Athletic Jordan or Technical Jordan?

[Kieli]

If you had to build a dynasty around 88 - 90 Jordan or 95 - 98 Jordan, which would you choose? You'd essentially get the time-locked version of them, so they never age from that period.

I'd go with the technical, cerebral Jordan of the second three peat. His fadeaway jumpshot must be the prettiest shot in the game.

 

[Anth0ny]

Jordan post-Monstars was unstoppable

 

[CreepingFear]

95-96 Jordan after the summer. This was the Jordan that just lost to the Orlando Magic and spent the summer on a basketball court that Warner Brothers set up for him. He got in to basketball shape and developed his fade away, but he still had some athleticism left.

 

[Neece]

You reach, I teach.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

It's amazing how the Hornets-defender guarding Jordan can't do anything about MJ's fadeaway.

 

[Benjamin1981]

Fadeaway Jordan all day. That shot was unstoppable.

 

[BLEEN]

Space Jam Jordan
Runner-up: Crying Jordan

 

[ShutterMunster]

Fade-away Jordan is quite possibly the greatest mid-range scorer in league history, scary efficient.

 

[Solo]

I know Stephen A and Max Kellerman kind of cartoon characters (which is kind of the point to be honest), but one of them summed it up pretty good on First Take. I'm paraphrasing, but one of them said something to the effect that Jordan was the best player in the world during the second three peat, but that he was the best player in history during the first three peat. I tend to agree.

1991 Jordan is peak Jordan.

Having said that, there is no version of Bulls Jordan that isn't incredible.

 

[jwhit28]

95-98 but mostly because of Kobe. It's scary how close 95-98 Jordan and #24 Kobe's games were. Something I've noticed going through old games during the lockdown, first 3-peat Jordan reminds me so much of Kawhi. Especially when Pippen and Jordan go into half-court press mode. I never made that connection before. Airtime Jordan reminds me of Westbrook if you replaced the 4 bad 3s a game with a made 18 footer.

 

[Deleted member 23850]

Fundamental Jordan for sure.

 

[Mansa Mufasa]

95-96 Jordan was God.

The perfect balance between skill and athleticism.

 

[BadAss2961]

91-93 Jordan was somewhere in between and absolutely insane.

Would go with 2nd threepeat Jordan over young Jordan though. As was said in the documentary, by that point, he just seemed to have basketball figured out and couldn't lose. Unguardable fadeaway when he had it going.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

You can't pick 91-93 Jordan cuz that's the GOAT period from the GOAT player.

 

[callamp]

Much of Jordan's 95-98 game style is obsolete in the modern NBA. Contested fadeaways are just bad shots. There is a good reason that most teams have moved out of the mid-range.

Young Jordan is a far greater weapon in the modern NBA. Can get to the ring at will. Old Jordan can't do that.

 

[JasonV]

Contested fadeaways are just bad shots. There is a good reason that most teams have moved out of the mid-range.

Click to shrink...

Can you explain why? My basketball technical knowledge is based on NBA Jam.

 

[callamp]

Can you explain why? My basketball technical knowledge is based on NBA Jam.

Click to shrink...

Three pointers are just far more efficient. Even contested threes. So most teams have shifted towards shots at the rim / 3-point line and minimised the mid-range.

It's had a huge impact on shooting efficiency. For example, Jordan's shooting efficiency (TS%) in 1998 is better than than just one team this season (the lowly Knicks).

So I have my doubts that you could put up 20 midrange attempts per game, as Jordan was doing in the late 1990s, and be successful.

 

[JasonV]

Three pointers are just far more efficient. Even contested threes. So most teams have shifted towards shots at the rim / 3-point line and minimised the mid-range.

Click to shrink...

By efficient, do you mean the percentage of shots going in?

Like, is it worth taking more 3s for the extra point, despite missing more?

 

[thefro]

By efficient, do you mean the percentage of shots going in?

Like, is it worth taking more 3s for the extra point, despite missing more?

Click to shrink...

Yes, it's about how many points you generate per shot attempt. Close to the rim (better chance of making the shot, better chance of getting fouled) and at the 3 point line (you miss more, but you get 3 points if you make one) gives you more points per shot than mid-range shots.

 

[Tom Penny]

Build around Lebron who makes his teammates better.

 

[JasonV]

Yes, it's about how many points you generate per shot attempt. Close to the rim (better chance of making the shot, better chance of getting fouled) and at the 3 point line (you miss more, but you get 3 points if you make one) gives you more points per shot than mid-range shots.

Click to shrink...

Cool, thanks for explaining.

 

[BadAss2961]

Build around Lebron who makes his teammates better.

Click to shrink...

Until he leaves or trades them. lol

 

[Noctis]

But 91 Jordan tho