# If Jordan didn't retire the first time, would the Bulls have won in 94 and 95?



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

I've been arguing with a guy on the nba draft board. People in there are actually saying that if they had the draft to do over again, they still would have taken Olajuwon over Jordan.

The discussion developed to the point where I said the only reason Olajuwon won two championships was because Jordan retired. Another poster said that wasn't true, because Jordan was back with the team in 95, and the Bulls lost before the Finals.

Now I know Jordan was with the team, but I don't think there is any way to say that he was the same player in 95 that he would have been if he had never left. I don't think there is any way to say the Bulls were the same team in 95 as they would have been if Jordan never left.

Let me know what you think. Also, help me set some of these guys straight on the nba draft forum!


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Bulls win.

Olajuwon was at the top of his game, no doubt. But hmm..... so were Michael and Scottie. In fact, the '93 version of MJ and the '94 version of Pippen were the best most athletic SG/SF combo the NBA would have ever seen.

And that short porch for the NBA three? It'd be MJ and Pip reigning those short threes and not Horry and Cassell.




VD


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

If Mike hadn't retired, you could have etched the 1993-1994 title in stone. In fact, that individual team would have been better than the 1995-1996 team imo--Jordan, Pippen, and Grant at their absolute peaks, a rising B.J. Armstrong, and Paxson/Cartwright still good enough to contribute. Throw in Toni Kukoc off the bench and that squad is scary.

I'm not as certain about 94-95 just because you can't say for sure Grant would have been there, plus the team didn't have a replacement for Cartwright beyond Perdue. Still, you'd have to say they were a safe bet.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

I agree that the 94-95 team wasn't as much a given, but remember, Houston won the championship, and they were the 5th place team in the West! There really wasn't a dominant team, so I think its safe to say the Bulls would have won.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*95*

Jordan had not practiced or played competitive bball for 18 months or so & tried to get in shape and learn about his new teammates in a very short period of time. 

It very well could have been a different story if he had been with the team all year long. Perhaps he could have even convinced the Bulls to sign Grant if MJ was still around at the time.

p.s. Totally agree that 94 was a lock.


----------



## The Cat (Jul 14, 2002)

Please.

The fact that Houston won as a 6th seed means there wasn't a dominate team? Believe me, there were... Houston was just better. I would take Houston's chances, in that 94-95 run, against any team in the history of basketball. The chemistry on that team was truly remarkable, and they were the definition of unbeatable.

As far as 94 "being a lock", why don't you check out the head to head meetings between the Rockets and Bulls in the early 90's? I'm sorry, but just because the Bulls beat the Blazers and Suns in the Finals doesn't mean that they would beat the Rockets. Hakeem's prime, in those three years (94-96), was as great as any player I've ever seen. His peak was *shorter* than Jordan and a couple of other great players, but in that time, he was a remarkable, remarkable player. Ewing and Barkley were good, but not Hakeem.

The Rockets role players were also as clutch as the Lakers role players are today. Whenever we needed a big three, or any play, they found a way to make it happen. To think that there's no way the Rockets beat the Bulls is nothing but blatant Michael Jordan homerism and ***-kissing.

Also, there's just as strong of a case for saying that if the Rockets don't get injured in 1996, maybe the Bulls don't win the title then. You say Jordan coming back late affects the Bulls chemistry and whatnot... what do you think Dream, Cassell, and Elie coming back in April of 1996 does?


----------



## The Cat (Jul 14, 2002)

Also, posting this thread on a Bulls board is definitely a way to get an objecitve opinion.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> The fact that Houston won as a 6th seed means there wasn't a dominate team?


Oh, I see the regular season doesn't matter.  



> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> As far as 94 "being a lock", why don't you check out the head to head meetings between the Rockets and Bulls in the early 90's?


Oh, wait a sec, now the the regular season does matter"  



> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> To think that there's no way the Rockets beat the Bulls is nothing but blatant Michael Jordan homerism and ***-kissing.


This is coming from the Houston supporter that feels their fluke of a championship team was the definition of unbeatable.

LMOL


----------



## The Cat (Jul 14, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh, I see the regular season doesn't matter.
> ...


The regular season does matter when there's no playoff evidence to override it. Obviously using postseason records is more important, but considering the Rockets and Bulls never played in the postseason, what else can you do?

The 94-95 team was riddled with injuries all season long, and a blockbuster midseason trade. The way you claim you "lost" in 95 was by adjusting to Jordan and getting a new chemistry... do you not think we had to do the same things when Clyde came in?

If our championships are a fluke for not playing Jordan, yours are a fluke also for not playing Hakeem.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*93-94 Houston Rockets*

http://www.clutchcity.net/teams.cfm?Season=1994

* 58-24 
* Very healthy team
* 2nd best record behind Seattle whom we beat the previous year in the playoffs

* 1-1 vs. Jordan-less Bulls

* 15-8 in the playoffs. 
* Suns took them the full 7 games in the second round
* Knicks took them the full 7 games in the Finals (Did Starks really stink up game 7?). 

*94-95 Houston Rockets*

http://www.clutchcity.net/teams.cfm?Season=1995

* 47-35 
* Pretty healthy team. Akeem played 72, top 8 (including Thorpe\Drexler combo) all played 60+ games.
* Tied for 10th best record with the Bulls whom played w/o MJ for most of the season.

* 1-1 vs. Bulls

* 15-7 in the playoffs. 
* Jazz took them the full 5 games in the opening round
* Suns took them the full 7 games in the second round
* Swept the Magic in the Finals (Nick Anderson choack job in Game 1)

*Conclusions*

Rockets a good team?, yes
Unbeatable?, not at all

I stand by my earlier prognosis:

*Bulls in 94 by a landslide - adding Kukoc to a 3peat team was illegal*

*95 was not a lock for the Bulls but I would take my chances*


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> If our championships are a fluke for not playing Jordan, yours are a fluke also for not playing Hakeem.


No fluke, we played and beat the best teams each year for 6 straight years when MJ played the entire year. 

On the flip side, it's impossible to argue that the 93-94 Knicks were as good or better than the Bulls of that year with the addition of Jordan. We gave the Knicks a real battle in the playoffs that year. But for a phantom call against Pip on Hubert Davis's shot we probably would have beaten them w/o MJ.


----------



## local_sportsfan (Jul 24, 2002)

I'm a Wiz fan. I hated the mid-90's Bulls. However, I really liked the mid-90's Rockets. That being said, the Bulls would have waxed the Rockets both seasons.

It's no coincidence that the Rockets managed to win 2 championships while Jordan was on his sabbatical (and no, the comeback in 95 doesn't count). Jordan at his prime was clearly the best player in the L. Pippen was top 5. Olajuwon was a great player, but the Bulls usually had no problems with center-oriented teams.


----------



## The Cat (Jul 14, 2002)

The key word, of course, is usually. The gap, especially in those two years, between Hakeem and ANY other center in the league was like the gap between Jordan and any other shooting guard in the league.

The Rockets-Bulls series records in 94-95 aren't indicative of how the Rockets played them when Jordan was on the floor. You claim you guys were no fluke cause you played "the best" every year. However, if not for the Rockets injuries, isn't there a good chance we would be one of "the best"? 

If our 1995 championship is diminished because Jordan was "rusty", then any championship you guys won when Hakeem was injured counts as us being "rusty", since Hakeem usually had *less* than the month and a half Jordan had.

The fact that the Suns took the Rockets in 95 to seven games further proves my point: the Rockets will to win was so strong that nothing could stop them. They had to win deciding games on the road, win consecutive games against elimination, and then crushed the Magic in the Finals. You don't "luck out" for that many games in a row.

Unbeatable doesn't mean going out and winning by 20 every game. It means that when everything is against you, you go out and by a sheer desire and execution find a way to win.

This "the Rockets won because Jordan was out" theory just doesn't hold water. If it did, the Rockets would've made the Finals in other years and lost to Chicago. The fact is, it just so happened that the peak in Hakeem's game (and a period where he was one of the greatest athletes ever) happened in those 2-3 years.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Introducing your 1993-1994 Houston Rockets:

Hakeem Olajuwon
Otis Thorpe
Vernon Maxwell
Kenny Smith
Robert Horry (2nd year)
Sam Cassell (rookie)
Mario Elie


Introducing your 1993-1994 Chicago Bulls:

Michael Jordan
Scottie Pippen
Horace Grant
Scott Williams
John Paxson
Toni Kukoc (rookie)
Bill Cartwright

No comparison. You're telling me Cassell and Horry would do anything against the Bulls? No way. Whose going to guard MJ and Scottie? Mad MAx? Sheesh. NOt even close.




VD


----------



## The Cat (Jul 14, 2002)

By Jordan's admission, and by Jordan's numbers against the Rockets, Mad Max was one of the best in the entire league at guarding MJ. He frustrated him like no player I had ever seen.

Also, at the time, Robert Horry and Mario Elie were both terrific perimeter defenders, and could've played Pippen well.

There's no more evidence to suggest Cassell and Horry wouldn't play well than there is to suggest the Bulls role players (Paxon, Grant) wouldn't play well.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> If our 1995 championship is diminished because Jordan was "rusty", then any championship you guys won when Hakeem was injured counts as us being "rusty", since Hakeem usually had *less* than the month and a half Jordan had.


What it the world are you talking about? 

Hakeem played 82 & 80 games in the 2 years b/f you won the 2 championships. 

He played in 78 games after you won the 2 championships. 

He was at practice & at training camp with these teams.

On the other hand, Jordan missed training camp, most of the practices and most of the games in 95. * HE PLAYED in 17 games in 95. He missed 65 games!!!* 

Jordan was the best player b/f he left for baseball & after he came back once he got in condition. He and Akeem are about the same age. My theory is that the Rockets caught some luck that the best player in the game took 2 years off.

Or we can go with your theory that Akeem had such an increadible 2 year peak such that it did not matter than the Bulls were at their peak, had won 3 straight years and added Kukoc.

The choice seems easy to me.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> By Jordan's admission, and by Jordan's numbers against the Rockets, Mad Max was one of the best in the entire league at guarding MJ. He frustrated him like no player I had ever seen.


Okay. Provide me a link. You're implying Mad Max would hold his own against the greatest clutch player ever to lace up sneakers in a best out of 7 series. Uhhh okay.



> Also, at the time, Robert Horry and Mario Elie were both terrific perimeter defenders, and could've played Pippen well.


Robert Horry was a rookie. Pippen was All-NBA first team and All-NBA first defensive team in 1993-1994. He would have no problem handling Horry OR Elie.



> There's no more evidence to suggest Cassell and Horry wouldn't play well than there is to suggest the Bulls role players (Paxon, Grant) wouldn't play well.


Grant a role player? 1993-1994 was arguably his best season, he averaged 15/11/3.4. NBA second team for defense. And yes, a better player than Otis Thorpe. Kukoc would have had the same impact as Horry in such a veteran laden series... ie. not much at all.

Bulls in 5. 

VD


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

damn it VD, your making me sad... reading your post REALLY makes me think we would have had 2 more champioinships no problem, I agree with everything you said above and it all makes sense when you compare it player to player like that... too bad jordan left!:upset:


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HAWK23</b>!
> damn it VD, your making me sad... reading your post REALLY makes me think we would have had 2 more champioinships no problem, I agree with everything you said above and it all makes sense when you compare it player to player like that... too bad jordan left!:upset:


Sorry man... but when you think that the '93-'94 team won 55 games WITHOUT MJ... just imagine. Wow.





VD


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*the bulls would have won*

the bulls wre one of the dominat teams of all time at their peak to say the rockets would have won even though they came back the following year and didn't even get to the finals let alone win another title or really for all intensive purposes considered a worthy contender (the jazz spurs and the sonics leapfrogged them pretty quick)instead of just an also ran


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

we would have also won the shortened season after the lockout if we would have re-signed everyone for 1 more year...

anyone think if that season was just completely canceled instead of shortened that Jordan would have re-signed with us?

:upset: again


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

With 100% hindsight, I would agree that Olajuan would be the better draft choice than Jordan. In other words, I would draft Olajuan over Jordan. I mean, of course any GM would drool over having a center of Olajuan's caliber to build a team around...

That said, it is really obvious the Bulls would have won the title both years if Jordan hadn't retired.

It isn't about Jordan or Olajuan as much as it is about the offense and defense systems the teams used, the chemistry, the coaching, the experience, the swagger...

As Vin Diesel wisely pointed out, the Bulls won 55 games without MJ. That team did it with Pippen and a pretty meager supporting cast who played well within the system, and who played very good defense. And they were a ticky-tacky (terrible) foul call away from advancing in the playoffs against the Knicks who eventually faced the Rockets in the Finals.

I would disagree that somehow Olajuan had just two magical seasons that propelled the Rockets to the championship. He had a career full of magical seasons.

A final point I'd like to raise is that it looks to me like the Bulls demonstrated a very different breed of basketball in which the center position was clearly de-emphasized. And became a dynasty in the process. Other teams looked to emulate this scheme and also de-emphasized the center position. To the point we are today with a dearth of centers in the league.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> With 100% hindsight, I would agree that Olajuan would be the better draft choice than Jordan. In other words, I would draft Olajuan over Jordan. I mean, of course any GM would drool over having a center of Olajuan's caliber to build a team around...
> 
> That said, it is really obvious the Bulls would have won the title both years if Jordan hadn't retired.


This seems like a contridiction. Why would you pick the Dream?


----------



## lanqiu (Dec 8, 2002)

if you simply switch Jordan and Olajuwan in the 93-94 squads, which was better?

Olajuwan +Grant+ pippen+ Kukoc +Amstrong, that would be a heck of a team.

I was not saying Olajuwan was better than Jordan. I was saying it was easier to build a championship team starting from a dominant center, which equals to it is easier to build around Yao Ming than JWill.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lanqiu</b>!
> I was not saying Olajuwan was better than Jordan. I was saying it was easier to build a championship team starting from a dominant center, which equals to it is easier to build around Yao Ming than JWill.


If you can draft the greatest player to ever lace them up, you do it.

No matter whom you have as the franchise, you still need to build a team around that player.

Start with the greatest. Start with MJ.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> This seems like a contridiction. Why would you pick the Dream?


Why would I pick the Dream? 

He was clearly going to be the player he turned out to be at the time of the draft.

You just don't find dominant centers to build a team around very often.

The Dream's combination of skills were both amazing and unique among centers. In his youth, he'd block a shot at the defensive end and get the dunk at the other on the fast break. He ran the floor unlike any big man, maybe even to this day. He could score inside and from the outside. He could pass, and he played awesome defense.

Jordan, on the other hand, was no guarantee. People did not expect him to be the player he was at draft time. Once he was in the league, he was a spectacular player, but it took the team years to be competitors.

Bulls record starting1984-85:
1983-84 (pre-jordan) 27-55 (5th central, 10th east)
1984-85 (rookie) 38-44 (3rd central, 7th east)
1985-86 30-52 (4th central, 8th east)
1986-87 40-42 (5th central, 8th east)
They draft Pippen:
1987-88 50-32 (3rd central, 4th east)
1988-89 47-35 (5th central, 5th east)

The Rockets with Hakeem were a slightly different story:
1983-84 (pre-Olajuwon) 29-53 (6th/last midwest, 11th west)
1984-85 (rookie) 48-34 (2nd midwest, 3rd west)
1985-86 51-31 (1st midwest, 2nd west)
Then Ralph Sampson got injured and John Lucas went into drug rehab:
1986-87 42-40 (3rd midwest, tie 6th west)

So, Jordan meant 11 wins for the Bulls as a rookie, and Olajuwon meant 19

And, Jordan actually played with a decent group of players on the Bulls: Woolridge, Greenwood, Dailey, Gervin, Oakley, etc.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> Why would I pick the Dream?
> 
> ...


Originally, you said, "With 100% hindsight, I would agree that Olajuan would be the better draft choice than Jordan."

Well, MJ is a guarentee with 100% hindsight, right?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Originally, you said, "With 100% hindsight, I would agree that Olajuan would be the better draft choice than Jordan."
> ...


Let me start with a little anecdote.

I used to run a pretty big sports www site in the mid-late '90s. People used to give me gifts all the time, knowing I was a huge Bulls and Jordan fan. It got to the point where people joked that I had a Jordan shrine in my office! ;=) I'm talking autographed pictures, jerseys, figurines, coffee mugs, menus from his restaraunt, and even a 6'7" lifesize cardboard Jordan... hehe

So when a guy who is that big a fan says he'd take Olajuwon over Jordan, it should say something...

I think you can easily make the case Jordan was the best player ever. You can make the case that others were, too. This kind of argument is impossible to win, IMO. 

There have been guys like Jordan: Dr. J, David Thompson, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson. In modern times, you have guys like VCarter, TMac, and Kobe. Even Jalen Rose. Perhaps not with the complete all-around game Jordan had (Kobe's darn close!)...

In all my years of watching basketball, I've never seen a center with Olajuwon's overall skills. Maybe Sabonis in his prime, but we never saw him in the NBA at that time.

And as lanqiu pointed out:



> I was not saying Olajuwan was better than Jordan. I was saying it was <B>easier to build a championship team starting from a dominant center</B>, which equals to it is easier to build around Yao Ming than JWill.


I think that is the conventional wisdom.

Cheers


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> So when a guy who is that big a fan says he'd take Olajuwon over Jordan, it should say something...


Seems like you are waffling to me.

Clearly, at the 84 draft, drafting Olajuwon first was the conventional wisdom. He was #1 on every draft board including the Bulls. And Houston in no way kicked themselves after the fact b/c they got a heckva player. And great centers are a great way to build a team.

So it's no big deal to say that Houston made the right choice _at the time_.

However, if you said that given your full knowledge of the abilities demonstrated by Jordan and Akeem in their NBA careers that you would pick Akeem, that's a big deal.

For the record, which is it?

======================

Assuming that you are going to pick Akeem, let me just say that it amazes me that Jordan is still underestimated after all is said and done. Guys like Jalen Rose, David Thompson, Dr. J and Vince can not hold the man's jock. And Dream had peers in his day such as Ewing and DRob that were not such a downgrade either.


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

hell, if Sam Bowie was AVAIL with pick #3 we would have taken him over Jordan as well, everyone had the big guys #1 on their draft board... if I could see into the future I would have taken Jordan over hakeem even though Hakeem was GREAT Jordan was the GREATEST.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Seems like you are waffling to me.
> ...


For the record, I'd still take Hakeem.

If the Bulls had taken him they would have won more championships because they would have started winning them sooner/earlier.

I'm not waffling in any way, shape, or form. hehe

Your argument that Ewing was in Akeem's league is bogus in my book. DRob is a good point.

My point about other players in Jordan's mold is that they are easier to come by (oversized guards) compared to a center of Hakeem's caliber. Did you see David Thompson play? Or Dr. J? Those guys were extremely close to MJ's early game, especially with the explosive and flashy moves around the hoop. Thompson was such a great leaper that he blocked Walton's shots in college a number of times.

The hype around Hakeem as a draft pick was greater than for almost any player I can remember. Bill Walton and Ralph Sampson are the only ones I can think of that were similar. Not just a "for sure" #1 pick, but a "for sure" dominant player in the league for his career. With 100% hindsight, Olajuwan proved everyone was correct in the hype.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> Hakeem's prime, in those three years (94-96), was as great as any player I've ever seen. His peak was *shorter* than Jordan and a couple of other great players, but in that time, he was a remarkable, remarkable player.



isnt it convenient that his prime was during mj's hiatus?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> For the record, I'd still take Hakeem.
> 
> If the Bulls had taken him they would have won more championships because they would have started winning them sooner/earlier.


Maybe.. Maybe in this alternative universe Jordan goes to Portland and he and Drexler win year after year after year.



> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> My point about other players in Jordan's mold is that they are easier to come by (oversized guards) compared to a center of Hakeem's caliber. Did you see David Thompson play? Or Dr. J? Those guys were extremely close to MJ's early game, especially with the explosive and flashy moves around the hoop.


Dr. J was my favorite player growing up and I wanted him to be the best player ever. I finally had to agree that Bird and Magic and ultimetely MJ contributed much more to a winnning bball team. 

Thompson was b/f my time but I have read enough about him to classify the guy. Maybe it's a different story if he doesn't mess his life up.

Jordan never won until his game evolved on O and he was always much better on the defensive end.



> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> The hype around Hakeem as a draft pick was greater than for almost any player I can remember. Bill Walton and Ralph Sampson are the only ones I can think of that were similar. Not just a "for sure" #1 pick, but a "for sure" dominant player in the league for his career. With 100% hindsight, Olajuwan proved everyone was correct in the hype.


Ewing, Shaq and Duncan and others had as much hype as I recall.

Sure, the Dream was as good as projected. MJ was a heckva a lot better than projected. And he is with 100% certainly my pick with 100% hindsight.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

Let me say this: Hakeem is perhaps the most underrated superstar (if that's possible). During his prime (short as it was) he was as dominant a center as there ever has been. He wasn't the point machine Wilt was, but he didn't choke when it counted either (rare for a center). Would I pick him over Jordan with 100% hindsight? Hell no, but I would have picked him over Wilt, Walton, Russell, Kareem, or possibly even Shaq. He and Wilt are the only centers, IMO, that could have completely neutralized (if not outplayed) Shaq in a series.


> There have been guys like Jordan: Dr. J, David Thompson, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson. In modern times, you have guys like VCarter, TMac, and Kobe. Even Jalen Rose. Perhaps not with the complete all-around game Jordan had (Kobe's darn close!)...


I think you're forgetting just how good Jordan really was in his prime. These are all great players, but Jordan could score absolutely at will, and his will was as great as anyone who has ever played. Not even Kobe is close to Jordan in his prime- Jordan would have destroyed(or at least outplayed by a wide margin) any one of these players.
And yes, the Bulls would have iced the Rockets.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> Let me say this: Hakeem is perhaps the most underrated superstar (if that's possible). During his prime (short as it was) he was as dominant a center as there ever has been. He wasn't the point machine Wilt was, but he didn't choke when it counted either (rare for a center). Would I pick him over Jordan with 100% hindsight? Hell no, but I would have picked him over Wilt, Walton, Russell, Kareem, or possibly even Shaq. He and Wilt are the only centers, IMO, that could have completely neutralized (if not outplayed) Shaq in a series.
> 
> I think you're forgetting just how good Jordan really was in his prime. These are all great players, but Jordan could score absolutely at will, and his will was as great as anyone who has ever played. Not even Kobe is close to Jordan in his prime- Jordan would have destroyed(or at least outplayed by a wide margin) any one of these players.
> And yes, the Bulls would have iced the Rockets.



Louie, I absolutely agree with everything you said. I think so many people forget how great Jordan was. To compare even Kobe to him is absurd. When Jordan was Kobe's age, he was averaging 37 points a game, while shooting 48% from the floor. Jordan revolutionized the game and revolutionized the league.

Not only did Jordan bring 6 championships to the Bulls, but he also brought a world-wide interest and fanbase that is totally unparalleled in sports, which is evidenced by the interest in this board as opposed to the boards of other teams on this site.

Most people really have no idea the impact Jordan had on things outside of the Bulls. If anyone wants a great book to read about Jordan's impact, you should definitely read _Playing For Keeps: Michael Jordan and the World he Made_ by David Halberstam...It's a remarkable book.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

I do not understand why people say that Olajuwon had a short time in his prime. The data suggests he was awesome from the day he took the court in 1984-85 through 1998-99.

He scored 23+ PPG NINE times. 24+ SIX times.

He had 10+ reb/game TWELVE times, and 11+ ten of those twelve.

Six times he averaged over 3 Ast/game (and 2 others 2.9). 

He averaged over 2 steals per game FIVE times and 1.8+ TEN times.

He averaged 4 blocks per game THREE times and 3+ NINE times.

Not only was he a threat to score a triple-double in any game, he has one of only three quadruple-doubles in NBA history (points, rebounds, assists, and blocks). And he was capable of a quintuple-double, as was among the league leaders in steals on a regular basis.

He was a 12-time all-star, back-to-back MVP, defensive player of the year, 1st- or 2nd-team Defensive player NINE times. 

He also led the league in rebounds twice. And not during the period when people suggest he was "in his prime"...

The data suggests he was a great player until his last three years...

And like I said earlier, he meant 19 Ws to his team as a rookie. As much of a Jordan fanatic as I am, I just didn't see that he made his teammates better for several years. 

One of my posts to the Yao vs. JWill thread got lost in the system problems the other day. FWIW, I talked about the VERY rare level of superstardom that we occaisionally see. Not just sports: FDR, Marylin Monroe, Lindbergh... In sports: Babe Ruth, Joe Dimaggio, Jordan, and Tiger Woods. Rare level of fame that is truly hard to imagine.

Cheers


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

In the spirit of this thread, enjoy the picture attached ;-)

Could we still be winning championships? We'll _never_ know.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> And like I said earlier, he meant 19 Ws to his team as a rookie. As much of a Jordan fanatic as I am, I just didn't see that he made his teammates better for several years.


MJ was rookie of the year, but hey, it's your alternative universe, take the Dream. 

I must ask you to refrain from calling yourself a Jordan fanatic, however. 

Cheers.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Cat</b>!
> By Jordan's admission, and by Jordan's numbers against the Rockets, Mad Max was one of the best in the entire league at guarding MJ. He frustrated him like no player I had ever seen.
> 
> Also, at the time, Robert Horry and Mario Elie were both terrific perimeter defenders, and could've played Pippen well.
> ...


You cant compare Jordans numbers in the regular season to what he would do in the playoffs. Same goes for the rest of the Bulls at that time! Its great you defend the Rockets. You should. But truth is if Jordan had stayed, we might have won 8 in a row. Maybe 9 had he not retired in the strike season. I said maybe, because the chances were more than 50/50 we would have.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>local_sportsfan</b>!
> I'm a Wiz fan. I hated the mid-90's Bulls. However, I really liked the mid-90's Rockets. That being said, the Bulls would have waxed the Rockets both seasons.
> 
> It's no coincidence that the Rockets managed to win 2 championships while Jordan was on his sabbatical (and no, the comeback in 95 doesn't count). Jordan at his prime was clearly the best player in the L. Pippen was top 5. Olajuwon was a great player, but the Bulls usually had no problems with center-oriented teams.


Nice post LSF. We realize a lot of fans hated the Bulls. I can see why.


----------

