How NBA rules prevented Michael Jordan's Bulls from facing superteams in the 1990s

[picko]

Genuinely amused that people are arguing that the Bulls weren't a superteam. They might have come together organically but their talent vastly outstripped any other team in the 1990s.

At one point the Bulls had the greatest player in league history, the league's best small forward (and perimeter defender), the greatest rebounder in league history and the league's best sixth man. Oh and arguably the greatest coach of all-time.

Not a superteam? Stop embarassing yourselves.

[Marrrcuss]

Bulls was a superteam for 90s standards.

The all time leader in 3 point % was the 7th man.
Kudos was the best foreigner.
Bison Dele, Ron harper, etc.

They were the real definition of super team instead of the lebromcemtric one

Ok, on the Miami heat, Ray Allen, all time most 3s was there 6th man...Shane battier, mike miller and rashard lewis were on there bench and Lebron had wade and bosh, so plz STFU with this bs

You're trying to post battier, Miller and Lewis? Did u do any research first? Rather disrespectful too
I can't come back at u because I just got warned, lol

[dhsilv2]

Good info but I don't know why it's directed at MJ rather than just being a primer on the league and salary cap at that time. MJ didn't face superteams but he also wasn't on a superteam. And other players were also not on or playing against superteams. So there was no superteam-related competitive advantage or disadvantage for MJ or anyone else.

Bulls was a superteam for 90s standards.

No they weren't. They just happened to have the GOAT. Were Duncan/Robinson/Elliot a super team?

Elliot isn't half as good as Grant nor did that team have Harper and Toni on it. How many teams had a 20 PER guy coming off the bench in the 90's?

[The4thHorseman]

Good info but I don't know why it's directed at MJ rather than just being a primer on the league and salary cap at that time. MJ didn't face superteams but he also wasn't on a superteam. And other players were also not on or playing against superteams. So there was no superteam-related competitive advantage or disadvantage for MJ or anyone else.

Bulls was a superteam for 90s standards.

How many points did Rodman average again? 5.5, 5.7 and 4.7 in those 3 championship years with the Bulls.
And in 1990-91 Jordan was the only Bull to make the All-Star game.

If it wasnt Rodman's scoring that got him FMVP votes in the 96 Finals, what was it?

[NADALalot]

Bulls was a superteam for 90s standards.

How many points did Rodman average again? 5.5, 5.7 and 4.7 in those 3 championship years with the Bulls.
And in 1990-91 Jordan was the only Bull to make the All-Star game.

If it wasnt Rodman's scoring that got him FMVP votes in the 96 Finals, what was it?

Nah, but having a hole in your scoring like Rodman and Longely, is not helpful.....and there were many, many teams with more potent starting fives than the Bulls (in terms of scoring at each position).
Even Ron Harper didn't score much (7.4, 6.3 and 9.3).
Kukoc came off the bench and scored, but even he only averaged 13ppg during those 3 rings.

[druggas]

So can we at least stop bashing LeBron or Durant for creacting superteams, and stop talking bullsh...that Jordan would never have call Magic and Bird (and dozens of such nonsense) ? The rules in 90sand 80s were completely different.

Not even close to the same.

[The4thHorseman]

How many points did Rodman average again? 5.5, 5.7 and 4.7 in those 3 championship years with the Bulls.
And in 1990-91 Jordan was the only Bull to make the All-Star game.

If it wasnt Rodman's scoring that got him FMVP votes in the 96 Finals, what was it?

Nah, but having a hole in your scoring like Rodman and Longely, is not helpful.....and there were many, many teams with more potent starting fives than the Bulls (in terms of scoring at each position).
Even Ron Harper didn't score much.
Kukoc came off the bench and scored, but even he only averaged 13ppg during those 3 rings.

So why did Rodman get FMVP votes in 1996 while providing minimal offense??

[Cavsfansince84]

No. Michael Jordan loves competition. Michael Jordan loves competition. Michael Jordan loves competition.

He loves competition so much that he can't stop gambling playing spades, a game in which he has no physical advantage. He loves it so much he tried baseball, a game he hadn't played in more than a decade. That Iverson crossover clip that's been making the rounds again? Michael Jordan welcomed the challenge of going after one of the quickest humans of all time on the perimeter when Mike was what? 33? Because Michael Jordan loves competition.

Winning is great and greatness is great, but Michael Jeffrey Jordan loves mixing it up. He would've been bored on a superteam.

Lebron and Durant are chasing a ghost seeking validation. They childishly seek fame and adulation. They could never measure up to a career so pure.

I wouldn't argue at all against the idea of Jordan being insanely competitive but the way in which you are attempting to justify some of his choices in hindsight are pretty ridiculous imo. So he was being more of a true competitor by playing aa baseball than by trying to go for a 4 peat? You say that as though he retired for the specific reason of wanting to play bb when I think he only did bb because he needed something to do and enjoyed it. He retired because his tank was running on empty and he probably did feel like he'd accomplished everything he wanted to but that isn't proof of him being the ultimate competitor. It's just proof that he was human and needed a break.

[The_Hater]

I’m not sure it was NBA rules that prevented superteams, both the teams and the players didn’t really think it was even possible until Miami did it in 2010.

If you got 2 top players on your team, that was already considered a huge win and it made you a contender. And if you could get a fringe all-star as your 3rd, that was considered quite lucky.

[dhsilv2]

Clickbait-y title, made it sound like the NBA intentionally created rules to allow Jordan to win when the article is recapping how FA rules evolved organically.

Toni is so undervalued. He was an allstar level guy coming off the bench. Certainly not an all nba or top tier guy, but yes allstar level. Rodman was Rodman, likely rather overrated but not bad for the 4th best player on a team. Kerr and Harper are two more guys who were a LOT better than people give credit. Not allstars but not nearly as far from that level as people seem to think. Luc was really the only guy who wasn't an impact player and the bulls used to run a small ball lineup anyway to avoid playing him in key moments.

And Pippen lets not forget was boarderline top 5 in the game, a lot of team had 2 all nba guys, but to have 2 top 5ish guys and then have the best 6th and 7th man in nearly every game with a guy like Harper who was something like a top 50 player, and then an all nba type defender to round things out...that was a special team. The sonics had the depth at one point but not the top tier stars (kemp was grossly overrated at the time).

And Grant on those first 3 teams was just down right criminally undervalued. Grant was a complete stud.

[NADALalot]

If it wasnt Rodman's scoring that got him FMVP votes in the 96 Finals, what was it?

Nah, but having a hole in your scoring like Rodman and Longely, is not helpful.....and there were many, many teams with more potent starting fives than the Bulls (in terms of scoring at each position).
Even Ron Harper didn't score much.
Kukoc came off the bench and scored, but even he only averaged 13ppg during those 3 rings.

So why did Rodman get FMVP votes in 1996 while providing minimal offense??

The same reason why Andre Iguodala won it for the Warriors - defense (or defense and rebounding in Rodman's case).
But I don't think of "superteam" when I hear the name Rodman. He was a role-player for the Pistons/Spurs.

[Jkam31]

This is embarrassing

[yoadknux]

For the record I'm pretty sure Charles Barkley tried to team up with Reggie Miller in Indiana

[The4thHorseman]

Nah, but having a hole in your scoring like Rodman and Longely, is not helpful.....and there were many, many teams with more potent starting fives than the Bulls (in terms of scoring at each position).
Even Ron Harper didn't score much.
Kukoc came off the bench and scored, but even he only averaged 13ppg during those 3 rings.

So why did Rodman get FMVP votes in 1996 while providing minimal offense??

The same reason why Andre Iguodala won it for the Warriors - defense (or defense and rebounding in Rodman's case).
But I don't think of "superteam" when I hear the name Rodman. He was a role-player for the Pistons/Spurs.

Just seemed silly that you were downplaying Rodman due to his avg ppg in those 3 Finals, when you know damn well why Chicago brought him in in the first place.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

At the time, I was arguing a lot how Pippen's salary made the Bulls possible.
And Krause was really a genius.

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

[Ryoga Hibiki]

I’m not sure it was NBA rules that prevented superteams, both the teams and the players didn’t really think it was even possible until Miami did it in 2010.

If you got 2 top players on your team, that was already considered a huge win and it made you a contender. And if you could get a fringe all-star as your 3rd, that was considered quite lucky.

The Magic did the same in 2000, but were not lucky with Hill's health.
After that, restricted FA made it extremely difficult, as teams had control of players for like 10 years before LeBron decided to sign a shorter extension.

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

[dhsilv2]

How many points did Rodman average again? 5.5, 5.7 and 4.7 in those 3 championship years with the Bulls.
And in 1990-91 Jordan was the only Bull to make the All-Star game.

If it wasnt Rodman's scoring that got him FMVP votes in the 96 Finals, what was it?

Nah, but having a hole in your scoring like Rodman and Longely, is not helpful.....and there were many, many teams with more potent starting fives than the Bulls (in terms of scoring at each position).
Even Ron Harper didn't score much (7.4, 6.3 and 9.3).
Kukoc came off the bench and scored, but even he only averaged 13ppg during those 3 rings.

It's as if you can be a great player without scoring...

[BeatDaCavs420]

This is the most hating ass **** I ever seen lmao

[dhsilv2]

Nah, but having a hole in your scoring like Rodman and Longely, is not helpful.....and there were many, many teams with more potent starting fives than the Bulls (in terms of scoring at each position).
Even Ron Harper didn't score much.
Kukoc came off the bench and scored, but even he only averaged 13ppg during those 3 rings.

So why did Rodman get FMVP votes in 1996 while providing minimal offense??

The same reason why Andre Iguodala won it for the Warriors - defense (or defense and rebounding in Rodman's case).
But I don't think of "superteam" when I hear the name Rodman. He was a role-player for the Pistons/Spurs.

You need to change your perception of the value of defense then.

[Jazztop]

Looks like a well researched OP but just a couple of simple points - while Jordan never faced a ‘superteam’, he did still beat plenty of super teams. That Detroit team had Thomas, Dumars, Rodman, Johnson, Salley, Lambeer etc, that Blazer team had Drexler, Porter, Cliff Robinson, Kersey, Williams, Ainge, Lakers had a reigning MVP in Magic and all the costars from the Showtime Lakers bar Kareem, Phoenix had Barkley, KJ, Majerlie and Ainge, Jazz had Malone, Stock, Hornacek (multiple 60+ win seasons and swept the Shaq-Kobe Lakers), Sonics had Payton, Kemp, Schremp, Hawkins, Perkins, McMillan
the Knicks had Ewing, Starks, Mason, McDaniel, Oakley, Mark Jackson etc....

These were some deep, talented teams...whatever you think of the actual talent across eras is not relevant but at the time, for that time, the average top team was more stacked and physically tougher than today in many ways.