OT- The Last Dance documentary

[HomoSapien]

3. That he, Al Vermeil, and even Phil, all thought Longley and Rodman were done. That Longley's legs were shot and that Rodman didn't have another full season in him. And that given this, they were in a position where they were going to pay MJ and Scottie a ton of money and have little left over to address the PF and C positions.

(...)

I actually believe 3. I mean, they weren't wrong. Longley played three more years, missing significant time in two out of the three, and Dennis played a grand total of 35 more NBA games in his career after 1998. They may well have been in a position where MJ and Scottie were still playing well, but without a frontcourt playing at the necessary level. They may have looked like the March/April 1995 Bulls. Or a worse version of the gassed 1998 playoff Bulls.

And it's also 100% believable the JR didn't want to pay the money for MJ and Scottie if management didn't think the team could win again.

About this: Luc Longley played 39 games in the short season and 72 in the next. Less minutes and still helped the Suns go over the Spurts without Duncan. He could have been over but it is not like he was a great player. I've been enjoying him vs Pacers in 98 (rewatched the first 3 games until now).

Rodman... the only reason why he would not be able to take another season is his mind. The guys seemed fine physically to me in the 98 playoffs. So, I've watched all the games until game 3 of the ECF and I think I saw all of his starts: only one game under 10 rebounds (the first one). Some great passing and some good defense... even a spart in offense for game 1 of the ECF.

(and lots of weak fouls against him... the guy had a target... but also some of dirty/smart plays by him like grabing on screens and so that the refs didn't see).

If we look at what he did on other teams it is just his attitude and that no team wanted him. I do belive that with Phil, Pippen and Jordan he would have been fine in the Bulls.

So, for 99 and 00 we could have been right there with the same starting 5. Then we know that Harper, Longley and Pippen were really on the last legs.

So I call that reason also a bit of BS. Even with Longley on less minutes, wouldn't we be able to get a center?

Good post. I've never understood the Rodman was toast after 98 comments. The guy led the league in rebounding and played 80 games his final season on the Bulls. The next two seasons playing with no motivation and surrounded by horrible infrastructures, he showed he still could rebound just fine. Like you said, it was all mental with him. That said, I'm pretty convinced that he'd do much better in 99 with Phil, MJ, and Scottie than with Rambis and a young Shaq and Kobe.

[troza]

Good post. I've never understood the Rodman was toast after 98 comments. The guy led the league in rebounding and played 80 games his final season on the Bulls. The next two seasons playing with no motivation and surrounded by horrible infrastructures, he showed he still could rebound just fine. Like you said, it was all mental with him. That said, I'm pretty convinced that he'd do much better in 99 with Phil, MJ, and Scottie than with Rambis and a young Shaq and Kobe.

Just to add that while he was a starter (vs Nets and Hornets) he was averaging 16.1 rebounds a game on the playoffs, his best rebounding playoffs ever (in rebounds per game), even with only 8 rebounds in his first game in about 40 minutes a game (if I'm not mistaken). Then he went to the bench and that's another story.

[dice]

I'm wonderingg why Finley fell so far. Guy averaged 20ppg his last 3 years at Wisconsin.

his TS% fell from 57.8% as a soph/jr to 50.4% as a senior, so that probably had something to do with it

[dice]

That said, Krause felt he could burn it to the ground and rebuild a true contender so would have never gone for that type of plan. The irony of that is that Krause, in his entire history, drafted 1 star player (Pippen) and really had logical reason to think he could pull off what he tried based on his history.

Ironic indeed.

krause obviously vastly overestimated his astuteness, but to be fair, there's only one GM who has ever drafted more than 1 player on pippen's level: red auerbach

-jerry west never drafted a single one (traded for kobe 2 weeks after the draft)
-jerry colangelo (4 time exec of the year) never drafted one
-r.c. buford traded for kawhi on draft day

in looking into this, i noticed the supreme irony of bob bass winning his 2nd exec. of the year award the season he traded kobe for vlade

[prolific passer]

I'm wonderingg why Finley fell so far. Guy averaged 20ppg his last 3 years at Wisconsin.

his TS% fell from 57.8% as a soph/jr to 50.4% as a senior, so that probably had something to do with it

Interesting. Guy had a good career none the less. Played with Barkley, Dirk, Nash, and Duncan and was one pick shy of playing with Jordan and Pippen. 2 time all star and beat Lebron for his only championship.

[dougthonus]

krause obviously vastly overestimated his astuteness, but to be fair, there's only one GM who has ever drafted more than 1 player on pippen's level: red auerbach

-jerry west never drafted a single one (traded for kobe 2 weeks after the draft)
-jerry colangelo (4 time exec of the year) never drafted one
-r.c. buford traded for kawhi on draft day

in looking into this, i noticed the supreme irony of bob bass winning his 2nd exec. of the year award the season he traded kobe for vlade

It's disingenuous to say draft day trades don't count as drafting the player if that is what you are saying. West gets credit for Kobe, Buford gets credit for Kawhi. They get more credit, like Krause for Pippen, because they targeted the player and made a trade to get a pick they wouldn't have otherwise to get them.

I'd say Butler and Rose would count as a Pippen level. Injuries obviously stopped Rose from having that type of career.

[logical_art]

3. That he, Al Vermeil, and even Phil, all thought Longley and Rodman were done. That Longley's legs were shot and that Rodman didn't have another full season in him. And that given this, they were in a position where they were going to pay MJ and Scottie a ton of money and have little left over to address the PF and C positions.

(...)

I actually believe 3. I mean, they weren't wrong. Longley played three more years, missing significant time in two out of the three, and Dennis played a grand total of 35 more NBA games in his career after 1998. They may well have been in a position where MJ and Scottie were still playing well, but without a frontcourt playing at the necessary level. They may have looked like the March/April 1995 Bulls. Or a worse version of the gassed 1998 playoff Bulls.

And it's also 100% believable the JR didn't want to pay the money for MJ and Scottie if management didn't think the team could win again.

About this: Luc Longley played 39 games in the short season and 72 in the next. Less minutes and still helped the Suns go over the Spurts without Duncan. He could have been over but it is not like he was a great player. I've been enjoying him vs Pacers in 98 (rewatched the first 3 games until now).

Rodman... the only reason why he would not be able to take another season is his mind. The guys seemed fine physically to me in the 98 playoffs. So, I've watched all the games until game 3 of the ECF and I think I saw all of his starts: only one game under 10 rebounds (the first one). Some great passing and some good defense... even a spart in offense for game 1 of the ECF.

(and lots of weak fouls against him... the guy had a target... but also some of dirty/smart plays by him like grabing on screens and so that the refs didn't see).

If we look at what he did on other teams it is just his attitude and that no team wanted him. I do belive that with Phil, Pippen and Jordan he would have been fine in the Bulls.

So, for 99 and 00 we could have been right there with the same starting 5. Then we know that Harper, Longley and Pippen were really on the last legs.

So I call that reason also a bit of BS. Even with Longley on less minutes, wouldn't we be able to get a center?

Good post. I've never understood the Rodman was toast after 98 comments. The guy led the league in rebounding and played 80 games his final season on the Bulls. The next two seasons playing with no motivation and surrounded by horrible infrastructures, he showed he still could rebound just fine. Like you said, it was all mental with him. That said, I'm pretty convinced that he'd do much better in 99 with Phil, MJ, and Scottie than with Rambis and a young Shaq and Kobe.

Those were Krauses words. Listen to his interview with Woj. Also he didn't do anything again in his career. We can speculate he might have done better with the Bulls, but that's simply speculation. His career was essentially over after 1998.

[wickywack]

krause obviously vastly overestimated his astuteness, but to be fair, there's only one GM who has ever drafted more than 1 player on pippen's level: red auerbach

-jerry west never drafted a single one (traded for kobe 2 weeks after the draft)
-jerry colangelo (4 time exec of the year) never drafted one
-r.c. buford traded for kawhi on draft day

in looking into this, i noticed the supreme irony of bob bass winning his 2nd exec. of the year award the season he traded kobe for vlade

It's disingenuous to say draft day trades don't count as drafting the player if that is what you are saying. West gets credit for Kobe, Buford gets credit for Kawhi. They get more credit, like Krause for Pippen, because they targeted the player and made a trade to get a pick they wouldn't have otherwise to get them.

I'd say Butler and Rose would count as a Pippen level. Injuries obviously stopped Rose from having that type of career.

By that measure, Krause drafted zero. Seattle officially drafted Pippen.

[bledredwine]

Stumbled upon this today in my tube feed.

It has some incredible stats on both players. I highly recommend for anyone who's curious.
It also has a much better approach to the typical crap arguments you hear in this debate, including in-depth analysis of strengths, weaknesses, all time rankings, spots on the floor, a much greater sample size for clutch shots (honest comparison, for a change).
Most importantly, it considers context and compares both to what teams were gravitating towards at the time

Watch on YouTube

Fun fact- Jordan has 19 of the 100 top Gamescores.... that's crazy, 1 out of every 5 is Jordan, including the top one (69 and 19 Rebs against Cleveland)

[dice]

krause obviously vastly overestimated his astuteness, but to be fair, there's only one GM who has ever drafted more than 1 player on pippen's level: red auerbach

-jerry west never drafted a single one (traded for kobe 2 weeks after the draft)
-jerry colangelo (4 time exec of the year) never drafted one
-r.c. buford traded for kawhi on draft day

in looking into this, i noticed the supreme irony of bob bass winning his 2nd exec. of the year award the season he traded kobe for vlade

It's disingenuous to say draft day trades don't count as drafting the player if that is what you are saying. West gets credit for Kobe, Buford gets credit for Kawhi.

i'd say that west gets less credit for kobe because of all the time that passed that enabled other teams to potentially snag him. if you see kobe as anything more than a developmental prospect, you don't take any chances. you offer more than vlade divac well before 2 weeks after the draft. who knows how interested west really was in kobe. additionally, neither west nor buford traded up, as they both could have, to select their prospect outright avoid having to negotiate w/ whoever ended up with him. kawhi was considered a top 10 prospect, so obviously there was no pre-draft agreement w/ the pacers to select him at 15. they were hesitant to part with george hill in the deal

I'd say Butler and Rose would count as a Pippen level. Injuries obviously stopped Rose from having that type of career.

eh, butler's not quite on scottie's level. and derrick was a gimme pick

[dice]

krause obviously vastly overestimated his astuteness, but to be fair, there's only one GM who has ever drafted more than 1 player on pippen's level: red auerbach

-jerry west never drafted a single one (traded for kobe 2 weeks after the draft)
-jerry colangelo (4 time exec of the year) never drafted one
-r.c. buford traded for kawhi on draft day

in looking into this, i noticed the supreme irony of bob bass winning his 2nd exec. of the year award the season he traded kobe for vlade

It's disingenuous to say draft day trades don't count as drafting the player if that is what you are saying. West gets credit for Kobe, Buford gets credit for Kawhi. They get more credit, like Krause for Pippen, because they targeted the player and made a trade to get a pick they wouldn't have otherwise to get them.

I'd say Butler and Rose would count as a Pippen level. Injuries obviously stopped Rose from having that type of career.

By that measure, Krause drafted zero. Seattle officially drafted Pippen.

technically true, but there was an agreement in place before the selection. krause effectively made the pick for seattle

[dougthonus]

i'd say that west gets less credit for kobe because of all the time that passed that enabled other teams to potentially snag him. if you see kobe as anything more than a developmental prospect, you don't take any chances. you offer more than vlade divac well before 2 weeks after the draft. who knows how interested west really was in kobe. additionally, neither west nor buford traded up, as they both could have, to select their prospect outright avoid having to negotiate w/ whoever ended up with him. kawhi was considered a top 10 prospect, so obviously there was no pre-draft agreement w/ the pacers to select him at 15. they were hesitant to part with george hill in the deal

I'm not sure why you think there is any difference between a predraft agreement and one that is decided upon during the draft here. That makes no sense to me at all.

Whether you are assigning brilliance to those picks or not is also irrelevant and off topic. Those picks were made by those GMs.

I'd say Butler and Rose would count as a Pippen level. Injuries obviously stopped Rose from having that type of career.

eh, butler's not quite on scottie's level. and derrick was a gimme pick[/quote]

I'd say Butler is near enough that I'd count him as a star pick, but yeah, I think Pippen is better. Rose was a gimmie, but still a star. Again, not relative to the original point of guys drafting stars.

[dice]

i'd say that west gets less credit for kobe because of all the time that passed that enabled other teams to potentially snag him. if you see kobe as anything more than a developmental prospect, you don't take any chances. you offer more than vlade divac well before 2 weeks after the draft. who knows how interested west really was in kobe. additionally, neither west nor buford traded up, as they both could have, to select their prospect outright avoid having to negotiate w/ whoever ended up with him. kawhi was considered a top 10 prospect, so obviously there was no pre-draft agreement w/ the pacers to select him at 15. they were hesitant to part with george hill in the deal

I'm not sure why you think there is any difference between a predraft agreement and one that is decided upon during the draft here. That makes no sense to me at all.

you really don't see a difference between proactively trading up to ensure you get your guy and making a last minute deal after waiting until he falls way below expectations?

Whether you are assigning brilliance to those picks or not is also irrelevant and off topic. Those picks were made by those GMs.

off topic? the topic is the drafting of star players. what am i missing here?

I'd say Butler and Rose would count as a Pippen level. Injuries obviously stopped Rose from having that type of career.

eh, butler's not quite on scottie's level. and derrick was a gimme pick

I'd say Butler is near enough that I'd count him as a star pick, but yeah, I think Pippen is better. Rose was a gimmie, but still a star. Again, not relative to the original point of guys drafting stars.

feel free to amend the topic to stars not dropped into a GMs lap by winning the lotterytaken #1 overall. we're allowed to do that on the fly, right? because that was clearly what i was doing

the general topic was obviously the drafting acumen of jerry krause. more specifically here being the ability to spot high end talent. jerry west w/ kobe and buford w/ kawhi are thus reasonable points of comparison. bringing derrick rose into the conversation takes us waaaaaay off the reservation...and might not even qualify given that derrick himself was arguably not on scottie's level (only was for a single regular season, anyway)

even if you add garpax to auerbach as the only 2 GMs to draft more than 1 star player, that doesn't change the point i was making, which is that even a great talent evaluator is unlikely to draft more than 1 star. it wouldn't be that factor that should've prevented krause from his megalomaniacal view of his abilities

[prolific passer]

i'd say that west gets less credit for kobe because of all the time that passed that enabled other teams to potentially snag him. if you see kobe as anything more than a developmental prospect, you don't take any chances. you offer more than vlade divac well before 2 weeks after the draft. who knows how interested west really was in kobe. additionally, neither west nor buford traded up, as they both could have, to select their prospect outright avoid having to negotiate w/ whoever ended up with him. kawhi was considered a top 10 prospect, so obviously there was no pre-draft agreement w/ the pacers to select him at 15. they were hesitant to part with george hill in the deal

I'm not sure why you think there is any difference between a predraft agreement and one that is decided upon during the draft here. That makes no sense to me at all.

you really don't see a difference between proactively trading up to ensure you get your guy and making a last minute deal after waiting until he falls way below expectations?

Whether you are assigning brilliance to those picks or not is also irrelevant and off topic. Those picks were made by those GMs.

off topic? the topic is the drafting of star players. what am i missing here?

eh, butler's not quite on scottie's level. and derrick was a gimme pick

I'd say Butler is near enough that I'd count him as a star pick, but yeah, I think Pippen is better. Rose was a gimmie, but still a star. Again, not relative to the original point of guys drafting stars.

feel free to amend the topic to stars not dropped into a GMs lap by winning the lotterytaken #1 overall. we're allowed to do that on the fly, right? because that was clearly what i was doing

the general topic was obviously the drafting acumen of jerry krause. more specifically here being the ability to spot high end talent. jerry west w/ kobe and buford w/ kawhi are thus reasonable points of comparison. bringing derrick rose into the conversation takes us waaaaaay off the reservation...and might not even qualify given that derrick himself was arguably not on scottie's level (only was for a single regular season, anyway)

even if you add garpax to auerbach as the only 2 GMs to draft more than 1 star player, that doesn't change the point i was making, which is that even a great talent evaluator is unlikely to draft more than 1 star. it wouldn't be that factor that should've prevented krause from his megalomaniacal view of his abilities

Trust in Krause because he says so.

[dougthonus]

you really don't see a difference between proactively trading up to ensure you get your guy and making a last minute deal after waiting until he falls way below expectations?

The second of those probably has a lot more merit when discussing how you target a specific player, as you are trading up to get someone specific when you know he is there. The first is trading up because you want a pick. The second situation is fairly common, the first is very rare. Teams typically only trade up when they know the guy they want will be available, and you never know 100% until a team is on the clock.

off topic? the topic is the drafting of star players. what am i missing here?

The thread started specifically on the quote of "no one has ever drafted 2 pippen quality players" which was what I was responding to. If you decide the pick, you clearly count as having made it, even if the trade was consummated afterwards, and how obvious the pick was doesn't seem relative to whether you made it.

feel free to amend the topic to stars not dropped into a GMs lap by winning the lotterytaken #1 overall. we're allowed to do that on the fly, right? because that was clearly what i was doing

See point above, I was responding to "no one has ever drafted 2 players of this quality" there was no discussion of excluding #1 picks, excluding trades that were made on draft day, or other things in the point I was replying to.

the general topic was obviously the drafting acumen of jerry krause. more specifically here being the ability to spot high end talent. jerry west w/ kobe and buford w/ kawhi are thus reasonable points of comparison. bringing derrick rose into the conversation takes us waaaaaay off the reservation...and might not even qualify given that derrick himself was arguably not on scottie's level (only was for a single regular season, anyway)

I wasn't discussing this general topic in this thread, but have done so earlier. In that general topic, I viewed Krause as having made 2 great picks (Pippen and Kukoc) that went well above what a normal GM would do. A few more good picks (Chandler (though Gasol was better and available one slot later), Oakley, Brand, Artest, Crawford, though none of them worked out for us). I don't think that was exceptionally good over the 25 or so years he was GM with huge amounts of busts.

even if you add garpax to auerbach as the only 2 GMs to draft more than 1 star player, that doesn't change the point i was making, which is that even a great talent evaluator is unlikely to draft more than 1 star. it wouldn't be that factor that should've prevented krause from his megalomaniacal view of his abilities

Let me rephrase it this way, because setting the bar at Pippen is artificially high to my point. Krause never drafted another player that likely would have been viewed as top 25 in the league in any given year outside of Pippen. There are tons of teams that have done that.

Also setting it at a single GM vs an org with the same scouting staff moves the bar a bit. Lots of teams don't keep GMs for long periods of time. Krause was around for 13 years and drafted one guy who was a top 25 player when he decided to break up the team to start over.

At some point in a 13 year stretch in recent history, I would guess more than half the teams in the league have drafted two players better than whomever you think Krause's 2nd best draft pick is.

[troza]

Sorry for changing the topics... Currently watching the series between Bulls and Pacers in 98 and that game 4... the referees were not constant. We got turnovers on offensive fouls by Jordan and Rodman... but on the other hand Miller with a clear foul on Jordan to get free and he did threw a punch intended for Harper and no technical. Still... We lost cause Pippen did his Malone impression.

So far I'm enjoying those series. All good games. Too bad that Phil rested Jordan a bit in game 3 (loosing a 8 point lead away that could have killed the series).

[JimmyJammer]

You can always leave it to big mouths like Charles Barkley to tell it like it is. How in the world a bulldog owner like Jerry Reinsdorf would let a diminutive GM destroy a dinasty that he had any faith in? Please, explain that to me. Reinsdorf is sitting out there right now like some kind of passive owner who had nothing to do with this. Please, give me a break. In retrospect, I am not really angry about the whole thing, because the team was obviously getting old, with Rodman being down the hill and with Pippen having some back issues. Additionally, there was this feud with Phil. However, it all boiled down to Reinsdorf not wanting to pay for an aging team and a coach that the organization could no longer control. There has been a pattern of this even after Jordan to prove it, like with the trade of Butler and Derrick Rose. I would not be surprised if this is the reason why that star players shy away from signing with the Bulls or agreeing to a trade to the Bulls. Here is the link with some of the quotes from Barkley below.

Charles Barkley blames Jerry Reinsdorf for breaking up Bulls after 1998 seasonBy Jack Maloney1 hr ago • 2 min read

With no games going on due to the coronavirus pandemic, the entire NBA world has turned its attention to "The Last Dance," the 10-part documentary series detailing Michael Jordan and the 1997-98 Chicago Bulls. The storylines there are endless, but one, in particular, has gotten a lot of attention, especially after the early episodes: credit and blame.

How did the Bulls reach such great heights, and then, why did it all fall apart? In the film, much of the blame has fallen on late GM Jerry Krause, who has been painted as the villain of the story. Let Charles Barkley tell it, however, the real reason the team broke up is that owner Jerry Reinsdorf didn't want to spend the money necessary to keep them together. 

Dan Patrick Show

✔@dpshow

"The notion that [Jerry Krause] broke up the Bulls is asinine and absurd... Jerry Reinsdorf broke up the Bulls because he didn't want to pay anybody." -Charles Barkley

Hour 2 starting now:

Watch on YouTube

 …

202

9:58 AM - Apr 29, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

68 people are talking about this

Here's Barkley on the Dan Patrick Show:

He didn't take that apart. Anybody who thinks that is a fool. That thing was all orchestrated by Jerry Reinsdorf. The notion that [Jerry Krause] broke up the Bulls is asinine and absurd. If you go back and look at it and use common sense, just use common sense. Jerry Reinsdorf broke up the Bulls because he didn't want to pay anybody.

You think about it, he let Horace Grant go because he became a free agent and didn't want to pay him. They probably won't talk about that in the documentary. That's why he left and went to Orlando. He only paid Michael the last two years. When he had Michael at a bargain he was happy. So he didn't want to pay Michael. He paid him the last two years. He had Scottie on a great deal. That's the reason he broke up the Bulls -- strictly because of money.

But to try to make Jerry Krause to be the bad guy, I thought that was very disingenuous by Jerry Reinsdorf. 

Https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/the-last-dance-charles-barkley-blames-jerry-reinsdorf-for-breaking-up-bulls-after-1998-season/

[wickywack]

Sorry for changing the topics... Currently watching the series between Bulls and Pacers in 98 and that game 4... the referees were not constant. We got turnovers on offensive fouls by Jordan and Rodman... but on the other hand Miller with a clear foul on Jordan to get free and he did threw a punch intended for Harper and no technical. Still... We lost cause Pippen did his Malone impression.

So far I'm enjoying those series. All good games. Too bad that Phil rested Jordan a bit in game 3 (loosing a 8 point lead away that could have killed the series).

That was a fascinating series in many ways. Going into it, I didn't particular expect a close series. The Pacers were a good team, but the Bulls had the top seed despite missing Pippen for half the season - and now they had Pippen back. Going into game 7, Bulls (from memory) dominated their home games. The Pacers barely eked out their home games (I think all come down to the last possession). I think the general sentiment was that the Bulls had outplayed the Pacers but failed to put them away. Game 7 was in Chicago and should have been an easy win based on how the series had played out to that point. A tie game with 2 minutes left was a shock.

I do wonder how Krause and Reinsdorf were rooting in the end. If those last 2 minutes had gone in the other direction, the outrage on breaking up the team would certainly have been muted.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

He didn't take that apart. Anybody who thinks that is a fool. That thing was all orchestrated by Jerry Reinsdorf. The notion that [Jerry Krause] broke up the Bulls is asinine and absurd. If you go back and look at it and use common sense, just use common sense. Jerry Reinsdorf broke up the Bulls because he didn't want to pay anybody.

You think about it, he let Horace Grant go because he became a free agent and didn't want to pay him. They probably won't talk about that in the documentary. That's why he left and went to Orlando. He only paid Michael the last two years. When he had Michael at a bargain he was happy. So he didn't want to pay Michael. He paid him the last two years. He had Scottie on a great deal. That's the reason he broke up the Bulls -- strictly because of money.

But to try to make Jerry Krause to be the bad guy, I thought that was very disingenuous by Jerry Reinsdorf. 

Https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/the-last-dance-charles-barkley-blames-jerry-reinsdorf-for-breaking-up-bulls-after-1998-season/

Barkley is just wrong about some things here. I don't want to come across as a JR-apologist, but facts matter.

First, the Bulls thought they had a verbal agreement with Horace. Now, I'm sure Horace would dispute that, would say that JR misinterpreted a handshake or something. But the story has always been that he backed out of a verbal agreement with the Bulls to sign with Orlando. A lot of fans were even pissed at him for a long time. I always got the feeling there were issues beyond money between Horace and the team.

Second, the thing about JR 'only' paying MJ in the last two years. That's disingenuous. MJ had signed an 8-year deal with the Bulls in 1988, which expired after 1995-96. Salaries across the board skyrocketed in the mid-90s after the Dream Team. When MJ retired the first time in 93, he was not being underpaid by any stretch. He was the 2nd highest-paid player in the league in 1992-93(#1 was David Robinson). By the last year of his contract - 1995-96 - he was the 32nd highest-paid player in the league. So the Bulls rectified that and paid him handsomely the following two years. That's it. This is the same thing as Scottie's situation. He signed a 7 year deal in 1991, salaries skyrocketed a few years later, and he had to wait until his contract expired to get in on that action.

It is just stupid to blame JR for either MJ or Scottie's contract situations in the 90s. They both happened to sign their contracts shortly before the biggest financial transformation in the league's history. It was an accident of timing. That's all it was.

[troza]

He didn't take that apart. Anybody who thinks that is a fool. That thing was all orchestrated by Jerry Reinsdorf. The notion that [Jerry Krause] broke up the Bulls is asinine and absurd. If you go back and look at it and use common sense, just use common sense. Jerry Reinsdorf broke up the Bulls because he didn't want to pay anybody.

You think about it, he let Horace Grant go because he became a free agent and didn't want to pay him. They probably won't talk about that in the documentary. That's why he left and went to Orlando. He only paid Michael the last two years. When he had Michael at a bargain he was happy. So he didn't want to pay Michael. He paid him the last two years. He had Scottie on a great deal. That's the reason he broke up the Bulls -- strictly because of money.

But to try to make Jerry Krause to be the bad guy, I thought that was very disingenuous by Jerry Reinsdorf. 

Https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/the-last-dance-charles-barkley-blames-jerry-reinsdorf-for-breaking-up-bulls-after-1998-season/

Barkley is just wrong about some things here. I don't want to come across as a JR-apologist, but facts matter.

First, the Bulls thought they had a verbal agreement with Horace. Now, I'm sure Horace would dispute that, would say that JR misinterpreted a handshake or something. But the story has always been that he backed out of a verbal agreement with the Bulls to sign with Orlando. A lot of fans were even pissed at him for a long time. I always got the feeling there were issues beyond money between Horace and the team.

Second, the thing about JR 'only' paying MJ in the last two years. That's disingenuous. MJ had signed an 8-year deal with the Bulls in 1988, which expired after 1995-96. Salaries across the board skyrocketed in the mid-90s after the Dream Team. When MJ retired the first time in 93, he was not being underpaid by any stretch. He was the 2nd highest-paid player in the league in 1992-93(#1 was David Robinson). By the last year of his contract - 1995-96 - he was the 32nd highest-paid player in the league. So the Bulls rectified that and paid him handsomely the following two years. That's it. This is the same thing as Scottie's situation. He signed a 7 year deal in 1991, salaries skyrocketed a few years later, and he had to wait until his contract expired to get in on that action.

It is just stupid to blame JR for either MJ or Scottie's contract situations in the 90s. They both happened to sign their contracts shortly before the biggest financial transformation in the league's history. It was an accident of timing. That's all it was.

Agreed.

And, if I'm not mistaken, he paid Jordan while he was retired during the first years. He actually gave money for Pippen to retire as a Bull. We took an horrible deal for Pippen so he could play where he wanted.