Drexler = Jordan? Surprising takes of the '92 Finals
How the press saw MJ vs. Drexler before The Shrug
On this date, 32 years ago, a lot of sports reporters thought Clyde Drexler was juuuuuust about as good as Michael Jordan.
Seems crazy to say it now, especially with what we know about how that series played out, ESPECIALLY when we think about Game 1 alone. The Shrug changed history. But heading into Game 1 of the 1992 NBA Finals, a surprising number of reporters thought one of these four things:
Jordan over Drexler, but only slightly
Jordan over Drexler, but Porter/Drexler over Jordan/Paxson
Jordan over Drexler, but Blazers over Bulls
Drexler over Jordan
I took a trot through Newspapers.com and found 15 previews of the 1992 Finals that included “Who has the edge?” positional breakdowns. Here’s a look at what reporters said about Jordan vs. Drexler before MJ’s famous Shrug game.
Jordan over Drexler, but only slightly
The overall view coming into the series was that Jordan held an edge over Drexler, but that the rest of the Blazers made the series close. Martin McNeal of the Sacramento Bee and Jerry Zgoda of the Minneapolis Star Tribune thought that Jordan held a slight edge over Drexler, and since McNeal picked the Bulls to win the title while Zgoda did not offer a pick, I guess you take what you can get.
Let’s start with McNeal: “Chicago’s Michael Jordan is simply the game’s best player. He takes over when the game is crucial. He’s averaging 34 points during the playoffs … he was the league’s MVP for the second straight season and also made the All-Defensive Team.”
Feels like the description of a player with no peer, especially compared to what he wrote about Drexler: “Many consider him the league’s second-best player as his runner-up finish to Jordan in MVP balloting attests. Has been handling the ball more in the set offense, and that has led to an increase in assists and Porter’s scoring.”
Somehow, McNeal gave the edge “Slightly to Jordan.”
Up in Minnesota, Zgoda wrote: “OK, so nobody can equal Jordan. But Drexler is close, and perhaps this is the showcase in which he will prove just how close. Edge: Bulls, in a small way.”
Jordan over Drexler, but Porter/Drexler over Jordan/Paxson
This is a stunning collection of opinions — again, in retrospect. The notion that the difference between Terry Porter and John Paxson would overcome the difference between MJ and Clyde. Here is the AP’s Bill Bernard:
“Michael Jordan is the best player in the NBA, but Clyde Drexler might be second-best, and Terry Porter has been outstanding in the playoffs for the Blazers. … Drexler and Porter have combined for 50.4 points per game in the playoffs, with Porter hitting 52.3 percent of his 3-point attempts. Jordan is averaging 34.0 and Paxson 7.0 on just 5.5 shots per game. Drexler and Porter probably won’t be able to maintain such as wide discrepancy … but the Portland duo has been so effective that Jordan won’t be able to match their firepower alone.”
Over at the Indianapolis Star, an unlisted writer called John Paxson “money in the bank from the perimeter” and gave MJ his due, but then noted that Terry Porter outplayed John Stockton in the Western Conference Finals and described Drexler as “the closest thing on the planet to the monster he’ll be guarding.”
Lastly, in Atlanta, Ailene Voisin broke it down like this:
“While the Bulls are led by Michael Jordan, the Blazers’ combination of MVP runner-up Clyde Drexler, Terry Porter and Danny Ainge arguably is the best rotation. Porter should be able to both overpower John Paxson and B.J. Armstrong and force them outside because of his 3-point proficiency.”
Porter did have a strong series, and he did outscore Pax 16.2-10.3. But Paxson’s points came on a sterling 52% shooting, including a 6-9 night in Game 6. MJ dominated Clyde 35.8-24.8. Together, Jordan and Paxson shot 52% from the floor, while Drexler and Porter shot 43%.
As for the three-point shooting, MJ wasn’t the only one with a big series from the arc. Pax went 7-18, Bobby Hansen went 3-4, and the Bulls shot 38.5% for three compared to Portland’s 19.2%.
Jordan over Drexler (or even), but Blazers over Bulls
Jim Newman of the New Virginian was the one writer to put Jordan and Drexler on even ground, simply giving their stats, which showed MJ with a significant scoring edge and Drexler with a decent lead in assists (+2.2) and a slight lead in rebounds. Jan Hubbard of New York Newsday picked MJ over Drexler but gave the Blazers nearly every other edge, including Jerome Kersey over Scottie Pippen, and then picked the Blazers in 7, without any additional explanation.
Fine.
But the shocker was our own legend, the great Sam Smith, giving the Bulls the edge for Jordan, Pippen and Phil Jackson, and then picking the Blazers in 7:
I like to think that Sam was just trying to fire up the GOAT :)
Drexler over Jordan
Only one outlet I saw took Drexler straight up over Jordan: Michael Arace of the Hartford Courant. Frankly, this might have been a put-on for engagement, considering that Arace wrote “If you don’t agree, write the sports editor.”
His take:
“Chicago’s Michael Jordan just won his third league MVP award (but) Drexler was more important to the Blazers than Jordan was to the Bulls, because of the presence of the Bulls’ Scottie Pippen. Jordan has struggled occasionally in the playoffs … while Drexler hasn’t.”
We all know how this went, so I’ll just share this fun gambling tidbit with you:
Over/under, Michael Jordan total points, Game 1: 35
Michael Jordan’s Finals record for most points in a half: 35
-
-
-
Looking for a winning Father’s Day gift?
Pick up my collection of sportswriting, “WHY WE ROOT: Mad Obsessions of a Chicago Sports Fan.” Grab it here!
Thanks for reading, everyone!
Best,
Jack