What years were Michael Jordan's prime?

[hourockman]

I'm not insulted about Jordan; I'm insulted at the idea that winning made Jordan a better player.

Moreso, I'm arguing that he had a learning curve and a mental change in the way he approached the game somewhere after Phil began expecting the team to run the system his way. I thoroughly believe that Shaq and Kobe went thru the same maturation process (though Kobe is more willfull than Jordan). Once Jordan internalized Phil's ideas, the winning came with ease. I just happen to think that he was also in his prime during these seasons due to the mixture of knowledge and skill. His knowledge and experience in 98 still put him far beyond the rest of the field even with declining athleticism. So, I'm not sure exactly how he wasn't a better player in 98 (with declining athleticism) while winning titles that he couldn't win by bulling his way to the rim in 89 and 90 to no avail.

[IG2]

It's extremely debatable, and it's not really backed up by any objective facts.

Him being stronger is certainly a FACT. He started lifting after the '90 season and is noticeably bigger in '91.

The other two - being more skilled and a better game manager - obviously, is subjective, this is why I said IF you have followed his game closely, it should be obvious that he IS better at those 2 things. I cannot prove this to someone who hasn't closely followed MJ's career. This is something you have to watch it yourself. There are countless Bulls game uploaded on YT, go and watch them. The difference between MJ in....say, '88 and MJ in '92 should be VERY noticeable.

Like you talk about the Detroit series, but how did his "polish" effect his production?

MJ had 2 awful games against Detroit in the '90 playoffs(Game 2 & 5) that led to Bulls losses, while having none the following year against them. '91 MJ, due to being bigger(stronger), a better ball handler(skill) and smarter(finding higher % shots within the triangle), could have his way against Dumars in ways he couldn't the prior year. Again, this is noticeable if you have closely watched both series'.

[Gongxi]

As I've said, I grew up watching those series. It wasn't "obvious" at all. In fact, very much rooted in hindsight. Which is why you'd say the poor Game 2 and 5 in 90 were a result of being a worse player than in 91, when he had an ever poorer Game 1 against the Pistons. What is that a result of, then?

[MacGill]

As I've said, I grew up watching those series. It wasn't "obvious" at all. In fact, very much rooted in hindsight. Which is why you'd say the poor Game 2 and 5 in 90 were a result of being a worse player than in 91, when he had an ever poorer Game 1 against the Pistons. What is that a result of, then?

Listen, I certainly respect the fact that you post with what you believe, and you usually want to take an analytical/realist approach to things but I have to question something here in respect to what some of these posters are saying.

You said in a previous thread that you are 30 years of age, IIRC turning 31 this year. That would make you either 3 or 4 years old in MJ's rookie season, and around 10 or 11 years old when he won his first chip.

I don't want this to come across to you in a disrespecting manner but how were you able to make these analysis's at these ages? Or is this something you revisited as you got older?

If I am wrong about your age, my apologies, but I am certain that is what you said. BTW for argument sake, I was 16 when Jordan won his first chip.

[magicman1978]

It seems some people are taking other factors - teammates, coaching, championships, etc. - into account when determining Jordan's prime. Count me among those that don't see a 93 Jordan as being better than 89 Jordan - and yes, I did watch him pretty closely.

[jdub114]

^^^Good post.

I may be in the minority here, but I don't think of the late 80's as Jordan's physical peak. He didn't have the classic Jordan body until 1991, where it looked like every muscle was ripping out of his jersey. He was much stronger, and still had the vertical. Some of his craziest layups/dunks were during this period. In the 80's he was dunking everything and that tapered off a bit in the early 90's, but I think that's due to maturity.

96-98 he didn't have the same explosion, but he was so good by that point he was toying with people. Basketball was probably most effortless to him during this period, so that's a different kind of prime. Didn't Bill Simmons say Jordan had four primes?

Jordan's overall prime I'd say was from 1984-1998.

Hey, I like your Youtube videos. Keep up the good work!

[hourockman]

MJ had 2 awful games against Detroit in the '90 playoffs(Game 2 & 5), while have none the following year against them. '91 MJ, due to being bigger(stronger), a better ball handler(skill) and smarter(finding higher % shots within the triangle), could have his way against Dumars in ways he couldn't the prior year. Again, this is noticeable if you have closely watched both series'.

Calmer demeanor against Detroit than in 89 and 90. Refused to react to their obvious attempts to muddy the game up when they were starting to lose grip. That's also night and day difference between 91 and the previous years. Bulls and MJ finally understood that they were going to beat Detroit by being patient and calm and not deviating from the system -- reduced 1:1 forays to the rim (no Mike to the teeth of the D from the opening tip onward), earnest effort to find open looks for guys like Armstrong, get the ball to the bigs -- spread the rock around early, then Jordan and Pippen can take over in the end if need be.

****, the Bulls beat my Lakers the same way that year. I could only have wished that Jordan and Pippen tried to do it all by themselves against what was the more experienced team. Jordan and Pippen got the ball to all the other supplementary guys and that's what really was the difference maker for them offensively. They also played a trapping (roving) defense on any Laker that had the ball in the halfcourt, causing Perkins and Scott to be negated. The myths about how they won that series w/ Pippen shutting down Magic or some such nonsense are some of the most ridiculous things I can think of in all my years as a fan. That series and the Pistons series were hallmarks of the Bulls new coaching staff and a different Jordan (and even a different, less reactive Pip)

[Gongxi]

As I've said, I grew up watching those series. It wasn't "obvious" at all. In fact, very much rooted in hindsight. Which is why you'd say the poor Game 2 and 5 in 90 were a result of being a worse player than in 91, when he had an ever poorer Game 1 against the Pistons. What is that a result of, then?

Listen, I certainly respect the fact that you post with what you believe, and you usually want to take an analytical/realist approach to things but I have to question something here in respect to what some of these posters are saying.

You said in a previous thread that you are 30 years of age, IIRC turning 31 this year. That would make you either 3 or 4 years old in MJ's rookie season, and around 10 or 11 years old when he won his first chip.

I don't want this to come across to you in a disrespecting manner but how were you able to make these analysis's at these ages? Or is this something you revisited as you got older?

If I am wrong about your age, my apologies, but I am certain that is what you said. BTW for argument sake, I was 16 when Jordan won his first chip.

You're absolutely right about my age, but I watched the videos (Come Fly With Me, et al) basically from when they came out until...well, **** I guess I lost most of them when I left home. I had to have my dad tape the 97 Finals because I was on a school trip out of the country, and I still have that around somewhere. I still have the old NBA 1995-1996 preview with the Leigh Montville article in the back talking about how everyone should be making a bigger deal about Jordan coming back, all that jazz. I'm very, very familiar with Jordan.

[IG2]

As I've said, I grew up watching those series.

You might want to refresh your memory then. All of these games are up on YT. There's a noticeable difference in size, skill and game managing between 91-93 MJ and 84-89 MJ. Minor difference between '90 and 91-93 MJ, but noticeable enough for the astute watcher.

In fact, very much rooted in hindsight.

Not at all. By that logic, people would consider 2nd 3peat MJ superior to...say, '90 or '89 MJ, but I certainly wouldn't and I don't know any serious MJ fan who would. Maybe '96 MJ>'89 MJ, but that's the extent of it.

when he had an ever poorer Game 1 against the Pistons.

Not really. The stats are identical. Difference being, Bulls won Game 1 in '91 because MJ was able to turn it up during a key 4th qtr stretch. Game 2 & 5 in '90 were close games too, but MJ was pretty darn bad in the 4th qtr of both games.

[Gongxi]

Well, thanks for your subjective input that's rooted in nothing but your observations, that was nice.

[IG2]

Bulls and MJ finally understood that they were going to beat Detroit by being patient and calm and not deviating from the system -- reduced 1:1 forays to the rim (no Mike to the teeth of the D from the opening tip onward), earnest effort to find open looks for guys like Armstrong, get the ball to the bigs -- spread the rock around early, then Jordan and Pippen can take over in the end if need be.

Very true. This is what I mean when I talk about "game management", which is knowing WHEN and HOW to attack the opposition. This is something MJ was noticeably better at in the 90's, a result of higher IQ and skill-level.

[mr.ankle]

He was still in his prime in his mid thirties . He was still the best player in the NBA.

[Jordan23Forever]

1989-1993, his peak was '90-'92 imo. Absolute best year either '90 or '91.

[Jordan23Forever]

Before 1991, he was viewed by and large as a step below Magic and Bird, no matter WHAT he was doing physically in previous years.

Jordan was considered the best player in the league by a majority of people by 1989, 1990 at the latest. So no, he wasn't viewed as worse than Magic until he won in 1991 - most people had already realized that he was the better player a year or two before that.

Oh, sue me, minor gaffe. I'm still right. If you think he was going to win a title under Collins, you're naive.

'89 and '90 Jordan easily wins titles in '89 and '90 if Pippen and Grant are in their '91/'92 forms. Fact. He pushed the Pistons to 6 and 7 games (handing them their only two postseason losses in 1989) almost singlehandedly, with Pippen and Grant disappearing all the time and playing like garbage against Detroit. Give me a break...

[ShabazzMuhammad]

Jordan had an abnormally long prime, all the way into his mid 30's.

[Mamba Venom]

He is MJ so ... February 17, 1963 to today

[Elden Payton]

Jordan averaged 37.1 points & was the first person to ever garner 200 steals & 100 blocks in a season in 86-87....& Magic still won the MVP....Magic averaged 23.9 points 12.2 assists & 6.3 rebounds....

Have two players ever had so good a season the same season??

MJ's prime was basically the minute he stepped onto an NBA court until he walked off for good.

[hourockman]

Jordan was considered the best player in the league by a majority of people by 1989, 1990 at the latest. So no, he wasn't viewed as worse than Magic until he won in 1991 - most people had already realized that he was the better player a year or two before that.

Except for people like the ones who voted Magic the MVP in both 89 and 90? What's your theory on that one? Did they not yet recognize? Did they "screw him" because of this, that, or the other?

FTR, I didn't say he was "worse" (as a player) than Magic in 91. I said something to the effect that there was a large portion of observers who wanted to see him win BEFORE putting him in the Larry/Earvin category. Before he did that, he was getting all the "team player" criticisms. If you were a fan back then, I don't see how you could deny the PRESENCE of that kind of talk. You were either too young or you just plugged your ears like your Kobe24Forever counterparts do when they hear ill thoughts of their idol. It was out there, trust me. I didn't even say it was necessarily right or wrong, just that it was there.

[LakerLegend]

His absolute prime was 90-93. He started lifting weights in 90 and you can see a greater smoothness to his game.
I think Jordan in 1996 was about as good as he ever was. He still had most of his athleticism and compensated with better footwork, more consistent jumper, and strength. At worst he was 95% of what he was. He had only played 8 seasons worth of games at that point and he was only 32 years old up until the all star break.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1mcuyoOWB8&t=6m20s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3tEmNWHHLg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu-9-c2sUoY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm7I96kIcNU(for comparison)

Edit: Here's Jordan saying he was 97 or 95% of what he was: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgxOduiEh3E

[Jordan23Forever]

Except for people like the ones who voted Magic the MVP in both 89 and 90? What's your theory on that one? Did they not yet recognize? Did they "screw him" because of this, that, or the other?

Voting someone as MVP != thinking that they are the best player in the league, then or now.