U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-05-2018, 03:37 PM
 
11,679 posts, read 7,043,561 times
Reputation: 6387

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
I donít see why itís so difficult understand that massive, rapid expansion without a corresponding expansion of the talent pool is going to lead to a diluted league. Most great players from bygone eras would be great players in any era, but there were a lot of players from Jordanís prime would not have been in the league in previous or subsequent eras. Prime John Starks doesnít start for any playoff team in 1986 or 2006.
Thereís no way to empirically measure the impact of this supposed ďdilutedĒ league and/or how to factor that in when judging a playerís accomplishments. I canít automatically assume that Michael Jordan is a genetically inferior athlete because John Starksí skill set isnít as valued in todayís NBA One could also argue that elite players (top 10) in todayís NBA can simply join other top 10 players which negates the competive difficuties of opposing role players being more skilled. Some teams in fact donít even start more stars than role players - I.e. the Warriors with Curry/Durant/Green/Klay (arguably all top 20 players). If elite players are more easily arranged onto certain teams (for example, Lebron/Wade/Bosh ó->Lebron/Kyrie/Love 6 months later) than why does it matter if role players are more skilled?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2018, 08:08 PM
 
51,901 posts, read 41,783,059 times
Reputation: 32374
For the first 3 championships Jordan had Pippen.

Horace grant went to ONE all-star game his entire career.

So mentioning him as some sort of "force" for Chicago is a complete joke.
The rest of the Bulls squad was "decent".

The second 3 championships with Rodman was by far the stronger supporting cast as it also had a developed Toni Kukoc.

LOL....look at the talent level of the teams the Bulls beat for their first championship...I mean pssssh....whose that Magic Johnson dude anyway? LOL. Then you have the fact that the Bulls kept Malone\Stockton and a VERY good Jazz team from ever getting a ring....oh and that Suns team that had Barkley, Ainge, KJ, Marjle etc. that team was stacked as heck.

Bottom line is that Jordan won his first 3 championships with one other HOF level player and a very very marginal all-star level player plus a bunch of ok players. That's not a stacked team by any measure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2018, 08:42 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,269,370 times
Reputation: 7950
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
For the sake of clarity; this is not a knock on Jordan, but rather a critique of the SIX RINGZ narrative. Jordan has six rings because he played in a weak era. The addition of Charlotte, Orlando, Miami, Toronto and Vancouver severely diluted the NBA talent pool, and teams hadn't really tapped into the international market.
As a Bulls fan, I actually tend to agree with this. I do think the Sonics and Blazers were better than you give credit. Clyde Drexler was a great player who scored, rebounded, and passed (6.1 rebounds, 5.6 assists over his career, which was very close to what MJ had). Drexler couldn't shoot from distance, but then neither could Jordan.


Another point is that several of the Bulls titles were won only in precarious fashion. The first one was against a Lakers team that was so banged up that Sam Perkins became their go to guy. The Portland series was looking lost in a game when Phil Jackson in desperation pulled the starters and brought in bench players en masse. The bench players miraculously recovered the lead, and the Bulls went on to win in 6.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2018, 08:44 PM
 
7,702 posts, read 4,557,747 times
Reputation: 8414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
For the first 3 championships Jordan had Pippen.

Horace grant went to ONE all-star game his entire career.

So mentioning him as some sort of "force" for Chicago is a complete joke.
The rest of the Bulls squad was "decent".

The second 3 championships with Rodman was by far the stronger supporting cast as it also had a developed Toni Kukoc.

LOL....look at the talent level of the teams the Bulls beat for their first championship...I mean pssssh....whose that Magic Johnson dude anyway? LOL. Then you have the fact that the Bulls kept Malone\Stockton and a VERY good Jazz team from ever getting a ring....oh and that Suns team that had Barkley, Ainge, KJ, Marjle etc. that team was stacked as heck.

Bottom line is that Jordan won his first 3 championships with one other HOF level player and a very very marginal all-star level player plus a bunch of ok players. That's not a stacked team by any measure.
Horace Grant’s advanced metrics were insane for that first 3-peat.

90-91: 3rd in the league Ortg.
91-92: 1st in Ortg, 7th in Drtg, 3rd in fg%, 5th in TS%, 6th offensive reb%, 3rd in winshares, 5th in box +/-, 6th in VORP.
92-93: 5th Oreb%

In the season his Orlando Magic beat #45 Jordan in the playoffs:
2nd in Ortg
3rd in fg%

He was also 4-time All Defensive 2nd team (behind the greatest defender in the history of the position). Grant was a beast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2018, 10:21 PM
 
11,679 posts, read 7,043,561 times
Reputation: 6387
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post


Another point is that several of the Bulls titles were won only in precarious fashion. The first one was against a Lakers team that was so banged up that Sam Perkins became their go to guy. The Portland series was looking lost in a game when Phil Jackson in desperation pulled the starters and brought in bench players en masse. The bench players miraculously recovered the lead, and the Bulls went on to win in 6.
If we nit pick the way titles were won, could we bring up Popovich leaving Duncan on the bench which resulted in Ray Allen’s shot? That was the craziest 30 seconds in finals history considering the Spurs were up 5 and they were already preparing for the trophy presentation. What about the craziness that led to Draymond’s suspension for gam 5? If Lebron and Co could follow these seemingly lucky breaks up with wins over these same teams the following year, perhaps luck wouldn’t even be mentioned. However, both the Spurs and Warriors followed their disappointing loses up by thrashing the Heat/Cavs.

A 3 peat team undeniably goes down as a dynasty in any era...a 2x 3 peat team...well damn, you’re a bad man if involved with that. There’s probably a high degree of mental focus/toughness that goes into such dominance...beyond the stats, era, play style, etc. When looked at as a whole, the word luck isn’t used much when discussing 3 peat teams.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2018, 01:57 PM
 
51,901 posts, read 41,783,059 times
Reputation: 32374
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
Horace Grantís advanced metrics were insane for that first 3-peat.

90-91: 3rd in the league Ortg.
91-92: 1st in Ortg, 7th in Drtg, 3rd in fg%, 5th in TS%, 6th offensive reb%, 3rd in winshares, 5th in box +/-, 6th in VORP.
92-93: 5th Oreb%

In the season his Orlando Magic beat #45 Jordan in the playoffs:
2nd in Ortg
3rd in fg%

He was also 4-time All Defensive 2nd team (behind the greatest defender in the history of the position). Grant was a beast.
...and yet despite his 91-92 season with #1 Ortg and #7 Drtg....he didn't even make 3rd team all-nba.

That's because he only averaged 14ppg and got most of that on wide open dunks and putbacks because there were 3 guys collapsing on Jordan.

He was a "C-" Offensive player and "A" Defensive player that scooped up all his offensive "stats" weakside rebounding and getting his plate set for him. (advanced metrics are entirely misleading for a 10FGA player that plays alongside of the two greatest offensive threats of that era and were a "4th option" scorer.)

Again, the guy never made an all-nba team.

Golden State RIGHT NOW has 4 starters that have made the all-nba team.
Cleveland had 3 until the KI Trade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2018, 02:46 PM
 
7,702 posts, read 4,557,747 times
Reputation: 8414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
...and yet despite his 91-92 season with #1 Ortg and #7 Drtg....he didn't even make 3rd team all-nba.

That's because he only averaged 14ppg and got most of that on wide open dunks and putbacks because there were 3 guys collapsing on Jordan.

He was a "C-" Offensive player and "A" Defensive player that scooped up all his offensive "stats" weakside rebounding and getting his plate set for him. (advanced metrics are entirely misleading for a 10FGA player that plays alongside of the two greatest offensive threats of that era and were a "4th option" scorer.)

Again, the guy never made an all-nba team.

Golden State RIGHT NOW has 4 starters that have made the all-nba team.
Cleveland had 3 until the KI Trade.
He never made all-nba because the basketball writers of the day overvalued scoring. No chance Draymond Green made All-NBA in the 90ís. Grant was somewhere between a prime Shawn Marion and Deandre Jordan. If he played today, heíd get a couple all-nbaís and a max deal.

The double teaming of Michael Jordan is largely overstated. Illegal defense rules of his era made double teaming far less common than in the modern NBA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2018, 03:39 PM
 
11,679 posts, read 7,043,561 times
Reputation: 6387
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
He never made all-nba because the basketball writers of the day overvalued scoring. No chance Draymond Green made All-NBA in the 90’s. Grant was somewhere between a prime Shawn Marion and Deandre Jordan. If he played today, he’d get a couple all-nba’s and a max deal.

The double teaming of Michael Jordan is largely overstated. Illegal defense rules of his era made double teaming far less common than in the modern NBA.
Well in 1992 Dennis Rodman made 3rd team all NBA while averaging a glorious 9.8 ppg.

And really, who do unquestionably leave off to include Horace Grant? Let’s take 1991 for example - Grant averages 12.8 ppg/8.4 rpg. Ok, well here are your all NBA selections...

1st team: MJ, Magic, DRob, Malone, Barkley

2nd team: Mullin, Nique, Ewing, Drexler, Kevin Johnson

3rd team: Bernard King, James Worthy, Hakeem, Dumars, Stockton

What forward drops for Grant? Bernard King who put up 28/5/5 on 47% shooting? If Bernard does come off the list is Grant the next man up? Why not Rodman who won DPOY in 91? Buck Williams would probably say he has a case over Grant too. He put up 12/9 on 60% shooting...good defender too.

Last edited by eddiehaskell; 04-06-2018 at 03:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2018, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,269,370 times
Reputation: 7950
I remember predicting to my friend that the Bulls would be better w/ Rodman than Grant, because Rodman didn't need touches on offense, which left more for Pippen & Jordan.


Sure enough it was after Rodman that they had the 72 win season. Sometimes less is more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2018, 04:09 PM
 
7,702 posts, read 4,557,747 times
Reputation: 8414
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
Well in 1992 Dennis Rodman made 3rd team all NBA while averaging a glorious 9.8 ppg.

And really, who do unquestionably leave off to include Horace Grant? Letís take 1991 for example - Grant averages 12.8 ppg/8.4 rpg. Ok, well here are your all NBA selections...

1st team: MJ, Magic, DRob, Malone, Barkley

2nd team: Mullin, Nique, Ewing, Drexler, Kevin Johnson

3rd team: Bernard King, James Worthy, Hakeem, Dumars, Stockton

What forward drops for Grant? Bernard King who put up 28/5/5 on 47% shooting? If Bernard does come off the list is Grant the next man up? Why not Rodman who won DPOY in 91? Buck Williams would probably say he has a case over Grant too. He put up 12/9 on 60% shooting...good defender too.
Grant over Worthy in 90-91 and Kevin Willis in 91-92.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top