Is Michael Jordan tarnishing his legacy by continuing to play?

In My Humble Opinion
1

This was the title of a segment on PTI today. (PTI or Pardon The Interruption is a 1/2 show that airs at 5:30 PM Eastern time on ESPN and the ringmasters are Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon, both of whom write columns for The Washington Post.

ANYway, apparently there are a bunch of asshat sports reporters and fans who are bleating and screeching that Jordans legacy has been forever tarnished since he came out of retirement last year to play for the Wizards.

Do said asshats explain the reasoning behind this asinine stance?

Of course not.

Wilbon said it best, "*I don’t remember Ali fighting Trevor Berbick, I remember him fighting George Foreman in *The Rumble In The Jungle. I’m going to remember Jordan soaring through the air in a red and black Chicago Bulls uniform.

Plus, as both Tony and Michael agreed, Jordan is one of the Top 20 players in the NBA and if he wanted to, he could still put up 40 EVERY night.

So, is his legacy as the greatest basketball player ever tarnished?

Magic 8 Ball says NO.

What do you have to say?

2

I don’t really follow sports at all.

That said, I think what bothers me most is the retirement-out of retirement -retirement cycle he’s in. If you go, GO, don’t come back in a year, because it just looks like youre milking your own talent. I know he misses the game, and I can’t blame him for it, but it does end up looking kind of bad, you know?

Even so, I don’t think anyone thinks he’s less of a player for it. The man is TALENTED, and although he’s not as good as he was, it appears hes still better than most. And why shouldn’t he play is he doesn’t want to? All it shows to me is that he’s passionate for the game. For what I know (which isn’t much, regarding this), he’s been a great guy through and through, and is really someone to look up to. THATS what sports should be about, not beating up other players and being arrested constantly. Thats why I hate watching sports. The game gets lost behind the self-centred “players”.

Anyways, thats all I have to say about something I dont know anything about :slight_smile:

3

If he wanted to, he could still put up 40 a night? Then why the hell doesn’t he? Sounds like the bully who says he’s going to kick your ass–tomorrow.

Short term yes, long term no. Who remembers O.J. Simpson on the 49ers? Or Willie Mays on the Mets? Or Babe Ruth on the Braves? Not that many people.

But I think here and now, it does. It’s weird to picture MJ coming off the bench for a weird team like the Wizards.

4

I have no doubt that he could put up 40 a night. He’d just take all the shots and his team would let him because he’s Michael Jordan.

I don’t buy into the whole “tarnished legacy” thing. Is anything Jordan’s doing now changing anything he’s accomplished in the past? No. At the worst, he’s shaving a couple percentage points off of his shooting average or lowering his own personal win/loss ratio.

5

I kind of fancied the notion that Jordan, after being the greatest starter ever, was going to concentrate on being the greatest sixth man ever in the twilight of his career.

But that’s before he put himself back in the starting lineup. Oh, well.

6

Did Magic Johnson tarnish his by unretiring or by having a failed coaching try? No, people still remember him as the leader of Showtime, a proven winner, and the man that revolutionized the point guard position.

-How about Babe Ruth? He wasted a final year in Boston.
-Joe Namath held on a couple of years too long (including one with the Rams). Didn’t hurt his luster (although I think he was on slightly above average other than one grand prediction, but that’s a whole other thread.
People question whether it tarnishes his legacy simply because he is playing with declined skills in the here and now. Much like other scenarios (was this guy a good politician, is she a good actress) it is a pretty pointless debate until there can be some years put between the career and the final outlook.

This 2 year stint with the Wizards will do nothing to hurt his athletic image. In the end, it may help his overall basketball image if he can make the Wizards a consistent playoff contender as the GM.

7

Tarnishing his legacy? Of COURSE not! Well, not yet, anyway.

Yes, may athletes have stayed around way too long, and ended up embarrassing themselves with terrible play. But Michael Jordan is nowhere near that stage yet. He’s not the superstar we all remember, but he’s still a very decent, very solid NBA player. He’s no longer an All-Star, and he’s no longer one of the NBA’s elite, but he can still make real, valuable contributions.

If I were Michael Jordan, and some fan told me, “You should retire, so I can remember you as the superstar you were,” I’d say, “Look pal, I LOVE playing basketball, and I’m still pretty good at it. If you know another job where I can make this much money and have this much fun, I’m all ears. If not, I’m gonna keep playing as long as somebody wants me around.”

8

Or what about the Magic Hour? Did that hurt his legac … uh, never mind.

Don’t forget Johnny Unitas with the Chargers.

I don’t see anything wrong with Jordan playing for the Wizards. I wish he was still with the Bulls, and I wish that the Jerrys wouldn’t have been so ignorant and greedy (let’s get rid of the greatest team ever so that we can start rebuilding NOW) , so as long as Michael is doing what he wants, I don’t think he cares (nor should he) about what anyone else says.

9

Hey OP person guy dude, you forgot to close the parentheses. :slight_smile:

…I’m sorry. This has nothing to do w/ the board, does it? :smiley:

10

MJ ended his career the second time with a fairytale ending–He single-handedly beat the Jazz in the final minute with a basket to get them in range, a steal at the other end, and a shot which only He could have made. Being a Jazz fan, I remember watching Him break my heart that night like it was yesterday.

He retired on top. No question, the best of the best (except Wilt, but that’s another subject).

Unretiring again ruined that moment for me, especially given that he left for the right reasons and returned for the wrong ones. Moreover, he has been fragile and merely good. Michael Jordan has been many things on the basketball court, but never just good. I am glad he’s walking away (again) at the end of the year. Obviously, he’ll make the Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility. Over time, people will begin to forget his bad decisions regarding retirment, just as surely as they have forgotten about him trying to be a pro baseball player.

As for Magic, I found his in and out of retirement shtick to be sad. Just sad. And the same goes for pretty much everyone else who has done that. Let go and move on, fer cryin’ out loud! Of course, as I write this, another unretired guy is leading the NHL in scoring (Mario), which only goes to show, I guess.

11

First off, if you can’t stand the sight of two opinionated blowhards constantly yelling at each other, don’t watch PTI, because that sure as frag isn’t going to change anytime soon.

Now, then…while I agree that the bleating about Jordan ruining his legacy is overstating it a bit, I think we’re missing the point here.

Let’s not forget (even though virtually everyone who covers basketball today seemingly has) that Jordan…gad, I cannot believe how quickly we’ve forgotten this…had a lot of help. In the Bulls’ championship years (and let’s also not forget that it took him seven years to win his first title), he had Scottie Pippen, Horace Grant, Toni Kukoc, BJ Armstrong, and Dennis Rodman as teammates. Not to mention Phil Jackson, arguably the smartest NBA coach ever, and an offensive scheme which was perfectly suited for the Bulls’ abundant talent. Meanwhile, Hakeem Olajuwon was surrounded by nobodies (lessee, there was…there was…uh…give me a moment here…), and Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, and Gary Payton didn’t exactly have a ton of help either.

All I’m saying is, when one person on a powerhouse team gets an inordinate amount of credit…and, today, is the ONLY person to get any credit…there’s going to be some backlash. He’s simply being held to an impossible standard and blasted for not being capable of something he never was capable of.

All this, of course, doesn’t tarnish his real legacy at all, which was being the greatest basketball TEAM player ever. Like Joe Montana or Mark Messier, actually.

(Potential hijack: Am I the only one flabbergasted by how Scottie Pippen has been pretty much continually run through the wringer from the moment he left Chicago? I mean, what is this? Is anyone seriously claiming that Jerry Rice accomplished nothing in San Francisco and is just taking up space on the Raiders’ roster? Is David Robinson being villified for winning zero championships without Tim Duncan? Does Jaromir Jagr’s failure to win the Stanley Cup post-early 90’s prove that Mario Lemieux did it all by himself? How about John Elway being a worthless leech who got creamed in every Super Bowl where he didn’t have a strong running game and good pass protection? Sheesh.)

12

DKW: I think Pippen’s complete meltdown post-MJ is a far cry from the other players you’ve mentioned. They all had/have individual successes. Jerry Rice continues to add on to his NFL records for a playoff contending team; David Robinson won the Rookie of the Year, MVP (I’m pretty sure), and all-star selections before Tim Duncan was on the team; Jagr is still one of the most dangerous goal scorers in hockey; and Elway was a master at the 4th quarter comeback.

What did Scottie Pippen do post-MJ? Piss, bitch, and moan through several lackluster seasons with the Rockets and Blazers. His last year in Chicago, he averaged almost 20 points per game. Since, he hasn’t topped 14.5 and that number has went down in each consecutive season since then.

13

Yes.

He’ll always be remembered as one of the greatest players of all time, but to me, going out the way he did, scoring the winning bucket against the Jazz is one of greatest endings of all time. And he’s blown that. His final court moment will be in a Wizard’s uniform, and not in a Championship game.

I’ve had the same reservations about Mario Lemieux coming back. He’s leading the league in scoring, so it’s tough to argue… but what a cool memory I have of him playing his last game in Pittsburgh. 1997 playoffs against the Flyers… He scores on his final shot. How cool is that?

I always think how cool it is to see Ted Williams hit that home run in his last at-bat at Fenway, and cruise into the dugout. Awesome. Imagine how forgettable it would have been if he came back two years later and grounded out to third.

Yes, I’ll never be able to erase Jordan’s exploits from my mind… but just like Willie Mays in a Mets uniform, Jordan in Wizards garb is just as distasteful.

Of course, this is just me.

14

Boy, I used “cool” alot. How uncool.

Note to self. Buy Thesaurus.

15

Jordan took over games at will before the Bulls Crew ™ arrived, if I recall correctly.

Also, Phil Jackson might be the most over-rated coach ever. I could win 60 games with the talent he’s fallen into.

16

This isn’t directly related to the original topic, but I’ll bring it up anyway.

When ever a subject like this comes up ("is it time for a former sport superstar to quit?), one of the examples people always bring up is Willie Mays, with the 1973 Mets. It’s almost taken for granted that Mays was a bumbling clown in 1973, and was embarrassing himself and his fans by trying to play at all. Problem is, I’m old enough to have seen the 1973 World Series, I SAW him play, and I can attest things were nowhere NEAR as bad as latter day sportswriters would have you believe.

Look up the stats: Willie did NOT make any errors in the outfield in the 1973 World Series. On ONE play, only ONE, he bobbled a base hit momentarily, before picking up the ball and throwing it back to the infield. Now then…

  1. Could a younger, faster, more athletic Willie Mays have made the catch? Nope. It was a clean base hit, and NOBODY could have caught it.

  2. Did anybody score because of Willie’s momentary bobble? Nope.

  3. Did any baserunners advance because of his lapse? Nope.

In short, Willie didn’t make an error, and he didn’t cost the Mets ANYTHING. The ONLY thing he was guilty of was, well, LOOKING bad for a second. And for the “crime” of LOOKING bad, Willie has had to endure years of “Why couldn’t he have retired in his prime” recriminations.

Now, it probably WAS just about time for Willie to retire. But don’t exaggerate a minor miscue that amounted to nothing.

17

Now, back to the OP: I’m not surprised that Tony Kornheiser brought this issue up. He brings this issue up all the time. Look, I generally like Kornheiser (he’s funny, and frequently entertaining), but let’s face it: it’s the nature of TV talk shows that hosts have to rant and rave and spout off a lot of nonsense. And in this case, Kornheiser was spouting nonsense.

In case you didn’t know this, just a few weeks before the last U.S. Open of tennis, Kornheiser stated NOT ONLY that Pete Sampras should retire, but that Anna Kournikova would win a major before Pete ever won one again. A few weeks later, Sampras was holding up the championship tropy at Flushing Meadows.

Now, I don’t bring this up just to insult Kornheiser (though Sampras might well smirk, “Hey Tony, if I’d listened to idiots like you, I’d be down one trophy and a million bucks.”). Because even if Sampras isn’t quite over the hill yet, he WILL be one day. So will EVERY great athlete. The question is, at what point SHOULD a former great quit?

A lucky few athletes quit on their own terms, when they’re at the very top of their games: golfer Bobby Jones and running backs Jim Brown and Robert Smith come to mind.

Others are lucky enough to quit when their numbers are still good, but their bodies are telling them that they can’t handle the stress of competition any more: John Elway and Sandy Koufax come to mind.

A few others quit as soon as they realize they’re no longer among the elite. Chris Evert said, upon her retirement, “I know I’m still capable of winning a major… but now I’m equally capable of losing to unranked players in the first round. That just isn’t good enough for me.”

I can respect Evert’s decision. If she couldn’t stand the idea of being a fair-to-middling, competitive-but-not-stellar tennis player, she was right to quit. But does that mean Jimmy Connors was a fool or an embarrassment to keep playing as long as he did? Fans sure didn’t think so. When Connors was 38, he surely knew he wasn’t going to win the U.S. Open- indeed, it would take a HUGE effort and a small miracle or two for him to make even the semis. But you know what? He loved the game, he loved the competition, he loved the fans, and he was making pretty good money besides. So, he kept playing, he played hard, he played well, and gave the fans their money’s worth.

So…why SHOULDN’T he have kept playing as long as he enjoyed the game and the money was good? He wasn’t a #1 seed any more, and knew he never would be again, but so what? He was still a solid, competitive pro tennis player… and what’s so awful about that?

Similarly, in the 1970s, Bill Walton was a superstar, one of the most dominant NBA centers ever. By the mid 1980s, he was a shell of his former self, and was only a bench player for the Celtics. Maybe Tony Kornheiser would have said, “Bill, pack it in. We don’t want to see yo uas the 6th man. We want to remember the guy who led Portland to the NBA title.” Instead, Walton was a valuable 6th man, and helped the Celtics dynasty to more titles.

Walton didn’t “tarnish” his legacy by accepting a smaller role, did he?

Now, my only problem with Michael Jordan is this: he’s still a valuable, capable player, but he’s not The Man any more, and he probably can’t ever be that guy again. Oh, he’s still capable of showing flashes of the old Michael, but he SHOULDN’T be the guy the Wizards build their team (or their marketing efforts) around, and he shouldn’t be paid like a superstar (because he isn’t one any more).

I don’t blame Michael for wanting to play, and I don’t blame any team that wanted him around. But Michael has to acknowledge what Walton did in the 1980s: “I’m not The Man any more.” He can then decide whether he’s willing to accept a lesser (but still important role) or whether he NEEDS to be the focal point of his team.

If he CAN’T accept being just another player, THEN he should follow Chris Evert’s example. If he CAN, great! He should keep playing until his body can’t handle the job any more.

18

Jordan signed a 2 year contract for $2.1 million, which is far below what he is worth. Allan Houston gets in the neighborhood of $16 million a year and he is the farthest thing from a superstar. Half of the guys in the NBA don’t deserve the salaries that they pull down.

19

I agree with posts about how it really isn’t nec. to retire at the peak. Just don’t go too far down. But …

He really doesn’t have that much legacy to tarnish. So he goes down in sports history that could take five steps to the basket without being whistled. So what? We will never really know whether he was any good or not due to the “hands off the stars” officiating that has ruined the NBA. He probably isn’t even in the top 5 of NBA players of the last 20 years.

20

It was also Mays’s single put the Mets ahead in game 2. Granted, it didn’t go more than ten feet past home plate, but it got the job done. And, of course, compared to Don Hahn (the team’s regular centerfielder), even a 42-year-old Mays looked good. :slight_smile:

Back to the OP, where is it written that a star has to quit when he’s on top? As a matter of fact, if it wasn’t for Reggie Jackson in games 6 and 7, the Mets would have been World Champions and Mays would have retired on top. As it was, his team was the NL champs, which is pretty good.

It’s all part of one of the Grand Misconceptions of modern sports commentary: you’re only a great athlete if you win a championship. Which makes Ernie Banks, Carl Yastrzemski, Ty Cobb, and Ted Williams somewhat inferior to Charlie Silvera.