Why did it take MJ 8 years to win a title?

Question

I mean you guys speak of him like some kind of god.

Then the 2 seasons he abandoned his team they still won 57 games. He wanted to play baseball, lol, he was bored. he never had the passion to play like Kobe. Even when LA sucked Kobe competed and demanded help. Russell never got bored when he won ever year. Yet MJ gets away with any excuse you can think of. ESPN sold you all MJ and you bought it like military brainwashing. Many of you were too young to realize e was the best ever. You never seen West compete against Halvick and Russell when Russell won the ring but saidWestt was the MVP. You never seen Oscar or wilt dominate/

When Mj left the Bull in 94, They werent expecting to replace their leading scorer, which was his role. They retooled then he came back and stole the spotlight and all the credit again...

Answer 1

cause he had to wait for magic, jabbar, bird and thomas to be past their prime.

Answer 2

because with respect to Jordan's rookie year... it took 8 years for the bulls to form a contender team... which has all the pieces... and that time phil jackson became the coach... his greatest support is pippen...

and the bulls rather have jordan steal the spotlight and win titles than get the glory and win none...

it's as simple as that

it's like a player would rather be a good player and champion rather than be the greatest player alive without a championship

Answer 3

ya Kobe never won without shaq and Jordan won 6 championships they r both good but no one will ever control a game like Jordan did but Kobe will go down in history as the top 5 players of altime

Answer 4

Because nobody can win a championship by himself. This is a team sport. The young athletic Duncan had the experienced and still capable David Robinson.

Also, Jordan played baseball to honor his father. And when he played baseball, the Bulls were unable to win championships until Jordan returned.

And you say w/o Jordan they won 57 games? with Jordan they won 72 games!

Stop hating on Michael Jordan. With the level of competition during his era, it's still kinda hard to compare him to the monopoly of Wilt, Russell, and Robertson during the 50's and 60's.

Answer 5

Nice explanation. With that, for me, I can say that Kobe is indeed better than Michael Jordan.  

Answer 6

How could they replace their leading scorer, when they already had the other leading scorer in the NBA in their team?..

Jordan was a ball hog in his young ages usually taking at least half of his team's FGA, but Phil Jackson taught him how to pass and his teammates to help. Jordan started winning titles when he had arguably the second best player [Not in my opinion though] in the league nad Phil as a coach. He had this season when everyone thought he improved his shooting, but that wasn't really the case. Jordan is good. Jordan is the best. I don't care about Russel and Wilt. Again,Jordan is the best.

Imagine Kobe with a higher FG% [but with a worse 3 pt game]. That is MJ.

Kobe + Shaq is basically the same as MJ+ Pippen.

Both duos were made of 2 of some of the best players in the league at the time.

Answer 7

mj was a one man team for quite a few years when he entered the league. they started to assemble the players around him to get him to the next level. and then they got him the right coach and system that would benefit his unique talents. the last thing he needed was to TRUST his teammates. his teammates were soft (pip with migraine headache in ECF game 7 etc)...when he finally trusted them, they won championships.

with all due respect to magic, bird, kobe, etc...players who won titles early in their careers...they were drafted by teams that had great players on there already (either veterans, up and coming superstars or were fortunate to have made wise trades). jordan didnt have that. i really dont think dave corzine would strike a lot of fear in opposing teams' hearts.

the reason why the 94' bulls won 57 games? pippen stepped up his game, they wre used to the system already being run there and honestly the players were probably a little happy with the challenge of seeing how well they can do without michael there.

Answer 8

Why does it matter he got 6 rings and a bunch of other stuff.

Stop comaparing Kobe with MJ because Mj is the BEST

Kobe wanted to get traded last off season how is that passion, MJ was and is the face of the NBA

Answer 9

Baketball fans who dont care for past greats like Wilt, Russell, Oscar etc. and their achievements are NOT basketball fans.

Anyway, in terms of the evolution of basketball skills and concepts, Russell is on the same plane as the opponents he faced in the 60's. Jordan too is on the same plane as the opponents he faced in the 90's. In other words, in terms of difficulty of opponents, Russell and Jordan FACED THE SAME DIFFICULTY. Its not like Jordan was playing with antiquated 60's skills and concepts during his 90's championship run to make his experience more difficult. Its not like Russell was privy to modern basketball concepts which would gave him an advantage over his contemporaries in the 60's when he had his championship run. If Jordan learned his basketball in the 50's and played basketball in the 60's, he wont be doing modern stuff.

The key difference between the two eras is on the quantity and concentration of the talent when they are playing. The level of talent during Jordan's time was DIFFUSED across 30 teams and international players are still few and hardly made an impact (like Dirk, Manu, Parker etc. in post-2000) to counterbalance this. Players who were NOT talented enough to be drafted and play in the NBA in the 80's got their chance in the 90's when 6 expansion teams joined the League. Also, the top players in Jordan's time rarely match up each other to test thier abilities. To give an example, Shaq only faceoff with Ewing in the East 4x and facesoff with Hakeem and Robinson in the West 2x. The top centers spend most of their time fending off middling talent like Ilgauskas. Where is the challenge in that? You consider this a competitive era?

In contrast, in Russell's time, the NCAA and NIT (when it still mattered) was concentrated in only 8-9 teams. The 24th pick of the 1st round today would be the final pick of the 3rd round in the 60's. Only the cream of the crop get to play in the NBA in the 60's. In addition, Russell would face off Wilt Chamberlain 8-9 times a season. When he is not fighting Wilt, he is fending off other Hall of Famers 8-9x again like Nate Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, Willis Reed etc. you get the drift. They have to work their butts off almost everytime.

Need i mention that each team in the NBA in the 60's have multiple hall of Famers in their roster?

Comparing Jordan to Bill Russell:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Side by side comparison (scroll down):

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...