Because the 93 Bulls weren't the same team as the 94 Bulls. The 94 Bulls had added TONI KUKOC, Steve Kerr, & Luc Longley. If the 94 Bulls had the same EXACT team as the 93 Bulls without MJ, they would of totally crumbled. At the time, Kukoc was actually good enough to help the Bulls be a playoff team along with Kerr & Longley. Kukoc was so good that the Bulls paid him more then they paid Pippen, and Phil actually trusted Kukoc more with clutch shots. Do you remember when Pippen set out because he was jealous that Kukoc was taking the last shot? and despite Pippen sitting out, the Bulls still won because of Kukoc's last second shot..... Anyways, click the video below. You'll see Kukoc holding his own against The 1992 Dream Team(greatest team ever). If player that good get added to any team he'll help them make the playoffs, must you agree?
Watch This:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZBLAP275ho
Despite getting a player that good, they still needed MJ. They only made it to the 2nd R.
2007-03-09 08:34:56 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Basketball
People make a big deal about the number of wins. Fact of the matter is that MJ wasn't the only major roster difference as you've pointed out. You also have to look back at the 93 team. They went to the finals the past two years and then there 2 best players didn't have an offseason because of the Barcelona Olypmics. So they conserved energy in the regular season. In 1992 with the same team, they won 67 games which is 12 more than in 94. Also a contract year for Horace Grant. And by the way just for the record Pip messed up Kucoc in the Olympics
2007-03-10 00:56:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You just won't give up, will you.
1) Kukoc was a FORWARD, and only averaged 10.9 ppg in 94...nowhere near the 32 ppg Jordan averaged.
2) Kerr replaced John Paxson (93)...its basically a wash.
3) Luc Longley....are you serious?? LOL He only played 25 games in 94 anyways.
You're giving Kukoc WAY more credit than he deserves. He was still in his "developing" stage then, and had yet to become a contributor.
The fact is that Jordan was not missed nearly as much as everyone wants to believe. He had a good team, and they proved it. Give credit where credit is due.
Without Jordan, they took the Knicks to seven games, and should have won the series. Had it not been for one of the worst calls by an official in playoff history, they would have gone to the finals.
Would they have beat the Rockets without Jordan? Probably not. But it still would have been a huge accomplishment for them to even be there. Remember, EVERYONE thought they'd crumble when MJ retired, including Phil Jackson.
And Jordan did return the next year, with the very same team you're talking about, and only got them to 6 games in the second round (I know...he was "rusty", lol).
Nice try though, IDIOT.
2007-03-10 20:00:02 · answer #2 · answered by Hoopfan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
scottie was a stud leading the bulls in almost all statistical categories that season.
but with all due respect to jordan, the system they were running was already in place. they just had to implement a few new players to learn it. there was NO WAY kukoc was going to go into the bulls franchise and be the main man...that was scottie's job. even if phil did pick him to take the last shot. and phil wasn't about to change a system that worked so well for their team even if they didnt have mj. now would they be as successful if phil left and a new coach came in and ran a new offensive and defensive scheme? doubtful.
players that came to the bulls were ones that flourished in that system and knew their role in that team. while they only lost 2 games in standings to the previous bulls team...w/o mj as the stopper they werent going to win the championship. scottie while he was a great player...is not a closer of games.
2007-03-09 19:02:09 · answer #3 · answered by carlos l 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
pippen is underrated. since jordan is so great everyone thinks that he was the only one who won those championships. if he didt have pippen he would have been double or even triple teamed and not have anyone decent to pass to. kukoc and kerr were good but werent the same as pippen. but just becaus michael is great doesnt mean he was the only one
2007-03-09 17:20:50 · answer #4 · answered by i dont know 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The answer is Pippen. He led the Bulls in 6 statistical categories when Jordan wasn't there including PPG REB AST STL
Pippen was 3rd in NBA MVP voting that year, 1st team all NBA, 1st team all Defensive.
Pippen averaged more points assist rebounds steals blocks fg% over his career.
20 career triple doubles.
Sorry, buddy... Pippen was way better.
2007-03-09 17:41:51 · answer #5 · answered by AgentZero 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because the other guys were pretty good, too.
The Bulls won as much in spite of Jordan as they did because of him.
2007-03-09 21:54:07 · answer #6 · answered by Gerry S 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because PIP was still playin!....duh!.......Pip was underrated!
How many screen names do you have?........you asked this same question under jdw767...............Now your saying Toni Kukoc is as good as MJ?
You know absolutely nothing about b-ball.........to easy....
2007-03-09 16:39:21 · answer #7 · answered by Alpha Wolf(Bringer of Rain) 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋