What if Pippen had quit and MJ had to go it without him?

[Cavsfansince84]

Turn back time to 1993 and its Pippen who says he's had enough and wants out of Chi but Reinsdorf tells him no so Pippen is gonna sit the season out. MJ decides he wants to prove he can win without Pippen. Do the Bulls win 55 with no Pippen and do they get any further in the playoffs?

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Well, when Scottie missed the first 38 games of 97-98, the Bulls went 26-12, which is a .684 winning percentage and a 56 win pace. That was an older Jordan with Kukoc as his second best player and Rodman as his third best player. Assuming everything else in 93-94 is the same, it's a prime Jordan with Kukoc who was pretty good already in his rookie year and peak Grant backing him up, with Kerr and Pete Myers becoming the new Levingston and Hodges.

Cartwright / King-Longley(before-after trade) / Wennington
Grant / Scott Williams
Kukoc / Myers
Jordan / Kerr
Armstrong / Paxson

I don't see any reason why they couldn't win 55.

As far as do they get past New York in the playoffs? I could see it. I see two things: one, Phil isn't drawing up the play at the end of Game 3 for Kukoc if Jordan is there, and two, in Game 5, Scottie isn't the one contesting the Hubert Davis shot at the end. Maybe it gets offensively easier for the Knicks with Kukoc at the 3 instead of Scottie, but defensively, they have to expend energy covering Jordan now instead of the non-factor of Pete Myers.

[One_and_Done]

Then Jordan would be remembered more like Dominique Wilkims or Karl Malone. Everyone would like him more than those guys, but nobody would see him as the GOAT.

[lessthanjake]

The Bulls were still an elite (but not historic) team in almost half a season without Pippen in 1998. So that should provide us with an initial baseline to assess this from. Going from there, the 1994 supporting cast was better than the 1998 supporting cast IMO—the 1998 team was quite old, and 1994 Grant is far better than 1998 Rodman. Indeed, the 1994 Bulls had perhaps the best supporting cast the Bulls ever had (since they recharged some role players that year and got Kukoc, while Grant was at his best and better than Bulls Rodman was—1996 is probably the only competitor here for best Bulls supporting cast). Meanwhile, I think we can safely assume that 1994 Jordan would be notably better than 1998 Jordan, since Jordan had taken a step down by 1998. So I think the 1994 Bulls with Jordan and no Pippen would probably be a high-end elite team, albeit perhaps not the historic title-lock the Bulls were in that era otherwise.

Notably, not all years are the same in terms of difficulty of winning a title, because some years just have top teams that are really clicking more than other years. Crucially, I don’t think 1994 was a very strong year. The only team in the East that would’ve had a chance against those Bulls would’ve been New York. They had a good year, but they weren’t great in the playoffs IMO. I find it hard to imagine them beating the Bulls if you swapped Jordan and Pippen, given that they barely beat the Bulls with Pippen. And that wasn’t just a fluke—they also barely got past a merely-pretty-good Pacers team. And then it comes to the Finals. The Rockets were obviously a formidable opponent and they did tend to give the Bulls some trouble in the regular season in that era, but they weren’t world beaters. Hakeem was great and the team fit well around him, but they were one of the less talented title-winning teams we’ve seen, only were a 4.19 SRS team in the regular season, and only barely squeaked by the Knicks. Basically, I don’t think there was any world-beating team in 1994 for the Bulls to contend with, so I think the Bulls with Jordan and no Pippen would’ve been the pretty clear title favorites (albeit not a lock—that’s a very high bar, and it’s not really a talented enough team for that).

If we extend the hypothetical to 1995, it gets more complicated. The loss of Grant would hurt a lot, and while Harper is a nice addition, he doesn’t make up for that. If we assume Scottie comes back in rusty form near the end of the season like Jordan did in 1995, then maybe they can win the title. Pippen being rusty and Jordan not being rusty is better than vice versa, so the team would be better than it was in reality in 1995. But I’m not sure that that would be enough against the Magic. Maybe? But even then there’d be other teams to contend with. I think in this hypothetical the 1995 Bulls would be a real contender, but would probably need some luck to actually win the title. (When mapped onto my above thoughts about 1994, I suppose that means that I think 1994 Grant was notably better than a rusty Pippen would’ve been, but that seems correct to me).

[DorianRo]

They basically did go without Pippen in '98 as he could hardly move with a bad back and MJ put the team on his back to win the title

[Hook_Em]

They win in 96’ with a motivated Rodman but Utah goes b2b.

[Homer38]

They basically did go without Pippen in '98 as he could hardly move with a bad back and MJ put the team on his back to win the title

Pippen was 3rd team all-nba despite missing the first 38 games....The bulls had a very good record in those games(26-12) but they were much better with him(36-8)

[SNPA]

They basically did go without Pippen in '98 as he could hardly move with a bad back and MJ put the team on his back to win the title

Pippen was 3rd team all-nba despite missing the first 38 games....The bulls had a very good record in those games(26-12) but they were much better with him(36-8)

Knowledge drop. Well played.

[DorianRo]

Its all silly anyways.. What does Lebron do without a Superteam? (well we saw what he did LOL) What does Shaq do with Kobe/Wade. What does Kobe do without a BIG man? Yada yada. The only guy that didn't need a ton of talent to win chips around him was Hakeem. And that never would have happened of course if MJ didn't retire in '93

[Homer38]

Its all silly anyways.. What does Lebron do without a Superteam? (well we saw what he did LOL) What does Shaq do with Kobe/Wade. What does Kobe do without a BIG man? Yada yada. The only guy that didn't need a ton of talent to win chips around him was Hakeem. And that never would have happened of course if MJ didn't retire in '93

Read on Twitter

[DorianRo]

Its all silly anyways.. What does Lebron do without a Superteam? (well we saw what he did LOL) What does Shaq do with Kobe/Wade. What does Kobe do without a BIG man? Yada yada. The only guy that didn't need a ton of talent to win chips around him was Hakeem. And that never would have happened of course if MJ didn't retire in '93

Read on Twitter

How did they do the finals? Oh yea. SWEPT. And 66 wins in the LeEastern Conference full of G-leaguers. What an accomplishment

[OhayoKD]

Its all silly anyways.. What does Lebron do without a Superteam? (well we saw what he did LOL) What does Shaq do with Kobe/Wade. What does Kobe do without a BIG man? Yada yada. The only guy that didn't need a ton of talent to win chips around him was Hakeem. And that never would have happened of course if MJ didn't retire in '93

Read on Twitter

How did they do the finals? Oh yea. SWEPT. And 66 wins in the LeEastern Conference full of G-leaguers. What an accomplishment

Man, if only Lebron beat a 73-win team with an otherwise 30-win supporting cast...

[trex_8063]

Without looking at any other replies.....

Well, you have prime MJ with Horace Grant during one of his two best seasons, plus a relatively experienced rookie Kukoc (who is now likely a starter), then a PG rotation of Armstrong/Kerr (with a shortened 3pt line [which is likely to help MJ, too], fwiw), and the acquisition of Wennington (plus the late-season trade to get Longley + a 2nd-round pick for Stacey King, which was a steal) does modestly improve their C rotation from the 1st 3peat years. Pete Myers is otherwise (aside from whichever of Kerr/Armstrong that isn't starting, and the deep assortment of mediocre centers) is your primary bench player, filling in both SG/SF.

That's not a bad line-up in '94, with a HOF coach at the helm, too. That's going to be a strong team.
EDIT: Whoops. I just recalled the 3pt-line wasn't shortened until the next year. Still, BJ/Kerr is a decent PG rotation. Armstrong's AS selection is a joke; he was a weak starter-level player that year, nothing more, not even a top-50 player in the league. But he's not garbage, and Kerr is a nice back-up.

Do they win 55 games? idk, decent shot at it anyway (bear in mind, based on SRS the expected wins with Pippen was just 50).
I think a decent jump point is to look at what prime Jordan did with his cast in '90 (this is just marginally before Pippen has truly hit his prime [Grant perhaps just barely so, too]).......they won 55 games [though with an SRS that predicted 50 wins], though got as far as the ECF.

In this hypothetical, he'll have no peri-prime Pippen, but he'll have a better Grant, an arguably better PG rotation, and marginally deeper options at C. It should be pretty comparable.

So I think they win a similar(ish) number of games: 51-53 at a minimum, maybe 56-58 at the most; probably get similar seeding, probably still lose to NYK in the 2nd round (though maybe their odds are a little better). If they DID get by the Knicks......that makes things interesting. I do think they'd then get by the Pacers, too.

And then who knows in the Finals......I suppose it depends if Hakeem goes super-nova again.

[trex_8063]

Then Jordan would be remembered more like Dominique Wilkims or Karl Malone. Everyone would like him more than those guys, but nobody would see him as the GOAT.

Hyperbole is a fun way to [try to] make a point, but seriously......one can be critical of MJ and his legacy without murdering his own credibility with statements like this. Malone, maybe(ish); but you overplayed your stroke with the Wilkins mention.
How is Wilkins even in the same universe as Mailman in an all-time sense? It's like saying someone would be remembered more like Larry Bird or Alex English.

[One_and_Done]

Then Jordan would be remembered more like Dominique Wilkims or Karl Malone. Everyone would like him more than those guys, but nobody would see him as the GOAT.

Hyperbole is a fun way to [try to] make a point, but seriously......one can be critical of MJ and his legacy without murdering his own credibility with statements like this. Malone, maybe(ish); but you overplayed your stroke with the Wilkins mention.
How is Wilkins even in the same universe as Mailman in an all-time sense? It's like saying someone would be remembered more like Larry Bird or Alex English.

Like I said, he'd be better than those guys. I'm talking about how he'd be thought of by the masses if he had zero titles. It would be more in the vein of those 2 guys than as the GOAT.

[trex_8063]

Then Jordan would be remembered more like Dominique Wilkims or Karl Malone. Everyone would like him more than those guys, but nobody would see him as the GOAT.

Hyperbole is a fun way to [try to] make a point, but seriously......one can be critical of MJ and his legacy without murdering his own credibility with statements like this. Malone, maybe(ish); but you overplayed your stroke with the Wilkins mention.
How is Wilkins even in the same universe as Mailman in an all-time sense? It's like saying someone would be remembered more like Larry Bird or Alex English.

Like I said, he'd be better than those guys. I'm talking about how he'd be thought of by the masses if he had zero titles. It would be more in the vein of those 2 guys than as the GOAT.

Firstly, you didn't say he'd be "better than" those guys (which he was); you said everyone would "like him more".

But more to the point, he wouldn't have zero titles in this scenario. Read OP again. He'd have THREE already; and we're in essence debating his chances of a fourth in this, his 10th season (without Pippen).

[parsnips33]

Then Jordan would be remembered more like Dominique Wilkims or Karl Malone. Everyone would like him more than those guys, but nobody would see him as the GOAT.

He would have already 3peated once in this hypothetical?

[SHAQ32]

Its all silly anyways.. What does Lebron do without a Superteam? (well we saw what he did LOL) What does Shaq do with Kobe/Wade. What does Kobe do without a BIG man? Yada yada. The only guy that didn't need a ton of talent to win chips around him was Hakeem. And that never would have happened of course if MJ didn't retire in '93

Read on Twitter

Fans bring up the 66 wins in the regular season and then blame the supporting cast for the early playoff exit. LeBron gets all of the praise and none of the blame, as usual.

[Cavsfansince84]

Fans bring up the 66 wins in the regular season and then blame the supporting cast for the early playoff exit. LeBron gets all of the praise and none of the blame, as usual.

Conf finals isn't really an early exit imo. Went 8-0 the first two rounds. You can only call it early if you wanna act like they were expected to make it to the finals(which the media was sort of acting like at the time) but has a team with a guy like Mo Williams as the second best player ever won anything in the nba? Even the 2011 Mavs had a dpoy worthy def anchor and solid vets around Dirk. It's similar to about the 89 Bulls being expected to win the title had MJ lifted them to 60 wins in the rs. Had he done that then gone off for 38/8/8 in the conf finals before losing I don't think you'd be here saying he deserves blame for anything.

[Homer38]

Its all silly anyways.. What does Lebron do without a Superteam? (well we saw what he did LOL) What does Shaq do with Kobe/Wade. What does Kobe do without a BIG man? Yada yada. The only guy that didn't need a ton of talent to win chips around him was Hakeem. And that never would have happened of course if MJ didn't retire in '93

Read on Twitter

Fans bring up the 66 wins in the regular season and then blame the supporting cast for the early playoff exit. LeBron gets all of the praise and none of the blame, as usual.

Why when a player have a 38-8-8 series deserve the blame for that?

Make no sense