Rasheed: “MJ wasn’t that good of a defender”

HabitualChiller

Enjoying a Long Night of Solace✌
Supporter
Joined
Oct 27, 2016
Messages
16,661
Reputation
3,805
Daps
51,644
Reppin
Somewhere on an Xbox
I personally don't even know where MJ can be shown to be a great defender outside of his DPOY season because he always was attached to the opposing teams tertiary scoring option once Pippen came into his prime.

And if it wasn't Pippen, it was Ron Harper or BJ Armstrong or someone like that.
 

UpNext

Superstar
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Messages
4,643
Reputation
1,622
Daps
17,287
He gambled a lot and wasn't Bruce Bowen on man to man but he was still above average on man to man defense and great off the ball. Played the passing lanes very well, was great at switching, excellent help defender him and Scottie both could just pressure the shyt out teams with their off ball movement/chemistry and he could give you rim protection from the perimeter with his explosiveness.


I don't understand this take. Few had the physical tools to do what Mike could off the ball.
 

Shadow King

Quiet N***a Loud Choppa
Supporter
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
42,269
Reputation
3,310
Daps
85,486
Reppin
Hometown of Cherokee at Law
He gambled a lot and wasn't Bruce Bowen on man to man but he was still above average on man to man defense and great off the ball. Played the passing lanes very well, was great at switching and could give you rim protection from the perimeter with his explosiveness.


I don't understand this take. Few had the physical tools to do what Mike could off the ball.
The problem is Mike has that Bruce Bowen reputation though. Everything you said is correct but that's not the common narrative.
 

UpNext

Superstar
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Messages
4,643
Reputation
1,622
Daps
17,287
The problem is Mike has that Bruce Bowen reputation though. Everything you said is correct but that's not the common narrative.
I agree he wasn't Bruce Bowen in pure man to man defense, but when it came to off ball, switching, help on the double, closeouts, etc he was more impactful than Bruce was because he had that 48 inch vert, elite footwork and elite lane agility.


I think his defense is underrated because of the focus on one on one man defense, if anything. You still gotta help and play defense when the ball isn't in front of you.
:yeshrug:
 

Shadow King

Quiet N***a Loud Choppa
Supporter
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
42,269
Reputation
3,310
Daps
85,486
Reppin
Hometown of Cherokee at Law
I agree he wasn't Bruce Bowen in pure man to man defense, but when it came to off ball, switching, help on the double, closeouts, etc he was more impactful than Bruce was because he had that 48 inch very and elite lane agility. :yeshrug:
So physical gifts allowing him to take gambles others couldn't. Especially unique in the 80s and even 90s.

You agree he's not Bruce Bowen. Many do not.
 

UpNext

Superstar
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Messages
4,643
Reputation
1,622
Daps
17,287
So physical gifts allowing him to take gambles others couldn't. Especially unique in the 80s and even 90s.

You agree he's not Bruce Bowen. Many do not.
Yeah physical gifts are important. You can't punish him for having them and knowing how to effectively use them. How many guards you seen average 1.5 blocks in a season? Just the one with the 48 and 4.3 running speed with world class balance.:yeshrug:
 

UpNext

Superstar
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Messages
4,643
Reputation
1,622
Daps
17,287
In a discussion across eras? You kinda can...
Mike's physical tools are unique in this era and would work more in his favor since this era favors the ability to switch and help off your man while his iso ball era was more man to man (which I'll agree wasn't his strength) oriented.


Having a guard that can protect the rim has more value in today's game where your bigs are pulled to the perimeter than his era.
 
Top