The Last “Dance” ESPN Documentary

Ledbetterman10 · May 2020

bootlegger10 said:

They should have showed Kukoc’s third quarter in game 7 against the Pacers. I re-watched that game last week and he kept them in the game and allowed MJ to rest. B.S. that wasn’t included. Would have taken only a minute.

Totally agree. He was great in that game. 21 points if I remember correctly. No way they win that game if not for him.

Ledbetterman10 · May 2020

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

tempo_n_groove · May 2020

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

Ledbetterman10 · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

Oh they were definitely good. Made the finals two years later.

Glorified KC · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

tempo_n_groove · May 2020

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

The reason I compare him to Curry is the movement he would do in a game. He was always moving, running, using a pick to create space. All the things that Curry does now Reggie was doing 20 years ago.

Glorified KC · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

The reason I compare him to Curry is the movement he would do in a game. He was always moving, running, using a pick to create space. All the things that Curry does now Reggie was doing 20 years ago.

I always considered Reggie to be more of a catch-and-shoot type of shooter, where Steph can stop-and-pop as well as anyone the game has ever seen. I would prefer Reggie taking the last shot over Steph, if I had a choice. Few had more ice in their veins than Miller.

Ledbetterman10 · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

The reason I compare him to Curry is the movement he would do in a game. He was always moving, running, using a pick to create space. All the things that Curry does now Reggie was doing 20 years ago.

But Curry's way better at creating his own shot. They always had to run Reggie around picks. Sometimes many picks where he'd start on one wing, runs off of double Davis-brother picks underneath, and pop open in the opposite corner or wing. Bill Simmons laid it out in his book how this was sort of to the Pacers' detriment. Since Reggie didn't really take guys off the dribble, the whole offense had to be catered around finding ways to get him the ball in space.

tempo_n_groove · May 2020

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

The reason I compare him to Curry is the movement he would do in a game. He was always moving, running, using a pick to create space. All the things that Curry does now Reggie was doing 20 years ago.

I always considered Reggie to be more of a catch-and-shoot type of shooter, where Steph can stop-and-pop as well as anyone the game has ever seen. I would prefer Reggie taking the last shot over Steph, if I had a choice. Few had more ice in their veins than Miller.

Reggie could stop and shoot in transition. Case in point, watch him score the 8 points in 4 seconds against the Knicks. I'll never forget that game as long as I live.

Glorified KC · May 2020

Ledbetterman10 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

The reason I compare him to Curry is the movement he would do in a game. He was always moving, running, using a pick to create space. All the things that Curry does now Reggie was doing 20 years ago.

But Curry's way better at creating his own shot. They always had to run Reggie around picks. Sometimes many picks where he'd start on one wing, runs off of double Davis-brother picks underneath, and pop open in the opposite corner or wing. Bill Simmons laid it out in his book how this was sort of to the Pacers' detriment. Since Reggie didn't really take guys off the dribble, the whole offense had to be catered around finding ways to get him the ball in space.

Or he needed Mark Jackson to drive and kick out to him. Don't get me wrong, Reggie was unique in his time given the league was so inside-out at that time. I think you can make comparisons to Reggie (Ray Allen, Allan Houston, Peja Stojakovic) where it's more difficult with Steph.

xavier mcdaniel · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

So I never knew that about Kerr's father in Beiruit. How the hell did I ever miss that story?

I really want a part 2 now. I am sure they have tons of footage left.

I knew about that when I read the college basketball book "A Season Inside" by John Feinstein. It is a book going behind the scenes of the 1987-88 season and Feinstein basically wrote chapters on the all the major figures of the game then and some other and the whole backstory of Kerr's father and how he wound up at Arizona is in that book.

Ledbetterman10 · May 2020

cdthomas1981 said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

cdthomas1981 said:

The comment Miller made about the 1997-1998 Pacers being the better team really had me thinking too. Chicago won 62 games and that was without Scottie for the first 2 months of the season. I'd have to think more about this, but my initial impulse is to disagree with Miller. If not for the game 4 winning shot (which should not have happened, he clearly pushed off of Jordan), that series never sees a game 7.

Yeah I didn’t like that either. I never like when someone from the losing team says they were better than the team they lost to. But from Reggie’s perspective, the Bulls had to seem ripe for the picking...between fatigue from the Bulls’ three-straight title runs, Pippen’s back, and Rodman being on the cusp of being completely washed. But they had MJ, which renders most other weaknesses moot.

That pacers team was stacked though. I remember them always playing the Knicks tough and they whooped them 4-1 that year.

That was a great Pacers team and with the talent they had they very well should have beat the Bulls.

That was pretty much the same team they had rolled out the 3 years prior, except now a deeper bench and Larry Bird as the HC. I would agree Indiana was the deeper team, but there's no one on the Pacers I would take before Jordan or Pippen. Rodman was still rebounding and defending at a high level. Kukoc always gets overlooked, but was a player ahead of his time. If Toni had played in today's NBA, he would be the perfect stretch 4. Chris Mullin was past his prime. Reggie was a tremendous shooter, but I would disagree with the earlier comment comparing him to Curry. He's nowhere near the ball handler Curry is. Both the Pacers and Jazz caught breaks in those playoffs (Reggie's no-call push off and Pippen's back against Utah). The Bulls could have and should have won both series within 5 games.

The reason I compare him to Curry is the movement he would do in a game. He was always moving, running, using a pick to create space. All the things that Curry does now Reggie was doing 20 years ago.

But Curry's way better at creating his own shot. They always had to run Reggie around picks. Sometimes many picks where he'd start on one wing, runs off of double Davis-brother picks underneath, and pop open in the opposite corner or wing. Bill Simmons laid it out in his book how this was sort of to the Pacers' detriment. Since Reggie didn't really take guys off the dribble, the whole offense had to be catered around finding ways to get him the ball in space.

Or he needed Mark Jackson to drive and kick out to him. Don't get me wrong, Reggie was unique in his time given the league was so inside-out at that time. I think you can make comparisons to Reggie (Ray Allen, Allan Houston, Peja Stojakovic) where it's more difficult with Steph.

Yeah good point on the inside-out way of play in that era and Reggie being an outlier. He’d kill it today. But I still think Steph is better overall as a playmaker.

tempo_n_groove · May 2020

You guys should go back and watch how much Miller ran around the court. That is what I mean by him being like Curry.

Glorified KC · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

You guys should go back and watch how much Miller ran around the court. That is what I mean by him being like Curry.

I'll definitely go back and check it out. I'd like to rewatch some more of the Bulls-Pacers series, but also the Knicks-Pacers games from 1994 and 1995.

tempo_n_groove · May 2020

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

You guys should go back and watch how much Miller ran around the court. That is what I mean by him being like Curry.

I'll definitely go back and check it out. I'd like to rewatch some more of the Bulls-Pacers series, but also the Knicks-Pacers games from 1994 and 1995.

Knicks Pacers Bulls games were always battles. All 3 teams were competitors and very fun to watch.

Ledbetterman10 · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

You guys should go back and watch how much Miller ran around the court. That is what I mean by him being like Curry.

I'll definitely go back and check it out. I'd like to rewatch some more of the Bulls-Pacers series, but also the Knicks-Pacers games from 1994 and 1995.

Knicks Pacers Bulls games were always battles. All 3 teams were competitors and very fun to watch.

I always felt those late 90’s Heat teams were kinda in that category too. They had some great, high-seeded teams in 97, 98, and 99 with Mourning, Hardaway, and Mashburn (with Riley coaching). But they couldn’t get it done in the playoffs.

tempo_n_groove · May 2020

Ledbetterman10 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cdthomas1981 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

You guys should go back and watch how much Miller ran around the court. That is what I mean by him being like Curry.

I'll definitely go back and check it out. I'd like to rewatch some more of the Bulls-Pacers series, but also the Knicks-Pacers games from 1994 and 1995.

Knicks Pacers Bulls games were always battles. All 3 teams were competitors and very fun to watch.

I always felt those late 90’s Heat teams were kinda in that category too. They had some great, high-seeded teams in 97, 98, and 99 with Mourning, Hardaway, and Mashburn (with Riley coaching). But they couldn’t get it done in the playoffs.

Think of all the fun teams in the 90's. Lakers w Magic early and then Kobe and Shaq later, Dallas started to become good w Kidd and Jackson, Barkleys teams w Phoenix and Rockets. Seattle had Kemp and Payton oh and Detlef Schrempf! The Spurs were no slouch either. There was a very high caliber for some teams and others were just very, very bad.

Oh and I HATED Nick Van Excel and LOVED Eddie jones. I was upset when he left the lakers. He was one of my favorite players on a fastbreak.

Glorified KC · May 2020

The mid-90's Magic teams too. The Hawks with Nique in his prime. The Warriors had Run TMC (Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond and Chris Mullin), honestly any team coached by Don Nelson was fun to watch. I was just looking up some stats on the 97-98 season and somehow ended up on the Phoenix Suns that year. They won 56 games and had both Jason Kidd and Steve Nash on that club.

The Juggler · May 2020

Ledbetterman10 said:

Somehow this play didn't make into the documentary at any point. One of my Pippen nit-picks from this otherwise perfect documentary. It's from Michael's "double-nickel" game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgiZmKxAmFs

Hubie Brown with the spot on analysis. Young buck back then. He was probably in his late 70's at the time.

markymark550 · May 2020

tempo_n_groove said:

markymark550 said:

SVRDhand13 said:

eeriepadave said:

I wonder if MJ didn’t retire for those two years would the bulls have won eight in a row?

I don’t think so but I guess it depends on Phil Jackson

I don't think so either. 3-peats are difficult enough. I just don't see 8 in a row because they would stumble somewhere. I think that 94 Rockets team might have won even if they played Jordan and the Bulls.

The only reason the Rockets won is because Jordan wasn't around.

The Knicks had that series but messed up.

Not really. The Rockets were a bad match up for those Bulls teams. Jordan himself had doubts about Chicago's ability to beat the Rockets. In the first 3-peat, the Rockets went 5-1 against the Bulls. Nobody on the Rockets could stop Jordan, but Vernon Maxwell was a good enough defender to be a pain in his ass. The Bulls had nobody that would have been able to stop Olajuwon one on one. Jackson didn't like double teaming, so Olajuwon would have had a field day against them. Even if they did double team Olajuwon, Houston was one of the best 3-point shooting teams that year, so he would be able to kick it back out to a good shooter. It might have been a 7 game series, but I still think Houston would have won in 94.

The Last “Dance” ESPN Documentary

Comments

Categories