Chicago Bulls: Channing Frye is wrong about Michael Jordan

Channing Frye recently offered up some interesting takes on Michael Jordan and how he’d be in today’s NBA. Here’s why Frye’s wrong.

Chicago Bulls legend Michael Jordan has been at the center of nearly every NBA talk ever since The Last Dance started pumping out episodes. Thanks to some recent comments made by Channing Frye, that won’t change anytime soon.

On NBC Sports Northwest’s Talkin’ Blazers Podcast, Frye had this to say about MJ (via Marlow Ferguson Jr. of Rip City Project):

"“He only had really one job. And that was to just score. And he did that at an amazing, amazing rate. But I don’t feel like his way of winning then would translate to what it is now. Guys wouldn’t want to play with him. Right? I think you have to adjust and adapt, and to say that Jordan would average 50? No, he wouldn’t. Everyone would double team him.”"

Wow. There’s a lot to dissect there.

Channing Frye isn’t 100 percent wrong with everything he said. He’s like, 99 percent wrong, though. The only thing Frye got right in that quote is that Jordan wouldn’t average 50 in today’s NBA. As good as MJ would be in the modern era, there’s literally no way he would average 50. It’s just unrealistic.

Now let’s get into what Frye got wrong (everything else).

Saying MJ’s only job was to score is so abhorrent that I couldn’t believe Frye — a guy who understands the NBA — actually said it. Was scoring MJ’s best skill? Clearly. But he did so much more than that. For years, he was one of the most dominant defensive players in the NBA, earning nine (nine!) All-Defensive Team honors and even winning the Defensive Player of the Year award in 1988. He also led the league in steals three times.

It’s also important to note that MJ’s offensive game went far beyond just scoring. Over the years, his playmaking has become increasingly underappreciated. Was he Magic Johnson? Of course not. But he was a dang-good passer. For his career, he averaged 5.3 assists per game.

He’s also an underrated rebounder. He never posted monster rebounding numbers, but for a 6-foot-6 two guard, he was really solid, using his hops, strength and basketball IQ to his advantage. For his career, he averaged 6.2 rebounds per game.

So does it make any sense to suggest that MJ’s only job was to score? No. It’s one of the most indefensible takes that’s been thrown out into the ether in a while.

Now, let’s tackle Frye’s next point, suggesting that MJ’s style of winning wouldn’t translate to today and that nobody would want to play with him.

I mean… come on. Even Frye himself has to understand how ridiculous that sounds. Right?

Right? 

Are there some guys who wouldn’t want to play with MJ because of his harsh demeanor? Yeah. Of course. But that was true in the ’80s and ’90s as well. Do you really think a guy like Giannis Antetokounmpo wouldn’t want to play with Michael Jordan? What about Kawhi Leonard? Klay Thompson? Those are just a few superstars who come to mind when I think of current guys that would love to play with MJ, but the list goes on and on.

Even if Jordan couldn’t get another star to play with him, would it really matter? He’d find a way to make the best out of whatever situation he was in or whoever his teammates were.

Jordan was simply a winner and winning translates. It might not look the exact same as it did in the ’90s, but Jordan would adapt. He’d do whatever it took to win because that’s all he knew.