Jordan retired in October of 1993. The critics predicted gloom and doom for the Bulls. (I was one of these critics). Some even declared that without Jordan, the Bulls wouldn't even make the playoffs. After all, Jordan supposedly carried those stiffs to three titles, right? Because Jordan waited so late to retire, the Bulls were not able to pick up an adequate starter in free agency. They settled with Pete Myers from the CBA. They were set up to fail. Myers had a defensive reputation, but no where near that of Jordan, who had been named first-team all-defense 6 times and won the defensive player of the year award. Furthermore, Myeres hadn't even played in the NBA for the last two years, and he never averaged more than 5 points per game. How can you replace Jordan's 32 ppg and all-world defense with this guy? The Bulls were set up to fail. These predictions were also made - and all of them were reasonable assumptions, as you will see. The first assumption was declared by nearly everybody. Even Bulls coach Phil Jackson predicted a 15-game slip in his autobiography, Sacred Hoops. He based this upon the retirement of superstars from the past. Replacing Jordan with Myers should have been detrimental. However, the Bulls only slipped 2 games: from 57-25 with Jordan in 1993 to 55-27 in 1994. How could this be? They should have fallen apart. The answer is that Jordan simply wasn't as instrumental in taking the Bulls to another level as thought. I'm not saying they could win a title without him. He did make them marginally better, but not significantly better. Look at Jordan's elite peers: if you replace Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or Bill Russell with a C.B.A. center, do you expect a 2-game drop? No way. If you replace Larry Bird, Oscar Robertson, or Magic Johnson with a C.B.A. player, do you expect a 2-game drop? Think again. Why did Phil Jackson predict a 15-game drop? Because he knew the impact that elite players had on their teams. Look at the table below and ask yourself why Jordan's impact was so minimal? Year before losing Bill Russel: 48-34 Year after losing Bill Russell: 34-48 Difference in wins: -14 Year before losing Oscar Robertson: 59-23 Year after losing Oscar Robertson: 38-4 Difference in wins: -21 Year before losing Wilt Chamberlain: 60-22 Year after losing Wilt Chamberlain: 47-35 Difference in wins: -13 Year before losing Larry Bird: 57-25 Year after losing Larry Bird: 42-40 Difference in wins: -15 Year before losing Magic Johnson: 58-24 Year after losing Magic Johnson: 43-39 Difference in wins: -15 Year before losing Michael Jordan: 58-24 Year after losing Michael Jordan: 55-27 Difference in wins: -2 To make matters worse, the Bulls lost in the 2nd round of the playoffs to the Knicks in 7 games. In Game 5, Scottie Pippen received one of the most unfavorable calls in playoff history by referee Hue Hollins when he was called for a foul on Knicks' rookie Hubert Davis, that allowed Davis to go to the line and win the game. If you are a real Bulls fan, you'll remember the call. I was cheering for the Knicks in that series, and even I admitted the Bulls got hosed. The Bulls should have won that series. I believe that would have defeated Indiana in the finals. They owned them in the regular season and the Knicks handled the Pacers. I don't think they had any chance of beating the Rockets in the finals without Jordan, but I do believe they could have got there without Jordan. It's all speculating, but it's not unreasonable speculation. Interesting....
For whatever reason, Pippen (and others) had a down year in 1993 when the Bulls "only" won 57 games. He bounced back in a big way for the 1993-1994 season and became a legitimate MVP-caliber player. If Pippen played like that in the preceding season, I'm guessing the Bulls wins would have been some where in the mid 60s, like the two previous years. Also, the Bull's record of 55 wins was probably an over-achievement. Based on point-differential, they should have won only around 50 games.
But Pippen couldn't play like that with Jordan on the team. The reason being that both players needed the ball to become MVP-calibur players and they couldn't contend for the title by each equally sharing it.
I've always wondered why this is never brought up in any of Jordan's legacy type topics. Very interesting indeed.
<div class="quote_poster">Laker_fan Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">But Pippen couldn't play like that with Jordan on the team. The reason being that both players needed the ball to become MVP-calibur players and they couldn't contend for the title by each equally sharing it.</div> Maybe. But Pippen did slump in 1993 compared to the two previous years. Looking at win shares, Pippen had 32, 37, 25, and 35 in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 respectively.
I see someone read the link that I posted...lol....it had a lot of interesting stuff in there though......one thing that stood out to me in particular was Jordan getting 1st team defense after his return, eventhough it was rare that he guarded the best offensive player everynight (that job went to Harper and Pippen)
<div class="quote_poster">THE DREAM Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I see someone read the link that I posted...lol....it had a lot of interesting stuff in there though......one thing that stood out to me in particular was Jordan getting 1st team defense after his return, eventhough it was rare that he guarded the best offensive player everynight (that job went to Harper and Pippen)</div> But that doesn't have to do with a particular bias towards Jordan. Those All Defense Teams are notorious for being more reputation-based than performance-based.
Maybe instead of looking at the performance of the Bulls after Jordan's retirement, we should look at how the Bull's were before Jordan arrived? I don't see this as detrimental to Jordan's legacy. It just shows that MJ taught them well. Was Scottie a great player before Jordan?
<div class="quote_poster">BALLAHOLLIC Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Year before losing Michael Jordan: 58-24 Year after losing Michael Jordan: 55-27 Difference in wins: <strike>-2</strike> -3</div> Fixed. While I dont think this makes Jordan any less of a player, I think it definatley shows he had better players around him than people thought he did.
Very interesting point but I don't think it has an effect on his legacy at all. There are certain questions that just can't be explain. Also like that other guy already mentioned, maybe Jordan had a lot of helps around him than people thought. Pippen, if not for Jordan, could be one of the top 5 SF imo. Don't get fool by his okayish stat. He was one of the best all-around player. Not to mention, the Bulls also had a great coach Phil Jackson to run the show even when Jordan retired. If Magic, Larry, or Wilt were to play for the Bulls and they suddenly retired like MJ, I dont' think the Bulls would drop dead like you intended. The Bulls have a group of players that all very good and some of them could blossom if they were to play for other teams like Toni Kukoc, Scottie Pippen, Horace Grant, BJ Armstrong. Also to explain this, you could factor in the scenerio that when Magic or Larry retired, the other players that played with them also retired or in a stage of decline. I definitely don't agree about Jordan didn't have anhuge impact on the Bulls. He was the focal point of the Bulls' franchise. He turned the Bulls into a 6 times NBA champion. Upon his return, the Bulls set a record with 72 wins.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">^ Pippen came after Jordan.</div> Ok well my point was would Pippen be the player he is/was if it wasn't for Jordan? And same goes for the rest of the team. I think they did great the season after Jordan left because Jordan MADE them a great team. Just because he leaves doesn't mean they are going to forget everything and play shitty..... I dunno, that's just me. And this little statistic means nothing to me.
<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Maybe. But Pippen did slump in 1993 compared to the two previous years. Looking at win shares, Pippen had 32, 37, 25, and 35 in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 respectively.</div> But the team had nearly as many wins. If he wasn't performing well, the others also improved with Jordan away or he just made the team better.
Jordan was such a ballhog that his teammates had to shoot 100% from the field everytime they touched the rock to get their 8ppg. When Jordan retired, they were so used to having to make the most outta every shot that they were just as unguardable as Jordan. <font color=""White"">(joke)</font>
<div class="quote_poster">Laker_fan Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">But the team had nearly as many wins. If he wasn't performing well, the others also improved with Jordan away or he just made the team better.</div> No. Pippen's slump coincided with the 92/93 season, when the Bulls won only 57 games compared to 67 games the year before.
