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.
What are you talking about? The Bulls were on the up from the moment they got Jordan. That shot was only consequential in the sense that instead of losing to the Cavs, they would lose to the Pistons instead. Which they did for 3 consecutive years before breaking through in 1991. There's no reason to think if there was no 'the shot' in Cleveland that the Bulls would have broken up or regressed. I mean, this is almost as baseless as saying that if Jordan had missed the shot, that he wold have retired afterwards or something. This is simply baseless conjecture on your part.
So you don't agree that big losses in the postseason leads to huge changes? What i'm saying is maybe one of the starting players would have been traded because sometimes GM's feel that they are under pressure to make moves. No GM's does nothing after a big playoff loss
So you don't agree that big losses in the postseason leads to huge changes? What i'm saying is maybe one of the starting players would have been traded because sometimes GM's feel that they are under pressure to make moves. No GM's does nothing after a big playoff loss
The bulls roster still changed after that, lets not forget the person MJ gets hugged by first, is none other than the immortal Brad Sellers
The bulls roster still changed after that, lets not forget the person MJ gets hugged by first, is none other than the immortal Brad Sellers
After that buzzer beater loss, the Cavs next 2 season were
42 wins in 89-90 season-1st round playoff exit
33 wins in 90-91 season-no playoffs
So the Bulls would have probably have made the Finals in 1993 instead of 1991. That's what I mean, the franchise would have taken a step back and would have had to work hard to get back to where they were
So you don't agree that big losses in the postseason leads to huge changes? What i'm saying is maybe one of the starting players would have been traded because sometimes GM's feel that they are under pressure to make moves. No GM's does nothing after a big playoff loss
I'm not saying it doesn't, but you're making a bold statement saying that missing that shot would have disrupted the course of history over the following decade. I can accept the ripple in the lake theory, but you have no hard evidence to say that missing that shot would have disrupted the Bulls dynasty before it got off the ground.
Bear in mind that losing to the Pistons for 3 consecutive years would make for a far more demoralizing situation that missing the shot in Cleveland. Yet the Bulls persevered, Phil Jackson took over as coach, Jordan came into his prime, Pippen and Grant came of age, so on and so on, and the rest is history. So I repeat that your comment is conjecture, you're making a huge presumption with no real tangible evidence to support it. I mean, why not say that if Jordan had missed the shot, that the Cavs and not the Bulls would have gone on dominate the 90s. It's just as much baseless assumption as your theory.
After that buzzer beater loss, the Cavs next 2 season were
42 wins in 89-90 season-1st round playoff exit
33 wins in 90-91 season-no playoffs
So the Bulls would have probably have made the Finals in 1993 instead of 1991. That's what I mean, the franchise would have taken a step back and would have had to work hard to get back to where they were
lol, I don't even know how you come up with this stuff.
After that buzzer beater loss, the Cavs next 2 season were
42 wins in 89-90 season-1st round playoff exit
33 wins in 90-91 season-no playoffs
So the Bulls would have probably have made the Finals in 1993 instead of 1991. That's what I mean, the franchise would have taken a step back and would have had to work hard to get back to where they were
This is nonsensical. You bring up the Cavs records, and then this leads you to conclude that this somehow would have prevented the bulls from making the finals for an extra two seasons. ON WHAT BASIS? Why do you equate the Cavs fortunes with the Bulls, as if their fates are tied to each other?!! One has NOTHING to do with the other.
lol, I don't even know how you come up with this stuff.
Seriously, it is complete BS. Personally I think TVSG is one hell of a troll, most spew blatant nonsense but this guy actually sounds convincing that he believes the crap he comes up with.
Seriously, it is complete BS. Personally I think TVSG is one hell of a troll, most spew blatant nonsense but this guy actually sounds convincing that he believes the crap he comes up with.
Right, if I didn't truly believe TVSG believed what he posts, then I would have to ban him for being so troll like with the illogical thought trains. But I do believe he is genuine which makes him within our rules....
Kind of a side note but like math guy I was living in Chicago (hyde park) during the Jordan era. IMO the Bulls did not become truly dominant until they acquired Dennis Rodman in 1995 (by that time I had moved from Chgo however, so never got to see them except on TV).
The Bulls won their first title against an injury-depleted Lakers team. Both Magic & Worthy were struggling with injury and Sam Perkins had to become the go-to guy for the finals. Also remember the finals against Portland, it got so bad that Jackson took out the regulars and put in all bench players. The bench brought them back from the brink of defeat and they went on to win the game and title. I remember a team that often froze up on offense. So often you'd see Jordan flinging up threes towards the end of the game, and when that happened I knew it was probably going to be an 'L.'
I always thought the team could have won another title if they had kept the team together one more year. That was 1999 lockout season, and Jordan, Jackson, Pippen, and Rodman all decided to split. Jordan would have been about 36, Pippen 35, and Rodman 38, so it's tough to say.
Kind of a side note but like math guy I was living in Chicago (hyde park) during the Jordan era. IMO the Bulls did not become truly dominant until they acquired Dennis Rodman in 1995 (by that time I had moved from Chgo however, so never got to see them except on TV).
The Bulls won their first title against an injury-depleted Lakers team. Both Magic & Worthy were struggling with injury and Sam Perkins had to become the go-to guy for the finals. Also remember the finals against Portland, it got so bad that Jackson took out the regulars and put in all bench players. The bench brought them back from the brink of defeat and they went on to win the game and title. I remember a team that often froze up on offense. So often you'd see Jordan flinging up threes towards the end of the game, and when that happened I knew it was probably going to be an 'L.'
I always thought the team could have won another title if they had kept the team together one more year. That was 1999 lockout season, and Jordan, Jackson, Pippen, and Rodman all decided to split. Jordan would have been about 36, Pippen 35, and Rodman 38, so it's tough to say.
They just barely beat the Jazz in 1998 so I doubt very seriously if they would have won again. Remember Game 6 of the NBA Finals when the Jazz was in full control late in the game and turned the ball over?
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.
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.
