OT- The Last Dance documentary

[dice]

"i hate steve kerr. i HATE steve kerr. i hate him. painful memories. that game 7 leaves me shaking my head. we expected MJ. we expected scottie. we didn't expect little stevie. those 11 points were the difference makers. it was IMPACTFUL 11 points in game 7. big, big shots against us" - reggie

[dice]

'91-'98 bulls average margin of victory:

0.19 Houston Rockets (8-8 record/MJ 10-12 vs rockets for bulls career)
2.43 Los Angeles Lakers (12-9)
3.43 Utah Jazz (18-10)
3.59 Portland Trail Blazers (14-8)
3.77 New York Knicks (40-20)
4.06 San Antonio Spurs (9-7)
4.09 Phoenix Suns (13-9)
4.88 Indiana Pacers (30-12)
5.23 Seattle SuperSonics (15-7)
5.63 Cleveland Cavaliers (33-16)

7.26 Orlando Magic
8.43 Detroit Pistons
8.91 Washington Wizards
9.00 Milwaukee Bucks
9.14 Atlanta Hawks
9.36 Charlotte Hornets
10.06 Philadelphia 76ers
10.24 Miami Heat
10.47 New Jersey Nets
10.58 Toronto Raptors
10.61 Boston Celtics
10.94 Denver Nuggets
11.06 Golden State Warriors
11.94 Minnesota Timberwolves
13.13 Los Angeles Clippers
13.31 Sacramento Kings
14.44 Dallas Mavericks
14.67 Vancouver Grizzlies

[troza]

In some ways I'm glad it ended the way it did. In the mind of everyone, Jordan went out on top. I don't think the Bulls would have won another title if they came back. They would have been in the running, but I don't think they would have done it.

Hard to say.

The Knicks and Spurs weren't exactly terrifying teams in '98-99.

With an off-season to recharge and maybe a roster tweak, I wouldn't have beat against them.

Strike shortened season
#8 seed made run to the Finals

Tends to fuel belief an aging team with injuries could have pulled it off

Spurs vs Bulls would be immense strength vs weakness matchup. Classic series but I like our chances finding some bodies to bang down low with Robinson/Duncan than the Spurs ability to find someone to guard Jordan. Sean Elliot, Mario Ellie and Avery Johnson were all out of the league within 2 years. Also Kerr is not on the Spurs bench.

2000? Yah we would be toast.

Against who? Phil and Pippen wouldn't be helping other teams to be the best in the league.

In 1999 we actually needed more big men. On 1998 that was a weakness of our team: Longley, Rodman... and then Bill Wennington? And no one else? Ok, Kukoc if you want. That would make the 99 finals very hard for us.

But as you said... Elliot, Ellie and Johnson would be eaten alive by Pippen, Jordan and Harper. The size/strength difference is huge.

The sixth title season WAS the one more year.

Should be required reading:

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/jerry-krause-explains-why-bulls-dynasty-unraveled-his-words

I've posted here many times on how the Bulls were running on the fumes for the 6th title, and more than one participant used that exact phrasing.

And Scottie waited for YEARS to get his chance to get paid - he was going to take a one year deal? Come on MJ. You know that wasn't going to happen. MJ, who ya crappin'?

Scottie, Rodman, and Longley were not nearly as good after the 6th title. MJ sliced his hand open. That team wasn't sniffing a title.

The optics I agree were not good, and the Bulls didn't seem to care about the PR aspect, but there are no bad guys imo.

Great documentary, great time. Love MJ and Scottie.

I'm still wondering how a team that faced injuries on a started and ended up 62-20 and wins a title is on fumes. Surelly it wasn't the best version of the team and maybe that was really the last year but we will never know.

What is actually shown by the future is that some pieces were still good for some time: Jordan in his Wizards come back was good until the major injury vs Sacramento... now imagine a few years before that. Pippen was good for 2 years. Phil was still the best coach for a long time... Kerr and Harper still did their thing for a while (well... Kerr until 2003), Longley was the starting center of the team that took off the Duncanless Spurs in 2001.

And Rodman... he actually was averaging more than 14 rebounds in Dallas showing that the problem was mental... as it was before he joined the Bulls!

Was the team perfect? No. Was it the best version of our team? No... we would still be able to be a contender for a while even if we ended up without the title. I would say that Pacers and the Spurs would be our opponents in 99 and in 00 maybe the Portland even without Pippen? I doubt the Lakers would get there without Phil Jackson.

[dice]

speaking of the lakers w/ phil, how many titles would MJ have won had he been drafted by the lakers at age 18, started w/ a 24 year old shaq and added phil in his 4th season?

[Southpaw]

Reinsdorf admitting on camera that money was the real reason the Dynasty was broken up was a surprise to me, and he didn't beat around the bush either.

I know it's impossible but I wonder if Jordan would've pushed for a 4-peat if he (time traveller? lol) knew Shaq and Kobe would get a 3-peat in early 2000s. We had 2 shots at it and one was entirely in his control. We all know getting a 3-peat was important to him because Larry, Magic and Isiah never got to do it.

I know being 6-0 and adds to Jordan's legacy but it would've been nice to see how they would react after getting beaten, it would've been cool to see Jordan "pass the torch" to the next great team. I feel we had a good shot at '99 had they all been brought back and 2000 would've been harder against peak Shaq.

[dougthonus]

Over the years we've heard that Jordan was offered the chance to pick his own coach (Frank Hamblen was pitched) and he supposedly turned that proposition down. Reinsdorf's last quote (below for reference) doesn't really make it seem like Jordan was ever approached with this possibility. Jordan himself sort of contradicts that notion by saying that he would have accepted a one year deal to come back in 99.

I think if the Bulls did everything in their power to keep Jordan that they would have had a good chance of keeping Jordan. It would have involved bringing everyone back including Phil, but they probably could have done it. Should they have done everything in their power to keep Jordan? Yeah, of course! Did they? No.

At the same time, Jordan aggrandizing himself and overselling the "forced out" thing because he thinks it makes him look better. He was probably asked a 1000 times about coming back and would never commit to wanting to come back. He could have forced the Bulls hand with absolutely no effort into bringing everyone back.

He could have just gone to play with another team if he wanted to keep playing at that moment. He could have threatened it and the Bulls would have caved faster than you could blink. It was reported that the Bulls made efforts to keep him and that Jordan wasn't interested. His actions also show he wasn't interested that interested. His self-serving speech 22 years later doesn't change that.

I don't know if I would say the Bulls needed to thread a needle to convince him to stay, but they definitely had to work hard for it, and they should have done that work, and in retrospect, any team acting today would absolutely do that work, but Jordan wasn't dying to play. He was burnt out. If he was dying to play then he would have played. We saw multiple times that he was just willing to walk away because he was burnt out, and that's not something we've seen from any athlete of his caliber. That might actually be the biggest chink in his armor as GOAT athlete of all time.

[The Duke]

My memory is a bit hazy, but if i remember the one year contracts Jordan were signing in 97 and 98, were like $30-34M each, prior to the lockout, or so?

I think it's a little false to say pip would come back for one year, unless he got a baloon one year deal as well, and that was not going to happen

[dougthonus]

And to makes things worse... Phil made the Lakers great, Pippen was a big part of that Portland team, Harper was still doing his thing in the Lakers, Steve Kerr did his thing for the Spurs, Longley did his thing for the Suns... Horance Grant was a starter in the championship team in 2001... and the east became so weak (Rik Smits in 2000 wouldn't bother us as much as he did in 98)... yeah... We were in a good position if we kept the team.

Just to be clear:
Rodman completely fell off the reservation in 99 and couldn't even last half a season with a championship contending team on the roster.

Pippen and Kerr were significantly worse every year of their career 99 and afterwards and were both clearly in significant decline.

Horace Grant was already gone and wasn't coming back under any circumstances.

Maybe Rodamn, Pippen, and Kerr would have all been dramatically better if they stayed in the triangle under Jordan/Jackson, but if you look at what actually happened with those guys and project similar quality onto the Bulls, then the Bulls would have imploded in 99.

[dougthonus]

Hard to say.

The Knicks and Spurs weren't exactly terrifying teams in '98-99.

With an off-season to recharge and maybe a roster tweak, I wouldn't have beat against them.

Certainly we will never know. We know Rodman fell off the face of the Earth, Pippen and Kerr dropped significantly in their ability, and the Bulls had no cap room to bring in any significant contributors. It would have been awfully tough for them to go up against the Spurs with no quality defensive big men.

[chitowndish]

I still feel like a lot of those guys were just done for various reasons and Krause became the easy excuse. There was a ton of pressure on all of them to come back and I don't think a lot of them really wanted to. The main one is Phil though he sounded done he wanted a break he strongly believed he only had 7 years with a team and the thing that struck me about the documentary was after the 6 championship when PJ said it was perfect like you couldn't have written a better ending. He's big into energy and the feel of the moment and I sure think he felt like that was the perfect ending.

MJ I thought they did a brilliant job highlighting the crazy media pressure MJ was facing in both 93 and 98 (this is where the time jumping paid off big time). In 93 he was facing the crumbling of his image and people interviewing him about if he was a gambling addict instead of his greatness. In 98 he couldn't even go anywhere and in that moment said pretty strongly that he did want to go out on top and he wouldn't miss it. I think he's changed his mind since then but I think that car ride in for the playoffs as well as when he's just sitting in his hotel room trapped show he was just done too.

Pip also was done from a financial perspective. MJ glossed over it saying he would need convincing I agree there was really no amount of convincing that would have kept him there unless he was making the same as MJ. The main problem with Pip was the money but it really seemed to go deeper than that it was constantly being in MJ's shadow he wanted to go out and prove he could win somewhere else.

Krause was full of himself and thought he could just go out and do it again with the young guys wanted to prove it. We saw what he was taking from the players so he probably wanted every single one of them gone regardless of WTF happened because of how far things were gone and wanted to prove that he could rebuild. Yeah Krause has a lot of blame in that but I'd say they all have a part of that because that was going really far and as others have said it's a bad to let things get to that point and they were all adults and any one of them could have swallowed their pride for the team. Reinsdorf is the guy that let things get to that point, wanted to save money and went with Krause.

I think it was a case where there was a mountain of public pressure to keep that thing going and I don't think in the moment any of them actually wanted to keep going. I think MJ regrets it now and Pip now sees the results of what happened and would rather have another championship but at the time they all seemed done. Someone was going to take the fall for that or they would all be viewed more negatively so they threw Krause under the bus. I think the main domino was probably PJ, Reinsdorf tried to get him involved in the rebuild and MJ thinks that's why PJ left was that it was a rebuild but I think Phil was just done overall, like someone else said this already was the one more year and I think for Phil the second time he came back for a one more year. He needed time and I think MJ was not coming back without Phil I don't think he ever had any doubt about that and I think that's what really killed the dynasty.

I guess overall too I do think that was the perfect moment to end it, the steal the shot to take the championship. I think it's kind of cool that nobody beat him in his prime and I actually agree with Seinfeld there is something to be said about going out on top and leaving them wanting more rather than watching the long slow decline (That's why I really liked the "I'm going to make quitting the move of the 90's line" I thought that was another really brilliant moment). MJ said similar things in the car ride and I have no reason to doubt him he wanted to go out on top and like Phil said you couldn't have written it any better. I know people would rather see them ride it out until they lose but I'm not mad with that ending.

[troza]

I still feel like a lot of those guys were just done for various reasons and Krause became the easy excuse. There was just a ton of pressure on all of them to come back and I don't think a lot of them really wanted to. The main one is Phil though he sounded done he wanted a break he strongly believed he only had 7 years with a team and the thing that struck me about the documentary was after the 6 championship when PJ just said it was perfect like you couldn't have written a better ending. He's big into energy and the feel of the moment and I sure think he felt like that was the perfect ending.

I do think the main domino was probably PJ though

Agreed in here. More than anything else, the decision by Phil is what ended the dynasty. If he was back, we would fight for another one. Without him, no MJ and it didn't make sense to get all those veterans back when we knew that wasn't taking us to the title.

I guess overall too I do think that was the perfect moment to end it, the steal the shot to take the championship. I do think it's kind of cool that nobody beat him in his prime

Final 8 points and that last minute is crazy. 4/4 from the free throw line, one layup, one steal and one shot for the ages! And if he didn't play for the Wizards that would be the best career ending of all time.

(and the video I have isn't the best quality and I still wonder if that Stockton's shot was a three... as we all know Harper's was a shot clock violation... well... that wasn't a good game for the refs, with mistakes against or in favour of both sides... the Hesley three point shot taken down, some fouls called on Rodman were unfair... one was not a foul and at least another should have been a double foul for him and Malone in that wrestling sequence)


I see that the main problem is that we feel that we had a chance to get more titles. No other team in history has gone for a rebuild after 3 years of winning 72, 69 and 62 games and 3 titles... and all we know (maybe forgetting some details) is that we had a chance (the Knicks weren't that good, the Spurs either, the Pacers could be a problem as we beat then in 98 with Miller injured but Smits wouldn't be as good). And that there was nothing relevant from this team unless those two years of Rose at the top.

And to makes things worse... Phil made the Lakers great, Pippen was a big part of that Portland team, Harper was still doing his thing in the Lakers, Steve Kerr did his thing for the Spurs, Longley did his thing for the Suns... Horance Grant was a starter in the championship team in 2001... and the east became so weak (Rik Smits in 2000 wouldn't bother us as much as he did in 98)... yeah... We were in a good position if we kept the team.

Just to be clear:
Rodman completely fell off the reservation in 99 and couldn't even last half a season with a championship contending team on the roster.

Pippen and Kerr were significantly worse every year of their career 99 and afterwards and were both clearly in significant decline.

Horace Grant was already gone and wasn't coming back under any circumstances.

Maybe Rodamn, Pippen, and Kerr would have all been dramatically better if they stayed in the triangle under Jordan/Jackson, but if you look at what actually happened with those guys and project similar quality onto the Bulls, then the Bulls would have imploded in 99.

I will say this: I'm not sure of anything. But Rodman would have been out of the league by 96 if it wasn't the Bulls... He was a cancer for that Spurs team. Yet he gave us 3 very good seasons. He still had it physically but he never found himself again on a team that could demand him things like he had in Chicago (he did respect Phil, maybe the only coach at that time that could handle him, Jordan and Pippen)

Kerr still had some big playoff moments in the Spurs title in 99 and 2003. Was he doing more for the Bulls that being a spot up shooter? Not in 98... so I still see him being useful.

Pippen was worse but he was still a good player in a good Portland team. Phil wanted him in LA... just didn't want his contract. He would do good in the triangle? I don't know but we can imagine that he would have at least 2 years in the tank even if it was at a lower level. He would still provide defense on the opposing point guards, rebounds, steals and some offense...

And the other projects weren't near the quality of the Bulls. Worse coaches, no player better than MJ... and even the pressure wasn't as big.


Could they have imploded? Yes. Still... if they went for another year, we know that these guys were adicted to win. The implosion would have likely happened in the off-season (as it did anyway) but in 99 or 2000. Who knows right?

[dougthonus]

I will say this: I'm not sure of anything. But Rodman would have been out of the league by 96 if it wasn't the Bulls... He was a cancer for that Spurs team. Yet he gave us 3 very good seasons. He still had it physically but he never found himself again on a team that could demand him things like he had in Chicago (he did respect Phil, maybe the only coach at that time that could handle him, Jordan and Pippen)

Rodman was cracking in 98 with the Bulls already pretty badly and was 37 years old. I think there's every reason to suspect that he was going to be considerably worse the next season. Maybe he wouldn't have completely fallen off the reservation, but he was going to be worse for sure, and if he went fully off the reservation (which he actually did on a title contender) then the team would have been toast for sure.

Kerr still had some big playoff moments in the Spurs title in 99 and 2003. Was he doing more for the Bulls that being a spot up shooter? Not in 98... so I still see him being useful.

Kerr shot 32% from three that year and scored about half as many points per game. He struggled with back problems if I recall correctly. Again, he was definitely going to be worse.

Pippen was worse but he was still a good player in a good Portland team. Phil wanted him in LA... just didn't want his contract. He would do good in the triangle? I don't know but we can imagine that he would have at least 2 years in the tank even if it was at a lower level. He would still provide defense on the opposing point guards, rebounds, steals and some offense...

Yeah, he would have had something in the tank for sure, but he was also clearly worse, and I think he also struggled with back problems.

Could they have imploded? Yes. Still... if they went for another year, we know that these guys were adicted to win. The implosion would have likely happened in the off-season (as it did anyway) but in 99 or 2000. Who knows right?

Rodman is the key to whether the whole thing blows up terribly. If he could have held it together then they would have had a chance but I think they would have been underdogs. If he fell apart (like he did in reality) then it would have been a trainwreck.

[troza]

I will say this: I'm not sure of anything. But Rodman would have been out of the league by 96 if it wasn't the Bulls... He was a cancer for that Spurs team. Yet he gave us 3 very good seasons. He still had it physically but he never found himself again on a team that could demand him things like he had in Chicago (he did respect Phil, maybe the only coach at that time that could handle him, Jordan and Pippen)

Rodman was cracking in 98 with the Bulls already pretty badly and was 37 years old. I think there's every reason to suspect that he was going to be considerably worse the next season. Maybe he wouldn't have completely fallen off the reservation, but he was going to be worse for sure, and if he went fully off the reservation (which he actually did on a title contender) then the team would have been toast for sure.

I don't understand this. His stats were good, as a starting player (until game 1 of the Indiana series) he was on more than 16 rebounds a game and still provided with great plays from the bench.

He was better in the 98 playoffs than in 97. He did a good season.

So again... he would have been wild if we couldn't handle him. But the Bulls proved that they could as what he did after that Bulls run is very similar to his final days on the Spurs. Yet... we got him going for 3 more seasons.

I agree that without him there would be almost no chance (as we let Caffey go for nothing) but we were the team that could handle his behaviour and get production out of him.

Of course, this is on the scenario where Phil Jackson would stay... and that, for me, is the only reason why everything fell apart after that season. Nothing else. We still had a team (even with all the BS about the condition of the players) to go for another one. There were some amazing players available on the next years and I'm pretty sure that they could have ended up on the Bulls instead of other teams, because the Bulls were the right place for ring chasers (and some names were available although I don't know the Bulls cap space and possibilities at that time).

[dougthonus]

I don't understand this. His stats were good, as a starting player (until game 1 of the Indiana series) he was on more than 16 rebounds a game and still provided with great plays from the bench.

He was better in the 98 playoffs than in 97. He did a good season.

So again... he would have been wild if we couldn't handle him. But the Bulls proved that they could as what he did after that Bulls run is very similar to his final days on the Spurs. Yet... we got him going for 3 more seasons.

He started avoiding all aspects of the game to chase rebounds. His offense got even worse and his defense was slipping IMO as well. He was also starting to fall apart mentally in that last year which they covered in the documentary.

I agree that without him there would be almost no chance (as we let Caffey go for nothing) but we were the team that could handle his behaviour and get production out of him.

Of course, this is on the scenario where Phil Jackson would stay... and that, for me, is the only reason why everything fell apart after that season. Nothing else. We still had a team (even with all the BS about the condition of the players) to go for another one. There were some amazing players available on the next years and I'm pretty sure that they could have ended up on the Bulls instead of other teams, because the Bulls were the right place for ring chasers (and some names were available although I don't know the Bulls cap space and possibilities at that time).

Bulls would have had no cap space. I believe they would have had the MLE which came in during that CBA if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure ring chasers were as big a thing in 99, but they obviously would have been one of a couple destinations that people would have signed for the minimum to get a ring would go to. Back then the salary structure was so depressed compared to today that people would almost always chase the money to my recollection.

A lot of whether you believe they had a chance is whether you believe Rodman could have held it together. We know what actually happened in reality is that he couldn't. Would another run with Phil/Jordan have changed that? I definitely see the argument. I think he would have been better in that situation than what actually happened for sure, but I think he was slipping either way.

[troza]

I don't understand this. His stats were good, as a starting player (until game 1 of the Indiana series) he was on more than 16 rebounds a game and still provided with great plays from the bench.

He was better in the 98 playoffs than in 97. He did a good season.

So again... he would have been wild if we couldn't handle him. But the Bulls proved that they could as what he did after that Bulls run is very similar to his final days on the Spurs. Yet... we got him going for 3 more seasons.

He started avoiding all aspects of the game to chase rebounds. His offense got even worse and his defense was slipping IMO as well. He was also starting to fall apart mentally in that last year which they covered in the documentary.

During the playoffs it doesn't seem like he is not doing all the rest to go after rebounds. His defense on Malone was pretty good.

His offense... I still see the same Rodman as always: no care for the free throws, his shot selection was doubtful (although he gave us some big shots) and his passing was good for his position (even if some of them were slopy, he still added some nice assists). He provided energy from the bench and our best team was with him on the floor with Kukoc, Pippen, Jordan and Harper/Kerr (Kerr due to his size was sometime bad on defense but with him the spacing was better).

I won't say that he didn't just go for the rebounds on that season during the regular season but on the playoffs it didn't seem like it. And about the regular season, I'm pretty sure there was praise for him while Pippen was away.

Bulls would have had no cap space. I believe they would have had the MLE which came in during that CBA if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure ring chasers were as big a thing in 99, but they obviously would have been one of a couple destinations that people would have signed for the minimum to get a ring would go to. Back then the salary structure was so depressed compared to today that people would almost always chase the money to my recollection.

A lot of whether you believe they had a chance is whether you believe Rodman could have held it together. We know what actually happened in reality is that he couldn't. Would another run with Phil/Jordan have changed that? I definitely see the argument. I think he would have been better in that situation than what actually happened for sure, but I think he was slipping either way.

As I said before, I have no recollection of that. But if we look for the Lakers between 00 and 04 not so many years after the last dance, we actually see some faces there.

I don't know who could we get with some sign and trades but there were some names that changed teams that season on the free agency that would have given us some boost: Dell Curry and Perkins were two names that I caught on the movements of that year. I also saw Dennis Scott but I guess that failed big so he wouldn't make a difference (he was injured, right?)

Funny thing... a certain Kurt Thomas (who wasn't anything special at that time) was available... what if he played for us a few years ealier?

I don't have the context for all the names I saw but some of them that would be very interesting... I doubt that we would be able to get them.

[MrFortune3]

I think the erosion by the players who left is overblown. Phil had them in very specific roles for the Bulls and they would have continued in said roles had he come back and they tried for another title.

Even capped out, I have a hard time believing that a person like Krause who reshaped the team early on to add new pieces wouldn't find a way to fuel the 7th championship run if he really wanted to.

[dougthonus]

I won't say that he didn't just go for the rebounds on that season during the regular season but on the playoffs it didn't seem like it. And about the regular season, I'm pretty sure there was praise for him while Pippen was away.

They covered in the doc that he was great while Pippen was out but started falling off and slipping once Pippen came back and he felt he wasn't as important and needed to go on his Vegas break in the middle of the season.

As I said before, I have no recollection of that. But if we look for the Lakers between 00 and 04 not so many years after the last dance, we actually see some faces there.

I don't know who could we get with some sign and trades but there were some names that changed teams that season on the free agency that would have given us some boost: Dell Curry and Perkins were two names that I caught on the movements of that year. I also saw Dennis Scott but I guess that failed big so he wouldn't make a difference (he was injured, right?)

Funny thing... a certain Kurt Thomas (who wasn't anything special at that time) was available... what if he played for us a few years ealier?

I don't have the context for all the names I saw but some of them that would be very interesting... I doubt that we would be able to get them.

Yeah, I can't say I know what they could or could not have done or remember FA real well in 99 or paid that much attention to what other teams were doing. I know they wouldnt' have had a lot in terms of resources, but the desirability of the situation may have gotten them some okay guys to fill out the depth at the minimum.

In the end, the Spurs had a higher SRS (Simple rating system) number in 99 than the Bulls did in 98, and everyone on that 98 team was basically in decline outside of Kukoc and almost all had very significant decline. If you say that 70% of that decline was just due to changing situations, and only 30% of that decline was due to actual players declining (and most were at the age where decline is expected as they would have been Jordan 35, Pippen 33, Rodman 37, Harper 35 etc), then you would still say mathematically the Bulls would have been the underdog.

I think the Bulls would have come out of the East for sure though. The Knicks upset the Heat in the first round, the Pacers fell off the map in terms of their defense, there was no one else to challenge them in the East really the way it played out. It's just that Spurs team would have been a matchup nightmare for them.

[prolific passer]

Perkins and Jordan played together and won a title at unc so that might have persuaded Jordan to stay. Ben Wallace was starting to come into his own in 99 and maybe the bulls should have taken a chance on him.

[ChettheJet]

I'd like to consider what could have been, had Jordan decided to play. Let's say Pippen says NO way, so they either let him go or do a S&T even the same one and they get Roy Rogers who for whatever reason they just cut loose. He wasn't a great player but when you look at the 98-99 roster he was good enough for that team. OK Rodman is deemed too big of a risk so they don't bring him back.

With no moves you've got
Harper Brown Kerr
Jordan Buechler
Longley Wennington
Kukoc Burrell Booth
Simpkins

Maybe the smart moves were made trade Longley, Kerr maybe they keep Beuchler and Burrell


But back to trying again, maybe Phil comes back maybe not, maybe Michael has enough faith in Jimmy Rodgers, Frank Hamblin, Bill Cartwright and Tex Winter that one of them becomes head coach and they run things the same way, but smoother without the Rodman craziness.


Obviously they signed Brett Barry, got Andrew Lang, Mark Bryant, Roy Rogers in trades

But with Jordan vowing to play until he didn't win a championship could they have signed better FAs than Brent Barry and Kornel David? They wouldn't have counted on Keith Booth, Rusty LaRue, Cory Carr, Corey Benjamin, Charles Jones

On the market were
Dell Curry, Derek Harper, Anthony Miller, Mario Ellie, Adrian Griffin, Vinny Del Negro, Jim Jackson
Derek Coleman, Thurl Bailey, Antonio McDyess, Mark West, Joe Smith, Brad Miller,

All of them played for several more years, quite a few ended up with the Bulls later when they weren't nearly as good. Any of them might have signed for a year or two with the understanding that Jordan would stay until be didn't win a championship, so they were betting on being a part of that effort. Some might have signed long term figuring Chicago would be a good place to stay and rebuild.

Finding players to fill in around Jordan was Krause's talent, obviously rebuilding from scratch wasn't.

[prolific passer]

I'd like to consider what could have been, had Jordan decided to play. Let's say Pippen says NO way, so they either let him go or do a S&T even the same one and they get Roy Rogers who for whatever reason they just cut loose. He wasn't a great player but when you look at the 98-99 roster he was good enough for that team. OK Rodman is deemed too big of a risk so they don't bring him back.

With no moves you've got
Harper Brown Kerr
Jordan Buechler
Longley Wennington
Kukoc Burrell Booth
Simpkins

Maybe the smart moves were made trade Longley, Kerr maybe they keep Beuchler and Burrell


But back to trying again, maybe Phil comes back maybe not, maybe Michael has enough faith in Jimmy Rodgers, Frank Hamblin, Bill Cartwright and Tex Winter that one of them becomes head coach and they run things the same way, but smoother without the Rodman craziness.


Obviously they signed Brett Barry, got Andrew Lang, Mark Bryant, Roy Rogers in trades

But with Jordan vowing to play until he didn't win a championship could they have signed better FAs than Brent Barry and Kornel David? They wouldn't have counted on Keith Booth, Rusty LaRue, Cory Carr, Corey Benjamin, Charles Jones

On the market were
Dell Curry, Derek Harper, Anthony Miller, Mario Ellie, Adrian Griffin, Vinny Del Negro, Jim Jackson
Derek Coleman, Thurl Bailey, Antonio McDyess, Mark West, Joe Smith, Brad Miller,

All of them played for several more years, quite a few ended up with the Bulls later when they weren't nearly as good. Any of them might have signed for a year or two with the understanding that Jordan would stay until be didn't win a championship, so they were betting on being a part of that effort. Some might have signed long term figuring Chicago would be a good place to stay and rebuild.

Finding players to fill in around Jordan was Krause's talent, obviously rebuilding from scratch wasn't.

Krause wasn't good at scouting and drafting and when you aren't good at that. You aren't going to rebuild properly.