DESTROYING The MYTH That Michael Jordan Dominated A WEAK ERA

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

Mike avg like 35 a game vs the mighty Celtics being on a shytty team. I posted MJ stats vs Hakeem didn't I?

Again, both MJ and Hakeem played great against each other. Mike scores and assisted more like a guard should do. Hakeem grabbed a lot more rebounds and blocked a lot more shots like a center should do, and Hakeem shot noticeably better from the field. Again, the rockets also won that matchup more than they lost as well. It was not like what we saw with Hakeem dominating his matchups with Patrick and Robinson in 1994 and 1995. Centers don’t match up head to head against guards when teams play. As for Boston, the bulls got their asses kicked 2 out of 3 games. They got outscored by 27 over the last 3 quarters of game 1 on the way to a 19 point loss, and the bulls were down by 28 after 3 quarters in game 3 with mike scoring 19 and fouling out. The scoring is less impressive when 2 of the 3 games are blowouts. The bulls did not dominate every team they saw and Michael didn’t clamp down every great player the bulls faced like 2009 Darrelle Revis with every receiver he saw that season.

 

[Remote]

To clarify,

I am not suggesting that Michael Jordan is not the best player ever. Whether you're a casual fan judging greatness on how many rings they win, or whether you are more of an objective numbers guy....all measures....ALL MEASURES (even the analytics this board hates so much) supports Jordan as being the best, or one of the top few to ever play in the NBA.

But this idea that you can't even question things...that makes no sense. People are legit insulted that there may be a few scratches in Jordan's armor. I mean, grow up.

 

[Diondon]

Again, both MJ and Hakeem played great against each other. Mike scores and assisted more like a guard should do. Hakeem grabbed a lot more rebounds and blocked a lot more shots like a center should do, and Hakeem shot noticeably better from the field. Again, the rockets also won that matchup more than they lost as well. It was not like what we saw with Hakeem dominating his matchups with Patrick and Robinson in 1994 and 1995. Centers don’t match up head to head against guards when teams play. As for Boston, the bulls got their asses kicked 2 out of 3 games. They got outscored by 27 over the last 3 quarters of game 1 on the way to a 19 point loss, and the bulls were down by 28 after 3 quarters in game 3 with mike scoring 19 and fouling out. The scoring is less impressive when 2 of the 3 games are blowouts. The bulls did not dominate every team they saw and Michael didn’t clamp down every great player the bulls faced like 2009 Darrelle Revis with every receiver he saw that season.

Yeah, the Bulls didn;t stand a chance against Boston back then. They were the 8 seed I think.

 

[Diondon]

To clarify,

I am not suggesting that Michael Jordan is not the best player ever. Whether you're a casual fan judging greatness on how many rings they win, or whether you are more of an objective numbers guy....all measures....ALL MEASURES (even the analytics this board hates so much) supports Jordan as being the best, or one of the top few to ever play in the NBA.

But this idea that you can't even question things...that makes no sense. People are legit insulted that there may be a few scratches in Jordan's armor. I mean, grow up.

Of course you can question stuff. Mike has had bad shooting games. Mike has lost playoff series. That observation became a famous quote of his. But we look at careers objectively on a whole. To say MJ dominated a "weak" era when he played against the greatest players of all time is an insult. This era is defensively worse (we can all admit that) and Lebron can't even dominate that.

 

[idonttouchgrass]

the 2013 spurs would wash every team jordan played in the finals. the 2014 spurs vs the bulls is a toss up.

jordan is still the goat by far

Spoiler

until durant returns to gsw healthy

 

[Sunalmighty]

SInce y'all love deferring to people who played the game so much. Dr. J, Larry Bird, and Magic all talking about expansion diluting the league. Hell, players during that era will say the same shyt.

Hell, even Michael Jordan himself was downplaying the Bulls in '91 before they won the title, saying they really weren't that great and were beating up on expansion teams

If you criticize Jordan's titles due to the expansion era, you have to criticize every superstar that won a title. Starting with Olajuwon since Houston ONLY won 2 because Mike retired

 

[Gravity]

From 1991-2003, the bulls were the only eastern team to win a title. The only team to beat them had the huge advantage of signing Horace Grant away as a free agent while the bulls didn’t find an adequate replacement for him until the next season. The second best player on the second best team in the east from 1991-98 was John Starks. This was a bad period of time for the east. You had 2 years of the magic as legit contenders (1 of which was ruined by injury in the playoffs) and that was it outside the bulls over a span of 13 years. This need to prop up the Knicks and pacers is pitiful.

The second best player on the current nba champs is either pascal siakam or Kyle Lowry. And that's using your childish, simple, stupid ass "logic".