User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.8011 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Isn't this true of any ball dominant wing because it necessarily kills some of the value in a PG and increases the pressure on that wing to capably distribute?
There's no statistical knock on Bird, but the three rings isn't up to the other candidates' level, I grant.
I also don't recall any other noticeably hard fouls on him this year, but I'm sure he has a couple in mind.
Yeah, the defense. And playing with KAJ might "hurt" him the same way that playing with Magic "hurts" KAJ.
I think a big part of the reason he's seen as being a notch above some of the other true greats (Magic, Bird, Wilt, Kareem) is that when he was in his 90's prime, the Bulls were almost unbeatable in the playoffs. Other teams have looked unbeatable for a season or so (2001 Lakers, for example), but Jordan's Bulls were for almost an entire decade (minus his baseball years). Magic won 5 rings, but he also lost in the Finals 4 times. Bird won 3, but also lost twice. Kobe won 5, but also lost twice. Jordan was a perfect 6-0. And unlike Duncans Finals perfect 4-0 Spurs, quality of competition doesn't enter into the discussion. The Bulls 6 Finals opponents won 58, 57, 62, 64, 64, and 62 regular season games. The Spurs 4 opponents won 44*, 49, 54, and 50.
With team success factored in, the biggest challenger to Jordan's GOAT argument would likely be Bill Russell, but even then era and level of competition factors have to be considered.
* = lockout season; projected pace of a 27-23 Knicks team
I agree that the "Jordan never played against anyone great" arguments are basically crap. ALL of the teams he played in the Finals were very good teams led by future HOFers. They never won titles in large part because Jordan prevented them from doing so. These Finals "losers" were NOT on par with say, the 1999 Knicks, 2001 Sixers, 2002-2003 Nets, and 2007 Cavs, who didn't win titles cuz they simply weren't really a championship caliber team, and they made the Finals in a weak Eastern Conference largely by default. Jordan's Finals opponents all could have won championships in many other seasons.
Edit: corrected for clarity
See, to me, I don't see how making the finals three times fewer than Magic is a point in his favor. It's really, really hard to make the finals (almost as hard as winning). Magic only played 12 years in his prime (not counting the '96 comeback). His team made the finals almost every year he played--and Magic NEVER missed the playoffs! That's amazing!
Michael played 13 seasons with the Bulls. They only made the finals less than half his career!
edit:
Yes.
Michael played 13 seasons with the Bulls. They only made the finals less than half his career!
I'd counter by saying that Magic played on some absolutely loaded teams in his peak. The Bulls had virtually nothing for Jordan to work with in his first few years, and even when Pippen delevoped into a star and they got Rodman, I'd still say that the Showtime Lakers were deeper from top to bottom than the 90's Bulls were. Didn't Kareem and Worthy each win Finals MVP's during some of Magic's championship years? Magic wasn't ALWAYS the Lakers best player in every series. Jordan was with the Bulls. Great as Pip was, he never beat out MJ for a single Finals MVP.
Would there be a way to retroactively simulate a Jordan-free alternate world '90s and get a sense of who might have won titles instead?
Seriously. That is the central and unanswered (maybe unanswerable?) question in basketball analysis. To put it differently- is there something about how players interact with each other that we are not (yet) able to measure that has synergistic, psychological, or otherwise intangible effects on team success?
That is the crux of the Wilt/Russell debate. You could frame Magic vs. Jordan in those terms. People have certainly verged into that territory to argue that Lebron is not as great as his stats. I would even say that the Timberwolves season pre and post Rubio injury could be seen as an argument for the "there's something else there that we're not doing a good job of measuring" side of the debate.
I am a pretty analytical thinker and I prefer to be able to have some concrete reason for why I'm making a decision. Nonetheless, I tend to think that there is a big chunk of basketball analysis that we have not yet captured. In a way, that is the thing that makes basketball so appealing, there is this mystery involved that goes way beyond, say, the Indians getting off to a hot start last year because they were getting hits at an unsustainable pace. I know the debate here isn't "stats know everything" vs. "stats know nothing," and that it's really a gradient, but I guess what I'm saying is that I probably fall somewhere further toward the skeptical part of the spectrum than the median here.
Kareem - 6 titles (one came before I was born), 2 Finals MVP (Magic won 3, Worthy once)
Magic - 5 titles, 3 Finals MVP (Kareem, Worthy)
Bird - 3 titles, 2 Finals MVP (Cedric Maxwell)
Shaq - 4 titles, 3 Finals MVP (Wade)
Kobe - 5 titles, 2 Finals MVP (3 for Shaq)
Duncan - 4 titles, 3 Finals MVP (Parker)
Jordan - 6 titles, 6 Finals MVP
To win that often and be without a doubt your teams best player every time is a very rare and impressive feat.
Man, I've dreamed about this my whole life. Take away Jordan and my Jazz have two titles (I don't think the 1997 Heat or 1998 Pacers would have beaten them, sorry). My boy Malone also now has a third straight MVP and 5 scoring titles. Would he now be considered a top 10 all time player with 5 scoring titles, 3 MVP's, and back to back championships in addition to being the second all time scorer and having all the all star and all NBA selections that he already does? Methinks he might be.
I think a log5 per season with the Bulls significantly downgraded in Jordan's absence, and take some of the more prominent results and see what narratives would come out of them. I think Booey is right about the dramatic shift in Malone's career perception were that to happen.
Jordan's denial of titles to players in their prime is one of the impressive things in his own narrative:
Barkley
Malone
Stockton
Payton
Drexler (had to be a wingman to Olajuwon to get his)
Ewing (with an assist from Olajuwon)
So, there seems to be a notion that Jordan needed low-usage bigs, but there's missing data in that he never had a great big to play with (few do). What happens if you swap Pippen for Olajuwon? How well would they co-exist? (That's probably not quite even, since I'm thinking Olajuwon rates higher than Pippen, but still, an interesting thought experiment)
Agreed, but it may also show the dilution of talent in the league. Who else was gonna win, Bill Wennington?
I don't really get this--and it's cherry picking, besides.
This also, I don't get. Part of the reason why the Showtime Lakers were so great was the feeds they got from Magic. Magic won from the moment he got into the league. He won with Kareem injured. He won before Worthy. He won before Byron Scott. Magic won a championship with 39 year old Kareem as the second best player. Magic won with Pat Riley as coach, with Paul Westhead as coach, with Mike Dunleavy as coach.
Michael won when Pippen got good and when the best coach in NBA history was coaching. Saying that Pippen never won a finals MVP doesn't mean that much to me. It's a voted-on award and the team was designed to showcase MJ's scoring.
What if the Sonics win the 96 title, they never trade Kemp to Cleveland, he never gets fat, and goes on to be a perennial all-star?
Also, do the Sonics move if they have a title roughly 10 years in the rearview?
I've thought about that a lot also, with regards to Jordan never un-retiring.
As much as I'd love to think that the Muggsy/LJ/'Zo Hornets might have done something, I think Orlando could have done some damage in '96. If they make back-to-back finals, maybe Shaq never leaves. Utah probably would have won at least one title in either '97 or '98.
EDIT: and to add to the criticism that Jordan won titles in a watered-down league following four expansions: that has some validity for regular season, but the non-CHI top-end teams were (mostly) still excellent.
Saying that Pippen never won a finals MVP doesn't mean that much to me. It's a voted-on award
I also don't understand what the award being voted on has to do with anything, unless you're arguing that Pippen was a better player than Jordan during any of the Finals.
Well, that Pippen guy was a first ballot HOFer, and Rodman made it eventually too...
Part of the reason why the Showtime Lakers were so great was the feeds they got from Magic
Of course. But the other side of that coin is that part of the reason Magic was able to get so many great feeds was because he had great teammates to feed to. Kareem was a super-duper star well before he ever played with Magic, for example.
Jordan's denial of titles to players in their prime is one of the impressive things in his own narrative:
Barkley
Malone
Stockton
Payton
Drexler (had to be a wingman to Olajuwon to get his)
Ewing (with an assist from Olajuwon)
You could throw Reggie Miller in there too if you think the 1998 Pacers might have won the title, and maybe Alonzo Mourning (though I think the 1997 Heat have less of an argument than the Pacers).
Should have been the Knicks (who split the season series with the Bulls 2-2...####### PJ Brown).
Everyone forgets he was on the 2006 Heat, so he has a ring too.
Part of the reason why the Showtime Lakers were so great was the feeds they got from Magic.
Michael won when Pippen got good and when the best coach in NBA history was coaching. Saying that Pippen never won a finals MVP doesn't mean that much to me. It's a voted-on award and the team was designed to showcase MJ's scoring.
1. So Magic made his teammates better but Jordan didn't? (selective quoting) Was Phil the best coach in NBA history his 2nd season (the first year the Bulls won a title)?
2. What year did Pip or someone else deserve it over MJ? Give him extra credit for the D on Magic, and I think 91 is the closest year.
Making the Finals is great, but winning them is even better. Jordan WON one more title than Magic in three fewer Finals appearances. I don't see how that's NOT a point in his favor. He also lost 2 years of his prime to retirement, and it isn't completely unreasonable to think the Bulls may have had 8 straight otherwise.
Magic NEVER missed the playoffs! That's amazing!
That's always cool, but it's not unheard of. Other players have done it too, and in longer careers. Stockton and Malone each made the playoffs in every one of their 19 seasons. Duncan has made it in each of his 15 (and not just barely, either - project the strike years out to full seasons and his Spurs win 50 games in every year of his career).
Because Jordan ultimately did it against inferior competition. The top teams in the 80s were stacked in talent, where you had quality players serving bench roles or being the 4th or 5th option on offense. Michael Thompson may just be a old goober today, but he was the 1st pick of the draft when he came out and he couldn't even break the Lakers' starting lineup, despite being a decent player. You have 4-6 loaded teams constantly battling it out with each other in the Lakers, Celtics, Pistons, Rockets, and a few interchangeable teams. The Bulls teams from 1984-1990 were just afterthoughts most years, they'd be the equivalent of the Magic today, a team with one of the best players in the league, but not enough talent to be taken seriously.
There's also the massive expansion the NBA took that helped Jordan fuel his first title runs.
And that's even counting the NBA adding the Grizz and Raptors in 1995. Jordan had enormous luck that the NBA decided to rapidly expand during the middle of his prime, he had the talent to single handily take over a game if need be and the requirements of building a team also declined due to the talent dispersal that *must* happen due to the arrival of 6 new teams during his prime.
I had added the qualifier "in his prime" part for that reason. Payton wasn't exactly a high-leverage asset on that team.
Yeah, but of all those 80's teams, Magic's Lakers themselves were probably the MOST stacked with talent. Magic won on a stacked team playing against other stacked teams. Jordan won in a watered down era with a couple stars and a bunch of role players playing against other watered down teams with a couple stars and a bunch of role players. Jordan may have had "inferior" competition, but he had inferior teammates too. Magic's stronger competition also came with stronger teammates on his end. So it goes both ways. I don't really see an advantage here.
But shouldn't that be true of other top teams with two superstars? Stockton/Malone, Payton/Kemp, etc.? Sure, there's more bad teams, but I don't see the best teams besides the Bulls getting worse because of this.
Edit: Coke to Booey
I disagree. If you put Magic on any of the other good teams of the time, those teams would look like they were the most stacked with talent. Everyone played better because of Magic.
1. Jordan may have made his teammates better, but not to the same degree that Magic did. Part of this is also system. Yes, Phil (in my view) is the best coach in NBA history pretty much as soon as he started coaching.
2. I don't know, and it's tedious to look through logs of every game. I am at least skeptical that MJ deserved to win every year.
I tend to agree with this, with Kareem as the notable exception. Worthy, etc. are a bit overrated by being a part of showtime and playing with Magic.
Based on my memory, he clearly did. Feel free to try and disprove it if you want to discount it though.
For 91/92, here's MJ's game log and Pip's. My memory about that series was off, perhaps I'm only remembering Pip being the leading scorer in the clinching game 5. MJ 92 and Pip 92 (approaching almost triple/double avg during the Finals). MJ 93 and Pip 93; MJ's best Finals. MJ 96 and Pip 96, getting closer as it was MJ's worst Finals. MJ 97 and Pip 97, big advantage MJ. MJ 98 and Pip 98, MJ mostly was a scorer this year but Pip had his worst Finals.
I don't think anyone else on the teams really came close to either guy any of those years.
The 78-79 Lakers had basically everyone but Magic that was on the 79-80 team (*), and they won 47 games and got smoked in the Western semis.
(*) Plus Adrian Dantley, who was far better than the Chones/Landsberger/Haywood triumvirate that ostensibly replaced him.
I'm still in awe of Jordan's '91 Finals. I wasn't paying close enough attention back then. When your worst game in the Finals is 11/28 for 29 points, 9REB, 9AST, 4STL, 2BLK, 3TO and you average 30+ while shooting 50%+ for the series, with 10+ AST and 6.5REB per game...LeBron would be immediately inducted into the HOF if he put up a Finals win like that.
The problem there, though, is that Magic won Game 6 in 1980 without Kareem and with Norm Nixon going 1 for 10 from the floor.
These were the other seven guys who played with Magic in that gaem: Jamaal Wilkes, Mark Landsberger, Jim Chones, Norm Nixon, Michael Cooper, Brad Holland, Marty Byrnes. Not exactly the 93-94 Chicago Bulls.
I just don't see the Lakers as some superteam. The Celtics really were close to a superteam--top 2-3 players of all time at both power and small forward--and HOFers at center and point guard
Jordan was thrown onto a terrible team, and could have easily suffered the same fate as Barkley, Malone, etc. What if the Bulls had kept Olden Polynice instead of trading for Pippen? He could have been Elgin Baylor, the best player in the league trapped on a team that perennially fell juuuuuuuust short. When the Bulls did win, it was with a team built specifically to play as an extension of Jordan himself.
This isn't to say that Johnson was thus better than Jordan; Magic himself says Jordan's the greatest ever. It's certainly easy to believe Jordan could win playing for a different coach in a different style — the guy's talent was just overwhelming. I can absolutely buy the argument that Jordan's No. 1. I just don't buy that there's anything but a sliver of a margin between him and Johnson, Chamberlain, etc.
Parish shot for a better percent, .592 to .510, but Kareem wins everything else. He outscored Parish 21.7-16.7, got to the line 7.5 times (.667%) compared to 4.5 times (.593%). Kareem wins rebounding 7.3-6.5, and blocks (2.5-1.2).
When you're saying that McHale is one of the top 2-3 power forwards ever, you're meaning at the time, right? Cuz I think Duncan, Malone, Barkley, Garnett, and Dirk have all clearly passed him since.
And to be fair, sometimes players are HOFers BECAUSE they played for multiple championship teams. DJ was great, but I doubt he makes the HOF playing for most other teams.
This is ignorant. You make it sound like he was a free rider on the Celtics. I'm a Knicks fan, so this isn't pro-Celtics bias, but DJ was legitimately one of the best defensive players ever to play in the NBA. In addition he led the Sonics to a title in 1979. The Celtics won in part BECAUSE of him; he didn't just glom onto a great time and coast into the HoF. I would like to have seen DJ v. MJ at their athletic peaks. (Many think of DJ as a fat guard, but the guy was an athlete known to throw the ball down when younger. He completely changed his game when he came to the Cs. Really, one of those guys easy to underrate b/c he played with more prominent great players.
/rant in favor of a Celtic (?)
Not at all. I mentioned in my previous comment "DJ was great." I'm just saying that based on stats he's a borderline HOFer, and championships are often what pushes a borderline HOFer over the edge. You could say the same thing about Dumars, Rodman, etc. I don't think it's ignorant or an insult to DJ to say that.
Edit: And by "borderline", I'm including his defense. If he was an average defender, I think he'd be a very good but clearly not HOF player.
I just checked. I see a guy who filled up the stat sheet, who adjusted his game a new situation in Boston as a PG, and who was primarily known as one of the premier defensive players of his time, a great leader and facilitator, and still has a career avg. of 15 ppg. He compares quite well to, say, Scottie Pippen (adjusting for positional differences) or Gary Payton, both great players, no?
Not adjusting for era or position (career numbers)
PPG/AST/REB/PER/TS%/eFG%/ORtg/DRtg/WSper48
DJ: 14.1/5.0/3.9/14.6/51.1%/44.8%/107/105/.110
Pippen: 16.1/5.2/6.4/18.6/53.6%/50.4%/108/102/.146
Payton: 16.3/6.7/3.9/18.9/52.8%/49.6%/111/106/.148
Looks like he's clearly below both of them. I think Pippen gets a little more defensive credit (even without knowing how good DJ was having not seen him) since Pip covered almost anyone from PG to PF.
Why did he move from Seattle to Phoenix to Boston?
EDIT: He sure looked like he stepped up his game in the playoffs the year the Sonics won the title, but was quite a low percentage shooter most of his time in Seattle.
I see an upwardly mobile man's John Starks.
So... Allen Iverson - superstar or not?
Seattle to Phoenix because Lenny Wilkens -- for reasons still mysterious -- dubbed him a "cancer."
Phoenix to Boston because the Phoenix GM was clueless. Trades don't get much worse than DJ for Rick Robey.
He doesn't appear to compare very well to them in ways that show up on the stat sheet, going by PER or the other numbers. I will also throw in the caveat that I only remember watching him during the tail end of his career, but I have a hard time believing that a 6'4" guard who never had a season with 2 steals per game was a historically great defensive player.
Also, going strictly by the numbers, he appears to have been the third best player on the Sonics championship team. Either he's a bit overrated for being on those Celtics teams, or his intangibles must have been through the roof.
Edit: Cokes.
No you're not. You could win championships with DJ and both Seattle and Boston did, and he was a first-team all-NBA caliber player before he went to Boston. Finals MVP, too. Perennial all-defense.
I'm not quite sure what the problem is with his "numbers"; he filled the stat sheet and scored more almost every year in the playoffs. The guy was pure money.
EDIT: He averaged 21 points/6.1 boards/4.1 assists, with lockdown defense, in the '79 playoffs. He was the best player on the Sonics.
That's what happens when a Knicks fan tries to argue in favor of a Celtic! :)
So... Allen Iverson - superstar or not?
Very good, but certainly overrated. Not one of the top 10 players of the post Jordan era (and sure as hell not one of the top 40 players ever like Simmons ranked him in his book).
(and yes, I realize you were jokingly trying to change the subject and probably weren't actually expecting an answer)
Ooh, wow, I don't know. Duncan, yes. Malone, maybe over a career, due to McHale's broken foot. I'd take McHale at his prime over Barkley, Garnett, or Dirk.
Without blinking, over Barkley. Dirk's a tougher call, Garnett way tougher. I'd probably take Garnett. McHale was more offensively unstoppable than any of them and a much better defender than Dirk.
Jason Kidd to the Nets is a good example of what a great point guard in this style can do. Not quite with the versatility, but there's a certain something to a legendary passing point guard like that.
This was what people said about DJ as well. didn't Bird say something akin to, "DJ was the best teammate I ever played with?" or something like that?
We did this once...not that that doesn't make it worth discussing. Though it does bring out my love for the 2001 Sixers. Speaking of a team specifically constructed for a high-volume wing....(which we've also done)
Without blinking, over Barkley. Dirk's a tougher call, Garnett way tougher
Really? That's interesting (I'm not saying it's wrong, it's just not the answer I was expecting). I would've thought Barkley would be considered the best of these 3, not the worst.
That brings up another question- given that McHale was always on teams with really good teammates, what do people think would have been the ideal way to build a team where he was the star instead of a supporting player?
That brings up another question- given that McHale was always on teams with really good teammates, what do people think would have been the ideal way to build a team where he was the star instead of a supporting player?
1991: Detroit over the Lakers: 4-2. It would have been a somewhat ugly series (for the time) and if somebody wants to argue it going the other way, OK.
1992: Portland over Cavs 4-1. I find it more likely the Knicks make the Finals than the Cavs beat Portland.
1993: Phoenix over Knicks 4-2. Not much to discuss here.
1995: Sonics over Knicks 4-1. Orlando wouldn't have matched up well to the Knicks in the conference finals.
1996: Jazz over Heat 4-2. Ugly, Ugly, Ugly
1997: Pacers over Jazz 4-2.
Feel free to disagree. Does anybody think that these finals would have been more entertaining than the ones featuring Jordan?
Let's see, he averaged 7.5pts, 14.6reb (6.8off), 2.5ast, and less than a block and steal per game. I remember that being a real breakout series for Kemp, and he averaged 23.3pts, 10reb, and 2blks each game. Rodman's defense was usually stellar, but I don't think it was difference maker that particular series (IIRC, he seemed to bother Malone more than Kemp). So no, I'll disagree.
Sure. It's possible that in a Chicago-less universe, 1994 Denver is a bit weaker and Seattle survives the first round scare and proceeds to win the NBA title rather than Houston. I don't claim my predictions are exact.
Nothing wrong with a guy filling the stat sheet with 15 points, 6 assists, 4 rebounds per game. But there's also nothing unique about it either. He needs the defensive rep and maybe some intangibles to get past HOVG and earn his spot as a borderline HOFer. Which he has and did, but he's below the Clydes (Drexler or Frasier) and nowhere near the truly elite like Michael and Magic.
Jordan '87 & '88 says hi. 125 and 131, respectively. But yeah, not a whole lot of guards with that many blocks.
For single seasons; played in the NBA/BAA; in the regular season; from 1946-47 to 2011-12; played G or G-F; requiring Blocks >= 100; sorted by most seasons matching criteria.
Absolutely. Dynasty's are boring, IMO.
I'd take all three over McHale, because McHale is a terrible human being, Satan's representative on Earth. Also, I think Dirk's being underrated here.
They don't seem that similar to me. Gasol, arguably a center as much as he is a power forward, is a great passer (his AST% dwarfs McHale's) who, if I'm not mistaken, scores a lot of his points on short to mid-range jumpers. McHale, unquestionably a power forward (right? and didn't he even defend small forwards occasionally in his younger days?), made the All-Defense team six times (Gasol: zero), and scored on a possibly unequaled plethora of post moves (and didn't pass much).
It does remind me of the line about how McHale felt he had no reason to pass it back out to Bird because "I'm better!"
Sub-species, "Ugly, Gangly White Guy Comparison."
Without Jordan and (probably) Rodman? No way.
There have been a lot of great PFs since McHale retired. When he retired, he seemed to have the top slot cornered. If you count Duncan as a PF, the argument is over. If not, I would place him over Barkley and Nowitzki and Garnett, but am not sure I can justify him over Malone.
Um, no. Even if by some miracle they made the Finals, the '96 Sonics won 64 games themselves. They were no pushovers.
Some of thok's proposed series would have been ugly to watch, as he said.
They couldn't have been worse than all those Knicks/Heat abominations from the '90's. First team to 80 wins! The only entertaining part of those series was watching Jeff Van Gundy cling to Alonzo Mourning's leg for dear life while 'Zo and LJ took turns missing each other with wild punches.
Good comp for Dantley's low post game. Like McHale, he was a ball-hog (see Aguirre trade) but he was unstoppable one-on-one. I have to say that one of the reasons that I have such a man-crush on Bynum right now is his plethora of moves in the post. He doesn't have the footwork of McHale, Olujawon and Dantley, but I love to see low post bigs with an arsenal more than a dunk. Having Shaq and then D-Howard overshadow Duncan, as the shining examples of the best low post scorers in the game has been a set-back over the last decade +.
On that note, which guard (non-Kobe/MJ/Oscar) had the best low-post game. I'm torn between Mark Jackson and Gary Payton.
Also David West gave Gordon Hayward a wet willie for some reason.
Thoughts:
1. Jordan clearly looked to deserve every MVP over Pippen. Pippen's prime Finals years overlapped with Jordan's.
2. I'm ok with DJ making the HOF based on his defensive rep but I refuse to believe he was so good he should ranked in the 20s like he was by Simmons.
3. I'd take Garnett over McHale, fully realizing that I didn't see/remember McHale's prime. I think Garnett has gotten to the point where it sounds like people are underrating Garnett's Minnesota years.
I'll throw out my monthly plug for Jackson as one of my all-time favorite players to watch.
Delonte West. But yeah, that was weird.
There's the comment I was looking to quote for truth.
Jordan never fed the post in his career. The big with the highest usage he played with was Orlando Woolridge. To me, that's an indicator that he wasn't very comfortable with it and his game didn't mesh with it very well. I might be wrong.
Maybe he never fed the post because he never had a low post teammate worth feeding?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main