There is one reason why Michael Jordan is the greatest of all-time

[QUOTE=jlauber]Finally, we are getting somewhere. Jordan HELPED, and HAD help. He was NO miracle worker. Was he a great player? Of course he was...top-5 in MY book. BUT, the fact that he went 1-9 in his first three playoff appearances (ok...him, and his TEAM)...and struggled for his first six seasons...and did not win a title without Pippen and a supporting cast of Grant, Paxson, Cartwright...and later with Pippen, Rodman, Kerr, Kukoc, and Harper...tells me all I need to know. He led great rosters to titles. BUT, he never led good, or average, or mediocre rosters anywhere close to a title.[/QUOTE]

I think everyone here is confusing things. The Bulls no doubt had a very good squad without Jordan. But they went from winning the title to losing in the 2nd round. To say Jordan is just top 5 is insane. Its not all about rings....let me say that again.....ITS NOT ALL ABOUT RINGS.

I am so sick and tired of hearing this debate going back and forth when everyone only factors in rings. Its much more about what kind of player you were. If Jordan had only won 3 titles.....most people would still consider him the best to ever play. Jordan averaged 33 points 6 boards and 6 assists for his career in the playoffs and was one of the ten best defenders the league has ever seen. He just brought his game up to another level compared to the other greats to play......bird/magic have no case against jordan whatsoever. Kareem has a legit argument for the GOAT....but that is about it. Its not just about rings....its about how well you play the game first and foremost. You can't discount any titles for a player that is clearly the alpha dog/leader of the team....its really hard to win in the NBA and if you lead a team to a title you deserve big time credit. Factor in that Jordan was able to accomplish what he did without a legit post presence in a defensive era much more difficult on perimeter player and you will start to realize why most consider him the best ever. If Jordan played his career over the last decade he would have easily averaged 38 points a game in the playoffs on the same number of shots because he would have been impossible to guard without fouling.

These players do not play in a vacuum. Are you going to penalize Magic for winning with Kareem or vice versa? Shaq for winning with Kobe or vice versa? Come on guys. MJ was the best 2 way player of all time. One of the 3 best offensive players ever and one of the 10 greatest defensive players ever. He's easily one of the two best players ever.

The OP sounds like a homo.

[QUOTE]But they went from winning the title to losing in the 2nd round. [/QUOTE]

Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.



:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year. I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?



Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')[/QUOTE]

Pulling numbers out of MJ's rear? Hardly. The 92 bulls has already won 67 games. Add Kukoc and Kerr to the mix. You are looking at the 96 team which won 72 games, with Grant subbed for Rodman, and a younger, better Jordan.

70 games is highly plausible and certainly not pulled out of anyone's ass, least of all simply because you said so.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...[/QUOTE]

Ok. Let me explain it better. The Bulls had a 0% chance to win the title without MJ. With MJ they would have been the favorites in both 94 and 95 if he had not retired. Just stop it. The Bulls had an under-rated supporting cast....i agree with that....but you aren't factoring in the difference between the regular season and playoffs. Ask Cavs fans about the difference.

But even so. The Bulls championship teams had less talent overall than the pistons, lakers, celtics teams that were winning titles before MJ.

I have been saying it for weeks on here.....YOU NEED A REALLY REALLY GOOD TEAM AND GOOD COACHING TO WIN A NBA TITLE.

MJ was no exception to that rule.....but he had less help than most stars historically and he still won 6 titles and never lost in the finals as his team's best player. That is very impressive and something that no other player i can think of can match.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.



:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year. I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?



Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')[/QUOTE]

You'll give Jordan a break the year that he missed nearly the entire season with a broken foot? Wow, how magnanimous of you. :)

Jordan joined a franchise without a history of success like the lakers and celtics had. The bulls were perennial losers. The culture of success had long since been ingrained in Boston and LA. MJ built that shit from the ground up.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...[/QUOTE]

Wrong. When Pippen was out half the season, in 97-98, the bulls won 62 games, not 55. Quit posting misinformation.

[QUOTE=t-rex]Actually Jordan's supporting cast is probably the most [B][U]UNDERRATED IN NBA HISTORY.[/U][/B]


Below is some factual info in regard to Jordan's supporting cast that I posted in another thread a few days ago.


Jordan and the Bulls won the title in 1993.

The Bulls won 57 games that year.

Before the 1994 season, Jordan retired. This is gives us a real good "apples to apples" comparison as to just how good Jordan's supporting cast really was.

The following year without Jordan (1994), the Bulls with Pippen, Grant etc. won 55 games and still advanced to the second round of the playoffs. There was only a 2 game difference between the Bulls in 1993 vs 1994 even without the remarkable Jordan.


Here is a look at how Bulls (without Jordan) faired in 1994 against the compeition that included some HOF all time great players.




Here are the records of some notable teams in 1994.


Houston Rockets 58-24- Hakeem Olajuwon is in the prime of his career. He is voted MVP and Defensive Player of the Year. He is regarded as the best player in the world. He is MVP of the NBA finals.



New York Knicks 57-25- Patrick Ewing is in the prime of his career. So is John Starks. Pat Riley is the head coach. Yet they are only 2 games better than the Jordanless Bulls.



Phoenix Suns 56-26- Charles Barkley is in the prime of his career. He was MVP of the league last year.



San Antonio Spurs 55-27-David Robinson is in the prime of his career. He leads the NBA in scoring at 29.8 points per game. Rodman is at his peak too. He leads the NBA in rebounding at 17.3 per contest.



*******Chicago Bulls 55-27- No Jordan, no problem. With Pippen, Grant and Head coach Phil Jackson the Bulls have no problem hanging with the NBA’s elite. Remarkably they finish tied with the Spurs despite a career year by Robinson and Rodman. And they are just 3 games behind the Rockets who won the NBA title with Olajuwon who was MVP and DPY. So, is Scotty Pippen still a nobody?******** Jordan's supporting cast won just 2 less games without him when comparing the Bulls of 1993 to the Bulls of 1994.




Utah Jazz- 53-29- Two all time great players are in the prime of their careers for this team. This includes Karl Malone who is often regarded as the greatest Power Forward in NBA history. Stockton led the NBA in assists that year with 12.6 per game. Yet they finished 2 games behind the Bulls (minus Michael Jordan).



Orlando Magic-50-32- Shaq was not quite in his prime yet. But the Magic were just one year away from a NBA finals appearance. With Shaq, Dennis Scott and Penny Hardaway, they were 5 games worse than the Bulls playing without Jordan.




The more you research this, the better Jordan’s supporting cast gets. I don’t see how the issue of star players carrying otherwise bad teams to the NBA finals is even debatable.


The fact is Jordan's supporting cast was a 55 win team without him. Jordan's supporting cast alone ranked was easily among the best teams in the NBA.

Can we say the same for Kobe's Lakers?

Would this year's Cavs win 55 games without Lebron.


The Bulls were legit NBA title contenders without Jordan. This is indisputable evidence as to how strong Jordan's supporting cast truly was. And it provides further evidence that the notion of one great player carrying his team to a championship is largely a myth. Even when we take an accurate look at the supporting cast of the great Michael Jordan.



The thread with more info can be found here.


[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=174444[/url][/QUOTE]

Wow, that's a lot of rambling about regular season records, while nearly ignoring the playoffs. :roll:

Surely, if you have learned anything this post season, it's that the regular season means relatively little.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]:oldlol: at MJ fans pulling numbers out of MJ's rear. 70 wins? Maybe it would have been 80! It happened only once in NBA history yet a 55 win team that won 57 the year before would certainly win 70 in 94'? MJ fans keep talking about 67 wins in 92'. Put that into context. Bulls win totals from 1990-1994: 55, 61, 67, 57, and 55. Yet 67 is the sacred number? Teams vary their win totals by year. The Cavs won 66 last year; 61 this year. The Lakers won 65 last year; 57 this year.



:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Keep in mind this was with MJ retiring at the last possible minute and the Bulls being forced to replace him with a D-League scrub. Imagine that team with a legit starting SG, not the worst starting SG in the league who could not make a NBA roster in the previous two seasons...

[B][U]The Kukoc and Kerr hype is hilarious. Every team adds role players in a given year.[/U][/B] I guess Channing Frye is why the Suns went from 9th to 3rd in the West this year? :lol Rookie Kukoc averaged 9/4/3 in 18 minutes a game in the playoffs and Kerr averaged 3.5 points a game in the playoffs. These mostly offset losing the alleged GOAT?



Yeah--and he lifted a 27 win team to only 38 wins. This is easily the least impact any GOAT caliber player had on his team. Why? The "clear GOAT" had the least impact, even though he joined the #12 scorer in the league? :oldlol: at invoking his superior opponents. Maybe MJ should have led them to winning records in 85' and 87' and gotten a decent seed? (I'll give him a break for 86')[/QUOTE]

Thank you for admitting that Kerr and Kukoc were ROLE PLAYERS. Jordan won his first 3 rings with just pippen and a bunch of role players. He won his last 3 rings with Pippen, Rodman, and a bunch of role players. :)

Those were 2 key role players on the 72 win team in 96. Add them to the 92 team (same as 93), which MJ had already led to 67 wins and you are looking at a clear possibility of 70+ wins.

[QUOTE=Soothsayer]Wrong. When Pippen was out half the season, in 97-98, the bulls won 62 games, not 55. Quit posting misinformation.[/QUOTE]

Their winning percentage was on par with a 56 win team without him for half a season (maybe they should have replaced him with Pete Myers? :oldlol: ). This is reasonable speculation based on what the team did. I didn't pull out numbers from nowhere and say they would have won 75 if he played all year.

[QUOTE]70 games is highly plausible[/QUOTE]

:oldlol: There is a reason it only happened once. The 97' Bulls>the 94' Bulls and could not win 70.

[QUOTE]The Bulls had a 0% chance to win the title without MJ.[/QUOTE]

:wtf: Obviously you did not watch in 94'. They were battling for the #1 seed all year and would have had it without Pip's injury early in the season and they were robbed against the Knicks in the playoffs and the Knicks came within 1 shot of a ring. To say they had "no shot" is ridiculous. 94' was a very competitive year and the Bulls were right in mix.

[QUOTE]With MJ they would have been the favorites in both 94 and 95 if he had not retired.[/QUOTE]

Jordan did play in 95' and his team lost in the second round (legitimately) this time.

[QUOTE]The Bulls championship teams had less talent overall than the pistons, lakers, celtics teams that were winning titles before MJ. [/QUOTE]

And? One word: dilution. The championship teams this decade generally have had less talent than the 90's Bulls. Look at the Spurs teams.

[QUOTE]You'll give Jordan a break the year that he missed nearly the entire season with a broken foot?[/QUOTE]

Well, they were only 9-9 when he played and were swept in the playoffs...

[QUOTE]Jordan joined a franchise without a history of success like the lakers and celtics had. The bulls were perennial losers. The culture of success had long since been ingrained in Boston and LA. MJ built that shit from the ground up.[/QUOTE]

You sound like Da_Realist...

If the claims made about MJ are accurate none of this would be necessary. His record would suffice yet MJ fans to this day diminish his teammates incessantly.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Yeah, and he came back the following year and they performed slightly worse in the playoffs (Pippen+Grant outperformed Pippen+Jordan in 95'). What is your point? When Grant left the team went from a 55 win team to a 45 win team. When Pippen got hurt for half a season they went form a 69 win team to a 55 win team. :lol at everyone who acts if MJ's subtraction is the only one that would impact the Bulls when the facts clearly show otherwise.

Plus most non-MJ fans know why the Bulls "lost" in the second round...[/QUOTE]

If Jordan LEAVING abruptly before the 93-94 season left the bulls in a lurch, his RETURNING EVEN MORE ABRUPTLY in the 94-95 season left a lot to be sorted out for a team built around Pippen. Jordan did not exactly mesh completely with that team and was, as both Pippen and Phil mentioned after the playoffs, not exactly in prime basketball shape.

[QUOTE=Soothsayer]If Jordan LEAVING abruptly before the 93-94 season left the bulls in a lurch, his RETURNING EVEN MORE ABRUPTLY in the 94-95 season left a lot to be sorted out for a team built around Pippen. Jordan did not exactly mesh completely with that team and was, as both Pippen and Phil mentioned after the playoffs, not exactly in prime basketball shape.[/QUOTE]

agreed. its idiotic to pretend like the bulls were firing on all cylinders going into the playoffs in 95.

also....a big LOL at anyone that thinks the Bulls team in 94 had any chance at all to win a title. No way in hell guys....not even a chance. The playoffs are different than the regular season.....why is this concept so hard to understand?

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Their winning percentage was on par with a 56 win team without him for half a season. This is reasonable speculation based on what the team did. I didn't pull out numbers from nowhere and say they would have won 75 if he played all year.

[B]No, it is not reasonable. You said when Grant left, the bulls went from 55 to 45 wins, not mentioning that record would have been worse had MJ not returned. To falsify the bulls 97-98 record to suit your purposes is very disingenuous at best. The bulls went from 69 to 62 wins with Pip missing half the season and Jordan playing at 34-35 years old with a torn ligament.[/B]


:oldlol: There is a reason it only happened once. The 97' Bulls>the 94' Bulls and could not win 70.

[B]yes, but the one time it DID happen, the players were VERY similar to what they would have been on a 93-94 bulls team with a younger, better Jordan on it, who had ALREADY led a team to 67 wins. 70 is quite reasonable.[/B]



:wtf:




Jordan did play in 95' and his team lost in the second round (legitimately) this time.

[B]yes, Jordan played...after having just returned from retirement and not in prime basketball shape, nor having meshed with a team built around pippen.[/B]



And? One word: dilution. The championship teams this decade generally have had less talent than the 90's Bulls. Look at the Spurs teams.

[B]Mere opinion. Many would disagree. Once again, nobody was talking about the "talent" on the bullls other than Jordan and an up and coming Pippen, before the bulls won the ring. Jordan won with Pippen and a bunch of role players 91-93.[/B]



Well, they were only 9-9 when he played and were swept in the playoffs...



You sound like Da_Realist...[/QUOTE]

[B]Who?[/B]

[QUOTE=Soothsayer]If Jordan LEAVING abruptly before the 93-94 season left the bulls in a lurch, his RETURNING EVEN MORE ABRUPTLY in the 94-95 season left a lot to be sorted out for a team built around Pippen. Jordan did not exactly mesh completely with that team and was, as both Pippen and Phil mentioned after the playoffs, not exactly in prime basketball shape.[/QUOTE]

They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.

[QUOTE]LOL at anyone that thinks the Bulls team in 94 had any chance at all to win a title. No way in hell guys....not even a chance. The playoffs are different than the regular season.....why is this concept so hard to understand?[/QUOTE]

Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was? The Bulls were considered legit title contenders that year by everyone, although MJ fans like to revise history today.

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Their winning percentage was on par with a 56 win team without him for half a season (maybe they should have replaced him with Pete Myers? :oldlol: ). This is reasonable speculation based on what the team did. I didn't pull out numbers from nowhere and say they would have won 75 if he played all year.



:oldlol: There is a reason it only happened once. The 97' Bulls>the 94' Bulls and could not win 70.



:wtf: Obviously you did not watch in 94'. They were battling for the #1 seed all year and would have had it without Pip's injury early in the season and they were robbed against the Knicks in the playoffs and the Knicks came within 1 shot of a ring. To say they had "no shot" is ridiculous. 94' was a very competitive year and the Bulls were right in mix.



Jordan did play in 95' and his team lost in the second round (legitimately) this time.



And? One word: dilution. The championship teams this decade generally have had less talent than the 90's Bulls. Look at the Spurs teams.



Well, they were only 9-9 when he played and were swept in the playoffs...



You sound like Da_Realist...

[B]If the claims made about MJ are accurate none of this would be necessary. His record would suffice yet MJ fans to this day diminish his teammates incessantly.[/QUOTE][/B]

Not sure what "claims" you're referring to, but Jordan's career resume obviously stands on its own and convinces many that he is GOAT, or darn close. He certainly doesn't need me or anyone else defending him. I simply enjoy the debate. :cheers:

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.



Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was?

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?[/QUOTE]


Yes. I watched every second of the NBA playoffs that year. No team is ever going to win a title with Pippen as their best player. Sorry. 0% chance mate.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.

Yes, Jordan, retired for a year and a half, and not in basketball shape, could still put up good stats. But as Lebron knows, good stats aren't what it's about. Jordan had not formed chemistry with that team and was not in basketball shape.



Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was?

The Bulls were considered legit title contenders that year by everyone.

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?[/QUOTE]

No players wins "by himself", so no, Jordan never had a chance to win "by himself". He won as the LEAD dawg, contributing hugely to his teams' success 6 times in 6 tries, never once losing to an underdog.

Unprecedented.

Bulls were one bad call from the finals without Jordan

He was the one that put them over the top, he willed them to win

[QUOTE=Horde of Temujin]Bulls were one bad call from the Eastern conference finals without Jordan[/QUOTE]

Corrected.

[QUOTE=Soothsayer]Corrected.[/QUOTE]


If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks that year, it would have been a shocking upset if the Pacers had knocked them off in the ECF. If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks, they would have been heavy favorites to return to the finals.



Question?



If I take Lebron off the Cavs, do they win 55 games and advance to the second round of the playoffs? Are they legit title contenders?

If not, then you must conclude Lebron's supporting cast is not as good as Jordan's.

Neither is Kobe's.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]I think everyone here is confusing things. The Bulls no doubt had a very good squad without Jordan. But they went from winning the title to losing in the 2nd round. To say Jordan is just top 5 is insane. Its not all about rings....let me say that again.....ITS NOT ALL ABOUT RINGS.

I am so sick and tired of hearing this debate going back and forth when everyone only factors in rings. Its much more about what kind of player you were. If Jordan had only won 3 titles.....most people would still consider him the best to ever play. Jordan averaged 33 points 6 boards and 6 assists for his career in the playoffs and was one of the ten best defenders the league has ever seen. He just brought his game up to another level compared to the other greats to play......bird/magic have no case against jordan whatsoever. Kareem has a legit argument for the GOAT....but that is about it. Its not just about rings....its about how well you play the game first and foremost. You can't discount any titles for a player that is clearly the alpha dog/leader of the team....its really hard to win in the NBA and if you lead a team to a title you deserve big time credit. Factor in that Jordan was able to accomplish what he did without a legit post presence in a defensive era much more difficult on perimeter player and you will start to realize why most consider him the best ever. If Jordan played his career over the last decade he would have easily averaged 38 points a game in the playoffs on the same number of shots because he would have been impossible to guard without fouling.

These players do not play in a vacuum. Are you going to penalize Magic for winning with Kareem or vice versa? Shaq for winning with Kobe or vice versa? Come on guys. [B]MJ was the best 2 way player of all time. One of the 3 best offensive players ever and one of the 10 greatest defensive players ever. He's easily one of the two best players ever[/B].[/QUOTE]

So,, Jordan was one of the three best offensive players ever, and one of the ten best defensive players ever...and that makes him at least #2. Who is #1?

How about this...

Defensive WIN-SHARES...

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_season.html[/url]

Yes, Russell and his 11 rings is easily the best ever...BUT, who is #2 based on that list? Why, it is CLEARLY a guy by the name of Chamberlain.

Or a career list, in which Russell, Kareem (longevity), Olajuwon...and then Chamberlain. Where does MJ appear? #21.

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_career.html[/url]

How about Offensive Win Shares in a Career? Kareem (longevity), then Wilt.MK is 4th behind Oscar.

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ows_career.html[/url]

Single-Season Offensive Win-Shares?

Kareem, then Wilt.

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ows_season.html[/url]

How about Single-Season Win Shares? Kareem, then Wilt, several times over...

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_season.html[/url]

Career? Kareem (longevity), then Wilt, K. Malone, and finally Jordan at #5.

Here are some more ratings. and the explanation:

[url]http://www.databasebasketball.com/about/aboutstats.htm[/url]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]"*** Efficiency is a new stat the NBA developed in 2002. It is calculated using the following formula: (pts*100)/((fta*.44) + fga + to - oreb)
Since Efficiency is calculated on a per game basis, it is good at seeing how well a particular player has performed, regardless of the number of games that the player has played during that season. For an estimate of a players value to his team for the entire season, Approximate Values can be used.

Approximate Value (AV)

Approximate Value (AV) was developed by Dean Oliver. You can read more about this formula and more at this website: [url]http://www.powerbasketball.com/theywin2.html[/url]

Here is a quick synopsis of AV values


Credits= PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-FG MISSED-FT MISSED-TO

AV= Credits^(3/4)/21

The Value Approximation Method was a major task to come up with, taking me about two months to finally arrive at satisfactory results. The plan for the method was to end up with a scale of integers between 0 and about 20 rating players, with 10 representing an 'average' player. It was to be based upon several standards a player was to meet in order to gain points of approximate value. The whole thing was modeled on Bill James' Value Approximation method for baseball. As James did, I assigned verbal descriptions to ranges of scores in order to see if the method produced results that matched general descriptions of players. Those descriptions are as follows:



A score of about twenty indicates an exceptional MVP season.
A score of seventeen or eighteen indicates a strong MVP candidate or an ordinary MVP season.
A score of sixteen indicates an MVP candidate.
A score of fifteen indicates a definite All-Star who is a marginal MVP candidate.
A score of fourteen indicates a probable All-Star.
A score of thirteen indicates a marginal All-Star.
A score of twelve indicates a very fine season; an All-Star candidate.
A score of eleven indicates an above average regular; an excellent player playing about 1800 minutes.
A score of ten indicates an average regular or a very good sixth man.
A score of nine indicates an average regular or a good sixth man.
A score of eight indicates a fair regular or an average sixth man.
A score of six or seven indicates an average bench player or a good player playing under 1500 minutes.
A score of four or five indicates a player who plays about 1000 minutes and who doesn't deserve many more.
Scores of three or less usually indicate players who are unimpressive in limited playing time.
Before the '73-74 season, steals (STL), blocks (BLK), and turnovers weren't kept as official stats. In the credits formula for player seasons before '73-74, those stats are just omitted as they tend to cancel each other out to some degree when included anyway. "[/COLOR]



How about EFF?

Whoa! Wilt in a LANDSLIDE! (He has the top-SEVEN seasons)

[url]http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadersseason.htm?stat=eff&lg=n[/url]

How about EFF in a Career? Chamberlain ROUTS the field, and MJ comes in at #8.

How about AV ratings? Single season...Chamberlain CRUSHES EVERYONE...SEVEN of the Top-8 seasons (Kareem at #7 on that list)

[url]http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadersseason.htm?stat=av&lg=n[/url]

AV Career? Kareem is #1 but it is based on longevity...and Wilt is #2. Jordan is #8.

How about the NBA Record Book...

Incidently this site is INCORRECT. It lists Wilt with 72 records. In ACTUALITY, it is somewhere around 130. BUT, for purposes of this discussion...it will do...

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Career_achievements_of_Wilt_Chamberlain[/url]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]"Chamberlain is holder of 72 NBA all-time records, 63 of which he holds by himself.[18] Among his records are several which are regarded as virtually unbreakable, such as averaging 22.9 rebounds for a career or 50.4 points in a regular season, scoring 100 points or 55 rebounds in a single game, scoring 65 points or more fifteen times, 50 or more points 118 times.[14][6] During Chamberlain's time, defensive statistics like blocks and steals had not been recorded yet. However, according to Jack Ramsay, "Harvey (Pollack) said he used to tell one of his statisticians to keep track of Wilt's blocks in big games... One night, they got up to 25".[19]

[edit] NBA scoring records
See also: List of National Basketball Association top individual scoring season averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association top rookie scoring averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association players with 60 or more points in a game
See also: List of individual National Basketball Association scoring leaders by season
NBA Record - Most Points Per Game in a season (50.4 in the 1961-62)
Chamberlain also holds the next two highest with 44.8 in 1962-63 and 38.4 in 1960-61.
NBA Record - Most Points in a season (4,029 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next highest with 3,586 in 1960-61
NBA Record - Most Points Scored in a Game (100 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most Points Scored in a Half (59 in the 2nd half vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most 50 Point Games in a season (45 times in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 30 in 1962-63. No other player has had more than 10.
NBA Record - Most 40 Point Games in a season (63 times in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 52 in 1962-63. Michael Jordan holds third with 37 in 1986-87.
NBA Record - Most Consecutive Seasons Leading League in Points Per Game (7)
Record shared with Michael Jordan.
NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 60 Point Games (32 times)
Kobe Bryant is in second place with 5.
NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 50 Point Games (118 times)
Michael Jordan is in second place with 31.
NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 40 Point Games (271 times)[20]
Michael Jordan is in second place with 173.
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 50 Point Games (7 times from December 16, 1961-December 29, 1961)
Chamberlain also holds the next three longest with 6 in 1962, 5 in 1961, and 5 in 1962
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 40 Point Games (14 times from December 8, 1961-December 30, 1961 and also 14 times from January 11, 1962-February 1, 1962)
Chamberlain also has the next most with 10 from November 9, 1962 through November 25, 1962
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 30 Point Games (65 from November 4, 1961-February 22, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next two longest streaks with 31 in 1962 and 25 in 1960.
NBA Record - Most Consecutive 20 Point Games (126 from October 19, 1961-January 19, 1963)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 92 from February 26, 1963 through March 18, 1964.
NBA Record - Most points per game by a rookie (37.6 in 1959-60)
NBA Record - Most points by a rookie (2,707 in 1959-60)
NBA Record - Most points by a rookie in a game (58 on January 25, 1960 and 58 on February 21, 1960)
NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 20,000 Points (499 achieved in 1966)
Michael Jordan, at 620 games, took the second fewest games.
NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 25,000 Points (691, achieved on February 23, 1968 against the Detroit Pistons)
Michael Jordan, at 782 games, took the second fewest games.
NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 30,000 Points (941, achieved on February 16, 1972 against the Phoenix Suns).
NBA Record - Most consecutive seasons leading the league in field goals made (7 from 1959-60 through 1965-66)
Shared with Michael Jordan
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a season (1,597 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next three spots with 1,463 in 1962-63, 1,251 in 1960-61, and 1,204 in 1963-64
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a season (3,159 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next four highest with 2,770, 2,457, 2,311, and 2,298.
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a Game (36 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next highest with 31, and is tied (with Rick Barry) at third with 30
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Game (63 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next two most with 62 and 60.
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a Half (22 in the 2nd half vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Half (37 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962 (2nd half)
NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Quarter (21 in the 4th quarter vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
NBA Record - Most Free Throws Made in a Game (28 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Record shared with Adrian Dantley
NBA Record - Most seasons leading the NBA in free throw attempts (9)
NBA Record - Most consecutive seasons leading the NBA in free throw attempts (6 from 1959-60 through 1964-65)
NBA Record - Most Free Throws Attempted in a season (1,363 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain also holds the next four spots with 1,113, 1,054, 1,016, and 991.
NBA Record - Most Free Throws Attempted in a Game (34 vs. the St. Louis Hawks on February 22, 1962)
Chamberlain also holds second place with 32 on March 2, 1962.
NBA Playoff Record - Most points by a rookie in a game (53 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 14, 1960)
Pulled down a rookie playoff record 35 rebounds in the same game.
Chamberlain also scored 50 as a rookie against the Boston Celtics on March 22, 1960.
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goals in a seven game series (113 vs. the St. Louis Hawks in 1964)
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goals in a game (24 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 14, 1960)
Record shared with John Havlicek and Michael Jordan
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a game (48 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 22, 1962)
Record shared with Rick Barry
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a half (25 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 22, 1962)
Record shared with Elgin Baylor and Michael Jordan
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a three game series (104 vs. the Syracuse Nationals in 1960)
NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a five game series (159 vs. the Syracuse Nationals in 1962)
NBA All-Star Game Record - Points in a game (42 in 1962)
NBA All-Star Game Record - Field goals in a game (17 in 1962)
Record shared with Michael Jordan and Kevin Garnett
NBA All-Star Game Record - Field goals in a half (10 in 1962)
NBA All-Star Game Record - Free throw attempts in a game (16 in 1962)
Chamberlain also holds the second most attempts in an All-Star Game with 15 in 1960.
[edit] Other selected scoring facts
2nd highest career scoring average (30.06)

Continuing...

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Career_achievements_of_Wilt_Chamberlain[/url]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]"NBA rebounding records
See also: List of National Basketball Association top individual rebounding season averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association top rookie rebounding averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association players with 40 or more rebounds in a game
NBA Record - Career Total Rebounds (23,924)
NBA Record - Career Rebounds Per Game (22.9)
NBA Record - Most seasons leading the league in rebounds (11)
NBA Record - Most seasons with 1,000 or more rebounds (13)
NBA Record - Rebounds Per Game in a season (27.2)
Chamberlain also holds the next two highest averages with 27.0 in 1959-60 and 25.7 in 1961-62)
NBA Record - Total Rebounds in a season (2,149 in 1960-1961)
Chamberlain also holds the next six highest totals.
NBA Record - Rebounds in a game (55, Philadelphia Warriors vs. Boston Celtics, November 24, 1960)
NBA Record - Most rebounds per game by a rookie in a season (27.0)
NBA Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a season (1941)
NBA Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a game (45 on February 6, 1960)
Chamberlain, as a rookie, also grabbed 43 rebounds in one game, 42 in two others, and 40 in another.
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a playoff game (41 against the Boston Celtics, on April 5, 1967).
Game 3 victory in the Eastern Division finals.
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a half (26 against the San Francisco Warriors on April 16, 1967)
Also an NBA Finals record.
NBA Playoff Record - Highest rebounding average in a playoff series (32.0 in a five game series against the Boston Celtics in 1967).
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 5-game playoff series (160 against the Boston Celtics in 1967).
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 6-game playoff series (171 against the San Francisco Warriors in 1967).
Also an NBA Finals record for a 6-game series.
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 7-game playoff series (220 against the Boston Celtics in 1965).
NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a game (35 against the Boston Celtics on March 22, 1960)
Scored a then-playoff record 53 points (still a rookie record) in the same game (a game 5 victory).
NBA All-Star Game Record - Most career rebounds in the NBA All-Star game (197).
NBA All-Star Game Record - Most rebounds in a half (16 in 1960).
Record shared with Bob Pettit
[edit] Other selected rebound facts
2nd most consecutive seasons with 1,000+ rebounds (10)

[QUOTE=zizozain]yes one reason :
[B][SIZE="4"][SIZE="3"]ESPN[/SIZE][/SIZE][/B][/QUOTE]

this




but for real though MJ is the greatest

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]They went 13-4 when MJ came back on top of a 11-6 post-ASG record prior to MJ's return. All in all, a 24-10 close to the season. Jordan averaged 31 ppg on something like 48% in the playoffs.



Do you think the Knicks had "no chance"? Do you know how the Knicks "won" against the Bulls? Do you know how close the Knicks-Rockets series was? The Bulls were considered legit title contenders that year by everyone, although MJ fans like to revise history today.

MJ had plenty of chances to win all by himself and had another chance in 99' but quit. So what? He is a legend. Why insist, though, that he did what he never came close to doing in reality?[/QUOTE]
So i should listen to you instead of Phil jackson and Pippen about Mj in 98. This is a hard choice. I tell you that.:wtf:

Last time i checked the Knicks were in the finals.. They had no chance in hell of winning.

[QUOTE=t-rex]If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks that year, it would have been a shocking upset if the Pacers had knocked them off in the ECF. If the Bulls had beaten the Knicks, they would have been heavy favorites to return to the finals.



Question?



If I take Lebron off the Cavs, do they win 55 games and advance to the second round of the playoffs? Are they legit title contenders?

If not, then you must conclude Lebron's supporting cast is not as good as Jordan's.

Neither is Kobe's.[/QUOTE]
LMFAO Gasol,Odom,Fisher, and bynum are you stupid?? MJ>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kobe Taking LJ off the cavs is a joke through.

[QUOTE=jlauber]So,, Jordan was one of the three best offensive players ever, and one of the ten best defensive players ever...and that makes him at least #2. Who is #1?

How about this...

.[/QUOTE]
How about 6>2:lol

[QUOTE=juju151111]How about 6>2:lol[/QUOTE]

You're absolutely right...

The REAL order of greatness...

Russell with 11 rings, Sam Jones with 10, KC Jones (yep...a greater player than MJ) with 8, Havlicek with 8, and Horry with 7.

Of course, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, and several other are well behind KC Jones, too. Oscar and West...well, you could probably come up dozens of players who have at least two rings...which means, of course, that they are superior players to them.

[QUOTE=jlauber]You're absolutely right...

The REAL order of greatness...

Russell with 11 rings, Sam Jones with 10, KC Jones (yep...a greater player than MJ) with 8, Havlicek with 8, and Horry with 7.

Of course, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, and several other are well behind KC Jones, too. Oscar and West...well, you could probably come up dozens of players who have at least two rings...which means, of course, that they are superior players to them.[/QUOTE]

This counter argument would make sense is all said players were "the man" on their championship teams.

[QUOTE=jlauber]You're absolutely right...

The REAL order of greatness...

Russell with 11 rings, Sam Jones with 10, KC Jones (yep...a greater player than MJ) with 8, Havlicek with 8, and Horry with 7.

Of course, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, and several other are well behind KC Jones, too. Oscar and West...well, you could probably come up dozens of players who have at least two rings...which means, of course, that they are superior players to them.[/QUOTE]
Mj has the combination of all those things, which is why he is the Goat. Don't be mad at me for stating the facts.

[QUOTE=juju151111]Mj has the combination of all those things, which is why he is the Goat. Don't be mad at me for stating the facts.[/QUOTE]
KAJ had the combination of all those things too, tell me why you pick MJ over KAJ...

Pay no attention to roundball and jlauber. They have an agenda of discrediting Jordan at any given opportunity.

It's really sad that they stoop to such lengths to stretch the truth.

From someone who was there for every game from the 1993 finals to 1996 I can give a better perspective of those teams.

1993 - the Bulls weren't exactly the favorites goinginto the playoffs as everyone was picking the Suns. The suns had the best record at 62-20 that year with Barkley as the MVP of the league. The Bulls weren't even favored to beat the Kncks that year and had lost the first two games of the series before roaring back to take the next four straight in mostly close and tightly contest games.

The Bulls vs. Suns finals had the suns as the favorites to win it all. But the Bulls jumped out to a quick 3-0 series lead and never looked back. That Bulls team had MJ and Pippen as their best players and everyone else played a role. That's not spin, that's the truth.

1994 - This team was VASTLY different than the championship '93 team. They didn't simply replace Jordan with Pete myers. They added Steve kerr to and already deadly deep threat team in paxson and Armstrong. They added 2 bill wennington who was a stretch the floor center in a time where centers didn't take jumpshots from 19' out. They drafted Corey Blount whom they figured would replace grant. Last but not least was the addition of Toni kukoc. 6' 11" SF who could shoot, pass, drive the lane and create his own shot. Gone were the non contributing scrubs from the 1993 squad. This was a good team and they fought for each ofthos 55 wins. They didn't coast like 1993 team did. They struggled early in November posting a losing record that month. In December they started to gel and gain traction and posted a winning record that month. Each win they got was a battle. We all know the playoff screw job. And I do beliefs that they would've handled the pacers and rockets
that year as they had done so in the regular season. Therockets would have had the best chance to beat them though.

1995 - Horace Grant bolts for Orlando and the bulls are left without a starting pf. This squad was wierd. They had just added luc longley to replace bill Cartwright. Jud buechler was brought in for what reason I'll never know and they added some other players that weren't really any good. The core of pippen, kukoc, kerr, and Armstrong was still in tact and they weren't as good as the year before. In January Jordan starts showing up to bulls practices and played with them but couldn't fully participate as he wasn't an active player. The bulls started playing better in games and winning a little more. After the all star break the rumors start flying that Jordan is returning and the buzz builds momentum. Then on march 19 the fax comes through with two words "I'm back" and he was. But he was different, he was bulky, and had a flat jumpshot. He was also a little slower than we were used to seeing. In his words he had a baseball player's body and not one for basketball as they used different muscle groups. He played in the last 19 games of the season (not the full season as some would lead you to believe) and the Bulls were good again. They handled Charlotte (hornets) and lost to Orlando. Why? Because they still had no answer for pf forward and grant abused them, add the deadly 3-point shooting of Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott with shaq and penny, that was an amazing squad that went on to be swept by the rockets in the finals.

1996 - to solve the pf problem, bulls management takes a huge gamble in bringing in the games greatest rebounder in Dennis rodman. No real major tweaks were made to the team as they were set at pretty much ever position. Well we all know what happens after that.

In short the bulls didn't always have stacked teams. They did however have the perfect mix of chiefs and Indians. Everyone knew their roles and executed them to perfection. This isn't a slight on any one player as I look at these teams as a whole and not try to diminish players for the sake of an agenda.

[QUOTE=magnax1]So hes the best individual player ever because of the players he played with?[/QUOTE]

Yes because Basketball is a team sport. I think Jordan himself will be the first to tell you that.

To answer the this thread Jordan is the GOAT because of two things....he's talent on the b-ball court which changed that game and Nike. We all know about his talent..mindset..skill...etc. But Nike...think about it has any pro athlete before Jordan been marketed that way to reach the masses like him? I'm talking about Jordan the brand right now. Jordan the brand is about as legendary as Jordan the ball player. Think about it....his retro kicks are legendary today still selling for $$$$. His logo when you see it you know what it is.

[QUOTE=alexandreben]KAJ had the combination of all those things too, tell me why you pick MJ over KAJ...[/QUOTE]
KAJ wasn't the man for 2 of his chips.

[QUOTE=Glide2keva]Pay no attention to roundball and jlauber. They have an agenda of discrediting Jordan at any given opportunity.

It's really sad that they stoop to such lengths to stretch the truth.

From someone who was there for every game from the 1993 finals to 1996 I can give a better perspective of those teams.

1993 - the Bulls weren't exactly the favorites goinginto the playoffs as everyone was picking the Suns. The suns had the best record at 62-20 that year with Barkley as the MVP of the league. The Bulls weren't even favored to beat the Kncks that year and had lost the first two games of the series before roaring back to take the next four straight in mostly close and tightly contest games.

The Bulls vs. Suns finals had the suns as the favorites to win it all. But the Bulls jumped out to a quick 3-0 series lead and never looked back. That Bulls team had MJ and Pippen as their best players and everyone else played a role. That's not spin, that's the truth.

1994 - This team was VASTLY different than the championship '93 team. They didn't simply replace Jordan with Pete myers. They added Steve kerr to and already deadly deep threat team in paxson and Armstrong. They added 2 bill wennington who was a stretch the floor center in a time where centers didn't take jumpshots from 19' out. They drafted Corey Blount whom they figured would replace grant. Last but not least was the addition of Toni kukoc. 6' 11" SF who could shoot, pass, drive the lane and create his own shot. Gone were the non contributing scrubs from the 1993 squad. This was a good team and they fought for each ofthos 55 wins. They didn't coast like 1993 team did. They struggled early in November posting a losing record that month. In December they started to gel and gain traction and posted a winning record that month. Each win they got was a battle. We all know the playoff screw job. And I do beliefs that they would've handled the pacers and rockets
that year as they had done so in the regular season. Therockets would have had the best chance to beat them though.

1995 - Horace Grant bolts for Orlando and the bulls are left without a starting pf. This squad was wierd. They had just added luc longley to replace bill Cartwright. Jud buechler was brought in for what reason I'll never know and they added some other players that weren't really any good. The core of pippen, kukoc, kerr, and Armstrong was still in tact and they weren't as good as the year before. In January Jordan starts showing up to bulls practices and played with them but couldn't fully participate as he wasn't an active player. The bulls started playing better in games and winning a little more. After the all star break the rumors start flying that Jordan is returning and the buzz builds momentum. Then on march 19 the fax comes through with two words "I'm back" and he was. But he was different, he was bulky, and had a flat jumpshot. He was also a little slower than we were used to seeing. In his words he had a baseball player's body and not one for basketball as they used different muscle groups. He played in the last 19 games of the season (not the full season as some would lead you to believe) and the Bulls were good again. They handled Charlotte (hornets) and lost to Orlando. Why? Because they still had no answer for pf forward and grant abused them, add the deadly 3-point shooting of Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott with shaq and penny, that was an amazing squad that went on to be swept by the rockets in the finals.

1996 - to solve the pf problem, bulls management takes a huge gamble in bringing in the games greatest rebounder in Dennis rodman. No real major tweaks were made to the team as they were set at pretty much ever position. Well we all know what happens after that.

In short the bulls didn't always have stacked teams. They did however have the perfect mix of chiefs and Indians. Everyone knew their roles and executed them to perfection. [B]This isn't a slight on any one player as I look at these teams as a whole and not try to diminish players for the sake of an agenda.[/B][/QUOTE]


My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's, and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.

[QUOTE=Glide2keva]Pay no attention to roundball and jlauber. They have an agenda of discrediting Jordan at any given opportunity.

It's really sad that they stoop to such lengths to stretch the truth.

From someone who was there for every game from the 1993 finals to 1996 I can give a better perspective of those teams.

1993 - the Bulls weren't exactly the favorites goinginto the playoffs as everyone was picking the Suns. The suns had the best record at 62-20 that year with Barkley as the MVP of the league. The Bulls weren't even favored to beat the Kncks that year and had lost the first two games of the series before roaring back to take the next four straight in mostly close and tightly contest games.

The Bulls vs. Suns finals had the suns as the favorites to win it all. But the Bulls jumped out to a quick 3-0 series lead and never looked back. That Bulls team had MJ and Pippen as their best players and everyone else played a role. That's not spin, that's the truth.

1994 - This team was VASTLY different than the championship '93 team. They didn't simply replace Jordan with Pete myers. They added Steve kerr to and already deadly deep threat team in paxson and Armstrong. They added 2 bill wennington who was a stretch the floor center in a time where centers didn't take jumpshots from 19' out. They drafted Corey Blount whom they figured would replace grant. Last but not least was the addition of Toni kukoc. 6' 11" SF who could shoot, pass, drive the lane and create his own shot. Gone were the non contributing scrubs from the 1993 squad. This was a good team and they fought for each ofthos 55 wins. They didn't coast like 1993 team did. They struggled early in November posting a losing record that month. In December they started to gel and gain traction and posted a winning record that month. Each win they got was a battle. We all know the playoff screw job. And I do beliefs that they would've handled the pacers and rockets
that year as they had done so in the regular season. Therockets would have had the best chance to beat them though.

1995 - Horace Grant bolts for Orlando and the bulls are left without a starting pf. This squad was wierd. They had just added luc longley to replace bill Cartwright. Jud buechler was brought in for what reason I'll never know and they added some other players that weren't really any good. The core of pippen, kukoc, kerr, and Armstrong was still in tact and they weren't as good as the year before. In January Jordan starts showing up to bulls practices and played with them but couldn't fully participate as he wasn't an active player. The bulls started playing better in games and winning a little more. After the all star break the rumors start flying that Jordan is returning and the buzz builds momentum. Then on march 19 the fax comes through with two words "I'm back" and he was. But he was different, he was bulky, and had a flat jumpshot. He was also a little slower than we were used to seeing. In his words he had a baseball player's body and not one for basketball as they used different muscle groups. He played in the last 19 games of the season (not the full season as some would lead you to believe) and the Bulls were good again. They handled Charlotte (hornets) and lost to Orlando. Why? Because they still had no answer for pf forward and grant abused them, add the deadly 3-point shooting of Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott with shaq and penny, that was an amazing squad that went on to be swept by the rockets in the finals.

1996 - to solve the pf problem, bulls management takes a huge gamble in bringing in the games greatest rebounder in Dennis rodman. No real major tweaks were made to the team as they were set at pretty much ever position. Well we all know what happens after that.

In short the bulls didn't always have stacked teams. They did however have the perfect mix of chiefs and Indians. Everyone knew their roles and executed them to perfection. This isn't a slight on any one player as I look at these teams as a whole and not try to diminish players for the sake of an agenda.[/QUOTE]
Problem is people always AUTOMATICALLY thought Jordan is the GOAT without thinking, and the rest of the candidate AUTOMATICALLY out of the GOAT discussion; how can that be???!!!

People neglect Bill Russell had the most impact to the game and neglect his effort and his 11 rings which's FAR more than Jordan's, and also I doubt Jordan's MIND is stronger than Bill Russell's, and giving the criteria of "With and without you" theory, Bill Russell was FAR more important player than Jordan to their teams, the 1995 Bulls had proved that;

KAJ has combination of rings and personal awards and honours just like Jordan did, how can he be left out of the GOAT discussion?

Wilt Chamberlain has 2 rings, and he wrote the "NBA record book" like his own "diary book", how can he left out of the GOAT discussion too?

[QUOTE=juju151111]KAJ wasn't the man for 2 of his chips.[/QUOTE]
Without KAJ, Magic will never got the chance of reaching the ring, just like Kobe and Shaq, Wade and Shaq..

[QUOTE=jlauber]My only AGENDA is to present the FACTS in these GOAT discussions. [B]And the FACTS were, Jordan played with the most talented rosters in the 90's[/B], and his TEAM won six titles. Was Jordan the primary reason? Of course he was. But, for those that have this perception that MJ HIMSELF won those rings, what about Pippen, who won just as many. On top of that, using this analogy that ONE player won the rings, Pippen got the Bulls just as far in '94, withOUT MJ, as he did WITH MJ in '95. And,Pippen played on a Portland team that took the 99-00 Lakers to the final minutes of a game seven, as well.

And, once again, MJ was NO miracle worker. He played on FIVE losers in his career. He took a 27 win team to 38 wins in his first year. Bird, Kareem, D. Robinson, and Wilt all had far more IMPACT in their first season.

And uneducated fans, who never even saw Wilt and Russell play, believe the MYTH that Wilt was a "loser" (although he played on as many title teams as Olajuwon did.) The real FACTS were that Wilt carried inferior rosters for much of his career, to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in professional sports history. He played in FOUR game sevens, and those teams lost those games by a combined NINE points. I have documented the variety of reasons, as well...and they are all FACTUAL. He played on inferior rosters; and in several post-season games in which an opposing player hit a miracle shot to beat his team (1962 and TWO games in 1969); or a horribly officiated game that cost a HUGE under-dog team a title (game five of the 70 Finals); or where an opponent made a great play at the end of the game (65 ECF's game seven.)

Jordan supporters would argue that MJ would NEVER have lost a close game seven. MY take is that Jordan would never have gotten those teams that Wilt played on, nearly as far. For those that did not see him play, Elgin Baylor was a similar player to MJ. He and Jerry West are two of the greatest players ever (West had POST-SEASON numbers similar to MJ's BTW)...and yet, they went 0-7 against Russell's Celtics. Wilt not only played in four series in which he could easily have won...he DID lead a team to a convincing victory over the Celtics.

I have given the '86 Bulls as an example before, but here we go again...MJ played brilliantly, but he could not lead Chicago to even ONE win against the Celtics, and their FIVE HOFers. Meanwhile, Wilt took the same basic last-place roster that he joined in '60, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 62 Celtics..and their SIX HOFers.

You can find flaws in most all of the great players, as well. Kareem played on several 60+ win teams that did not win a championship. In fact, he was considered a huge disappointment until Magic arrived in 79-80. Shaq, as dominant as he was in so many post-seasons, played on several teams that got swept in the post-season.

Really, if you are using rings as a gauge, only Russell stands alone. His TEAMs won 11 titles in 13 seasons, and 27 playoff series in 29 tries. He also won with a 48 win team.

If you are using INDIVIDUAL domination...it is simply NO CONTEST...Wilt was the statistically most dominant player in ANY professional team sport.[/QUOTE]

But that is not a fact, that is your opinion. Why are you trying to pass it off as a fact? Pretty much everyone thought the 92 Blazers were more talented then the Bulls.

[QUOTE=Leviathon1121]But that is not a fact, that is your opinion. Why are you trying to pass it off as a fact? Pretty much everyone thought the 92 Blazers were more talented then the Bulls.[/QUOTE]

Yeah right. Chicago went 67-15 that year, while the Blazers went 57-25.

kobe never lost to a team that wasn't better than his. what do you mean when they should have won it all? i'm sorry but :

those spurs were better than the lakers, duncan was inhuman that year.

those pistons had a great team defense and were relentless with their bench.

the suns were just better from 1-12. so what if hes the best player in that series? he was the best but the suns had the next 8 top players in that series (yeah i randomly said 8 lol)

the celtics were a great team with great team defense. they threw so many bodies on him, plus the lakers size was neutralized. which is prob what will happen again but this team the lakers have a great defender they can put on pierce to prevent him from going off. im sorry but luke walton and sasha and radmanovic all had their turns getting burned by pierce and allen lol

yeah it seems like im making excuses, but i dont excuse kobe for putting up sh*tty performances. while he may have cost the lakers a game here or game there in them series, the lakers were outmatched in all of them. but whatever, im sure mj beat better teams all the time right. oh wait they never had enough competition and everyone else in that era was mentally weak, and im a knicks fan and i admit they might have thought they could compete but mentally MJ would demoralize them.