The big question: if and when Jordan comes back, how many rings does he win? If he ends up with 4 or 5 rings, does the gap between he and Lebron close?
I kind of think that Jordan would have won with just about anyone. Who knows if Kemp has the same conditioning and possible drug issues if he is playing with Jordan and Jordan is pushing him every night.
Something to also think about. Aside from Pippen, I think it is universally accepted that Dennis Rodman was the third best player that Jordan had on any of those title teams. Do people realize though that by the time Rodman got the Bulls he was about 34? Don't we think that Bosh had to be a lot better player than 34-36 year old Rodman? When you look back at the rosters of some of those bulls teams they really had mind blowingly little depth and were extremely old.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/1997.html
It's crazy Jason Caffey and Bill Wennington combined to start 40 games for that team. That team probably only has 8 players that really belonged in the NBA. I think Jordan would have won that chip with Kemp, Rodman and Pierce or whoever else suited up with him.
It doesn't matter how old Rodman was, it matters how he was producing. His age isn't really relevant here. And you frame it like having an All-Defensive 1st team player (in '96 at least) who averaged 15-16rpg, leading the league in rebounds and rebound % by a decent margin each year isn't that good? I think Bulls Rodman would be the 3rd best player on a lot of championship teams.
Also depth is overrated when you have Jordan and Pippen never missing a game playing 40 minutes a night (in the playoffs).
But I think you're really discounting the Bulls talent here. Pippen is better or as good as any other championship #2 in that era and beyond, and I'd say Rodman and Kukoc are as good as many #3's and #4's. The bench talent is similar to other championship bench talent.
And after Jordan left after the first 3-peat, BJ Armstrong and Horace Grant showed they were All-Star players and the Bulls still won 55 games.
Both of the Bulls 3-peats had a lot of talent.
I don't know what bothers me more, that you think guys like Dennis Rodman, Toni Kukoc, Ron Harper, Luc Longley, Jason Caffey, Bison Dele, etc. are that bad, or that you apparently think Harrison Barnes, Shaun Livingston, JR Smith, Richard Jefferson, Boris Diaw, Mario Chalmers, etc. are that good.
You are trying to say way too many things with this post and it makes it impossible to respond to. You mention role players from 6 different bulls teams and then mention random supporting players from other teams that won the titles decades later. How in the world am I supposed to respond to that? Also when did I say anything about the players you mentioned being good? Or the players you said I think are bad being bad? Your talking about players from lots of teams I didn't even mention including Jordan's first 3 peat which has nothing to do with what anyone was talking about (The Pippen trade would have been after the first 3 peat and I included a link to roster of their team 97). Want to try and make this make a bit more sense?
I don't know what bothers me more. That your post isn't related to what anyone said or that you tried to put words in my mouth
You said you think Jordan would have won with anybody. You made it seem like Rodman being the 3rd best player on your team was a negative factor for that team. You specifically said the Bulls had "mind blowingly little depth." The Bulls depth is the players I mentioned.
If Dennis Rodman, Toni Kukoc, Ron Harper, Luc Longley, Jason Caffey, Bison Dele are considered poor depth, I would assume you think the majority of other championship teams had better depth? I think if you look at GS, Cleveland, Miami, San Antonio, etc, really most other championship teams since that Bulls team, the Bulls depth and bench can hold their own with them. All those others players I mentioned before (Barnes, Diaw, Chalmers, etc.), do you consider them good depth for their respective championship teams? If Bulls had mind blowingly little depth, I assumed you thought these other teams had much better players after the top 2. Correct me if my assumptions are incorrect though.
Again, you seemed amazed that Jason Caffey/Bill Wennington started 40 games. Mario Chalmers started every game during the Heats' championship years. Boris Diaw started 25 games when the Spurs won in '14. I think many would argue Jason Caffey was better than Diaw, at the least they're very comparable. You pick any championship team and you have guys like Caffey/Wennington starting a chunk of the games (Scal started 9 games for the C's in '08!).
I was trying to highlight how poor I thought the "Bulls had no depth, Jordan would have won with anybody" argument was.
In regards to my brief mention of the first Bulls 3-peat, you said "some of those bulls teams" and hpzantazo said "Jordan had below average teammates besides Pippen for the most part." I thought you both were referring to both 3-peats, not just the 2nd one, so my mistake there. But I also thought the Bulls had more depth on the 2nd 3-peat, so that is also why I assumed all those Jordan teams were being lumped together. My mistake.
So, in conclusion, I think Jordan's teams had great depth, especially when compared to other champions. Very confused how you can claim the Bulls have no depth. Not sure if you just think very highly of other NBA scrubs (like Livingston, Chalmers, Diaw, etc) or you just think guys like Kukoc, Harper, Longley, Caffey, etc. were that bad. Either way I think you're wrong, but I do agree with your next post that"it is super hard to compare Role players from different teams," especially across different eras, so I'm sure that's a big part of our disconnect right there.
Topic: George Karl: Sonics Almost Completed a Deal with Chicago for Pippen (Read 3376 times)