Do you consider Jordans Bulls a Super Team?

[OriginalRed]

Thank you. Prime Pippen joins prime Barkley and Hakeem, and they don't win jack squat. He goes to Portland while still in his prime and can't win. What again has Pippen won without MJ?

Meanwhile, MJ probably runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star level player. MJ's will to win simply couldn't be stopped in the 90s. Those Bulls teams/players owe MJ EVERYTHING for those championships and their legacies.

This is not an accurate characterization. Pippen wasn't in his prime with Portland and Houston. Barkley and Hakeem were also far from their primes when Pippen was there

You say MJ runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star player. How did Jordan do before Pippen arrived? And the team won 55 games without Jordan in 1994, so they were a capable group. Jordan didn't take a bunch of scrubs to championship. He pushed a very good team to S-tier historic greatness. But they were very good to begin with

Not that I disagree with your overall point that Jordan had a great supporting cast during his title runs but this is a terrible comparison when you consider the roster Jordan had before Pippen came and the opponents he had to go through.

[DimesandKnicks]

Thank you. Prime Pippen joins prime Barkley and Hakeem, and they don't win jack squat. He goes to Portland while still in his prime and can't win. What again has Pippen won without MJ?

Meanwhile, MJ probably runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star level player. MJ's will to win simply couldn't be stopped in the 90s. Those Bulls teams/players owe MJ EVERYTHING for those championships and their legacies.

This is not an accurate characterization. Pippen wasn't in his prime with Portland and Houston. Barkley and Hakeem were also far from their primes when Pippen was there

You say MJ runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star player. How did Jordan do before Pippen arrived? And the team won 55 games without Jordan in 1994, so they were a capable group. Jordan didn't take a bunch of scrubs to championship. He pushed a very good team to S-tier historic greatness. But they were very good to begin with

Like why? Why call them prime Barkley and prime Hakeem. They were 35 and 36. In Portland they were an alley hoop away from being the Lakers who they lost too every subsequent year on their way to their own three-peat. Why are we trying to diminish how great Pippen is just to prove Jordan didn’t play for an all time great team

[Percentsign]

Thank you. Prime Pippen joins prime Barkley and Hakeem, and they don't win jack squat. He goes to Portland while still in his prime and can't win. What again has Pippen won without MJ?

Meanwhile, MJ probably runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star level player. MJ's will to win simply couldn't be stopped in the 90s. Those Bulls teams/players owe MJ EVERYTHING for those championships and their legacies.

This is not an accurate characterization. Pippen wasn't in his prime with Portland and Houston. Barkley and Hakeem were also far from their primes when Pippen was there

You say MJ runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star player. How did Jordan do before Pippen arrived? And the team won 55 games without Jordan in 1994, so they were a capable group. Jordan didn't take a bunch of scrubs to championship. He pushed a very good team to S-tier historic greatness. But they were very good to begin with

Like why? Why call them prime Barkley and prime Hakeem. They were 35 and 36. In Portland they were an alley hoop away from being the Lakers who they lost too every subsequent year on their way to their own three-peat. Why are we trying to diminish how great Pippen is just to prove Jordan didn’t play for an all time great team

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

[MavsDirk41]

This is not an accurate characterization. Pippen wasn't in his prime with Portland and Houston. Barkley and Hakeem were also far from their primes when Pippen was there

You say MJ runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star player. How did Jordan do before Pippen arrived? And the team won 55 games without Jordan in 1994, so they were a capable group. Jordan didn't take a bunch of scrubs to championship. He pushed a very good team to S-tier historic greatness. But they were very good to begin with

Like why? Why call them prime Barkley and prime Hakeem. They were 35 and 36. In Portland they were an alley hoop away from being the Lakers who they lost too every subsequent year on their way to their own three-peat. Why are we trying to diminish how great Pippen is just to prove Jordan didn’t play for an all time great team

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

Your using one year to show that Pippen was great enough to lead a team to a championship….and wasnt that the year Pippen refused to leave the bench because Jackson drew up a play for Kukoc?

Im not trying to diminish Pippen but minus that one year what else did he do to prove that he could lead a team to a championship as “the guy.”? Typically guys that are great enough to be the main guy display that sort of talent for multiple years. He was Jordans Robin for most of his career and a geat Robin too.

[Percentsign]

Like why? Why call them prime Barkley and prime Hakeem. They were 35 and 36. In Portland they were an alley hoop away from being the Lakers who they lost too every subsequent year on their way to their own three-peat. Why are we trying to diminish how great Pippen is just to prove Jordan didn’t play for an all time great team

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

Your using one year to show that Pippen was great enough to lead a team to a championship….and wasnt that the year Pippen refused to leave the bench because Jackson drew up a play for Kukoc?

Im not trying to diminish Pippen but minus that one year what else did he do to prove that he could lead a team to a championship as “the guy.”? Typically guys that are great enough to be the main guy display that sort of talent for multiple years. He was Jordans Robin for most of his career and a geat Robin too.

He was playing alongside Jordan the rest of the prime years, so that 1994 season is really all that we have. What else do you expect? Was he supposed to be the main man when Jordan was there? He was Robin only relative to Jordan. Otherwise, he would have been Batman, as he was in 1994

[Jables]

The eras are so different it's an odd comparison. Rodman was no superstar, of course people are going to say he's a huge addition but the first 3peat just gets overlooked, along with the fact they lost two All Stars in Armstrong and Grant. You wanna say okay they didn't deserve to be All Stars, well Rodman ain't going to be so famous if he didn't get on Jordans team, same ****, who is going to guarantee they still win 6 rings if you replace Grant with Rodman for the first rings?

[MavsDirk41]

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

Your using one year to show that Pippen was great enough to lead a team to a championship….and wasnt that the year Pippen refused to leave the bench because Jackson drew up a play for Kukoc?

Im not trying to diminish Pippen but minus that one year what else did he do to prove that he could lead a team to a championship as “the guy.”? Typically guys that are great enough to be the main guy display that sort of talent for multiple years. He was Jordans Robin for most of his career and a geat Robin too.

He was playing alongside Jordan the rest of the prime years, so that 1994 season is really all that we have. What else do you expect? Was he supposed to be the main man when Jordan was there? He was Robin only relative to Jordan. Otherwise, he would have been Batman, as he was in 1994

Sorry buddy disagree. Alot of nba HOF players were great Robin’s throughout their career, doesn’t diminish them one bit. Pippen was the perfect #2 but he was best in a complimentary role as the second option. He was a jack of all trades and a beast defensively but he would have to be a sidekick to a alpha to win a ring.

[NZB2323]

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

Your using one year to show that Pippen was great enough to lead a team to a championship….and wasnt that the year Pippen refused to leave the bench because Jackson drew up a play for Kukoc?

Im not trying to diminish Pippen but minus that one year what else did he do to prove that he could lead a team to a championship as “the guy.”? Typically guys that are great enough to be the main guy display that sort of talent for multiple years. He was Jordans Robin for most of his career and a geat Robin too.

He was playing alongside Jordan the rest of the prime years, so that 1994 season is really all that we have. What else do you expect? Was he supposed to be the main man when Jordan was there? He was Robin only relative to Jordan. Otherwise, he would have been Batman, as he was in 1994

He won 1 playoff series in 94 and went to 7 in the 2nd round because his teammate hit a game winning shot in a game he refused to enter.

In the 94 playoffs Pippen averaged 23, 8, and 7, 52.1 TS%, 22.8 PER. Those aren’t typical numbers of a guy who leads his team to a championship, and those are the best playoff numbers Pippen ever had. I guess Pippen could win a championship if you swapped him out with Tatum or Jaylen Brown on the Celtics last year, but he’s not a Batman the way that Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Lebron, Dirk, Curry, Kawhi, Giannis, and Jokic have been Batman.

He could be a Batman the way Paul George was a Batman when he was the best player on his teams.

[DimesandKnicks]

This is not an accurate characterization. Pippen wasn't in his prime with Portland and Houston. Barkley and Hakeem were also far from their primes when Pippen was there

You say MJ runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star player. How did Jordan do before Pippen arrived? And the team won 55 games without Jordan in 1994, so they were a capable group. Jordan didn't take a bunch of scrubs to championship. He pushed a very good team to S-tier historic greatness. But they were very good to begin with

Like why? Why call them prime Barkley and prime Hakeem. They were 35 and 36. In Portland they were an alley hoop away from being the Lakers who they lost too every subsequent year on their way to their own three-peat. Why are we trying to diminish how great Pippen is just to prove Jordan didn’t play for an all time great team

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

I was talking to Scranton, I quoted him

[JayMKE]

Super teams really only refer to Miami Heat with LeBron/Wade/Bosh and Golden State with KD. Maybe there is an argument for Boston with KG/Ray Allen/Pierce but that’s when concept that these guys had to buddy up to have a chance to win. I don’t think Rodman joining the 2nd 3-peat makes them a super team.

[Percentsign]

Super teams really only refer to Miami Heat with LeBron/Wade/Bosh and Golden State with KD. Maybe there is an argument for Boston with KG/Ray Allen/Pierce but that’s when concept that these guys had to buddy up to have a chance to win. I don’t think Rodman joining the 2nd 3-peat makes them a super team.

KG/Allen/Pierce was when the "superteam" moniker began. With LeBron/Wade/Bosh, there was actually some doubt because people questioned whether Bosh was that good

[JayMKE]

Super teams really only refer to Miami Heat with LeBron/Wade/Bosh and Golden State with KD. Maybe there is an argument for Boston with KG/Ray Allen/Pierce but that’s when concept that these guys had to buddy up to have a chance to win. I don’t think Rodman joining the 2nd 3-peat makes them a super team.

KG/Allen/Pierce was when the "superteam" moniker began. With LeBron/Wade/Bosh, there was actually some doubt because people questioned whether Bosh was that good

Maybe but I think it came into more common usage with Miami because of the outrage of LeBron and Bosh signing their as free agents in their prime, then later with KD to Warriors. Boston had to trade assets for their team and their prime’s were at an end.

[MavsDirk41]

Super teams really only refer to Miami Heat with LeBron/Wade/Bosh and Golden State with KD. Maybe there is an argument for Boston with KG/Ray Allen/Pierce but that’s when concept that these guys had to buddy up to have a chance to win. I don’t think Rodman joining the 2nd 3-peat makes them a super team.

KG/Allen/Pierce was when the "superteam" moniker began. With LeBron/Wade/Bosh, there was actually some doubt because people questioned whether Bosh was that good

Lmao who questioned whether Bosh was that good??? What in the world lol

[nikster]

Your using one year to show that Pippen was great enough to lead a team to a championship….and wasnt that the year Pippen refused to leave the bench because Jackson drew up a play for Kukoc?

Im not trying to diminish Pippen but minus that one year what else did he do to prove that he could lead a team to a championship as “the guy.”? Typically guys that are great enough to be the main guy display that sort of talent for multiple years. He was Jordans Robin for most of his career and a geat Robin too.

He was playing alongside Jordan the rest of the prime years, so that 1994 season is really all that we have. What else do you expect? Was he supposed to be the main man when Jordan was there? He was Robin only relative to Jordan. Otherwise, he would have been Batman, as he was in 1994

He won 1 playoff series in 94 and went to 7 in the 2nd round because his teammate hit a game winning shot in a game he refused to enter.

In the 94 playoffs Pippen averaged 23, 8, and 7, 52.1 TS%, 22.8 PER. Those aren’t typical numbers of a guy who leads his team to a championship, and those are the best playoff numbers Pippen ever had. I guess Pippen could win a championship if you swapped him out with Tatum or Jaylen Brown on the Celtics last year, but he’s not a Batman the way that Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Lebron, Dirk, Curry, Kawhi, Giannis, and Jokic have been Batman.

He could be a Batman the way Paul George was a Batman when he was the best player on his teams.

It doesn't seem like a lot but that was enough to be the 5th in ppg, 10th in apg, while being the best non big man defender. Those are better than the numbers Ewing put up on the way to the finals that year.

He wasn't MVP level like Hakeem or Barkley but he was basically in that next tier.

[MavsDirk41]

Super teams really only refer to Miami Heat with LeBron/Wade/Bosh and Golden State with KD. Maybe there is an argument for Boston with KG/Ray Allen/Pierce but that’s when concept that these guys had to buddy up to have a chance to win. I don’t think Rodman joining the 2nd 3-peat makes them a super team.

KG/Allen/Pierce was when the "superteam" moniker began. With LeBron/Wade/Bosh, there was actually some doubt because people questioned whether Bosh was that good

And just to clarify, Bosh was a 5x all star prior to going to Miami with averages of
24/11
23/10
22/9
23/11
23/9

To think Chris Bosh wasnt one of the best players in the nba during that time is wild

[michaelm]

This is not an accurate characterization. Pippen wasn't in his prime with Portland and Houston. Barkley and Hakeem were also far from their primes when Pippen was there

You say MJ runs the table again and wins multiple titles if you replace Pippen with any other all-star player. How did Jordan do before Pippen arrived? And the team won 55 games without Jordan in 1994, so they were a capable group. Jordan didn't take a bunch of scrubs to championship. He pushed a very good team to S-tier historic greatness. But they were very good to begin with

Like why? Why call them prime Barkley and prime Hakeem. They were 35 and 36. In Portland they were an alley hoop away from being the Lakers who they lost too every subsequent year on their way to their own three-peat. Why are we trying to diminish how great Pippen is just to prove Jordan didn’t play for an all time great team

I didn't say Barkley and Hakeem were in their prime when Pippen arrived. I said the opposite - they were far from their primes. I didn't diminish Pippen. I'm the one ITT who said that the 1994 Jordan-less Bulls showed that Pippen was good enough to lead a championship caliber team (did you mean to quote somebody else?)

He showed he could lead a team to one good regular season record, but not 2. He never showed he could lead a championship caliber team which requires being good in the play-offs. He didn’t have much chance to do so obviously Doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be in the HOF or that he didn’t contribute greatly to the success of the Bulls. He and Jordan were part of good to great teams, the team thing being what LeBron partisans and imo LeBron himself don’t seem to get.

[Snakebites]

No.

I believe super teams must have 3+ All Stars or All NBA players. Jordan only had Pippen (and Rodman for a bit).

A bit is 3 championship seasons and Horace Grant wasn't an all star.

TDIL.

I don't personally view the Bulls as a superteam but this post is fascinating.

[Snakebites]

Broadly you’re going to get different answers based on what folks think a “super team” is.

I’d argue that a super team isn’t just a team with 3 or more all stars/All NBA guys.

The 2006 Pistons had 4 All Stars, two of whom also made All NBA that year. The Bucks had three all stars in 2023- Jrue, Midds, and Giannis. The dynasty Spurs had 3 all stars in their peak years including a top 10 all time player. If anyone is calling these super teams I’ve never seen it.

At the end of the day as I see it a super team has two criteria in terms of how the label is applied:

1) A talent level (either real or perceived) that is above what competitors can field. This generally means more than one MVP level guy along with additional all star talent.

2) The team was put together in a way fans perceive as inorganic or artificial- generally via free agency or trade requests or both.

By these criteria I don’t think the Bulls qualify.

[SportsGuru08]

People with agendas will twist themselves in knots over this, but the reality is that all the dynasties in NBA history were 'super-teams' in the sense that talent is often heavily concentrated within a few teams. Most super-teams in NBA history have been created by smart GMs, notably guys like Auerbach, Krause, West who ran rings around their hapless peers. More recently, greater player agency has allowed player constructed super-teams to emerge, the most successful being the Heat and Warriors.

Jordan's championship teams were always vastly more talented than their competition. The same was true for Magic's Lakers, Bird's Celtics and Shaq/Kobe Lakers.


In 1995-96, the Bulls had the MVP (and another top 5 finish), the league's best two-way player, the league's best rebounder, three of the top defenders, arguably the best coach in league history and the league's 6th man of the year. And that's in an era where the league wasn't particularly deep from a talent standpoint after years of expansion.

The best player on the league's 2nd best team that season, the Supersonics, would have been the third best player on the 1995-96 Bulls. Quite simply, it was the most stacked team since the 1960s Celtics after accounting for league-wide talent. So pretending it wasn't a 'super-team' - likely because you are trying to elevate Jordan vs his peers - seems foolish.

Using this logic, the 2001 Sixers were also a super team. Iverson was MVP, Larry Brown COY, Mutombo the DPOY and rebounding leader, and McKie the SMOY.

Except Brown won a championship with no Top 10 players, something Phil never did. Mutombo could actually score 10 points in an empty gym, unlike Rodman. And McKie was a much better defender than Kukoc.

And for the record, Scottie's play declined sharply after the All-star break and those struggles lasted the entire postseason.

I started my post by saying "People with agendas will twist themselves in knots over this" and you couldn't resist turning yourself into a pretzel.

This isn't very difficult: every dynasty in league history was a 'super-team'. Every single one. There are no exceptions. They were all vastly more talented, both in top-end talent and depth, than their peers.

Creating disingenuous examples won't change that.

Calling the '90s Bulls a superteam retroactively is the very definition of having "an agenda." Talk about lack of self awareness.

Everything I stated about the '01 Sixers and '96 Bulls in that post was factually correct. All you have are baseless opinions.

[SportsGuru08]

If the sixers had another MVP caliber player/top five vote getter that’s absolutely a super team

Pippen only played great up to the All Star break. Afterward, he stunk the rest of the regular season and playoffs. Basically for half a season he was a glorified Aaron McKie.

Are we really going to underplay Pippen this much as to push a comparison between the 01 Sixers and 96 Bulls?

Let's also pretend that Iverson and MJ are even close to the same tier of player.

I don't care for the nonsense of labelling 'superteams', but it was pretty clear that the Bulls were the best teams in the years they won. Plenty of that is to do with MJ being the best player in the league, but they also had a very very strong team relative to the competition they were facing.

I get people like the diminish the Bulls teams to prop up MJ, but it can be true that the Bulls were the best team and MJ is a GOAT level player without having to take away from either.

My only point is that the '01 Sixers met his personal criteria for a super team and he didn't even realize it. All I did was call him out on it.