MJ says "no one great player"

[Kush77]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4674835

MJ pretty much says he appreciated the gesture from LBJ but if his #23 is retired by basketabll you'd have to retire Wilt's, Larry's and Magic's.

"Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Bill Russell, all those guys should have their jerseys retired, too," Jordan said. "I understand his gesture, but I am in the same group as those guys so I wouldn't want to see my jersey retired unless you retire those guys. It is a compliment. I totally understand that. I appreciate LeBron for doing that and it is very thoughtful."

Now for all the media folks who couldn't stop crying about how "ungracious" MJ was during his HOF speech, I wonder if they'll give him credit for being gracious here? Of course not.

This is an issue MJ didn't even have to address and he did by giving credit to guys that played before him. But I'm sure this will be overlooked.

 

[houheffna]

Of course...Jordan has carried himself with class throughout his career. No one but members of the media expected him to be that callous in his HOF speech.

Are you willing to acknowledge how classy Krause was in handling that situation?

 

[Kush77]

Re:MJ says

houheffna wrote:

Of course...Jordan has carried himself with class throughout his career. No one but members of the media expected him to be that callous in his HOF speech.

Are you willing to acknowledge how classy Krause was in handling that situation?

I never heard Krause's comments on that? Did he say something?

I know he's said things like he's thankful for Michael Jordan etc. in the past. I'll have to look up his comments on the HOF speech? Do you have a link?

 

[houheffna]

Re:MJ says

http://tmobile.si.mlogic.mobi/news/...=0EE950A182B9BDC3396F97AC3F193623.cnnsilive9i

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/sep/12/nation/chi-12-hall-of-fame-bits-sep12

 

[Kush77]

I'll give Krause credit for taking the high-road. I guess that's all he could do. I assume he wouldn't want to get into a war of wards with Jordan.

 

[houheffna]

Dude...he could get into a war of words over this...because Jordan was the one who came off like an idiot. Jordan is not God...nobody is afraid of him.

 

[Kush77]

Re:MJ says

houheffna wrote:

Dude...he could get into a war of words over this...because Jordan was the one who came off like an idiot. Jordan is not God...nobody is afraid of him.

Really and that would benefit Krause in what way? My point is Krause would look bad because more people support Jordan. That's the bottom line. Right or wrong Krause wouldn't benefit even if the facts were 100% on his side.

And Krause's "organization" comment makes sense when you break it down. But at the time he made it, he didn't explain it like that and it's coming from a man that was so dead-set on proving he could build a franchise without Jordan. So it came off as a guy who was trying to give himself more credit than he deserved. Was that his intention, probably not, but he failed once again in the PR spectrum. As usual. Thus getting into a war of words with MJ would be a PR failure right or wrong.

But he's retired and is probably in his 70s now, it might not matter anyway.

 

[mlewinth]

Re:MJ says

houheffna wrote:

Dude...he could get into a war of words over this...because Jordan was the one who came off like an idiot. Jordan is not God...nobody is afraid of him.

I beg to differ. I belive Jordan is a god and he freaks the shit out of me!

 

[Kush77]

Here's a little story about Krause's comment from so long ago.

At the time he never publicly clarified what he said. He should have, just like he did in the links Hou posted.

But the this goes back to Bulls management and the way they allowed the relationship between themselves and players/coaches to deteriorate. If the relationship was better things like this wouldn't be talked about 12 years later. Do you think this would ever happen between Jerry West and Kobe Bryant, or Nowitzki and Cuban, Donnie Walsh and Reggie Miller? No because they had great relationships.
Has there ever been such a sour relationship between players/coaches and a team that won multiple titles?

The only one I can think of off the top of my head was the way Jimmy Johnson left the Cowboys because of issues with Jerry Jones. But there wasn't any issues with players and Jerry Jones. Here's the story.

Meaning gets muddled in Krause quote
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES - Tuesday, November 4, 1997
Author: John Jackson

Several readers have asked for a clarification of exactly what Bulls operations chief Jerry Krause said on media day last month when he addressed the subject of how championships are won.

The paraphrased quote attributed to Krause that appeared in the Sun-Times and newspapers across the country had him saying players and coaches don't win championships , organizations do.

Is that what he really said?

To a small degree, yes. But the spirit of what Krause was conveying was misrepresented.

The portion of the quote broken out was a small part of a long, drawn-out statement of several sentences. The theme of what he was saying was that everyone from ownership down to the locker-room attendants has played some role in the success of the organization .

Krause said the Bulls win as a group and lose as a group, that everyone is together in the same fight.

But to get that message, you had to hear the entire quote. If you just heard a sentence or two, it would be easy to misconstrue exactly was he was saying_and that's what happened on media day.

A few reporters, including one from the Associated Press, heard only a portion of Krause 's statement and immediately jumped to coach Phil Jackson for his reaction of what seemed to be an inflammatory quote.

To put it mildly, Jackson and Krause haven't seen eye-to-eye on a lot of matters in recent years and Jackson didn't hesitate to fire back when the paraphrased quote was relayed to him.

"He would say that," Jackson snapped.

That made for interesting copy and a story using both quotes appeared on the Associated Press wire and made its way around the world. The quotes also were pulled from the AP story and inserted into a Sun-Times report from media day.

In reality, Krause 's words simply were misrepresented and he was subjected to scorn for something he never said.

 

[houheffna]

But the this goes back to Bulls management and the way they allowed the relationship between themselves and players/coaches to deteriorate.

If you think Jordan doesn't know what Krause REALLY meant by now...you are fooling yourself. This is a case of Jordan being disrespectful. I have shown you news clippings of him being an ahole before to players and management. This was not one sided...Jackson, Jordan and others fed the beast also. This kind of stuff happens more than you are giving credit.

Krause was not innocent, but he is not the sole guilty party either.

However, it would have been nice if Jordan had taken the high road when they came back to him with that quote instead of blowing it out of proportion.

 

[Kush77]

Re:MJ says

houheffna wrote:

But the this goes back to Bulls management and the way they allowed the relationship between themselves and players/coaches to deteriorate.

If you think Jordan doesn't know what Krause REALLY meant by now...you are fooling yourself. This is a case of Jordan being disrespectful. I have shown you news clippings of him being an ahole before to players and management. This was not one sided...Jackson, Jordan and others fed the beast also. This kind of stuff happens more than you are giving credit.

Krause was not innocent, but he is not the sole guilty party either.

However, it would have been nice if Jordan had taken the high road when they came back to him with that quote instead of blowing it out of proportion.

Of course Jordan would have known by the time he made the speech. He was just taking a shot at Jerry Krause. And I don't blame him or rip him for that. People can call it petty, that's fine. I enjoyed Jordan's speech. If I wanted to hear the same ole ho-hum stories I'll pop in my DVD of Michael Jordan's Playground, Airtime or Come Fly With Me.

My point is more about the reaction of Phil Jackson "He would say that," Jackson snapped.

Why is that the default reaction for Jackson and Jordan? Because the relationship was so bad. If the relationships were better (like in 99% of dynastys) this wouldn't be an issue.

 

[houheffna]

Re:MJ says

Well I don't give a damn WHO Jordan is, I don't go off of who can make a jumpshot. I go off of right and wrong...for him to do that right there was wrong. Point blank. He retired now, he aint no saint to me.

The way I feel about it...handle your business like men...bitchin about that crap over 10 years later is supa lame. Jordan is a bully, rubbin it in just because he can. He is the greatest basketball player ever, that night...he looked like the biggest loser ever to me.

But that is my opinion.

And please tell me how you know how things were in 99% of other dynasties? You don't think they had internal conflict, that they didn't let out? You don't think other great teams had problems? You don't think they conflicted with ownership? There are plenty of examples...of dysfunction and strife...but if you are going to buy into that b.s., at least hold Jackson and Jordan accountable for the childish crap they did as well as ownership...

 

[Kush77]

Re:MJ says

houheffna wrote:

Well I don't give a damn WHO Jordan is, I don't go off of who can make a jumpshot. I go off of right and wrong...for him to do that right there was wrong. Point blank. He retired now, he aint no saint to me.

The way I feel about it...handle your business like men...bitchin about that crap over 10 years later is supa lame. Jordan is a bully, rubbin it in just because he can. He is the greatest basketball player ever, that night...he looked like the biggest loser ever to me.

But that is my opinion.

And please tell me how you know how things were in 99% of other dynasties? You don't think they had internal conflict, that they didn't let out? You don't think other great teams had problems? You don't think they conflicted with ownership? There are plenty of examples...of dysfunction and strife...but if you are going to buy into that b.s., at least hold Jackson and Jordan accountable for the childish crap they did as well as ownership...

I believe in right and wrong too. When it comes to the real world, not arguments between millionaires. I couldn't care less that Jordan ripped into Krause during that speech. Krause deserves it because he likes to think he's responsible for the Bulls' dynasty. His ego is so big that he thought as soon as he ran Phil and MJ out of town he could build another dynasty. Well that worked real well.

I know things were better 99% of other dynastys because no other dynasty has broken up in the fashion of the Chicago Bulls. I gave the only example I could think of with the Cowboys and Jimmie Johnson and Jerry Jones. But that was just the coach.

Never said there wasn't an argument. I said no other dynasty has broken up over players vs management conflict.

So please name me some that have broken up because of internal conflict between management an ownership. Especially one involving the best player in the sport.

Did the 80's Lakers break up - No

Did the 60s Celtics break up - No

Did the 80s 49ers break up - No

Did the 80s Oilers break up - Somewhat. The owner traded Gretzky because he was broke and couldn't afford to pay him. But the Oilers actually won the Stanley Cup 2 years after they traded Gretzky.

Did the 00s Pats break up - No

70s Steelers - No. I wasn't around for that but guys like Bradshaw and Swann have nothing but love for Art Rooney.

00's Spurs - No. I personally don't consider the Spurs a "dynasty" but they've won a lot and things seem to run smoothly there.

90s Cowboys - talked about that already.

90s Yankees - No

So please tell me what dynasty in sports has broken up (while still on top) because of internal conflict.

 

[houheffna]

Re:MJ says

Krause would repeatedly say in interviews before the speech Jordan gave what an incredible player Jordan was and how much he enjoyed running those teams...he has a right to feel he had some responsibility for those teams. He has said that his statements were misquotes and he has given Jordan and the players their respect as the reason for the winning. But the organization...coaches, trainers...and yes the general manager had something to do with those championships too.

I think I have shown WHO contributed to the breaking up of that dynasty. I talked about the problems that were faced and the issues between management and players not being anything new. As far as them breaking up...

It is well known that players had as much to do with that as the owners may have had to do with it. I have already given you that proof...you poo pooed it as nothing. So there is nothing else to say.

I just gave you proof of Krause showing class and you acted as if he had no other choice...so the argument is a no-win situation.


I cannot give you some magical solution or find some precedence that will allow you to let go of all of this bitterness concerning 1998...so why try? Coaches step down, players move on, management begins new agendas all the time...you should be just as mad at Jordan and Jackson as you are at ownership. Expecting Reinsdorf and company to baby these grown ass men any more than he did is asking too much to me...

 

[Kush77]

I'm not bitter about 1998. I had my Brand and Artest jerseys and was ready to move forward in 1999.

I'm bitter about how you can never answer my questions.

Tell me what other dynasty has broken up over management/player conflicts. NONE. Only the Bulls with the super ego of Jerry Krause and the owner, JR, who let his little minion run wild.

If you answer the question it hurts your argument.

Because management is ultimately responsible for the poor relationship with all the cheap petty moves they pulled over the years. Bottom line.

 

[houheffna]

If I answer your question...it prolongs the argument...I have proven that Krause was not the reason behind the breakup that there was shared culpability. I have proven that Krause outclassed Jordan as far as the recent HOF speech and still...you give no credit...so what's the point???

I don't get the point of your question because you just fabricated a scenario out of thin air. What you are saying happened DIDN'T HAPPEN!!! So why should I go on some wild goose chase to disprove your scenario when it didn't happen? That is like me sending you away to prove some cockamamie theory I just made up based on whatever. Jackson, Jordan were grown ass men who made their own decisions...nobody needed to kiss their ass anymore than what was already done.

I don't see Jordan as perfect, or some saint incapable of being wrong...or even incapable of blowing up a dynasty. Jordan never forgave Krause for trading Oakley, not getting Joe Wolf, not getting Walter Davis...a myriad of decisions that Krause was actually right on. It has been stated that even when trades were being talked about between the Bulls and the Wizards, Jordan refused to talk to him. Krause refused to give in to an athlete's immense ego and I don't blame him.

 

[Frank Breakfast Styleham]

He's probably right but I don't know...

See, if i was in position A many things would be different.

If I was President you'd see the faces of Theodore Roosevelt (the greatest President ever) and Rutherford B. Hayes on bills instead of Andrew "Trail of Tears" Jackson and Thomas "WHO...?" Hamilton.

If I ran the Bulls, while I don't wish to boast, I do think they would be riding a little higher up in the standings (I certainly wouldn't have let Tim Thomas go that's for sure).

And if I was Commissioner I would change the NBA logo with Michael Jordan's famous hangman as the new one.

Jerry West was a fine player but c'mon...Jerry West as the NBA logo (he wasn't even a top 3 player when he was IN the league)?

I don't want to accuse anyone of anything bad but sometimes I wonder if Jerry West would have been chosen if he was black.

Um...

I don't think it would...

Am I wrong here?

 

[houheffna]

Thomas "WHO...?" Hamilton

You mean Alexander Hamilton ($10)...first secretary of the treasury...under George Washington($1)...ideological opponent of Thomas Jefferson($2)...very important historical figure in American politics.


They shouldn't use the hangman symbol...that is the symbol of the shoe...something about copyright infringement...just saying.

Jerry West was a great player and until the 1980's...the prototype shooting guard in the league's history. I don't like the "if he was black" argument so much...but you might have a point.

And why Rutherford Hayes? Do you mean Franklin Roosevelt? Theordore was good but Franklin is considered one of the top 3 usually, with Washington and Lincoln...

 

[Frank Breakfast Styleham]

Re:MJ says

houheffna wrote:

Thomas "WHO...?" Hamilton

You mean Alexander Hamilton ($10)...first secretary of the treasury...under George Washington($1)...ideological opponent of Thomas Jefferson($2)...very important historical figure in American politics.

Oh yeah. I guess i forgot. lol He's not as well-known as Presidents are but you're right.



Jerry West was a great player and until the 1980's...the prototype shooting guard in the league's history. I don't like the "if he was black" argument so much...but you might have a point.

I know...I don't like to go there usually because it can be a dangerous path. It just makes me wonder the same way that Bill Walton's legend makes me wonder. I was watching this NBA compilation of best dunks ever and Walton's back-to-back made number one as the greatest dunk of all-time. I've seen Theo Ratliff do the same thing but...nothing. Makes me wonder...

And why Rutherford Hayes? ...

Have you seen that guys beard!?

 

[houheffna]

Re:MJ says

Yeah, that was a heck of a beard...