An Unbiased Fan wrote:In 1990, Phil brought the Tri to Chicago, and Pippen's assists jumped from 3.5 apg to 5.4 apg. This was by design, Phil is not a fan of ball-dominant systems, and likes ball movement. It's no secret that MJ was hesitant at first with the Tri and his role. In 91', he fully bought into the system, and it clearly paid off. MJ & Pippen's apg basically flipped as Pip became the usual faciliatator.
Your argumenation would be some sort of legit, if we would talk about a fully developed Pippen, but Pippen wasn't as good as he became later. Watch the games and look how he played and not just look at how his numbers improved.
And Jordan did play less as a facilitator, because Pippen improved, that is all.
Your "bought into the system" is completely off, because he played no different in the 1990 playoffs in comparison to the 1991 playoffs. In fact Jackson made Jordan play a more ball dominant role in the 1991 finals than anything Jordan done in that respective area in 1990.
An Unbiased Fan wrote:I don't see how alllowing Pippen more in the offense would have hurt the Bulls, if anything, they would have been a much more complete 7 balanced team.
Seriously, how do you think the offense will look like, if a player has to do more with the ball than he is capable off? Really, Pippen had way more problems with ball handling and passing in 1990 than he had one year later. Look up his turnover numbers (he had 3.4 per game in 1990 and 2.8 per game in 1991), you can clearly see that. Pippen became better in those areas which allowed Jordan to play more off the ball, that it the reason Pippen's assists numbers increased from 1990 to 1991.
And how much of a difference a Jordan led offense made to a Pippen led offense were we able to see in 1994 and 1995.
An Unbiased Fan wrote:The difference with how the system ran is pretty clear. This isn't about game 7, it's about the whole year. MJ's leadership, and how he played within the system was better from 90' to 91', IMO.
You can repeat that multiple times, but that doesn't make it right. The system didn't look much different afterall, but the younger players developed, that is the difference between 1990 and 1991. Heck, I really would love to see your argumenation, if Pippen and Grant wouldn't have went 4 of 27 from the field in game 7 in Detroit. Just a normal 50 fg% for both and the Bulls would have advanced to the finals and Jordan would have ended that game with 31 points and 13 or 14 assists. How would you argue then?
It wasn't Jordan's fault that his teammates couldn't make their open shots, shots they were able to make one year later.
And how the hell does that all fit with your point that Magic is the #1 in 1990? That makes no sense seeing that the Lakers lost even one round earlier.
An Unbiased Fan wrote:Also, you bring up turnovers, BUT, wouldn't you say that had a lot more to do with a brand new system getting put in place, rather than a lack of ability with Pippen. MJ himself had 3 tpg, and it dropped to 2.5 tpg in 91'. Pip had 3.4 tpg in 90' and then it dropped to 2.8 tpg in 91'.
Jordan's turnovers dropped to a normal level from 1989 to 1990, because he handled the ball less in 1990 than in 1989. The new system was invented in 1989/90, thus it might be an explanation for Jordan, BUT not for Pippen. Pippen actually dropped one year later, because he became better as a ball handler and passer. You can clearly see that in those games. The TPO for sure helped Pippen more than Jordan, because the TPO covers up for Pippen's weaknesses on offense.
An Unbiased Fan wrote:The Bulls were not ball-dominant in 91', like they were in 90'. MJ taking over a game is fine if it's within the flow of the offense, which it was. There's a big difference between dribble, dribble, dribble, as compared to a star taking advantage of matchups & situations through ball movement, slashing, penetration, and great mid-range play. The 91' Bulls were much better in the Tri, and MJ was much better running it that year.
Jordan didn't dribble the ball much in set plays, in fact he mostly came off screens and took the shot. Jordan was more opportunistic in fastbreak situations, in which he used the spaces in the opponents defense more often in 1990. But that was also because the games were more close and the Bulls were down more often. One year later that was different, and the Bulls slowed it more down and ran more set plays. Just normal for the better team, control the pace. For someone who isn't really into it that might look like Jordan actually played way different and "hold is teammates back", but in the end the way he played mostly in the 2nd half of games was more defined by the performance of his teammates in the first half than by his actually different level of maturity. He played in the same fashion one year later, if the support couldn't get anything done. It just happened less often. It is pretty simple.
