Off the Iron: The Endurance of MJ’s Perfection

With apologies to Hakeem Olajuwon and Kevin McHale, there are two post moves in the history of basketball that reign above all others in the unstoppable category: Kareem’s skyhook and MJ’s fadeaway. With both of those shots, the defender was irrelevant. If Mike missed, it was just cause he happened to miss; it wasn’t because of something the guy guarding him did.

Above, you can watch Mike, even at 46-years-old, toying with a defender on the block, making fadeaway after fadeaway. (via Slam)

While it’s interesting to see that Money’s still got it, the more enduring abstraction that struck me while watching this video is what Mike’s fadeaway represents: A key reason that few people who ever saw Mike play will ever admit that anyone else is better.

I’m not saying anyone is better yet, but someday, somewhere, some kid will come along who is better than Mike. It’s inevitable. Still, 99% of the people who watched Mike play will still say Mike was better. These people will use Mike’s undeniable on-court greatness as evidence. They will list his accomplishments. They will reference all the other NBA players and experts who believe Mike was the best ever.

But all those valid points will not be the ultimate rationale behind why most MJ-era NBA fans will never admit that some new kid is better than Mike. The reason they will not admit that is because Mike had a perfect career trajectory that is (almost certainly) inimitable. And there are two separate, yet equally memory-engraving ways in which Mike’s career trajectory was perfect.

Reason #1 That MJ Had a Perfect Career Trajectory
If Hollywood made “The Michael Jordan Story” into a movie, you would say “This plot is some Mighty Ducks-esque derivative nonsense.”

Here’s the MJ career arc of lore as it’s most widely spun:

  • Mike gets cut from his high-school basketball team.
  • Mike overcomes that adversity to become a high-school star and enroll in one of the biggest college programs in the country, where he hits an NCAA Championship-winning shot as a freshman.
  • Mike becomes the best college basketball player in the country.
  • Mike gets drafted by a middling NBA team that has never won anything and instantly becomes an unstoppable player in the League who is way better than anyone else to the point that Larry Bird (who was either the number 1 or 1A player in the league previously) called him “God disguised as Michael Jordan” — yet many people still see Mike as too flashy and too much of a ball-hog to be considered a true all-time great.
  • Mike elevates his team to contender status but still can never quite oust his arch rival (Chuck Daly’s Pistons).
  • Mike not only defeats his nemesis and then knocks off the best team of the 80s (Magic Johnson’s Lakers) to win his first professional championship, but he goes 15-2 in the Playoffs on his way to the title.
  • Mike never loses again.

Obviously, the last item is excluding the Wizards part of his career (which I think most people don’t consider to be an actual part of the MJ mythos) and the tail end of the 1994-95 season when he came back to the NBA — out-of-shape and out-of-sync —  for 17 regular season games before losing to the Orlando Magic in the second round of the Playoffs (which I think most people also generally disregard).

In short, he rose from nothing (getting cut from Laney High), overcame his biggest hurdle (the Pistons), become the king of basketball and wore the crown with such undisputed supremacy that he eventually decided to relinquish the thrown on his own terms. Every other all-time great in the history of the NBA (and, to my knowledge, every other all-time great in any sport ever minus maybe Rocky Marciano) has ascended to the thrown, worn the crown for a while and then had it taken away from him by a younger up-and-comer. But no one ever took Mike’s crown. He just gave it away, seemingly because he was tired of participating in the ongoing charade that the sport of basketball was even still an exercise in competition.

Mike actually reached the status that Jay-Z once boasted about his crew achieving: “The game is ours, we will never foul out; yall just better hope we gracefully bow out.”

Reason #2 That MJ Had a Perfect Career Trajectory
In the classic film Office Space, Ron Livingston’s character Peter Gibbons details a startling revelation about the depths of his depression to a hypnotherapist. “Ever since I started working,” he says, “every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that’s on the worst day of my life.”

Mike’s professional career was the exact opposite. Every single day that you saw him, that was on the best day of his life. He got better every day of his career. He may have averaged 37 ppg, 5 apg and 5 rpg in 1987, but he was a better player in 1998. And on the final day you ever saw him in a Bulls uniform — right down to his final 30 seconds ever on the court — he was the best he had ever been. If you don’t remember, just ask Karl Malone and Bryon Russell. The 1987 Mike doesn’t embarrass the third best power forward of all time (or second, depending how you feel about Charles Barkley) by stripping him in the post and then walking down and calmly hitting a jumper 15 seconds later to win the NBA Championship — in front of the hostile Utah fans no less.

His Bulls career trajectory did not follow the path of nearly every other professional athlete we have ever seen. He didn’t improve rapidly in his early years, peak during his prime and then decline until retirement. He may have slowed down athletically, but his abilities never stopped improving. His improvement was steady, upward and seemingly limitless. (At least the perception of his improvement was, and that’s what is really at issue here. Only a few people — Scottie Pippen, Phil Jackson, Doug Collins and Tim Grover likely among them — could really tell you with any semblance of certainty if 1998 Mike was actually better than 1993 Mike.)

Nike, Gatorade, Hanes, McDonald’s and Mike himself have a lot to do with how we view the MJ mythos and how he never stopped improving. One apt example is the Gatorade “You Reach, I Teach” commercial that pits Old Mike vs. Young Mike. In just 60 seconds, we see why Old Mike is better, and the fadeaway is not-so-coincidentally the move he goes to after telling the youngster “I teach.”

An even more illustrative point is made when Old Mike swats a layup attempt from Young Mike. Following the play, Young Mike bombastically shrugs off the block with some slick posturing that alludes to the fact that he wasn’t really trying, a remark to which Old Mike offers the simple, sage advice of a basketball master.

Young Mike: “Coulda dunked.”
Old Mike: “Shoulda dunked.”

The lesson here is that 1987 Mike might have been capable of doing anything on a basketball court, but 1998 Mike was the guy who knew exactly when to do everything. He never failed. He was, for all intents and purposes, an infallible basketball player. He was perfect.

Mike’s fadeaway was the incarnation of this perfection. His at-the-time unparalleled athleticism started to fade in the mid-90s, but the development of that fadeaway (and, more generally, his entire post game) superceded any physical slowdown. His increasingly flawless fadeaway was what made his improvement seem limitless. Honestly, had the whole Wizards thing never happened, the above video would likely prompt many people to think that a 46-year-old MJ could still dominate the NBA today.

The potential of an ever-escalating career trajectory towards perfection is why guys like Bo Jackson have become John Henry-like folk heroes. If not for that career-ending hip injury, he might have continued honing his craft, getting better and better until he morphed into some untackaleable half-Jim Brown/half-Walter Payton hybrid. It’s why when Duke’s Coach K says something like (paraphrasing) “There are two players I’ve seen in the ACC that were clearly better than everyone else: Michael Jordan and Len Bias” it makes people like the Sports Guy wonder whether a Bird/Bias-led Celtics team would have won five straight titles or six.

In the real world, people always decline. They reach a peak and we celebrate them and then we lament their fall. But once we accept it as inevitable, we hope to see some flashes of their previous greatness. It’s why we lionize Jack Nicklaus so greatly for his 1986 Master’s victory. And, conversely, it’s why we don’t criticize Jack Nicholson for messing up The Departed or phoning in The Bucket List.

Mike, of course, clearly declined in the public eye while playing for Washington. But I think his two-year lay-off away from daily scrutiny makes people differentiate the vibrant, Bulls-era, Superman MJ with the aged, Wizards-era, mere mortal Mike to the point that his Washington days are simply an irrelevant epilogue to his career arc.

Mike, the human, declined. But MJ, the immortal, never did.

And, most importantly, never will — regardless of whether or not some young kid drops 63 in a playoff loss against LeBron and the 2017 Cleveland Cavaliers.

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Good, if a little rose-tinted, article on the GOAT.
I was suprised by the quality of comments. Intelligent, reasoned discussion points.
Then came Kaveh. Oh dear.

Not sure why anyone responded to his comments. If you ignore the idiot, he will go away (hopefully!).

I was (am) a hardcore MJ fan. I am a hardcore Kobe fan. I see a lot of the same attributes as the apprentice modelled himself on the master. BUT there is no sensible argument you could make saying that Kobe is better than MJ.

Kaveh's other remarks about Wilt, Shaq etc are equally laughable. Not even worth putting him straight on them.

Lets just respond to comments worth responding to.

It's really sad the way you cherry pick stats to try and prove that Kobe is on MJ's level, Kaveh. What does one regular season game (the 81 point game) against the worst defensive team in the league mean compared to what a guy averaged throughout his entire career? MJ has the highest scoring average in the regular season, the highest scoring average in the postseason, and the highest scoring average in the finals. We're talking all-time here. Over the course of his career. Kobe doesn't even come close. In fact, Kobe could win 7 championships and he still won't come anywhere near matching MJ's overall career accomplishments, because rings don't tell the whole picture at all. (Robert Horry > Jordan?) LEADING your team to a championship means more to the GOAT debate than just having been in the right place at the right time, and whether Kobe fans like it or not, he was a second banana during the Lakers's 2000-02 run. Anyway, check out this site and educate yourself:

http://www.michaeljordansworld.com/

Also, check out Hoopsencyclopedia's channel on Youtube. Someone may come along who is as good or better than MJ, but it's not Kobe. Like Adam pointed out, it's already too late to seriously put Kobe in the same conversation, and Kobe's not going to get better from this point forward. (in fact, LeBron has been the better player for the last couple of seasons; it's just that Kobe has the better teammates) Unless he's able to accumulate four or five Finals MVP awards by the end of his career, there's little reason to bring him up. The way that the media brings up Jordan in order to sell Kobe tickets doesn't mean anything to those who are aware of Jordan's accomplishments beyond just the six championships. It's just silly and annoying.

kaveh,

I'm sorry, but the Kobe/MJ debate ended when the Lakers got blown out in the deciding game of the 08 finals.

I disagree with all of your arguments, but either way, Jordan simply didn't allow his teams to lose. He willed them to wins. MJ would have NEVER allowed his team to lose by 40 (40!) points in a deciding game, let alone the NBA Finals.

Also your point that MJ only had 2 rings at Kobe's current age is incredibly misleading (and wrong: Jordan was 31 in 94: 3 rings). Kobe has played 13 NBA seasons and has 4 rings, 3 of which came with him NOT being the team's best player. Even if you count MJ's 2nd season when he broke his foot and only played 18 games and the 94-95 season when he came back for 17 games, his 13th season was his final with the Bulls. He won 6 rings, every time being the best player on the team and winning the Finals MVP. This doesn't even take into account that he gave up 2 years of his prime.

So I'll count the 2 seasons that he missed almost all of so you can't nit pick my argument, but in reality, MJ had 6 rings as the best player on the team in 11 seasons. Kobe has had all of his prime and only has 1 ring as the best player in 13 seasons.

Fisking completed.

Jordan,

We could all debate for hours about the caliber of players now vs then, so I won't waste your time. There is one thing that you cannot debate: the types of defenses faced.

With the hand-check rules and the quick whistles of referees these days, defenses simply aren't as good. Think about the physical pounding that the Pistons and Knicks were allowed to bring on their opponents.

Like I said, we can argue on and on about Stockton and Malone vs. Paul and Garnett (not to detract from my argument, but you have the career leaders in assists, steals, and points vs. ...) (also their mystique is partially ruined bc MJ didn't let anyone win any rings).

Anyway, Jordan dominated when defenses were allowed to literally beat players up. I'm not saying LeBron or some future star couldn't win then, but the comparison isn't so simple. Also, win 6 rings, and lose MVP races bc people are literally tired of voting for you, then we'll talk.

The truth of the matter is that MJ had the most of luck in his career. His career came at the perfect time of excess in the world. The economy really started humming in the early 1990's, and the information technology boom appeared. Basketball was no longer just a USA thing, but images of MJ were broadcast the world around. Can you say ESPN? 24-hour media telling you why Mike was the greatest. The NBA going on a media blitz telling you why MJ was the greatest. And in my opinion a true LACK of talent, not the opposite.

Would MJ and Scottie be able to beat Shaq/Kobe? I think the Shaq/Kobe lakers were the superior team. Kobe is about the same as MJ and Shaq is far superior to Pippen. The truth is that during MJ time, you did not have good competition. Compare MJ's time to the 1980's, when you had the Lakers and the Celtics, each with 3-4 hall of famers on the team! Or the 2000's with the Duncan Spurs or the Kobe/Shaq lakers.

Also, I believe that MJ is perhaps the most over-rated player in NBA history. Regarding total domination, Wilt Chamberlin was far ahead of MJ. Wilt averaged over 48minutes per game in some seasons, averaging 50+ points and like 25+ rebounds per game (not to mention blocks, which unfortunately they did not keep record of). Wilt was a far more dominating pure basketball player than MJ. What about Oscar? A much better all around player, stat wise. Regarding championships? Well, you had Bill Russell with 11. A mark MJ had no chance of reaching. What about Magic and his Lakers with 5 rings? The truth is that no one really put it all together like MJ, and that's why he is remembered as being better than the rest.

MJ had the domination, the all around numbers, the score at will, the longevity and most importantly, the championships. However, this does not mean that MJ is untouchable! If you want to compare, Kobe is right on MJ's level, career wise. At Kobe's age, MJ had 2 rings. Kobe is the more explosive scorer --MJ never even approached 81 points in a game (by the way, KObe could have scored 100 points that game if he really wanted to), or 62 in 3 quarters agaunst the 2006 Mavs who won like 65 games and had one of the best Ds in the league. Their defense is comparable. MJ has more rings, but Kobe COULD have 6 by the time he retires. He could have more points/playoff points, wins, etc. Kobe's playmaking and facilitating is better than Jordan's. Jordan was more consistent and dominant stat wise. All in all, Kobe and MJ are very similar and on the same level. Yet to suggest such a thing is blasphemy to basketball fans.

MJ has a lot more going for him than bball.

The day when people take a second look at Jordan's stint with the Wizards, his image will take a serious hit. The only reason why his being touted as potential MVP for having his team have a single good month is not embarrasing is the 2003 all star starting lineup fiasco.

It doesn't matter how much better the players today are compared with those in the 1980s/1990s. MJ would still find a way to dominate night in, night out.

Great post/comments, but one thing always bothers me: when Michael Jordan was "cut" from his his high school varsity basketball team, he was a sophomore. People treat the story as a major setback, but being cut from the varsity team as a sophomore is not a setback -- sophomores aren't supposed to make the varsity team. Don't get me wrong, he was good enough and all, but it gets treated with a lore that it doesn't exactly deserve.

Great stuff, Bart (and others...MJ, is that you?)

More so than making a case for MJ being at his according to Hoyle best in 1998, I think what I was really trying to convey is that everyone -- meaning, the general public -- still considered 1998 MJ to be unbeatable. In most people's memory, there was very little if any drop off and, like you say, his "higher bball IQ" and the perception of him evolving into this benevolent, willing passer in his old age helped supersede any physical drop off that most onlookers would ever remember.

Only hardcore NBA fans would really be able to follow your comments about Mike actually having to "overcome" upper management rather than get by the Pistons or legitimately being beat by the Magic, which are certainly valid views to have. Honestly, those of us who are reading HP on the reg and can offer opinions on PER vs Wages of Wins probably aren't the demographic I'm talking about when I say it will be nearly impossible to convince anyone that Mike isn't better than whoever Mike 2.0 is. I'm talking more about dudes like Skip Bayless or even credible, well-intentioned sports generalists like Wilbon as the public face of people who will always be like "This new kid's good, sure, but you should have seen MJ. He never would have..."

Personally, I'd probably take a 30-year-old 1993 Mike over a 1987 Mike or a 1998 Mike. You get much of the athleticism, less of the a$$holeishness to teammates and most of the learned-through-experience IQ. Then again, I was 7 in 1987, so what the hell do I know? Maybe the "It's gotta be the shoes, Money" Mike was the best there ever was.

@Bart,
Great info, but I have to disagree with that last point about the Magic having a better nucleus. While I was a huge Penny fan, how'd that turn out for him? He missed most of 97 and then was traded away to Phoenix. Nick Anderson Shaq did, btw, win 3 championships in a row in Los Angeles, so I'd say he made the right choice. And, Shaq doesn't win 3 championships in a row without Kobe Bryant. Cuts both ways. If he had stayed with the Magic, he might not be in the discussion over greatest centers of all time. Smaller market (nowhere near a twitter world back in 1998) and when Penny went down in Big numbers sans championships rings hallow, just ask Wilt Chamberlin.

@Mike Clandor,
Your right, the caliber of players isn't the same...it has greatly improved. Tim Duncan is the greatest power forward ever. Chris Paul is putting up numbers Stockton on his best day couldn't put up. There was nobody like Shaq during MJ's heyday, let alone Dwight Howard or Kevin Garnett. You can make a case for Garnett a top five power forward. I could go on and on about Lebron, Wade, Nowitzki, the influx of talent from around the world that just wasn't there in MJ's day, but if you can't see how much better the league is today, then you'll probably never see it.

@Bart: you make some good points BUT Detroit (and New York) were both bigger rivals for MJ than Krause or Reinsdorf.

I disagree with a few points in the article. First, Jordan was not superior in 1998 than the late 80s. His defensive skills declined, his shooting % was lower, however he somewhat made up for it by having a higher b-ball iq. (and better teammates and coaches)

Second, the "You Reach, I teach commercial" was not based on him in the late 90s, but approx. 2002. He was suppose to be 39 or 40 in the ad, not 34 or 35.

Third, people really need to take a second look at his return with the Wizards. Barring, an injury he encountered after the All-Star break during the 2001-2002 season, they certainly would have not only made the playoffs, but there was a lot of talk of MJ as an MVP candidate. (leading up to the All-star break the Wizards had a 24-11 record in their last 35 games, a better record than EVERY TEAM IN THE NBA)

Considering the season before, the Wizards had the third worst record in the NBA that is an incredible turnaround. Check out MJ's stats for those 35 games (35 games is not a brief stretch of time, rather almost 1/2 a season), and they are comparable to his late Bulls years. The following season, the Wizards probably would have made the playoffs, but his primary teammates (Stackhouse and Hughes) endured injuries.

If someone preposteriously thinks injuries are an excuse for success, perhaps they should ask Kevin Garnett how that opportunity in 2008-2009 to repeat his title went.

The final 17 games that MJ returned from in 1994-1995 was not a failure by any scope of the imagination either. He returned to a .500% ballclub, and they subsequently went 13-4. He was not quite the ball player of earlier - or later - seasons due to some rust. But, it was unimaginable they could have beaten the Magic, who had a real power forward. (and a real center, AND a true point guard.) Candidly, if Shaq would have been more patient, the Magic had a better nucleus than the Lakers of 2000-2003. (and no one would have ever mentioned Kobe and MJ in the same sentence, which annoys more people worldwide than Jon and Kate could ever inflict upon us.)

Also, MJ's biggest opponent was not the Pistons, but the Bulls themselves. He had to overcome numerous infighting with management over various trades, draft picks, returning from injury too late, and other sundry issues that finally led to Phil Jackson's release, and MJ walking away from the game.

The fact he dominated an era that had several players that can be dubbed "greatest in their position" (i.e. Karl Malone, John Stockton, Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing,etc.) that should also be remembered. I don't think the caliber of players is the same as it was back then.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Oh, right. Here’s the MJ piece I wrote for Hardwood Paroxysm. [...]

  2. [...] Michael Jordan’s perfection explained. [Hardwood Paroxysm] [...]

  3. [...] Michael Jordan Doesn’t Need Your Favors Where Were You When Michael Jordan Became God? Off the Iron: The Endurance of MJ’s Perfection Best There Ever Was, Best There Ever Will Be Celebrating Michael Jordan vs. The Nets [...]