coastalmarker99
06-11-2021, 01:08 PM
Let's take a trip down memory lane for those old enough to remember the landscape that was painted prior to the 1998-1999 NBA lockout-shortened season. Phil Jackson has ridden off into the sunset as his proclaimed "Last Dance" necessitated the trade that sends Scottie Pippen to Houston and Michael Jordan's retirement. We now know that the truth of the matter was that MJ wasn't done---he wanted to continue playing until somebody knocked the Bulls off. But with Phil officially retired, MJ refused to play for anybody else.
Now entertain this scenario for a moment. In retrospect, it's clear that MJ had another five good years in him. FIVE. Phil Jackson winds up taking a year off and then joining the Lakers with some familiar faces on his staff---and let's not forget Ron Harper on the floor with Kobe and Shaq.
While it may have shocked the NBA to see MJ switch conferences, let's discuss what this move could have meant for MJ's legacy.
First, had Jordan signed straight away with the Lakers in 1999 and joined them for the lockout-shortened season, putting Jordan and a young Kobe in the backcourt together, there is a very real possibility that the second round sweep the Spurs handed the Lakers would have been a Lakers victory, or in more realistic terms, a far more competitive matchup, even sans Phil Jackson.
Now let's not forget, Phil Jackson made a casual comment back in 2000 about asking Michael if he was interested in lacing up for the Lakers in. Apparently, Michael was committed to staying retired at that time. So we know that this conversation at least took place casually two years before Jordan wound up returning to the Wizards. But had Jordan already been a Laker, and then Phil Jackson joins, the legend would write that Phil came out of retirement to rejoin Michael for the twilight of his career.
It goes without saying that if you were to add MJ to the 2000-2002 Lakers 3-peat team, the team would remain the best in the league, assuming Kobe doesn't lose his mind (or demand a trade) being second fiddle to Michael as he nears the peak of his career. From my perspective, even if the Kobe situation implodes and Phil's lineup replaces Kobe with Michael, I say they still get that 3-peat.
Assuming Michael hangs it up for good after the 2002-2003 season (be it after a championship or a loss), he would have played around 240 games more than he did with the Bulls and Wizards. If he averages 25 PPG for that stretch (28, 27, 25, 23, and 20 per game in the five seasons), his career point total goes right up at or past Kareem's, in far fewer games. Not to mention 9-10 championships and quite possibly 6-7 consecutive.
The biggest projected concession Michael has to make in this scenario is giving up the career PPG record which he retained even with his low-for-Michael production years in Washington (assuming he averages 28, 27, 25, 23, and 20 PPG his career PPG would be around 29.5). He has to contend with the side-by-side comparisons between him and Kobe, which could in some way tarnish his legacy when you see Kobe's physical abilities and on-court presence surpass his within a few years of playing together.
On the other hand, Jordan would be credited with taking Kobe as a true apprentice, and who knows, maybe Kobe racks up 6-7 rings of his own thanks to that apprenticeship.
Another point to consider is the perception of Jordan joining a talent-soaked Lakers roster after leaving the Bulls, which could be seen as an easier route to winning 3-4 more championships. Would that make room for debate about whether he really "led" the Lakers to championships in the same way he led the bulls to championships? One would imagine that at most he picks up one more finals MVP before Shaq and Kobe start collecting their own as they fill up the stat line.
Now entertain this scenario for a moment. In retrospect, it's clear that MJ had another five good years in him. FIVE. Phil Jackson winds up taking a year off and then joining the Lakers with some familiar faces on his staff---and let's not forget Ron Harper on the floor with Kobe and Shaq.
While it may have shocked the NBA to see MJ switch conferences, let's discuss what this move could have meant for MJ's legacy.
First, had Jordan signed straight away with the Lakers in 1999 and joined them for the lockout-shortened season, putting Jordan and a young Kobe in the backcourt together, there is a very real possibility that the second round sweep the Spurs handed the Lakers would have been a Lakers victory, or in more realistic terms, a far more competitive matchup, even sans Phil Jackson.
Now let's not forget, Phil Jackson made a casual comment back in 2000 about asking Michael if he was interested in lacing up for the Lakers in. Apparently, Michael was committed to staying retired at that time. So we know that this conversation at least took place casually two years before Jordan wound up returning to the Wizards. But had Jordan already been a Laker, and then Phil Jackson joins, the legend would write that Phil came out of retirement to rejoin Michael for the twilight of his career.
It goes without saying that if you were to add MJ to the 2000-2002 Lakers 3-peat team, the team would remain the best in the league, assuming Kobe doesn't lose his mind (or demand a trade) being second fiddle to Michael as he nears the peak of his career. From my perspective, even if the Kobe situation implodes and Phil's lineup replaces Kobe with Michael, I say they still get that 3-peat.
Assuming Michael hangs it up for good after the 2002-2003 season (be it after a championship or a loss), he would have played around 240 games more than he did with the Bulls and Wizards. If he averages 25 PPG for that stretch (28, 27, 25, 23, and 20 per game in the five seasons), his career point total goes right up at or past Kareem's, in far fewer games. Not to mention 9-10 championships and quite possibly 6-7 consecutive.
The biggest projected concession Michael has to make in this scenario is giving up the career PPG record which he retained even with his low-for-Michael production years in Washington (assuming he averages 28, 27, 25, 23, and 20 PPG his career PPG would be around 29.5). He has to contend with the side-by-side comparisons between him and Kobe, which could in some way tarnish his legacy when you see Kobe's physical abilities and on-court presence surpass his within a few years of playing together.
On the other hand, Jordan would be credited with taking Kobe as a true apprentice, and who knows, maybe Kobe racks up 6-7 rings of his own thanks to that apprenticeship.
Another point to consider is the perception of Jordan joining a talent-soaked Lakers roster after leaving the Bulls, which could be seen as an easier route to winning 3-4 more championships. Would that make room for debate about whether he really "led" the Lakers to championships in the same way he led the bulls to championships? One would imagine that at most he picks up one more finals MVP before Shaq and Kobe start collecting their own as they fill up the stat line.