Michael Jordan, Not the Best Ever?

[MaxFly]

Man, this guys tries to murder Jordan. Enjoyable read for any NBA fan and there's plenty to agree and disagree with.

http://airjudden2.tripod.com/jordan/index.htm

Edited September 30, 2006 by MaxFly

[WesSyde]

didnt have time to read it all, but as a Jordan fan it wasnt up my alley. i am trying to be open minded, but:

"he purpose isn't to determine that player X is the best ever...only that Jordan is NOT the best" ok, well its easy to prove Jordan is not the best if thats your goal, just like its easy to prove he is the best if you like him. this site seemed to lack an open minded view, just a lot of "Jordan is not the best and your opinion is bull if you think that" repeated over and over again. i will try and read the rest of it later on, but it seemed like he was reiterating the same point over and over again.

one thing that i will say, Jordan is kinda like the 2Pac of basketball. he was a legend and still worshipped to this day and its hard to put a clear reason on why he was so good, but he just was. its hard to say why he got all the hype but he did. he was clutch, he was all around, he played with heart, he won lots of games. i think there are valid points for Wilt Chamberlain, the only problem i see is that back in Wilt's era the game was a little different, almost like it was not the same accomplishment to score 70 points as it is today. thats just kinda what i get, i dont have any proof tho and i do admit there are good competitors against Jordan. but for me personally, i had the privilege of watching him in his prime and he did things that revolutionized the sport of basketball.

[MaxFly]

didnt have time to read it all, but as a Jordan fan it wasnt up my alley. i am trying to be open minded, but:

"he purpose isn't to determine that player X is the best ever...only that Jordan is NOT the best" ok, well its easy to prove Jordan is not the best if thats your goal, just like its easy to prove he is the best if you like him. this site seemed to lack an open minded view, just a lot of "Jordan is not the best and your opinion is bull if you think that" repeated over and over again. i will try and read the rest of it later on, but it seemed like he was reiterating the same point over and over again.

one thing that i will say, Jordan is kinda like the 2Pac of basketball. he was a legend and still worshipped to this day and its hard to put a clear reason on why he was so good, but he just was. its hard to say why he got all the hype but he did. he was clutch, he was all around, he played with heart, he won lots of games. i think there are valid points for Wilt Chamberlain, the only problem i see is that back in Wilt's era the game was a little different, almost like it was not the same accomplishment to score 70 points as it is today. thats just kinda what i get, i dont have any proof tho and i do admit there are good competitors against Jordan. but for me personally, i had the privilege of watching him in his prime and he did things that revolutionized the sport of basketball.

I think the notion that Jordan routinely carried a bunch of scrubs to the NBA finals and championships is what bugs me the most when it comes to the hype that surrounds him. Some of the commentary is obviously biased, but the writer's argument that Jordan had great teams around is right in line with what I've been saying since I was 8. A lot of people don't know this, but Jordan and Scottie Pippen were dang near exploited salary wise. For the longest time Jordan wasn't being paid what he was worth, and neither was Pippen. However, it worked out well for them in that the team was able to surround them with great role players.

I thought that the "Jordan didn't make those around him better" argument was dumb, though I will agree that he was a one man show for the better part of the first 6 years of his career. His coaches repeatedly asked him to trust his teammates, and Phil Jackson finally got through to him. That's when they started winning championships; but he has a great team player during the championship years.

I do think that Jordan is overhyped. There was a poll on ESPN at the beginning of last season pitting all time teams against eachother in a playoff format to see who would have the best team if you put all the stars of that team over the generations together... All-Time Celtics, All-Time Sixers, All-Time Bulls, All-Time Lakers, All-Time Knicks... etc... there were 8 teams... The Bulls won the poll, beating out both the All-Time Celtics, and the All-Time Lakers... merely because of Jordan...

[Typhoon20]

When I read ''Michael Jordan'' I instantly new it had to be max lol.

I read that page, I thought I was going to read some objective and fair analyses where in fact the guy seemed like ''my way is the right way''.I find it biased, he calls people uneducated about the fact that rings don't determine how great a basketball player is and if people do they are uneducated or fanboys.

That seems to me like he isn't open-minded at all, he tries to be though, to cover up his one-dimensional writing.He more then once stated that the only part where Jordan is no.1 is endorsements, commercials etc.

I don't want to burst his bubbles, but this to me seems something a hater, closed-minded fanboy would write. He just should have said jordan sucks, no need to try to look objective where most of the time his writings are based on ignorance, and he makes it seem like it's quite intelligent.

Jordan, the best or not. Who knows, everyone has his/her own opinion about it, I find it highly disturbing when people only think their way is the right way, as noted at the comments of that guy.

In order to know who the best basketball player is, you'd have to play every player 1 on 1, since we don't have a time machine that seems a bit impossible.

But, we can compare the different times of basketball and see the positive or negative aspects.

In the early times basketball wasn't highly evolved, therefore it was going to be decised on physical ability mostly, so freak of natures wilt and russel had a huge advantage, I watched some games of wilt and it was insane, he could score so easily because of how poor the opponent defenders were. From what I saw he wasn't the evolved smart bball player, he was more a show-off type of person, not to forget with the countless amounts of woman he slept, gives an indication how much he loves attention.

Fundamentals weren't that high back then, BBALL IQ was very low.

It's like comparing the first car to todays car, with time you get faster, smarter and better.

Russel was the more evolved player, he didn't try to show off, he

did the little things that made them a team, his post-up game was strong, for me he was the first big man with a good Bball IQ, he had some great moves.

Wilt had also a good Bball iq but not at russel's level, wilt tried to do it on his own, perhaps we could relate him to kobe.100 points or 81 doesn't matter, if you don't share it with your team, you won't become a champion, you might win single games.

When basketball got evolved the more finesse players started to arise,

bird was a great team-player, he had great fundamentals, he was in my eyes the 2nd coming of russell, strangely for the same team :)

He wasn't that gifted physically but he had a very high BBALL iq for that era.Same as Magic, he was more physically gifted then bird and was also a great team player but his IQ was even higher, during the 80's basketball really was going upwards and these 2 people gave an emphasis on how to play the game the smart way, they were very talented and on top of that they were the more evolved players of the late 70 begin 80.

Then the pistons started to rise during the mid late 80's ,not very talented as the likes of johnson or bird, but they played as a team with a very high physical ability with an emphasis on team defence.

They played defence as one of the best, perhaps the best ever. who knows. Then a lot more superstarts started to rise up, the golden era of basketball reached it's peak in the 90's.With players like ewing, shaq, rodman, the whole pistons team, johnson, bird, drexler, barkley, starks,stockton, malone, hornacek,pippen, jordan and i'm still forgetting a lot of names, payton, reggie miller, divac and lots of more nba stars.kidd, hill.

There was no heavy rules in the 80/90's.No 3 second violation, no hand-check fouls, no open lanes, it was defence at it's best, you couldn't drive inside the lane without getting beaten up, jordan got beaten up so many times against the pistons, knicks most of them weren't even called for a foul.In that era he dominated, even the worst teams had 1 or 2 stars on their team, Jordan had pippen, just as shaq had penny, malone had stockton, magic had worthy, divac, kobe had shaq, now has odom, which has the same stats as pippen last year.Tmac has ming. Jazz has kirilenko, okur boozer a lot more, magic has a future star howard + nelson.

Every team in the NBA has approx. the same budget, some a bit more then the others but in general everyone has a fair chance.

I kind of dislike the fact that whenever Jordan is mentioned the haters bring up, well he had a great team. Well since basketball is played 5 on 5 it's supposed to take a great team to win a championship in the first place.

Everyone has a great team in the NBA, without Jordan the mighty bulls only made it to the playoffs.It's not a surprise that when Jordan came back with some time in the summer his full year was instant success. 3 more championships.

Jordan's fault is that he should have trusted his teammates earlier,

he started to trust them after 89, but if he had done that earlier who knows what might have happened, we might not be talking about the pistons that much.

Most teams make the playoffs. A great team wins a championship but 1 great player above all guides them to the championship.

In the 91-92-93 championships, finals,Jordan totally dominated, no other basketball player has dominated such a final like he did.It was crazy for words, putting up 40-50 points back to back, making the final second shots, not only scoring but also averaging 12 assists in the 91 finals vs. lakers, vs johnson, one of if not the best point guard.He single handedly scored 40+ and 60+ points against 1 of the best defensive teams ever, boston celtics in the playoffs.It wasn't toronto.There's a reason why players like bird, magic, dr.j, russel, jerry speak of him as the best there ever is.I think it has a lot of credibility when these opinions come from the players who have witnessed him 1 on 1.Most great teams make the nba finals, you can guide your team to the finals, your team can guide you to the finals, but in the end, responsibility lies on 1 person, he makes or breaks the team.

It's unfair to say MJ had a great team, because they all have great teams.

Malone had perhaps the better team, wth a great point guard, a terrific shooter in hornacek and one of the best PF's in malone.

But in the end it rests on 1 player, not the team.

It was Jordan who stole the ball from malone brilliantly, it was Jordan who took the ball, it was Jordan who finished off the game.

Today the NBA is not going forward, the rules are killing the true spirit of basketball, they are making life a living hell for big man, every little touch is called for a foul, lane is wide open, no contact allowed, NO DEFENCE ANYMORE.Stern is trying to get more viewers, ratings, by making the game more offensive.Then kobe goes and scores 81 on toronto, wade goes to the free throw line in an NBA FINAL 25 times per game.

When todays players score 30 points half of them are from FT's.

This is unfair to the game, and perhaps unfair to the players.

I would have loved to see todays players go for it the HARD WAY, just as in the 80/90's.But Stern is killing it, literally.

In a time where it seemed as if Jordan's legacy was finally cemented and people would stop having the undying need to compare every superstar in the league to Jordan, I've found that it's almost exactly the opposite. While you'll never find a major publication going out of their way to proclaim Kobe or T-Mac greater than Jordan like SLAM once did with Grant and Penny, it seems as though the fans are more frantic than ever.

As i've said time and time again, people get caught up in the nostalgia of the happenings surrounding us in the moment and tend to forget how great the past truly was in exchange for the refreshing and nostalgic moments of today and tomorrow.

While I'll be the first to admit it's always great to suffice to the future and enjoy it for what it is, it's also an irrational decision-making process that fuels us to be neglecting toward what once was -- and in this case, still is.

Todays generation consists mainly of a younger generation who never got to see the undeniable skill, finesse, pure athletecism, and accomplishments of Michael Jordan. I'm not talking about everything written on paper, like his 6 rings, 5 MVPS, 6 finals MVP's, or his insane stats and scoring accomplishments... I'm referring to the way he changed the game and did things every game that you might not ever see again.

People forget that despite being the most dominant player of our modern era, he was also the most stylish and most exciting. Nowadays you'll see 2 or 3 amazing plays every couple games from our stars like Vince, Kobe, Mac, etc... But you never see it like you used to with Jordan, sometimes up to ten times a game.

This guy, like Daily once said, was literally embarassing the leage he was that good... And with no coincidence at all involved, it just so happened to be the most competetive and hard faught era the league has seen to date.

True, he never used an Allen Iverson cross or a Kobe Bryant around-one-leg dribble to ellude defenders... But then again, he never had to. What people seem to forget is that this guy was faster, smarter, and could jump higher than the previous mentioned players. Some people might remember in his 55 point return game against the Knicks, his dish off to Wennington for the win... But how many remember the fact that he almost broke Stark's ankles [one of the most skilled perimiter defenders of the 90's] in doing so? Or how many times he'd just completely erase the defense by coming in full speed (with a 4.3 second 40 yard dash time), and just stopping completely on a dime for a far-too-easy jump shot.

Regarding the defensive changes, I ask everyone to pick up Lindy's 2007 NBA preview which is out now. The cover story is "The Death of Defense". In it, Rod Thorn goes into detail at how the NBA wanted to encourage wing scoring to bring up ratings - to help players be more like "MJ". The old rules were making strength and bruising defense take away from the skill of the wing players so taking away such rules (hand/body up on D) are supposed to encourage slashing and creativity. Tex Winter adds that the problem is it's too lopsided and results in too many touch FTs which is slowing the game down. Plus, rules inside to defend Big Men aren't changed so he thinks it's ridiculous to keep it hard for big men but easier for wing men. The shift is dramatic - with the huge % of shots going to wing players today. Well, we all know the main reason to make it easier for wing men to score is to replace what MJ used to do in any era. Tex goes on "All these guys can score 40 today but they need 15-20 fts to get there." Dumars adds (paraphrased), "The new rules make it hard to play different styles because you can't do anything on D. You can have different schemes but defenders can't do anything to an offensive player on the perimeter." A humble and unbiased professional, he laughs at guarding MJ today, "virtually impossible".

Really, all this comes from MJ's causing the "Jordan Rules" which brought D. into the forefront (and which is why the NBA invented the 'Flagrant foul' - yes, there was no such thing as a flagrant during that time - they were just 'hard' fouls - no techs). MJ was good enough to keep his ppg regardless of what was thrown at him but scoring through the NBA plummeted due to the strong rules, young players, poor fundamentals etc. In 1989, the NBA added a rule to limit MJ even more; it was an anti-isolation rule nicknamed the "Michael Jordan Rule" which prevented players (well, him) from getting the ball with two teammates near the free throw line (MJ became the only guard to have a special rule to limit his domination (Mikan, Wilt and to a small degree Shaq also caused rule changes.) When MJ retired the first time, they took back the rule because of the ratings drop and went the OTHER way to support isolation to help AI and the like to score. When MJ came back, he also benefitted from the 'pro-iso' rules at ages 33-35 which showed barely a blip in his efficiency even though he was not as explosive as he once was. Now, it's way too much with the new 'no hands.' We all noticed how games were 15 minutes longer last year - back-to-back games on TV never started on time or you missed the first 7 minutes of the first quarter. All these trips to the FT line are the reason. That being, Kudos to guys like Parker and Wade for taking advantage of this situation by attacking the rim.

Pick up Lindy's 2007 to read the whole piece.

Also, the NBA was a little taller in the 80s (from 84-88 the average height was the tallest ever - the motley of great centers being obvious). However, the average weight is higher today and that is mainly due to weight training which didn't start until the late 80s. With rising strength, the bruiser D was even more killing so it's another reason why the NBA relaxed the rules to give skill more of a chance.

One thing for sure is we will still see more changes because no one likes FTs every other play.

Edited September 30, 2006 by Typhoon20

[bigted]

If you think about all the teams that the Bulls beat in the '90s it's actually understandable to see them compete with the all time Lakers and Celtics 'cause there was teams with deeper rosters than the Bulls had talent wise(Ewing's Knicks, Barkley's Suns, Reggie's Pacers, Malone's Jazz, Kemp's Sonics would all have won championships in other eras I'm sure), I think it's similar to all the talent that LL Cool J beat in his battles in the '80s/90s, they could beat any other mc but not LL, MJ is like the LL of basketball, they had the '80s/90s on lock and were also the household names of pop culture, young kids might try to argue that Kobe and Jay-Z are better, lol

Edited September 30, 2006 by bigted

[MaxFly]

If you think about all the teams that the Bulls beat in the '90s it's actually understandable to see them compete with the all time Lakers and Celtics 'cause there was teams with deeper rosters than the Bulls had talent wise(Ewing's Knicks, Barkley's Suns, Reggie's Pacers, Malone's Jazz, Kemp's Sonics would all have won championships in other eras I'm sure), I think it's similar to all the talent that LL Cool J beat in his battles in the '80s/90s, they could beat any other mc but not LL, MJ is like the LL of basketball, they had the '80s/90s on lock and were also the household names of pop culture, young kids might try to argue that Kobe and Jay-Z are better, lol

Here's a list of the All-Time Lakers

Magic Johnson

Kareem-Abdul Jabbar

Wilt Chamberlain

Shaquille O'Neal

James Worthy

Elgin Baylor

Gail Goodrich

Jerry West

Kobe Bryant

James Worthy

Michael Cooper

Norm Nixon

That's 9 HOFs if you consider Kobe Bryant and Shaq HOFs...

This is what young kids are arguing... They grew up in a generation where all they saw was Michael Jordan but they don't know anything about the past players, they haven't watched any of the old games or battles, and so they're tranxfixed Jordan and the Bulls, and while those Bulls teams were great, their All-Time most notable players are Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Charles Oakley and Horace Grant... Add a sprinkling of past and present Bulls and that's supposed to beat a team with 9 HOFs? That's what kids are arguing, and that's why I say that Jordan, and subsequently, the Bulls, are overhyped.

[Hero1]

you can't overhype jordan.. when it really counted he always came up with the goods..when the pressure was on, when his team needed him, he delivered. That's a true champion. :bowdown:

[bigted]

If you think about all the teams that the Bulls beat in the '90s it's actually understandable to see them compete with the all time Lakers and Celtics 'cause there was teams with deeper rosters than the Bulls had talent wise(Ewing's Knicks, Barkley's Suns, Reggie's Pacers, Malone's Jazz, Kemp's Sonics would all have won championships in other eras I'm sure), I think it's similar to all the talent that LL Cool J beat in his battles in the '80s/90s, they could beat any other mc but not LL, MJ is like the LL of basketball, they had the '80s/90s on lock and were also the household names of pop culture, young kids might try to argue that Kobe and Jay-Z are better, lol

Here's a list of the All-Time Lakers

Magic Johnson

Kareem-Abdul Jabbar

Wilt Chamberlain

Shaquille O'Neal

James Worthy

Elgin Baylor

Gail Goodrich

Jerry West

Kobe Bryant

James Worthy

Michael Cooper

Norm Nixon

That's 9 HOFs if you consider Kobe Bryant and Shaq HOFs...

This is what young kids are arguing... They grew up in a generation where all they saw was Michael Jordan but they don't know anything about the past players, they haven't watched any of the old games or battles, and so they're tranxfixed Jordan and the Bulls, and while those Bulls teams were great, their All-Time most notable players are Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Charles Oakley and Horace Grant... Add a sprinkling of past and present Bulls and that's supposed to beat a team with 9 HOFs? That's what kids are arguing, and that's why I say that Jordan, and subsequently, the Bulls, are overhyped.

Well if the NBA was played on paper then we wouldn't have the Pistons beating the Lakers a couple years ago, right? It takes more than just the most talent to win, like I said the Knicks had a better roster some years that the Bulls beat 'em, the '96 Sonics had a better roster than the '96 Bulls but the '96 Bulls ended up winning 72 games and beat them in the Finals 'cause of team chemistry, if they could end up winning championships with f'ing Luc Longley and Scott Williams at starting center I think they could beat anybody,the '80s/'90s was the golden era of basketball, most of the players who were on the the NBA 50 Roster played during the '80s/90s, it was like hip-hop in the '80s/90s, the mcs and players that got slept on during that era are probably better than most out there today, Wilt Chamberlin and Bill Russell won all those championships respectfully 'cause there was less talent and less teams, it's actually harder to win in later years 'cause there's more teams out there and there's more talent, there was an immense amount of talent out there, you can't just have a team of all stars and win, maybe in a video game yes but not in reality, not to knock how great those players were but come on now with all those guys they'd argue about who gets the ball more, everyone on the Bulls knew their role, they knew how to play fundemental basketball, it's actually good to have a couple all-stars/hall of famers and a bunch of role players, and in the end Jordan always delivered when the game was on the line, maybe Magic would be that guy on the Lakers but the Bulls shut him down before in reality,it was actually a blessing that Bulls didn't have a team of all-stars 'cause if they did they wouldn't win as much as they did, it'd be too much ego clashing

Edited September 30, 2006 by bigted

[mfuqua23]

Michael Jordan is the best player ever, period? HE's done it all at some point or another. He said "I'll leave the game when I have nothing more to prove." Now why he came back to play for the Wizards is beyond me? I never kept up with Jordan after '98. It's definitely one of the best ever if not THE BEST. He did it all. Scoring, dunking, defensive, passing, championships, game winning shots. And he lost/failed in the process of accomplishing all this. Somebody on this forum has him quoted.

Typhoon also brought out some nice points. Matter of fact, just the other day, I was watching "Michael Jordan's Playground". The video was in 1991. It's been a while since I watched the whole thing. Came remember if the Bulls first championship was showcased as well. I don't think it was. But in this video, everything was discussed and points were brought up, FROM GUYS JORDAN PLAYED AGAINST. I forget who said it, but he was like "Everybody talks about Magic Johnson's passing ability, and Larry Bird's passing ability, but they forget Michael's passsing abilities." They even discussed Michael Jordan and Dominque Wilkins. Not as only as dunking showcase, but also playing each other. Isiah Thomas was all smiles when he talked about them. He said "They're not trying to hurt each other, but they're playing hard against each other."

Maybe MJ was exploited quite a bit. Do videos of any other players come out? Even of the overhyped ones? The videos are from CBS/FOX video sports. Find out if they had a bigger repitoire. I know there's one on Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Even if Michael Jordan isn't the greatest to everybody, which he's shouldn't and won't be, he's definitely a favorite.

btw, if you check out his links, there is a site dedicated to "Anti-Bulls" and such. So he is a Jordan Hater.

Edited September 30, 2006 by mfuqua23

[bigted]

Jordan had love to play the game, I think that's why he went to the Wizards, he'd play forever if his body could allow him to do so, he was still an NBA All-Star at 40 years old, who else has done that? If the Wizards had team chemistry they could've won more and Jordan coulda ended up hitting one last game winning shot in the playoffs, maybe not win it all but maybe win a round or two if they got in... Sure Robert Parish and Kareem played over 40's but they weren't a threat like they were before in their hall of fame careers, Kevin Willis recently played as a backup center on the last place Hawks a couple years ago at 42, usually at that time to even still play in the NBA is an accomplishment, Rodman's still trying to get back, lol, but Jordan was still feared by Vince Carter and Allen Iverson even when he was 40, but Jordan's knees were giving out on him a little bit you could say, one good thing about music is that we could have great artists still make albums when they're over 40 'cause you can't break a hip writing a song, it's a mental game really, Jordan played when the internet started up so he got all this media attention but it was definately deserving attention, look how now TO gets all this media attention and he never won a Super Bowl yet in his 10 year career with most years never even making the playoffs, now that's the definition of media overhyping somebody, he'll never win one either 'cause he don't allow his teammates to play their role, it's all about him, Jordan knew the fundementals of basketball and knew that it took more than just him to win, Jordan 6 rings in an era where most of the NBA 50 greatest players played, nuff said, Barkley, Wilkins, Ewing, etc. would've won in other eras no doubt about that

Edited September 30, 2006 by bigted

[MaxFly]

As I said earlier Ty, the guy is definitely a hater, but I also acknowledged that he made some good points and that his overall point of Jordan being overhyped is correct, though I would never stress it to the degree the author of that webpage did.

In the early times basketball wasn't highly evolved, therefore it was going to be decised on physical ability mostly, so freak of natures wilt and russel had a huge advantage, I watched some games of wilt and it was insane, he could score so easily because of how poor the opponent defenders were. From what I saw he wasn't the evolved smart bball player, he was more a show-off type of person, not to forget with the countless amounts of woman he slept, gives an indication how much he loves attention.

Fundamentals weren't that high back then, BBALL IQ was very low.

It's like comparing the first car to todays car, with time you get faster, smarter and better.

Russel was the more evolved player, he didn't try to show off, he

did the little things that made them a team, his post-up game was strong, for me he was the first big man with a good Bball IQ, he had some great moves.

Wilt had also a good Bball iq but not at russel's level, wilt tried to do it on his own, perhaps we could relate him to kobe.100 points or 81 doesn't matter, if you don't share it with your team, you won't become a champion, you might win single games.

Wilt Chamberlain had a huge ego, but the reason he didn't win many rings was that his supporting cast was inferior in comparison to those of other teams during his era. If he had taken fewer shots and shared the ball with his teammates more, they would have fared worse. There seems to be this concept that if a player passes the ball more, his team will be automatically be better. I draw this analogy... I played high school basketball. If I go to the playground to run a 5 on 5 and pick four 10 year olds to be on my team against a team of my former high school teammates, will my team do better if I pass the ball a lot? People don't seem to realize that there is a happy medium between passing and being aggressive, and it changes depending on the makeup of a team. Kevin Garnett in Minnesota is an example of a player who isn't aggressive enough. He passes the ball a lot and defers to his teammates, so by some people's expectations, his team should be doing very well... Not the case. Jordan was the same way. When he first came into the league, he had pretty bad teams and had to take on most of the burden. If Jordan had passed the ball more in his early years, his teams wouldn't have done any better, and in fact, they would have done worse.

Also, I don't agree with the notion that Basketball IQ and Fundamentals were low back then. Players in Wilt's area weren't extremely athletic, their fundamentals and basketball IQ were actually all they had to depend on. They couldn't freestyle on the court like today's players... They had to depend on providing good help defense, running effective plays by continuing ball movement, boxing out for rebounds, making the smartest passed... if anything, the fundamentals and basketball IQ were higher back then than in today's NBA. Today's players dribble too much, and rely to much on their athleticism. Even coming out of college, many of them don't know how to set proper screens, or how to execute a good pick and roll. The fundamentals in todays NBA are shoddy and basketball IQ is average... Back in the day, that's what players relied on... They couldn't settle for shoddy fundamentals and a low IQ, they had nothing else to fall back on... today's players do.

Every team in the NBA has approx. the same budget, some a bit more then the others but in general everyone has a fair chance.

I kind of dislike the fact that whenever Jordan is mentioned the haters bring up, well he had a great team. Well since basketball is played 5 on 5 it's supposed to take a great team to win a championship in the first place.

Everyone has a great team in the NBA, without Jordan the mighty bulls only made it to the playoffs.It's not a surprise that when Jordan came back with some time in the summer his full year was instant success. 3 more championships.

I don't think that the haters are pointing out that Jordan had good teams for the sake of it. People seem to think that Jordan dragged a team of scrubs to the playoffs and the championships... They want to make him seem better and more mythical than he actually was. The reality is that Jordan had some very good teams. The 93-94 team won 55 games after Jordan retired the first time. They only lost two more games than the previous season when Jordan actually played. Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant, the leaders of that 94 Bulls team, had their individual numbers go up in the absence of Jordan, including their shooting percentage. When people bring up the fact that Jordan had good teams, they aren't hating. There's nothing wrong with having a good team... It's the notion that Jordan had a bad team around him and that he was the only reason they were good that people want to set straight. Of course, there will be haters who try to twist things for their own agenda, but it's important to remember that the core of the argument is correct; Jordan didn't play with a bunch of scrubs, and that's what any people have tried to make it out to be.

He single handedly scored 40+ and 60+ points against 1 of the best defensive teams ever, boston celtics in the playoffs.It wasn't toronto.There's a reason why players like bird, magic, dr.j, russel, jerry speak of him as the best there ever is.I think it has a lot of credibility when these opinions come from the players who have witnessed him 1 on 1.

The Celtics were a good team, but that year (86), they were not one of the best defensive teams ever. That Celtics team had aging players. The Celtics from the 80s were never known for being one of the better defensive teams ever. Robert Parish at center made them formidable of the defensive end, but when I think of the best defensive teams, a lot of teams come before those 80s Celtic treams. Being from Boston, one thing I know is Celtic basketball... They kick you out of the city if you aren't a Celtics fan, and as much as I loved those Celtics teams, the team that Jordan hung his 63 points on was not even near one the best defensive team... Moreover, the Bulls lost that game in which he scored 63 and we swept them in that series, 3-0...

Today the NBA is not going forward, the rules are killing the true spirit of basketball, they are making life a living hell for big man, every little touch is called for a foul, lane is wide open, no contact allowed, NO DEFENCE ANYMORE.Stern is trying to get more viewers, ratings, by making the game more offensive.Then kobe goes and scores 81 on toronto, wade goes to the free throw line in an NBA FINAL 25 times per game.

When todays players score 30 points half of them are from FT's.

This is unfair to the game, and perhaps unfair to the players.

I would have loved to see todays players go for it the HARD WAY, just as in the 80/90's.But Stern is killing it, literally.

In a time where it seemed as if Jordan's legacy was finally cemented and people would stop having the undying need to compare every superstar in the league to Jordan, I've found that it's almost exactly the opposite. While you'll never find a major publication going out of their way to proclaim Kobe or T-Mac greater than Jordan like SLAM once did with Grant and Penny, it seems as though the fans are more frantic than ever.

As i've said time and time again, people get caught up in the nostalgia of the happenings surrounding us in the moment and tend to forget how great the past truly was in exchange for the refreshing and nostalgic moments of today and tomorrow.

This is another major misconception that people have... and I know why people bring it up, but I'll get to that later. People keep saying that defenses today make things easier for guards and that the league has changed the rules so that guards can score more easily... I think that this is groupthink...The rule changes did two major things. The first is that it eliminated the allowance of handchecking... That means that defenders were allowed to be more aggressive and put their hands on perimeter players and players in general. This is what people generally harp on when they say that the rules made things easier for guards. The lack of handchecking does make things easier for guards... it doesn't stop there though that's where a few people want to stop. The rules also allowed teams to play the zone defense, a defense which makes it more difficult for perimeter players to get to the rim. Moreover, teams could now double a basketball player who didn't have the ball, something they couldn't do before. If you can double a player before they have the ball, you can keep the ball out of his hands or at least prevent him from easily getting by his defender, making things harder for perimeter players. Prior to the rule changes, a player could catch the ball and make a quick move before the double team came. Handchecking wasn't going to stop a player from going right by you if you were too close back then, but the new rules made it harder for a player to do that. As a result, the handchecking is offset by the zone defense and the allowance of double teams, and some. At the beginning of last season, when Phil Jackson returned to the Lakers, it was decided that Kobe Bryant would play Jordan's role in the triangle offense. Kobe Bryant called Jordan to ask him for pointers... how he should approach Jordan's role in the triangle, etc... Jordan went on record as saying that Kobe Bryant should try to attack defenses from the wing by posting up... Jordan then said that it would be harder for Kobe than it was for him because of the changes to the defensive rules. He said that teams could double Kobe earlier and make it harder for him to consistently get good shots from the post and to drive... That was Jordan saying that the new defensive rules made things harder.

Also, I edit this to address your comment about nostalgia. There is no nostalgia whatsoever for today's basketball. The nostalgia is for the basketball of the 80s and 90s. People are always saying that the basketball of the 80s and 90s was better... That they wish today's basketball would be more like the 90s and 80s... That they wish Jordan was still playing. They wish today's defense was like the beat-em-up defense the bad boys and the knicks played in the 90s... The nostalgia is a longing or yearning for things past. You can't have nostalgia for the present.

Edited September 30, 2006 by MaxFly

[MaxFly]

Well if the NBA was played on paper then we wouldn't have the Pistons beating the Lakers a couple years ago, right? It takes more than just the most talent to win, like I said the Knicks had a better roster some years that the Bulls beat 'em, the '96 Sonics had a better roster than the '96 Bulls but the '96 Bulls ended up winning 72 games and beat them in the Finals 'cause of team chemistry, if they could end up winning championships with f'ing Luc Longley and Scott Williams at starting center I think they could beat anybody,the '80s/'90s was the golden era of basketball, most of the players who were on the the NBA 50 Roster played during the '80s/90s, it was like hip-hop in the '80s/90s, the mcs and players that got slept on during that era are probably better than most out there today, Wilt Chamberlin and Bill Russell won all those championships respectfully 'cause there was less talent and less teams, it's actually harder to win in later years 'cause there's more teams out there and there's more talent, there was an immense amount of talent out there, you can't just have a team of all stars and win, maybe in a video game yes but not in reality, not to knock how great those players were but come on now with all those guys they'd argue about who gets the ball more, everyone on the Bulls knew their role, they knew how to play fundemental basketball, it's actually good to have a couple all-stars/hall of famers and a bunch of role players, and in the end Jordan always delivered when the game was on the line, maybe Magic would be that guy on the Lakers but the Bulls shut him down before in reality,it was actually a blessing that Bulls didn't have a team of all-stars 'cause if they did they wouldn't win as much as they did, it'd be too much ego clashing

I just looked it up to make sure... the Lakers started the 03-04 season going 20-5... When Karl Malone got injured, they went 22-18... So yes, going by paper and knowing all the facts, it wasn't beyond the realm of possibility for the Lakers to lose to Detroit since Karl Malone was injured and hobled the entire series. Devean George also missed a game or two. To prove my point, can you name the players the Lakers played in Karl Malone and Devean George's stead? A lot of people thought... oh, 4 HOFs... that should be easy... didn't take injuries and role players into consideration. Serves them right for underestimating their opponents...

But that's not the case with these teams, we're talking about all of these players healthy and at their best (Prime) when they were with these teams. No injuries... nothing like that. There's no argument for "team chemistry" either. This is a composite of the best players of those teams... they don't have time to practice together to develop team chemistry. Jordan doesn't have time to play with Andres Nochioni and Luog Deng... Ron Harper and Scottie Pippen don't have time learn how Kirk Hinrich likes to come off his screens... Magic doesn't have time to practice entry passes with Wilt and Shaq... here's no argument to be made for team chemistry... this is a composite team... it's talent against talent... And people believed that the Bulls had more talent than the Celtics composite team and the Lakers composite team. In reality, there's no intangible that would give a series between these two teams to the Bulls... people are going to look for one, not because they think that the Bulls are a better team... but because they want the Bulls to be the better team... because the Bulls are all they know...

It really amazes me that people actually think that the composite Bulls team is more talented than both the Laker and Celtics teams... could win a series if the players were just thrown together... With Wilt, Shaq, and Kareem rotating as centers and power forwards... :shakehead:

[Chief]

Bill Wenington

[MaxFly]

Bill Wenington

Lol

[bigted]

Well the Bulls couldn't beat the Knicks without Jordan in '94, they were very good team and they had a lot of chemistry but Jordan was a clutch player, they were missing him at the end of the games, the Bulls would probably still make the playoffs from '96-98 without Jordan too but they sure wouldn't win a championship in those years, you need the combination of Jordan's clutchness and the role players playing their roles to win, in the '80s he was very good but the reason that a lot of the reasons why the Bulls couldn't win championships 'cause the rosters on those Bulls teams was too much of a revolving door, if players play together a long time they could win, usually that's how dynasties are, the Bulls were a special team and Jordan was a special player, and now how could somebody who scored basically 30 points a game and win 6 championship rings in the golden age of basketball be overhyped? He made the playoffs basically every year

too, getting away from just championships, that's an accomplishment in itself too, just making the playoffs for the Bulls was an accomplishment, he brought excitement immediately to the team from his rookie year, they were only winning like 20 games a year for a while when he got drafted, all the things that Jordan did it's hard to say he was overhyped, he deserves to mentioned as the greatest, a lot of the older players and younger players would tell you so too, considering all the hype a lot of these players get today it's hard to really call him overhyped, that's like calling LL Cool J overhyped when rappers like 50 Cent get much more hype when they haven't really done anything special musically that LL's never done