1999 wrote: spree8 wrote:
dude i bolded the part where opposing GM's knew jordan knew he was saying his teammates weren't good enough
how do you think they knew ?
do you think Jordan was directly calling them ?
no he was spouting it to the press , but i shouldn't have to even quote the jordan rules to you , either you weren't around or paying attention this is michael jordan we are talking about anytime he said anything it was widely spread news which makes your viewpoint of events back then inaccurate to say the least .
How did the other Gm’s know? You didn’t know MJ played golf with them?
"I play golf with these general managers all summer," Jordan said, "and they all tell me they don't want to deal with Krause because he's always trying to rip them off, get something for nothing. It's why we don't do anything. "
That’s how. “I shouldn’t have to quote the Jordan Rules for you.”
Still waiting for evidence to be produced that Jordan badmouthed his teammates to the press at the time. Again, not saying he didn’t, but I haven’t heard that
What difference is it if MJ wanted them gone publicly or physically and verbally disparaged them in private? Why is MJ credited for making teammates better? You can easily make the case that if Kerr wasn’t a strong minded individual his career would’ve been ruined. MJ also punched Will Purdue. Bill Cartwright was treated like garbage by MJ because they traded his bff Oakley to get him. All of these things occurred and more would be known if it occurred in this era. Lastly, the season following MJ’s first retirement the bulls played better offensively without him
. Why would Pippen’s, Horace Grant’s and others field goal percentage rise while Jordan wasn’t on the court. You would expect their ppg to go up on a worse efficiency but that wasn’t the case...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Team statistics relating to the year before and year after MJ retired. 1992-93 & 1993-94.
1992-93 - 105.2 PPG
1993-94 - 98.0 PPG
Hmmmm, does this look like they played better offensively without MJ?
1992-93 - 26.0 APG
1993-94 - 25.6 APG
MJ was such a ball hog and disrupted the ball movement. Oh wait.....
1992-93 - 13.5 TO's
1993-94 - 15.9 TO's
The Bulls were more efficient offensively..... Oh wait 2.5 more turnovers a game is actually not good?
1992-93 - 47% FG
1993-94 - 46% FG
Not a big difference but nevertheless, still better the year before he retired and they had 230 more Field goals made. You said it improved tho?
1992-93 - 73% FT
1993-94 - 70% FT
They must've improved at something the year after MJ retired right? Oh.. nah....
Nice try but again you have failed to actually do any research. I was just going to stick with the PPG difference but I didn't, sorry. Of course Scottie and Horace's points will go up the year after losing a 33ppg player in MJ. More touches for them. Also Horace Grant's FG% every year with MJ was over 50%. Scottie's shooting wasn't that far off either.
1987-88 - 50%
1988-89 - 52%
1989-90 - 52%
1990-91 - 55%
1991-92 - 58%
1992-93 - 51%
1993-94 - 52%
1987-88 - 46%
1988-89 - 48%
1989-90 - 49%
1990-91 - 52%
1991-92 - 51%
1992-93 - 47%
1993-94 - 49%
So your theory is wrong based on these shooting percentages. To simply say because MJ retired they became better offensively is silly. Especially when you see consistent shooting percentages in all the years prior to him retiring.
Also it's expected for the team's offensive scoring to go down as well when losing a player that significant. The point here is that you're wrong saying the Bulls played better offensively the year after MJ retired. They didn't. So I'm not sure what point you were trying to make.
Kporzee. Make the Knicks great again!