Michael Jordan is arguably the greatest basketball player ever. He’s known for his incredible tenure with the Chicago Bulls, spanning 13 historic seasons, six championships, and just about every individual accolade the league has to offer. Then…there’s the two years with the Wizards no one likes to talk about. Everyone makes them out to be worse than they were, but Jordan on the Wizards was a great player. He wasn’t the guy he used to be, but still, definitely one of the top players in the league. However, that doesn’t make this claim that Rasheed Wallace made about Jordan true.
Former NBA All-Star Says Wizards Jordan Was ‘More Dangerous’
If you couldn’t figure it out yet, this is not a great take on Jordan. Wallace was a great NBA player, being named an All-Star four times. However, this statement couldn’t be farther from the truth. Here’s the full quote:
“I think he was a little more dangerous when he was with the Wizards. He didn’t have the athleticism that we were used to seeing M.J. have. … His angles were a little more sharp. He was a strong two, three guard. He wasn’t going to move them lightly. His shot became more dangerous. He became more solid as that veteran player in his years in Washington.”
This isn’t the first time a player has made a comparison to the GOAT. This statement can be pretty easily debunked by pointing towards each of Jordan’s attributes, but I want to take time to dismantle each part of this statement and prove why it isn’t true. Let’s start with his angles and position.
The Nuances of Jordan’s Game
If we look at Wallace’s point of view, I can understand why this argument might make sense for him. Making it in the NBA as an older player is difficult, unless your name is LeBron James. To stay in the league into your late 30s, you have to transform your game. The first part of Wallace’s statement is correct: Jordan didn’t have the athleticism that he used to have while he was on the Wizards. His third statement is also correct. While on the Wizards, Jordan spent most of his time at small forward, instead of shooting guard like he used to. Unfortunately, that’s where the correct parts of this argument end.
Jordan’s angles were plenty sharp when he was on the Bulls. Perhaps not as much so during the first few years of his career, where Jordan flew around the court and played off his athleticism. However, once the Bulls started winning championships, Jordan’s game became more nuanced. He had a variety of moves that he used to get to his spots. During his prime, Jordan’s attacking angles were as sharp as ever. However, they weren’t noticed as often because of the freakish athleticism that people tended to get lost on. Jordan’s game with the Wizards was far less refined than the Bulls version of Jordan.
Then, there’s his passing angles. If you recall, the Bulls briefly experimented with moving Jordan to the point guard. For that stint of time (around 10 games), Jordan averaged nearly a triple-double. If you’re averaging over 10 assists per game over a stretch and up to 8.0 assists per game in a season, your passing angles are fine.
Jordan’s Shooting
The last part of Wallace’s argument is that Jordan’s shot became more dangerous, which is laughable. I can kind of understand why he said this. If Jordan lost athleticism, then he would become more dependent on his shot. However, the numbers don’t back this up at all. Excluding the two seasons where Jordan came back rusty from baseball and broke his foot a few games into the season, Jordan’s lowest FG% for a year came in 1997-98, at 46.5%. In many years, he shot well over 50% from the field, which makes sense. He did lead the NBA in scoring 10 times during his career.
The shooting argument doesn’t make sense from three-point territory either. During Jordan’s prime (which we’ll call 1988-1998 because 1988 was his first MVP and 1998 his last championship), Jordan shot 34.6% from three. In his early days, Jordan notably wasn’t a good three-point shooter, and he didn’t take many of those shots. However, during the Bulls championship runs, he slowly began getting more comfortable with the shot (think 1992 NBA Finals and the shrug). You’re telling me the Jordan that shot 24.1% from three on the Wizards on even fewer attempts is a better shooter? I’m sorry Rasheed Wallace, but your theory has been debunked.
