Michael Jordan Greatest Games: 38 Points vs Rockets (1996) 

The Rockets tried to build a “super team” adding Barkley in ‘97, but it didn’t quite worked out as planned. Then tried it again in ‘99 when they added Pippen, but it didn’t quite worked out either 🤷🏻‍♂️

Man that was the worst trade ever. The Rockets gave up 4 young players with championship experience for an aging Barkley. They had no guards. Brent Price & Matt Maloney? 😂 The Rockets should have picked up 2 guards that could defend the perimeter, and a small/power forward. They made horrible player acquisitions. That led to what we saw in 96&97. No perimeter defense. They couldn’t hardly get Hakeem the ball that why the bulls bust them across the head like that.and the Sonics & Jazz

@chadwick allen the Bulls and Rockets went 1-1 vs each other that season. That ain't busting nobodies head

@@chadwickallen5495 they still had those guys in 96, got swept by Seattle and they made the conference finals in 97 with Barkley. And needless to say, Mark Bryant and Chucky Brown werent young players nor were they big factors

@@FuShengAlex the Bulls went 2-0 against them in the 98 season. Busting heads troll

You are just now realizing this? What are you... like 12 years old?

well this 96 rocket team was different from the one in 94, starting with those ugly uniforms

I agree; he used as little dribbles as possible and definitely made every move count. I think that's one thing (at least eye test wise) that separates Mike from Kobe and Bron; his efficacy was crazy. Kobe would work very hard in the post, and expend lots of energy on perimeter. Bron dribbles, dribbles and dribbles; but Mike was just so efficient with the ball

as far as wasted energy and motion is concerned Jordan was light years ahead of every scorer in history...

Bird has the lowest usage rate

dp233332 - unfortunately, they are all centurions here. Pip - 30 to 32 years old MJ - 33 to 35 years old Rodman - 35 to 37 years old. They were the oldest team in the league

It would have been a clean sweep by this Bulls team, a complete yawn-fest. The first 3-peat Bulls would have taken the Rockets out in 6.

RaurMan 94-95 Rockets had a better chance of any team to beat the first 3peat Bulls they had no post presence to stop Hakeem. But once Rodman signed, they had 3 championship caliber all stars against a solo Hakeem.

They almost met in 1997, though we had an ex-factor, the late Brian Wiliams.

Rockets in 98 were too old. Let’s see the 94-95 Rockets vs any of the Bulls teams 👌

@Greg Hubbard Not with Phil Jackson they wouldn't because he was their coach too.

The Bulls consistently beat Kobe and Shaq.

Kenny Smith and John Salley both say dumb salty sh!@ from time to time, to stay relevant.

After 95 the Rockets were done and the bulls had the greatest season of all time and led to the 2nd 3peat team. They were better theN the 1st 3peat team the Rockets gave problems. This team no contest. Bull dominated

@@chadwickallen5495 it was so obvious that Michael Jordan longevity was more powerful than Hakeem Olajuwon, it's like LeBron James right now 17 seasons and still playing like he's just 18 years old is just crazy some players are born with that physique

Poli Gonzo of Jordan was one of those once in a lifetime athletes. Jordan sure did pick Hakeem to be on his pick up team. The bulls beat the rockets after 95 because the rockets couldn’t hardly get the ball to Hakeem. The bulls shut the perimeter down, that turned into a beat down. Jordan to basketball is like Ali to boxing

Kenny Smith smoking that good weed thinkin Rockets could fuck with Bulls. Regular season is one thing, but everyone knows the Bulls went into another gear........ especially Jordan in the playoffs!!!!

And he got blocked by Horry.

The Bulls would have beaten the Rockets in 5 or 6 games

@@tyroneweathersby9234Yet your judging off a regular season game? lol The fact is we never got to see the 2 best teams of 90's play.

@@hectorlopez1069Exactly. With Rodman offensive foul lol. Funny how MJ fans only see what they want. Try to pretend '95 doesnt exsist also lol

The greatest player coming off the bench.

+dlawson688 I think one thing a lot of people forget is that those Bulls championship teams never had a dominant center or point guard. Guys like Cartwright, Will Purdue, Scott Williams, Longley, Brian Williams, Bill Wennington, while serviceable, were in no way dominant. In my opinion, the 90's were the dominant era of centers from Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, Mutumbo, Shaq (though I didn't think he was peak Shaq yet). Paxon and Armstrong were more spot up shooters than ball handlers. Same with Kerr.

I thought they would beat them in 94 and 95 if mj played whole seasons

The fuck are you talking about the Sonics won 64 games? They had the 3rd best defender of all-time, a prime Shawn Kemp that dunked at will and could shoot the lights out, Schrempf and Hawkins where all star caliber players, And they had Sam Perkins who could shoot 3's like crazy. Bro your tippin if you think the Hall of fame determines if a team will win rings or not.

Norcal gotta agree the Sonics was good could've went 7 if they would have put Payton on Jordan early in the series I got the entire Nba Championship legacy on DVD I know what I'm talking about but the bulls would have still won

Mr. Entringer - the problem with this generalization is that it's deceptive. These are not 4 guys in their prime but rather 3 older men and 1 rookie. During the 3-peat years, their ages were as follows - PIppen - 30-32, MJ - 33-35, Rodman - 35-37 and Kukoc was a rookie here who averaged 13 points a game - hardly superstar numbers despite your HOF characterization. Compare this to any of LBJ's self made super teams or GSW and it's not even close. GSW is 4 top stars in their younger, prime years. The same goes for all of LBJ's Miami and Cleveland teams. And the Bulls did it all by drafting as free agency did not exist like it does today in those day. How is this unfairly the Bulls and how are the artificially created super teams of today considered to be fair at all? For those of us who were alive and watched, while the Bulls were considered the best at the time because of MJ, they were not outright better than the many good teams of both conferences of that era. Nobody knew they were going to win it all and nobody predicted their incredible season. MJ was considered over the hill and the Bulls were considered a team that was past its glory days by many. Unlike today, we did not ever know who was definitely going to be in the Finals before the season started like we do today with Cleveland and GSW.

MR Entringer Kukoc has no business going into the NBA HOF he was MJs whipping post...u never knew what u were gonna get from 1 night to the next-he was totally unreliable...if he gets in its because hes a foreigner same thing with Yao Ming neither player belongs in the NBA HOF neither performed in the NBA at a HOF level during any season of their career let alone sustained it for the majority of their careers...Yao had no significant impact in the NBA, made no noise in the postseason, didnt dominate against other great big men, and wasnt a reg MVP candidate...Can anyone even tell me where Kukoc ended his NBA career without looking it up on basketball-reference.com?1996 Bulls are overrated...3HOFers 1 of whom was past his prime(MJ) another (Rodman)wont shoot the ball unless hes wide open under the rim...They won 72 games because there was an expansion draft the previous offseason during which the rest of the league got weaker while they got stronger thru the Perdue for Rodman trade... The 4th best player on the 96 Bulls wasnt Kukoc...It was Ron Harper, widely recognized as one of the best 2 guards in the league behind MJ only a few yrs earlier, he was brought in 1 yr earlier to be MJs replacement in case MJ didnt return from baseball...His defensive efforts and scoring ability made a massive difference...During those 3 championship seasons most nights he was the player taking on the harder defensive assignment among the opposing guards so that MJ could conserve energy to take over offensively during the 4th qtr...MJ played like shit vs Seattle, largely because of the defensive efforts of Gary Payton and the added knowledge that Kemp was lurking around the rim drooling over a chance to send anything soft MJ put up into the 7th fukn row...If it wasnt for Rodman getting into Kemps head and absolutely dominating the boards offensively, Chicago would have lost that series to Seattle in 6 or 7 games...It was by far MJs worst finals performance statistically...look it up...Rodman should have been given finals MVP, but the league knew doing that would have derailed the perfect narrative of MJs comeback story-contrary to the propaganda youve been fed, MJ was never as great after returning from baseball as hed been before baseball-MJ circa 1985-93 was the best defensive player in the league and the best offensive player in the league...seemingly had a neverending supply of energy-had the quickness and handles usually only seen in players under 6feet tall...from 85-93 the bread and butter of his game on offense was taking it to the hole...After baseball he never fully regained the top end of his quickness his handles or his ups, and he wasnt the ungodly tireless defensive force after baseball that he was before it...Due to the deterioration of his handles quickness and ups the bread and butter of his game after baseball became the postup turnaround midrange fadeaway jumper and he hit a significantly lower FG% overall as a result...he was still the best player left in the NBA by that time but MJ circa 1996-1998 was not better than Bird circa 1984-86 or several others were at their own best...

It will go to 7 games between Rockets vs Bulls in the Finals.

@@hectorlopez1069 bulls would have won in 6

To be fair to the Rockets, they were tired and playing injured most of that season after having barely any time to rest from their 2-peat, kind of like how the '98 Bulls looked like crap compared to their 96 and 97 teams.

This rockets team was definitely missing some key players like Vernon maxwell and Clyde Drexler. They were huge pieces for the Rockets championship years

When Kukoc was signed in 94. He was being paid more than Jordan and Pippen! At the time, he was the highest paid Bull ever. So cry me river.

that's why Scottie cut off the head of the snake lol

Stockton Malone and a very good Jazz team pushed the Bulls but the Knicks and Pacers took them to 7 games. Ewing, Oakley, Mason, the pesky Starks- those cats made you earn it. They were brutal. The Davis bros and Reggie weren't an easy out either when they played Indiana

@@jupiteral8217 Is not the number of games. Its the dominance that the bulls shown. Did you know that bulls won the 97 finals with a difference of 0 points combined? The 1998 final had a difference of +5 points in all games except 1, where jazz had a really nad game and lost by like 40+. But there was no other series that close. Knicks and pacers lost for a combined -29 points. What Im trying to say is that the series against Indiana and the Knicks most games were decided fairly quick either side. Very few games were decided at the buzz. Vs Jazz, only like 3 games in both series were decided early, most games were decided at the final seconds. Compare the players. Stockton was better than Miller and Starks overall. Malone was better than Oakley and Mason (RIP). While Ostertag was questionable offensively, what was called the 3 headed monster was very strong defensively (they rotated Ostertag, Foster and Carr as center And Foster and Carr were also replacing Malone). If you ask me, the Jazz had the most chance to defeat the bulls, just that all the close games (7 with 1-4 point difference) were won by the bulls 6-1. That 8-4 W/L looks very dramatic, but if you examine it closer, could have gone either way on those 7 games.

@@Alientcp all very good points Alientcp. Perhaps I'm leaning towards the physicality in the EC games and the frequency of them. That said, i agree it could have gone either way. Big turning point- the mailman didn't deliver on Sunday

@@jupiteral8217 Didnt delivered the whole week lol. I mean, i understand your point, and while Utah didnt played outright dirty with the intention of hurting someone like with the Knicks for example, their entire offense and df was based on strong picks and screens. Specially Stockton, he had to be extra physical due to his low stature. Stockton was absorbing charges from everyone when picking for Malone, but at the same time, he was also locking down people. Just watch Malone on the 97 final shot vs the rockets and you will see why Stockton was free. Yes, they werent rivals per say, so there was no inherent violent treath, they were as physical as anyone, the impression probably is due the frequency of the matches and the rivalry.

+kissmygrits and it was a hybrid between man on man and zone defense depending on the situation, the defense would adjust. Nowadays, it is like players don't have the iQ to think outside the box and improvise. To me the role players of the 90's were far more intelligent and understood how to play in a team system. Modern players are so lethargic when it comes to defense, with some exceptions.

John. Hahahaha. U know u just watched highlights, don't u? Have u ever watched a live game in 90s? Do u know why nba changed rules in the late 90s?

John Bishop - don't know what ur watching and don't think you would know how to interpret games anyway based on your post. This idea that zone defense is more effective than man to man shows not only an utter lack of understanding of basketball but how you and many kids have gotten this idea by those desperate online to discredit superior basketball from the 80s/90s golden age of the NBA. If you knew anything about the NBA on any meaningful level, you'd realize that even today, only certain teams use zone and very sparingly, for a few minutes at a time just to give a different look than man to man. Even back then teams used zone for short spurts Including this Bulls team. Just to give an idea on how zones were viewed, Pat Riley, one of the greatest defensive coach of all time called referred to the zone as "that dinky zone defense". Man to man is superior period and one of the only reasons to use zone is to hide defenders that aren't athletic or effective enough to defend their man. This idea that the illegal defense rule was eliminated and the zone fully allowed to be an defensive upgrade is preposterous. Even more ridiculous is the idea that defense today are more "sophisticated" and "complex". The only way these things are true if you understand that instituting a 3 sec. defensive rule handicaps defenses on a systemic level and today's defenses are predicated around this ridiculously restrictive handicap. It's akin to telling an NFL defense, both the lineman and secondary that from the 20 yard line to the end zone, they have to stand near the side line - they can't stand in the middle to play prevent defense and they have to wait until the ball goes to the middle and then chase from behind. How could defense ever be more effective when you can no longer stand in the middle and by the basket for more than a few seconds? And if you just want to hate and disbelieve, just reference David Stern and Rod Thorne who not only made all the rule changes to defense but thoroughly explained why they felt the need to castrate defenses - unfair advantage to defensive player, to open up the game, to help perimeter players. It's why we have so many little guards that drive the basket today - no, genetics have not changed humans in the last 17 years nor has nutrition improved where players today are more athletic as kids claim. Because of these changes, teams draft little guards to take advantage of these new conditions and with so much more space to operate, players can rely mostly on athleticism today and not bother with skills like posting up. Quite frankly more than half the little guards today could not okay in the NBA of the past and all you have to do is look at teams in the past to recognize this truth. I'll conclude with the obvious - if any effective perimeter player (especially MJ) that drives the basket faces a zone defense, he will slither to the basket every time and again that's even more true today with the 3 second def. rule. I won't even bother to mention how no hand checking or chucking or the ridiculous standards that refs use now to call fouls make defense today nonexistent.

That's why scoring is so high now. TEAMS during JORDAN's era were routinely held to less than 80 pts. You are stupid. Zones are useless against good shooing TEAMS. That's why you can score 150pts easily today. Why PLAYERS are scoring 50-60 pts MORE often. There is no substitute for getting up into a player and disrupting what he wants to do. Making him pick up his dribble. The best DEFENSIVE TEAMS today don't play zone. Kawhii and PG don't play zone. You are being silly, and obviously don't know what you are talking about.

@@travistovey3736 Because scoring was so hard to come by. Scores were low. It was extremely hard to score in the 90's and early 2000's.

Look at the score silly.

Games such as nov 28 1987, dec 12 1987, jan 25 1992, feb 24 1989 says otherwise you troll

@@nonamewillbegiven6136 13-10... Jordan jocker

@@FuShengAlex yawn troll

@@FuShengAlex and championships>regular season wins

No he aint you troll

You must be 11 years old...Jordan and Lebron in the same sentence is laughable...Jordan dominated at both ends not just offense...Plus he was wayyy smarter than Lebron .

TallPostMan87 5,8,11 year old bla bla bla.. u are just retro fan. lebron is god in basketball, all nba history

We're out even born when Jordan started playing...??

seth8556 All retro fan??Ohkkayyy???Look at Jordan's stats then Lebron's stats...Jordan is the far superior player...Lebron can't even shoot the basketball he's just big...Skill wise Jordan runs cricles over Lebron...

seth8556 Now Lebron & Pippen that's maybe a camparisson. Lebron edges him I'll give you that but then again I think Scottie also at 6'8 could contain Lebron.