Michael Jordan appeared in the NBA Finals six times in the 1990s. All six times Jordan won the title. At least that’s the story told. If we think about it, though, we realize that Jordan didn’t win any titles. Jordan is a player. And its teams that win games and titles, not one single player.
Still, Jordan was such an incredible performer that one suspects that Jordan could have won six titles with any collection of teammates. In fact, his actual teammates almost drowned in Jordan’s brilliance, earning the moniker “the Jordanaires”.
Jordan’s brilliance has caused people to question the contribution of the architect of these championship teams, Jerry Krause. With but one exception, every player on these title teams was chosen by Krause. The one exception was MJ, who just happened to be there when Krause became GM. And again, since anyone could have won with Jordan, why should we credit Krause with doing anything?
When we look back at these teams we do see that Jordan clearly was the best player on the Bulls (and perhaps the best in the league). But the data clearly tells us that Jordan didn’t win by himself.
The Efficiency Differential Story
While looking back at the Bad Boys I noticed something odd about Jordan and the Jordanaires. In my memory the Bulls gradually improved each year until Chicago eventually surpassed the Pistons (or maybe the Pistons just got old). But my memory was incorrect. In reality there was very little improvement for years, and then one giant leap. To see this, consider Chicago’s efficiency differential and regular season wins in the early years of Jordan’s career.
– 1984-85: -0.8, 38 wins
– 1985-86: -3.7, 30 wins (Jordan misses all but 18 games)
– 1986-87: 0.9, 40 wins
– 1987-88: 3.4, 50 wins
– 1988-89: 1.4, 47 wins
– 1989-90: 3.2, 55 wins
When we look over this data we see that for the first six years of Jordan’s career the Bulls were a bit short of amazing. Their best season in terms of efficiency differential in the first six seasons was 1987-88, when they posted a 3.4 mark. To put that in perspective, seven teams bested this differential this past season. Eight teams bested that mark in 1987-88. In sum, for six seasons Jordan and the Jordanaires were hardly a hit group.
Then in 1990-91 the team took off. Its efficiency differential increased to 9.2 and the team won 61 games. What exactly happened?
The Wins Produced Story
To answer this question, let’s consider the Wins Produced from the players on this team from 1988-89 to 1992-93. Across these five seasons we can see how this team evolved from a slightly above average team to one of the dominant teams in NBA history.
Table One: The Chicago Bulls from 1988-89 to 1992-93
In 1988-89 the Bulls were indeed Jordan and the Jordanaires. Jordan produced 34.1 wins on a team whose summation of Wins Produced only reached 48.1. The Bulls had eight players in the negative range and no player – other than MJ — who posted a Wins Produced per 48 minutes [WP48] above 0.150. In sum, this team was quite similar to the Minnesota Timberwolves today who employ Kevin Garnett and not much else.
The next season we see a similar story. Again, Jordan produces more than half the team’s wins. The Bulls did get close to 19 wins from Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant. And this tells us that help was on its way.
In 1990-91 we see that help finally arrived. Pippen posted a WP48 of 0.306 and produced 19.2 wins. Grant chipped in 11.2 wins and a WP48 of 0.204. Meanwhile Jordan’s performance was virtually unchanged from the previous season. If we add it all together we see that these three players combined to produce 57.5 of the team’s 65.3 Wins Produced.
As amazing as this threesome was in 1990-91, they were even better in 1991-92. The Bulls that season won 67 games. More than 60 of these can be linked to the efforts of the amazing trio: MJ, Pippen, and Grant. Yes, Jordan was still the best. But all three posted a WP48 in excess of 0.300, an amazing achievement for three players on the same team.
The 1991-92 season was the peak for Jordan, Pippen, and Grant. The next season the team only won 58 games as the performance of Pippen and Grant both declined somewhat. In the summer of 1993, Jordan retired for the first time. Although Pippen and Grant combined to produced 35 wins in 1993-94, without Jordan the team was obviously not quite as good (a story detailed in The Wages of Wins).
By the time Jordan returned to play a full season in 1995-96, every member of the 1993 championship team – except for Pippen — was gone. Yet in 1995-96, with Dennis Rodman on board, the Bulls were even better than the 1991-92 team (another story detailed in The Wages of Wins).
The Jerry Krause Legacy
Let’s just summarize the Jordan and the Jordanaires story. MJ was an amazing player. In the book we argue that he might have been the best ever (although one could argue for Magic Johnson, a story I might get to tomorrow). But without Pippen and Grant – and later on, Pippen and Rodman – Jordan could have been Kevin Garnett, part one.
Jordan was fortunate to play with players who were extremely productive. These players all posted outstanding numbers without Jordan, suggesting it was not Jordan who made them better (and as detailed in the book, the Law of Diminishing Returns tells us that Jordan did not make them better). And Pippen and Grant were both acquired by Krause in the 1987 draft.
Yes, Krause was given a huge building block in Michael Jordan. But other general managers – like Kevin McHale – have been given similar building blocks and yet failed to build a championship contender. Again, one player cannot win a title. Teams win titles. And on the Bulls, it was the team of Jordan, Pippen, and Grant that dethroned the Bad Boys and won three titles. Two-thirds of this trio was chosen by Krause, and for that he should be given a substantial amount of credit (even if it was all just luck, but that’s another story of another day).
– DJ
Wages of Wins Journal 
JChan
June 25, 2007
Interesting stuff. I’m really enjoying these looks at the past. Even MJ needed two more productive guys to win. I’m really hoping KG gets traded to a team where he has two productive guys to help him win. The guy deserves it after all these years dealing with such terrible teammates.
Pacifist Viking
June 25, 2007
In my own subjective opinion, Jordan played with two other top-60 all-time players: Scottie Pippen (all six titles) and Dennis Rodman (three titles).
No doubt Jordan is one of the best ever, but just look at the ’95-96 championship team. Pippen was All-NBA first team and All-Defense first team, Kukoc was the 6th man of the year, Dennis Rodman was the league’s leading rebounder and All-Defense first team. Jordan was absolutely stunning, but that 72 win team was completely loaded.
db
June 25, 2007
there is a common cycle in the news media: some news media outlets praise someone so much that their reputation becomes an exaggeration, after which there is an inevitable backlash by other news media outlets in response to the initial overpraise, and then a cycle of criticism and underpraise emerges to compensate.
such is the case of michael jordan and his role in the bulls 6 titles in an 8 year span. no, jordan was not the only reason the bulls won, but he got the bulk of the praise from many sources in the news media. too much, it would seem.
in a 1-on-1 sport like golf or tennis you can rightfully say that a person’s championships are won by that player (but even then you can share credit with a player’s coach). so in basketball every player, coach and gm had to all do exactly what they could for a team to win. bj armstong doesn’t hit the game winning shot in game 5 of the conference finals in new york in 93, and who know if the bulls win that series in 6. so of course jordan didn’t win 6 rings by himself, or with just any players, and the bulls postseason performance from 1985-1990 should be enough proof to show that jordan needed the right teammates, coaches, gm, and owner.
but jordan does deserve some praise that stats can’t quantify. what statistics do not measure are the intangibles, including the development of skills that go into a player’s oncourt performance, like jordan’s offcourt effect on his teammates that played a role in their oncourt play. when he was young pippen mimicked jordan’s style of play — on both offense and defense — so much that bulls personnel were calling pippen “jordan 1 A” (at the time pippen also mirrored jordan’s oncourt apparel: jordan wore a knee bandage over his left calf, pippen wore an identical one on his right calf. jordan wore a wristband on his left forearm, pippen wore one on his right forearm). did pippen’s midrange outside shot improve dramatically on his own (pippen had 3point range as a rookie), or as a result of his competitive shooting contests with jordan (a portion of which we glimpse in one the the bulls nba championship videos)? jordan’s oncourt play may have stifled the point production of his teammates (note how bj armstrong and horace grant only became all-stars in 94 after jordan retired), but one could easily argue that their level of play was improved during their time with jordan because of his reputation for being a demanding teammate who occasionally gave advice on how to improve, including during games. their scoring improved in 94 to fill the vacuum of 32 points per game that were no longer filled by jordan. but armstrong was not noted for his defense, yet after he admitted he tried to learn from jordan’s legendary “glove-like” defense armstrong played surprisingly well against kevin johnson in the 93 finals, a factor why they won that series. this did not show up in a box score.
what made jordan great, perhaps the greatest, was not simply his unique physical ability (the quickness of a point guard, in jordan’s prime), abnormal strength for someone thin, jumping ability to elevate over players half a foot or more taller than him, 3% body fat and incredible endurance (having enough in the tank to finish off teams down the stretch), a high pain threshold and the ability to play at a high level while in pain — all of which separate him from magic and bird (as they admit), what makes him great are not only jordan’s on court skills, clutch play, ability to lead his teammates (notably rodman, who freely admitted that he knew he had to stay in line because of his respect for jordan), or even his competitive drive that kept the bulls from getting complacent after winning titles (jordan never lost a playoff series the year after winning a title–he retired after both threepeats). no, it was his ability to do all of that and instill confidence in his teammates, who would play better as a result. after the bulls lost game 5 in chicago in the 93 finals the team was depressed on the team bus before going to the airport to fly to phoenix for game 6. jordan memorably got on the bus upbeat and told his teammates that they would win game 6 and not to worry. the team played inspired in that game and won it (with all 5 players touching the ball on their final possession when paxson hit the game winning shot). because the bulls had jordan with them, when an opponent would score a go-ahead basket in the closing seconds of a game the bulls never cared. they had the ultimate closer. this had a profound influence on their play, to know that just having jordan on their side meant that they had a chance at the end fo the game to win. (an intesting anomaly is that at times the bulls would have a better +/- scoring average when jordan would sit on the bench. could an explanantion be that when jordan sat down the opponent’s defense had a mental lapse because they were no longer on edge about worrying about jordan, and this complacency was the cause for their worse defense? joe dumars famously said that when jordan was on the court in his prime you were consumed with jordan and what he could do to you. it would only be natural to relax when jordan went out, the same way teams with 20 point leads relax. this explanation could not be found by analyzing the data of a boxscore.
as for krause, he will never get the attention he deserves for his role in crafting two unique teams that won a threepeat. yes, jordan and pippen were the common thread on both teams, but this is 5-on-5, not 2 on 2. there was a turnover of ten players from the 93 to 96 title teams. the will purdue for rodman trade will go down as one of the most one-sided trades in nba history. rodman played three seasons for the bulls and won three titles there. kukoc was a huge pickup and the third leading scorer behind jordan and pippen, not to mention a clutch player. krause not only got the players he found phil jackson, and was in favor of using the triangle offense years before.
whatever happened after that 98 title, krause should get credit for building a championship roster around jordan and pippen, twice.
nathan
June 25, 2007
I got a feeling for a possible pattern that championship teams were succeeding for the first time in the 3rd year their core 3 leaders were together. It isnt a law of nature but it seem a rough estimate for many with some cores doing it with one piece a little sooner or later.
First Bulls championship was 3rd year of grant with Pippen and Jordan.
Some others
06 Miami 3rd year for Wade, 2nd for Mourning with ONeal but also 3rd with Haslem is a little different but close.
04 Pistons 4th year there for Billups and B Wallace, 2nd for Hamilton.
03 Spurs 3rd for Ginobli, 2nd for Parker with Duncan.
00 Lakers 4th Kobe, 3 ¼ Horry with Shaq
This year you could look at who lost. Kobe in 3rd year without Shaq. I think 3rd year of Vince in big 3 in New Jersey. 3rd year of Terry with Dirk? 3rd year of Nash with Suns? Often teams will try a 4th and 5th year but if you dont get it done in 3rd year are the odds against it working? Should GMs take that as cue to change the big 3? More research could be done. Next season would be 3rd of Hughes with LeBron, 3rd Jazz lead by D Williams, will it be 3rd with Mcgrady/ Yao? I might be off on one these 3rds but you get the idea.
Dave
June 26, 2007
How can you say it wasn’t Jordan who made them better? Who’s to say that Jordan didn’t help to develop those guys to become the players that they became. Don’t you think that playing next to the greatest basketball player of all time would help you to develop your skills? Where do you think their work ethic came from? Not to mention their confidence! By the time those guys played without Jordan they were already 3 time returning Champions. And yet Jordan didn’t make them better… That is why they were so incredible before they got to the NBA that everyone thought they would be some of the best supporting players ever to play the game. WRONG! They were nobodies, and they would have remained nobodies if it weren’t for Jordan. Have you ever played with some one that stole all of the defenses attention? It sure is easy to get rebounds when three of the defenders are all on him. Not to mention the amount of times that you are left wide open under the basket. Jordan made them better! It is incredibly obvious!!
john marzan
June 26, 2007
give credit for the guy for snagging pippen to a 6 year, $3 million per year contract ($18 million) that pippen tried to get out of.
Yuma Home Auto Insurance
June 26, 2007
I am not sure how anyone could argue with the success Krause had.