# The Infamous 1984 Coin Flip



## SolidGuy3 (Apr 23, 2005)

The Houston Rockets and Portland Trail Blazers had to do a coin flip to determine the #1 overall pick. Was this out in the open where people could see the flip or done behind the scenes. Did David Stern discipline Portland by awarding Houston with the #1 pick. We would have picked Hakeem and won titles. Imagine Akeem with his buddy Drexler.



> The fateful coin flip isn't where this story started, though.
> 
> There almost wasn't a coin flip.
> 
> ...


http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:...7847/+"bucky+buckwalter"+michael+jordan&hl=en


----------



## SolidGuy3 (Apr 23, 2005)

LOL, now that I think of it, I wish Stern did strip Portland of the pick. Then we could go back and say Stern was responsible for us not picking Akeem or Jordan. We would have a legitimate argument many years later if indeed there was no evidence that Portland did anything bad.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Portland would have picked Bowie regardless.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

MARIS61 said:


> Portland would have picked Bowie regardless.


No, they would have taken Akeem (later Hakeem). He was the consensus #1.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

MARIS61 said:


> Portland would have picked Bowie regardless.


No, they wouldn't have. Did you even read the article?


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Fork said:


> No, they wouldn't have. Did you even read the article?


Yes, and it is creative butt-covering hindsight.

I remember vividly at the time Ramsey desperately wanted Stockton and Bowie was seen by most as a more polished center than Olajuwan and a far better passer.

My guess is The Blazers would have traded picks with Houston in an attempt to move up to get Stockton. Obviously, not knowing what we know now, but at the time that would have been the sensible thing to do.

Had Bowie not had his career cut short by injuries, he would have had a better career than Hakeem.

Had we had Bob Whitsitt back then, he would have gotten us all 4 players. :biggrin:


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Bowie, if healthy would have been damn good.


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

Ahh, can we please put this topic bed...FOREVER! Olajuwon, Barkley, Jordan and Stockton our out of the league. That draft cost us anywhere from 1-10 championships.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

CelticPagan said:


> Ahh, can we please put this topic bed...FOREVER! Olajuwon, Barkley, Jordan and Stockton our out of the league. That draft cost us anywhere from 1-10 championships.


Bowie's injuries cost us.

The draft didn't.

At the time, our pick was considered the prudent choice by nearly everyone in the league.

And Barkley does not have a place in this topic.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> Bowie's injuries cost us.
> 
> The draft didn't.
> 
> At the time, our pick was considered the prudent choice by nearly everyone in the league.


HAH!

Anyone who's watched the broadcast of the NBA draft recently would heartily disagree with this. Everyone knew that Jordan was a special, special college player and maybe knew he had a chance to be incredible in the NBA. Akeem going first made a ton of sense, but Bowie was a bad pick at the time and a worse one (clearly) in retrospect.

Ed O.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Ed O said:


> HAH!
> 
> Anyone who's watched the broadcast of the NBA draft recently would heartily disagree with this. Everyone knew that Jordan was a special, special college player and maybe knew he had a chance to be incredible in the NBA. Akeem going first made a ton of sense, but Bowie was a bad pick at the time and a worse one (clearly) in retrospect.
> 
> Ed O.


Although in hind sight I agree with you Ed O, Bowie was the right pick for Portland *at that time* - as the team already had Paxson and Clyde with tons of proof and potential.

I think saying he was a bad pick is going too far to make your point. We were all excited about getting a 7'1" center who could shoot, pass, rebound and play D with the best of them. Injuries, after the fact, were his demise - not being selected that high. It would probably happen again today in similar circumstances.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

There was a rumour going around after that draft that Jordan was not taken because Weinberg knew he was going to be expensive. Bowie was considered the more prudent investment.

We did not always have an owner with a massive wallet.

iWatas


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> Bowie, if healthy would have been damn good.


Yes, but even back then he didn't have the offensive skills Hakeem did. Bowie was athletic, but was offensively limited compared to "The Dream". I remember the draft. Had Portland won the flip, they pick Olajuwan. It wouldn't have even been close to a tough decision.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

kaydow said:


> Yes, but even back then he didn't have the offensive skills Hakeem did. Bowie was athletic, but was offensively limited compared to "The Dream". I remember the draft. Had Portland won the flip, they pick Olajuwan. It wouldn't have even been close to a tough decision.


you never know for sure what others were/are thinking, but I recall Hakeem being pretty much the concensus #1 as well. Dude was obviously a physical freak at Houston boarding, blocking shots, and dunking on everyone with his unbelievable quickness. Sam was a very good center prospect at UK, but Olajuwan clearly had superstar talent.

side note... following the Rockets 2nd championship, he cut his endorsements down to just 3 items. He endorsed a brand of water and a brand of rice of high quality that were sold in his native Africa, and contracted with Spaulding to make a signature shoe for him that sold in stores at under $30 to counter the $100+ Air Jordan's that many poor kids were wasting their families few dollars on. He played the next few years in those cheap shoes. I thought that was very cool of him. 

STOMP


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I was profoundly depressed when Weinberg or whoever it was called tails instead of heads, and lost Hakeem. There was never any question among any NBA follower, none whatsover, that whoever won the toss would take Hakeem. The idea that Portland would have chosen Bowie over Hakeem is just nutty. Losing the toss caused Portland to have to choose between Bowie and Jordan. There was concern about Bowie's previous two leg injuries, but Portland desperately needed a defensive-minded big guy and had an overabundance of SGs. They knowingly gambled on Bowie's health and lost (this after having gone through Walton's leg injuries). Picking Bowie over Jordan made some sense (for Portland) at the time. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but picking Bowie over Hakeem, considering their respective college careers, athleticism, and health concerns, is laughable.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Regarding Houston, I think it was the Hakeem draft (but it could have been the Sampson draft, I don't remember for sure), but it was well known to everyone and their mother that Houston was purposely throwing the entire season in order to get a shot at the number one pick. There was even a sports-related comic strip, "Tank" (I think) that devoted the whole season to lampooning their 'effort'. Funny the NBA didn't levy any fines (it wasn't Portland after all), although they did end up doing away with the coin flip because of it.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Blazer Bert said:


> Regarding Houston, I think it was the Hakeem draft (but it could have been the Sampson draft, I don't remember for sure), but it was well known to everyone and their mother that Houston was purposely throwing the entire season in order to get a shot at the number one pick. There was even a sports-related comic strip, "Tank" (I think) that devoted the whole season to lampooning their 'effort'. Funny the NBA didn't levy any fines (it wasn't Portland after all), although they did end up doing away with the coin flip because of it.


Bill Fitch actually benched Sampson in several successive close games at the end of the season to seal losses, drawing the ire of Sampson and the league in general. Portland would never have been allowed similar leeway, nor would they want it.

Because of their cheating, The Houston Rockets have yet to EARN a single title.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Ed O said:


> HAH!
> 
> Anyone who's watched the broadcast of the NBA draft recently would heartily disagree with this. Everyone knew that Jordan was a special, special college player and maybe knew he had a chance to be incredible in the NBA. Akeem going first made a ton of sense, but Bowie was a bad pick at the time and a worse one (clearly) in retrospect.
> 
> Ed O.


Yeah, and everyone knew what the stock market would do in the Clinton years.

That's why we're all millionaires today.

Wilt would have been a horrible pick, as would Magic, Larry, Hakeem or Jordan, had they been injured for life.

We caught very little flak at the time.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Iwatas said:


> There was a rumour going around after that draft that Jordan was not taken because Weinberg knew he was going to be expensive. Bowie was considered the more prudent investment.
> 
> We did not always have an owner with a massive wallet.
> 
> iWatas


Larry Weinberg was/is no pauper by any stretch.

He had no problem paying for good players.


----------

