Michael Jordan was the only LEGIT 1996 FMVP candidate besides Kemp.

[QUOTE=Smoke117]No the reality is that Pippen was playing with a wrist, knee, and ankle injury in the 96 playoffs. He still led the playoffs in drating and defensive win shares.[/QUOTE]

Good lord

now even better reason why Kemp had such a good finals. Kemp even posterized pippen & rodman like crazy with some Jam session of his own throughout the series.

Pippen cannot score but people expected Pippen-Rodman combo to defend Kemp.

[QUOTE=guy]Jordan was the MVP. The people that usually have a problem with it are the ones that usually have a problem with how much credit Jordan gets in general.

Jordan played below his standards while Rodman didn't. But that doesn't mean Rodman was a better player in the series. There's no one in their right mind that can seriously say the Bulls would've had a better chance without Jordan then without Rodman.

The argument against Jordan seems to be his inefficiency and scoring impact in general wasn't greater then [b]Rodmans rebounding impact. Well, why do these same people not argue for Wallace over Billups in 04, KG over Pierce in 08, and Gasol over Kobe in 2010? [/b]Scoring wise, their impact was equal or less, while their teammates not only had a huge impact on the boards that may have not been as big as Rodman's, but some of the clearly had a larger offensive impact then him.[/QUOTE]
Billups in 04 had a huge difference in points and assists over Wallace while shooting 51/47/93 in the series.
KG has a good case for 08 FMVP.
Gasol averaged only 3.6 more RPG than Kobe in 2010.

Looking at the numbers, Jordan was the FMVP. The series was won after the first 3 games when the Bulls took a 3-0 lead. MJ had 28-7-2 on 50%, 29-6-8 on 41%, and 36-3-5 on 48% in those first 3 games. Those are FMVP worthy in any series. Game 3 which really put the series away since a 3-0 series lead with a win vs a 2-1 series lead with a loss is big. In that game 3 Rodman had 5 points and 10 rebounds while Jordan had 36 points.How can people say Rodman was FMVP? When you take into account the whole series, Jordan averaged nearly 20 more PPG than Rodman. Way too big of a gap offensively to even make a case for Rodman.

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]Billups in 04 had a huge difference in points and assists over Wallace while shooting 51/47/93 in the series.
KG has a good case for 08 FMVP.
Gasol averaged only 3.6 more RPG than Kobe in 2010.

Looking at the numbers, Jordan was the FMVP. The series was won after the first 3 games when the Bulls took a 3-0 lead. MJ had 28-7-2 on 50%, 29-6-8 on 41%, and 36-3-5 on 48% in those first 3 games. Those are FMVP worthy in any series. Game 3 which really put the series away since a 3-0 series lead with a win vs a 2-1 series lead with a loss is big. In that game 3 Rodman had 5 points and 10 rebounds while Jordan had 36 points.How can people say Rodman was FMVP? When you take into account the whole series, Jordan averaged nearly 20 more PPG than Rodman. Way too big of a gap offensively to even make a case for Rodman.[/QUOTE]
So the first three wins dont hold as much weight as the last one? Jordan should get credit for having statistically good performances in 2 losses? Wow

[QUOTE=97 bulls]So the first three wins dont hold as much weight as the last one? Jordan should get credit for having statistically good performances in 2 losses? Wow[/QUOTE]

MJ was ROCK SOLID in first 2 games.

MJ was GREAT in most important ROAD game of the series.

Game 3 & Game 5 are the most important games of Finals series.

[B]Game 3 even more important cuz of 2-3-2 format.[/B]


[B]Game 3 is a SITTING DUCK to be stolen by a visiting team before home team feels the ultimate heat of loosing finals[/B]


Even if a team wins 72 games, those 3 BACK-2-BACK-2-BACK games ON THE ROAD can literally make sure Finals series dont go back to THEIR HOME for game 6.

[B]MJ stole Game 3 by having the best game of the series!

Bulls got incredible 3-0 lead!

CHI FMVP was decided[/B].

So MJ's leadership doesn't count for anything?

All this mention of Rodnan's 'other' aspects yet MJ didn't do any of these 'other' stuff???

Reminds me of Pip apologists that say "pip did the other stuff" as if MJ just stood in the corner like Kobe.

[QUOTE=gengiskhan]MJ was ROCK SOLID in first 2 games.

MJ was GREAT in most important ROAD game of the series.

Game 3 & Game 5 are the most important games of Finals series.

[B]Game 3 even more important cuz of 2-3-2 format.[/B]


[B]Game 3 is a SITTING DUCK to be stolen by a visiting team before home team feels the ultimate heat of loosing finals[/B]


Even if a team wins 72 games, those 3 BACK-2-BACK-2-BACK games ON THE ROAD can literally make sure Finals series dont go back to THEIR HOME for game 6.

[B]MJ stole Game 3 by having the best game of the series!

Bulls got incredible 3-0 lead!

CHI FMVP was decided[/B].[/QUOTE]
Lol. MJ "stole" game 3? IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT. The Bulls jumped out on the Sonics 11-2. Finished the half being up 25 pts. They won by 22

Pippen almost had a triple double, with 3 stls and led the Bulls in defensive rating
Kukoc had 14/7/7
Longley scored 19 on 61% and along with Rodman shut down Kemp by limiting him to only 14 shots.
Rodman 5/10 in only 30 min.

The game was never in doubt. The Bulls had the lead from start to fiinish

[url]http://m.youtube.com/results?q=1996%20nba%20finals%20game%203%20full%20game[/url]

Heres clip of the game

[QUOTE=andgar923]So MJ's leadership doesn't count for anything?

All this mention of Rodnan's 'other' aspects yet MJ didn't do any of these 'other' stuff???

Reminds me of Pip apologists that say "pip did the other stuff" as if MJ just stood in the corner like Kobe.[/QUOTE]
No. You guys act as if Pippen did little to nothing. That s always been my gripe. And not just Pippen, but the team as a whole.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]No. You guys act as if Pippen did little to nothing. That s always been my gripe. And not just Pippen, but the team as a whole.[/QUOTE]
Nobody ever said he didn't. The issue is you and your ilk exaggerating his feats and minimizing MJ's.

All we ever heard was "pip provides intangibles" and continue to spew the often debunked "pip always guards the best player" as if MJ didn't do any of all that.

People alluded to that in this thread with rodman again.

" but he plays defense and does the intangibles"
Again....as if MJ didn't do all that while leading the team and being the defensive focus.

[QUOTE=andgar923]Nobody ever said he didn't. The issue is you and your ilk exaggerating his feats and minimizing MJ's.

All we ever heard was "pip provides intangibles" and continue to spew the often debunked "pip always guards the best player" as if MJ didn't do any of all that.

People alluded to that in this thread with rodman again.

" but he plays defense and does the intangibles"
Again....as if MJ didn't do all that while leading the team and being the defensive focus.[/QUOTE]
A few post above this one...... Ghengis stated that Jordan "stole" game 3. STOLE!!!!!!! How do you steel a game in which you blow it he opposition out? I said it was a team effort. Ghengis credited Jordan, I credited the team as a whole.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]A few post above this one...... Ghengis stated that Jordan "stole" game 3. STOLE!!!!!!! How do you steel a game in which you blow it he opposition out? I said it was a team effort. Ghengis credited Jordan, I credited the team as a whole.[/QUOTE]

You did not understand the logic bruh!

[B]Game 3 in NBA finals gives a "new" HOME COURT ADVANTAGE to home team[/B].

whatever happened in first 2 games for AWAY team is distant now.

They have [B]3 STRAIGHT HOME GAMES in their back yard because of the 2-3-2 sequence.[/B]

BUT

Game 3 could be STOLEN by visiting team if they play the cards right especially if the series is 1-1.

HOME team is bit relaxed & doesnt really push the panic button to desperately win game 3.

Bulls exactly did that.

The reason why MJ is credited for Game 3 win at seattle?

[B]MJ's best game of the series is Game 3. he hit 48%FG, his Finals average. He hit 36 pts mark, his finals average.[/B]

MJ as a visiting player was clearly the Game 3 "PLAYER OF THE GAME"

The way sonics played in game 1,2,4,5. Its clear that Bulls STOLE one led by MJ's 35+ pts performance.

Its a reality!

Pippen hasn't done much the entire series btw. He may have near triple double but 1996 finals were MJ-Rodman-Kukoc show.

[QUOTE=gengiskhan]You did not understand the logic bruh!

[B]Game 3 in NBA finals gives a "new" HOME COURT ADVANTAGE to home team[/B].

whatever happened in first 2 games for AWAY team is distant now.

They have [B]3 STRAIGHT HOME GAMES in their back yard because of the 2-3-2 sequence.[/B]

BUT

Game 3 could be STOLEN by visiting team if they play the cards right especially if the series is 1-1.

HOME team is bit relaxed & doesnt really push the panic button to desperately win game 3.

Bulls exactly did that.

The reason why MJ is credited for Game 3 win at seattle?

[B]MJ's best game of the series is Game 3. he hit 48%FG, his Finals average. He hit 36 pts mark, his finals average.[/B]

MJ as a visiting player was clearly the Game 3 "PLAYER OF THE GAME"

The way sonics played in game 1,2,4,5. Its clear that Bulls STOLE one led by MJ's 35+ pts performance.

Its a reality!

Pippen hasn't done much the entire series btw. He may have near triple double but 1996 finals were MJ-Rodman-Kukoc show.[/QUOTE]
Im not arguing Pippen. For whatever reason Pip just didnt have it. Ive heard it was because GP20 was defending him, his injuries, fatigue, whatever. Ive always maintained that I was most impressed with Rodman and Longley. As well as Kukoc. They played very well. Jordan wasnt himself either.

I just dont think Jordan should he anointed with the MVP based on what he did in a blowout win and two losses.

And perhaps we dont see the term "stole" as having the same meaning when it comes to sports. Stole to me is when a team wins a close game they werent supposed to. Like in the Bulls/Heat series this year game 1. Or the flu game in 97. Or the game where Bird stole that errant Isiah Thomas pass. Not a game where a team is heavily favored blows the other team out and the players play well on top of that.

Most of Kemp's points didn't come necessarily in garbage time, they usually came when Longley guarded him. I don't see why anyone can make any claim about the 1996 series without watching any of the games. Obviously Rodman didn't "shut down" Kemp but he did play very good defense against him.

[QUOTE]
[I]1996 NBA Finals[/I]

Michael Jordan: [B]27.3 PPG[/B] (42% FG, 32% 3PT, 84% FT), 5.3 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1.7 SPG, 0.2 BPG
Dennis Rodman: 7.5 PPG (49% FG, 58% FG), [B]14.7 RPG (6.8 ORPG)[/B], 2.5 APG, 0.8 SPG, 0.2 BPG

Of course there’s more to the game than a stat sheet, but Jordan averaged 20 more PPG, Rodman averaged 10 more RPG, and Jordan had more APG and SPG by considerable margins.

[B]The reason why Jordan [U]shouldn’t [/U]have won[/B]
His numbers weren’t as dominant as they have been in his other finals. Gary Payton played him very well in the final 3 games of the series, holding him to 23.7 PPG on 37% shooting. This was the first time we’ve really seen Jordan struggle on this magnitude. We had seen him lose before, but not looking this uncomfortable. It was eye-opening, but because it showed vulnerability, it showed how great his performances were prior to the 96 finals.

[B]The reasons why Rodman [U]shouldn’t[/U] have won[/B]
We saw the offensive rebounding numbers from Rodman, but I mentioned before how the Sonics were doubling off him. It was his inability to score efficiently, even when open, which caused the Bulls offense to stall so bad. So yes, Rodman did create a lot of second chances for Chicago, but if we’re being honest, he was also the reason the Bulls were missing so many shots too. Had he been a more reliable scoring option, then Seattle can’t double as much, and if that’s the case, does Jordan shoot 37% in the final 3 games if he’s getting single-coverage by the Sonics? I think not, especially when you considered what Jordan did the very next time they played, and Rodman missed the game due to suspension.

[I]Chicago at Seattle Feb 02, 1996[/I]

Michael Jordan: 45 points (19/ 28 FG, 2/3 3PT, 5/6 FT), 7 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 steal

Now I know it’s not a finals game, and it’s a small sample, but it’s worth noting what happened with essentially the same rosters, without Rodman.
The other reason why Rodman shouldn’t have taken the finals MVP is Games 4 and 5. The Bulls were annihilated, and let's look at that closely. Shawn Kemp, the guy that Rodman was assigned to, exploded for 25 points on 12/17 FG, and 11 rebounds in game 4. Game 5 was another Sonic blowout, and Kemp had 22 points on 8/16 shooting along with 10 rebounds. This led to the Bulls forcing to collapse at times on Kemp when he was isolated with Rodman, and led to clean looks for Hawkins and Payton from the perimeter, and opened up their offense. Not all of Kemp’s points came at the expense of Rodman, as (in another crazy coaching move), Phil Jackson opted to put Luc Longley on the explosive Shawn Kemp. This should have been Rodman’s role, but Rodman was far too prone to foul trouble, so he’s not getting a pass here for his lack of discipline.[/QUOTE]

Continued below...

Great analysis from [URL="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08798HDFH/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=matthew+damian&qid=1587306626&s=digital-text&sr=1-1"]More Than 6 Rings - Michael Jordan's Legacy: The case for Jordan being the greatest NBA player of all time[/URL] by Matthew Damian

(Edited to fit within word-constraint limit)

Continued from ^^^

[QUOTE][B]Who should have won then?[/B]
It’s still Jordan. If you look in horror at Jordan’s shooting numbers, scroll down to the Bulls second-leading scorer, Scottie Pippen:

[I]1996 NBA Finals[/I]
15.7 PPG (34% FG, 23% 3PT, 71% FT), 8.2 RPG, 5.3 APG, 2.3 SPG, 1.3 BPG

Outside of the scoring numbers, this is pretty good production. Unfortunately for Pip, the point I am making is how badly he struggled in scoring. Look at those shooting numbers, and that’s for the entire series. Let’s examine his scoring in the final 3 games (just like we did for M.J.)

[I]Scottie Pippen in games 4, 5 and 6 of the 1996 Finals[/I]
13.3 PPG (29% FG, 22% 3PT, 75% FT), 9 RPG, 5.7 APG, 2 SPG, 1 BPG

If you winced at Jordan’s shooting numbers during that stretch, you might need a bucket nearby after reading Pippen’s. Now after all this info, I will still accept the fact that the Bulls wouldn’t have won in 96 without Rodman (especially after the job he did on Shaq in the conference finals), but that doesn’t mean he was the most valuable. I’ll go far enough to say the Bulls might not have won without Rodman. But when you factor in how Rodman hurt the Bulls offense and limited their ability to score, you can make an argument that they would have still won that series. On the other hand, when you look at the lack of offensive firepower they had, and how badly their other 2 scoring options (Kukoc and Pippen) played in that series, Chicago would not have even been competitive without Jordan, and that’s why he was (deservedly so) Finals MVP.[/QUOTE]

Great analysis from [URL="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08798HDFH/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=matthew+damian&qid=1587306626&s=digital-text&sr=1-1"]More Than 6 Rings - Michael Jordan's Legacy: The case for Jordan being the greatest NBA player of all time[/URL] by Matthew Damian

(Edited to fit within word-constraint limit)

^^^ Typo. The game was Feb 02, 1997

[url]https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199702020SEA.html[/url]