PDA

View Full Version : Would Jordan Have Eight Rings Had He Not Retired In 94 and 95?



amos1er
10-11-2013, 04:57 AM
Well, would he? Of course this is all speculation, but lets try to give a good educated guess. Obviously the 94 Rockets would have been his biggest hurdle, but Scottie was balling those two years. They most likely make the finals at least both years, but do they beat the Rockets both times? I would say yes. The 94 finals would have most likely gone 7 games, but I think that Jordan gets it done with a prime/peak Pippen at his side. In 95 they would have HCA for sure and would have most likely won in 6. So I have to go with 8 rings. Thoughts...

Jesse2272
10-11-2013, 05:18 AM
Yes

amos1er
10-11-2013, 06:38 AM
Obviously he played at the end of the 95 season, but that hardly counts as he was not in peak shape and did not have the benefit of playing the full season. That and they were 13-4 with him in the line up and likely would have been the number one seed had he been there the full season.

Badluck33
10-11-2013, 07:20 AM
Jordan would have had 9 rings in 8 years.

Delrayhc
10-11-2013, 08:20 AM
Yes

August 2010

SanAntonioSpurs23
10-11-2013, 08:45 AM
Yes

koreancabbage
10-11-2013, 08:50 AM
most likely. a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question

JoeBlessU
10-11-2013, 08:51 AM
Jordan would have had 9 rings in 8 years.

I see what you did there. Its clever because its impossible to have 9 rings in 8 years, gotta watch you, clever guy lol.

Pierzynski4Prez
10-11-2013, 09:01 AM
Who knows. I voted yes though.

There are some who will say that they would've lost anyways to the magic in 95, basically because of losing Grant to the Magic giving Bulls no front court depth, but had Jordan not retired, who knows if Grant ever leaves.

Some will also say the 94 Rockets would've won because of their regular season success against the Bulls (as a Bulls fan I know that statement is completely false and bears no meaning on playoffs). Both arguments are pretty legit, but I tend to think no way MJ loses in the Finals to the 94 Rockets. If HOU had a chance, it would've been in 95 when they added Clyde.

Slug3
10-11-2013, 09:31 AM
I am just not sure if anyone would have been able to stop Hakeem those years, but it would have been great basketball.

Dade County
10-11-2013, 09:50 AM
Yes!

Jordan is the originator of the super star foul call... So that made playing against him complete unfair, and gave him a competitive edge over every team he faced.

We see it today in the NBA, but the league has balanced it out. So we have around 15 players that can get the same call on any given night... Unlike in the Jordan era (after bad boys piston era, the rules changed for Jordan) when it was just him...smh

Jordan is still one of the greatest, but for his opponents to play against him under these rules was completely unfair.

mjt20mik
10-11-2013, 09:52 AM
He probably would have. Prime MJ was something special.

asandhu23
10-11-2013, 09:54 AM
this question again for the 18384859940568th time.

Big Zo
10-11-2013, 10:13 AM
No. Too much wear and tear.

BKLYNpigeon
10-11-2013, 10:32 AM
YES.

Without Jordan. The Bulls made it to the Eastern Confrence Finals and lost in Game 7.

Jesse2272
10-11-2013, 11:10 AM
MJ swallows the humpday camel with one gulp

Hellcrooner
10-11-2013, 11:35 AM
http://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CFcQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F1995%2F05%2F19% 2Fsports%2F1995-nba-playoffs-bulls-burst-in-the-air-as-magic-moves-on.html&ei=lhpYUquYBqG57AblvYDYAw&usg=AFQjCNEdPvlv7RjQzQ0IjoORwKwk5ugblQ&sig2=BpIlGt-3-_tx5jQlbkkC-g

He WAS THERE

He didnt.

Time to close the stupid topic.

ManningToTyree
10-11-2013, 11:43 AM
Most likely.

Chronz
10-11-2013, 12:52 PM
They lose in 95 for sure. 94, they prolly win but the Rockets were deep enough to make a series of it. That is, if the Bulls are even capable of getting past the Knicks/Magic in the prior rounds.

I really wish MJ didn't retire, just so that people could see he wasn't invincible, those 2 Rockets teams represented his greatest challenge. Dream has a lifetime winning record vs MJ. And as far as number 2 options go, Drexler had a post season run for the ages

b@llhog24
10-11-2013, 12:57 PM
Hakeem and Co. would've waxed that *** in 95. Not sure about 94, maybe.

Chronz
10-11-2013, 12:58 PM
http://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CFcQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F1995%2F05%2F19% 2Fsports%2F1995-nba-playoffs-bulls-burst-in-the-air-as-magic-moves-on.html&ei=lhpYUquYBqG57AblvYDYAw&usg=AFQjCNEdPvlv7RjQzQ0IjoORwKwk5ugblQ&sig2=BpIlGt-3-_tx5jQlbkkC-g

He WAS THERE

He didnt.

Time to close the stupid topic.
Yeah but he was playing at a level of say... a Kobe Bryant, not the usual MJ we were accustomed to seeing. I do like Orlando's chances against them tho, Horace Grant was huge in that series.

Jesse2272
10-11-2013, 01:00 PM
coulda woulda shoulda

the legend grows

Max.This
10-11-2013, 01:01 PM
Yes!

Jordan is the originator of the super star foul call... So that made playing against him complete unfair, and gave him a competitive edge over every team he faced.

We see it today in the NBA, but the league has balanced it out. So we have around 15 players that can get the same call on any given night... Unlike in the Jordan era (after bad boys piston era, the rules changed for Jordan) when it was just him...smh

Jordan is still one of the greatest, but for his opponents to play against him under these rules was completely unfair.

Yeah theres a couple guys that get those calls now a days but their mostly on the HEAT minus James harden

bearadonisdna
10-11-2013, 02:44 PM
Weird. Jordan and Kobe didnt have to switch teams to get titles.

Chronz
10-11-2013, 02:51 PM
Weird. Jordan and Kobe didnt have to switch teams to get titles.
No they didn't. They just had to threaten to retire if they dared trade his binky and the other tried to get traded only to find out he was wrong about his teammates and management.

KB24PG16
10-11-2013, 02:56 PM
he would've at least won one of those

Bruno
10-11-2013, 03:00 PM
no. probably not. sure they could have won in '94 and made a better challenge in '95, but had they gone deep into june both those years, the titles in '97 and '98 would have been up for grabs because that team would have lost their legs by then. sorry, three months rest between game six of the finals and day one of training camp for eight years in a row would kill that teams chances by the late 90's. The 1998 Pacers would have gone to the finals in this scenario.

Bruno
10-11-2013, 03:12 PM
Yeah but he was playing at a level of say... a Kobe Bryant, not the usual MJ we were accustomed to seeing. I do like Orlando's chances against them tho, Horace Grant was huge in that series.

ah common dude- because putting up a post-season WS/48 of .150 is playing at the level of Kobe Bryant?

When Kobe was 31 his WS/48 was at .190 and he racked a finals MVP. he also did it on one leg with a broken index finger. his production in '95 was more Drexleresque than Bryantesque.

mightybosstone
10-11-2013, 03:12 PM
I'll try to be as objective as I possibly can as a Rockets fan, but I'll preface this by saying I don't like these types of threads objectively as a sports fan. Why? Because it's easy to say Team X would have won Y Championship if Z variables happened, but there are so many unknown variables and it's extremely difficult to win a championship in any professional sport when you're playing great teams every night.

But this poll is especially awful, because it naturally assumes the Bulls would make it to the Finals in the first place, while giving no credit to some of the Eastern Conference teams of that 90s era. Regardless, my answer is that I don't think he wins 8 rings if he stays in the league in 93, and here are a few reasons why:

1. As previously stated, wining a championship is not easy. The Heat have won back-to-back titles and will go into the season as the odds on favorite, but that doesn't mean they'll have a cake walk, and a million things could happen that could prevent them from winning. If you have to put money on the best team to win a championship or the field, the smart money is on the field 99% of the time.

2. Jordan left the sport because of a major event in his life: the passing of his father. If he stays in the league, there's no telling what kind of impact that could have on him mentally throughout the season. He might not have been as motivated to win, and I don't think you can ever take the mental aspect out of any sports conversation.

3. If Jordan doesn't retire, but does win titles in 94 and 95, there's no guarantee he wins titles in 96, 97 or 98. That's basically two years he was out of the sport and two years he gave his body a break from basketball. If he plays those two years, he might have had injuries, or maybe he would have retired before he had a chance to win eight straight. There's way too many health factors to consider to just assume he would be healthy for eight straight seasons.

4. This thread assumes the Bulls get past the East, but that's a poor assumption. For one, the Bulls had major issues defending a 22-year-old Shaquille O'Neal in 1994-95, which is why they lost in the conference semifinals. Shaq posted 26/12, 25/12, 28/10, 17/10, 23/22 and 27/13 in those six games. Having a 100% Michael Jordan would have not have helped them defend Shaq significantly better.

5. The Bulls were between Horace Grant leaving and acquiring Dennis Rodman in the 1994-95 season, so they had a huge weakness in terms of post defense. Even if they had beaten the Magic that season, Olajuwon would have given them fits.

6. One of my biggest regrets as a Rockets fan is that I never got to see a Rockets/Bulls NBA Finals in the 90s, because the Rockets were one team that gave the Bulls major problems during the regular season. Hakeem's Rockets were 12-9 all-time against Jordan's Bulls in the regular season, including a 7-6 record in the 90s. Hakeem's Rockets also had pretty perimeter defenders in 1994-95 when they won their two titles (Maxwell, Horry, Drexler), and the Bulls (as previously mentioned) really lacked a great post defender that season.

7. I've said it a million times before, and I'll continue saying it. Jordan was obviously going to be a little rusty coming back from the league late in the 94-95 season, but he had plenty of regular season games to acclimate to the speed of the game, and the Bulls still got beat in the second round of the playoffs. I don't care how you slice it; Jordan had his chance to win a title 94-95 and failed to do so. I don't think you can assume that him playing the entirety of that season would have given the Bulls the title.

So, long story short, I don't think you can assume that Jordan wins eight straight titles if he doesn't retire in 1993. In fact, I think there's enough evidence to suggest it would have been unlikely.

koreancabbage
10-11-2013, 03:16 PM
Weird. Jordan and Kobe didnt have to switch teams to get titles.

the fact that Kobe didn't start his career with the Lakers says otherwise. and yet Shaq, who led the Lakers to the title three times and dragged Kobes *** along with him as well with his "shoot first, ask later" mentality, also came from another team.

funny when people just say **** out of their *****

Chronz
10-11-2013, 03:31 PM
ah common dude- because putting up a post-season WS/48 of .150 is playing at the level of Kobe Bryant?
Yes?


When Kobe was 31 his WS/48 was at .190 and he racked a finals MVP. he also did it on one leg with a broken index finger. his production in '95 was more Drexleresque than Bryantesque.
I meant more as a generality, I suppose it depends on which part of Kobe's career you're looking at but overall, if you look at Kobe's production since he started winning chips till his final days, the numbers are pretty similar. Interestingly enough, at 31 they had an identical post season PERs. Its an interesting debate (If Rusty MJ was on Kobe's level or Clydes).

FlashBolt
10-11-2013, 03:33 PM
These would, could, should topics are getting old. We can argue all we want but no one can actually give a definite answer. Would Jordan have been injured had he not retire? We can only assume.

Hawkeye15
10-11-2013, 03:45 PM
as many have stated before, no. Losing Horace Grant and him going to the Magic was far more devastating for the Bulls than most can imagine.

bearadonisdna
10-11-2013, 03:50 PM
the fact that Kobe didn't start his career with the Lakers says otherwise. and yet Shaq, who led the Lakers to the title three times and dragged Kobes *** along with him as well with his "shoot first, ask later" mentality, also came from another team.

funny when people just say **** out of their *****

Kobe has played every second and minute of his nba career in a laker uniform. wth are u talking about laker fan?

Kobe2324
10-11-2013, 03:52 PM
Without a doubt

mightybosstone
10-11-2013, 03:59 PM
Without a doubt

How can you say that? That statement is blatantly ignorant.

SoxPatsCeltsBs
10-11-2013, 04:02 PM
Some of the basketball threads are pretty ridiculous

Pierzynski4Prez
10-11-2013, 04:05 PM
as many have stated before, no. Losing Horace Grant and him going to the Magic was far more devastating for the Bulls than most can imagine.

But in this hypothetical situation, Horace may not have bolted had Chicago 4peated in 94. Things weren't great with him and management after 94 season, however the riff I believe was more due to the team faltering, which I doubt would be an issue with MJ still there. Not sure if any of that means he actually would've stayed, but who its certainly possible to want to stay if you've just won 4 straight titles.

bearadonisdna
10-11-2013, 04:12 PM
How can you say that? That statement is blatantly ignorant.

How is it blantantly ignorant. THe bulls team was still really good when jordan left. Pips bulls still posted a 55 win season and add the best player ever u do the math. U might not agree but to say its ignorant come on. And to be honest the rockets were pretty low seeded for an nba champion and upon mjs returnmn they fell off the face of the earth.

Chronz
10-11-2013, 04:16 PM
But in this hypothetical situation, Horace may not have bolted had Chicago 4peated in 94. Things weren't great with him and management after 94 season, however the riff I believe was more due to the team faltering, which I doubt would be an issue with MJ still there. Not sure if any of that means he actually would've stayed, but who its certainly possible to want to stay if you've just won 4 straight titles.
Im pretty sure he leaves regardless. Bulls management was done with him too, looking forward to Kukoc IIRC. He grew tired of being Phil's whoopin boy and not getting any recognition as an individual by then as well. His only All-Star selection came the year MJ retired, as people finally begun to appreciate his talent.


How can you say that? That statement is blatantly ignorant.

Its an opinion.

Pierzynski4Prez
10-11-2013, 04:21 PM
How is it blantantly ignorant. THe bulls team was still really good when jordan left. Pips bulls still posted a 55 win season and add the best player ever u do the math. U might not agree but to say its ignorant come on. And to be honest the rockets were pretty low seeded for an nba champion and upon mjs returnmn they fell off the face of the earth.

93-94 Rockets were the 2 seed. 94-95 was when they were the 6 seed and got Drexler at the deadline. They had a number of injuries that year too on there team between Horry, Maxwell, Thorpe, Hakeem a bit. But were still the defending champs plus having just added Clyde. Magic beat the Bulls in 6, however the Rockets swept the Magic in the finals. 94-95 finals was no guarantee for us, definitely not unless Horace stayed with us after 93-94.

Pierzynski4Prez
10-11-2013, 04:23 PM
Im pretty sure he leaves regardless. Bulls management was done with him tho, looking forward to Kukoc IIRC. He grew tired of being Phil's whoopin boy and not getting any recognition as an individual by then as well. His only All-Star selection came the year MJ retired, as people finally begun to appreciate his talent.


True, but its not like he left for this big payday. 5/17 from Orlando is what he got, which annually was hardly more than what he made in his last season with the Bulls. Just another what-if. If he had, Bulls never get Rodman as well.

Hawkeye15
10-11-2013, 04:37 PM
But in this hypothetical situation, Horace may not have bolted had Chicago 4peated in 94. Things weren't great with him and management after 94 season, however the riff I believe was more due to the team faltering, which I doubt would be an issue with MJ still there. Not sure if any of that means he actually would've stayed, but who its certainly possible to want to stay if you've just won 4 straight titles.

Horace had grown sick of the way he was treated in Chicago. He was gone anyways

mightybosstone
10-11-2013, 04:51 PM
How is it blantantly ignorant. THe bulls team was still really good when jordan left. Pips bulls still posted a 55 win season and add the best player ever u do the math. U might not agree but to say its ignorant come on. And to be honest the rockets were pretty low seeded for an nba champion and upon mjs returnmn they fell off the face of the earth.
You're misinterpreting my response. My response wasn't that I think it's impossible for Jordan to hypothetically have won eight straight titles, or even unlikely. My response is to the statement "without a doubt." "Without a doubt" assumes 100% likelihood. Even if you're a massive Bulls homer who love Michael Jordan like a second father, no competent NBA fan should be able to say a team would win a title "without a doubt."

In the history of sports, we've seen Davids beat Giolaths hundreds of times. Just because a team has a history of continued success and is the favorite going into a season guarantees nothing. Not even when Jordan won back-to-back titles would any competent NBA fan have said there was a 100% chance Jordan would have succeed in a threepeat going into the 93 and 98 seasons.

If you want to make an argument, go for it. I'm all for debate and hearing the other side of argument. But don't say "without a doubt." It's a useless, incorrect, ignorant phrase which has no use whatsoever in a discussion like this.


Its an opinion.
Perhaps, but it's a piss poor one. Have you ever gone into any season and said you think a team would win a title "without a doubt?" Of course not. Even in the NBA where there isn't much parity and there likely 5-7 legit contenders at the start of the year, no title is guaranteed.

Anyone who suggests that a title for any team is guaranteed "without a doubt" is either being overly confident or is a complete idiot, much less two titles.

PowerHouse
10-11-2013, 04:55 PM
Jordan was back for the '95 season. Bulls got their *** kicked by Orlando in the playoffs that year.

championships
10-11-2013, 05:13 PM
There is no real answer to this. No one is right, no one is wrong. Fact is nobody knows and never will.

Way too many variables that could have happened.

championships
10-11-2013, 05:15 PM
You can't predict injuries to key players either.

ramsizzle
10-11-2013, 05:33 PM
what we do know is after rusty jordan and friends got smacked by olrando (invincibility check even though orlando was favored) the bulls came back and broke the wins record and jordan got another mvp. they also won 3 more in a row.... i'd take my chances if i were the bulls.

LoveMeOrHateMe
10-11-2013, 05:45 PM
No way the bulls would have lost motivation

MickeyMgl
10-11-2013, 05:51 PM
Some will also say the 94 Rockets would've won because of their regular season success against the Bulls (as a Bulls fan I know that statement is completely false and bears no meaning on playoffs). Both arguments are pretty legit, but I tend to think no way MJ loses in the Finals to the 94 Rockets.

Wait. The statement that the Rockets had success against the Bulls is false? Or it's true but in your opinion it bears no meaning?

MickeyMgl
10-11-2013, 05:53 PM
This.

There's a reason he retired. (Assuming it wasn't the secret suspension for gambling.) Three straight trips to the Finals is exhausting.

ramsizzle
10-11-2013, 06:03 PM
Wait. The statement that the Rockets had success against the Bulls is false? Or it's true but in your opinion it bears no meaning?

bears no meaning... especially true for us bulls fans.

We have sort of dominated the bulls vs. heat series in the regular season only to lose in the playoffs. that is where he is coming from.

hidalgo
10-12-2013, 01:47 AM
yes, 9 straight had they stayed together for the 99 season. 1995 they'd need a nice replacement PF for the H Grant to Rodman transition. (think Kevin Willis on a 1 year deal). I really believe they didn't have a true PF there because they had no idea MJ would come back & give them a chance at a title. they weren't playing very well until MJ came back, so they probably figured a midseason trade for a PF wouldn't get them far anyway. but had MJ been there the whole time, the Bulls upper management make sure they get a solid PF out there. K Willis is my best guess for a really good PF they could have got short term

that's why I think MJ's 6 titles are very misleading & simply tying his 6 or getting 7 doesn't mean much(he's still better than you), cause he could have had so many more than 6. he certainly didn't max out on titles by any stretch of the imagination. a few were left on the table by his retirements, etc. had he been hell bent on 8 or 9, he'd have done it

it is mind boggling if you think about it, MJ retiring in his prime at age 30, for almost 2 full seasons. such a waste of valuble prime years. unthinkable, yet it happened

had Pippen not had that migrane in game 7 of the 1990 ECF (or had he gotten some great painkillers, & not played like crap, supposedly he couldn't see straight that game, his stats back that up) they probably win 10 straight 90-99. in 2000 the pacers or heat probably would have put an end to their reign

todu82
10-15-2013, 11:10 AM
Option 2. I think they would have had an off year in between all those titles.

Jimi032890
10-17-2013, 11:51 AM
Kobe has played every second and minute of his nba career in a laker uniform. wth are u talking about laker fan?

maybe he's talking about the fact that Kobe was drafted by the hornets. But i'm with you on this cuz that doesnt really count