OT- The Last Dance documentary

[kulaz3000]

Watch on YouTube

[Michael Jackson]

I'm starting to agree with the Ken Burns' criticism now.

30 minutes of controlled MJ propaganda with the rest of the 10 minutes sprinkling in some background or setup is just a boring formula.

We know everything about Jordan at this point.

Nothing new is being revealed or being allowed by MJ.

It would have been way more interesting to talk about the supporting cast more, or highlight them.

We're watching a Jordan infomercial at this point.

Once the nostalgia factor wears off, its not a good documentary.

It’s Jordan’s production for sure and it is going to be biased. It is still fun to watch. The winners always right history

[ImSlower]

Getting a great deal on a year of The Athletic has been a fantastic purchase for me. I read all of Mayberry's great Bulls content, same with any Cards stuff. They have some of my favorite sportswriters there. So far, the highest respect for the publication.

That said, today I dipped over and their headline is a story comparing LeBron's last year in Cleveland to Jordan.

Get. The. ****. Outta. Here.

It's behind a paywall, and it's not worth the click, but for reference.

[GetBuLLish]

I'm enjoying every second of this documentary. I really don't understand the complaints. Seems like people being negative just to be negative. Were they expecting the documentary to reveal that MJ was a serial killer or something?

[Big Pippen]

I'm enjoying every second of this documentary. I really don't understand the complaints. Seems like people being negative just to be negative. Were they expecting the documentary to reveal that MJ was a serial killer or something?

Come on. Literally not one person has said they are not enjoying this. People are allowed to say they are enjoying something, while dialoguing over creative choices that could have been handled differently.

[Stratmaster]

I'm starting to agree with the Ken Burns' criticism now.

30 minutes of controlled MJ propaganda with the rest of the 10 minutes sprinkling in some background or setup is just a boring formula.

We know everything about Jordan at this point.

Nothing new is being revealed or being allowed by MJ.

It would have been way more interesting to talk about the supporting cast more, or highlight them.

We're watching a Jordan infomercial at this point.

Once the nostalgia factor wears off, its not a good documentary.

It could be worse.. but I do agree with you. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being completely unauthorized, and a 1 being edited by Jordan himself, this doc is a 2. In a career that included divorce, court depositions, extortion attempts, a mysterious layoff, fraternizing with referees off hours, and everything in Leahy's and Sam Smith's books.. this doc has been super pro Jordan in every layer

As someone who pays almost no attention to the personal lives of celebrities, I am very glad this is the case. It is called the last dance, and pegged as the story of the Bulls final championship. I want basketball content and I think it has been handled perfectly. All of the front office drama is being covered. that is basketball related. The gambling issue was covered, which is basketball related because of the claim that it affected his game 2 performance.

If this was about Jordan's personal life, I wouldn't even be watching it. Why do I care about MJ's marriage and court depositions. I have no clue what you are even talking about other than the divorce, and have no interest in learning about it. I have never read Sam Smith's book and don't know who Leahy is.

Obviously, just my personal opinion.

[Stratmaster]

I'm starting to agree with the Ken Burns' criticism now.

30 minutes of controlled MJ propaganda with the rest of the 10 minutes sprinkling in some background or setup is just a boring formula.

We know everything about Jordan at this point.

Nothing new is being revealed or being allowed by MJ.

It would have been way more interesting to talk about the supporting cast more, or highlight them.

We're watching a Jordan infomercial at this point.

Once the nostalgia factor wears off, its not a good documentary.

It is a documentary of the Bulls last championship run set against the historical basketball background. What have they left out?

Are you saying that Jordan should not be allowed to present his version of the story? So...you wanted a hit piece?

[troza]

Getting a great deal on a year of The Athletic has been a fantastic purchase for me. I read all of Mayberry's great Bulls content, same with any Cards stuff. They have some of my favorite sportswriters there. So far, the highest respect for the publication.

That said, today I dipped over and their headline is a story comparing LeBron's last year in Cleveland to Jordan.

Get. The. ****. Outta. Here.

It's behind a paywall, and it's not worth the click, but for reference.

Well... but here it was one guy wanting out not the owner wanting that guy out... Also the reason behind it was Lebron while here the focus of staying and going was management and Phil Jackson.

[Stratmaster]

I have watched the Bulls 1996 championship run playoff games, and am up to game 5 of the Indiana series in 1998. I don't see a better thread for it, so I wanted to put some observations here.

On the NBA:
1. They used to actually call traveling in the NBA, including limiting a player to 2.5 steps when attacking the rim. Or lifting your pivot foot.
2. Multiple teams employed full court pressure on defense, way more than you ever see it now.
3. The idea that it is faster paced today is a fallacy. Many of those teams ran a bunch. The more aggressive defenses just hampered the ability to do it on every possession. They also were a lot smarter and more disciplined in when and how they ran back then. If taking bad shots early in the shot clock is "faster-paced", then modern basketball is faster paced.
4. It was so much more physical, even on the perimeter. The picks that were being set. The tenacity of the defense. Re-institute the old rules and mode of officiating and watch 3 point shooting percentages plummet. It's a little tougher to make 3 pointers when you can't take them in a bubble, and when you ran into a pick from a 260' Center the last time down the court. THIS is why the mid-range shot was still valuable.
5. A lot of talk about officials favoring stars back then. Overall, the officiating was way better though. Still frustrating at times because the nature of the game makes it impossible to get all the calls right.
6. Players today are way better shooters, and way worse in every other aspect of the game.
7. Basketball was both more sophisticated and more caveman-like simultaneously.

On the Bulls specifically, after watching the 1996 series', then the 1998, Jerry Krause wasn't as wrong as I remembered. He still mishandled just about everything, but the Bulls did look like the last gasp of a dynasty in '98. Jordan was still the best player in the game, but he no longer dominated the game. Pippen was still in his peak, but on the tail end of it. Rodman was done, more-so mentally than physically. Kukoc was still in his prime but had settled into his role player status and seemed way too comfortable with it.

The way Krause handled it certainly factored into some of that, although I think each player's individual performance after the breakup pretty much reinforces that Krause wasn't way off in his assessment. Still, you have to give the team a chance to 4-peat. I doubt they had another championship run in them. It sure would have been nice to have given them a shot at it, and would have been fun as hell to watch.

[troza]

On the Bulls specifically, after watching the 1996 series', then the 1998, Jerry Krause wasn't as wrong as I remembered. He still mishandled just about everything, but the Bulls did look like the last gasp of a dynasty in '98. Jordan was still the best player in the game, but he no longer dominated the game. Pippen was still in his peak, but on the tail end of it. Rodman was done, more-so mentally than physically. Kukoc was still in his prime but had settled into his role player status and seemed way too comfortable with it.

I can see where you're going. Maybe not dominating as before but he was still dominating. I'm watching the 98 playoffs (I will start today the game 7 vs Indiana) and I still see him doing well on defense (not as often) and some monster dominating games. Against Indiana so far he as been the best player on the field on every game and he has been doing great things all games... And he has been clutch. Ok, not super clutch all games but he actually makes baskets and plays at the end of the games. And let's not forget game 2 where he scores to end the first 3 quarters and he is the one scoring the decisive points on the 4th quarter.

[Stratmaster]

On the Bulls specifically, after watching the 1996 series', then the 1998, Jerry Krause wasn't as wrong as I remembered. He still mishandled just about everything, but the Bulls did look like the last gasp of a dynasty in '98. Jordan was still the best player in the game, but he no longer dominated the game. Pippen was still in his peak, but on the tail end of it. Rodman was done, more-so mentally than physically. Kukoc was still in his prime but had settled into his role player status and seemed way too comfortable with it.

I can see where you're going. Maybe not dominating as before but he was still dominating. I'm watching the 98 playoffs (I will start today the game 7 vs Indiana) and I still see him doing well on defense (not as often) and some monster dominating games. Against Indiana so far he as been the best player on the field on every game and he has been doing great things all games... And he has been clutch. Ok, not super clutch all games but he actually makes baskets and plays at the end of the games. And let's not forget game 2 where he scores to end the first 3 quarters and he is the one scoring the decisive points on the 4th quarter.

I have been underwhelmed watching him again in the 1998 playoffs. I said he was still the best player in the game. When I say underwhelmed, that is in comparison to the Michael Jordan of 1996 and earlier.

I agree with you though. MJ was still the reason the Bulls won the championship in 98. Just shows you how good he was when he was in his prime, that at about 60% of what he used to be he was still the best.

[The Evidence]

It is a documentary of the Bulls last championship run set against the historical basketball background. What have they left out?

Are you saying that Jordan should not be allowed to present his version of the story? So...you wanted a hit piece?

Everything we know about the Bulls is LITERALLY the Jordan/Nike/ESPN/Chicago narrative

This was an opportunity to see the team through a different lens.

[Stratmaster]

It is a documentary of the Bulls last championship run set against the historical basketball background. What have they left out?

Are you saying that Jordan should not be allowed to present his version of the story? So...you wanted a hit piece?

Everything we know about the Bulls is LITERALLY the Jordan/Nike/ESPN/Chicago narrative

This was an opportunity to see the team through a different lens.

No, it wasn't ever advertised as that. Like someone else said, everything about Jordan's personal failings is well documented if that is what you want to read or hear about.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[wickywack]

On the Bulls specifically, after watching the 1996 series', then the 1998, Jerry Krause wasn't as wrong as I remembered. He still mishandled just about everything, but the Bulls did look like the last gasp of a dynasty in '98. Jordan was still the best player in the game, but he no longer dominated the game. Pippen was still in his peak, but on the tail end of it. Rodman was done, more-so mentally than physically. Kukoc was still in his prime but had settled into his role player status and seemed way too comfortable with it.

I can see where you're going. Maybe not dominating as before but he was still dominating. I'm watching the 98 playoffs (I will start today the game 7 vs Indiana) and I still see him doing well on defense (not as often) and some monster dominating games. Against Indiana so far he as been the best player on the field on every game and he has been doing great things all games... And he has been clutch. Ok, not super clutch all games but he actually makes baskets and plays at the end of the games. And let's not forget game 2 where he scores to end the first 3 quarters and he is the one scoring the decisive points on the 4th quarter.

I have been underwhelmed watching him again in the 1998 playoffs. I said he was still the best player in the game. When I say underwhelmed, that is in comparison to the Michael Jordan of 1996 and earlier.

I agree with you though. MJ was still the reason the Bulls won the championship in 98. Just shows you how good he was when he was in his prime, that at about 60% of what he used to be he was still the best.

The 98 Bulls won at a 67+ win rate when Scottie Pippen was in the lineup (he missed almost half the season). Only 13 teams in NBA history have won 67+ games in a season. 9 of those teams won a championship. In other words, a healthy Bulls team was still historically great. They had room to drop and still be historically great.

If the goal is to maximize championships, it's just silly to break up a team like that. The odds of putting a new team together on par with the 98 Bulls or hypothetical 99 Bulls were just poor.

[TheFinishSniper]

The 98 Bulls won at a 67+ win rate when Scottie Pippen was in the lineup (he missed almost half the season). Only 13 teams in NBA history have won 67+ games in a season. 9 of those teams won a championship. In other words, a healthy Bulls team was still historically great. They had room to drop and still be historically great.

If the goal is to maximize championships, it's just silly to break up a team like that. The odds of putting a new team together on par with the 98 Bulls or hypothetical 99 Bulls were just poor.

Yes. In your eyes. Not in jerry krause eyes who by 91 when Bulls won first one was already on mark that organizations win championships and that people behind scenes deserves same credit as players. Now just imagine ego after 5 more.

[dougthonus]

Getting a great deal on a year of The Athletic has been a fantastic purchase for me. I read all of Mayberry's great Bulls content, same with any Cards stuff. They have some of my favorite sportswriters there. So far, the highest respect for the publication.

That said, today I dipped over and their headline is a story comparing LeBron's last year in Cleveland to Jordan.

Get. The. ****. Outta. Here.

It's behind a paywall, and it's not worth the click, but for reference.

If you want to compare LeBron's 2nd to last year where the Cavs came back from 3-1 deficit to beat the 73 win Warriors then sure, I think that's a reasonable comparison of one year of LeBron to any year that Jordan had (and perhaps better).

[dice]

Getting a great deal on a year of The Athletic has been a fantastic purchase for me. I read all of Mayberry's great Bulls content, same with any Cards stuff. They have some of my favorite sportswriters there. So far, the highest respect for the publication.

That said, today I dipped over and their headline is a story comparing LeBron's last year in Cleveland to Jordan.

Get. The. ****. Outta. Here.

It's behind a paywall, and it's not worth the click, but for reference.

If you want to compare LeBron's 2nd to last year where the Cavs came back from 3-1 deficit to beat the 73 win Warriors then sure, I think that's a reasonable comparison of one year of LeBron to any year that Jordan had (and perhaps better).

he certainly didn't PLAY better than jordan's peak that season, but rallying to beat a 73 win team to bring cleveland their first title was a singular achievement. tough to top that

[dumbell78]

I'm starting to agree with the Ken Burns' criticism now.

30 minutes of controlled MJ propaganda with the rest of the 10 minutes sprinkling in some background or setup is just a boring formula.

We know everything about Jordan at this point.

Nothing new is being revealed or being allowed by MJ.

It would have been way more interesting to talk about the supporting cast more, or highlight them.

We're watching a Jordan infomercial at this point.

Once the nostalgia factor wears off, its not a good documentary.

It could be worse.. but I do agree with you. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being completely unauthorized, and a 1 being edited by Jordan himself, this doc is a 2. In a career that included divorce, court depositions, extortion attempts, a mysterious layoff, fraternizing with referees off hours, and everything in Leahy's and Sam Smith's books.. this doc has been super pro Jordan in every layer

As someone who pays almost no attention to the personal lives of celebrities, I am very glad this is the case. It is called the last dance, and pegged as the story of the Bulls final championship. I want basketball content and I think it has been handled perfectly. All of the front office drama is being covered. that is basketball related. The gambling issue was covered, which is basketball related because of the claim that it affected his game 2 performance.

If this was about Jordan's personal life, I wouldn't even be watching it. Why do I care about MJ's marriage and court depositions. I have no clue what you are even talking about other than the divorce, and have no interest in learning about it. I have never read Sam Smith's book and don't know who Leahy is.

Obviously, just my personal opinion.

Gotta have that TMZ in your face dirt. Conspiracy theory gambling suspension, what really happened in his marriage? Why did his dad really get murdered? etc. We demand that MJ is dragged over the coals so we can be entertained.

Its just nonsense.

[troza]

Getting a great deal on a year of The Athletic has been a fantastic purchase for me. I read all of Mayberry's great Bulls content, same with any Cards stuff. They have some of my favorite sportswriters there. So far, the highest respect for the publication.

That said, today I dipped over and their headline is a story comparing LeBron's last year in Cleveland to Jordan.

Get. The. ****. Outta. Here.

It's behind a paywall, and it's not worth the click, but for reference.

If you want to compare LeBron's 2nd to last year where the Cavs came back from 3-1 deficit to beat the 73 win Warriors then sure, I think that's a reasonable comparison of one year of LeBron to any year that Jordan had (and perhaps better).

he certainly didn't PLAY better than jordan's peak that season, but rallying to beat a 73 win team to bring cleveland their first title was a singular achievement. tough to top that

I wonder what tops that... humm... being the best player in a 72 win team that wins the title?

[troza]

On the Bulls specifically, after watching the 1996 series', then the 1998, Jerry Krause wasn't as wrong as I remembered. He still mishandled just about everything, but the Bulls did look like the last gasp of a dynasty in '98. Jordan was still the best player in the game, but he no longer dominated the game. Pippen was still in his peak, but on the tail end of it. Rodman was done, more-so mentally than physically. Kukoc was still in his prime but had settled into his role player status and seemed way too comfortable with it.

I can see where you're going. Maybe not dominating as before but he was still dominating. I'm watching the 98 playoffs (I will start today the game 7 vs Indiana) and I still see him doing well on defense (not as often) and some monster dominating games. Against Indiana so far he as been the best player on the field on every game and he has been doing great things all games... And he has been clutch. Ok, not super clutch all games but he actually makes baskets and plays at the end of the games. And let's not forget game 2 where he scores to end the first 3 quarters and he is the one scoring the decisive points on the 4th quarter.

I have been underwhelmed watching him again in the 1998 playoffs. I said he was still the best player in the game. When I say underwhelmed, that is in comparison to the Michael Jordan of 1996 and earlier.

I agree with you though. MJ was still the reason the Bulls won the championship in 98. Just shows you how good he was when he was in his prime, that at about 60% of what he used to be he was still the best.

Just watched game 7 of that series. He did shoot poorly but made things happen on offense and contributed big on defense.

Indiana had a big 1st quarter but after that (mainly after their bigs got into foul trouble) there is one run here and there but nothing consistent. The Bulls could have played better though. Kukoc was on fire on that third quarter.