30 For 30 On Michael Jordan: The Last Dance

[Guest Lobo]

Well to bring it all full circle, how about a raging debate on whether or not Jordan would have beaten Houston those two years for two more titles, had he not "retired"?  I know he was technically back for the '95 playoffs but everybody, including Jackson and Jordan, admit he wasn't ready to compete at that level after almost two years away from the game.

[Goo Punch 4275]

 

[Iceman 2978]

Wennington said Jordan was “chalky white.” With the flu/ sick.

 

lolz

[TexasMan 11455]

 

 

Me. MJ. Same but different. 

[TexasMan 11455]

 

[Radical Larry 28820]

 

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

Steve Kerr was a fucking dog throughout his career. I don’t know if the stats would back it up, but definitely one of the best shooters ever 

[TexasMan 11455]

 

[texaslong 678]

43 minutes ago, TexasMan said:

 

Savage

[Radical Larry 28820]

 

[MrBig 5627]

1 hour ago, youdunnf'dup said:

Steve Kerr was a fucking dog throughout his career. I don’t know if the stats would back it up, but definitely one of the best shooters ever 

That 4-peat he pulled off as a player was pretty nice. 

[texaslong 678]

Awesome documentary.

[Trey3216 15452]

4 minutes ago, texaslong said:

Awesome documentary.

Yep.  It’s like having to say goodbye to my childhood again. 

[TexasMan 11455]

Pearl Jam's Present Tense. What a deep cut. 

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 hour ago, youdunnf'dup said:

Steve Kerr was a fucking dog throughout his career. I don’t know if the stats would back it up, but definitely one of the best shooters ever 

I believe he has the best 3P% in the history of the game, so congratulations?

[gmr548 16697]

1 hour ago, youdunnf'dup said:

Steve Kerr was a fucking dog throughout his career. I don’t know if the stats would back it up, but definitely one of the best shooters ever 

Pretty sure he's the NBA record holder for three-point percentage. I know he had a season or two above.500 which is just goofy.

[Aqua Buddha 14806]

If you watched this and still think GS is the best team of all time, I don’t know what to tell you.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

33 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

I believe he has the best 3P% in the history of the game, so congratulations?

 

27 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Pretty sure he's the NBA record holder for three-point percentage. I know he had a season or two above.500 which is just goofy.

Haha well there you go. I feel like his name rarely gets brought up when people talk about the best shooter ever

[TommyGufano 6023]

I'm not saying Kerr didn't have an absolute flame thrower. He did. But he loaded up (by his standards; he didn't play/shoot a ton) on 3s in the years they moved the 3pt line up.

[TommyGufano 6023]

40 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

If you watched this and still think GS is the best team of all time, I don’t know what to tell you.

But do they give Chicago as good of a series as the '98 Pacers?

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 minute ago, TommyGufano said:

I'm not saying Kerr didn't have an absolute flame thrower. He did. But he loaded up (by his standards; he didn't play/shoot a ton) on 3s in the years they moved the 3pt line up.

He was also strictly a spot up shooter.  He created nothing for himself.  Didn’t have the ball in his hand with :03 left on the shot clock and was asked to make something happen.  He would tell you Steph is a better shooter despite having a lower percentage.  He was still a great shooter.

[conVINCEd 21477]

55 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

If you watched this and still think GS is the best team of all time, I don’t know what to tell you.

It’s them or the Shaq/Kobe Lakers as to who would be the best matchup from teams since then.   Maybe one of the Spurs teams, I would have to go back and look at those teams to determine which one.   It’s difficult to compare eras.  Would the Bulls ditch the traditional center if  GS was their biggest threat and compose their roster differently?  Would the Bulls have made a trade for someone to guard Shaq? Would Chicago play Rodman like Draymond if their wasn’t a big threat at center in the league?  Lots of questions.  I would still pick the Bulls.

[Hate 20247]

7 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

It’s them or the Shaq/Kobe Lakers as to who would be the best matchup from teams since then.   Maybe one of the Spurs teams, I would have to go back and look at those teams to determine which one.   It’s difficult to compare eras.  Would the Bulls ditch the traditional center if  GS was their biggest threat and compose their roster differently?  Would the Bulls have made a trade for someone to guard Shaq? Would Chicago play Rodman like Draymond if their wasn’t a big threat at center in the league?  Lots of questions.  I would still pick the Bulls.

I know I'm a homer, but the 2005 Spurs team could have given them a run for their money.  They had peak Duncan, Manu, and Tony.  They also had Bruce Bowen to guard Michael.  He would have made Jordan work for his 30+.  They also had some good role players like Robert Horry, Brent Barry, and Malik Rose.  I'm not saying that they win, but they do present some matchup problems for those Bulls. 

Edited May 18, 2020 by Hate

[ChickenSandwich 9958]

4-1 Bulls over that Spur team.  Peak Rodman with 80s-90s rules helps slow Duncan. The rest is inconsequential 

Would rather have seen Bulls Rockets in those lost years with Dream in his prime.

Edited May 18, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

7 hours ago, Hate said:

I know I'm a homer, but the 2005 Spurs team could have given them a run for their money.  They had peak Duncan, Manu, and Tony.  They also had Bruce Bowen to guard Michael.  He would have made Jordan work for his 30+.  They also had some good role players like Robert Horry, Brent Barry, and Malik Rose.  I'm not saying that they win, but they do present some matchup problems for those Bulls. 

 

10 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

4-1 Bulls over that Spur team.  Peak Rodman with 80s-90s rules helps slow Duncan. The rest is inconsequential 

Would rather have seen Bulls Rockets in those lost years with Dream in his prime.

Guys, I don’t know if happened to learn this from watching the doc, but I did...

Jordan would’ve found a way to pull through. He would’ve taken something someone said out of context (on purpose), found some kind of unrelenting motivation to kick the shit out of either team. 

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

9 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

If you watched this and still think GS is the best team of all time, I don’t know what to tell you.

2017-18 GS (First and 2nd year with KD) beats Chicago if we’re playing under the current NBA rules. Now if they were playing under the rules of the bulls era, I don’t know if they get out of the west.
 

The teams played two entirely different sports. You can’t really compare.

 

Edited May 18, 2020 by youdunnf'dup

[Aqua Buddha 14806]

As for the Bulls vs. GS, don't forget that the Bulls were largely a finesse team (compared to the rest of the league) who learned how to play physical.  Pippen, Grant, Rodman, etc. were all very athletic.  Even Luc Longley who gets lost in all this could play today.  He could play defense, move, and was a good passer and just massive.  So, it's not like the Bulls would have trouble adapting to GS but GS would have trouble adapting to the Bulls.  By the time he retired, Jordan's playing weight was around 220.  That's about as big as Draymond.  Anyone on Chicago could have guarded anyone on GS.  The opposite isn't true. 

The Bull teams were also great on defense and very long with Pippen, Jordan, and Harper all being 6'6" or bigger. 

 

[Aqua Buddha 14806]

2 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

2017-18 GS (First and 2nd year with KD) beats Chicago if we’re playing under the current NBA rules. Now if they were playing under the rules of the bulls era, I don’t know if they get out of the west.
 

The teams played two entirely different sports. You can’t really compare.

 

Under the current rules, the entire GS back court would be on the bench with foul trouble.  Under the old rules, they'd be in the hospital.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

12 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Under the current rules, the entire GS back court would be on the bench with foul trouble.  Under the old rules, they'd be in the hospital.

If that team couldn’t beat the bulls under the current rules, then KD maybe isn’t as good as I’m giving him credit for. If he really is a top 10-20 all time player/talent, GS finds a way to pull that out IMO. Maybe I’m wrong. But I don’t think the bulls had the shooting to beat GS in 2017 in a 7 game series. 
 

Im saying this, but i guess that would be counting on steph being pre-KD steph, and I don’t know if you can count on that if both are on the floor at the same time.

Edited May 18, 2020 by youdunnf'dup

[Hate 20247]

4-1 Bulls over that Spur team.  Peak Rodman with 80s-90s rules helps slow Duncan. The rest is inconsequential 

Would rather have seen Bulls Rockets in those lost years with Dream in his prime.

4-0 Bulls.

[Don Johnson 4847]

The Ringer argues Jordan couldn't hang with the Warriors.  Neg the article, not me.  I'm just linking for entertainment value.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2020/5/18/21260106/michael-jordan-the-last-dance-evolution

Quote

That difference would be a huge problem for the Bulls in any hypothetical matchup with a modern champion. The 2017-18 Warriors would pack the paint, send multiple defenders at Jordan and Scottie Pippen, and dare players like Ron Harper (28.9 percent from 3 on 1.8 attempts per game) and Dennis Rodman (23.1 percent on 0.4 attempts) to beat them from the perimeter. If Chicago responded by bringing shooters like Steve Kerr and Toni Kukoc off the bench, Golden State would spread the floor to prevent the Bulls from helping them out and then put them in pick-and-rolls against Steph Curry and Kevin Durant. (Imagining how Kerr, the Warriors coach, would strategize against Kerr, the Bulls player, is one of the more mind-bending aspects of these made-up scenarios.)

 

[gmr548 16697]

It’s them or the Shaq/Kobe Lakers as to who would be the best matchup from teams since then.   Maybe one of the Spurs teams, I would have to go back and look at those teams to determine which one.   It’s difficult to compare eras.  Would the Bulls ditch the traditional center if  GS was their biggest threat and compose their roster differently?  Would the Bulls have made a trade for someone to guard Shaq? Would Chicago play Rodman like Draymond if their wasn’t a big threat at center in the league?  Lots of questions.  I would still pick the Bulls.

The Spurs that played Miami in the finals immediately before GS started their run of dominance were playing the Warriors' game. I still can't believe SA lost to Miami the first time and that rematch series was one of the most one sided finals series I've ever seen. Just noncompetitive. I don't know if they'd have beat them, but we never got to see the Spurs play the Warriors with a healthy Leonard, which is a shame.

I do think it comes down to what set of rules you're playing by when it comes to peak Bulls vs GS. Cop out take, I know, but the difference is huge.

[Not a cat 5807]

1 hour ago, youdunnf'dup said:

 

Guys, I don’t know if happened to learn this from watching the doc, but I did...

Jordan would’ve found a way to pull through. He would’ve taken something someone said out of context (on purpose), found some kind of unrelenting motivation to kick the shit out of either team. 

1995- Hakeem told everyone he didn't even need water to beat the Bulls that one time they played during Ramadan.

2005- Duncan's overly polite "good game" after the Spurs' game one victory was obviously sarcasm.

2017- no need to make anything up, Draymond would have punched someone in the nuts.

[Kermit 3162]

1 hour ago, Hate said:

4-0 Bulls.

3-0 Bulls. Spurs would’ve quit after the third game due to Carmen Electra’s pussy juice contaminating their locker room. How did her pussy juice get there? Ask Dennis.

[HoffaJimmy 316]

Great stuff. 

I know it's our nature but the hot take columns are annoying the ever loving shit out of me this morning. 

 

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

23 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I do think it comes down to what set of rules you're playing by when it comes to peak Bulls vs GS. Cop out take, I know, but the difference is huge.

I don’t think it’s a cop out take at all. Both were technically under the NBA umbrella but it was a different sport back then. It’s like when people try to compare wrs or qbs from the 80s to today’s game. You just can’t compare unless we clarify which set of rules we’re playing under. 

[Hate 20247]

3-0 Bulls. Spurs would’ve quit after the third game due to Carmen Electra’s pussy juice contaminating their locker room. How did her pussy juice get there? Ask Dennis.

No, I meant the Bulls would sweep the Rockets. It’s funny that he mentioned Rodman being able to shut down Duncan when Rodman couldn’t even shut down Karl Malone. Rodman isn’t stopping Duncan and he isn’t even slowing him down. Tony Parker would be a huge matchup problem for the Bulls as well. They had a lot of difficulty when they went against great PG’s. A lineup of Parker, Ginobili, Bowen, Horry, and Duncan would have given the Bulls some issues. I’m not claiming that they win, but that 4-1 and it’s all academic statement is ridiculous.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

7 minutes ago, Hate said:

No, I meant the Bulls would sweep the Rockets. It’s funny that he mentioned Rodman being able to shut down Duncan when Rodman couldn’t even shut down Karl Malone. Rodman isn’t stopping Duncan and he isn’t even slowing him down. Tony Parker would be a huge matchup problem for the Bulls as well. They had a lot of difficulty when they went against great PG’s. A lineup of Parker, Ginobili, Bowen, Horry, and Duncan would have given the Bulls some issues. I’m not claiming that they win, but that 4-1 and it’s all academic statement is ridiculous.

Karl Malone was a better offensive player than Duncan, no? Duncan has the better career and was the better player, but Malone was definitely the better scorer if I remember correctly.

[conVINCEd 21477]

4 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

Karl Malone was a better offensive player than Duncan, no? Duncan has the better career and was the better player, but Malone was definitely the better scorer if I remember correctly.

He probably had a higher scoring average, but he did most of his damage in transition and in pick and rolls.  Duncan was the superior post player.

[Hate 20247]

One could argue that sure. Malone was a great scorer as his place on the all time scoring standings points out. I don’t think the difference between 1998 Malone and 2005 Duncan is all that substantial though, IMO. I think the biggest difference was in FT shooting as Duncan was inexplicably bad during that part of his career.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

10 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

He probably had a higher scoring average, but he did most of his damage in transition and in pick and rolls.  Duncan was the superior post player.

Fair enough. I just know he is (or was) the all time leading scorer, so I just assumed that part of his game was virtually untouchable. Too young to really remember him during that time.

Edited May 18, 2020 by youdunnf'dup

[TommyGufano 6023]

Just now, youdunnf'dup said:

Fair enough. I just know he is (or was) the all time leading scorer, so I just assumed that part of his game was virtually untouchable.

never caught KAJ.

And  for whoever referenced "peak Rodman" -- he never played for the Bulls

[Kermit 3162]

Rodman willing taking on tough defensive assignments is a bizarre concept to a Spurs fan. I’m glad it worked out for the Pistons and the Bulls though.

[Hate 20247]

Yeah, here’s an interesting article about Rodman in SA. I don’t know that everyone recalls just how disruptive he was including basically quitting on the Spurs in the 1995 WCF. The Spurs did not have the team in place to handle Rodman like the Bulls and Pistons did.  
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1995-10-08-9510080118-story,amp.html

[Paul Wesley 3313]

14 hours ago, Mdhorn said:

Does it matter to you that Houston had a better team than Orlando which kind of matters?  

A few things about those '95 Rockets, one of my all-time favorite sports teams.  Any of y'all who aren't interested in a Rockets fan blathering on a Michael Jordan thread, just scroll down.

The '95 Rockets had a very ugly regular season , especially considering that they were the defending NBA champion.  Kenny Smith has talked about an arrogance and self-satisfaction that crept into the team that year.  They suddenly felt that their practice facilities weren't good enough, their hotels weren't good enough, their flights weren't good enough, etc.  

Late in that season, they traded Otis Thorpe for Clyde Drexler.  It was a Hail Mary trade.  Thorpe wasn't much of a scorer, but he was a very athletic 4, and he allowed the Rockets to match up against teams like Detroit and New York, who were still playing the very physical style of bully-ball (which was about to go out of fashion in favor of speed and 3-point shooting, though I'm not sure NBA fans knew that at the time).  Houston management, to their credit, saw the writing on the wall... they were likely headed for a very early exit from the playoffs.  Even after that trade, the Rockets limped along.  They had a sub-.500 record in the last 35 games of the regular season.  They were a very mediocre team by any metric.

On top of losing Thorpe, their starting 2-guard, Vernon Maxwell, who was a fierce perimeter defender and among the best 3-point shooters in the league, started pouting, faking injuries, and became a locker-room cancer.  He resented losing minutes to Drexler, and he quit the team after their first playoff game.  

So one game into the 1995 playoffs, the Rockets were the 6 seed, without two of their most essential ingredients from their championship the year before, and they were playing sub-.500 basketball even after the arrival of Drexler.  I don't know what kind of odds you cold have gotten in Vegas for them to repeat as champions, but they weren't even in the discussion of who the favorites were.  They were 6-11 in the regular season against the four teams they would eventually face in the playoffs.

What followed was one of the most unlikely playoff runs in the history of team sports.  They played the four teams with the four best regular-season records in the league, giving up home-court advantage in every round.  They set an NBA record for road wins in the playoffs, which is a mark unlikely to be broken.  They got an absolutely transcendent performance from Hakeem.  You could make a hall-of-fame caliber highlight reel using only his footage from that one-month period.  

Their draft picks from the prior years proved prescient.  Neither Robert Horry nor Sam Cassell was a lottery guy or an especially dazzling pick on draft day.  Each had careers far beyond the players drafted around them.  Their roster also had journeymen like former 7th-round pick Mario Elie, one of the league's very first "3 and D" players (which wasn't really a "thing" at the time either).  They were one of the first NBA teams to say, "We're going to spread you out and put 4 guys on the floor who can shoot threes."

Anyway, I'm writing all this in response to the suggestion that "Houston had a better team than Orlando."  Which is true in the same way that it's true that the Nationals had a better team than the Astros last year.  Those Nationals played better **at the time that it counted**, they got more clutch hits, they got more clutch pitching, they won games on the road where they were huge underdogs.  But if you were going to auction/trade away the whole roster, they definitely wouldn't have been "better" than the team they beat.

The '95 Magic were universally considered to be the future of the NBA.  Hardaway was considered the next Magic Johnson (he fell short largely due to injuries), Shaq was maybe the most coveted draft pick in NBA history, and the Magic lived up to their moniker when their ping-pong ball landed him.  The league actually re-wrote the lottery rules because of how powerful upstart Orlando had suddenly become, mostly due to the luck of the Shaq draft.  In addition to the best young point guard and the best young center, they had Horace Grant in the prime of his career.  Dennis Johnson was a great spot-up shooter, and Nick Anderson was an athletic young scorer.  Before the playoffs, probably every GM in the league would have traded his roster for Orlando's.  After the playoffs, they STILL would have picked Orlando's, because they were younger, more talented, and had way more upside than any team in the league, including Houston.

So sure, in hindsight, maybe we'd have to agree that Houston was better because they peaked at precisely the right moment, they got one of the great playoff performances in history from a Hall-of-Famer, and they got ridiculously clutch performances from 4 or 5 journeymen on a very pedestrian bench.  

But starting the 1995 playoffs, there were 7 or 8 teams in the league "better" than Houston, and that included Jordan's Bulls, who would have run into the same buzz saw that Orlando did, even if those Bulls could have made it out of the East.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

One thing I learned in this doc that i feel like a lot of younger people learned us, I think I may have kind of slept on Scottie Pippen’s career while he was on the bulls. I knew he was all star caliber and I knew he was named one of the 50 greatest players in that list they made almost 20 years ago, but I always just kind of assumed that was by default. That the all star player on the greatest dynasty had to be listed as one of the 50 greatest players simply by default. I didn’t realize he was probably a top 5 player throughout his prime. Had no idea. 

[Mitch Cumsteen 18963]

10 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

One thing I learned in this doc that i feel like a lot of younger people learned us, I think I may have kind of slept on Scottie Pippen’s career while he was on the bulls. I knew he was all star caliber and I knew he was named one of the 50 greatest players in that list they made almost 20 years ago, but I always just kind of assumed that was by default. That the all star player on the greatest dynasty had to be listed as one of the 50 greatest players simply by default. I didn’t realize he was probably a top 5 player throughout his prime. Had no idea. 

Pippen never really got his due even when he was playing. Jordan's star burned so bright that he couldn't help but be caught in the shadows. For his career, Pippen made three All-NBA first teams and two of them were in the two years that MJ was "retired."

Pippen's game wasn't really the type to be overly celebrated either because he wasn't a big scorer and never stuffed the stat sheet. His career numbers were 16, 5 and 6. He only had a few seasons where he eclipsed 20 ppg.  He was more of a facilitator on offense and he was just absolutely suffocating on defense. But he was maybe the best glue guy, ever. Pretty much anything you needed to get done to help you win a basketball game that didn't show up in the box score, he was fucking great at.

That said, I'm not sure he was a perennial top 5 player in the league. During that era, nobody would have taken him over Hakeem or David Robinson or Jordan or Barkley or Karl Malone. Well, maybe Karl Malone because he was such a dickhead. But Pippen wasn't considered to be better than guys like Drexler or even Dominique back then. He was never considered to be a superstar that you could build a team around. He was the greatest #2 ever, but does that make him a true top 5 player? In fact, doesn't that kind of argue that he wasn't? 

[Iceman 2978]

Pippen being recognized on the 41st best player EVER in the NBA is pretty damned "due"

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/833472-nbas-50-greatest-players-remix-what-will-the-list-look-like-on-nbas-75-b-day

 

For me the quitting on his team post-MJ  and the Houston experience were 2 major blemishes on his career.  He still gets props though.

Edited May 18, 2020 by Iceman

[MAUFRAIS 6739]

What weirdly sticks in my mind about pippen was that he banked it in a lot.

[texaslong 678]

I bust out laughing when Bird and the Pacers thought they were going to beat Jordan and the Bulls in game 7, and Bird came over after the game to give MJ props. They both were laughing and Jordan says "You bitch, fuck you," and they start laughing. The greats were all good friends away from the game, but wanted to destroy each other on the court. That's what is missing from todays game.