OhayoKD wrote:After losing almost all their games to end the season, the Bulls redistributed "point" responsibilities. That is why I linked a Cleveland playoff game alongside a Hornets one during the crest of "archangel". Pippen does not need to be a "major playmaker" to enable Jordan to not be a helio PG.
There’s no basis whatsoever for this claim that the Bulls “redistributed point responsibilities” or your claim that “Jordan went back to the 2” for the playoffs. You just want it to be true, because the Bulls did pretty well in those playoffs and you want to claim the Bulls were worse with Jordan at PG.
Your only basis is to point to the fact that a 17-game sample in the playoffs has lower assists than a prior 24-game sample, which is just obviously basing an argument on statistical randomness. And it’s especially odd when even the 17-game sample had abnormally high assist numbers for Jordan anyways. It’s then even more odd that you come to a baseless conclusion that they put Jordan back at the 2 for the playoffs because they lost almost all their games to end the season, when actually Jordan averaged lower assists in that bad timeframe (8.8 a game) than he had in the more successful games before that at PG (12.1 a game). So your logic is simultaneously that lower assist totals in small samples shows that Jordan’s playmaking duties were lower, while also saying that they decided to lower his playmaking duties because they didn’t do well in a set of games where he…had lowered assist totals (and therefore, by your logic, that bad stretch would’ve been a set of games his playmaking duties were lowered, which then logically would give no reason for the Bulls to do what you’re claiming they did). It’s all just obviously complete nonsense. You’re just looking at a set of numbers and squinting at it for a while until you can come up with a way to weave a completely misleading and materially false narrative that is convenient for your agenda (not to mention that even the regular season data by itself plainly disproves your original “regression” claim).
This really isn’t that difficult to be honest. We know full well Jordan was still at PG in the playoffs. You could even just take a quick glance at the lineups and see that he was very obviously still at PG. You see, the Bulls had two PGs on their team: Sam Vincent and John Paxson. They also had Craig Hodges, who was a backup SG. Before Jordan moved to PG, the Bulls consistently started Sam Vincent (and if Vincent was out, they started Paxson). When Jordan moved to PG, they quickly moved Sam Vincent out of the starting lineup in favor of Craig Hodges (in the only RS starts Hodges ever got during his time on the Bulls). Hodges ended up being out for a bunch of games towards the end of the season (meaning Vincent/Paxson had to be put back in the starting lineup during that time), but Hodges was back for the playoffs. And, lo and behold, Craig Hodges started every single game for the Bulls in those playoffs. And not as a nominal starter—Hodges had substantially more minutes in the playoffs than Vincent and Paxson combined (who both had reduced minutes compared to the RS). In other words, in those playoffs, the Bulls started and gave large minutes to a SG that they never otherwise started during other time periods, while simultaneously substantially reducing the minutes of their PGs. Your claim that Jordan “went back to the 2” in the playoffs is just blatantly false. Just because you want something to be true doesn’t mean it is. You are wrong, I think you should know you’re wrong unless you’re really drinking your own kool-aid, and I fully expect to never again see this claim about the Bulls “regressing” with Jordan at PG.
Apologies to others for this sidetracking of the thread—it’s just a claim that gets thrown around over and over across tons of threads and needed to be corrected at some point.