Unpopular Basketball Opinions

[Damon_3388]

I remember Jeremy Lin being criticised for a similar turnover rate and he was the point guard

Lin's turnover rate, both for their careers and during Linsanity (2011-12), is/was much higher. Don't just look at the per game averages.

 

[Lethality]

Lin's turnover rate, both for their careers and during Linsanity (2011-12), is/was much higher. Don't just look at the per game averages.

6.0 and 6.9 per 100 possessions. I don't know that that's much higher.

 

[Damon_3388]

6.0 and 6.9 per 100 possessions. I don't know that that's much higher.

Well, there's a difference of nearly 6% in their actual rate per 100 plays, which is pretty significant, considering that Lin's usage rate was lower, too.

 

[jod23]

This actually annoys me about Jordan going that we always have that against our two championships. I actually believe of any team during the first and last of Jordan's championships that the 94 Rockets team was the most likely to beat them in the finals. Going into Jordan's retirement Houston had won 5 of the last 6 games, Dream was at his best and was destroying everyone from Ewing to Robinson to Shaq, the Bulls had one of the worst frontcourts in the league, they literally had nothing to stop Hakeem, also Mad Max was as good as anyone at containing Jordan(well as well as he could be contained). Also people seem to completely forget Jordan actually played in 95, those that remember claim he was rusty which he probably was but he was still averaging over 31 in the playoffs and dropped 55 on the Knicks... so he couldn't have been that rusty. At the end of the day it was Jordan so the prior matchups may not have mattered but on face value it would have been a great finals and their biggest test.

It's all if's and but's though. The Rockets will always have a little * next to both their championships because Jordan retired. I dont think Jordan would have had any troubles beating the Rockets though. Olajuwon was a handful but if can contain him, the rest of the team was fairly average.

 

[PP34]

Nobody was containing Hakeem

 

[jod23]

Nobody was containing Hakeem

Nobody contains Jordan, and he is far bigger problem than Olajuwon, as good as he was.

 

[PP34]

Nobody contains Jordan, and he is far bigger problem than Olajuwon, as good as he was.

Too bad his team didn't get to the finals in the year he returned.

I agree with the other poster. People make out like Jordan returned and was subpar.

Jordan and the Bulls simply failed that year.

The Rockets probably had a stronger supporting cast anyway. It's not like there was a gulf between Jordan and Olajuwon as good as Jordan was.

Hakeem is arguably the greatest two way player ever.

The second Rockets title doesn't deserve an asterisk.

 

[fidstar]

It would have been a great match-up.

If you took the 95-96 Bulls team and played them against the 93-94 or 94-95 Rockets team, I think the Bulls take care of them easily (5, maybe 6 games), but if Jordan didn't retire I think it's probably a 60/40 in the Bulls favor against the 93-94 Rockets team. The Bulls team wasn't as strong then, and coming off 3 long seasons and a 'not as motivated' Jordan, it would have been very interesting.

I'm also of the opinion that the Bulls would have only been a 10% chance of winning 8 in a row if MJ didn't retire the first time. It might have happened, but it would have been very very difficult. I just see them dropping at least one of the next 5 championship seasons after the original 3 peat. For one the team probably wouldn't have 'retooled' if they had kept winning. Getting new players was one of the reasons that the second 3-peat championship team was as good as it was.

In regards to the season MJ came back. MJ was still good, but the team lacked the chemistry for him being away for 2 years and then only playing one month of the regular season. To put in perspective there was only 1 player in the Bulls top 6 players that was there when MJ was there last time (Pippen). He also struggled down the stretch of games as his body wasn't basketball fit, something that he never struggled with at any other time of his career.

 

[fidstar]

Also lol at any championship needing an * because someone decided to retire.

Do you hear Laker fans saying that the first Bulls championship show have an * because the Lakers had a bunch of injuries during the finals?

And their second championship because Magic had to sit out the season with HIV?

I mean if you think someone retiring means there should be an *, you could make an argument about every championship ever.

What if the air-conditioning worked in the finals last year and the Heat were up 2-0 having won both the opening two road games?

It's just stupid. Hakeem and the Rockets won and deserve their championships.

 

[Damon_3388]

Just on Hakeem, I feel like the 1987-88 to 1991-92 ("prime age", 25-29 years old) version of him was just as good as the 1992-93 to 1994-95 version (the accepted "peak" for him). The main difference is that in the latter period, he touched the ball more (26.8 USG% vs. 30.0 USG%) and played more minutes (37.0 mpg vs. 40.1), leading to more shots and more impressive per-game scoring and assist numbers. He also had a better team around him by that latter time, too. I don't feel like he was necessarily a better player by the time he reached his 30s than he was during his late 20s, or that he suddenly "learnt how to be a winner" or anything mythical like that. He was always a killer on both ends of the floor, it just got more national and international exposure once his team rode him to the max and the team became more successful.

 

[Gak Attack]

Too bad his team didn't get to the finals in the year he returned.

I agree with the other poster. People make out like Jordan returned and was subpar.

Jordan and the Bulls simply failed that year.

The Rockets probably had a stronger supporting cast anyway. It's not like there was a gulf between Jordan and Olajuwon as good as Jordan was.

Hakeem is arguably the greatest two way player ever.

The second Rockets title doesn't deserve an asterisk.

Pretty much this. I think it's pretty disrespectful to how good that Magic team was in 95 too, topped the East and had one of the greatest centres ever, even if it was early in his career and for those that weren't watching at the time pre-injury Penny Hardaway was ******* good, the Bulls had just easily taken care of the Hornets(who were a higher seed) the round before meeting the Magic.

Showing my age a bit here but I think a lot of people who jumped on basketball for the Bulls later championships when Jordan was just way better than anyone else and also had a much better team than before his retirement don't realize how good some of the other players were back especially in the late 80's to mid 90's. You never heard anyone at the time question the Rockets taking Hakeem over Jordan, in fact after 95 I can remember reading legit debate about who was the better player, Jordan had one more ring and both had been to the finals 3 times with Hakeem getting there first. Of course the second run of Jordan coinciding with the gradual downfall of Hakeem put that to bed. After the Rockets knocked out a bloody good Lakers side in 86-86 most teams in the league were expecting them to be the next force, if Sampsons knees never went who knows.

Back to a possible matchup if Jordan plays in 94. Thorpe and Grant pretty much cancel each other out, as do Smith and Armstrong, Maxwell takes Jordan.. you would expect him to still score but anyone who watched that time Maxwell was a great defender... was probably and earlier version of Ron Artest as in always tip toeing on the edge and had a few screws loose up top, he was also a decent scorer in his own right. Pippen is up against Horry and clearly the better player, even though Horry would spend a lot of time at 4 as well. Hakeem well he goes up against Longley and Cartwright.... yeah nah he's going to town there. Bench's the Rockets goes deeper but the Bulls had good players in Kukoc and Kerr, the Rockets had quality guards off theirs with Ellie, Brooks and Cassell. I actually think this squad has a better chance than the one in 95 which has Drexler.

 

[flight23]

hated both Houston championships because i just get bored when a centre is the best player on the team

in saying that anyone who puts an asterick on either one of those rings is a troll or doesn't know basketball

Hakeem is the greatest centre i've ever seen and beating Shaq and Ewing was great for putting any discussion to rest

(can watch highlights of the dream all day just not full games)

 

[Benno355]

It's all if's and but's though. The Rockets will always have a little * next to both their championships because Jordan retired. I dont think Jordan would have had any troubles beating the Rockets though. Olajuwon was a handful but if can contain him, the rest of the team was fairly average.

Lol! Its almost like Jordan never played in a loss......

 

[jod23]

Too bad his team didn't get to the finals in the year he returned.

I agree with the other poster. People make out like Jordan returned and was subpar.

Jordan and the Bulls simply failed that year.

The Rockets probably had a stronger supporting cast anyway. It's not like there was a gulf between Jordan and Olajuwon as good as Jordan was.

Hakeem is arguably the greatest two way player ever.

The second Rockets title doesn't deserve an asterisk.

He was pretty subpar. He played just 17 games after not playing the game for almost 2 years. He averaged just 26.9ppg which is way down for him as his career average at Chicago was 31.5. The real problem was his stroke wasnt back. His assists and rebounds were on par but his steals numbers were way down and his shooting was horrible. Shooting .411 for the 17 games he played. He was a career .505 at Chicago. If you take away the three ball which he shot ok on his return in limited shots, then it gets worse.

His 2pt% was way down at .403, down from .520 career at Chicago. He was definitely sub par. He just didnt have his rhythm back yet. He didnt have his shooting stroke or his tank after not playing for almost two years.

Hakeem arguably the greatest two way player ever? He is up there but so is Jordan so not sure why that is relevant. In fact in reality it is Jordan. Elite defender, plus the best scorer the game has ever seen.

 

[jod23]

It would have been a great match-up.

If you took the 95-96 Bulls team and played them against the 93-94 or 94-95 Rockets team, I think the Bulls take care of them easily (5, maybe 6 games), but if Jordan didn't retire I think it's probably a 60/40 in the Bulls favor against the 93-94 Rockets team. The Bulls team wasn't as strong then, and coming off 3 long seasons and a 'not as motivated' Jordan, it would have been very interesting.

I'm also of the opinion that the Bulls would have only been a 10% chance of winning 8 in a row if MJ didn't retire the first time. It might have happened, but it would have been very very difficult. I just see them dropping at least one of the next 5 championship seasons after the original 3 peat. For one the team probably wouldn't have 'retooled' if they had kept winning. Getting new players was one of the reasons that the second 3-peat championship team was as good as it was.

In regards to the season MJ came back. MJ was still good, but the team lacked the chemistry for him being away for 2 years and then only playing one month of the regular season. To put in perspective there was only 1 player in the Bulls top 6 players that was there when MJ was there last time (Pippen). He also struggled down the stretch of games as his body wasn't basketball fit, something that he never struggled with at any other time of his career.

This argument is always open for debate because if Jordan doesnt retire then the roster would have been totally different. The domino effect. Not sure "not as motivated" when talking about Michael Jordan is even reality. He would have been motivated to win 4 in row cos nobody outside of Boston's 8 had ever done it. Then if he gets 5, then Rodman arrives. 6. Then 8 is in reach and the motivation to tie Boston's great record is there for him.

Even without all that, Jordan never needed motivation. He just hated losing and refused to do it.

But yeah, all if's and but's because everything would have changed roster wise had Jordan not retired. So we will never know really. I wouldnt bet against him beating the Rockets in 94 and 95 though. He is Michael Jordan after all.

 

[fidstar]

This argument is always open for debate because if Jordan doesnt retire then the roster would have been totally different. The domino effect. Not sure "not as motivated" when talking about Michael Jordan is even reality. He would have been motivated to win 4 in row cos nobody outside of Boston's 8 had ever done it. Then if he gets 5, then Rodman arrives. 6. Then 8 is in reach and the motivation to tie Boston's great record is there for him.

Even without all that, Jordan never needed motivation. He just hated losing and refused to do it.

But yeah, all if's and but's because everything would have changed roster wise had Jordan not retired. So we will never know really. I wouldnt bet against him beating the Rockets in 94 and 95 though. He is Michael Jordan after all.

You do know that MJ cited losing motivation as the reason he retired, so obviously he had lost motivation.

Also if Bulls win number 4, Horace Grant doesn't leave and Rodman probably never comes to the Bulls. Like you say dominoes effect.

 

[jod23]

You do know that MJ cited losing motivation as the reason he retired, so obviously he had lost motivation.

Also if Bulls win number 4, Horace Grant doesn't leave and Rodman probably never comes to the Bulls. Like you say dominoes effect.

He did say that, but im pretty sure the murder of his father had far more to do with it than losing motivation.

But if Jordan plays, he doesnt need motivation, he is the most competitive person ever. It's just he chose to retire. But of course if his father isnt murdered, he doesnt retire. He plays and when he plays he wants to win.

 

[fidstar]

He did say that, but im pretty sure the murder of his father had far more to do with it than losing motivation.

But if Jordan plays, he doesnt need motivation, he is the most competitive person ever. It's just he chose to retire. But of course if his father isnt murdered, he doesnt retire. He plays and when he plays he wants to win.

Just my opinion, but I do think he was over it and his father's death just pushed him over the edge into retirement. He didn't seem to really enjoy his last season of his first 3 peat.

 

[jod23]

Just my opinion, but I do think he was over it and his father's death just pushed him over the edge into retirement. He didn't seem to really enjoy his last season of his first 3 peat.

Ill agree to disagree on that one.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

I'll bet ten cents that Giannis Antetokounmpo isn't a millimetre over 205.74cm (6'9") without shoes, his wingspan isn't a millimetre over 220.98cm (7'3"), and that he's not "still growing" in length at all. I feel his height and supposed continued growth is as mythical as the 196-197cm I've seen quoted for Cale Morton and Tom Swift at times.

I say this with some bitterness that I maxed out at 193cm (6'4") with a 193cm wingspan at age 16.

I guess Zaza, Henson and Sanders are all 6'8 or shorter.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Also lol at any championship needing an * because someone decided to retire.

Do you hear Laker fans saying that the first Bulls championship show have an * because the Lakers had a bunch of injuries during the finals?

And their second championship because Magic had to sit out the season with HIV?

I mean if you think someone retiring means there should be an *, you could make an argument about every championship ever.

What if the air-conditioning worked in the finals last year and the Heat were up 2-0 having won both the opening two road games?

It's just stupid. Hakeem and the Rockets won and deserve their championships.

I agree that there should not be an * next to the Rocket's back-to-back. They were clearly the best teams those 2 seasons. And any team that wins the title is derserving of it.

But that should in no way detract from the dominance of Jordan and the Bulls over the 90's. The Bulls still won 6 straight titles in seasons that Jordan was there throughout the year.
Would the Bulls have won 8-straight if Jordan didn't retire? Who knows, there are so many different factors at play... it would've been a close to impossible ask in this era of basketball - but it is not something that you could quickly rule out - and that to me is the sign of just how dominant the Bulls were.

And I will add - looking back at the first 3 Bulls titles, and in particular '93 vs the Suns (where the Bulls really weren't big favourites going in), and listening to how Barkley talks about that series... you just get a sense that no matter what team you put in front of them, those Bulls (well, really Jordan) were going to find a way to beat anybody. It is one of those what-if's that will go down in history, and everyone will have their own opinion, but put those Bulls in a series with the 94-95 Rockets, and I would tip the Bulls to win. (BUT - thats not how it happened, and the Rockets got their rings, and they derserve that)

You do know that MJ cited losing motivation as the reason he retired, so obviously he had lost motivation.

Also if Bulls win number 4, Horace Grant doesn't leave and Rodman probably never comes to the Bulls. Like you say dominoes effect.

Don't forget the rumors, (just from Bill Simmons really), that it was actually an 18-month suspension for gambling.

As for Rodman, Pop (as GM) wanted him gone and reportedly didn't really care what we got back for him, so I still wouldn't rule that out, even if the Bulls did have Grant still.

 

[Damon_3388]

Also if Bulls win number 4, Horace Grant doesn't leave and Rodman probably never comes to the Bulls. Like you say dominoes effect.

Furthermore, Toni Kukoc, Ron Harper, Steve Kerr, Bill Wennington and Luc Longley all came to join the Bulls after Jordan left the first time. They might have all been various degrees of 'role player' by the time 1995-96 came around, but they were all there for all three championships, and played vital roles in all of them. That second three-peat team, aside from Jordan, Pippen and Phil, was a totally different squad in personnel to the first. Who knows how things would have gone roster-wise had Jordan not left? Would the first three-peat squad just have aged and died out? Would the Bulls have tried to blow things up and start again with a younger group? Would they have had everything in place (cap space, trade chips, willingness for players to sign) to re-tool along the way?

 

[jod23]

I agree that there should not be an * next to the Rocket's back-to-back. They were clearly the best teams those 2 seasons. And any team that wins the title is derserving of it.

But that should in no way detract from the dominance of Jordan and the Bulls over the 90's. The Bulls still won 6 straight titles in seasons that Jordan was there throughout the year.
Would the Bulls have won 8-straight if Jordan didn't retire? Who knows, there are so many different factors at play... it would've been a close to impossible ask in this era of basketball - but it is not something that you could quickly rule out - and that to me is the sign of just how dominant the Bulls were.

And I will add - looking back at the first 3 Bulls titles, and in particular '93 vs the Suns (where the Bulls really weren't big favourites going in), and listening to how Barkley talks about that series... you just get a sense that no matter what team you put in front of them, those Bulls (well, really Jordan) were going to find a way to beat anybody. It is one of those what-if's that will go down in history, and everyone will have their own opinion, but put those Bulls in a series with the 94-95 Rockets, and I would tip the Bulls to win. (BUT - thats not how it happened, and the Rockets got their rings, and they derserve that)

Yeah when you hear Barkley talk about it you realise that MJ just really couldnt be stopped. I listened to him in an interview when he turned 50, he talked about that 93 NBA Finals series. He said that it was the first time, since he had become a great player, that he said to himself that guy is better than me, meaning Jordan.

Ego is massive in the NBA. Yet you hear greats of the game just simply say, he was better. Barkley has said it, Bird has said it, even Magic Johnson has said Jordan is the greatest.

I think a lot of people really forget how good Jordan was because he has been retired for so long now. But id never, ever bet against him in a 7 game series. Olajuwon was a great player but im still backing Jordan's Bulls to beat them.

 

[PP34]

Nobody is forgetting how good Jordan was.

You keep saying that whenever someone dares to say anything against the campaigner.

 

[fidstar]

I think a lot of people really forget how good Jordan was because he has been retired for so long now. But id never, ever bet against him in a 7 game series. Olajuwon was a great player but im still backing Jordan's Bulls to beat them.

With all due respect it's actually the opposite. People look better as time goes by. For successful people, they tend to forget they failed a lot as well. MJ included.

Classic example is when the Bulls were down 2 games to nil against the Knicks MJ came out and shot 3-18 in game 3. Pippen was the reason they won that game. But what people remember is that MJ came out and scored 54 for next game. People remember the good, but not the bad.

And I'm MJs biggest fan.