Would the Chicago Bulls Have Won the Title in 1999?

Discussing whether the Bulls would have won their 4 straight title in 1999 had they kept the dynasty together for one more season.

#ChicagoBulls #BullsNation #NBA #MichaelJordan #ScottiePippen #DennisRodman #ZachLavine #PatrickWilliams #NikolaVucevic #LauriMarkkanen #CobyWhite #TheLastDance

[nasmaxfit]

4 in a row would have been the ULTIMATE challenge for MJ, he would have shown up more determined than ever.

[qpope]

Is this a trick question 😂 you asking if Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman would won another title under Phil Jackson on a short season of 50 games.

[stryrafoam_cupz]

I definitely think that the Bulls would win the championship in 1999. Wish it could have happened though.

[James]

If the Bulls never disbanded...PLUS the shortened schedule? Bulls would win Title #7.

[royfablooo]

Definetly would win 4 Straight, alot of people don't know this but Jordan was injured in his Wizard days he tore his Meniscus and before that injury he averaged around 28 points.

[marvinstrong]

They might not have faced a superstar center in the finals but they eliminated and swept a DOMINANT HOF center (Shaq) in the ECF. And that team was the best team in the east for 2 years until MJ came back.

[bigdog]

If the Bulls kept their team together, Steve Kerr wouldn't have gone to the Spurs. The Spurs and the Jazz were tied for the #1 seed in the West in '99, with the Spurs winning the tie breaker. If Kerr was worth even one victory to the Spurs, taking him away gives the Jazz the #1 seed, and the whole playoff scenario changes. We might be talking about a third straight Bulls-Jazz final.

[marcusmcneal]

I would have to agree and I say this with the Spurs being my second favorite franchise in the NBA. It would have been a knockdown, drag out battle. But a Bulls team that had so much experience and potentially fresh legs against a younger Spurs team with no finals experience would have had a certain mental edge. And again, Michael Jordan changes everything. He still would be the best player in the league at that point. Despite being so much bigger, I’m still not sure how a baby Tim Duncan would have dealt with a defender like Rodman, who was still the leading rebounder in 1998. Then, there’s Phil Jackson’s legendary coaching. Pops isn’t far behind, but Phil’s ability to make adjustments over the course of a series has always been elite. The Spurs would have needed one of the Bulls big four (including Kukoc here because he was a baller!) to fall off a cliff to win 7 games against them, something no team has ever done. I just can’t see that happening.

[BSBV]

Hot take: If derrick rose never got injured and the bulls kept jimmy Butler would they have gotten at least one title.

[cej]

This would have been a 7 game series where the Bulls win on a jump shot by MJ to win it all.

[alecsanderhamilton]

The 99 Spurs vs 99 Bulls w 2nd 3peat roster would have been a very interesting NBA Finals.

[zeaferjones]

That Spurs team was really good. It might actually be the most dominant of the Spurs Championship teams because they swept the Lakers and the Blazers and those were the two best teams the following year. Bulls vs Spurs would have been a great match up.

[mrfreez]

OK, so watching this video made me watch Episode 10 of The Last Dance again, specifically the last 5 minutes, where Reinsdorf and MJ both make their arguments for trying to get #7 vs. rebuilding. Here are my thoughts (Sorry if this rant is a bit long):


Reinsdorf said that it would be 'suicide' to re-sign everyone because of market value and he mentioned names like Ron Harper. Harper was, in fact, signed for one more year on his deal. He was on that 99 roster, along with 7 other returning players from 98 (as was Corey Benjamin, Randy Brown, Toni Kukoc, Rusty LaRue, Dickey Simpkins and Bill Wennington).


Now, hypothetically speaking, if MJ is assured by Reinsdorf that they will give the one-year deals to him, Dennis, Steve Kerr, Jud Beuchler, Luc Longley and they keep the team together. Now, Phil seemed to really want out because of how toxic his relationship with Krause got. And Scottie wanted to get paid what he felt he was rightfully owed. So signing those two back may or may not have happened.


Say Scottie absolutely refuses to sign back with us. Re-sign Scott Burrell, and he could have fit in that backup 3 spot and given you decent production at Small Forward (yes, I know he was a target of MJ's scorn). But at the end of the day, he could have filled in some of the void Scottie had left. He and Toni Kukoc starting at SF would have made up for the loss of Scottie's production.


Now say Phil says no. But, looking back at it, Tim Floyd's coaching staff had three holdovers from Phil's staff in 98 (Bill Cartwright, Frank Hamblen and Tex Winter). MJ respected those assistant coaches and would have been able to work with Tim Floyd, I truly believe. They still implemented the triangle offense and the players all knew the system.


So say that Reinsdorf goes above Jerry Krause and signs the above-mentioned to those 1-year deals. That means MJ probably doesn't go on vacation and cuts his index finger half off with a cigar-cutter. The lockout happened later in 1998 and lasted until the beginning of 99. So that means these older players get the rest they need to gear up for one more run. And a compressed season of 50 games in 1999 would have been perfect for the aging Bulls.

For all intents and purposes, they had the tools and could have at least tried to make one more run and they would have been able to handle the Spurs in the Finals. Say the Bulls lost..at least they tried and it didn't happen, but they attempted to defend their championship and lost, everyone moves on...and besides honestly, the 1999 and 2000 NBA drafts were some of the worst draft classes ever, so tanking out the season as they did wouldn't have gotten you another franchise star any of those next couple of draft classes anyway.


Now all of the above-mentioned is butterfly effect. Krause got his way and we all know how that panned out. But what could have been...and if they faltered and lost, at least they had the opportunity to try.

[sheldonmckenzieel]

The reason I think they win a 4th is, I agree with the 50 game season gives them extra rest, but as for the Spurs winning, it is VERY rare that a team wins the NBA title on their first try AGAINST AN EXPERIENCED CHAMPION from the year before. That year that the Spurs won, they were inexperienced, and so were the Knicks. So they were 2 "fresh teams" playing for the chip. Look at the Pistons when they won... their first trip to the finals, they lost against the experienced Lakers that had won the year before. Then the Pistons swept the Lakers their second year. When the Sixers won the Championship in 1983 against the Lakers, that was on their second straight trip to the finals after losing it the year before to the Lakers. When the Lakers were playing Boston in the finals, the Lakers beat the Celtics in 1985, after losing to the Celtics in 1984. And that is why I say the Utah Jazz's best chance to win a title was their second year reaching the finals against the Bulls, because they would not have been nervous being on the "Finals" stage. But we know how that all turned out. And to me that is one of the major reasons why MJ is the goat. Let's take Lebron and Miami against and the Spurs.

So that is usually the narrative ... a team's first trip to the finals against an experienced champion (a champion that won the year before) would almost always lose, because the finals is the highest stage, and that team would make more mistakes coming down the stretch of a game than the reigning champion would. And for that reason, the Spurs would have lost to the Bulls, and the Bulls would have picked up their 4th straight. Remember, the Bulls never got rattled on the road, because they had been there so many times before, and the other team's home court advantage played no part in rattling the Bulls. They had already won against Phoenix when Phoenix had home court advantage 4-2, and they won against Utah when Utah had home court advantage 4-2.

[ramirobenavidez]

11:16. Thank's For saying this, I'm a die hard spurs fan it's my birthplace. But i also loved the Bull's of the '90s and you're channel. This without a doubt would've been the Bull's hardest match up even more so than Houston. This Spurs team was on a misson that year. They swept the three time to be championship lakers this same year in '99. They we're absolutely unstoppable. Now, The '99 sesaon would've had the bull's a longer vacation but when the season began you also had several back to backs in all an incrediblely short amount of time for several months to make-up a 50 win shorten season. This schedule would've shredded the aging Bull's with jordon at age 36 plus even if they got past the east, i seriously doubt they would've had enough to put up against both prime David and Timmy. I understand you're a bull's channel you love jordon more than anyone else probably, but even you have to admit all this I'm sure. My Spurs we're going to win that year regardless, of who they we're facing, healthy of course. You can't say oh because they have Jordan's killer instinct and go back on what you just said. Explain, how they'd get past prime David Robinson and Tim Duncan with a loaded team? Using an aging injured riddled bull's team with title experience?. It's just not happening. And i do know jordon is the greatest player of my generation. But he isn't beating one the strongest version's of my Spurs championship team's. I mean seriously you have to find the line of separating myth from reality-based observations. This isn't happening for the bull's in 1999. And It's really a Damm Shame a little man in the bull's organization with a napoleon complex is to blame for all this!.

[EAchank]

I wouldn't ever bet against MJ GOAT he would definetely win the chip in 1999

[boxer]

This video could have been one second long...
"Yes"

[Rodzilla]

i agree, they would have beat the Spurs. probably win in 7 games, with Jordan having to score like 48 points, and maybe a game winner

[robkelly]

I think they would have won as the bulls beat other super star bigs like Ewing and Shaq for the Magic

[chibang]

You mentioned that the Knicks had Anthony Mason in 99. Anthony Mason wasnt on the Knicks in 1999. He left the Knicks in 96.
The Knicks replaced him with Larry Johnson. Sad thing for the Knicks is Larry Johnson was injury prone and his productivity declined during his Knicks years.
Anthony Mason was on the Hornets from 96-2000. I've always felt the Knicks would of been much better off had they kept Anthony Mason as there defensive anchor.
Sorry if I'm knit picking. Just thought I'd mention this.
P.s love your channel and I've enjoyed being subscribed
Keep up the great content. PEACE.
RIP Anthony Mason.