As the starting point guard of the 1993-94 and 1994-95 championship squads for the Houston Rockets, Kenny Smith knows the strengths of those iconic Hakeem Olajuwon-led teams as well as anyone.
There is, however, a hypothetical question surrounding those titles. Would Houston have won them, had Michael Jordan not abruptly taken a mid-career retirement from October 1993 to March 1995? After all, Chicago won the three NBA championships both before and after Houston’s two-year “Clutch City” run in 1994 and 1995.
Many around the Rockets have long bristled at that notion, especially because the 1994-95 team had the toughest title path in NBA history. There’s also the fact Jordan played in the 1995 playoffs, but his Bulls lost in the second round to Shaquille O’Neal and the Magic. Then, in the NBA Finals, the Rockets swept that same Orlando team.
In a newly released interview with ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith, Houston’s Smith — now an analyst with TNT’s Inside the NBA — makes his case for why the Rockets were set, either way.
“Yes, we would’ve beat the Chicago Bulls, I feel. I’m glad we didn’t beat them, because it would’ve hurt Michael’s legacy in the debate with LeBron [James],” said a smiling Smith, who played alongside Jordan for one college season at North Carolina.
“The reason I thought we would’ve beat them is because they were too small for us,” Smith added. “There was no Horace Grant. Dennis Rodman wasn’t there yet. So who’s going to guard Dream? No. Impossible. No way, no how. We would’ve beaten the Michael Jordan Bulls because they were too little. We would’ve smacked them.”
Among casual NBA fans, the conventional wisdom is that because Jordan didn’t return from his retirement until March 1995, he was still working his way back into shape during the 1995 playoffs.
But a closer look at the numbers reveals that Smith could be correct. Jordan actually averaged more points per game (31.5) in the 1995 playoffs than he did in either of Chicago’s next two championship years, and he did it on superior shooting efficiency (48.4%), as well.
The biggest difference with the 1994-95 Bulls was timing. That season came after Chicago had lost Horace Grant to Orlando, but before they had added Rodman (who was in San Antonio at the time).
Now, had Jordan not retired, could they have perhaps kept Grant — or made a marquee frontcourt addition a year earlier? Maybe. But that kind of roster hypothetical exists surrounding every NBA season.
It’s also worth noting that from 1990-91 through 1992-93, prior to Jordan’s retirement, Olajuwon’s Rockets went 5-1 in six regular-season meetings versus Jordan’s Bulls. They only met twice per year, since Houston plays in the Western Conference and Chicago the East.
Ultimately, the 1990s-era Rockets never beat the Bulls in the playoffs, and the 1990s Bulls never beat the Rockets in the playoffs. Each team’s playoff peak came when the other wasn’t at its best. So when it comes to a comparison, each group is left solely with hypotheticals.
Based on the sheer volume of overall titles and Jordan’s status as arguably the greatest basketball player of all-time, the Bulls often win that hypothetical debate among casual fans. But a close look at the evidence suggests that Smith’s argument has merit, too.
