
In the spirit of the NBA Finals, I've decided it's time to weigh in on a fantastical myth that abounds among a good many NBA fans--especially those from the Chicago hereabouts.
This past Saturday night as I was trailing off to sleep watching the ESPN Classic NBA Finals marathon, I was reminded of two things: 1) how incredibly awesome it was to watch Hakeem Olajuwon in his prime and 2) how wildly underappreciated his mid-'90s Rockets are.
Lots of folks--lots of loudmouthed Chicagoans, that is--will tell you that the '93-'94 and '94-'95 NBA seasons were the most "meaningless" in the league's history. They'll tell you that they were invalidated by the phantom year-and-a-half of Michael Jordan's prime that never reached the court. They'll pretend that the Rockets served as default champions while the NBA awaited the return of M-Jay.
But such is not true.
Yes, the Bulls may very well have won in '93-'94 had Jordan been playing for them. He could very well have bridged the gap between a seven-game defeat to the Knicks in the second round and an Eastern Conference title. And as good as Hakeem and the Rockets were that year, they beat those Knicks in the most closely contested seven-game Finals in history. So it's not altogether unreasonable to extrapolate that potential defeat of the Knicks into a title.
But remember that the Bulls only slipped two games in the entirely-based-on-sheer-talent regular season from '92-'93 to '93-'94, which would indicate that they were only slightly less potent compared to league average. That is to say, the Knicks were a very good team that was peaking that season and had viably threatened the Bulls in the previous year.
However, '94-'95 was an entirely different story. And it's where the "Bulls woud've won" refrain gets really insane.
First of all, Jordan was there.
"But he was still rusty!"
Garbage. He put up 55 in his third game back. I realize that he shot 26% from the field that season (exaggeration), but could he have truly re-rustified so drastically over the next 18 games leading up to the Orlando series?
More importantly, the Bulls were godawful weak down low that year. No matter how sharp Jordan could have been, he had no control over this obvious weakness. Does Kukoc and Purdue ring a bell? The Bulls barely posed a challenge to Shaq's Magic--a team that posed no challenge to Hakeem's Rockets.
The 72-win season the following year obscures how mediocre the '94-'95 team was. A 14-man roster that sees 86% turnover in a three-year span is rarely a title contender--especially when it includes such an obvious sag. '94-'95 was the sag stage of that turnover, and it would have been that way regardless of whether Jordan had retired.
There never was an eight-peat; there never could have been an eight-peat; and most importantly, THERE NEVER WAS AN EIGHT-PEAT, SO GET OVER IT, LOSERS.
Perpetuating the myth that the '94 and '95 NBA titles rightfully belonged to the Bulls only distorts some really, really obvious reality. And worse, it undermines the brilliance of one of the finest athlete primes we have ever seen.
Labels: Bullsss, Chicago Bulls, Hakeem Olajuwon, Houston Rockets, Michael Jordan, NBA Finals
MJ
The concept of a probable 8-peat is valid!
Hakeem is without question the greatest center of all time. In the playoffs, the list of big men he bested includes Kareem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Barkley, Malone (yes, forwards had to cover him when their centers fould out) and many more. No big man beat the caliber of big men that Hakeem did in the post season.
I don't know that the Bulls would definitely have won eight straight, and I don't think it takes away from Hakeem either way. But to say there's no way the Bulls would have won in either '94 or '95 is silly.
Jordans PER in those 17 games was 22.1 !!!! The year before it was 29.7. The year after 29.4.
Thats like replacing a Dwyane Wade, Kobe, or KG at their peak with Manu Ginobili or Pau Gasol.
HE WAS RUSTY. Check the stats, you're wrong. Get over it
The Bulls are HUGE favorites to win in both those years if Jordan plays. You lose
Sorry, but "Horace Grant left" is just weak.
I know, I know.....none of those teams had a center. Well let me ask you this? Who on the Rockets guards Michael Jordan? Who guards Scottie Pippen? What Rocket small forward scores at will on Pippen? Mario Elie?
I think (H)akeem Olajuwon is one of the top 5 players of all time, and he is my 2nd favorite NBA player ever. I have nothing but the greatest respect for him. But to say that Hakeem's Rockets would have beat the Bulls in 94 or 95 is not, how you say, smart.
8 PEAT FOREVER!!!
Vernon Maxwell and then Clyde covers Jordan. Vernon always played Jordan tough. Pippen would have been guarded by this guy named Robert Horry.
Bulls fans like to forget that the Bulls could do no better than split with Houston during that era in their regular season matchups. Houston went 4-2 against Chicago from 92/93 to 94/95 (the Rockets' began peaking that first year).
In the end, there is no way to know who would have won, but it is myopic for Bulls fans to think they'd have beaten Houston so easily twice. Just because you could beat a gutless Utah twice in two years doesn't mean anything. And "Jordan never would have let them lose" doesn't hold nearly as much weight considering that he did "let" his team lose to Orlando in 1995. Saying "Jordan wouldn't have let them lose" doesn't make it so, any more than saying "LeBron is the greatest thing since the Big Bang" makes it so either.
Bulls would have won. Jordan vs. Drexler in a big game? That's not even funny.
No one ever owned Jordan, and Clyde Drexler had less of a chance of doing that than anyone; why did the author of this post begin by bashing Bulls fans for being arrogant and then write the snarkiest post ever?
Yeah, just like he did in 91-92, right? And saying that the Rockets and Vernon Maxwell always played the Bulls tough is a bad argument, because the Jazz regularly killed the Bulls in regular season play, and yet the Bulls went 8-4 over them in the Finals over a span of two years.
And to the guy who said Pippen would get guarded by Robert Horry......are you kidding? Horry was (and still is) an average defensive player, at best, while Pippen regularly put up 18-22 points a game while playing unbelievable defense.
Boston Celtics 1959-1966.
The greatest player in the history of the game took 2 years off, and your team wins 2 titles? Hmm ... not a coincidence, methinks.
And who knows? If Jordan and the Bulls win in 1994 and 1995, how do we know Jordan stays for 1997 and 1998? We really don't. As a Bulls fan, I don't take offense to the argument put forth above as some of my fellow travellers seemingly do. As long as those titles aren't won by the Pistons or Celtics, I've got no issue with it.
1) Pippen got called for fouling Daivs, even though he never touched him. That call eliminated the Bulls, and all hopes of a minimum twelve-peat, with them.
2) Jordan would not allow his team to lose. He could will things to happen on the court. No disrespect to The Dream or The Glide, but they couldn't stop Jordan.
3) There is no way Robert Horrie guards Pippen. If you can't jump more than 3 inches off the ground, you can't gurd Scottie.
Yes he really pwned Jordan when Jordan dropped 35 points in the first half against Glide and the Blazers.
I am pretty sure that Drexler did not go to the Rockets until '94-95 season and only won one title.
I'll acknowledge my bad move insinuating that Jordan wasn't rusty in '95 because he was, but all this talk about Jordan "willing" his team? Cut it the fuck out. Give me something better than that.