35 year old Jordan w/ no Pippen for half a season = 62 - 20
GOAT gonna GOAT
Printable View
35 year old Jordan w/ no Pippen for half a season = 62 - 20
GOAT gonna GOAT
Some numbers to consider:
Margin of victory, beginning with the Bulls first title season.
1990-91 (9.10 points) Rank #1
1991-92 (10.44 points) Rank #1
1992-93 (6.29 points) Rank #4
1993-94 (3.09 points) Rank #11
1994-95 (4.83 points overall) Rank #5
1994-95 (3.40 points, before Jordan)
1994-95 (6.88 points, after MJ, 17 game stretch)
1995-96 (12.24 points) Rank 1
1996-97 (10.80 points) Rank 1
1997-98 (7.11 points) Rank 3
[QUOTE=f0und]teams overachieve all the time. it happens every year in every sport. the 94 bulls are one of them. it also helps that the team is a group of strong minded championship experienced veterans with something to prove, led by one of the GOAT coaches. they overachieved that year, and just like most overachieving teams, they get exposed in the playoffs. the bulls ended up losing in the second round.
the following year they came back down to earth and played to more realistic expectations. before jordan came back late in the season, the bulls were fighting for the 5th playoff spot in the east. when jordan came back, they went something like 13-4 the rest of the way. all of the sudden they went from middle of the pack to the hottest team in the league. from pretender to contender, even with jordan being rusty and having lost a step. but again, playoffs expose your weaknesses and reveal who you truly are. a rusty(athletically and mentally) jordan can get it done in the reg season. but in the playoffs, you have to be at the top of your game. the bulls lost in 6 to the magic in the second round with jordan uncharacteristically having multiple brain farts down the stretch of game 6. you can expect that kind of stuff kobe and lebron, but not jordan. it was really the only time post '89 that i can remember going, "holy *hit jordan. wtf was that?" but we all know how he bounced back and the rest is history.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean overachieve? How many wins do you think Jordan was worth? Just think. If the only difference between the 94 Bulls 55 win team and the 96 Bulls 72 win team was Jordan, and an upgrade from Rodman to Grant. That's an 18 game increase.
Your math is off. If you think the 94 Bulls overachieved, I assume you feel they were roughly a 43-45 win team. Then what your saying is Jordan was good for almost 30 wins when comparing the 94 to 96 teams.
They still have all of the attributes to win games "go to guy, consistent rebounder, best coach in the NBA, bench scoring.
The 94 bulls were similar to the current Pacers minus Roy Hibbert.
[IMG]http://terriblepass.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/horace-grant.jpg[/IMG]
best defensive PF, great o rebounder + pippen
[QUOTE=Nikola_][IMG]http://terriblepass.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/horace-grant.jpg[/IMG]
best defensive PF, great o rebounder + pippen[/QUOTE]
Plus Jackson, and Kukoc. They were a great team
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Plus Jackson, and Kukoc. They were a great team[/QUOTE]
The '94 Bulls were a great team? They overachieved sure, and won 55 games. Impressive to an extent, they were definitely playing beyond their typical capabilities.
But a "great team" to me either:
Wins 60+ games
Wins a championship
Wins multiple championships
Not 55 games, second round exits. That's good. Far from great by any stretch. Lots of teams get to the 2nd round of the playoffs. Like say the 2013 Bulls. Great team? No.
[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]The '94 Bulls were a great team? They overachieved sure, and won 55 games. Impressive to an extent, they were definitely playing beyond their typical capabilities.
But a "great team" to me either:
Wins 60+ games
Wins a championship
Wins multiple championships
Not 55 games, second round exits. That's good. Far from great by any stretch. Lots of teams get to the 2nd round of the playoffs. Like say the 2013 Bulls. Great team? No.[/QUOTE]
"Great" team is thrown around pretty liberally around here, lol. Reggie Miller led the Pacers to game 7 against the Knicks the same year as Pippen did.
Infact he played better than Pippen in the playoffs that year (no crying on the bench and having to get bailed out by Kukoc) ... how much love does he get for that? lol, nada. It's only remembered now because of the Spike-Reggie feud.
Also people conveniently ignore that Pippen/Kukoc/Armstrong/Phil Jackson were a mediocre ass team in 94-95 until Jordan came back and immediately took them from a barely .500 squad to playing at a 60+ win level again.
[QUOTE=Nuff Said]Did they get a ring?[/QUOTE]
Everyone knows they were robbed with that call.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]"Great" team is thrown around pretty liberally around here, lol. Reggie Miller led the Pacers to game 7 against the Knicks the same year as Pippen did.
Infact he played better than Pippen in the playoffs that year (no crying on the bench and having to get bailed out by Kukoc) ... how much love does he get for that? lol, nada. It's only remembered now because of the Spike-Reggie feud.
Also people conveniently ignore that Pippen/Kukoc/Armstrong/Phil Jackson were a mediocre ass team in 94-95 until Jordan came back and immediately took them from a barely .500 squad to playing at a 60+ win level again.[/QUOTE]
Ill admit. Using the term great is a bit of a stretch. But they were a very good team even without Jordan.
[QUOTE=KyleKong]Everyone knows they were robbed with that call.[/QUOTE]
Robbed of one game. There was still two more games where they could've won the series. WTF?
They still had to go to the ECF and face either the Pacers, or Magic. Then they would've had to beat the Rockets in the Finals.
Second round exit, big deal. Most multiple time champions sans their best player would at the very least be able to make the 2nd round of the playoffs. It isn't that difficult.
[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]Robbed of one game. There was still two more games where they could've won the series. WTF?
They still had to go to the ECF and face either the Pacers, or Magic. Then they would've had to beat the Rockets in the Finals.
Second round exit, big deal. Most multiple time champions sans their best player would at the very least be able to make the 2nd round of the playoffs. It isn't that difficult.[/QUOTE]
Dude, this clearly shows you aren't a Bulls fan but a Jordan fan...
Up 3-2 going home you talk about how everything would still be open for the outcome... :coleman: Did you actually root for the Knicks that series? Probably not, but in retrospect you prefer it.
Bulls were a great team, Jordan or no Jordan. Cavs were a shit team without LeBron, that's the difference. Jordan's Bulls were about as stacked as the Heat are currently.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]"Great" team is thrown around pretty liberally around here, lol. Reggie Miller led the Pacers to game 7 against the Knicks the same year as Pippen did.
Infact he played better than Pippen in the playoffs that year (no crying on the bench and having to get bailed out by Kukoc) ... how much love does he get for that? lol, nada. It's only remembered now because of the Spike-Reggie feud.
[B][U]Also people conveniently ignore that Pippen/Kukoc/Armstrong/Phil Jackson were a mediocre ass team in 94-95 until Jordan came back and immediately took them from a barely .500 squad to playing at a 60+ win level again[/U][/B].[/QUOTE]
Yes MJ improved the team with his return. He's supposed to, being a legitimate GOAT candidate, but the Bulls had just gone 10-2 over the previous 12 games before MJ returned. They were getting things together before he returned.
Frankly in terms of simple W-L record, MJ's return didn't have any appreciably greater impact in '95 than Pippen's return had in '98 after injury. The Bulls went 26-12 without Pippen which was a pace of ~56 games. With Pippen the team went 36-8 which was a pace of ~67 games. Great players impact winning.
The biggest difference between the '94 Bulls and the '95 Bulls was the loss of their all star pf, Horace Grant. Grant had easily been their best post defender, and with him gone to the Magic, the Bulls' frontline was pitiful. And it wasn't just Grant's production that was missing. He understood the team's schemes. He was basically replaced in the starting lineup by Kukoc. IMO Grant was the MVP of the '95 ECSF. He had arguably the best playoff series of his career against his former team avg. 18/11 exposing the Bull's weak frontline.
No, I'm being a rational basketball fan. It's called reality. I have rooting interest in both Jordan as my favorite player, and being a fan of the Chicago Bulls.
I have nothing to gain but tell the truth.
A Bulls "fanatic" arguing Chicago would've won a championship that season or got hosed due to a bad foul call on Hubert Davis are delusional. Plain and simple.
I watched those Bulls teams, being you know ... in Chicago. The '94, and '95 Bulls teams weren't even close to being "great". Watching them I knew we weren't going to win a championship w/o Jordan, and they were playing as well as they possibly could in '94 without him.
They are what they are ... that's all I'm saying. A second round playoff team who pushed the Knicks 7 games in a hard fought series. The 2013 Bulls with significantly less talent gave the Heat, a greater team than the mid 90's Knicks, a momentary challenge. I'm not declaring them a great team by any stretch because of it. And I'm a Bulls fan !!!
I'm un-biased.
[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]No, I'm being a rational basketball fan. It's called reality. I have rooting interest in both Jordan as my favorite player, and being a fan of the Chicago Bulls.
I have nothing to gain but tell the truth.
A Bulls "fanatic" arguing Chicago would've won a championship that season or got hosed due to a bad foul call on Hubert Davis are delusional. Plain and simple.
I watched those Bulls teams, being you know ... in Chicago. The '94, and '95 Bulls teams weren't even close to being "great". Watching them I knew we weren't going to win a championship w/o Jordan, and they were playing as well as they possibly could in '94 without him.
They are what they are ... that's all I'm saying. A second round playoff team who pushed the Knicks 7 games in a hard fought series. The 2013 Bulls with significantly less talent gave the Heat, a greater team than the mid 90's Knicks, a momentary challenge. I'm not declaring them a great team by any stretch because of it. And I'm a Bulls fan !!!
I'm un-biased.[/QUOTE]
Ive got a question for you. If the 94 Bulls "over achieved", how many less games do you feel they would've won if they weren't playing with a proverbial "chip" on their shoulder?
[QUOTE=jlip]Yes MJ improved the team with his return. He's supposed to, being a legitimate GOAT candidate, but the Bulls had just gone 10-2 over the previous 12 games before MJ returned. They were getting things together before he returned.
[B]Frankly in terms of simple W-L record, MJ's return didn't have any appreciably greater impact in '95 than Pippen's return had in '98 after injury. The Bulls went 26-12 without Pippen which was a pace of ~56 games. With Pippen the team went 36-8 which was a pace of ~67 games. Great players impact winning.[/B]
The biggest difference between the '94 Bulls and the '95 Bulls was the loss of their all star pf, Horace Grant. Grant had easily been their best post defender, and with him gone to the Magic, the Bulls' frontline was pitiful. And it wasn't just Grant's production that was missing. He understood the team's schemes. He was basically replaced in the starting lineup by Kukoc. IMO Grant was the MVP of the '95 ECSF. He had arguably the best playoff series of his career against his former team avg. 18/11 exposing the Bull's weak frontline.[/QUOTE]
Great post. I've been stressing your point in the bold for the longest. But guys like Soundwave and Swish ignore it became it doesn't fall in line with their agenda.
And remember, they didnt just lose Grant, they lost Scott Williams, and Stacy King Cartwright retired, and Longley was hurt.
Pippen effect. Jordan was 1-9 in the playoffs without him.
When Jordan suddenly retired right before the season, the Bulls instantly became the biggest letdown game of all-time.
But once opponents woke up in the playoffs and following season, the Bulls were 2nd Round losers and barely .500 in 95.
Pippen was never considered a franchise player that is tasked with building a lottery team from scratch.. He was simply handed a fully-developed goat dynasty, which he cratered to barely .500 in less than 18 months.
Teams led by Klay or Pippen lack capacity to add talent, since any decent scorer supplants them as 1st option... This is why secondary producers like Klay, Pippen and Middleton aren't considered franchise players...
Ultimately, "franchise player" status is reserved for dominant producers like Love, KAT, or AD, and their obvious dominance allows them to make All-NBA with losing teams... Otoh, 2nd options like Klay or Pippen need winning teams and winning spotlight to make All-NBA.. And no one got more winning spotlight than Pippen - he never played above a Larry Nance or Iguodala caliber, but the winning spotlight inflated him to all-time status and media accolade - he's simply the most overrated player ever.
[QUOTE=Lebron23;15023223]Pippen effect. Jordan was 1-9 in the playoffs without him.[/QUOTE]
These arguments are all you got. Well Lebron was 1-8 vs Durant. Golden State and KD was too mighty and powerful for Lebron and his stars, right?