NBA: Was Jordan "The Greatest" Because Injuries/Tragedy Removed His Foils?
- By: The Professor
- On: 11/8/2009 4:26:00 AM
- View Comments : 35
Related: The Professor
1) Sampson was the #1 overall pick in 1983, and he was considered a sure-thing. A slim 7-4 big man with the skill set of a perimeter player, in some ways Sampson was a precursor to the Kevin Garnetts and Dirk Nowitzkis of this generation. Sampson entered the league as a monster, winning rookie of the year and averaging 21 points with 11 boards over his first three years. He teamed with Akeem Olajuwon to lead the Rockets past Magic's Lakers and took Bird's best Celtics team to six games in the Finals in only his third season (1986). After that season, injuries derailed Sampson's career and he never again started more than 44 games in any season.
2) Bowie was the #2 overall pick in 1984, after Olajuwon and before Jordan. These days he's a punch line, but people forget that he actually played solid double-double basketball when he was healthy...the problem is that he was never healthy. But Bowie was drafted to a Portland team that also featured Clyde Drexler, a Jordan-light that led the Blazers to two NBA finals appearances in 1990 and 1992 even without Bowie. Would a franchise center have been enough for Drexler to get his team over the top?
3) Bias was the #2 overall pick in 1986, and in watching that documentary I realized just what an athletic freak he was. He was an absolutely ripped small forward that could jump through the roof, like a mix between Dominique Wilkins and LeBron James. Bias was drafted by a Celtics team that some consider the greatest team in NBA history that featured a prime-but-aging nucleus of Larry Bird, Kevin Mchale and Robert Parish. If Bias had lived to reach anywhere near his potential in a championship environment, he very easily could have been fighting with Jordan in the Eastern Conference Finals all the way until MJ's second retirement.
4) Magic and Bird both saw their careers cut short due to injury or illness. You hardly ever think about it, but Magic especially is only three years older than Jordan. To put that in perspective, Bird was also three years older than Magic. Magic and Bird defined each other, while Jordan was able to win five titles and three MVPs after Magic's sudden retirement.
As far as I can remember, there has never been another time period when the two greatest players of the previous generation (one of which was of similar age to Jordan), and three ultra-blue chip contemporaries all had their careers end early. As an analogy, it'd be like Shaq, Chris Webber, Kevin Garnett, and Kobe Bryant all having retired in 1999. Wouldn't Tim Duncan have like 8 rings and 5 MVPs if that happened? Or if Bird, Dr. J, Moses Malone and Isiah Thomas missed the 80s...wouldn't Magic Johnson have swept just about every title and MVP for a decade?
At the end of the day "what if" doesn't do anything to change what actually happened, and what actually happened was that Jordan dominated the late 80s and 90s on a level never seen before. His place in history is secure. But as I think about all of the great players that we missed seeing him play against during his 6-peat, I can't help but feel like we were all gypped out of something special.
reddit
Comments
On: 11/8/2009 5:22:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 5:55:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 6:28:00 AM
My point isn't that Jordan was less. Jordan did his part. His competitors didn't do theirs, which meant that we rarely (if ever) got to see the best go up against the best. Everyone always says that Jordan lacked the "Bird to his Magic" or the "Russell to his Wilt", well, maybe he would have had them if not for all of the stuff that goes wrong.
One great player can be great. But one great player player an equal...now that is special.
On: 11/8/2009 7:22:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 8:16:00 AM
The "cult of Jordan" is pretty easy to understand if you watched basketball in the 1990's. He killed everyone, all the time, without fail, over and over and over again. and again. Maybe it would have been a more compelling narrative if he'd had a better foil or more adversity to overcome, but at least twenty of the NBA's "50 Greatest Players" careers overlapped Jordan's (as well as younger stars' like Kobe, KG, Duncan, etc.), so suggesting that he played in some sort of talent-vacuum is simply disingenuous.
I am somewhat suspicious of any argument that posits Jordan was NOT the greatest of all time, simply because of the overwhelming preponderance of evidence to the contrary. If you are going to make such an uphill argument, you are going to have to come up with something more convincing than the tragically unfulfilled promise of Sam Bowie et. al. (although I am sure Stu Inman and his family appreciate the effort).
On: 11/8/2009 8:35:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 8:55:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 9:26:00 AM
Arguments against Jordan's greatness (like holocaust denials, flat earth claims, or creationist myths) often seem to employ tortured logic and specious claims to advance an agenda, while somehow refuting what's right in front of everyone's collective face. Similarly, complaints that Jordan didn't have great rivals (I've heard them before) always sound like the bitter yearnings of Magic/Bird fans, disappointed that Jordan doesn't fit naturally into the narrative template established by those two NBA legends.
Just like the NBA was unsuccessful in finding "the Next Jordan," these narrative templates seldom apply to subsequent generations. In fact, attempting to shoehorn Jordan into the Magic/Bird model is an exercise in futility, and represents nothing more than a simple reflexive unwillingness to accept/appreciate Jordan's greatness on its own terms.
On: 11/8/2009 9:32:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 9:46:00 AM
But to your greater argument, if "raising a valid point that it was achieved in the absence of other all-time (top-10) greats" is not an attempt to detract from Jordan's greatness, then what exactly is it? All I am saying is that there are two basic arguments against Jordan being the greatest player of all time: The first ("Jordan was great, but Wilt/Russell/Bird/Magic was greater ...") is kind of fun and interesting; the second ("Jordan really wasn't so great after all ...") is just preposterous.
On: 11/8/2009 9:50:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 10:04:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 10:38:00 AM
On: 11/8/2009 11:27:00 AM
Meanwhile, players like Magic or Bias who actually were/may have been on Jordan's level weren't around at all during 5 of Jordan's rings. I mean, you don't find that at all relevant? Really?
On: 11/8/2009 10:27:00 PM
- Larry Bird played 12 full seasons in the NBA (13 if you count the 88-89 season, in which he played only a handful of games; we won't).
- Magic Johnson played 13 full seasons in the NBA (14 if you count the thirty-some games he played in his comeback year of 95-96; again we won't)
- Michael Jordan played 11 full seasons in the NBA (14 if you count his injury-plagued sophomore campaign and the two years he spent suiting up with the Wizards; obviously we won't)
Your suggestion that the truncated careers of Magic and Bird somehow artificially enhanced Jordan's greatness conveniently ignores the fact that Jordan's own career was similarly abbreviated (if not moreso). How many more titles would he have won if he had *not* disappeared for two years in the prime of his career to play baseball? Or if Jerry Krause had *not* prematurely blown up the Bulls in his zeal to commence the Tim Floyd era, and prove once and for all that "organizations win championships?"
You can't have it both ways ... if you are going to retroactively grant Sampson/Bowie/Bias health, success and prosperity, and hypothetically cure Magic's AIDS and heal Larry's back, it's probably only fair to extend the same restorative courtesy to Jordan, but clearly your argument neglects to do so.
The truth is, picking and choosing the circumstances/constraints of your imagined alternate reality can produce any sort of hypothetical outcome that you desire. Unfortunately, while the results of such an exercise inevitably say a lot about the a priori agenda of the author, they don't have much bearing on reality, and they certainly don't constitute a sound argument regarding Jordan's actual legacy.
That being said, I'm not really interested in beating this dead horse any longer, but I've certainly enjoyed the debate. Keep the good articles coming, and I will definitely keep reading!
On: 11/8/2009 10:30:00 PM
This isn't going anywhere.
On: 11/9/2009 12:24:00 AM
On: 11/9/2009 4:52:00 AM
Elsicilian, your argument in this last post actually hits exactly my point. Are the Rockets' back-to-back titles in the mid-90s as impressive as they should be (after all, not many teams go back-to-back)? No, they aren't, because everyone knows that Jordan wasn't there. It weakens their mojo, historically. Likewise, between the Bulls being blown up and the lockout there are still people that want to put an asterisk by the Spurs' title in '99. And my point is, THIS SAME PHENOMENON makes it interesting to me to wonder how history might be different if two of the greatest players ever and THREE top-2 picks of his peers might not have all had their careers end prematurely.
Nothing would have prevented Jordan from being thought of as one of the best ever. But I surely would have loved seeing him play against the best possible competition. And I think it's at least interesting to think about.
On: 11/9/2009 9:02:00 AM
As I pointed out in my previous post, Magic/Bird could have possibly extended their playing careers a few years under different circumstances, but the actual duration of each man's career was no shorter than Jordan's. Furthermore, Jordan's Bulls definitively beat Magic's Lakers in 1991 (a team that also included Worthy, A.C. Green, Byron Scott, Mychal Thompson et. al.), after sweeping Isaiah's Pistons, who (with their destruction of Bird's Celtics and back-to-back titles) had hithertofore been considered the unquestioned cream of the league. So this wasn't some sort of embarrassing-all-around, Larry Holmes type of title succession ... the Bulls began their championship run by unambiguously obliterating what had been the dominant teams of that era, featuring two of the three unquestioned superstars of the era (Magic and Isaiah).
Subsequent titles were amassed against a virtual who's who of 1990's NBA superstars (Drexler, Barkley, Payton, Kemp, Malone, Stockton as well as Ewing, Mourning, Reggie Miller, Hardaway, et. al.), each of whose legacy is complicated by Jordan's brilliance, as his thorough domination sometimes does seem to make their stars shine a little less bright. But that's the quintessential chicken/egg conundrum: is Jordan diminished because of them, or are they diminished because of Jordan? Your argument presupposes the former, yet the question is fundamentally unanswerable.
By every *objective* measure (individual statistics, hall-of-fame credentials, respect of peers, and virtually anything other than direct comparison to Jordan and/or the jewelry he selfishly hoarded), his best contemporaries are bona-fide all-time NBA superstars. Assuming otherwise is not only a questionable premise for an argument, it's actually pretty disrespectful of their talent and accomplishments. I'm not personally offended, but I don't imagine John Stockton or his family would think much of your argument, however they might feel about Jordan personally.
Retroactively imagining productivity for Sampson, a career for Bowie, and *life* for Len Bias in an attempt to find SOMEBODY to just once beat Michael Jordan's Bulls is a pretty significant deviation from reality. As I have emphasized all along, these certainly are fun ideas to debate among ourselves (I'm enjoying this one tremendously), but at the end of the day, we shouldn't pretend they have anything to do with Jordan's actual legacy.
To Mr. Liss' last point, I would simply say this: if you must judge, judge people on their actual accomplishments. If you want to argue against Jordan's actual greatness, be my guest. Just don't expect rational folks to naturally accept some version of a fictional alternate reality (cherrypicked and tailored to support the premise, of course) as legitimate evidence in a sound argument.
The End
On: 11/9/2009 10:49:00 AM
On: 11/9/2009 11:29:00 AM
Anyway, off topic, I think Jordan's teams, matched up with any team from any era, would have won because they don't have an equal regarding team defense. They didn't rely on brute force but technical excellence and intelligent strategy, spearheaded by Jordan, Pippen and Rodman/HGrant along with Cartwright's elbows. If in doubt, watch the demolition game of the Utah Jazz 96-54 during the 1998 Finals.
On: 11/9/2009 12:02:00 PM
And again, in some ways you kind of make my point with your list of the 1990s NBA superstars that Jordan faced in the playoffs. Yes, they were the best of their era, but even objectively they don't stand up to the very best of any other decade in recent memory and that isn't all due to Jordan. The very best players and teams generally tend to actually spend some time at the top. If you wanted an MVP or a title in the 80s you were going through either Bird or Magic, with an occasional Philly or Detroit mixed in. If you wanted an MVP or a title in the 2000s you were going through Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, or KG. In the 90s? None of those guys you name except for Malone at the end of the decade even sniffed the MVP more than once (if ever at all), and none of the teams that those Bulls faced except the Jazz even sniffed the Finals more than once. You're giving Jordan too much credit for keeping them from ultra elite status, as in reality most of his opponents would have been 1-hit wonders even without Jordan around. That's no disrespect to those guys, as they were all great players, but they just aren't the best of the best even without MJ and their teams weren't dynasty-caliber even without the Bulls.
As far as "deviation from reality", isn't that the whole point of a hypothetical? To say "this didn't happen...but what if it did?" It's not like I suggested making up players. Sampson really was a #1 overall pick, rookie of the year the year before Jordan, and matched with another #1 overall pick to make the Finals only 2 years into their shared career. Is it unreasonable to wonder if they might have been that second "super" team to face Jordan's Bulls through the years had they stayed healthy? Especially considering that Olajuwon did win the 2 titles during Jordan's retirement, even without Sampson.
Likewise, Len Bias really was considered a transcendant talent, Bird/Mchale really did have their careers shortened by injury in part because they had to play too many minutes through too many injuries starting in 1987. Is it unreasonable to wonder if that core, plus the thus far unmentioned Reggie Lewis (drafted in 1987) might have been a third "super" team in the 90s to join the Bulls and Rockets?
Similar story for Magic's Lakers (again, he still had years of prime left) or Drexler's Blazers with another strong big man. We're talking real people, on real teams, that very easily could have existed were it not for tragedy. All of the best players/dynasties usually have foils to measure themselves against. Jordan didn't have that. You believe it was because he was just that much better than everyone else. I just wish we would have been able to see that tested.
And again, let me quote myself from the original article: "At the end of the day 'what if' doesn't do anything to change what actually happened, and what actually happened was that Jordan dominated the late 80s and 90s on a level never seen before. His place in history is secure." This whole thing was a fun what-if exercise, not a testable or provable quest to bring Jordan down. I wouldn’t think I’d need that disclaimer, but apparently I do.
On: 11/9/2009 1:24:00 PM
Regarding the relative strength of teams, four of the Bulls' six NBA finals opponents (in 91,92,97, and 98) had previous or subsequent finals appearances within a one-or-two year window, so your assertion that most of them never "even sniffed the Finals more than once" isn't really accurate at all.
We can say definitively that the Bulls absolutely crushed Isaiah's Piston's and Magic's Lakers (and I don't honestly believe that another year on Magic's and Worthy's odometers would have empowered them to defeat Jordan's Bulls the next year, but that's just my opinion). Similarly, we know the Bulls vanquished every single challenger who crossed their path over the next decade, and that's about it. You are correct that the upper threshold of Jordan's greatness isn't precisely known because it was never fully met or surpassed; however, your presumption that Bias/Sampson/Bowie/whomever would be just enough to exceed Jordan's best effort and put another team over the top, is unfounded. Perhaps those Bulls' ceiling was so high they could have handily beaten *anybody* ... maybe even the Western Division All-Star team in a seven game series? We'll never know, but like you I would have certainly enjoyed watching.
Ironically, I think the best hypothetical opponent might be one you neglected to consider: forget a magically rejuvenated Sam Bowie and imagine the 1992 Trail Blazers anchored by Arvydas Sabonis in his prime ... that's a finals matchup I would have really liked to see!
On: 11/9/2009 2:21:00 PM
Re: the Finals. Here, my point was that he wasn't seeing the same teams during his title reign. In his 6 championship runs, he played 6 different teams in the ECF (Pistons, Cavs, Knicks, Magic, Heat, Pacers) and he played 5 different teams in the Finals (Lakers, Blazers, Suns, Sonics, Jazz twice). So it's not like how Wilt was epic but just couldn't beat Russell, or how Magic and Bird were always there win-or-lose but just couldn't always beat each other . There weren't any super-players our super-teams that the Bulls went through, just a lot of very good ones that were cannon fodder against a truly historic player/team like Jordan and the Bulls.
And I don't know that any of the players/team in my hypothetical would have been enough to get their teams over the hump. That was kind of the point, to raise the topic and really get into it in depth to see what shook out. This has been a great discussion, but outside of Zoso there has still been very little actual in-depth thought analysis of what these type of hypothetical matchups might have looked like. I was looking forward to debating, for example, how an inside-out attack like the Twin Towers may have functioned against the more perimeter-based approach of the Bulls. Or discussing what the Magic-led Lakers would have had to do to change the dynamic of their Bulls match-up if they met again in future years. Would Bias/Bird have developed a Duncan/Robinson kind of dynamic but among small forwards, and if so how might that have played out? Would Bias/Lewis have been able to keep things honest with Jordan/Pippen so that mid-30s Bird and Mchale could have been the difference makers?
This conversation has ended up being all about Jordan. When in reality, this was a Jordan article where to me a lot of the interesting potential for debate was about the other players.
By the way, good call on Sabonis. If that's your cup of tea, I'd love to hear how you think that might have played out as well.
On: 11/9/2009 5:07:00 PM
I understand your point about MVP candidates during the 1990s, though I don't think your conclusion is necessarily supported by the evidence. In fact, one could argue that the great diversity in MVP voting is as representative of a *wealth* of MVP-calibre players as a dearth. Once again, we're caught in an inescapably circular argument, and the conclusion toward which one is more naturally predisposed pretty much determines the course of his reasoning.
Actually, I don't disagree that Jordan's NBA finals were by and large anti-climactic, but let's not forget that the Eastern Conference was *much* stronger than the West throughout the Bulls' championship era. From 1988-1998 the Bulls squared off against the Knicks five times, the Pistons and Cavaliers four times, and the Heat three times. The playoff wars Jordan waged against Isaiah/Dumars/Laimbeer, Ewing/Oakley/Starks, Daughery/Price, and Mourning/Hardaway became annual events, and those players' collective inability to beat him even once diminished their legacy while it elevated his (which is why none of them are considered great). I suppose it would have made for better theater if one of those teams had been in the west (and presumably could have won that conference at least a couple of times), but simple geography conspired against such drama, much to NBC's chagrin.
Personally, I am of the opinion that Jordan's Bulls had a much higher ceiling than most people suspect. The best of them (1996 and 1992, in that order) could have beaten literally anybody (even the '86 Celtics or the '72 Lakers), so they would have manhandled a Sabonis-led Blazers squad. The best series each of them could have had would be against the other. Would '96 Jordan cover '92 Jordan, or would he leave that to Ron Harper? Would Rodman mercilessly torment '92 Pippen, or would he freak out, and accidently clash with '96 Pippen? Of course, that's exactly the sort of metaphysical hypothesizing against which I've been arguing this whole time, so I'm going to go ahead and quit while I'm only a little bit behind.
On: 11/9/2009 5:58:00 PM
I think the Garnett, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron comparison is weak, Chris. Let's see LeBron win a title before we talk about him in that sense. Are you really trying to say MJ didn't have to deal with teams like LeBron's Cavs? Come on. As for Garnett, how can you say "but MJ didn't have to play Garnett" when he had Barkley and Malone? I'd take Barkley in his prime over Garnett any day. Even Kobe - he won one title in a watered-down year; the rest were with Shaq. Only Duncan is the type of player who you can say "MJ didn't have to deal with" I do agree with Prof. in that sense - if there was no Shaq, Duncan would have 6-8 titles.
On: 11/9/2009 9:20:00 PM
On: 11/10/2009 7:51:00 AM
On: 11/10/2009 8:55:00 AM
During the 90's, Jordan's foes were: Mutombo, Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, Grant Hill, Mourning, Reggie Miller and Kevin Johnson, along with Olajuwon, K Malone, Barkley, Stockton, Ewing, and D Robinson
Basically, who do we think would win: Jordan's Olympic Dream Team or any of the team's assembled after his retirement for US international play?
I think if you look again at some of these player's careers, you'll some incredible numbers. These aren't outdated stats like baseball from the 1930's or 1950's but about 15 years ago, in which the similarities outweigh the differences.
I think overall, Jordan had very good players and teams to play against during his time, but no one came close to challenge him at his specific position. There were plenty of great forwards, point guards and centers, but no shooting guard. but then again, you need to look at different decades and era's to find anyone for comparison, such as West, Kobe, etc.
Sure KG is great, but it's not a blow off to compare him to Barkley or Malone. They physically would provide major problems for the lighter KG. It'd be interesting to see how well Lebron would do against Scottie Pippen.
On: 11/11/2009 6:13:00 AM
What would Magic Johnson have done if he had played in an era with no hand-checking on the perimeter? What about Jordan? Bird? The game has changed a lot in 20 years.
It's easy to talk about how great a guy like Chris Paul is today -- but in his entire career, he's never had to play games getting mugged by the likes of Derek Harper on every trip down the court.
Of course, you could say the same for Jordan, who never had to face a Bill Russell or a Wilt Chamberlain.
Jordan was the best of his era -- and in my eyes, no one was particularly close. Any discussion beyond that -- comparing "Jordan in his prime" against "Kobe in his prime" or "LeBron in his prime" -- which we probably haven't even seen yet -- is nothing more than sports bar talk. Interesting way to spend an evening, but ultimately nothing more than opinion.
Good conversation-starter, Professor.
On: 11/13/2009 9:53:00 AM
On: 11/18/2009 10:49:00 AM
1) Again this is "Bar" room material, this is what-a, should-a, could-a stuff. Just like elsicilian said, you can go on and on without ending the debate because of this nonsense of what-ifs. You said what if Olajuwon got his big men, what if Bias played etc. Why don't you add, what if Jordan got a great center?? what if Jordan, got Toni Kucok to play to his potential? what if Jordan didn't retire in his 1st and 2nd three-peats? You're changing all these variables outside of Jordan, but keep Jordan's variables the same. That's not fair. My opinion and I agree with elsicilian, Jordan's ceiling was much higher. His capacity to take it up another higher level made him so great and made others and their feats less diminutive. So really your question, "Was Jordan's Greatness because of injuries and tragedy? It's a horrible question to ask because you don't know if the variables can become true: IF Len Bias could have played to a higher level (there's a history of failed #1's), IF Sampson, Bird, and Magic could have played in a higher level.
2) It's really sad for this article to downplay, dishonor, and disrespect the great players in the late 80's and 90's. Again elsicilian said it best, Jordan's achievements, records, titles, reputation, and fame were so unbelievably at godly levels that it understated everybody else. Everybody remembers a winner, not a loser. But these guys lost to the best of the best. Karl Malone and Barkley were undeniably great players. They were athletic freaks. I have a hard time to discount them against these players today. Then you have Drexler, Stockton, Olajuwon, Ewing, Reggie Miller, Robinson, Kidd, Kevin Johnson, and Gary Payton. Wow, those are some great players. Let's end this, like what Zoso said: Match up Jordan's Dream Team against any other Dream Team. No Match. Case Closed. Jordan's greatness unrivaled and UNQUESTIONED.
On: 6/10/2011 8:14:00 PM
Wholesale Oakley Sunglasses
Wholesale Designer Handbags
Wholesale Coach Handbags
Wholesale Gucci Wallets
Wholesale LV Handbags
Wholesale Handbags
Wholesale Gucci Handbags
Wholesale Chanel Handbags
Wholesale Prada Handbags
Wholesale Burberry Handbags
Wholesale Chloe Handbags
Wholesale Christian Audigier Handbags
Wholesale D&G Handbags
Wholesale Dior Handbags
Wholesale ED Hardy Handbags
Wholesale Fendi Handbags
Wholesale Guess Handbags
Wholesale Juicy Handbags
Wholesale Polo Handbags
Wholesale Versace Handbags
Wholesale Wallets
Wholesale Coach Wallets
Wholesale LV Wallets
Wholesale Chanel Wallets
Wholesale Burberry Wallets
Wholesale juicy Wallets
Wholesale Sunglasses
Wholesale LV Sunglasses
Wholesale Gucci Sunglasses
Wholesale Chanel Sunglasses
Wholesale Prada Sunglasses
Wholesale D&G Sunglasses
Wholesale Dior Sunglasses
Wholesale ED Hardy Sunglasses
Wholesale Ferrari Sunglasses
Wholesale Ray.Ban Sunglasses
Wholesale Versace Sunglasses
swarovski crystal
swarovski outlet
swarovski uk￡?swarovski store
shop swarovski
buy swarovski
Swarovski Bracelets
Swarovski Bangles
Swarovski Crystals Bracelets
Swarovski Earrings
Swarovski Crystal Earrings
Swarovski Clip Earrings
Swarovski Earrings Sale
Swarovski Earrings On Sale
Swarovski Necklaces
Swarovski Crystal Necklaces
Swarovski Colliers
Swarovski Pendant Necklaces
Swarovski Earrings
Swarovski Crystal Earrings
Swarovski Clip Earrings
Air Max Schoenen
Nike Air Griffey Max
Nike Air Structure Triax 91
Nike Air Max2010
Men's Nike Air Max 2010
Women's Nike Air Max 2010
Nike Air Max 24/7
Men's Nike Air Max 24/7
Women's Nike Air Max 24/7
Nike Air Max 2009
Limited Edition Air Collection
Men's Nike Air Max 2009
Women's Nike Air Max 2009
Nike Air Max 2012
Air Max
Men's Nike Air Max 2012
Women's Nike Air Max 2012
Nike Air Max 90 Boot
Nike Air Max 2003
Men's Nike Air Max 2003
Women's Nike Air Max 2003
Air Max Winkel
Nike Air Max 360
Nike Air Max 180
Men's Nike Air Max 180
Women's Nike Air Max 180
Nike Air Max 97
Men's Nike Air Max 97
Women's Nike Air Max 97
Nike Air Max 95
Men's Nike Air Max 95
Nike Air Max Winkel
Women's Nike Air Max 95
Nike Air Max 93
Men's Nike Air Max 93
Women's Nike Air Max 93
Nike Air Max 92
Nike Air Max 91
Men's Nike Air Max 91
Women's Nike Air Max 91
Nike Air Max 90
Men's Nike Air Max 90
Women's Nike Air Max 90
Children Nike Air Max 90
Nike Air Max LTD
Men's Nike Air Max LTD
Men's Nike Air Max LTD II
Women's Nike Air Max LTD
Nike Air Max TN
Men's Nike Air Max TN
Women's Nike Air Max TN
Men's Nike Air Max BW
Nike Air Max Classic BW
Women's Nike Air Max BW
Children Nike Air Max BW
Men's 2009 Leather SI
Women's 2009 Leather SI
Nike Air Max Lebron VII
Nike Air Max Skyline
Men's Air Max Skyline
Women's Air Max Skyline
Nike ACG Air Max Foamdome
Nike Air Max
Nike Air Max 2009 Leather SI
Nicklas Backstrom Jersey
Alex Ovechkin Jersey
Ladainian Tomlinson Jersey
Mark Sanchez Jersey
Aaron Rodgers Jersey
Aaron Rodgers Jersey
Charles Woodson Jersey
Clay Matthews Jersey
Reggie White Jersey
Leave a comment
Commenting is restricted to registered users only. Please register or login now to submit a comment.