does this suddenly not count?

Boozer PER 100: 24/18/3/2/1
Ilgauskas PER 100: 26/14/2/1/4

So the production is close while Boozer/Ilgauskas were far better defensive players. Take your pick (which obviously goes to Boozer/Ilgauskas), but at least provide some context to this simpleton logic that you always seem to support.

And none of this even factors in the comparison of the Eastern Conference.

***Crickets***, as usual. I'll wait for the one liner comebacks and memes, or the long side-stepping essay from TheFakeBullsFan

[Baller789]

***Crickets***, as usual. I'll wait for the one liner comebacks and memes, or the long side-stepping essay from TheFakeBullsFan

Yep. Thats pretty much Lebrontards M.O.

[3ball]

I can think of plenty of players that can do better than 14 points on 6/22 in Game 7

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jN11Qtowgjs


Kawhi is the "modern" MJ doh

MJ looks way more "modern" than any player