Jordan's help. Wow.

[QUOTE=guy]If you're just going to read basketball reference to come up with your conclusions at least do it right. Harper was not a 20/6/5 player when he started playing with Jordan. He joined the 95 Bulls not the 96 Bulls and only averaged 8/3/2 on 42% in 20 mpg for 65 games before Jordan ever came back. Jimmy Butler? You're basically saying he was a top 20 player at worst then :oldlol:. And the 95 Bulls, who were barely above .500 before Jordan came back could've easily used his 20/6/5. But he didn't cause he wasn't capable at that point. He was a good defender at that point and that was about it. Please stop acting like you know what you're talking about :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

The guy is a joke. He doesn't understand anything about basketball pre-2004 because he wasn't watching back then. Worse yet, as you've stated, he can't even read box scores correctly when he's making one embarassing post after the other.

[QUOTE=plowking]Clearly exceptions to the rule are not allowed when making a general statement.[/QUOTE]
Rest?
Lets take a look at who Mj guards throughout the playoffs
89 and 90 Isiah
91 Magic
92 Clyde
3.93 Starks

Where is he resting numnuts

[QUOTE=Bankaii]Glad you're aware. You follow me around and comment on the majority of my Lebron/Wade posts. We get it you don't like Lebron, but go troll a Lebron stan I honestly don't care.[/QUOTE]

Me replying to your posts means I'm following you around :oldlol:

[QUOTE]His help was so great that he either led or was tied in points, assists, rebounds(0.4 difference), blocks (0.2 difference), steals.
Quite the crap man, take Lebron off that team from 06-10 and replace him with anyone not name Kobe and they get rekted in the first round every year.[/QUOTE]

[B]2007 vs Pistons[/B]
- Game 5, you have to admit was all LeBron. but what about the other games?
- the Cavs defense shut down the Pistons to 86 ppg for the series after 96 ppg in the season. A 10 ppg decrease
- Game 1 - Lebron 10 pts on 33%, Cavs only lost by 3
- Game 2 - LeBron 19 pts on 37%, 6 assist to 7 turnovers, Cavs only lost by 3
- Game 6 - LeBron 20 pts on 27%, Gibson drops 31-6-2 on 78%, and Cavs shut down Pistons to 82 points on 36% shooting to send them to the Finals

[B]2007 vs Spurs[/B]
- Spurs averaged 98.5 ppg in regular season, Cavs defense held them to 86.5 ppg. Spurs had a 12 ppg decrease against Cavs defense.
- Cavs defense hold Duncan to 45% shooting after 55% in regular season.
- Game 1 - Lebron 14 pts on 25% shooting, 7 rebs and 4 assist to 6 turnovers. Cavs only lose by 9
- Game 3 - Lebron 25 pts on 39%, 7 ast to 5 turnovers. Cavs only lose by 3 as Lebron missed game-tying 3
- Game 4 - 24 pts on 30 shots (33% shooting), 10 ast to 6 turnovers. Cavs only lose by 1 as Lebron goes 2/6 from the FT line.

[B]2008 vs Celtics[/B]
- Cavs defense shut down Celtics to 84 ppg for the ECSF after they averaged 100 ppg in the regular season. Celtics had a 16 ppg decrease against Cavs defense
- Game 1 - Lebron 2/18 shooting with 10 turnovers. In the 4th quarter, he had 1-8 FG, 0 FT, 2 points, and went 0/4 FG in the final minute including a missed game tying shot attempt with 10 seconds left. Cavs only lose by 4 after being forced to foul.[I] "Never had any help"[/I]
- Game 3 - Lebron 21-5-8 on 31% shooting, Delonte West has 21-5-7 on 64% shooting, and Celtics get shut down to 84 points by Cavs defense.
- Game 4 - Lebron 35% shooting and Cavs still get the win because the Cavs defense shuts down Celtics to 77 points on 39% shooting
- Game 6 - Lebron 39% shooting and 6 assists to 8 turnovers. Cavs still win because their defense shut down Boston to 69 points
Boston averaged 100 ppg in the regular season and the Cavs defense never let the Celtics reach 100 points once in the 7 game series.[I] "LeBron did it all by himself"[/I]
- Game 7 - Lebron has a great game of 45-5-6-2 on 48%.

[B]2010 vs Celtics[/B]
- Cavs are up 2-1, then in the next 3 games combined Lebron averages 34% shooting with 8 assists to 6 turnovers a game, and the Cavs go 0-3 and get sent home.

"abysmal help" :rolleyes:

'06 Wade makes it out of the 1st Round with Lebron's team, '09 & '10 Wade makes it as well.

[QUOTE]You stated their previous trips and that they gained Kukoc and Kerr. Longley was hurt most of the season and Kukoc and Kerr's combined >20 ppg scoring doesn't cover the GOAT scorer leaving.[/QUOTE]

You said players left outside of Jordan, what players?

[QUOTE]Before I stated that I prefaced it with "his IMPACT was overrated", but I did say his scoring was good due to his freedom in the GOAT system. I didn't mention his scoring in his earlier years because he scored alot but it resulted in losing. But continue name calling as if you know me.[/QUOTE]

I can only judge from what I've seen you post on this site.

I think I see what some of the problem is.

A lot of guys don't realize that the 1994 Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and win the championship next year - they were a 2ND ROUND TEAM PERMANENTLY without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be...

Otoh, 2014 Miami Heat were [I]not[/I] a 3-peat dynasty - they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC), and were actually beat worse than any team EVER... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those Western Conference teams.

At the time of their record defeat in the Finals, they were a 1st or 2nd Round Western Conference playoff team, at best.. [I]Then Lebron left[/I]... :eek:

That's a lot different then the Bulls actually WINNING the 3-peat with everyone still in their prime and therefore actually BEING a 3-peat caliber team, and then falling to permanent 2nd Round status (or worse) when MJ retired.

[QUOTE=3ball]Jamison missed 25 games and he was a starter.. Mo Williams (starter) missed 50 games.. Shaq (starter) left the team.. That's 3 starters outside of Lebron that the Cavs were missing..

Then they also lost Varejao, Delonte and Zydrunas - if you know ANYTHING about the Cavs, you'd know that each of these guys were key components of the team.. The Cavs had so many injuries and departures in 2011, that they had garbage men starting for them:

[I]Alonzo Gee[/I]: started 29 games
[I]Christian Eyenga[/I]: 18 games
[I]Ryan Hollins[/I]: 16 games
[I]Daniel Gibson[/I]: 15 games
[I]Manny Harris[/I]: 15 games
[I]Jamario Moon[/I]: 13 games
[I]Samardo Samuels[/I]: 10 games[/QUOTE]
Jamison was Lebron's second leading scorer in 2010 and only played 25 games in 2010, that's less than half the amount than in 2011. Quit using him as an excuse.

Since you keep using injuries as an excuse, through the first 30 games of the season, in which everyone on the Cavs was healthy, they were still [B]29th[/B] in the league in ORTG.

The team was decreased drastically the very next season before injuries. Want to know why... LeBron James.

There's a reason that even after the additions of lottery picks like Kyrie, TT, Waiters, Bennett, and additions like Deng, Hawes, etc the Cavs have have only cracked the top 20 in league ORTG once since Lebron left (they were 19th).

However time he returns they're back in the top 4 for back to back years.

Also, why don't you address how the Heat haven't even come close to returning to their offensive production in 2014 (5th best ORTG) in neither 2015 nor 16 (21st ORTG) despite loading up with talent to replace Bron and being healthy this year?

Your hate for Lebron makes you so oblivious.



[QUOTE=3ball]You've never proved anything or even tried to, so I have no idea what you're talking about.

You simply miss the point - wouldn't it be nice for Lebron to score 20% more on better efficiency????... Like, isn't that what any fan would want of their favorite player??.. Well that's what Jordan did...

Jordan simply DID MORE - just look at those stats again - Jordan scored more, on better efficiency - what else would you want him to do?... Score less, on less efficiency?... Like, your perception of this situation couldn't be dumber.[/QUOTE]
My goodness JORDAN SCORED MORE POINTS BECAUSE HE SHOT MORE.
Show me stats where Jordan took an equal amount of shots to Lebron, Bird, Kobe, etc and still scored more.

If you're referencing that per 100 playoff scoring then Jordan took far more shots on equal efficiency.
Volume scoring doesn't equal better scorer.



[QUOTE=3ball]They played at literally 98% capacity alongside Jordan - their highs alongside Jordan were essentially the same as their 1994 stats:

[I]Pippen 1992[/I]: 21.0 ppg.. 7.7 rpg.. [I][COLOR="Navy"]7.0 apg[/COLOR][/I].. 50.6 fg
[I]Pippen 1994[/I]: 22.0 ppg.. 8.7 rpg.. [I][COLOR="Navy"]5.6 apg[/COLOR][/I].. 49.1 fg

Grant's stats barely changed too - he averaged 14/10 in 1992, compared to 15/11 in 1994..

It's a testament to MJ's superior, off-ball style that Grant and Pippen could play to full capacity alongside Jordan... Compare that to Bosh, Love and Wade, whose stats crater alongside Lebron.. It's like night and day.[/QUOTE]
Anyone with a brain would understand this, but you don't understand the concept of context so I'll explain it again.

Jordan played in the GOAT system under the GOAT coach. The triangle is an equal opportunity offense that allows players to flourish even if the talent levels aren't equal. Although because Jordan is the GOAT, Phil gave him the freedom to score at will.

Pippen and Grant didn't have this freedom, which is why their stats didn't change significantly. Pippen could easily score 25 a game, if not under a system.

Lebron on the other hand has had rookie coaches with the Heat and current Cavs, thus there is no system. The plan is to go play also ball and out-talent other teams. Because Lebron is the best playmaker, he is usually the one that handles the ball the most.
This leads to players to not have as many opportunities as they would have being the 1st or 2nd option on shit teams.

And you're making shit up. Both Wade and Irving's stats are just as good as the year before.

Lebron actually helps his teammates get much easier shots, as seen by the increase in efficiency.

Bosh and Love's stats decreased because they went from being 1st options on shit, noncontending teams to 3rd options on championship contending teams. Both were taking 3-6 less shots per game, obviously their points will decrease. How stupid do have to be to not understand that?


[QUOTE=3ball]It's dumb that anyone would think this, but I'll respond anyway.

Pippen and Grant weren't as good in 1991 as they were in 1994 - just look at the stats... Pippen wasn't even an all-star that year and he was just coming off his epic choke in 1990 ECF.. He wasn't the experienced 3-time champion that he was in 1994.

The fact that Pippen and Grant had yet to peak is enough to prove the Bulls couldn't have duplicated the success they had in 1994 when they were savvy, 3-time champions.. Like ANY team, the Bulls' journey was an accumulative one.. The gradual acquisition of 3-peat-caliber execution, strategy, and teamwork enabled the Bulls to make the 2nd Round without MJ in 1994..

MJ had to lead the Bulls to a 3-peat first, before they could make the 2nd Round without him - those are the historical facts.. Every Bulls team required MJ to be the greatest scorer ever, which proves the Bulls didn't win 55 games in 1994 because they had talented scorers - they won because of the execution, strategy, and teamwork accumulated by 3-peating with MJ.[/QUOTE]
The last two paragraphs are copy and pasted, stop doing that shit.

Pippen had only been in the league for 2 years prior to 1990. For a 3rd year player his stats were incredible. Obviously he wasn't as good because he didn't have any experience.

Hypotheticals are dumb, but if Jordan doesn't exist the Bulls still would have made it to the 2nd round and 55 wins in 1994. They possibly are even better because they would've been required to do more.



[QUOTE=3ball]There wasn't a single copy paste in that post - you just can't respond to it - but here are the facts about the massive load MJ carried:

1) MJ scored a higher proportion of his team's points than any player ever

2) MJ assisted on the highest proportion of teammate field goals - he was the team leader in assist % for both 3-peats

3) MJ played goat-level defense in addition to all-time scoring and team leading passing.[/QUOTE]
You copy and paste everything 3Ball.

1) How many of those players had as many FGA as Jordan?

2) His usage was also extremely high, what do you expect?
No he didn't. The 1996 and 1998 Playoffs Pippen's is higher despite jordan having a 10% higher usage.

3) He also had to teammates that were both better defenders supporting him.
I don't discredit that doing what he did wasn't great, but he wasn't even the best nor most versatile defender on his own team.


[QUOTE=3ball]The Heat's record puts them in the middle of the playoff pack in the West - but more importantly, they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC)... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those playoff teams.

Infact, the Spurs destroyed the Heat worse than ANY team has been beaten - it was a record defeat.. Again, the 2014 Heat were a 1st or 2nd Round team out West (and I'm being generous), that fell to a lottery team in 2015 (due to injuries to Bosh/Wade).

So don't confuse the 2014 Heat going from 1st Round Western Conference equivalency to lottery in 2015, with the 1993 Bulls - the 1993 Bulls three-peated and would've beaten the 2014 Spurs, but then they fell all the way to the 2nd Round in 1994.. Can you see the difference?
.[/QUOTE]
This post has zero logic whatsoever.

You can't compare how teams played a common team to determine if they would win a series or not. How stupid is that?

Teams have different weaknesses against different opponents. This is how I know you don't watch and definitely dont play basketball, even casual fans understand that.

The Spurs lost to the Clippers last year and the Clippers lost to the Rockets.
So , Rockets>Spurs, right dumbass?

[QUOTE=andgar923]Love him or hate him.

As annoying and batshit crazy as any Stan can be, 3ball MURKS, it's doom for the opposition.

They hate him now, but other player stans secretly wish he was in their side.[/QUOTE]
Except he doesn't whatsoever.

Whenever he loses an argument he cherry picks people's posts and disregards what he has no response for.

[QUOTE=Wade's Rings][B]2007 vs Pistons[/B]
- Game 5, you have to admit was all LeBron. but what about the other games?
- the Cavs defense shut down the Pistons to 86 ppg for the series after 96 ppg in the season. A 10 ppg decrease
- Game 1 - Lebron 10 pts on 33%, Cavs only lost by 3
- Game 2 - LeBron 19 pts on 37%, 6 assist to 7 turnovers, Cavs only lost by 3
- Game 6 - LeBron 20 pts on 27%, Gibson drops 31-6-2 on 78%, and Cavs shut down Pistons to 82 points on 36% shooting to send them to the Finals[/QUOTE]
You say what about the other games, and conveniently leave out the 2 he did well in.
Game 3: 32/9/9 on 57%.
Game 4: 25/11/6 on 42%.

Game 1: You conveniently leave out his 10 rebounds and 9 assists/2 TO ratio.
Also the fact that of the 21 4th quarter points Lebron assisted/scored half og them and had the team's best DRTG.

Game 2: Assisted/scored 7 of the 13 4th quarter points.

Game 6: He also had 14 rebounds, 8 assists, 2 steals and 2 blocks and had the team's best DRTG. Gibson had a monster game though, that's what teammates are for. Is lebron supposed to be the leader in scoring, assists, reboundiing, and steals every game?

The end result was still loses lol. I understand Lebron underperformed even though his team put him in a position to succeed, and I'm not making excuses for his poor play in those situations. But using the Cavs' defense when Lebron was clearly their best defender is disingenuous.

Also, using PPG is pretty invalid because the Pistons weren't an offensive team.

Lebron dropped 26/9/9/3 on 45% against arguably the GOAT defensive team and you're calling it an underperformance.:roll:

[QUOTE=Wade's Rings][B]2007 vs Spurs[/B]
- Spurs averaged 98.5 ppg in regular season, Cavs defense held them to 86.5 ppg. Spurs had a 12 ppg decrease against Cavs defense.
- Cavs defense hold Duncan to 45% shooting after 55% in regular season.
- Game 1 - Lebron 14 pts on 25% shooting, 7 rebs and 4 assist to 6 turnovers. Cavs only lose by 9
- Game 3 - Lebron 25 pts on 39%, 7 ast to 5 turnovers. Cavs only lose by 3 as Lebron missed game-tying 3
- Game 4 - 24 pts on 30 shots (33% shooting), 10 ast to 6 turnovers. Cavs only lose by 1 as Lebron goes 2/6 from the FT line.[/QUOTE]
Lebron underperformed this series, I don't know what else you want me to say lol.

Game 1: The game was over by the 3rd. Lol at "only by 9".
Game 3: Dude scored 12 points in the 4th. I understand he missed the GT 3, but seriously his performance in crunch time was solid. Cavs only lost by 3 because he took over.
Game 4: Lebron only had 13 points in the 4th alone, including a clutch 3. The Spurs were just scoring on their end too.


[QUOTE=Wade's Rings][B]2008 vs Celtics[/B]
- Cavs defense shut down Celtics to 84 ppg for the ECSF after they averaged 100 ppg in the regular season. Celtics had a 16 ppg decrease against Cavs defense
- Game 1 - Lebron 2/18 shooting with 10 turnovers. In the 4th quarter, he had 1-8 FG, 0 FT, 2 points, and went 0/4 FG in the final minute including a missed game tying shot attempt with 10 seconds left. Cavs only lose by 4 after being forced to foul.[I] "Never had any help"[/I]
- Game 3 - Lebron 21-5-8 on 31% shooting, Delonte West has 21-5-7 on 64% shooting, and Celtics get shut down to 84 points by Cavs defense.
- Game 4 - Lebron 35% shooting and Cavs still get the win because the Cavs defense shuts down Celtics to 77 points on 39% shooting
- Game 6 - Lebron 39% shooting and 6 assists to 8 turnovers. Cavs still win because their defense shut down Boston to 69 points
Boston averaged 100 ppg in the regular season and the Cavs defense never let the Celtics reach 100 points once in the 7 game series.[I] "LeBron did it all by himself"[/I]
- Game 7 - Lebron has a great game of 45-5-6-2 on 48%.[/QUOTE]
Game 1: choke
Game 3: Was the teams best defender by far.
Game 4: 13 assists and 6 rebounds. Assisted or scored 16 of the 20 4th quarter points.
Game 6: You forgot the 32/12/6 part lol. And the fact that Lebron either scored or assisted on every FG made in the 4th quarter:roll:
Game 7: Lol at a 45 point game on 48% being just "great. He also had 13 points in the 4th quarter and his team still lost.
Only one other Cav had double digit scoring. This is a prime example of what I meant. Lebron has a historic scoring game while also controlling the 4th but his support can't help him win.

[QUOTE=Wade's Rings][B]2010 vs Celtics[/B]
- Cavs are up 2-1, then in the next 3 games combined Lebron averages 34% shooting with 8 assists to 6 turnovers a game, and the Cavs go 0-3 and get sent home.[/QUOTE]
Yea he choked that series. Closeout game of 29/19/10 along with incredible defense though.


[QUOTE=Wade's Rings]"abysmal help" :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]
Yes abysmal help. In all these series you proved if lebron doesnt lead the team in all major categories while shooting above league average his team is guaranteed to lose.

Again, how many players have to lead their team in points, rebounds, and assists?

You're pointing out series from a 22 year old Lebron having to carry teams again superior, stacked, defensive oriented teams. His FG% is going to be low due to the fact that he is sole offensive threat.

He's not going to play well every series, no one is. But the difference is that many players have teams that can carry them over the hump during that slump, from 04-10 Lebron didnt.

So many agendas. Ain't ever going to change.

So Harper was averaging 6ppg for the Bulls, the year before Jordan came back for a full year. I totally missed that. I'm sure the OP didn't.

[QUOTE=jstern]So Harper was averaging 6ppg for the Bulls, the year before Jordan came back for a full year. I totally missed that. I'm sure the OP didn't.[/QUOTE]

If anything, the list he made shows how much help he didn't have compared to others. Kukoc, Harper, BJ, Oakley probably wouldn't even make the same list for Kobe or Lebron.

[QUOTE=Bankaii]

Both Wade and Irving's stats are just as good as the year before.

[/QUOTE]

[COLOR="Blue"][SIZE="2"][B]Lebron significantly lowers the APG and assist % of Wade/Kyrie and all his teammates:[/B][/SIZE][/COLOR]


[COLOR="Green"]Wade apg and assist % before Lebron (04'-10'):[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html#2004-2010-sum:per_game]6.6[/url], [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html#2004-2010-sum:advanced]34.8%[/url] [/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Wade apg and assist % with[COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR] Lebron (11'-14'):[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html#2011-2014-sum:per_game]4.7[/url], [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html#2011-2014-sum:advanced]25.5%[/url] [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Green"]Irving apg and assist % before Lebron (12'-14'):[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/irvinky01.html#2012-2014-sum:per_game]5.8[/url], [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/irvinky01.html#2012-2014-sum:advanced]33.2[/url][/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Irving apg and assist % with[COLOR="White"].....[/COLOR] Lebron (2015):[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] 5.2, 25.0%[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Green"]Bosh apg and assist % before Lebron (04'-10'):[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] 2.2, 10.5%[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Bosh apg and assist % with[COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR] Lebron (11'-14'):[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/boshch01.html#2011-2014-sum:per_game]1.6[/url], [COLOR="White"].[/COLOR][url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/boshch01.html#2011-2014-sum:advanced]8.0%[/url] [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Green"]Kevin Love apg and assist % in MIN:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 2.5, 13.0%[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Kevin Love apg and assist % in CLE:[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] 2.2, 10.7%[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Green"]Mo Williams apg and assist % before Lebron:[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] 6.3, 30.0%[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Mo Williams apg and assist % with[COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR] Lebron:[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] 4.1, 20.1%[/COLOR]

[B]FYI...
[/B]
[COLOR="Green"]Pippen apg and assist % with[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] Jordan 91'-93':[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:per_game]6.5[/url], [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:advanced]24.5[/url][/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Pippen apg and assist % w/out Jordan 94'-95':[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1994-1995-sum:per_game]5.4[/url], [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1994-1995-sum:advanced]23.7[/url][/COLOR]
[COLOR="Green"]Pippen apg and assist % with[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] Jordan 96'-98':[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:per_game]5.8[/url], [url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:advanced]25.1[/url][/COLOR]


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

Lebron actually helps his teammates get much easier shots, as seen by the increase in efficiency.

[/QUOTE]
[I]Lebron not only reduces the APG of teammates, he increases their assisted rate, which proves he turns teammates from playmakers into play-finishers.[/I]

With less guys playmaking, the team's offensive sophistication is reduced and the team is more predictable.. [COLOR="Navy"]Look at ALL FOUR of Lebron's Finals losses[/COLOR] - his teams lost 3 straight games to finish the series each time, in blowout fashion.. The opponent figured out easy Lebron-ball, and then it's blowout-city.. With less guys playmaking, Lebron-ball isn't sophisticated enough to counteradjust, so it's just blowout city.

This is what happens in every Finals Lebron has lost - and it will happen again this year, when his team is trounced by the Warriors or Spurs, again - I predict the Cavs lose the last 3 games, which would be the FIFTH Finals that happened to Lebron... 2/7 vs. 6/6... yikes


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

Because Lebron is the best playmaker, he is usually the one that handles the ball the most.

This leads to players to not have as many opportunities as they would have being the 1st or 2nd option on shit teams.

[/QUOTE]
The Heat had all-nba Wade and perennial all-star Bosh - there's ZERO rationale for Lebron to monopolize the playmaking while playing with those guys.

But he did anyway, because that's how all of Lebron teams play - it's called Lebron-ball.. With Lebron reducing the APG and playmaking of Wade/Bosh (turning them into play-finishers instead), the Heat's team was never as good as they should've been.. That's why they only went 2/4 with all that talent.
.

You can put adam morrison on that roster replacing MJ and win rings

[QUOTE=Bankaii]

through the first 30 games of the season, in which everyone on the Cavs was healthy, they were still [B]29th[/B] in the league in ORTG.

[/quote]
At the start of the 2011 season, the Cavs were missing Shaq, Delonte and Zydrunas, [I][COLOR="Navy"]who averaged a combined [B]30 ppg[/B] in 2010 - this was exactly 30% of the team's points[/COLOR][/I].

But keep disregarding the 30 ppg of these guys, and only pay attention to Lebron's 30 ppg.. :rolleyes: .. And later in the season, Varejao and Mo Williams went down and missed 50 games each..

Overall, the Cavs lost 2 starters (Shaq, Mo Williams) and 3 other key players (Varejao, Delonte, Zydrunas) - [I][COLOR="Navy"]these guys scored a combined 52 ppg, which is more than half the Cavs points[/COLOR][/I].


[quote=Bankaii]

even after the additions of lottery picks like Kyrie, TT, Waiters, Bennett, and additions like Deng, Hawes, etc the Cavs have have only cracked the top 20 in league ORTG once since Lebron left (they were 19th).

[/QUOTE]
Deng only played 40 games for the Cavs before he was traded again.

But let me get this straight - you think a team consisting of Kyrie, Waiters, TT, Hawes and Bennett should have a top 20 ORtg?

That's a bad team with bad or non-offensive players outside of Kyrie... I would EXPECT a Kyrie-led team with zero supporting cast to be a bad offensive team...

But if you gave Kyrie players like Shaq, Antawn Jamison, Mo Williams, Delonte West and Zydrunas, then I'd expect Kyrie's team to have a solid offense.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

When Lebron returned to the Cavs, their offense was back in the top 4 for two straight years now.

[/QUOTE]
Do I have to state the obvious???... The Cavs added 26/13 Kevin Love, who was 2nd Team All-NBA.

Also, having a top 4 offense doesn't compare to MJ - MJ's teams had the highest ORtg's OF ALL TIME.

Lebron's top 4 offense doesn't compare to the goat offense.. That's a pretty big gap.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

Also, why don't you address how the Heat haven't even come close to returning to their offensive production in 2014 (5th best ORTG) in neither 2015 nor 16 (21st ORTG) despite loading up with talent to replace Bron and being healthy this year?

[/QUOTE]
It's easier to make definitive statements about Lebron's offensive impact on the Heat, since Lebron was the only change..

But you simply can't do that for his Cavs teams, since they lost literally half their team, which amounted to losing 52 ppg OUTSIDE of Lebron's scoring.

Certainly, Lebron's offensive impact on the Heat is much easier to quantify... But the Heat's offense was still only 5th best in the league with him.. Having a 5th best offense doesn't compare to MJ - MJ's teams had the highest ORtg's of ALL TIME.

Lebron's 5th-best offense in the league doesn't compare to [I]the goat[/I] offense.. That's a pretty big gap.. :applause:


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

[B]Show me stats where Jordan took an equal amount of shots to Lebron, Kobe, etc and still scored more. [/B]

[/QUOTE]
:rolleyes:

Lebron took 27 fga in 2015 playoffs, but only averaged 30 ppg.

Otoh, MJ averaged 33.5 ppg for his playoff career, on only 25 fga... And anytime MJ took 26+ fga in playoffs, he averaged 35+ ppg.. He also averaged 37 ppg in 1987 regular season on 27 fga... Take these L's (again).

Lebron and Kobe need MORE shots to match Jordan's scoring... And why is that?.. BECAUSE THEIR EFFICIENCY IS WORSE - here's their efficiency measures in the playoffs:

[I]JORDAN[/I]: 48.7 fg.. 56.8 ts.. 118 ORtg
[I]LEBRON[/I]: 47.1 fg.. 56.5 ts.. 114 ORtg
[I]KOBE[/I]:[COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR] 44.8 fg.. 54.1 ts.. 110 ORtg


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

JORDAN SCORED MORE POINTS BECAUSE HE SHOT MORE [B][COLOR="Red"]ON BETTER EFFICIENCY.[/COLOR][/B]

[/QUOTE]
There... fixed.

You can't knock a player for having better efficiency... If Lebron and Kobe could have better efficiency - they would... But they can't, even though they take less shots.

MJ scores 20% more than Lebron, on better efficiency... What else would you want MJ to do?... Score less, on less efficiency?... Your perception of this situation couldn't be dumber.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

Volume scoring [B][COLOR="Red"]doesn't equal better scorer[/COLOR][/B].

[/QUOTE]
So wait - you think Lebron is a better scorer than Jordan?... Is that what you're saying?

It's clear that you don't really think he's the goat - you just say he's the goat because you know you'll look ridiculous if you say otherwise.

Basically, you're a massive ***** who's too afraid to say what he really thinks.. You belong in the Lebron camp, that's for certain.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

Phil didn't give Pippen or Grant freedom under the triangle, which is why their stats didn't change significantly. Pippen could easily score 25 a game, if not under a system.

[/QUOTE]
You're lying here - Phil would never restrict Pippen or hold him down, especially if he was capable of 25+ ppg, as you claim he was..

Pippen was #1 option in 1994, but instead of averaging 33 ppg like MJ did under the same system, he averaged 22 ppg, which is the same as he did alongside MJ.

So your narrative about how the "system" held Pippen down is bullshit.. Pippen simply wasn't capable of averaging more than 21-22 ppg.. This was proven in 1994.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

if Jordan doesn't exist the Bulls would still have made it to the 2nd round and 55 wins in 1994.

[/QUOTE]
Ridiculous.. I'll explain it this way - in 1989, the Bulls won 47 games - the cutoff to make the playoffs was 45 games.. So without MJ's 33/8/8 on 54%, the Bulls miss the playoffs and are a lottery team heading into the 1990 season - surely you concede that this is true..

But WITH Jordan, they made it to ECF and went 6 games with the Bad Boys..

So going into the 1990 season WITH Jordan, the Bulls were ECF veterans and 1 season away from beginning their 3-peat, as opposed to being a lottery team WITHOUT Jordan..

If they were a lottery team without MJ going into the 1990 season (instead of contenders for the championship), there's no way they win 55 games by 1994.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

The 1996 and 1998 Playoffs Pippen had higher assist percentage than jordan

[/QUOTE]

[SIZE="3"][I]You proved my point - 4 out of the 6 championship runs, Jordan had the higher assist percentage - overall, here were their assist percentages:[/I][/SIZE]


[B]Playoff assist % during first 3-peat (1991-1993):
[/B]
Jordan: 31.1%
Pippen: 23.3%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[B]Assist Percentage during 2nd three-peat (1996-1998):
[/B]
Jordan: 22.3%
Pippen: 22.0%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[size="3"][I] In addition to assisting more, MJ scored at least 10 ppg more than Pippen in virtually every playoff series except two, where he averaged 5 ppg and 8 ppg more... GOAT[/i][/size]


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

MJ had two teammates supporting him (Grant and Pippen) that were both better defenders

[/QUOTE]
You're trying to re-write history 20 years after the fact.. But AT THE TIME, it was common knowledge that MJ was the team's best defender:

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOgJhzj4W9M&t=35m00s[/url]


At the time, no one thought Grant or Pippen was a better defender than MJ.. MJ has the most all-defensive selections EVER, and was also DPOY.. Otoh, you have [I]zero proof[/I] or basis for saying MJ was a worse defender, except your desperation to make MJ look worse..

But here's the reality - Pippen was a slower FORWARD - it's easily demonstrated that he couldn't stay in front of quick ballhandlers [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11977764&postcount=29]in the exact same spots[/url] that MJ did.

Also, it's historical fact that Pippen let every decent wing in the league go off for huge games on him - 35, 40, and 50 point games were routine - whereas, MJ rarely ever gave up a big game to anyone.


[QUOTE=Bankaii]

The Spurs lost to the Clippers last year and the Clippers lost to the Rockets.
So , Rockets>Spurs, right dumbass?

[/QUOTE]
I think I see what some of the problem is.

A lot of guys don't realize that the 1994 Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and win the championship next year - they were a 2ND ROUND TEAM PERMANENTLY without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, we must spread our arms very wide to demonstrate how big the gap is.

Otoh, 2014 Miami Heat were not a 3-peat dynasty - they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC), and were actually beat worse than any team EVER... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those Western Conference teams.

At the time of their record defeat in the Finals, they were a 1st or 2nd Round Western Conference playoff team, at best.. [I]Then Lebron left[/I]... :eek:

That's a lot different then the Bulls actually WINNING the 3-peat with everyone still in their prime and therefore actually BEING a 3-peat caliber team....... and then falling to permanent 2nd Round status (or worse) when MJ retired.
.

Derik fisher coaching with current elden campbel replacing MJ could win 6 rings with that roster though

[QUOTE=BigNBAfan]

Derik fisher coaching with current elden campbel replacing MJ could win 6 rings with that roster though

[/QUOTE]
It makes no sense to say "[I]kobe could've replaced MJ and won a 4th ring in 1994[/I]", when he couldn't average the 35/7/7 on 51%, or the 36/7/8 on 53% that the Bulls needed from MJ to three-peat in the first place?? (those were MJ's playoffs and Finals averages thru 1993)

Kobe's typical 25/5/5 on 45% wouldn't have come anywhere NEAR being enough to 3-peat... So if Kobe can't 3-peat in the first place, then it doesn't matter whether he could win a 4th straight ring with Jordan's ready-made, 3-peat Bulls.

Btw, if people think kobe or mitch richmond would win in 1994, then MJ would've 4-peated FOR SURE, and probably 9-peated.. That would make him the GOAT until the end of time.. As it is, he's 6/6, with a perfect career - he'll be the goat for our lifetimes, and probably forever tbh.. it's pretty impossible to have the career he had.
.

I mean robert horry could lead that bulls team to rings

[QUOTE=Bankaii]You say what about the other games, and conveniently leave out the 2 he did well in.
Game 3: 32/9/9 on 57%.
Game 4: 25/11/6 on 42%.[/QUOTE]

True he did play great in those Games.

[QUOTE]Game 1: You conveniently leave out his 10 rebounds and 9 assists/2 TO ratio.
Also the fact that of the 21 4th quarter points Lebron assisted/scored half og them and had the team's best DRTG.

Game 2: Assisted/scored 7 of the 13 4th quarter points.

Game 6: He also had 14 rebounds, 8 assists, 2 steals and 2 blocks and had the team's best DRTG. Gibson had a monster game though, that's what teammates are for. Is lebron supposed to be the leader in scoring, assists, reboundiing, and steals every game?[/QUOTE]

His rebounding was good & he was getting a lot of assists. He averaged .2 more rebounds than Big Z, and he's their primary scorer and playmaker so why wouldn't he lead them in assists, especially considering he dominates the ball so much?

DRTG? :oldlol:

[QUOTE]Also, using PPG is pretty invalid because the Pistons weren't an offensive team.[/QUOTE]

The Pistons were the 3rd best Offense that year.

[QUOTE]Lebron dropped 26/9/9/3 on 45% against arguably the GOAT defensive team and you're calling it an underperformance.:roll:\[/QUOTE]

I never said he unperformed. Just said he had help. BTW the Pistons didn't have Ben Wallace this year and were the 7th Best Defense (good but not Top 5 like they were the previous years). They weren't the GOAT defense anymore.

Lebron underperformed this series, I don't know what else you want me to say lol.

[QUOTE]Game 1: The game was over by the 3rd. Lol at "only by 9".[/QUOTE]

Through the 1st 3 quarters Bron had 8 points.

[QUOTE]Game 3: Dude scored 12 points in the 4th. I understand he missed the GT 3, but seriously his performance in crunch time was solid. Cavs only lost by 3 because he took over.[/QUOTE]

The Cavs headed into the quarter down by 5, Gooden & Pavlovic had 7 points to help keep the Cavs in it when the Spurs had open the lead up to about 6-7 points and Pavlovic hit another big 3 later in the Quarter. It wasn't only Bron.

[QUOTE]Game 4: Lebron only had 13 points in the 4th alone, including a clutch 3. The Spurs were just scoring on their end too.[/QUOTE]

A couple role players showed up in that Quarter too. BTW Bron shot 35% with 6 turnovers a game for that series, if he shoots 40% with 5 turnovers a game the Cavs could've been 2-2 heading into Game 5.

[QUOTE] Game 4: 13 assists and 6 rebounds. Assisted or scored 16 of the 20 4th quarter points.[/QUOTE]

True he played great in the 4th Quarter regardless of his shooting.

[QUOTE]Game 6: You forgot the 32/12/6 part lol. And the fact that Lebron either scored or assisted on every FG made in the 4th quarter:roll:[/QUOTE]

Shot 2/6 in the quarter with 3 Turnover.

[QUOTE]Game 7: Lol at a 45 point game on 48% being just "great. He also had 13 points in the 4th quarter and his team still lost.
Only one other Cav had double digit scoring. This is a prime example of what I meant. Lebron has a historic scoring game while also controlling the 4th but his support can't help him win.[/QUOTE]

He had a great game but you're completely ignoring him shooting 35% with 5 turnovers over the series. He also didn't shoot great in most of the 4th Quarters.

[QUOTE]Yea he choked that series. Closeout game of 29/19/10 along with incredible defense though.[/QUOTE]

He had his [URL= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d-Mnfz6iB0]infamous quit game[/URL] and 9 Turnovers in Game 6.

[QUOTE]Yes abysmal help. In all these series you proved if lebron doesnt lead the team in all major categories while shooting above league average his team is guaranteed to lose.[/QUOTE]

Plenty of Games in those series were competitive even with Lebron playing like shit. If he even shot 40% with 5 turnovers a Game vs the Spurs the Cavs could've easily won a couple games.

Again, how many players have to lead their team in points, rebounds, and assists?

[QUOTE]You're pointing out series from a 22 year old Lebron having to carry teams again superior, stacked, defensive oriented teams. His FG% is going to be low due to the fact that he is sole offensive threat.[/QUOTE]

The '07 Pistons weren't stacked and the Cavs were the favorites in '10 vs the Celtics.

[QUOTE=3ball]I think I see what some of the problem is.

A lot of guys don't realize that the 1994 Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and win the championship next year - they were a 2ND ROUND TEAM PERMANENTLY without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be...

Otoh, 2014 Miami Heat were [I]not[/I] a 3-peat dynasty - they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC), and were actually beat worse than any team EVER... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those Western Conference teams.

At the time of their record defeat in the Finals, they were a 1st or 2nd Round Western Conference playoff team, at best.. [I]Then Lebron left[/I]... :eek:

[B]That's a lot different then the Bulls actually WINNING the 3-peat with everyone still in their prime and therefore actually BEING a 3-peat caliber team, and then falling to permanent 2nd Round status (or worse) when MJ retired[/B].[/QUOTE]

Stop with this myth. I've kicked your ass time and time again and you keep repeating the same bullshit. The Bulls in '94 weren't the same team that had just 3peated. Cartwright and Paxson were on their last leg and barely played. Scott Williams was injured most of the year. New faces adjusting to their first year in the triangle offense had to play key roles. The only consistent key guys from that title team were Pippen, Horace and BJ. Never mind both Pippen and Horace Grant missed 10+ games that year nursing injuries and recoveing from surgeries due to the long playoff wars they had just gone through.

Just about all of the new faces on the Bulls were journeyman role players that came from losing franchises and barely had any playoff experience whatsoever. And maybe if Jordan hadn't made such a crap move of retiring 3 weeks before the season started the Bulls could have gotten better replacements than Pete Myers and Jo Jo English but they had to scramble to replace him with whatever they could find at the time. Pete Myers had no playoff experience whatsoever. Jo Jo English was a scrub that had never played a playoff game in his entire career. Kukoc had trouble adjusting to his first year, shot low percentages across the board and his defense was ridiculously bad. Bill Wennington had never played a playoff game in his entire career. Luc Longley came over over in a midseason trade, had to learn the triangle and once again never played a playoff game in his entire career. Only an idiot would say the '94 Bulls was a 3peat caliber team.

3bvall what the hell man.

Why you acting like the best the 94 Bulls could do was be a 2nd round team?
They pushed NYK to 7 games and could have very easily won that series if they had gotten an extra lucky bounce or two.
Then they would have faced Indiana who they beat in 4/5 reg-season games.

What if they beat NYK and then beat Indiana that year?
Even if they lost to Houston in 5 or 6... would you still feel the same about them only being a 2nd round team?

Yes they lost in the 2nd round but that doesn't mean that was the best they "could have" done.
That Knicks series was about as close as a series can get while still losing. One extra lucky bounce and they advance and then they probably beat Indiana who they slaughtered throughout the reg-season.

:biggums:

[QUOTE=To4]1986 Celtics or 1980s Lakers says Hi...

Too lazy to break down every player but some poster will do that for me[/QUOTE]

The league was less diluted then so each roster was stronger in absolute terms.

[QUOTE]"But doesn't Pippen deserve credit for the improved playoffs-seeding?"[/QUOTE]

Pippen was not a permanent starter (he started in the playoffs in 88'* but reverted to the bench the next year) until 1/3 the way through the 89' season. Moreover, Pippen missed 9 games altogether then. The Bulls went 47-35 overall that year. Without Pippen they were 4-5 (a 36 win pace). More revealingly, they went 24-11 when Pippen played 35+ minutes. I don't remember their exact record in the 56 games he started but it was markedly better than when he was on the bench. Chicago started that season 13-12--after Pippen became a starter they went on a big winning streak.

Maybe all of the above is just coincidental, though. :oldlol:

*The first round was best of 5 back then. Pippen started for the first time, had a huge game. Without that the Bulls would have lost in the first round for the fourth consecutive year.

[QUOTE]And maybe if Jordan hadn't made such a crap move of retiring 3 weeks before the season started the Bulls could have gotten better replacements than Pete Myers and Jo Jo English but they had to scramble to replace him with whatever they could find at the time. Pete Myers had no playoff experience whatsoever. Jo Jo English was a scrub that had never played a playoff game in his entire career.[/QUOTE]

:applause:

MJ stans conveniently always neglect this. The Bulls nearly won the #1 seed replacing MJ with a D-Leaguer. Imagine if they had been able to get a legitimate SG. The Bulls had the worst starting SG in the league and still were contenders. What does that say?

The Heat replaced LeBron with Deng, an above average SF who was a former all-star. Look at how much they declined in 2015. Now imagine the Heat replacing LeBron with a D-League SF because all the free agents had been signed by October.

[QUOTE]That Knicks series was about as close as a series can get while still losing.[/QUOTE]

The Bulls actually outscored the Knicks during the series. The Knick wins came by 1, 4, 5, and 10. One of them featured a phantom foul on the final play, gifting the Knicks Game 5 and a 3-2 series lead. Everyone other than MJ stans agree that was one of the worst calls of all-time.

Moreover, it is incredibly stupid to look at one year's performance and assume that same level of performance would exist in every other year. There is always some variation in yearly performance. In the 90's the top East teams outside the Bulls were the Knicks, Cavs, Magic, and Pacers. All of these teams had ups and downs.

If the Bulls had the entire 90's without MJ they would have almost certainly had years where they would have advanced further than the second round. They were on par with the Knicks in 94' by every metric. Look at the 1992-1997 Knicks' variance: ECSF, ECF, Finals, ECSF. According to 3ball, because they made the ECSF in 92' they could not improve in future years because teams always achieve the same outcomes.

[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

The Bulls in '94 weren't the same team that had just 3peated. Cartwright and Paxson were on their last leg and barely played. Scott Williams was injured most of the year.

[/quote]
Cartwright and Paxson had the same minutes and production in 1993... Cartwright averaged 5.6 ppg in 19 minutes in both 1993 and 1994...

Paxson averaged 4.2 ppg in 17 minutes in 1993, which declined to 2.6 ppg and 13 minutes in 1994.. This isn't making any difference on that team, especially considering the Bulls replaced Paxson with Kerr, who averaged a career-high 8.6 ppg.

As for Scott Williams - he averaged 5.6 ppg in 1993, which was replaced by Wennington's 7.1 ppg.


[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

Kukoc had trouble adjusting to his first year, shot low percentages across the board and his defense was ridiculously bad.

[/QUOTE]
This is an utter LIE.

Kukoc averaged 11/4/3 in 24 minutes and was the Bulls biggest clutch player - he hit all 4 game-winners for the Bulls in 1994 season, including the walk-off winner that prevented the Bulls from going down 0-3 to the Knicks in 1994 ECSF.

The Bulls would've been swept if it wasn't for that miracle shot, described by Ernie Johnson in detail here (Ernie mentions how Kukoc hit all the GW's for the Bulls all year):

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=0m10s[/url]


[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

Only an idiot would say the '94 Bulls was a 3peat caliber team.

[/QUOTE]
Can you read??.. I said the 1994 Bulls were a 2nd Round team without MJ, and they weren't going to rebound and win the championship next yeearr either - they were PERMANENTLY A 2ND ROUND TEAM (or worse) without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be.

Otoh, 2014 Miami Heat were not a 3-peat dynasty - they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC), and were actually beat worse than any team EVER... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those Western Conference teams.

At the time of their record defeat in the Finals, they were a 1st or 2nd Round Western Conference playoff team, at best.. Then Lebron left...

That's a lot different then the Bulls actually WINNING the 3-peat with everyone still in their prime and therefore actually BEING a 3-peat caliber team......... and then falling to permanent 2nd Round status (or worse) when MJ retired.

[QUOTE=ShaqTwizzle]

Why you acting like the best the 94 Bulls could do was be a 2nd round team?
They pushed NYK to 7 games and could have very easily won that series if they had gotten an extra lucky bounce or two.

[/QUOTE]
How can you say "[I]if this, and if that[/I]", when the Bulls go down 0-3 if Kukoc doesn't save the entire series with his walk-off in Game 3?

That was a crazy game, where Pippen refused to enter the game on the last play because Phil drew it up for Toni instead.. Then Kukoc saved the day in a highly unlikely, completely unique situation.

The whole "[I]if this, if that[/I]" bullshit never works, and it definitely doesn't work here, considering the same logic can be used to say the Bulls should've been down 0-3..

Ernie Johnson describes Kukoc's miracle shot here, and the crazy situation surrounding it (Ernie mentions how Kukoc hit all the GW's for the Bulls all year):

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=0m10s[/url]

What is most amusing about MJ stans vis-a-vis the 94' Bulls is the following claims MJ stans make:

*The 90's were an era of incredible competition.
*The 90's Knicks were the Bulls' toughest competition.
*The 90's Knicks were a great team.

Yet the 94' Bulls, who were equal to the 94' Knicks (the best iteration of those 90's Knicks!), by every available metric*, were an above average team. If the latter is true then it also cannot follow that the 90's Knicks were a great team--meaning MJ had no real competition. Which is it MJ stans? Were the 90's Knicks great or not? If the former, then it logically follows that the Bulls without MJ also were a top team. If they weren't, you are saying MJ won in a weak era.

The fact is the Bulls came within a whisker of beating the Bulls' top competition with a scrub at SG. That is like the Lakers nearly beating the Spurs with a D-League SG in place of Kobe or the Heat nearly beating the Pacers with a D-League SF. Can anyone envision that happening?

*Knicks: 57 wins, 1 superstar (4th in MVP voting), 3 all-stars, HOF coach. 4-3 versus Chicago in the ECSF.
*Bulls: 55 wins, 1 superstar (3rd in MVP voting), 3 all-stars, HOF coach. 3-4 versus the Knicks in the ECSF.

[QUOTE=3ball]How can you say "[I]if this, and if that[/I]", when the Bulls go down 0-3 if Kukoc doesn't save the entire series with his walk-off in Game 3?
[/QUOTE]

Sure that is true but even MJ relied on roleplayers to hit clutch gamewinning shots on occasion and coming back from an 0-2 hole isn't a huge deal or that rare.

Oh and Pippen had 25 / 7 / 5 on 59%TS in that G3 so obviously he was still the biggest reason they won that game.

In the end they took the Bulls too 7 games and three of their losses were by 5, 4 and 1 point.

I just want you to acknowledge the fact that they could have easily ended up winning that series and if they had they probably would have ended up making the Finals.

So saying they were at best a 2nd round exit is disingenuous and completely untrue certainly for that specific year if not others...

[QUOTE=ShaqTwizzle]I just want you to acknowledge the fact that they could have easily ended up winning that series and if they had they probably would have ended up making the Finals.

So saying they were at best a 2nd round exit is disingenuous and completely untrue certainly for that specific year if not others...[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

[QUOTE]How can you say "if this, and if that", when the Bulls go down 0-3 if Kukoc doesn't save the entire series with his walk-off in Game 3?[/QUOTE]

3ball always brings that up but ignores the Bulls narrowly lost Games 1 and 2. Yes, the Bulls came close to going down 0-3 but they also came close to being up 3-0! It was a close series in which the Bulls had fourth quarter leads in 6 of 7 games.

[QUOTE=ShaqTwizzle]

Oh and Pippen had 25 / 7 / 5 on 59%TS in that G3 so obviously [B][COLOR="Red"]he was still the biggest reason they won that game.[/COLOR][/B]

[/quote]

Dude... you have no idea what happened in that game and are talking out of your ASS.

The Bulls lost a 20 point lead in the 4th quarter and were on life support before Kukoc saved them (if you had clicked on the youtube link I posted earlier, you would've seen Ernie Johnson describe the [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=0m10s]entire situation in detail[/url]).

Here's Pippen's last possession before deciding to SIT OUT the final possession, in his greatest choke ever (of many):


[IMG]https://media.giphy.com/media/TmnwWY6ALWeUo/giphy.gif[/IMG]



[quote=ShaqTwizzle]

So saying they were at best a 2nd round exit is disingenuous and completely untrue certainly for that specific year if not others

[/QUOTE]
Just like you claim the Bulls could've won, I can claim the Bulls were a Kukoc walk-off away from being swept..

Regardless, they were a 2nd Round team - that's how good they were - they weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and win the championship next year - they were PERMANENTLY A 2ND ROUND TEAM (or worse) without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be.

Otoh, 2014 Miami Heat were not a 3-peat dynasty - they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC), and were actually beat worse than any team EVER... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those Western Conference teams.

At the time of their record defeat in the Finals, they were a 1st or 2nd Round Western Conference playoff team, at best.. Then Lebron left...

That's a lot different then the Bulls actually WINNING the 3-peat with everyone still in their prime and therefore actually BEING a 3-peat caliber team......... and then falling to permanent 2nd Round status (or worse) when MJ retired.
.

[QUOTE=3ball]
The Bulls lost a 25 point lead in the 2nd half and were on life support before Kukoc saved them.
[/QUOTE]

And how did they build that lead?
I judge a players performance by how he played from start to finish not just how he did in the final few seconds.

[B]Pippen had 25 / 7 / 5 on 59%TS[/B] in that G3.
[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]Kukoc had 8 / 4 / 4 on 46%TS[/COLOR][/B] in that G3.

If you really think Kukoc deserves even half the credit that Pippen deserves for that victory then you're insane.

[quote=Yao Ming's Foot]

My guess would be an average of his stats against similarly defensive efficient teams he faced in the playoffs.

MJ vs 97 Heat Def Rtg: 100.6

MJ vs 93 Knicks Def Rtg: 99.7

[/QUOTE]
[I][COLOR="Navy"]If your simple logic regarding DRtg was valid, then inferior players to Jordan (Melo, Kobe, Bonzi) wouldn't shoot between 48-61% against the Spurs' 99.6 defense - they'd shoot the same 39-40% that Jordan shot against the similarly-rated defenses you listed above..

Analyzing DRtg properly is far more complicated - here's a few examples of how complicated it is..[/COLOR][/I]

For starters, your DRtg's are from the regular season - [COLOR="darkred"]in the playoffs, the Knicks DRtg was an abysmal 107.0[/COLOR].. In the ACTUAL SERIES (the 1993 ECF) it was 112.4... It was horrific.. Jordan has many series where he shot much better against defenses that gave up far fewer points per possession... See how complicated it is??... No one who watched the 1993 ECF would say the Knicks played weak defense - but according to your erroneous use of DRtg, their defense was garbage.

Also, look at the 1989 and 1990 Pistons defense - they had some of the best defensive personnel ever, and played extraordinary team defense.. So why aren't their DRtg's as good as many crappier defensive teams in the 90's or 2000's??... It's because STYLE OF PLAY in any given era affects DRtg's.. In this case, offensive rebounding rate is the key factor - it was higher in the Pistons' era because teams didn't shoot 3-pointers - the higher proportion of 2-pointers increased offensive rebounding rate and consequently ORtg/DRtg as well.. This is statistical fact - previous eras had MUCH higher offensive rebounding rate due to the higher proportion of 2-pointers, which increased ORtg's and DRtg's for all teams.

Btw, in addition to higher offensive rebounding rate, I have a less-provable theory why DRtg's were higher: when teams get hot from midrange, THERE IS NO DEFENSE THAT CAN STOP THAT... It's not like 3-pointers, where you can get a hand in the face and drastically reduce the efficiency - good midrange shooters are accustomed to having defender draped all over... So in previous eras, when teams LIVED off midrange, they could get hot and be unstoppable.. I think that happened a lot in previous eras, like the aforementioned Bulls-Knicks series in 1993, where both teams had high ORtg/DRtg, even though it was a tough, grind-it-out defensive series... Just look at Game 4 - MJ scored 54 points ON ALL JUMPSHOTS, mostly midrange.. This isn't an exaggerration.. [I]This shows that when guys or teams get hot from midrange, DRtg goes out the window because there is no defense that can stop it.[/I]

And again, the simplest way that you're misusing DRtg is that you're conflating regular season DRtg's with playoff DRtg's.. Playoff basketball is much different, and the Spurs DRtg in the 2007 playoffs was 103.1... Whereas the 1998 Utah Jazz had a playoff DRtg of 100.4 - this is a lower playoff DRtg than anything Lebron has ever faced in the Finals.
.

Amazing to watch 3ball when he's on a roll, owning 4 posters at the same time.

Tbf some of these comments (by bankei, roundrock and etx) are embarrassingly easy to counter. These kids don't seem to know what they're talking about and are just handing out ammunition with every mess-up.

Still, credit to 3ball (as annoying as he is) for picking apart every ridiculous post that's been coming by these kids.

[QUOTE=3ball]Kukoc won the game single-handedly at the end!!!.. They don't win without Kukoc miracle shot!!!!
[/QUOTE]

Such idiotic logic... and you know better.

Let us imagine that Jordan scores 50pts in some random playoff game and gives his team a big lead after 3 quarters but then he plays poorly in the 4th, the opposing team makes it close and Steve Kerr ends up hitting a gamewinner at the very end after playing like crap the whole game.
Does Kerr become the the MVP of that game...?

Pippen had a great overall game and made a bone headed play at the end.
Kukoc had a shitty overall game and made a great play at the end.

Kukoc prior to his last shot had put up 5pts / 4ast on 39%TS.
Maybe if "Kukoc the savior" hadn't played so horribly and below his usual standards during regulation they wouldn't have even needed a gamewinner eh?

[QUOTE=ShaqTwizzle]

Let us imagine that Jordan scores 50pts in some random playoff game and gives his team a big lead after 3 quarters but then he plays poorly in the 4th, the opposing team makes it close and Steve Kerr ends up hitting a gamewinner at the very end after playing like crap the whole game.
[B][COLOR="Red"]Does Kerr become the the MVP of that game...?[/COLOR][/B]

[/QUOTE]
Depends if MJ sits out the final possession in an epic choke, thus failing his responsibility as team leader.. If he fails his responsibility as team leader and Kerr saves him (like Kukoc did Pippen), then Kerr gets credit for the win.

But thank goodness for Kukoc's miracle - otherwise, Pippen's choke and subsequent sweep would be a massive stain on his career that he doesn't recover from.. Actually, a Bulls' sweep gets Pippen traded almost certainly, given his disprespectful blunder.. Kukoc saved that ***** from getting traded.. :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=3ball]Cartwright and Paxson had the same minutes and production in 1993... Cartwright averaged 5.6 ppg in 19 minutes in both 1993 and 1994...

Paxson averaged 4.2 ppg in 17 minutes in 1993, which declined to 2.6 ppg and 13 minutes in 1994.. This isn't making any difference on that team, especially considering the Bulls replaced Paxson with Kerr, who averaged a career-high 8.6 ppg.

As for Scott Williams - he averaged 5.6 ppg in 1993, which was replaced by Wennington's 7.1 ppg.[/quote]

Look at the games played by those players in '93 and '94 dumbass. They drastically decreased.

[B]Cartwright[/B] - played 63 games in '93, only 41 in '94.
[B]Paxson[/B] - played 59 games in '93, only 27 in '94.

Those two players were done. Cartwright was on bad knees. And Kerr and Wennington aren't replacing Paxson and Cartwright's 3peat experience.

[quote]This is an utter LIE.

Kukoc averaged 11/4/3 in 24 minutes and was the Bulls biggest clutch player - he hit all 4 game-winners for the Bulls in 1994 season, including the walk-off winner that prevented the Bulls from going down 0-3 to the Knicks in 1994 ECSF.[/quote]

Kukoc struggled with his shooting all season and his defense was non-existent. A couple of fluke shots isn't going to change that fact. And his minutes and production decreased across the board in the playoffs. He was hardly any kind of consistent replacement needed to replace Jordan.

[quote]Can you read??.. I said the 1994 Bulls were a 2nd Round team without MJ, and they weren't going to rebound and win the championship next yeearr either - they were PERMANENTLY A 2ND ROUND TEAM (or worse) without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be.[/quote]

No shit they were a 2nd round team jackass. They had 7 new faces on the team with barely any playoff experience in their first year of learning the triangle. And the team no longer had a 1-2 punch. It was a single perimeter superstar team which usually don't go far. Just the year before the Bulls WITH their 3peat team intact BARELY beat the Knicks in the '93 ECF. Lucky for them they had a 1-2 punch. When Jordan was building a brickhouse shooting 3-17 in must-win Game 3 it was Pippen scoring 29 points picking up the slack. When Jordan was building another brickhouse in Game 6 shooting 8-25 and barely scoring a goddamn thing in the 2nd half it was Pippen closing out the Knicks to avoid Game 7 at MSG and propelling the Bulls to the '93 Finals. In '94 Pippen didn't have that same luxury of having another player in his prime beside him that could score 20+ points, play all-world defense, rebound and be a playmaker.

[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

[B]Cartwright[/B] - played 63 games in '93, only 41 in '94.
[B]Paxson[/B] - played 59 games in '93, only 27 in '94.

[/quote]
lol at thinking guys who average literally 2 ppg and 4ppg make a difference..

and again, BOTH guys were replaced with better players who produced much more.


[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

No shit they were a 2nd round team jackass. They had 7 new faces on the team with barely any playoff experience in their first year of learning the triangle.

[/QUOTE]
The Bulls were essentially the same team in 1994 - all the players were the same, except several significant IMPROVEMENTS of various marginal role players...

i.e. Kerr and his career-high 8.6 ppg replaced Paxson and his 4 ppg.. Longley and his 8 ppg replaced Cartwright's 6 ppg.. Wennington and his 8 ppg replaced Scott Williams and his 5 ppg..

And the Bulls added Kukoc, who averaged 11/4/3 in 24 minutes and was their best clutch player.

LOL at you for thinking that the Bulls were a different team just because a few bench players were replaced by BETTER players - every Bulls championship teams had similar, [I]immaterial[/I] turnover..



[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

When Jordan was building a brickhouse shooting 3-17 in must-win Game 3 it was Pippen scoring 29 points picking up the slack. When Jordan was building another brickhouse in Game 6 shooting 8-25 and barely scoring a goddamn thing in the 2nd half it was Pippen closing out the Knicks to avoid Game 7 at MSG and propelling the Bulls to the '93 Finals.

[/QUOTE]

[SIZE="3"][I]You're saying Pippen's contribution compared to MJ's??.... :yaohappy:

Jordan scored at least 10 ppg more than Pippen in EVERY playoffs series, except two, when he averaged 5 ppg and 8 ppg more.

In addition to scoring literally 50-400% more than Pippen in substantially every playoff series, Jordan assisted on a higher proportion of teammate field goals - he led the team in assist %:[/I][/SIZE]


[B]Assist Percentage 1991-1993 Playoffs:[/B]

Jordan: 31.1%
Pippen: 23.3%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[B]Assist Percentage 1996-1998 Playoffs:[/B]

Jordan: 22.3%
Pippen: 22.0%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[SIZE="3"][I]So MJ scored 50-400% more than Pippen, while leading the team in passing and playing GOAT defense... MJ carried the biggest load of all time.. No one else is close[/I][/SIZE]

.
[SIZE="5"]Btw, this was the consensus about Pippen:[/SIZE]



[B]Shaquille O'Neal:[/B]
[INDENT][I]"You did okay, but MJ did most of the work"

"Remember I WAS BATMAN YOU WAS ROBIN , I was PUFFY YOU WAS MASE"

"See what happens when Michael Jordan ain't protecting you, you lose a 17 pt lead in the fourth quarter." (referring to 2000 WCF Game 7) [/I][/INDENT]



[B]Bill Laimbeer[/B]:

[INDENT]"[I]We didn't even think about Scottie Pippen. It was Michael Jordan and the Jordannaires - and you can't win championships like that with only 1 player[/I]."

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h07m33s[/url][/INDENT]



[B]JERRY KRAUSE, Bulls GM:[/B]

[indent][I]

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]The league was less diluted then so each roster was stronger in absolute terms.



Pippen was not a permanent starter (he started in the playoffs in 88'* but reverted to the bench the next year) until 1/3 the way through the 89' season. Moreover, Pippen missed 9 games altogether then. The Bulls went 47-35 overall that year. Without Pippen they were 4-5 (a 36 win pace). More revealingly, they went 24-11 when Pippen played 35+ minutes. I don't remember their exact record in the 56 games he started but it was markedly better than when he was on the bench. Chicago started that season 13-12--after Pippen became a starter they went on a big winning streak.

Maybe all of the above is just coincidental, though. :oldlol:

*The first round was best of 5 back then. Pippen started for the first time, had a huge game. Without that the Bulls would have lost in the first round for the fourth consecutive year.



:applause:

MJ stans conveniently always neglect this. The Bulls nearly won the #1 seed replacing MJ with a D-Leaguer. Imagine if they had been able to get a legitimate SG. The Bulls had the worst starting SG in the league and still were contenders. What does that say?

The Heat replaced LeBron with Deng, an above average SF who was a former all-star. Look at how much they declined in 2015. Now imagine the Heat replacing LeBron with a D-League SF because all the free agents had been signed by October.



The Bulls actually outscored the Knicks during the series. The Knick wins came by 1, 4, 5, and 10. One of them featured a phantom foul on the final play, gifting the Knicks Game 5 and a 3-2 series lead. Everyone other than MJ stans agree that was one of the worst calls of all-time.

Moreover, it is incredibly stupid to look at one year's performance and assume that same level of performance would exist in every other year. There is always some variation in yearly performance. In the 90's the top East teams outside the Bulls were the Knicks, Cavs, Magic, and Pacers. All of these teams had ups and downs.

If the Bulls had the entire 90's without MJ they would have almost certainly had years where they would have advanced further than the second round. They were on par with the Knicks in 94' by every metric. Look at the 1992-1997 Knicks' variance: ECSF, ECF, Finals, ECSF. According to 3ball, because they made the ECSF in 92' they could not improve in future years because teams always achieve the same outcomes.[/QUOTE]

THIS!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

The REALITY was, the '93-94 Bulls had to scramble to replace Jordan...with the legendary Pete Myers.

Furthermore, Pippen and Grant missed a combined 22 games that season. Think about that...they went 55-27 with their two best players (and no MJ) missing 22 games. Had those two been relatively healthy, and they surely would have won 60+ games.

Which would have been HUGE. Why? Because the Knicks finished 56-26, and the Rockets went 58-24.

And this nonsense that the '94 Bulls were an ordinary second round team????? As RR posted above, they outscored the Knicks in the ECSF's. Furthermore, they went 3-0 at HOME in that series. Had they had HCA (which they surely would have had Pippen and Grant not missed 22 games), they would have beaten NY in the ECSF's. And given the fact that they wiped out the Pacers during the regular season, 4-1, there is very little doubt that they would have beaten them in the ECF's.

As it was, the Knicks beat the Pacers in the ECF's, and advanced to the Finals...where they lost a game seven to the 58-24 Rockets by four points, and in a series in which they outscored Houston.

Again, had Pippen and Grant not missed a ton of games, they likely would have been in the Finals, and perhaps even won the title. So much for a mere SECOND ROUND Team theory.

BUT, it gets even worse for the Jordanites.

Why? Because Grant jumped ship prior to the '94-95 season, and really was not replaced.

So, here was Pippen SINGLE-HANDEDLY carrying the '95 Bulls to a 34-31 record. Again, WITH Grant in '94, they went a deceptive 55-27 (easily a 60+ win team.)

Again, the SAME EXACT roster that went 55-27 withOUT Jordan...except with Jordan replacing Grant.

So, MJ returned to play the last 17 games of '95. Rusty? In his 5th game back, he scored 55 points. In the last game of the regular season he hung 33 points in 45 minutes. If anything, he was the HEALTHIEST player going into the post-season in the entire NBA.

And before someone gets excited about Chicago's 13-4 record in those last 17 games, keep in mind that the '94 Bulls played at what would have been a 12-5 pace in 17 games (and fully healthy, probably a 13-4 pace.)

Oh, and in the playoffs, Jordan's numbers were nearly identical to those of his '93 title run. So, in effect, he played nearly the same as his '93 post-season.

BUT, the Bulls WERE an ORDINARY second round team. They were bounced 4-2, by a 57-25 Orlando team. The same Magic team that would get swept by the 47-35 Rockets in the Finals. The '95 Bulls post-season was a SHELL of the '94 Bulls post-season.

Oh, and BTW, guess who the MAIN COG in beating MJ's '95 Bulls in the ECSF's?

How about this..."The MVP of the '95 ECSF's"...

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=357166[/url]

(thanks to Jlip BTW.)

An 18-11 .647 FG% series in which he was arguably the best player in the entire series.

Of course, GRANT always always came up HUGE in his post-seasons. Just look up his OTrgs in his prime post-season career.


Ok, so now the Bulls ownership realized that even with MJ, they had no chance of winning a title...without a dominant PF (like GRANT.) So, they went out and signed HOFer Dennis Rodman.

Here was MJ basically replacing Grant, on a 55-27 team (realistically a 60+ win team BTW)...and then ADDING a HOF PF to it! Is it any wonder why the '96-98 Bulls were able to overcome Jordan's poor shooting in those Finals to win three more titles????

BTW, there were articles proclaiming Rodman as a FMVP in '96...

[url]http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/08/sports/nba-finals-once-again-rodman-is-most-valuable-bull.html[/url]


And Pippen as FMVP in '98...

[url]http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-06-11/sports/9806110398_1_scottie-pippen-bulls-karl-malone[/url]


And let's get real here, too.

The 90's were a watered down era. Most teams were lucky to have TWO great players, and many had less. The '90's Bulls never faced teams of the caliber of the '80's Celtics and Lakers, nor the early 80's Sixers. And they were 0-3 against the Bad Boys at their peak. It wasn't until the Pistons crumbled (and with Grant and Pippen coming up HUGE) that they finally beat the Bad Boys. And please, don't give me the '91 Lakers. They were a SHELL of their 80's selves. Even the brilliance of Magic came as he was on the downside of his career.

And how about this?

Since we saw what the 90's Bulls did without Jordan...going 55-27 and a STRONG title contender...

let's remove the best player from every other team in the 90's, as well. Guys like Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Miller, Robinson, et al.

How many rings do the Jordan-less Bulls win the in the 90's, if every team is missing their best player? Probably at least six.

I've never seen a thread with this bad of an OP start on ISH, where the content of the OP's original post argues the complete opposite/so much against what he is actually trying to argue for. :facepalm

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]I've never seen a thread with this bad of an OP start on ISH, where the content of the OP's original post argues the complete opposite/so much against what he is actually trying to argue for. :facepalm[/QUOTE]

His point is very valid.

MJ had a TON of help in his six rings (and again, in the watered down 90's.)

SOME "Jordanites" argue that he had POOR surrounding talent.

Well, when he ACTUALLY did, his teams went nowhere and were a win away from being swept in the first round three straight times. The man did not walk on water.

It wasn't until he had 55+ win supporting casts (and then ADDED Rodman to them) that he started winning his rings.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]His point is very valid.

MJ had a TON of help in his six rings (and again, in the watered down 90's.)

SOME "Jordanites" argue that he had POOR surrounding talent.

Well, when he ACTUALLY did, his teams went nowhere and were a win away from being swept in the first round three straight times. The man did not walk on water.

It wasn't until he had 55+ win supporting casts (and then ADDED Rodman to them) that he started winning his rings.[/QUOTE]


You should change your post to "he had help winning a TON of rings".

And that loaded comment about the walk on water. He DID in those series. You know as well as I do they played one of the truly great teams in the 86 (and 87 Celts (before injuries hit them later in the playoffs) and a 59 win Bucks team.



And nope. You could do this with ANY player who's had success with a who they played with over their career, and they'd come off a hell of a lot more impressive than Mike's cast.

I watched almost every game of Mike's career. He CARRIED that s*** regularly. And other than Rodman, he MADE those players what they were.

And quite frankly if Kukoc, BJ, and an ancient Harper are the players near the top of your list in a 14 year career, then GTFO.

Just shows how Mike did more with less than anyone.

[B]When the playoffs came, his stats go way up. No coincidence. Because it was money time. Time to carry the team. And that's his playoff stats went up. Because when the going got tough. Mike upped it, when hardly ANYONE else on the team did.[/B]


Listen bro, I love your Wilt posts. And I have Wilt as the greatest center ever. But Mike played with crap relative to other great players.

But what separates Mike from others is he stayed and turned crap into something that was functional. [B]AND he turned it up like NO ONE EVER DID [/B]when it mattered in the playoffs.

[QUOTE=3ball]Kukoc won the game single-handedly at the end!!!.. They don't win without Kukoc miracle shot!!!!

According to Phil Jackson, Pippen [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=2m49s]asked out[/url] of the last play and sat on the bench.

[I][COLOR="Navy"]Interestingly, if Pippen had gotten his way and been allowed to brick the Final shot, the Bulls get swept!!!...
[/COLOR][/I]
And the sweep was the Bulls' true capability - that's what was supposed to happen, but the Kukoc shot gave the Bulls 2nd life and adrenalized the team.[/QUOTE]
They really wasn't a 2nd round team. There first round opponent was filled with injures.

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]You should change your post to "he had help winning a TON of rings".

And that loaded comment about the walk on water. He DID in those series. You know as well as I do they played one of the truly great teams in the 86 (and 87 Celts (before injuries hit them later in the playoffs) and a 59 win Bucks team.



And nope. You could do this with ANY player who's had success with a who they played with over their career, and they'd come off a hell of a lot more impressive than Mike's cast.

I watched almost every game of Mike's career. He CARRIED that s*** regularly. And other than Rodman, he MADE those players what they were.

And quite frankly if Kukoc, BJ, and an ancient Harper are the players near the top of your list in a 14 year career, then GTFO.

Just shows how Mike did more with less than anyone.

[B]When the playoffs came, his stats go way up. No coincidence. Because it was money time. Time to carry the team. And that's his playoff stats went up. Because when the going got tough. Mike upped it, when hardly ANYONE else on the team did.[/B]


Listen bro, I love your Wilt posts. And I have Wilt as the greatest center ever. But Mike played with crap relative to other great players.

But what separates Mike from others is he stayed and turned crap into something that was functional. [B]AND he turned it up like NO ONE EVER DID [/B]when it mattered in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

First of all...

CONTEXT.

Again, the '94 Bulls were an example of the quality of teams in the 90's. Basically without their best player, and with their two remaining stars missing a combined 22 games... a 55-27 record, and realistically a title contender.

The watered down 90's consisted of 60 win teams with maybe two stars. Unlike the 80's, which had STACKED rosters of 3-4- and even 5 HOFers.

And Jordan had his share of flawed performances. He was basically outplayed by Mongrief in their '85 H2H. He choked big time in the clinching game three of the '86 series against the Celtics. In their '87 rematch, against a crumbling Celtic team, he shot .417, which included a 9-35 performance in the clinching (and sweeping) loss. In the '89 ECF's, he QUIT on his team in a game five of a series that was tied 2-2, and ultimately a 4-2 loss.

Oh, and his numbers DECLINED considerably against the Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. And his teammates overcame shooting of .455, .427, and ,415 in his last three Finals.

No one is arguing against his place in NBA history. He is a Top-5 GOAT, and has a case for the GOAT.

BUT, the point of the OP was that, yes, he had a TON of help along the way.