Do you consider Jordans Bulls a Super Team?

[Castle Black]

No. As great of a rebounder as Rodman was, he was hands down one of the worst offensive players in the entire league. He averaged a whopping 5 ppg on 45% shooting his 3 years in Chicago, and that was almost entirely via put-backs or transition layups.

His TOV% all 3 years were some of the worst of his career as well despite his USG% being some of the lowest. He was still an impactful player due to his defense and rebounding, but offensively he was almost completely useless. The fact that the Bulls 3-Peated while essentially playing 4v5 offensively in the half-court is pretty remarkable actually.

[DimesandKnicks]

Somebody said BJ Armstrong

When people cite BJ being an all star, they lose all credibility.

That was all Bulls dynasty popularity + pure fan vote at the time + the guy had a baby face and looked like a kid.

The guy who mentioned BJ Armstrong said the Bulls basically had 3 allstars during the first 3 peat because they had BJ. Some of the stuff on here lol

The guy said technically

When I argued with my ex she would say things like “so your basically saying” instead of just saying what I said to try to win arguments too

[DimesandKnicks]

Are you joking? Winning 55 games is absolutely no indicator of a team being a "Super Team". They had just a really good coach and a solid supporting cast. That'd be like calling the 2019 Raptors a super team because they were able to win 59 games the year before Kawhi got there or that 60 win Atlata team a super team.

If you added Kawhi to the raptors without trading Derozan, you’d have a super team

Yes, but that wasn't the point I was making. I was more so referring to the number of games a team won. The Raptors won 53 games without Kawhi or Derozan in 2020 and yet nobody called the 2019 Raptors a super team is my point.

No body is calling the Pippen led bulls a super team either, they saying that becomes a super team when u add another HOFer, just like if u added Kawhi to the raptors without trading Derozan

[ScrantonBulls]

When people cite BJ being an all star, they lose all credibility.

That was all Bulls dynasty popularity + pure fan vote at the time + the guy had a baby face and looked like a kid.

The guy who mentioned BJ Armstrong said the Bulls basically had 3 allstars during the first 3 peat because they had BJ. Some of the stuff on here lol

The guy said technically

When I argued with my ex she would say things like “so your basically saying” instead of just saying what I said to try to win arguments too

Horace and BJ were quite LITERALLY all stars that season. Why are people getting so upset by that fact?

"They weren't all stars!!1" Well yes, they actually were all stars. That's a fact that can't be disputed.

[Hair Jordan]

No. The Bulls first 3-peat team was built thru the draft. Jordan, Pippen, Ho Grant, BJ, Perdue, Stacy King, Scott Williams etc were all drafted. Fringe guys like Livingston, Hopson, Paxon were free agent pick ups and the only guy they traded for was Cartwright who was 31 and oft injured. Their second 3-peat team was basically the same with the exception of Rodman who they traded for. Rodman was 35/36/37 years old during the Bulls 3-peat and past his prime. In fact, Jordan, Pippen and Rodman were all past their primes but they knew how to win and they ruled the league on their smarts, basketball IQ, intimidation, guile and championship experience. They were an all time great team but not a super team. Rodman never made an All Star team as a Bull and Pippen didn’t make the All Star team in ‘98. It was just Jordan. How many superteams can claim to have a lone All Star?

[Fantastik_Goat]

No.

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

What about 4 HOFs?

MJ, Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

5 HOF’s in 97”
Robert Parish

[ScrantonBulls]

They lost Michael Freaking Jordan in his prime for nothing and still managed to win 55 games.

You'd have a point if the only roster change was losing Jordan but it wasn't. They added several solid roleplayers including Kukoc (a future 6MOTY) and Kerr and got a much better Scottie Pippen year.

That 93-94 team had 3 all-stars that were all part of the 1st 3-peat. That's how good the supporting cast was on that first 3-peat.

No they most certainly did not. Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong were not stars. Making the all star team once in your entire career because your team won a bunch of games is no indicator of being a star. That's like saying Kyle Korver and Jeff Teague were star players cuz they made it once on that 60 win Atlanta team. Nobody in their right mind would call those guys star players. Pippen was the only true star Jordan had on his team during the 1st three peat, that's a fact.

Did you forgot the part about the Raptors trading back to back to back all-star DeMar DeRozan for Kawhi? Acting like they just got Kawhi for nothing a bit disingenuous, but ok.

Yes but your missing the point. Nobody was calling the 2019 Raptors a super team. Then they lose Kawhi the following year, add no one, and still managed to win 53 games in a shortened season. Did anyone call them a super team after that? No, that's my point. Just winning 50 or so games with a great coach and supporting cast doesn't automatically equate to being a super team. Ya'll throw around that term so easily nowadays.

Dude, Kukoc sucked ass during his first season with the Bulls. That was a tough adjustment to the NBA, especially in an era with few international players. Kukoc was not this great contributor you are making him out to be in that 1st season. And Steve Kerr, wow. Guess that's why they only won 2 fewer games despite losing His Airness.

You make a good point about that Raptors team being a superteam. They were stacked. Problem is it only lasted 1 season. They took down a hobbled Warriors squad. The Bulls dominated the league for 3 straight seasons. They were so stacked that you had 3 players from the 3-peat making the all-star game the season MJ left. No other teams had that much talent or depth.

[ScrantonBulls]

No.

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

What about 4 HOFs?

MJ, Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

5 HOF’s in 97”
Robert Parish

They also had Brian Williams (Bison Dele) coming off the bench in the playoffs. The guy was extremely talented. You could argue the 96-97 team was better than the 95-96 team.

[Hair Jordan]

No. The Bulls first 3-pear team was built thru the draft. Jordan, Pippen, Ho Grant, BJ, Perdue, Stacy King, Scott Williams etc were all drafted. Fringe guys like Livingston, Hopson, Paxon were free agent pick ups and the only guy they traded for was Cartwright who was 31 and oft injured. Their second 3-peat team was basically the same with the exception of Rodman who they traded for. Rodman was 35/36/37 years old during the Bulls 3-peat and past his prime. In fact, Jordan, Pippen and Rodman were all past their primes but they knew how to win and they ruled the league on their smarts, basketball IQ, intimidation, guile and championship experience. They were an all time great team but not a super team. Rodman never made an All Star team as a Bull and Pippen didn’t make the All Star team in ‘98. It was just Jordan. How many superteams can claim to have a lone All Star?

Pippen was All-NBA on both ends of the court in 98
Rodman won the rebounding title.

People call the 2016 title winning Cavs a superteam yet LeBron was the only All-Star that year. None of his teammates made All NBA or All Defense.

I think you’re confused about the term “superteam.” Superteams (in my opinion) are teams that come together when players conspire to join forces to win easy rings vs building a team legitimately thru the draft or free agency or trades. Nobody on the Bulls conspired to form a team. They were put together thru the draft (Jordan, Pippen, Ho Grant, BJ, Stacy King, Scott Williams, Kukoc), free agency (Paxon, Livingston, Hopson, McCray, Hansen, Trent Tucker, Ron Harper, Kerr, Bison Daly) and trades (Cartwright, Rodman). That’s the difference. Also, any superteam needs to have 3 legit All NBA caliber players. Jordan and Pippen are two but Rodman was a one dimensional player (albeit a great rebounding one) as a Bull.

[Hair Jordan]

They lost Michael Freaking Jordan in his prime for nothing and still managed to win 55 games.

You'd have a point if the only roster change was losing Jordan but it wasn't. They added several solid roleplayers including Kukoc (a future 6MOTY) and Kerr and got a much better Scottie Pippen year.

That 93-94 team had 3 all-stars that were all part of the 1st 3-peat. That's how good the supporting cast was on that first 3-peat.

No they most certainly did not. Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong were not stars. Making the all star team once in your entire career because your team won a bunch of games is no indicator of being a star. That's like saying Kyle Korver and Jeff Teague were star players cuz they made it once on that 60 win Atlanta team. Nobody in their right mind would call those guys star players. Pippen was the only true star Jordan had on his team during the 1st three peat, that's a fact.

Did you forgot the part about the Raptors trading back to back to back all-star DeMar DeRozan for Kawhi? Acting like they just got Kawhi for nothing a bit disingenuous, but ok.

Yes but your missing the point. Nobody was calling the 2019 Raptors a super team. Then they lose Kawhi the following year, add no one, and still managed to win 53 games in a shortened season. Did anyone call them a super team after that? No, that's my point. Just winning 50 or so games with a great coach and supporting cast doesn't automatically equate to being a super team. Ya'll throw around that term so easily nowadays.

Dude, Kukoc sucked ass during his first season with the Bulls. That was a tough adjustment to the NBA, especially in an era with few international players. Kukoc was not this great contributor you are making him out to be in that 1st season. And Steve Kerr, wow. Guess that's why they only won 2 fewer games despite losing His Airness.

You make a good point about that Raptors team being a superteam. They were stacked. Problem is it only lasted 1 season. They took down a hobbled Warriors squad. The Bulls dominated the league for 3 straight seasons. They were so stacked that you had 3 players from the 3-peat making the all-star game the season MJ left. No other teams had that much talent or depth.

The Bulls won 67 games in 1991-92. Jordan and Pippen played heavy minutes during their repeat season and then went directly to the ‘92 Olympics. The following year (1992-93) they eased back on the throttle to give Jordan and Pippen more rest. The end result was a 57 win season - 10 fewer wins than the previous year. They underachieved a little. The 1993-94 Bulls overachieved in Jordan’s absence by winning 55 games to everyone’s surprise and that’s why Ho Grant and BJ Armstrong were rewarded with All Star selections - not because they were legit All Stars. Neither one of them ever made another All Star appearance. The Bulls WERE NOT stacked. They had a bunch of new faces - Kukoc, Kerr, Harper, Meyers etc. The following year, those same Bulls fell back down to Earth and were 34-31 before Jordan came out of retirement and went 13-4 the rest of the regular season. They were basically a .500 team without Jordan.

[zimpy27]

Yes of course it was.

The only team more super were the Durant Warriors

[Drakeem]

Yes. They were the most talented team from top to bottom by FAR IMO in that second threepeat. People have mentioned the names already so I won't keep repeating words but that team was absolutely stacked for that era and the cherry on the top was that you had the arguable GOAT pulling it all together.

[ScrantonBulls]

You'd have a point if the only roster change was losing Jordan but it wasn't. They added several solid roleplayers including Kukoc (a future 6MOTY) and Kerr and got a much better Scottie Pippen year.

No they most certainly did not. Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong were not stars. Making the all star team once in your entire career because your team won a bunch of games is no indicator of being a star. That's like saying Kyle Korver and Jeff Teague were star players cuz they made it once on that 60 win Atlanta team. Nobody in their right mind would call those guys star players. Pippen was the only true star Jordan had on his team during the 1st three peat, that's a fact.

Yes but your missing the point. Nobody was calling the 2019 Raptors a super team. Then they lose Kawhi the following year, add no one, and still managed to win 53 games in a shortened season. Did anyone call them a super team after that? No, that's my point. Just winning 50 or so games with a great coach and supporting cast doesn't automatically equate to being a super team. Ya'll throw around that term so easily nowadays.

Dude, Kukoc sucked ass during his first season with the Bulls. That was a tough adjustment to the NBA, especially in an era with few international players. Kukoc was not this great contributor you are making him out to be in that 1st season. And Steve Kerr, wow. Guess that's why they only won 2 fewer games despite losing His Airness.

You make a good point about that Raptors team being a superteam. They were stacked. Problem is it only lasted 1 season. They took down a hobbled Warriors squad. The Bulls dominated the league for 3 straight seasons. They were so stacked that you had 3 players from the 3-peat making the all-star game the season MJ left. No other teams had that much talent or depth.

The Bulls won 67 games in 1991-92. Jordan and Pippen played heavy minutes during their repeat season and then went directly to the ‘92 Olympics. The following year (1992-93) they eased back on the throttle to give Jordan and Pippen more rest. The end result was a 57 win season - 10 fewer wins than the previous year. They underachieved a little. The 1993-94 Bulls overachieved in Jordan’s absence by winning 55 games to everyone’s surprise and that’s why Ho Grant and BJ Armstrong were rewarded with All Star selections - not because they were legit All Stars. Neither one of them ever made another All Star appearance. The Bulls WERE NOT stacked. They had a bunch of new faces - Kukoc, Kerr, Harper, Meyers etc. The following year, those same Bulls fell back down to Earth and were 34-31 before Jordan came out of retirement and went 13-4 the rest of the regular season. They were basically a .500 team without Jordan.

This sharade of acting like the 93-94 Bulls were the same as the 94-95 Bulls is pretty funny.

The 1st 3-peat was so stacked that you remove a godlike player (MJ) and they still won 55 games. So stacked that teammates like Horace and BJ finally got their flowers and were picked to be all stars.

Horace was so impactful on winning that the year he leaves, he helps his new team to the finals. Dude was a beast and one hell of a defender.

[ScrantonBulls]

Yes. They were the most talented team from top to bottom by FAR IMO in that second threepeat. People have mentioned the names already so I won't keep repeating words but that team was absolutely stacked for that era and the cherry on the top was that you had the arguable GOAT pulling it all together.

But where was the collusion?!

[Edrees]

Lebron, Wade, Bosh - Yes. 3 All NBA first team players, and even two MVPs level players (wade is 57th in MVP win shares which is quite high and he got close to winning many times. Also he was a finals MVP.)

Bosh wasn't an All-NBA 1st Team Player.

Oh wow. That's crazy I thought he was on the raptors. guess he was 2nd team. Still close enough I think.

[lessthanjake]

Dude, Kukoc sucked ass during his first season with the Bulls. That was a tough adjustment to the NBA, especially in an era with few international players. Kukoc was not this great contributor you are making him out to be in that 1st season. And Steve Kerr, wow. Guess that's why they only won 2 fewer games despite losing His Airness.

You make a good point about that Raptors team being a superteam. They were stacked. Problem is it only lasted 1 season. They took down a hobbled Warriors squad. The Bulls dominated the league for 3 straight seasons. They were so stacked that you had 3 players from the 3-peat making the all-star game the season MJ left. No other teams had that much talent or depth.

The Bulls won 67 games in 1991-92. Jordan and Pippen played heavy minutes during their repeat season and then went directly to the ‘92 Olympics. The following year (1992-93) they eased back on the throttle to give Jordan and Pippen more rest. The end result was a 57 win season - 10 fewer wins than the previous year. They underachieved a little. The 1993-94 Bulls overachieved in Jordan’s absence by winning 55 games to everyone’s surprise and that’s why Ho Grant and BJ Armstrong were rewarded with All Star selections - not because they were legit All Stars. Neither one of them ever made another All Star appearance. The Bulls WERE NOT stacked. They had a bunch of new faces - Kukoc, Kerr, Harper, Meyers etc. The following year, those same Bulls fell back down to Earth and were 34-31 before Jordan came out of retirement and went 13-4 the rest of the regular season. They were basically a .500 team without Jordan.

This sharade of acting like the 93-94 Bulls were the same as the 94-95 Bulls is pretty funny.

The 1st 3-peat was so stacked that you remove a godlike player (MJ) and they still won 55 games. So stacked that teammates like Horace and BJ finally got their flowers and were picked to be all stars.

Horace was so impactful on winning that the year he leaves, he helps his new team to the finals. Dude was a beast and one hell of a defender.

What actually happened in 1994 is that the Bulls added some incredibly important pieces.

Most notable was Toni Kukoc, who actually was by all accounts a *very* impactful player (and was already in his prime when he entered the NBA). For reference, five-year RAPM measures have Kukoc ranking somewhere between 12th and 27th in the NBA in 1997-2001, and Squared’s 1985-1996 partial RAPM has Kukoc ranked 12th (though that’s basically just on the back of his data in 1996). This was a massive addition, and was probably the 4th best player to play for the Bulls in Jordan’s entire career (peak Rodman was better than Kukoc, but Kukoc was better than mid-30’s Bulls Rodman). And his minutes were largely replacing Rodney McCray, who had been a -4.3 BPM guy for them. Even as compared to the 1991 and 1992 team (which didn’t have McCray), we can conceptualize his minutes as largely replacing Cliff Livingston’s minutes, and he was a -1.5 BPM guy for the Bulls. Kukoc’s BPM averaged just below +4 with the Bulls overall, and his RAPM values are around +4 as well.

The Bulls also added Steve Kerr, who was serious upgrade. For reference, in his years on the Bulls, Kerr had a 1.9 BPM, and various multi-year RAPM we have has him ranking around 100th in the NBA in those years, with around a +1.5 rating. This was a really significant upgrade over old John Paxson, who at this point was a -2.5 BPM guy over his last two years in the NBA.

Finally, the Bulls added Longley and Wennington, and replaced a lot of Cartwright and Stacey King minutes with them. Longley and Wennington were themselves not particularly good, but they were still significant upgrades over ancient Cartwright and Stacey King. For reference, Longley’s BPM in his years with the Bulls was -1.7 and Wennington’s in his first three years there was -3.1. Sounds bad, right? Well, Cartwright’s last four years in the NBA had a -3.9 BPM, and Stacey King was a career -3.4 BPM guy and was more like -4.3 BPM from 1993-96. So even though Longley and Wennington were not good, getting like 2000 minutes from them was a serious upgrade.

So let’s just do some back-of-the-napkin math here.

- As compared to 1993, replacing McCray with Kukoc was like replacing a -4 guy with a +4 guy. I’ll be generous and say he was replacing a -3 on average, since he played more minutes than McCray had and was also replacing minutes of a guy like Scott Williams (who was more like a -1.5 BPM guy). So that’s a +7 shift in 24 minutes per game. Which we’d naturally expect to move the average MOV about 3.5 per game. But Kukoc only played 75 games and there’s not quite 100 possessions a game (and RAPM and BPM are meant to be in per-100-possession terms), so let’s discount for that and say more like a +3 change in MOV.

- Kerr was like a +1.5 to +2 guy whose minutes were replacing a -2.5 guy. That is about a +4 or +4.5 shift for a guy who played 25 minutes a game. Let’s be generous and take the low end at +4. Discounting a bit for pace being below 100, we get about a +2 shift in MOV from that change.

- And then there’s the Longey/Wennington stuff. Wennington played 18 MPG and was only about +1 better than the guys his minutes were replacing. But let’s be generous and even say he was only +0.5 better. Discounting for games played and a little for pace, we get just above a +0.15 shift in MOV from this. Not big, but still something. Then there’s Longley. We do the same thing, but Longley was better, so we have a -1.7 replacing something more like -4.0. Longley didn’t play much that year though, so discounting for how much he played and a bit for pace, and we’re probably looking at a +0.25 shift in MOV from this.

Overall, we add this stuff together, and even though we made some conservative estimates in the calculations, we have a rough estimate of these changes moving the Bulls’ average MOV by about +5.4. Which is a huge amount! If you lopped 5.4 MOV off for the 1994 Bulls, they’d have had an average MOV of -2.3. Which would’ve made them something like a 30-35 win team. Of course this is just back-of-the-napkin stuff using BPM and RAPM values, but it gives us a good general sense of the importance of these other roster changes. The quality of the supporting cast matters a lot. I notice that LeBron/anti-Jordan fans are readily able to acknowledge this when assessing why the Lakers have been unsuccessful in recent years, but seem to turn off that part of their brain when assessing things like the 1994 Bulls.

[Narigo]

The second three peat was definitely a super team.

[Drakeem]

The 1st three peat Bulls absolutely not but the 2nd 3 peat absolutely were in comparison to the rest of the league (as opposed to like the KD warriors).

55 wins in 93-94

Are you joking? Winning 55 games is absolutely no indicator of a team being a "Super Team". They had just a really good coach and a solid supporting cast. That'd be like calling the 2019 Raptors a super team because they were able to win 59 games the year before Kawhi got there or that 60 win Atlata team a super team.

That Raptors team was so talented looking back at that year and the next one. If Kawai had stayed and they went back to back (pushing the Celtics to 7 with no actual first option ain’t bad at all), I think we would be looking at that as a super team.

[eyeatoma]

They were probably a defensive superteam, but offensively, it was Jordan and Pippen, that was it. That's just a one 2 star punch, with MJ doing most of the punching.

[sp6r=underrated]

I don't know if the Bulls were a "Super Team" since the definition is nebulous. But the important thing is Jordan had a great supporting cast for the 2nd three peat.

Bulls Record 1994-95 (No Jordan, Playoffs Included, Playoffs weighted 2x): 101-66, 3.52 (MOV)
Bulls Record 1994-95 (No Jordan, Playoffs Included): 95-62, 3.56
Bulls Playoff Record: 6-4, 2.8
Bulls Record 1994 (Pippen/Kukoc/Grant Playoffs weighted 2x): 67-35, 3.03
Bulls Record 1994 (Pippen/Kukoc/Grant): 61-31, 3.05
Bulls Record 1995 (Pippen/Kukoc): 34-31, 4.29

Pippen, Jackson, Grant, Rodman are appreciated by serious fans but Kukoc is one of those good players who has been lost to time. Jordan hated Krause but he built a good team around him. And Krause was right to wait for Kukoc,

Are you joking? Winning 55 games is absolutely no indicator of a team being a "Super Team". They had just a really good coach and a solid supporting cast. That'd be like calling the 2019 Raptors a super team because they were able to win 59 games the year before Kawhi got there or that 60 win Atlata team a super team.

Kawhi had an insanely good supporting cast in Toronto. I'm kind of floored that you don't recognize them as such.