Scottie Pippen's modern day equivelent? [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 05:23 PM

yep prime Grant Hill was a better version of Pip

Yeah--on offense. On defense? :roll: Hill was a great player but he was never better than peak Pippen. Maybe he would have been had he been able to reach his peak but unfortunately we were robbed of that. Let's remember that Hill and Penny were the designated successors to Jordan and had all the hype and marketing that came with that. Pippen was the best SF in the game until 98', although Hill stole Pip's spot on the first team all-NBA in 97' due in part to the hype but also due to Pippen starting the year slow due to injury. Once he got healthy he was putting up 21 ppg alongside the league leader in scoring! In other words, Pippen was scoring as much as the "#2 option" as Hill was as the "#1 option." Once you factor in defense then Pippen>Hill. I won't even bother talking about 95' and 96' when Pippen arguably was a top 3 player and certainly was top 5, although clowns with an anti-Pippen agenda will compare him to Caron Butler and see Paul Pierce was far better than him today.

I think Lebron James is pretty similar to pippen. Lebron is just better offensively, but their style of play is very similar.

I agree they are similar, although Pippen was better defensively but Lebron's superiority on offense is far greater than Pippen's superiority on defense.

Nobody.
Pip was a freakish combo of Turkoglu's composure and skill, Odom's unusual PG like attributes and defensive versatility, and a little bit of Gerald Wallace in there as well.

I don't see any of Iggy in there, Iggy is explosive, pippen was just smooth all the way thru

Yeah, Lebron and Iggy or Wallace are similar but there is no replica of Pippen like there is with some other legends. There may never be another Pippen. He was that unique.

Hmmm, well they are both point forward type players, athletic, around 6'8" and good rebounders, but they are also quite different. Pippen wasn't the 3 point shooter or the athlete James is, nor was he nearly as heavy and strong. But Pippen was 100X better defensively and probably a better rebounder as well.

Good post. The only thing I disagree with is the 3 point shooting comment. Pippen from 94' onward was similar to Lebron in 3 point shooting. From 1994-2002 Pippen was at 32-37%; Lebron has been at 32-36% since 2004. Pippen was aided by a shorter 3 point line when he shot 37% but he shot 34% without it so it wasn't that big of an aid to him.

Pippen's rebounding was better, but not much better than Lebron's on its face but it was much better when you factor in the era. He was pulling down 9 boards a game when the other top SF's were averaging only 5-6. Keep in mind Pippen sometimes played the guard position so that deflated his rebounding numbers slightly too. Lebron is at 7 rpg, which is on par with other top SF's and even a SF like Deng.

I think the Odom comparisons are coming from the fact that he's the sidekick to a superstar. who would have compared him to Pip before he played with the Lakers?

That is the problem with Pippen comparisons. Many people forget that Pippen himself was a superstar player (where was ISH in 94', 95' when MJ was retired?). All many see is the simplistic "sidekick! sidekick! sidekick!" neon sign. What a joke. "Sidekick" just means a player had a better teammate. And? Other than Lebron every other player in the league today would be a "sidekick" to Jordan (Lebron would be 1a/1b). Does that mean anything? Does that suddenly mean Wade, Carmelo, Dirk, and yes, Kobe suddenly is an inferior player? "Sidekick" causes some to have tunnel vision.

Here is a good article on the sidekick/Pippen equivalent question from a few years ago.

Over the years, Scottie Pippen's legacy has become that he was Michael Jordan's great sidekick, a guy who was a good 2nd option on offense and who did all the little things as MJ did his superhero thing and got his team championships. To call Scottie Pippen simply a "glue guy" and mention him in the same breath as a guy like Josh Howard or Shane Battier is simply insulting.

Scottie Pippen was an extraordinary offensive player; playing with one of the biggest ball-dominating players of all time, he scored 20 points a game, not simply by making cuts or knocking down open shots, but by using his ball-handling and athleticism to drive to the hole and finish resoundingly, scoring with his back to the basket using his height, wingspan, and a huge collection of post moves, and an outside shot to boot. And he could also hit open jump shots and move without the ball for easy scores, but again, to say he simply took advantage of the opportunities given to him by MJ is underestimating his offensive arsenal. And his chief role on offense wasn't even to be a scorer; he was a true point forward, whose court vision, passing (he averaged 6 or 7 assists per year during the Bulls championship years), and understanding of the offense was crucial to working the legendary triangle offense that won Phil and MJ all those championships.

Then, of course, there was his defense. He was the best defensive player on one of the best defensive teams of all time, and probably the best perimeter defender of all time; while the Jordan mystique dictates that he evolved into one of the best defenders around, it was always Scottie who got to shut down the other team's best scorer, as well as rotate over to provide help defense better than just about anybody. He regularly made more steals than anybody in the league today, and made enough blocks to put him on par with most centers.

When Jordan was off playing baseball, Scottie put up MVP numbers and led his team to 55 wins and within one game of the Finals. Simply put, he was no sidekick.

So when we talk about adding a "Pippen," what are we saying? We're asking for someone who plays on-ball defense like Ron Artest and help-side defense like Shawn Marion, as well as an offensive player with the scoring ability of Carmelo Anthony, and the passing ability of the kind of true point guard we so desperately wish we had. There's honestly no comparison for the kind of player Scottie was-the closest I can come is Artest, Tayshaun, or Marion, but he was far more skilled offensively than any of those players, and had point-guard like passing ability to boot.

Jordan and Pippen was an amazing coincidence, the kind of thing that shouldn't be able to happen-putting the greatest player of all time alongside a top-5 player that took absolutely nothing away from the team is extremely rare. The closest thing we've had to a "Pippen" situation since MJ left is when Kobe Bryant was paired up with Shaq in his prime, or Shaq just past his prime was paired up with Wade. So when we hope that Larry Hughes can come along into an effective defender and scorer, or that we can land a low-level star like Michael Redd or Joe Johnson, know that we aren't adding a "Pippen"; we're not doing that unless we add Tim Duncan.

So by all means, let's hope we can find a 20-point per game weapon to put next to LeBron, that Larry Hughes will get healthy and together and become the player we're paying him to be, or that we can find a point guard to run the offense smoothly and unleash LeBron, but don't think that those players can deliver us to six titles. Only one man would be capable of doing all that-This Man.

http://morekrolik.blogspot.com/2007/09/lets-not-insult-scottie-pippen.html

"Sidekicks" don't do this at their peak:

All-NBA finishes from 1994-96: 1st, 3rd, 2nd (behind MJ)
All-Defensive finishes from 1994-96: 1st, 1st, 1st

Is that the record of a "sidekick"? Oh wait. It is. He finished behind MJ so him finishing 2nd means nothing. :oldlol:

"Sidekicks" are not the #1 choice when Dream Team III players are asked who they would most like to be. Superstars want to be like a mere "sidekick"? That is idiotic. Superstars want to be a superstar--a superstar they think is better than them.

BarberSchool

02-09-2010, 05:29 PM

Hahahah old school Fila's diss.Wasn't really dissing Fila per se, just saw that the only way dude could think prime hill was better than prime Pippen was that he was an 8 year old in Detroit when Hill was prime is all.

I LOVED the high top FX-100's when I was little:
http://sneakers.pair.com/s/fx100ws.jpg

but I knew better than those $85 Grant Hills:
http://www.myairshoes.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/filagranthill.jpg

C'Mon son.:hammerhead:

OldSchoolBBall

02-09-2010, 05:31 PM

Odom is nowhere near as tough and nasty as Pippen. I don't see any similarities.

Pippen was certainly not tough and nasty. Odom thrives on contact more than Pippen ever did.

his will to win almost equalled Jordan's

:oldlol:

Yeah...ok.

ProfessorMurder

02-09-2010, 05:33 PM

Wasn't really dissing Fila per se, just saw that the only way dude could think prime hill was better than prime Pippen was that he was an 8 year old in Detroit when Hill was prime is all.

I LOVED the high top FX-100's when I was little:
http://sneakers.pair.com/s/fx100ws.jpg

but I knew better than those $85 Grant Hills:
http://www.myairshoes.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/filagranthill.jpg

Oh I know, but I love them getting mentioned at random times. Every time I see a mention I just think about them ruining Hill's career.

I never had a pair back then... I looked on ebay recently, but don't want to pay over 100 for a pair. I would definitely have rocked them though.

ShaqAttack3234

02-09-2010, 05:35 PM

Yeah, Lebron and Iggy or Wallace are similar but there is no replica of Pippen like there is with some other legends. There may never be another Pippen. He was that unique.

That's true. First of all, he was definitely the greatest defensive small forward I've ever seen, but he was also averaging nearly 9 rebounds at one point, scoring over 20 ppg on around 50% shooting and averaging 7 assists in the triangle offense! :eek: He played small forward, but he handled the ball and ran the offense like a point guard, he'd guard point guards as well at times, but he'd guard power forwards too.

Good post. The only thing I disagree with is the 3 point shooting comment. Pippen from 94' onward was similar to Lebron in 3 point shooting. From 1994-2002 Pippen was at 32-37%; Lebron has been at 32-36% since 2004. Pippen was aided by a shorter 3 point line when he shot 37% but he shot 34% without it so it wasn't that big of an aid to him.

Yeah, I was thinking Lebron was better at first due to volume, but their percentages are similar and because Lebron is so streaky maybe it's a bit more fair to say he was a better volume 3 point shooter, but he wasn't more consistent, IMO.And what I mean by that is Lebron will have a lot of games with 5, 6 threes, but other nights he can go 1 for 6 pretty frequently.

Pippen's rebounding was better, but not much better than Lebron's on its face but it was much better when you factor in the era. He was pulling down 9 boards a game when the other top SF's were averaging only 5-6. Keep in mind Pippen sometimes played the guard position so that deflated his rebounding numbers slightly too. Lebron is at 7 rpg, which is on par with other top SF's and even a SF like Deng.

Good point

allball

02-09-2010, 06:00 PM

FOH, what is this bias against Pip?
You clearly couldn't beleive this.
Were you a child in the D in 1995, wearing those Fila's?

by that I meant Grant came into the league as a better player than Pippen did and had more offensive versatility. his defense was nearly on par with Pip's and would have only gotten better.

Grant had a better jumpshot, a better drive and finish game and was at least an equal passer. his man on man defense was as good except he didn't jump the passing lanes as well as Pip but Pip also played with a much better defensive team and coach.

OldSchoolBBall

02-09-2010, 06:05 PM

by that I meant Grant came into the league as a better player than Pippen did and had more offensive versatility. his defense was nearly on par with Pip's and would have only gotten better.

Grant had a better jumpshot, a better drive and finish game and was at least an equal passer. his man on man defense was as good except he didn't jump the passing lanes as well as Pip but Pip also played with a much better defensive team and coach.

I would take peak Hill over peak Pippen (he was a more dominant offensive player - much more than the numbers let on to anyone who watched him), but let's not get crazy by saying that Hill's man to man defense was "as good" as Pippen's. That's crazy talk.

bdreason

02-09-2010, 06:06 PM

Nobody plays defense anymore.

allball

02-09-2010, 06:07 PM

Pippen was certainly not tough and nasty. Odom thrives on contact more than Pippen ever did.

:oldlol:

Yeah...ok.

dude Pippen in the early 90's was ferocious. this came after the years of playing against the Bad Boys. from 91 on Pip became a lot tougher and his nastiness against the Knicks is undeniable.

as for contact there is none compared to the early 90's

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 06:12 PM

First of all, he was definitely the greatest defensive small forward I've ever seen, but he was also averaging nearly 9 rebounds at one point, scoring over 20 ppg on around 50% shooting and averaging 7 assists in the triangle offense! He played small forward, but he handled the ball and ran the offense like a point guard, he'd guard point guards as well at times, but he'd guard power forwards too.

:applause:

As far as GOAT defensive SF it would either have to be him or Havelick.

Yup, he could guard PF's. Remember him shutting down Barkley in 95'? I was going to post a thread on that since there is video of it (Pippen had 35/9/6/4/2 in that game WHILE shutting down the GOAT offensive PF!) :bowdown: but this Pippen thread popped up so I'll defer that.

Pippen actually did play PG full-time for 1 1/2 seasons in Portland. Needless to say, Portland's performance was dramatically better with Pippen at the point. It wasn't his 11/6/6--this was 36 and 37 year old Pippen. It was his leadership and ability to make his teammates better that was causing such an impact. When he played in 02' and 03' their winning percentage was 4th and 5th in the league; when he was hurt they slipped to 18th and 19th. Unfortunately, the other top teams were all in the West and Pippen was hurt for the 03' playoffs yet he still came back to spur Portland to a key victory in the fourth quarter of one game--even though he was riding a bike for most of it!

Great point on his versatility. He could do anything on the court and this gave added value to his teams that often is overlooked. He was a rare unselfish superstar who sacrificed his stats to help his teammates. When players struggle many great players cut them off but Pippen's practice was to work even harder to get them a good shot to keep their confidence up. Pippen was always the guy players turned to when they needed encouragement. Pippen, according to Phil Jackson, was always the most well-liked player by Bulls' players. There is no stat to measure this but obviously a player who keeps everyone involved, morale high is going to have additional impact on a team that goes beyond his raw stats.

Yeah, I was thinking Lebron was better at first due to volume, but their percentages are similar and because Lebron is so streaky maybe it's a bit more fair to say he was a better volume 3 point shooter, but he wasn't more consistent, IM

Their volume is actually similar, at least for 95'-99' Pippen. He took between 4-5.2 three's per game in those seasons. Lebron has been in that range since his rookie year. Pippen was a streaky shooter too. On 3's they are basically identical at this point, although Lebron probably will improve to a 40% shooter later in his career.

by that I meant Grant came into the league as a better player than Pippen did and had more offensive versatility. his defense was nearly on par with Pip's and would have only gotten better.

What relevance does him coming into the league as better than Pippen have? Pippen, like Stockton and Drexler to name a few greats, was not a great player as a rookie. OJ Mayo as a rookie was better than Drexler. Does that mean Mayo will be better than Drexler?

Hill was nowhere near Pippen on defense.

Grant had a better jumpshot, a better drive and finish game and was at least an equal passer.

All that is true (except the jumpshot statement has to be qualified by saying Pippen had more range--he was a much better 3 point shooter). The thing is his advantages where he was better were not huge while Pippen's advantage on defense was.

I would take peak Hill over peak Pippen

Of course you would. :oldlol: You would take peak Paul Pierce, who was "way more dominant" according to you than Pip :roll: , over Pippen. The question for you is Caron Butler versus Pippen, not Hill or Pierce.

allball

02-09-2010, 06:13 PM

I would take peak Hill over peak Pippen (he was a more dominant offensive player - much more than the numbers let on to anyone who watched him), but let's not get crazy by saying that Hill's man to man defense was "as good" as Pippen's. That's crazy talk.

by man to man I mean staying in front of the man he's guarding. Pip however was better at fronting, jumping passing lanes and blocking from behind because if his length.

BarberSchool

02-09-2010, 06:15 PM

Pippen was certainly not tough and nasty. Odom thrives on contact more than Pippen ever did.

:oldlol:

Yeah...ok.http://web.utk.edu/~dkamp/Pippen-Abuse.gif
http://web.utk.edu/~dkamp/Pippen-Abuse.gif

CLTHornets4eva

02-09-2010, 06:16 PM

Gerald Wallace with a touch of Granger.

Joshumitsu

02-09-2010, 06:41 PM

I heard a few rumblings about Batum... But I haven't seen him enough, and I flat out don't believe it anyway. I was really going to watch him this year, but he got hurt.

Jordan has said Batum reminded him of a younger Pippen.

And Batum does pattern his game after Pippen (who happens to be his favorite player). You can youtube highlights and see that their 3-pt release, running abilities, athleticism, etc happen to be very similar.

As for the passing and scoring, Batum definately isn't Pippen. Although Batum did improve his handling over the summer and did well for the French National Team. Also, when he returned from his injury, he was scoring at a high clip with the limited minutes he got.

And if you want to compare Sophmore years, statistically, they aren't very much different.

I encourage you to watch a few more Blazer games this year, especially now that he might be starting back at SF.

DuMa

02-09-2010, 06:43 PM

Tayshaun Prince

AtomSmasher

02-09-2010, 06:44 PM

Iggy is a poor man's version of Scottie - Scottie was better in literally every aspect of basketball. They are world's apart offensively.

Desperado

02-09-2010, 07:09 PM

Jordan without Pippen was nothing but a bald-headed Dominique Wilkins.

NBASTATMAN

02-09-2010, 07:41 PM

I think the Odom comparisons are coming from the fact that he's the sidekick to a superstar. who would have compared him to Pip before he played with the Lakers?

I think alot of people compared him to Pippen before he got to the lakers.. But the comparisons stopped when Lamar couldn't put up the scoring numbers Pippen could put up... Still Lamar is very similar.. Can lead the fast break, play pt forward , rebound, and score as well as defend.. Pippen was a better defender and scorer...And most would also say a better leader... Odom is actually more of a third sidekick instead of a second sidekick...

Crystallas

02-09-2010, 07:47 PM

Give Duncan some range, and make him shorter.

bizil

02-09-2010, 07:56 PM

Ya I think Iggy is the guy that's closest. Shaq was saying three or four years ago Iggy was underrated and the closest to Pippen. To be like Scottie you have to:

Get 18-20 points, usually as the second option.
Get 6-8 assists
Get 6-8 boards.
2 steals a game
Play 1-2-3 or guard 1-2-3, and even guard fours like Dirk, Lewis, or in Pip's day Chambers, Chuck a little, Rodman, etc.

The main difference between these guys and MJ, Lebron, G Hill when right, Penny when right, and Kobe is that they don't take over the game scoring like these guys as the number one unstoppable scorer. Iggy and Pip are best used as a second scoring option or on a deep team with a lot of scoring. The guys like MJ, Kobe, Lebron, etc. have the great D, floor game, and versatility to go with the unstoppable scoring.

Desperado

02-09-2010, 08:01 PM

smh @ these pathetic Jordan stans hating on Pippen

When MJ retired to ''play "baseball" (We all know it was about gambling and his father getting killed by the debt collectors), Pippen led the Bulls to TWO less wins while adding a CBA scrub to play Mike's position.

LMAO @ MJ only making a difference of two wins after replacing him with a NBDL scrub

:roll: @ adding some garbage off the street to replace MJ and the team not skipping a beat.

D-Rose

02-09-2010, 08:03 PM

Some of you are just pathetic. Where are the real Bulls fans from the 90's who didn't care which guy got the job done but the fact that the team got the job done?

Fatal9

02-09-2010, 08:07 PM

Caron Butler in today's league. Butler was superior offensively and that more than makes up for Pippen's defensive edge.

:roll:

allball

02-09-2010, 08:08 PM

I think alot of people compared him to Pippen before he got to the lakers.. But the comparisons stopped when Lamar couldn't put up the scoring numbers Pippen could put up... Still Lamar is very similar.. Can lead the fast break, play pt forward , rebound, and score as well as defend.. Pippen was a better defender and scorer...And most would also say a better leader... Odom is actually more of a third sidekick instead of a second sidekick...

well Pippen wasn't the first point forward. it was Marques Johnson and Odom is much more like Marq than Pip but okay.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 08:12 PM

Get 18-20 points, usually as the second option.

What is with this "option" fetish on ISH? He scored 21 ppg alongside Jordan in 92', was hovering around 10th in scoring in 96' for 4/5 of the season before he got hurt, was scoring 21 ppg again in 97' when healthy alongside Jordan. When Jordan retired he scored 22 ppg in 94' and 95'. Without MJ he took exactly one more shot a game. And???

Why is the "option" talk only on the offensive end? Pippen was the "#1 option" on defense on the Bulls from 1994-98.

Iggy and Pip are best used as a second scoring option or on a deep team with a lot of scoring.

Iggy has never been close to being a top 10 scorer, which is what Pippen was when MJ was retired and he was close to it in 92' and also in 96' and 97' when healthy.

1994 scoring leaders

Points Per Game

1. David Robinson*-SAS 29.8
2. Shaquille O'Neal-ORL 29.3
3. Hakeem Olajuwon*-HOU 27.3
4. Dominique Wilkins*-TOT 26.0
5. Karl Malone-UTA 25.2
6. Patrick Ewing*-NYK 24.5
7. Mitch Richmond-SAC 23.4
8. Scottie Pippen-CHI 22.0
9. Charles Barkley*-PHO 21.6
10. Glen Rice-MIA 21.1

Pippen was third among perimeter players. I guess 94' Barkley, Richmond, and Rice were not "#1 options" too?

1995 scoring leaders

Points Per Game

1. Shaquille O'Neal-ORL 29.3
2. Hakeem Olajuwon*-HOU 27.8
3. David Robinson*-SAS 27.6
4. Karl Malone-UTA 26.7
5. Jamal Mashburn-DAL 24.1
6. Patrick Ewing*-NYK 23.9
7. Charles Barkley*-PHO 23.0
8. Mitch Richmond-SAC 22.8
9. Glen Rice-MIA 22.3
10. Glenn Robinson-MIL 21.9
11. Clyde Drexler*-TOT 21.8
12. Scottie Pippen-CHI 21.4
13. Clifford Robinson-POR 21.3
14. Alonzo Mourning-CHH 21.3
15. Anfernee Hardaway-ORL 20.9
19. Grant Hill - DET 19.9

Hey look, there is Penny behind Pippen! Do you realize Penny's scoring was similar to Pippen's? His career high is 21.7; Pippen's was 22.0. Don't tell me your argument is based on two playoff games Penny had while getting eliminated in the first round. Pippen was in the top 10 before MJ came back and his scoring slipped to just under 20 ppg.

@ these pathetic Jordan stans hating on Pippen

:oldlol: If the claims made about Jordan are accurate there would be no need for a Jordan fan crusade to diminish him to Caron Butler or Iggy's level. We know what this is all about. Too bad they still haven't come to terms with MJ's record. He had a chance to do what they want to paint him as doing and we know what the results were.

Some of you are just pathetic. Where are the real Bulls fans from the 90's who didn't care which guy got the job done but the fact that the team got the job done?

Real Bulls fans? Every Pippen fan on ISH who was a Bulls fan in the 90's still is today. Too bad we can't say the same about most Jordan fans...

I understand what you are saying, though. The answer to your question is the vast majority of Bulls fans avoid the Pippen-Jordan fan clash on ISH presumably because they revere both players.

Caron Butler in today's league. Butler was superior offensively and that more than makes up for Pippen's defensive edge.

:roll: :roll:

Butler in the 90's=top 5 player
Paul Pierce in the 90's= :bowdown:

godofgods

02-09-2010, 08:28 PM

Just pick any overrated SF who rides someone else's coattail into winning record.

Abraham Lincoln

02-09-2010, 08:32 PM

http://www.jlcauvin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/lebron-james-cavaliers.jpg

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 08:35 PM

Saying Jordan fans have a option fetish when you are the one getting offended by the FACT that Pippen was the second option.

That's what made the Bulls so great. Their 2nd option was a top-10, top-5 caliber player. Not many teams had that luxury.

As time had gone by, Pippen's rating has noticeably shot up. During 96-97, when the 50 GOAT list was made, I don't think many had him at top 25. Many had him at high 30's early 40s. In SLAM's top 75 list in 2003, they still had him at 41. In their new top 50 list though, they ranked him at 27.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 08:35 PM

Just pick any overrated SF who rides someone else's coattail into winning record.

:roll:

Subtracting each player from the Bulls

94' Bulls with Pippen, without Jordan (won 57 games in 93'): 51-21 (71%, #1 in the East and tied with Hakeem's Rockets for #2 in the league)

98' Bulls with Jordan, without Pippen (won 69 games in 97'): 24-11 (69%, #2 in the East and #5 in the league)

Pippen without Jordan

Regular season

51-21 (71%) on pace for the second best record in the NBA, #1 in the East
34-31 (52%)
31-19 (62%)
59-23 (72%) second best record in the NBA
35-25 (58%)
39-21 (65%)
38-19 (67%)
23-59 (28%) Pippen played in only 23 games and started only 6 so I cannot find their record in games he played. Needless to say, he was a washed up scrub by 2004.

Total: 310-218
Total minus 2004*: 287-159 (64%)

Playoffs

6-4 ECSF
1-3
10-6 WCF
0-3
0-3
3-4
DNQ

Jordan without Pippen

Regular season

38-44 (46%)
9-9 (50%)
40-42 (49%)
24-11 (69%)
30-30 (50%)
37-45 (45%)

Total: 178-181 (49.6%)

Playoffs

1-3
0-3
0-3
0-0--Missed playoffs
0-0--Missed playoffs

Pippen the perennial winner

49-30
47-35 (missed nine games)
55-27
61-21
67-15
56-25
51-21
46-33
67-10
69-13
36-8
31-19
59-23
37-27
39-23
41-23
3-20

Translated win totals over 82 games from 1988-2003

51
47
55
61
67
57
58
48
71
69
67
51
59
47
52
53

Average: 57 wins, 70%
Pace for best record in the NBA: 5
Pace for the second best record in the NBA: 2 (1994 and 2000)
Pace for the #1 seed: 6
Pace for the #1 or #2 seed: 8

Portland in 2002 with Pippen: 39-21 (65%, #5 in the league)
Portland in 2002 without Pippen: 10-12 (45%, 19th in the league)

Portland in 2003 with Pippen: 38-19 (67%, #4 in the league)
Portland in 2003 without Pippen: 12-13 (48%, #19 in the league)

How come his "stacked" Portland teams did so poorly without him?

He was stuck in the ultracompetitive, deep West in the 2000's. His 2002 and 2003 teams were top 5 teams. In 2002 his team was the 5th best in the league and in 2003 4th best but all the superior teams happened to be in the West. If his Portland teams, which were below .500 without him in these seasons, were in the East they would have been the #1 seeds and probably made it to the NBA finals in 2002 and 2003.

Saying Jordan fans have a option fetish when you are the one getting offended by the FACT that Pippen was the second option.

That's what made the Bulls so great. Their 2nd option was a top-10, top-5 caliber player. Not many teams had that luxury.

As time had gone by, Pippen's rating has noticeably shot up. During 96-97, when the 50 GOAT list was made, I don't think many had him at top 25. Many had him at high 30's early 40s. In SLAM's top 75 list in 2003, they still had him at 41. In their new top 50 list though, they ranked him at 27.

You missed the point. He was comparing Pippen as a scorer to Iggy. The former could serve as a superstar "#1 option" (which meant one more shot per game) while the latter cannot. Pippen's scoring ability is underrated because he served as his team's primary playmaker and was asked to pass first, shoot second. He could have scored a bit more if his role was to shoot first.

Regarding his rise, that happens all the time. As time elapses people usually rise historically compared to where they were when they were still active, whether it is basketball players (look at other people on the 03' list and where they were in 09') or American presidents. Reagan moved up from around 22nd to 9th-10th from 1989 to 2000; Bill Clinton went from around 25th to 15th in less than a decade and may move up 2-3 more spots in the next few years. Truman went from near the bottom to consensus top 10 and borderline top 5 after leaving office. These are just some examples.

Regarding Slam, look at these:

Robinson up from 36th to 25th
Payton up from 47th to 38th
Ewing down from 28th to 36th
Rodman up from 69th to 48th

Desperado

02-09-2010, 08:35 PM

Just pick any overrated SF who rides someone else's coattail into winning record.

Jordan without Pippen = 0 winning records, 5 losing records (below .500) all without Pippen

Lebron23

02-09-2010, 08:39 PM

Jordan without Pippen = 0 winning records, 5 losing records (below .500) all without Pippen

Are you Alpha Wolf or Poseidon?

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 08:43 PM

When MJ retired to ''play "baseball" (We all know it was about gambling and his father getting killed by the debt collectors), Pippen led the Bulls to TWO less wins while adding a CBA scrub to play Mike's position.

You mean a couple of teenagers who had no idea it was Jordan's dad? :oldlol:

Demery's lawyer, Hugh Rogers, said in his closing argument, "Larry Martin Demery did not shoot James Jordan. Period."

Demery told jurors that he watched Green shoot Jordan, and he helped dump the body in a South Carolina swamp.

Rogers told jurors that the initial plan in the Jordan robbery was to take the luxury car, tie up the driver and leave him on a roadside where someone would find him alive. Demery was shocked when the man was killed and surprised to find papers identifying him as Michael Jordan's father.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n4_v90/ai_18385457/

LMAO @ MJ only making a difference of two wins after replacing him with a NBDL scrub

He was also the difference between them having a chance at their fourth championship and getting knocked out of the second round.

:roll: @ adding some garbage off the street to replace MJ and the team not skipping a beat.

Um, what? A threepeat champion getting knocked out of the second round isn't "skipping a beat"?

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 08:47 PM

Um, what? A threepeat champion getting knocked out of the second round isn't "skipping a beat"?

Don't you know anything about basketball history? The Bulls won the championship in 1994 for their fourth straight title.:oldlol:

Dizzle-2k7

02-09-2010, 08:50 PM

Scottie Pippen is a myth.. an enigma.... a Point Forward with all-world defense and incredible playmaking abilities and the toughness of a gladiator and the fortitude to play 2nd fiddle to someone else without bitching or crying or moaning or demanding trades... dude is one in a billion..

doubt we'll ever see that again. :bowdown:

kmartshopper

02-09-2010, 08:51 PM

I think Kevin Durant can become all that and more.

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 08:52 PM

bizil

02-09-2010, 08:52 PM

What is this option stuff? He scored 21 ppg alongside Jordan in 92', was hovering around 10th in scoring in 96' for 4/5 of the season before he got hurt, was scoring 21 ppg again in 97' when 100% alongside Jordan. When Jordan retired he scored 22 ppg in 94' and 95'. Without MJ he took exactly one more shot a game. And???

Iggy has never been close to being a top 10 scorer, which is what Pippen was when MJ was retired and he was close to it in 92' and also in 96' and 97' when healthy.

1994 scoring leaders

Points Per Game

1. David Robinson*-SAS 29.8
2. Shaquille O'Neal-ORL 29.3
3. Hakeem Olajuwon*-HOU 27.3
4. Dominique Wilkins*-TOT 26.0
5. Karl Malone-UTA 25.2
6. Patrick Ewing*-NYK 24.5
7. Mitch Richmond-SAC 23.4
8. Scottie Pippen-CHI 22.0
9. Charles Barkley*-PHO 21.6
10. Glen Rice-MIA 21.1

Pippen was third among perimeter players. I guess 94' Barkley, Richmond, and Rice were not "#1 options" too?

1995 scoring leaders

Points Per Game

1. Shaquille O'Neal-ORL 29.3
2. Hakeem Olajuwon*-HOU 27.8
3. David Robinson*-SAS 27.6
4. Karl Malone-UTA 26.7
5. Jamal Mashburn-DAL 24.1
6. Patrick Ewing*-NYK 23.9
7. Charles Barkley*-PHO 23.0
8. Mitch Richmond-SAC 22.8
9. Glen Rice-MIA 22.3
10. Glenn Robinson-MIL 21.9
11. Clyde Drexler*-TOT 21.8
12. Scottie Pippen-CHI 21.4
13. Clifford Robinson-POR 21.3
14. Alonzo Mourning-CHH 21.3
15. Anfernee Hardaway-ORL 20.9

Hey look, there is Penny behind Pippen! Do you realize Penny's scoring was similar to Pippen's? His career high is 21.7; Pippen's was 22.0. Don't tell me your argument is based on two playoff games Penny had while getting eliminated in the first round. Pippen was in the top 10 before MJ came back and his scoring slipped to just under 20 ppg.

:oldlol: If the claims made about Jordan are accurate there would be no need for a Jordan fan crusade to diminish him to Caron Butler or Iggy's level. We know what this is all about. Too bad they still haven't come to terms with MJ's record. He had a chance to do what they want to paint him as doing and we know what the results were.

Real Bulls fans? Every Pippen fan on ISH who was a Bulls fan in the 90's still is today. Too bad we can't say the same about most Jordan fans...

Here we go pulling out the stats again. When I say second option I mean his best days were with MJ as the second option. And rightfully so. I said usually Pip would give you 18-20 as MJ's second option. Being the second option aint a bad thing. Pau Gasol and Kevin Mchale were second options that could be first option guys. Pip to me isn't a first option guy. It's all about mentality. Kevin Mchale was a beast on the block back in the day. But you knew Bird would lead the team in scoring and have the ball at the end for the clutch moments. For those Bulls teams without Mike to win a ring Pip would have had to have averaged 25 points and up for that to happen. Put MJ in Pip's place at that time and I feel the Bulls would have done better, maybe even make the Finals again. But that season right there proved Scottie wasn't a true number one guy. He proved it again in Houston when he went there as well. Proved it in Portland too.

When it comes to Penny and G Hill I said when healthy. When healthy both guys showed enough that I would conclude they would have both been better than Pippen. THAT's WHY I STRESSED WHEN HEALTHY! These guys had he same skillset as Pippen and had to be the number one option for their teams. Even when Penny played with Shaq he was the man on the perimeter while Shaq was the man down low. So you had the dominant big man score down low with Shaq, and the guy who can do it all in Penny. Same look with Kobe and Shaq down the road. Penny\Shaq and especially Kobe\Shaq is a situation where you have two number one scoring options. Sure Pip put up 23 in a year, but guys like Kobe and MJ can do what Pippen can, but Pip can't take over a game scoring like they can. It's simple, you can pull out all of the stats that you want. Pip was great, but he's not touching other perimeter guys just as versatile who can take over games like MJ, Kobe, Big O, Lebron, T-Mac, healthy Hill, Havlicek, or healthy Penny. All guys can play 1-2-3 in their sleep, have the great D, be clutch and can put a team on his back scoring wise. Pip ain't touchin them. I haven't even mentioned Bird or Barry. The only edge Pip had on them was D and ball handling. I would take either one over Pip as well. But Pip is still a HOFer and top 10 small forward. There is nothing wrong with being the second option. Sometimes it can be a Superman-Batman type of deal. Hell the Lakers had Magic, Kareem, Worthy, and McAdoo at the same time. But Scottie wasn't Superman or Batman, he was a Robin. All of this just because I said Pip was a second option to the greatest player of all time. Some second options are first caliber offensive weapons. Pip to me was a very good scorer but he didn't think like the true stud scorers do. Not a knock just the facts. And you can pull all the stats out you want, but Pippen is a Robin, not Superman or Batman.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 08:53 PM

He was also the difference between them having a chance at their fourth championship and getting knocked out of the second round.

:rolleyes:

http://www.nba.com/media/bulls/pippen_foul_050518.jpg

This decided a playoff series in the "tough" 90's when nothing was called. Yes, a touch foul after the shot on the Knicks' last possession. MJ fans will diminish the team and claim they would have lost anyway. :oldlol: @ that. From 1982-1994 NO team won a Game 7 (20 occurrences) on the road. That tells you how important HCA was then.The Knicks lost 9 straight playoff games in Chicago and 15 of 16. They went 0-3 in Chicago in that series. That was the last game in Chicago Stadium if the Bulls lost the series. There is no way the Knicks were going to win that series if the Bulls went up 3-2 as they earned on the court and all true Bulls fans know this.

What Jordan was the difference between was being a lock for the title and being just another championship contender a la the Knicks, Jazz, Suns, or, yes, the Rockets.

But that season right there proved Scottie wasn't a true number one guy.

Yeah, he was #1 in all-NBA AND all-D voting that year. What a second-tier player. :rolleyes: How did he beat all those "#1 options" in the voting? What you are saying has some validity but you also place too much stock in meaningless designations such as "sidekick" and "#2 option." That was my point. People simplistically throw around those designations without looking at the player's actual performance and role. Let's get real: Pippen taking 1 more shot a game meant nothing.

When I say second option I mean his best days were with MJ as the second option.

His best days were 1994, 1995, and 1996. MJ was not there for almost 2/3 of that period.

For those Bulls teams without Mike to win a ring Pip would have had to have averaged 25 points and up for that to happen

He averaged 23 in the playoffs--which was more than Shaq, Ewing, or D. Robinson that year. Pippen's role was to pass first, score second; Jordan and some of the others mentioned were tasked with scoring first.

Put MJ in Pip's place at that time and I feel the Bulls would have done better, maybe even make the Finals again.

Jordan did play on the Bulls without Pippen. Remember, 98'? The results were on par with Pippen without Jordan in 94'. Sorry, that is just a historical fact.

:oldlol: at using Houston and Portland against him. He was well past his prime by then due to a myriad of injuries and aging. With prime Pippen Portland wins a ring.

k7
Scottie Pippen is a myth.. an enigma.... a Point Forward with all-world defense and incredible playmaking abilities and the toughness of a gladiator and the fortitude to play 2nd fiddle to someone else without bitching or crying or moaning or demanding trades... dude is one in a billion..

doubt we'll ever see that again.

:applause:

:oldlol: @ a Jordan fan using a minor comment in that post to bash Pippen. He wanted to be traded due to contractual issues (top 5 player, 122nd in salary!), not because he wanted to be "the man" on a team. It is a shame he didn't demand the latter and go to Seattle or Phoenix. Too bad the Pippen-Kemp trade never happened in 95' or a trade to Phoenix.

PF Schrempf
SF Pippen
C Perkins/Johnson
SG Hawkins
PG Payton

or

PF Barkley
SF Pippen
C Who cares?
SG Person
PG K. Johnson

How many "rings as the man" does he win if either happens? :rolleyes:

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 08:58 PM

But Scottie wasn't Superman or Batman, he was a Robin.

And you can pull all the stats out you want, but Pippen is a Robin, not Superman or Batman.

I think Robin is an inappropriate comparison. He's a Night Owl, imo.

http://www.grovel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/watchm04.gif

Abraham Lincoln

02-09-2010, 08:59 PM

His best days were 1994, 1995, and 1996.
And 1997.

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 09:02 PM

:rolleyes:

http://www.nba.com/media/bulls/pippen_foul_050518.jpg

This decided a playoff series in the "tough" 90's. Yes, a touch foul after the shot on the Knicks' last possession. MJ fans will diminish the team and claim they would have lost anyway. :oldlol: @ that. From 1982-1994 NO team won a Game 7 (20 occurrences) on the road. The Knicks lost 9 straight playoff games in Chicago and 15 of 16. They went 0-3 in Chicago in that series. That was the last game in Chicago Stadium if the Bulls lost the series. There is no way the Knicks were going to win that series and all true Bulls fans know this.

New York was missing Derek Harper in game 4 due to his suspension in game three which he only played 13 minutes in. That series could have been a sweep had that fight not have started. Also, wasn't Harper the guy who you considered the last piece the 94 Bulls needed?

a Jordan fan using that to bash Pippen. He wanted to be traded due to contractual issues, not because he wanted to be "the man" on a team. It is a shame he didn't demand the latter.

Page 115 of the Jordan Rules by Sam Smith.

Pippen had become closer to Jordan, moving into his private berth on the team plane with Cliff Livingston, who'd attached himself to Jordan like a fly to glue as soon as he joined the Bulls. But Pippen also had his contract on his mind, and after his near holdout he had decided he had to produce statistics, for that's what the Bulls would measure him by. "They talk about winning", said Pippen, "but if I don't score more,they won't pay me. I've got to go for statistics this year."

Pippen would begin to imitate Jordan's play, as Winter had noticed, thus removing opportunities for others and setting up a developing conflict with Jordan over just who should be taking the shots.

That all being said, Scottie did indeed deserve to be paid more, there's no denying that. If you're the second best player on your team and also happen to be an All-Star caliber player, then you deserve to be paid like one.

O.J A 6'4Mamba

02-09-2010, 09:03 PM

:applause:

As far as GOAT defensive SF it would either have to be him or Havelick.

Yup, he could guard PF's. Remember him shutting down Barkley in 95'? I was going to post a thread on that since there is video of it (Pippen had 35/9/6/4/2 in that game WHILE shutting down the GOAT offensive PF!) :bowdown: but this Pippen thread popped up so I'll defer that.

Pippen actually did play PG full-time for 1 1/2 seasons in Portland. Needless to say, Portland's performance was dramatically better with Pippen at the point. It wasn't his 11/6/6--this was 36 and 37 year old Pippen. It was his leadership and ability to make his teammates better that was causing such an impact. When he played in 02' and 03' their winning percentage was 4th and 5th in the league; when he was hurt they slipped to 18th and 19th. Unfortunately, the other top teams were all in the West and Pippen was hurt for the 03' playoffs yet he still came back to spur Portland to a key victory in the fourth quarter of one game--even though he was riding a bike for most of it!

Great point on his versatility. He could do anything on the court and this gave added value to his teams that often is overlooked. He was a rare unselfish superstar who sacrificed his stats to help his teammates. When players struggle many great players cut them off but Pippen's practice was to work even harder to get them a good shot to keep their confidence up. Pippen was always the guy players turned to when they needed encouragement. Pippen, according to Phil Jackson, was always the most well-liked player by Bulls' players. There is no stat to measure this but obviously a player who keeps everyone involved, morale high is going to have additional impact on a team that goes beyond his raw stats.

Their volume is actually similar, at least for 95'-99' Pippen. He took between 4-5.2 three's per game in those seasons. Lebron has been in that range since his rookie year. Pippen was a streaky shooter too. On 3's they are basically identical at this point, although Lebron probably will improve to a 40% shooter later in his career.

What relevance does him coming into the league as better than Pippen have? Pippen, like Stockton and Drexler to name a few greats, was not a great player as a rookie. OJ Mayo as a rookie was better than Drexler. Does that mean Mayo will be better than Drexler?

Hill was nowhere near Pippen on defense.

All that is true (except the jumpshot statement has to be qualified by saying Pippen had more range--he was a much better 3 point shooter). The thing is his advantages where he was better were not huge while Pippen's advantage on defense was.

Of course you would. :oldlol: You would take peak Paul Pierce, who was "way more dominant" according to you than Pip :roll: , over Pippen. The question for you is Caron Butler versus Pippen, not Hill or Pierce.

Drexler was never the #1 player in High School in the US, since he was 13. Drexler never had the jumper Mayo had, the ability to go on crazy scoring burst, doesn't have Mayo's court vision, Mayo's breakaway open court speed, his endurance, will to win, the only thing Drexler had is he could dunk better that's about it.When it is all said and done Mayo will go down as a top 7 guard in NBA history. I only say that because it is a good chance he is moving to PG as so as the end of the regular season if we are out of the playoffs.

Desperado

02-09-2010, 09:07 PM

Jordan stans are angry right now :oldlol:

Pippen without Jordan = Western Conference Finals and almost beat the Lakers

Jordan without Pippen = never made it past the first round

bizil

02-09-2010, 09:17 PM

:rolleyes:

http://www.nba.com/media/bulls/pippen_foul_050518.jpg

This decided a playoff series in the "tough" 90's when nothing was called. Yes, a touch foul after the shot on the Knicks' last possession. MJ fans will diminish the team and claim they would have lost anyway. :oldlol: @ that. From 1982-1994 NO team won a Game 7 (20 occurrences) on the road. That tells you how important HCA was then.The Knicks lost 9 straight playoff games in Chicago and 15 of 16. They went 0-3 in Chicago in that series. That was the last game in Chicago Stadium if the Bulls lost the series. There is no way the Knicks were going to win that series if the Bulls went up 3-2 as they earned on the court and all true Bulls fans know this.

What Jordan was the difference between was being a lock for the title and being just another championship contender a la the Knicks, Jazz, Suns, or, yes, the Rockets.

Yeah, he was #1 in all-NBA AND all-D voting. What a second-tier player. :rolleyes: How did he beat all those "#1 options" in the voting? What you are saying has some validity but you also place too much stock in meaningless designations such as "sidekick" and "#2 option."

His best days were 1994, 1995, and 1996. MJ was not there for almost 2/3 of that period.

He averaged 23 in the playoffs--which was more than Shaq, Ewing, or D. Robinson that year. Pippen's role was to pass first, score second; Jordan and some of the others mentioned were tasked with scoring first.

Jordan did play on the Bulls without Pippen. Remember, 98'? The results were on par with Pippen without Jordan in 94'. Sorry, that is just a historical fact.

:oldlol: at using Houston and Portland against him. He was well past his prime by then due to a myriad of injuries and aging. With prime Pippen Portland wins a ring.

You Pippen fans are very sensitive. Pippen is a first tier all time great player. But as a scoring option I would take similar guys who could play 1-2-3 like MJ, Kobe, TMac, Penny, Big O, Havlicek, Lebron, G Hill over Pip. Those guys can are as versatile as Pip AND can carry the scoring load when needed. I realize Pip put up 23 points without MJ. But the goal is to win it all and Pip needed to score more in order for that team to go farther. MJ or Kobe in that spot would have done more in order for that team to go farther.

When it comes to SF's Pip takes a backseat to nobody when it comes to passing, ball handling, and defense. But scoring wise he takes a backseat. It's just that simple. He's still in the top 10 SF's of all time. When I say second option I mean to put the ball in the hoop. Scoring is about talent and mentality. A guy like Rasheed Wallace can score in many ways. But he never had the mentality to dominate a game scoring. When it comes down to it the only stat that guarantees a victory is who scores the most points. There are other very important elements in the game, but whoever as the most points on the scoreboard wins the game. Leborn James is proving right now he can do what Scottie could and dominate the game scoring when needed. Pip didn't prove that enough. I realize he wasn't what he was in Houston or Portland. My point was Scottie never showed he could will a team to victory through scoring when need. Isiah and Magic were PGs but we all know they would will through scoring or take that clutch shot. Pip didn't show the same elements. For you to imply I meant Scottie was a second rate player is not true. He's a first rate, first ballot HOFer.

ukplayer4

02-09-2010, 09:27 PM

the only player in the nba right now that is similar to pippen is igy, he is by far the closest in style but he is nowhere near as good.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 09:29 PM

And 1997.

Yes, when healthy but he started the season slowly because of the affects of his numerous 96' injuries plus the Olympics so I consider 97' a step below 94'-96'.

New York was missing Derek Harper in game 4 due to his suspension in game three which he only played 13 minutes in. That series could have been a sweep had that fight not have started. Also, wasn't Harper the guy who you considered the last piece the 94 Bulls needed?

And? The Bulls' had an injured starter. Pippen himself suffered minor injuries at the end of two games. They were very minor, foot and nose but he clearly was affected at the end of one of them (I think it was Game 1) and the Bulls narrowly lost that game in New York.

:oldlol: @ clinging to Harper. He averaged 8/2 in that series. Even excluding Game 4 he averaged only 9/3.

The Bulls needed ANY starting SG in the league. ANY SG in the league>a D-League/CBA level player like Myers.

It wasn't me. Pippen, Jackson, Krause, Bulls fans all agree they had a massive hole at the SG position. Common sense tells you this. If Lebron retired 2 days before training camp and was replaced by a D-Leaguer would that team not have a hole at SF?

Drexler was never the #1 player in High School in the US, since he was 13. Drexler never had the jumper Mayo had, the ability to go on crazy scoring burst, doesn't have Mayo's court vision, Mayo's breakaway open court speed, his endurance, will to win, the only thing Drexler had is he could dunk better that's about it.When it is all said and done Mayo will go down as a top 7 guard in NBA history. I only say that because it is a good chance he is moving to PG as so as the end of the regular season if we are out of the playoffs.

He may wind up better. My point was you cannot make reliable projections based on a rookie season, especially since Hill was pretty much the same player for years. It isn't as if he was dramatically improving each year. His career was experiencing a normal trajectory until tragedy stuck. He may have been better than Pippen but we never got to see him healthy from ages 28-30.

Pippen without Jordan = Western Conference Finals and almost beat the Lakers

That was the de facto NBA finals. Had Portland been in the East they would have been in the finals in 2000, 2002, and 2003. The 00' Blazers were one of the best teams of the decade but had the misfortune of running into the Shaq/Kobe/Rice 67 win juggernaut. (and the misfortune of having Mike Dumbleavy coaching!)

The funny thing is the ridiculous lengths they go to prop up Jordan (why would the "clear GOAT" need propping up? :confusedshrug: ) via diminishing Pippen. Just today I have seen:

*Paul Pierce>>>>>>>>Pippen
*Caron Butler=Pippen
*The 94' Bulls legitimately lost to the Knicks
*The usual "Pippen never won as 'the man'"

Let's be real. Does anyone think the 00' Blazers do not win a ring with prime Pippen? Yet he was incapable of winning as "the man." :roll:

But as a scoring option I would take similar guys who could play 1-2-3 like MJ, Kobe, TMac, Penny, Big O, Havlicek, Lebron, G Hill over Pip. Those guys can are as versatile as Pip AND can carry the scoring load when needed. I realize Pip put up 23 points without MJ. But the goal is to win it all and Pip needed to score more in order for that team to go farther. MJ or Kobe in that spot would have done more in order for that team to go farther.

When it comes to SF's Pip takes a backseat to nobody when it comes to passing, ball handling, and defense. But scoring wise he takes a backseat. It's just that simple. He's still in the top 10 SF's of all time. When I say second option I mean to put the ball in the hoop.

I understand and I agree, although I think Penny was overrated. My point was too much is made of the "option" talk. Pippen was not an elite scorer in that he could never be a top 5 scorer in any league. However, he was in that next group. Many people on ISH, especially MJ fans, act as if Pippen was on Mo William's level when it comes to scoring.

The only points I will make on this are:

1) Pippen was never asked to score first
2) He had one playoff run in his prime as "the man" and was constantly doubled and tripled at the end of games. Does this mean he could not take over? Not necessarily. Even Lebron got shut down far worse in the 07' finals in a similar situation and Lebron was shut down for the entire game. Pippen was putting up 20 ppg through three quarters. His scoring was down at the end of games but he was barely shooting then anyway due to constant double and triple teams. He would pass the ball to open teammates and they would miss. Don't take my word for it, though. Listen to phil Jackson:

"The reason we didn't win this year is because we didn't have a Scottie Pippen behind a Michael Jordan. Scottie had no one like himself to step up behind his effort. Horace wanted to, but couldn't. And BJ is BJ. He does pretty good with the talent he has...He does the most with what he has..."

While I agree with you regarding scoring, I firmly believe Pippen was capable of leading a team to a championship had he had a full career as "the man." Would it be a sure thing? No, it would depend on the situation but he certainly was capable of it. If he contended for a ring with Horace Grant as his "#2" you think he couldn't win with Shawn Kemp if he stayed in Seattle? Or with Payton if he was traded to Seattle in 95'? Or with Barkley in Phoenix (Pippen was better by that point)? He nearly won with Rasheed Wallace at 34 and well past his prime. Yet he couldn't win if he was in his prime with that team?

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 09:47 PM

And? The Bulls' had an injured starter. Pippen himself suffered minor injuries at the end of two games. They were very minor, foot and nose but he clearly was affected at the end of one of them (I think it was Game 1) and the Bulls narrowly lost that game in New York.

The Knicks had been putting up with injuries, too. Huber Smith and John Starks both had to ave knee surgery that season and missed substantial time.

@ clinging to Harper. He averaged 8/2 in that series. Even excluding Game 4 he averaged only 9/3.

Yet he was the final piece that the Bulls needed? Those numbers are about the same as Myers' were in the playoffs. It sounds to me like Harper wasn't the player the Bulls needed to win it all that year.

GiveItToBurrito

02-09-2010, 09:48 PM

I think Lebron's close to him in terms of skillset and what he does for the team as far as running the offense and being capable of guarding everyone, he's just a better scorer and passer. If he teams up with Wade, though, he'd basically become a rich man's Pippen.

artex

02-09-2010, 09:48 PM

iggy/odom/gforce are all good choices, but pippen was one of a kind-no true copy will ever be found imo. :bowdown:

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 09:59 PM

The Knicks had been putting up with injuries, too. Huber Smith and John Starks both had to ave knee surgery that season and missed substantial time.

That is the point! Every team has adversity through a season.

Yet he was the final piece that the Bulls needed? Those numbers are about the same as Myers' were in the playoffs. It sounds to me like Harper wasn't the player the Bulls needed to win it all that year.

:oldlol: This is what I was talking about regarding the lengths MJ fans go. If Lebron decided to retire 2 days before training camp and was replaced by a D-Leaguer would there not be a massive hole at the SF position?

Myers was out the NBA for a reason. As you know, the only reason he was even on the squad was MJ's late retirement. The only reason Myers was starting was the Bulls' SG combo consisted of Orlando's 12th man (Kerr) and Myers. People have bad series, although I will note Harper averaged 11 ppg in the 94' playoffs and Myers 7. What is clear is with Harper the Bulls would have had the #1 seed and as Bulls fans know the Knicks could not win in Chicago. Ask Phil Jackson about this. According to him the Bulls would have won with Harper or Hornacek.

Use common sense. The Bulls' were the legit winners against the Knicks even with a scrub at SG. Replace Myers with a legit NBA starter and the Bulls win, no? They were so close a ref had to save the Knicks even with Myers. Yet with an upgrade at SG they would have lost? We know the Bulls dominated Indiana that year even with Myers.

:oldlol: at Jordan fans acting as if the Bulls were not severely handicapped at the SG position due to MJ's last minute retirement and then they use the team losing against Pippen. What would Mikey have done if Pippen retired right before the season and was replaced with a D-Leaguer? MJ with Pippen replaced by prime Kukoc couldn't do more in 98' for a half season than Pippen with a scrub replacing Jordan did in 94'.

iggy/odom/gforce are all good choices, but pippen was one of a kind-no true copy will ever be found imo.

:rockon:

OldSchoolBBall

02-09-2010, 10:00 PM

http://web.utk.edu/~dkamp/Pippen-Abuse.gif
http://web.utk.edu/~dkamp/Pippen-Abuse.gif

Keep thinking that Pippen was "tough and nasty" based on one dunk. :oldlol: You can show clips of any player dunking on someone - that doesn't make every player tough and nasty.

lol @ Roundball mucking up the thread with his copy/paste bullsh*t as usual. :oldlol:

Desperado

02-09-2010, 10:04 PM

lol @ Roundball mucking up the thread with his copy/paste bullsh*t as usual. :oldlol:

you mad?

refute his points

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 10:09 PM

you mad?

refute his points

Did you see the thread where this Jordan zealot said prime Paul Pierce was "way more dominant" than Pippen and Caron Butler=Pippen? :roll:

Einstein, he used that dunk to illustrate a point. Obviously his argument is not based on one play.

Desperado

02-09-2010, 10:15 PM

:oldlol: @ a CBA scrub taking Jordan's place and Pippen still leading the Bulls to 55 games and a deep playoff run. That's more then Jordan ever did without Pippen.

Imagine if Jordan didn't wait to retire at the last minute. They could have picked up a better free agent. Then all they would have needed was some bum off the street to play SG in Jordan's place and they probably go on to win a title!

Its hard to believe the 'clear GOAT' is only worth 2 more wins to his team. They went from 57 wins to 55 after he retired and had to replace him with a D-League scrub because he waited till the last minute to retire. So just think what could have happed if they picked a better free agent instead of a D-League scrub to take his place.

And to make it worse Pete Myers hadn't played in the NBA for 5 years before coming to the Bulls to take Jordan's place!

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 10:27 PM

Now people are using MJ's retirement against him.

People like to talk about the Bulls' record in 94 to diminish MJ's importance. But the Bulls in 95 were a mere 34-31 before MJ came back. A far cry from the 94 asterisk championship Bulls team. But no one is saying nor implying that Horace Grant was more important than Pippen.

Although the 94 Bulls came close to the 93 team, record wise, I feel that the 93 Bulls was far more efficient. And the 93 team probably had a better point difference.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 10:32 PM

Jordan's retirement did screw the team. Sorry. Look at the net effect. They were stuck with a scrub as a replacement for him.

But the Bulls in 95 were a mere 34-31 before MJ came back. A far cry from the 94 asterisk championship Bulls team. But no one is saying nor implying that Horace Grant was more important than Pippen.

Yeah--because without Pippen the team was a 25-30 win team (see 94'), not a 45 win team which it was without Jordan and Grant in 95'. 95' shows how strong those Bulls teams were. They lost their best and third best players from 93' and remained a 5th-6th place team in their conference (6th, 2 games out of 5th and closing when MJ came back).

:oldlol: @ acting as if Jordan without Pippen would do better than Pippen did with that 95' team.

So just think what could have happed if they picked a better free agent instead of a D-League scrub to take his place.

All they needed was a legit NBA starting SG. They didn't necessarily need to get a Drexler or Richmond to replace Jordan in order to win.

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 10:35 PM

That is the point! Every team has adversity through a season.

So then why dispute that the Bulls lost in the second round that year? Every team has to face adversity, right?

:oldlol: This is what I was talking about regarding the lengths MJ fans go. If Lebron decided to retire 2 days before training camp and was replaced by a D-Leaguer would there not be a massive hole at the SF position?

Would replacing said D-leaguer with another NBA starter who averaged similar numbers matter? Also, Phil Jackson and John Starks were both members of the CBA at one point in their careers. Reminding people that Myers was in the CBA doesn't change the fact that he averaged similar numbers to Harper in the playoffs. If both had equal or similar production in the playoffs, then adding Harper to the team wouldn't have helped much, now would it?

Myers was out the NBA for a reason. As you know, the only reason he was even on the squad was MJ's late retirement. The only reason Myers was starting was the Bulls' SG combo consisted of Orlando's 12th man (Kerr) and Myers. People have bad series, although I will note Harper averaged 11 ppg in the 94' playoffs and Myers 7. What is clear is with Harper the Bulls would have had the #1 seed and as Bulls fans know the Knicks could not win in Chicago. Ask Phil Jackson about this. According to him the Bulls would have won with Harper or Hornacek.

I thought teams had to deal with adversity? Does it not apply to the Bulls, for some reason?

Also, why wasn't Harper's absence an issue in the 94 Semi Finals if he was that vital?

Use common sense. The Bulls' were the legit winners against the Knicks even with a scrub at SG. Replace Myers with a legit NBA starter and the Bulls win, no?

Put Harper in games 3 and 4 and the Knicks win, no? If the Knicks have to deal with adversity, then so do the Bulls.

Now, before you say Harper wouldn't have changed the outcome, what makes you think he would have changed it had he been in Chicago? He has no impact in New york, yet he's the final piece to a championship if he plays for the Bulls? Makes no sense.

They were so close a ref had to save the Knicks even with Myers. Yet with an upgrade at SG they would have lost? We know the Bulls dominated Indiana that year even with Myers.

How could Harper have been an upgrade if his absence is meaningless in a playoffs series? Also, see the 2009 Magic and Lakers.

:oldlol: at Jordan fans acting as if the Bulls were not severely handicapped at the SG position due to MJ's last minute retirement and then they use the team losing against Pippen.

Roundball, the point isn't to discredit Pippen but to give Jordan his due. Desperado claimed that the Bulls "didn't skip a beat" without MJ which is clearly false.

Desperado

02-09-2010, 10:35 PM

In 1995 Jordan came out of ''retirement'' with 17 games left in the season.

The Bulls were just starting to gel, and out of shape Jordan had to come in and mess up the team chemistry.

Scottie Pippen was having an incredible season, leading the Bulls in points, rebounds, assists, blocks, and steals.

Then, in the playoffs against Orlando, he gets his pocket picked in the final seconds by Nick Anderson. The Bulls still have a chance to win, but Jordan commits another turnover.

Shouldn't he have just waited till the next season to return, instead of coming back and screwing up the Bulls chances of winning a title? Was he afraid that the Bulls could win without him?

recap....

In game 1 of the Eastern Conference Semi's, against the Magic, in Orlando, Jordan had the ball stolen from him by Nick Anderson in the final seconds. Anderson drove in for a layup to put the Magic ahead.

Michael "Mr. Clutch" Jordan then proceeded to throw the ball away as time expired, giving the Magic the win.

The Bulls then beat Orlando in game 2. Had it not been for Jordan's major choke, the Bulls would have gone back to Chicago up 2-0.

Shouldn't Jordan have waited until the next season to come back, instead of throwing off the Bulls chemistry that had been built up all season?

Would the Bulls have gotten past Orlando and then Indiana? Was Jordan just afraid the Bulls would have won a title without him?........what do you think RoundBall Rock?

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 10:39 PM

When did they win 45 games without Jordan and Grant?

My point is a Pippen led Bulls team would not have the same intensity and swagger that they would have had if Jordan led the team. They might be able to go deep in the playoffs and possibly win a title but I doubt that they could win back-to-back or three straight.

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 10:51 PM

So now losing in the second round of the playoffs (or winning the asterisk championship) in 94 is considered going deep in the playoffs. But when Jordan led Bulls teams lost in the second round during the 80s, it's brushed off as nothing.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 10:54 PM

So then why dispute that the Bulls lost in the second round that year? Every team has to face adversity, right?

:wtf: They faced what was voted the worst foul call in NBA history by fans and the second worst in basketball history (behind the 72' Olympics fiasco). :oldlol: @ Jordan fans acting as if that was a routine thing. They got flat-out robbed of a win they earned.

Would replacing said D-leaguer with another NBA starter who averaged similar numbers matter?

:oldlol: Since when does 11=7? Ask Phil Jackson. Jackson said they would have won with Harper.

What is with this number nonsense? The Bulls currently have a D-Leaguer on their roster temporarily since Noah is out. He is averaging 14-15 boards per 36 minutes. Gee, I guess that means he is a great player? If a player is given playing time they will put up some numbers.

I thought teams had to deal with adversity? Does it not apply to the Bulls, for some reason?

Name one basketball legend who retired right before the season began of his own accord (which excludes Magic who was forced to retire). :oldlol: @ comparing that to run-of-the-mill injuries that happen every year.

Put Harper in games 3 and 4 and the Knicks win

4 was not close. :oldlol: @ Harper being worth erasing a double digit lead. Maybe in 3--but Harper was playing poorly that game anyway. Maybe 1.8 secondgate never happens if Harper kept playing poorly all game? I believe the Bulls did worse when Harper was out that game.

How could Harper have been an upgrade if his absence is meaningless in a playoffs series?

Easy: Myers was a scrub. Harper was a legit NBA starter.

:oldlol: @ the new MJ fan talking point on Harper. Fights happen. Maybe the 97' Knicks win it all if they don't have a slew of suspensions when they were leading Miami 3-1? Maybe the Suns win if the Cheap Shot Rob incident did not happen in 07'?

Desperado claimed that the Bulls "didn't skip a beat" without MJ which is clearly false.

That isn't what MJ fans are arguing. MJ fans act as if they were a run-of-the-mill second round team a la the 09' Mavs. They were legit title contenders despite a severe handicap at SG and being robbed of a game by a ref. The only "Bulls fans" who defend the Hollins call are Jordan fans. There is a reason for that.

When did they win 45 games without Jordan and Grant?

34-31=45 wins over 82 games.

My point is a Pippen led Bulls team would not have the same intensity and swagger that they would have had if Jordan led the team. They might be able to go deep in the playoffs and possibly win a title but I doubt that they could win back-to-back or three straight.

We saw Jordan and the Bulls without Pippen, remember? 98'. Half a season. The results? Basically the same as the Bulls with Pippen, without Jordan in 94'--except Pippen did it inheriting a 57 win team and Jordan with a 69 win team. Moreover, Pippen was replaced by prime Kukoc; Jordan with a scrub. Yeah, they had more swagger. So what? The results were eerily similar.

Shouldn't Jordan have waited until the next season to come back, instead of throwing off the Bulls chemistry that had been built up all season?

Would the Bulls have gotten past Orlando and then Indiana? Was Jordan just afraid the Bulls would have won a title without him?........what do you think RoundBall Rock?

Nah, he was freerolling. That team had no interior defense and its starting PF averaged 5 freaking boards a game. They were a horrible rebounding team outside of Pippen. They could not win a title under any circumstances, unless they lucked into Rodman for free in 95' instead of 96'. There were no expectations for Jordan. If they lost, so what? That is what was expected. If they won, Jordan would be the hero and receive all the credit. If Grant stayed, or the Bulls spent their free agent $$$$ on a quality PF and not a washed up Ron Harper, they would have been contenders again. If that happened I doubt MJ would come back at the end of the season. Why? Pressure, expectations. Then Jordan would be expected to lead them to a title.

So now losing in the second round of the playoffs (or winning the asterisk championship) in 94 is considered going deep in the playoffs. But when Jordan led Bulls teams lost in the second round during the 80s, it's brushed off as nothing.

? He lost in the second round only once in the 80's. I think you mean losing in the first round thrice. Jordan did solid at times with weak teams in the 80's--just not anywhere near what you would expect given the claims made about him but that has nothing to do with the thread or even the 94' tangent--which MJ fans brought up by diminishing Pippen as a superstar/leader.

sergiorodriguez

02-09-2010, 11:02 PM

Lamar Odom-both are pretty unclutch and miss big freethrows-Scottie is better defensively of course but offensively they are similar.

D.J.

02-09-2010, 11:04 PM

A younger Lamar Odom. Not the defender Pippen was, but tall, able to play multiple positions, good handles, decent scoring, and a better rebounder.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 11:04 PM

Lamar Odom-both are pretty unclutch and miss big freethrows-Scottie is better defensively of course but offensively they are similar.

:oldlol: Now Pippen had a "history" of missing big free throws? Such as?

Pippen wasn't clutch? His nearly averaged a triple double in three NBA finals, coming closest in 93' with 21/9/8. He had only one bad NBA finals in six trips, and he had three separate injuries that year. Many legends have worse NBA finals records...

Offensively they are similar? When did Odom come close to being a top 10 scorer? Do you think Odom as a scorer is equal to, say, Brandon Roy or Joe Johnson? Odom is similar in his skill-set; not in his skill.

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 11:10 PM

But the Bulls in 95 were inconsistent They could have won 45, less than 45, or more than 45 games if the continued without Jordan. You can't put it as fact that they would have 45 games just because they were 34-31 thru 65 games.

What about the time the Bulls reached the conference finals in the 80's and it was still seen as nothing?

AirJordan23

02-09-2010, 11:14 PM

I think in some ways a peak TMac and Garnett were similar to Pippen. Although, not anymore since they both have severely declined. TMac in his peak was a lockdown defender. Very active hands, great weakside defense, could hound and throw a player off his game. He was also an excellent playmaker and played some point forward too. Had the size that Pippen did as well as the ball handling, court vision and skill. He was a much better scorer/shooter than Pippen, though. And iirc, TMac mentioned that he took parts of his game from Pippen's and Pippen was one of the players he admired while growing up.

Same story with Garnett. KG also mentioned watching Scottie back in the day. Body wise, they're kinda similar. Tall, lanky, long arms, extremely agile lockdown defenders. KG definitely had more impact/dominance but there are parts of their games that are similar.

In today's league, I wouldn't really say there's a player similar to Scottie. Scottie was unique and some of the things he did on the court were remarkable and might not be repeated ever again.

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 11:18 PM

But the Bulls in 95 were inconsistent They could have one 45, less than 45, or more than 45 games if the continued without Jordan. You can't put it as fact that they would have 45 games just because they were 34-31 thru 65 games.

They were inconsistent, hence 34-31. I use 45 as a ballpark figure. They realistically could have been anywhere in the 43-46 win range (43 wins=6th seed). What is your argument? That they may have went 5-12 without Jordan or something like that? They were on a 8-2 roll right before MJ came back and 11-6 after the all-star break pre-MJ. They were playing as well as they could.

When Garnett, Wade and Kobe led similarly weak teams to around 45 wins they were lionized; why is Pippen criticized?

What about the time the Bulls reached the conference finals in the 80's and it was still seen as nothing?

Who said it was nothing?

catch24

02-09-2010, 11:27 PM

When Garnett, Wade and Kobe led similarly weak teams to around 45 wins they were lionized; why is Pippen criticized?

I think Pippen is criticized more because the previous season he led virtually the same team (minus Horace Grant) to 50+ W's. Wade, Garnett and Kobe had weaker talent across the board, don't you agree? BTW, this isn't a knock on him. He did an awesome job in 1994.

Alhazred

02-09-2010, 11:33 PM

:wtf: They faced what was voted the worst foul call in NBA history by fans and the second worst in basketball history (behind the 72' Olympics fiasco). :oldlol: @ Jordan fans acting as if that was a routine thing. They got flat-out robbed of a win they earned.

Likewise, the Knicks were robbed of one of their starters for two games and most of another. Fights do happen, but so do bad calls.

:oldlol: Since when does 11=7? Ask Phil Jackson. Jackson said they would have won with Harper.

How can a guy who plays like this:

4 was not close. :oldlol: @ Harper being worth erasing a double digit lead. Maybe in 3--but Harper was playing poorly that game anyway. Maybe 1.8 secondgate never happens if Harper kept playing poorly all game? I believe the Bulls did worse when Harper was out that game.

Make the difference between a second round exit and a championship?

Name one basketball legend who retired right before the season began of his own accord (which excludes Magic who was forced to retire). :oldlol: @ comparing that to run-of-the-mill injuries that happen every year.

Having three players(Doc Rivers, John Starks, Hubert Davis) miss a combined 113 games is considered "run-of-the-mill" injuries?

Easy: Myers was a scrub. Harper was a legit NBA starter.

Yet Myers managed to outplay Harper in game 7. Honestly, I found their performances in that series very similar. Harper that season wasn't as superior to Myers as you make him out to be, at least for that year.

:oldlol: @ the new MJ fan talking point on Harper. Fights happen. Maybe the 97' Knicks win it all if they don't have a slew of suspensions when they were leading Miami 3-1? Maybe the Suns win if the Cheap Shot Rob incident did not happen in 07'?

Fights do happen, but so do bad calls. Maybe the Lakers in 1988 don't win it all without those two free throws by Kareem or Chicago wins game 6 of the ECF in 1998 if Reggie Miller had been called for pushing off against Jordan.

That isn't what MJ fans are arguing.

No, it's what I'm arguing.

AirJordan23

02-09-2010, 11:37 PM

Likewise, the Knicks were robbed of one of their starters for two games and most of another. Fights do happen, but so do bad calls.

How can a guy who plays like this:

Make the difference between a second round exit and a championship?

Having three players(Doc Rivers, John Starks, Hubert Davis) miss a combined 113 games is considered "run-of-the-mill" injuries?

Yet Myers managed to outplay Harper in game 7. Honestly, I found their performances in that series very similar. Harper that season wasn't as superior to Myers as you make him out to be, at least for that year.

Fights do happen, but so do bad calls. Maybe the Lakers in 1988 don't win it all without those two free throws by Kareem or Chicago wins game 6 of the ECF in 1998 if Reggie Miller had been called for pushing off against Jordan.

No, it's what I'm arguing.

Just to let you know. You're arguing with a brick wall.

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 11:47 PM

They were inconsistent, hence 34-31. I use 45 as a ballpark figure. They realistically could have been anywhere in the 43-46 win range (43 wins=6th seed). What is your argument? That they may have went 5-12 without Jordan or something like that? They were on a 8-2 roll right before MJ came back and 11-6 after the all-star break pre-MJ. They were playing as well as they could.

When Garnett, Wade and Kobe led similarly weak teams to around 45 wins they were lionized; why is Pippen criticized?

I didn't argue anything. I was pointing out the weakness in your post. It's the same reason why I don't automatically crown the 94 Bulls as champions if the foul on Pippen had never been called. Games have to be played, injuries, suspensions could happen, etc.

You don't/can't really know what could have happened.

Who said it was nothing?

You guys in the Kareem = GOAT thread.

ILLsmak

02-09-2010, 11:47 PM

There's not really anybody because what made Pip greater than guys like Odom and Iggy is the fact Pip was a knock down shooter.

I'd put Tayshaun higher than those two in comparison, but Tay can't really push the point.

-Smak

Roundball_Rock

02-09-2010, 11:48 PM

I think Pippen is criticized more because the previous season he led virtually the same team (minus Horace Grant) to 50+ W's. Wade, Garnett and Kobe had weaker talent across the board, don't you agree? BTW, this isn't a knock on him. He did an awesome job in 1994.

It wasn't the same team, though. They lost their second best player. That left them with a 5 rpg softie as their starting PF (Kukoc, good offensive player but a joke on the glass considering his height and not exactly an imposing interior defender) and we all know their weakness at C.

I don't know about weaker talent. Maybe, maybe not but the gap was not huge. If anyone on that level (great, but not a top-tier great) else did that they would be lauded. Wade had Shawn Marion and Michael Beasely, Kobe Lamar Odom, Garnett Terrell Brandon and Wally Z when Z was an all-star plus Billups. Pippen had Kukoc as his second best player and BJ Armstrong. Surely Kukoc/Armstrong is comparable to the above players, other than what Kobe had but Odom is better than Kukoc ever was--especially second year Kukoc.

Pippen doesn't get credit because he is underrated retrospectively. How many people on ISH know that Pippen was a superstar in his own right? Don't take my word for it. Look at all-NBA voters.

1) Malone (F) 519
2) Robinson (C) 479
3) Pippen (F) 451
4) Stockton (G) 447
5) P. Hardaway (G) 394

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/12/sp...s-all-nba.html

And Pippen was #1, as usual, in all-D voting. That isn't a superstar? If you add a player like that to practically any team they were going to become respectable.

Yet what we hear now is Penny>>Pippen, Paul Pierce>>>>>>Pippen, Caron Butler=Pippen, Stockton>>>Pippen, Pippen was never a top 5 player (even though K. Malone was during Pip's best years), 94' and 95' Barkley>94' and 95' Pippen, etc.

I forgot to mention Durant. He is leading his team to 7th place and is ISH's new hero. He has scrubs they say. True (in the relative sense of course), but Westbrook/Green is comparable to Kukoc/Armstrong, no?

Edit: add Gasol leading Memphis to 45 and 50 wins.

The narrative is Pippen was overrated, a borderline top 10 player if he played today. 94' was a mysterious fluke over the course of 72 games. 95'! Now that is the real Pippen record. Let's get real. No one was going to win 55 games with that 95' team other than some of the top-tier greats but we are talking about second and third tier greats here.

Likewise, the Knicks were robbed of one of their starters for two games and most of another. Fights do happen, but so do bad calls.

Yeah, that was a run-of-the-mill bad call. :rolleyes:

Make the difference between a second round exit and a championship?

By being an upgrade over Myers.

Having three players(Doc Rivers, John Starks, Hubert Davis) miss a combined 113 games is considered "run-of-the-mill" injuries?

Do you watch basketball? Look around the L at all the injuries. The 94' Bulls had numerous injuries as well.

:oldlol: @ including Rivers. He was quickly replaced--by Harper via a trade.

Yet Myers managed to outplay Harper in game 7. Honestly, I found their performances in that series very similar. Harper that season wasn't as superior to Myers as you make him out to be, at least for that year.

Wow. One game. :applause: Phil Jackson thinks Harper would be a substantial upgrade but what does he know? I bet he said that in 1994 to prop up Kobe 16 years later.

Maybe the Lakers in 1988 don't win it all without those two free throws by Kareem or Chicago wins game 6 of the ECF in 1998 if Reggie Miller had been called for pushing off against Jordan.

And the 88' call is rightfully remember as an egregious call. :oldlol: @ acting as if this was an ordinary bad call which happens in every game. Why did you mention Miller pushing off in 98' but not Jordan? Do you know why neither call was made? Playoff games should not be decided by refs. That is why. Plus, pushing off is a more legit foul than the joke one called on Pippen.

The only "Bulls fans" who defend and/or downplay the Hollins calls are Jordan fans. Gee, I wonder why. :rolleyes:

I didn't argue anything. I was pointing out the weakness in your post. It's the same reason why I don't automatically crown the 94 Bulls as champions if the foul on Pippen had never been called. Games have to be played, injuries, suspensions could happen, etc.

You don't/can't really know what could have happened.

Who said they were automatic champs? I have said they probably make the NBA finals in 94' and lose to the Rockets if it weren't for the call. Based on the available evidence this is the most likely scenario, although they may have lost to the Pacers or beat the Rockets (2-1 in the Pippen-era with Pippen against the Rockets).

In the Kareem thread the argument was more about Jordan from 1985-1988 than 1989 and 1990. Jordan is called the GOAT. He should be held to a higher standard than the 90's version of Caron Butler. Do you expect the same things from Peyton Manning as you do from McNabb?

Mister JT

02-09-2010, 11:59 PM

Pippen doesn't get credit because he is underrated retrospectively. How many people on ISH know that Pippen was a superstar in his own right?

I think Pippen's rating actually went up after his retirement. And not just on ISH.

As I said in one of my posts in this thread, in 97 when the original top 50 was created, I think many people had Pip in the high 30s to low 40s. In 2003, SLAM had Scottie at 41 in their top 75. In their latest top 50 list, SLAM put Pippen at 27.

I think the reason for this is that after all this time, people have had a hard time finding a player similar to Pippen. The posters on this thread are having the same problem finding Pippen's modern-day equivalent. It is proof of Pippen's all-around game and uniqueness as player. IMO, that's why Pippen shot up to 27.

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 12:12 AM

I think Pippen's rating actually went up after his retirement. And not just on ISH.

As I said in one of my posts in this thread, in 97 when the original top 50 was created, many people had Pip in the high 30s to low 40s. In 2003, SLAM had Scottie at 41 in their top 75. In their latest top 50 list, SLAM put Pippen at 27.

So did Payton, D. Robinson, and Rodman in the same ranking (although Ewing went down 8 spots). This happens all the time. I bet Shaq will move up too when he retires and people get some perspective on his career. So will Duncan. The same trend occurs outside of basketball rankings. In presidential rankings it happens too. Reagan went from mid-pack to 9th-10th on average in a decade; Clinton from mid-pack to 15th in about five years. This happens because you can better assess a record when it is complete, when emotion is minimized as a factor. Pippen and Rodman were disliked by many people for various reasons so it is not surprising they were among those who moved up significantly.

I think the reason for this is that after all this time, people have had a hard time finding a player similar to Pippen. The posters on this thread are having the same problem finding Pippen's modern-day equivalent. It is proof of Pippen's all-around game and uniqueness as player. IMO, that's why Pippen shot up to 27.

Good point. I think that also is a factor, although I never thought of this until your brought it up. The biggest knock on him is "anyone" could have won in his position playing with Jordan. This thread shows why you could not plug in just any all-star SF and expect the same results. I'm not saying MJ would never win a ring with Schrempf or Rice but there is no way they win anywhere near 6. (yes, I believe MJ would win a ring with Schrempf)

He isn't underrated by "experts." Look at Simmons' book, Slam, or Kalb's book (had Pip #29 in 03' so presumably he would have him top 25 if he wrote an update). He is underrated by a lot of fans, especially because of "option" fetishism. A lot of people think he could not function as a "#1 option", which is idiotic. Joe Johnson, Gasol, Bosh, and Roy are just a few people who most would agree clearly are inferior to Pippen who have done well as "#1 options." Yet Pippen couldn't? Where were these people in 94' and 95'? Look at the 94' all-NBA vote:

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

He was #1 in all-D voting too. How could a mere "sidekick" do that? He finished ahead of big, bad "#1 options". He crushed Malone, a direct competitor of his at the forward position as well as Barkley. These were "#1 options." True "alpha dogs." "Guys who could carry a team." Throw in all the other cliches. :oldol:

If you polled ISH today, though, on whether Pippen was ever a top 5 player I bet most people would say he wasn't even though the above suggests he was more than a borderline top 5 player. There were people then who had him as high as #2 and #3 (the reason he beat Hakeem in the 94' all-NBA vote is Robinson took a lot of votes away from Hakeem).

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 12:13 AM

Yeah, that was a run-of-the-mill bad call. Name ONE playoff game in the 90's other than that one which was decided on such a "foul"? Hollins practically gift-wrapped the win to the Knicks since Davis was one of the best FT shooters in the L.

It was a game 5 and the Bulls won by 14 the next game. The series wasn't over at that point.

By being an upgrade over Myers.

How so? He got his butt whooped by him in Game 7, the deciding game.

Do you watch basketball? Look around the L at the injuries. The 94' Bulls had numerous injuries as well.

113 games worth?

Wow. One game. :applause: Phil Jackson thinks Harper would be a substantial upgrade but what does he know? I bet he said that in 1994 to prop up Kobe 16 years later.

That "final piece to the championship" got owned in a deciding game 7 by a D-Leaguer and all you can give me is a sarcastic applause emoticon?

And the 88' call is rightfully remember as an egregious call. :oldlol: @ acting as if this was an ordinary bad call which happens in every game. Why did you mention Miller pushing off in 98' but not Jordan?

What's the point in mentioning Jordan? I gave you two examples of bad calls made, how many do you need? I guess I must also be a Pistons homer since I didn't mention any calls made in their favor, either. :oldlol:

Do you know why neither call was made? Playoff games should not be decided by refs. That is why. Plus, pushing off is a more legit foul than the joke one called on Pippen.

Uh, the call was made in 1988. Kareem made those two free throws due to an alleged "phantom foul", and a bad call is a bad call no matter how much you break it down.

The only "Bulls fans" who defend and/or downplay the Hollins calls are Jordan fans. Gee, I wonder why. :rolleyes: Forget 94'.

Nice cheap shot at my loyalty to the Bulls, very insightful and informative. :applause:

Sorry if I was too busy celebrating during that second three-peat.

spree43

02-10-2010, 12:21 AM

Kobe/Iguodala

Igi's offense skills and athleticism, Kobe's defense, passing ability/offensive intangibles and intensity on the court

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 12:28 AM

It was a game 5 and the Bulls won by 14 the next game. The series wasn't over at that point.

:rolleyes:

Where was "the next game"? You like to do research. Research this: how many teams won a Game 7 on the road from 1982-1994. There were 20 such games. How many did the road team win?

How so? He got his butt whooped by him in Game 7, the deciding game.

What are you talking about? Myers was a SG. His direct opponent was Starks, not Harper. Who cares about one game? Gibson outplayed Billups in the close-out game of the 07' ECF. I guess that means a career bench player like Gibson>a several time all-star like Billups?

Uh, the call was made in 1988. Kareem made those two free throws due to an alleged "phantom foul", and a bad call is a bad call no matter how much you break it down.

Yeah, and why is that call remembered two decades later? It was an exception. It was egregious. If calls like that were routine no one would remember it, or the Hollins call, or even the LJ 4 point play in 99'.

Nice cheap shot at my loyalty to the Bulls,

It is what it is. I have only seen three "Bulls fans" defend/downplay that call. All of them are MJ fans. I suppose that is just a coincidence.

juju151111

02-10-2010, 12:31 AM

Pippen isn't even better then KD if he comes back know.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 12:41 AM

:rolleyes:

Where was "the next game"? You like to do research. Research this: how many teams won a Game 7 on the road from 1982-1994. There were 20 such games. How many did the road team win?

As if the Bulls had never won a series-deciding game on the road at that point. :oldlol:

What are you talking about? Myers was a SG. His direct opponent was Starks, not Harper.

Wasn't Harper a combo guard? Otherwise, why would Chicago want him to replace Myers if he didn't play the same position?

Who cares about one game? Gibson outplayed Billups in the close-out game of the 07' ECF. I guess that means a career bench player like Gibson>a several time all-star like Billups?

Not for their overall careers, no, but that is an entirely different comparison. Harper and Myers put up the same numbers that series and Derek missed two plus most of game three.

I am only referring to 1994, not to how they played in other years.

Yeah, and why is that call remembered two decades later? It was an exception. It was egregious. If calls like that were routine no one would remember it, or the Hollins call, or even the LJ 4 point play in 99'.

So then what do you wan to do? Shall we take away the Spurs' 2007 championship since the Suns lost Amare due to a poor call in the WSF? Bad calls suck, but you have to live with them. No matter how much you bitch about it, it's not like the NBA is going to go back and change it now. A 16 year old call in a game that is irrelevant at this point in time simply doesn't bother me.

It is what it is. I have only seen three "Bulls fans" defend/downplay that call. All of them are MJ fans. I suppose that is just a coincidence.

:rolleyes:

You're right, it's all a conspiracy against Scottie.

Duncan21formvp

02-10-2010, 12:42 AM

Granger, Iggy, Prince, Deng

v3DreJ80

02-10-2010, 12:45 AM

I use to think it was Prince but I truly believe Prince is overrated. I give him much props for that hustle block on Reggie Miller in the 2004 Playoffs, but the guy is just not that good.

Here's Pippen's own take on his modern day equivelent in 2005.

Bryan Matti Detroit: Which player in the NBA do you think reminds you of yourself and why?

Scottie Pippen: That's a tough call. I'd like to say Tayshaun Prince, but he is lefty. But he is long and has similar characteristics... but he wasn't probably pushed into the area I was....as a point-forward. Some people say Tracy McGrady... who I don't think is really like me at all. Sometimes folks say Lamar Odom, but I don't see the speed and energy in Lamar. And even if my offense was not working that night, I made my contributions on the defensive end...which you don't see alot. Also, I see some guys trying to compare people to Michael Jordan. One thing I can say on that, is that unless you perform at the top level on both ends of the court, on the offense and on the defensive end...you cannot begin to compare a guy's game to Michael's, because of what he did on the defensive end of the

InspiredLebowski

02-10-2010, 12:45 AM

People've really got to end this Granger Pippen comparison. It makes absolutely no sense. Maybe there were similarities during the draft, but not now that we're 5 years in. Not at all. I mean really, other than being a bit light skinned and fairly similar build, find one.

Bigsmoke

02-10-2010, 12:45 AM

magnax1

02-10-2010, 12:46 AM

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 12:49 AM

As if the Bulls had never won a series-deciding game on the road at that point.

Number of Game 7's from 1982-1994: 20
Number of times the road team won: 0

Wasn't Harper a combo guard? Otherwise, why would Chicago want him to replace Myers if he didn't play the same position?

It doesn't matter. Myers was matched up against Starks. I guess Myers>Starks too since he outplayed Starks in Game 7. :oldlol:

Ok. Pete Myers>Harper. That is exactly why Jackson and Pippen wanted Harper to replace Myers but what do they know? That is exactly why Myers was out the league in the previous two seasons.

If Myers was as good as you allege why was he never a starter anywhere else? Why was he out the league at any point? If Jordan retired in a normal fashion Myers would never have even been on a NBA roster in 94' let alone a starter.

s. Pippen in his prime, is equal to Payton in his prime. Nobody has Payton in their top 30, but if you stick him with Jordan and those stacked teams they probably would.
Pippen was a great, top ten player in the league in the 90's, and was probably the best second fiddle ever, but is not in the league of a superstar, and couldnt (and didn't) win a championship without Jordan. He had at minimum one chance, and in reality three chances where he was in/near his prime.

:roll: @ this coming from a Stockton fan! Pippen was a "second fiddle" who showed up in NBA finals...if Pippen was not a superstar how could Stockton?

How many rings did Jordan win without Pippen? How many rings did Stockton win with arguably the GOAT PF? 18 years, 9 first round losses, 0 rings. What a lame argument. :oldlol: @ saying Pippen in 99' or 2000 was anywhere near prime Pippen. A Jazz fan should know what happened to him since it was Malone who caused the injury that ruined Pippen forever.

If Pippen was not in the league of a superstar how did this happen?

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1994

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

I guess Malone was not a superstar in 94'?

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1995

1) Malone (F) 519
2) Robinson (C) 479
3) Pippen (F) 451
4) Stockton (G) 447
5) P. Hardaway (G) 394

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/12/sp...s-all-nba.html

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1996

1) Jordan (G) 113 (unanimous)
2) Pippen (F) 91
3) Hardaway (G) 90
4) Malone (F) 89
5) Robinson (C) 65

Since we know there were 113 voters Pippen received 81% of the vote. He got hurt during the final fifth of the season and his production declined so that surely cost him some votes. The margin between him and #3 and #4 would be greater if he didn't get hurt. Still, the guy gets hurt and averages 15 ppg for one-fifth of the season (21-22 ppg before that) and he still gets more votes than anyone not named Jordan.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/24/sp...tar-again.html

This is voting for the all-NBA team. Regarding the all-Defensive team, Pippen received the most votes in 1994. And in 1995. And in 1996. Yes, also in 1997. So to recap, these were his finishes during his peak:

All-NBA voting: 1st, 3rd, 2nd
All-Defensive voting: 1st, 1st, 1st

But he wasn't a superstar. :roll: If he wasn't then the league was a joke back then.

D.J.

02-10-2010, 12:53 AM

i do not see how prime scottie pippen was the best SF in the 90s

He is overall the best SF since he played at a high level though out the decade but i he wasnt the best SF to every step on the court during that era.

90-94 Dominique Wilkins > Pippen

Dominique was a better scorer, that's it. Pippen had better handles, was capable of playing multiple positions, could guard multiple positions, and was much better on defense.

Desperado

02-10-2010, 12:56 AM

How many times do we have to go over this. Pippen in his prime, is equal to Payton in his prime. Nobody has Payton in their top 30, but if you stick him with Jordan and those stacked teams they probably would.
Pippen was a great, top ten player in the league in the 90's, and was probably the best second fiddle ever, but is not in the league of a superstar, and couldnt (and didn't) win a championship without Jordan. He had at minimum one chance, and in reality three chances where he was in/near his prime.

really though?

A CBA scrub toke Jordan's place when he retired and Pippen still lead the Bulls to 55 games and a deep playoff run. (That's more then Jordan ever did without Pippen. btw)

Imagine if Jordan didn't wait to retire at the last minute. They could have picked up a better free agent. Then all they would have needed was some bum off the street to play SG in Jordan's place and they probably go on to win a title!

Its hard to believe the 'clear GOAT' is only worth 2 more wins to his team. They went from 57 wins to 55 after he retired and had to replace him with a D-League scrub because he waited till the last minute to retire. So just think what could have happed if they picked a better free agent instead of a D-League scrub to take his place.

And to make it worse Pete Myers hadn't played in the NBA for 5 years before coming to the Bulls to take Jordan's place!

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 12:59 AM

Dominique was a better scorer, that's it. Pippen had better handles, was capable of playing multiple positions, could guard multiple positions, and was much better on defense.

:oldlol: @ Dominique being better than Pippen. The Hawks were tied with the Bulls for first place in the East in 94' by the all-star break. The Hawks traded Wilkins for Danny Manning! If he was so great why would a title contender trade him for Danny Manning?

A CBA scrub toke Jordan's place when he retired and Pippen still lead the Bulls to 55 games and a deep playoff run. (That's more then Jordan ever did without Pippen. btw)

And that is more than Stockton did WITH Malone in 94'. :oldlol: @ these people acting as if 55 wins grow on trees. A Stockton fan should know this since it isn't as if the Jazz were winning 60 games every year even with malone and Stockton, not Horace Grant as their #2 guy.

Desperado

02-10-2010, 01:00 AM

Scottie Pippen's record in seasons without MJ: 317-225 (.585)
20-23 in the playoffs

MJ's record in seasons without Pippen: 182-228 (.444)
1-9 in the playoffs

Jordan was replaced by a CBA journeyman named Pete Myers and Scottie without MJ won 55 games (only lost 2 more games then the year before with MJ)

Plus, they even make it to the 2nd round of the playoffs, with Scottie, and without Michael...which is better than they ever did with Michael/but without Scottie...In 1994, Scottie became the 2nd player in NBA history to lead his team in scoring, rebounding, assists, blocks and steals... yeah, Michael made him better. :rolleyes:

Jordan played five years of his career without Pippen. ALL FIVE WERE LOSING TEAMS.

As a great man once said, without Scottie Pippen, Jordan was nothing more than a bald-headed Dominique Wilkins.

The Bulls dropped TWO GAMES after losing the "greatest player of all time" :oldlol: Yeah, right

Remembered that they won 55 without Michael but with Scottie, which is fine... how'd they do WITH Michael but WITHOUT Scottie? Let's check:

38, 30 and 40 wins... that's it... aw, that's too bad... 40 wins is SO CLOSE to a .500 season, I'd almost want to give Michael credit for a winning season that year... but I can't... a loser is a loser. I can't change the laws of mathematics... if you lose more games than you win, you're a LOSER! And that's what Michael was without Scottie as a teammate... sorry if the truth hurts, but you jordan jockers (hopefully) will get over it.

v3DreJ80

02-10-2010, 01:00 AM

i do not see how prime scottie pippen was the best SF in the 90s

He is overall the best SF since he played at a high level though out the decade but i he wasnt the best SF to every step on the court during that era.

90-94 Dominique Wilkins > Pippen
:oldlol: Did you ever watch Scottie Pippen play? In his late 90s for that matter? :oldlol:

magnax1

02-10-2010, 01:00 AM

:roll: @ this coming from a Stockton fan! Pippen was a "second fiddle" who showed up in NBA finals...

How many rings did Jordan win without Pippen? What a lame argument. :oldlol: @ saying Pippen in 99' or 2000 was anywhere near prime Pippen. A Jazz fan should know what happened to him.

If Pippen was not in the league of a superstar how did this happen?

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1994

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1995

1) Malone (F) 519
2) Robinson (C) 479
3) Pippen (F) 451
4) Stockton (G) 447
5) P. Hardaway (G) 394

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/12/sp...s-all-nba.html

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1996

1) Jordan (G) 113 (unanimous)
2) Pippen (F) 91
3) Hardaway (G) 90
4) Malone (F) 89
5) Robinson (C) 65

Since we know there were 113 voters Pippen received 81% of the vote. He got hurt during the final fifth of the season and his production declined so that surely cost him some votes. The margin between him and #3 and #4 would be greater if he didn't get hurt. Still, the guy gets hurt and averages 15 ppg for one-fifth of the season (21-22 ppg before that) and he still gets more votes than anyone not named Jordan.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/24/sp...tar-again.html

This is voting for the all-NBA team. Regarding the all-Defensive team, Pippen received the most votes in 1994. And in 1995. And in 1996. Yes, also in 1997. So to recap, these were his finishes during his peak:

All-NBA voting: 1st, 3rd, 2nd
All-Defensive voting: 1st, 1st, 1st

Scottie may never have been a top 5 player but if he wasn't he sure had a lot of people fooled at the time.
Why does it matter if Jordan didn't win a ring without Pippen? His teams sucked before Pippen got there, and continued to suck for Pippens first couple of years.
By your logic sprewell was a top 5 player in 94. By your logic Lebron was the second bets defender in the league last year.
And Pippen in 99 & 00 was at minimum 90% of the player he was in 98. He was just as good of a passer, and defender, and nearly as good of a scorer, but was no longer the second option. He was moved from second option in chicago, to third in Houston to fourth or fifth in Portland.
Lastly you've failed to differentiate Pippen from Payton at all. Why would Pippen be any different from Payton if he didn't have Jordan?

Bigsmoke

02-10-2010, 01:01 AM

Number of Game 7's from 1982-1994: 20
Number of times the road team won: 0

It doesn't matter. Myers was matched up against Starks. I guess Myers>Starks too since he outplayed Starks in Game 7. :oldlol:

Ok. Pete Myers>Harper. That is exactly why Jackson and Pippen wanted Harper to replace Myers but what do they know? That is exactly why Myers was out the league in the previous two seasons.

If Myers was as good as you allege why was he never a starter anywhere else? Why was he out the league at any point? If Jordan retired in a normal fashion Myers would never have even been on a NBA roster in 94' let alone a starter.

:roll: @ this coming from a Stockton fan! Pippen was a "second fiddle" who showed up in NBA finals...if Pippen was not a superstar how could Stockton?

How many rings did Jordan win without Pippen? How many rings did Stockton win with arguably the GOAT PF? 18 years, 9 first round losses, 0 rings. What a lame argument. :oldlol: @ saying Pippen in 99' or 2000 was anywhere near prime Pippen. A Jazz fan should know what happened to him since it was Malone who caused the injury that ruined Pippen forever.

If Pippen was not in the league of a superstar how did this happen?

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1994

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

I guess Malone was not a superstar in 94'?

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1995

1) Malone (F) 519
2) Robinson (C) 479
3) Pippen (F) 451
4) Stockton (G) 447
5) P. Hardaway (G) 394

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/12/sp...s-all-nba.html

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1996

1) Jordan (G) 113 (unanimous)
2) Pippen (F) 91
3) Hardaway (G) 90
4) Malone (F) 89
5) Robinson (C) 65

Since we know there were 113 voters Pippen received 81% of the vote. He got hurt during the final fifth of the season and his production declined so that surely cost him some votes. The margin between him and #3 and #4 would be greater if he didn't get hurt. Still, the guy gets hurt and averages 15 ppg for one-fifth of the season (21-22 ppg before that) and he still gets more votes than anyone not named Jordan.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/24/sp...tar-again.html

This is voting for the all-NBA team. Regarding the all-Defensive team, Pippen received the most votes in 1994. And in 1995. And in 1996. Yes, also in 1997. So to recap, these were his finishes during his peak:

All-NBA voting: 1st, 3rd, 2nd
All-Defensive voting: 1st, 1st, 1st

But he wasn't a superstar. :roll: If he wasn't then the league was a joke back then.

whatever, give me Malone over Pippen anyday

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 01:02 AM

Number of Game 7's from 1982-1994: 20
Number of times the road team won: 0

1991 and 1993 Chicago finished the Finals on the road. No excuses.

It doesn't matter. Myers was matched up against Starks. I guess Myers>Starks too since he outplayed Starks in Game 7. :oldlol:

So much for Pippen not having much help, huh? :oldlol:

Ok. Pete Myers>Harper. That is exactly why Jackson and Pippen wanted Harper to replace Myers but what do they know? That is exactly why Myers was out the league in the previous two seasons.

Ok, so then you acknowledge that Harper's absence affected New York in games four and five? If not, then how was he so much better than Meyers if he had such little impact? That does not sound like a guy who can elevate a second rounder to a championship, imo.

If Myers was as good as you allege why was he never a starter anywhere else? Why was he out the league at any point? If Jordan retired in a normal fashion Myers would never have even been on a NBA roster in 94' let alone a starter.

Yet he still managed to outplay John Starks and Derek Harper in a pivotal game 7. :oldlol:

Bigsmoke

02-10-2010, 01:04 AM

:oldlol: Did you ever watch Scottie Pippen play? In his late 90s for that matter? :oldlol:

i used to watch all of his games for free here :confusedshrug:

Dominique Wilkins was a more nasty player every in his early 30's then Pippen was. Just they way could take over game was beyond sick. I always thought Pippent was overrated.

D.J.

02-10-2010, 01:05 AM

Desperado

02-10-2010, 01:06 AM

magnax1

02-10-2010, 01:07 AM

Maybe because his teams sucked? Thought its not like Pippen did anything in 88.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 01:09 AM

If Pippen was just a mere role player like you Jordan worshipers claim then why is it that Michael Jordan never even had a winning season without Pippen?

1985: 38-44
1986: 30-52
1987: 40-42
2002: 37-45
2003: 37-45

The records don't lie. Without Pippen, Jordan was a LOSER!

I guess Hakeem Olajuwon is a total loser, too because he never made the Finals without Ralph Sampson or Robert Horry. :oldlol: Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound?

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 01:12 AM

Why does it matter if Jordan didn't win a ring without Pippen?

It shows the idiocy of the argument.

By your logic sprewell was a top 5 player in 94.

All-NBA voting is done on a position basis, which is why Pippen beat Hakeem (Robinson took votes away from him). Sprewell would not be all-NBA first team as a forward or center.

All-NBA voters are not all Pippen homers or in the tank for Kobe as far back as 94'. How did Pippen CRUSH the great Karl Malone? They were direct competitors at the forward position. He was close to Malone again in 95' and beat him in 96'. How can a non-superstar do this against the possible GOAT PF? Malone was not a "superstar" those years?

And Pippen in 99 & 00 was at minimum 90% of the player he was in 98.

:roll: Did you ever watch Pippen play? You didn't watch him in 99' or 00' that's for sure.

Q: “When you had the back problem in the ’98 Finals I was actually going through the exact same thing at that time in terms of a bulging L5-S1 disk and the radiculopathy, the pain going down the leg. That type of injury makes it so that you can barely move—“

Pippen: “It was something, I won’t say that it was career threatening, but it challenged me a lot. It challenged me to understand how to play with pain.”

Q: “Was that the worst pain you ever had?”

Pippen: “Oh, no question. I knew I didn’t want to go to a game seven. I knew that my team needed me. I didn’t think that they could win without me, maybe that’s just personal.”

Q: “You gutted it out in that game. If you look at the box score, it might not show everything you did, but you played the point guard—“

Pippen: “I was productive. I could have been more productive, could have done a lot more if I had been healthy.”

Q: “You were having a fantastic series before that point.”

Pippen: “Right. That injury really set me back.”

Q: “Do you feel that the back surgery you had in that off-season took away some of your athleticism?”

Pippen: “No question. I was 11 years in my career, had already had five or six surgeries at that point, two on my back, both ankles.”

Q: “Did they do a complete discectomy?”

Pippen: “No, no. They just took the herniated part away from the nerve to relieve the pressure.”

Q: “In ’98 it was two disks, right?”

Pippen: “Yeah, two disks.”

Q: “A lot of people don’t take things like that into account when they look at your time in Portland or try to assess what you have done without Michael.”

Pippen: “I was an older player by that time. You look at any player once they get over 10, 11 years in this league, especially a guy like me—I mean by the time I had 11 years in the league my body was probably facing 14 years because of the playoffs and the Olympics. So I had started to slow down a little bit, but I still had a pretty strong game. I understood the game well enough to be very effective. I could be effective in a game without scoring; I could affect a game that much.”

http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2005/12/chicago-bulls-retire-scottie-pippens.html

The thing I don't understand is how you can be such a big Stockton fan and such an anti-Pippen person. Your arguments against Pippen fly right back at Stockton, especially the "sidekick" obsession. Yet you talk about Stockton's importance on utah but downplay Pippen's.

whatever, give me Malone over Pippen anyday

:oldlol: @ taking Malone over Pippen in a NBA finals or in 94'.

I said Pippen was better. I said the only thing Dominique had on him was scoring.

I was talking about the guy who said Wilkins>Pippen, not you.

Dominique Wilkins was a more nasty player every in his early 30's then Pippen was.

:roll:

Quit playing dumb, allhaze. No one is dumb enough to think Myers>Starks based on one game. Face it: Jordan's record is what it is. Deal with it. Everyone knows Myers was a scrub--even Myers.

Harper>Myers. Post a thread on this. You won't find a single no0n-MJ fan say Myers was better.

That does not sound like a guy who can elevate a second rounder to a championship, imo.

And? I'll take Jackson's opinion over yours. Too bad Jackson didn't realize how "great" Myers was. :oldlol:

Yet he still managed to outplay John Starks and Derek Harper in a pivotal game 7.

No one can be this dumb. Gibson outplayed Billups, Hamilton, Lebron in an elimination game. I guess he is a GOAT candidate, not a career bench player. Are you trolling or simply so warped toward Jordan that you will hold absurd positions like Myers>Harper (and Wennington>Cartwright, 94' Barkley>94' Pippen, etc.)?

magnax1

02-10-2010, 01:18 AM

It shows the idiocy of the argument.
It shows the Idiocy of you're arguement. Garnett never made it past the first round without Sam Cassel or Paul Pierce. Pierce=Garnett Cassell=Garnett

All-NBA voting is done on a position basis, which is why Pippen beat Hakeem (Robinson took votes away from him). Sprewell would not be all-NBA first team as a forward or center.

All-NBA voters are not all Pippen homers or in the tank for Kobe as far back as 94'. How did Pippen CRUSH the great Karl Malone? They were direct competitors at the forward position. He was close to Malone again in 95' and beat him in 96'. How can a non-superstar do this against the possible GOAT PF? Malone was not a "superstar" those years?

:roll: Did you ever watch Pippen play? You didn't watch him in 99' or 00' that's for sure.

http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2005/12/chicago-bulls-retire-scottie-pippens.html

The thing I don't understand is how you can be such a big Stockton fan and such an anti-Pippen person. Your arguments against Pippen fly right back at Stockton, especially the "sidekick" obsession. Yet you talk about Stockton's importance on utah but downplay Pippen's.

Just answer this. What made Pippen better then Payton. What in Payton's game made him worse then Pippen?

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 01:23 AM

. Garnett never made it past the first round without Sam Cassel or Paul Pierce. Pierce=Garnett Cassell=Garnett

And? You pulled a statement out the blue. Did I say Jordan=Pippen? Jordan is top 3-4 all-time; Pippen top 20 imo.

What is with your Payton obsession? How did Pippen beat the great Karl Malone if he wasn't a superstar? The only logical responses are:

A) Pippen duped people across the country

B) Malone was not a superstar from 94'-96'

Which is it?

Payton was a superstar. :oldlol: @ using him as some sort of insult. I would take Payton over Stockton with money on the line that is for sure.

You are a Stockton fan who thinks Pippen was overrated because he was a "sidekick" (1994 and 1995 never happened). :wtf: Stockton never played without Malone so we don't know if he could lead his team to 45 wins let alone 55. You think Pippen "needed" another "superstar" to do well. That is a very odd statement to make from an alleged Stockton fan. Are you a MJ fan posing as a Stockton fan? :oldlol: It isn't that you are saying Pippen is overrated. Your arguments are very strange coming from a Stockton fan. It would be like a Shaq fan attacking Wilt as overrated based on Wilt's FT shooting. :oldlol:

juju151111

02-10-2010, 01:23 AM

Pippen still isn't better then KD round. LOL 10 rebs again. wat did i say about his rebounding??? Just goes to show you round is full of shit. 33pts,10rebs,3stls. LMAO better my ass.

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 01:24 AM

Maybe because his teams sucked? Thought its not like Pippen did anything in 88.
Pippen really didn't even become the type of Pippen the idiot above you is refering to until the 1990 REGULAR season. He still collapsed in crunch time and heated situations. He was a full fledged star caliber player in 1991. His first true year as a superstar caliber player. So technically he's right, but within context "Desperado" has no F'ing clue. Jordan dragged the Bulls on his shoulders with little to no significant game altering help until 1990 / 1991 - ish when late bloomers Pippen and Grant really started to utilize their potential.

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 01:25 AM

Jordan is top 3-4 all-time
:wtf:

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 01:25 AM

Quit playing dumb, allhaze. No one is dumb enough to think Myers>Starks based on one game. Face it: Jordan's record is what it is. Deal with it. Everyone knows Myers was a scrub--even Myers.

Harper>Myers. Post a thread on this. You won't find a single no0n-MJ fan say Myers was better.

And? I'll take Jackson's opinion over yours. Too bad Jackson didn't realize how "great" Myers was. :oldlol:

Ok, so you admit that Derek Harper was a good player. Thank you. Now, did his absence not vastly alter the way that series would have played out had he not been ejected in game 3? Surely a guy who was the final piece to a championship puzzle could have altered the results of games three and four, yes?

No one can be this dumb. Gibson outplayed Billups, Hamilton, Lebron in an elimination game. I guess he is a GOAT candidate, not a career bench player. Are you trolling or simply so warped toward Jordan that you will hold absurd positions like Myers>Harper (and Wennington>Cartwright, 94' Barkley>94' Pippen, etc.)?

I actually think Harper is better than Myers. See, first you downplay Harper's absence in the 94 semis and then you go on a tangent talking about how vastly superior Harper was to Myers. You want to claim that Pippen had no help and talk about how great Harper would have made the Bulls but don't want to have to admit that he would have changed that series in the Knicks' favor had he been allowed to play. It's such obvious Pippen fanboyism, no offense.

InspiredLebowski

02-10-2010, 01:26 AM

juju151111

02-10-2010, 01:28 AM

:wtf:
You haven't heard, other posters helped him relize MJ should drop 3 spots. LMFAO. Round is full of shit. He already admitted to be a hater of MJ. No coming back from that. Just another faketal.

magnax1

02-10-2010, 01:28 AM

And? You pulled a statement out the blue. Did I say Jordan=Pippen? Jordan is top 3-4 all-time; Pippen top 20 imo.

What is with your Payton obsession? How did Pippen beat the great Karl Malone if he wasn't a superstar? The only logical responses are:

A) Pippen duped people across the country

B) Malone was not a superstar from 94'-96'

Which is it?

Payton was a superstar. :oldlol: @ using him as some sort of insult. I would take Payton over Stockton with money on the line that is for sure.

You are a Stockton fan who thinks Pippen was overrated because he was a "sidekick" (1994 and 1995 never happened). :wtf: Stockton never played without Malone so we don't know if he could lead his team to 45 wins let alone 55. You think Pippen "needed" another "superstar" to do well. That is a very odd statement to make from an alleged Stockton fan. Are you a MJ fan posing as a Stockton fan? :oldlol: It isn't that you are saying Pippen is overrated. Your arguments are very strange coming from a Stockton fan. It would be like a Shaq fan attacking Wilt as overrated based on Wilt's FT shooting. :oldlol:
Im not insulting Payton or Pippen. I'm just saying that NOBODY has Payton ranked top 20. Payton is almost exactly the same player as Pippen. Why does Pippen rank Higher? He won more. Why did he win more? ...... figure it out. Its just that simple. I can't think of a logical reason that Pippen would be ranked much different then Payton.

I'm not a fan of any players. I'm a fan of the Utah Jazz. Stockton is my favorite player ever, because Malone was a choke artist and Stockton was the only consistant force for Utah in the playoffs. but I wouldn't want him to win if he had left the Jazz. Though that doesn't matter at all.
You always know you have someone cornered when they start insulting your favorite player for no reason,

D.J.

02-10-2010, 01:29 AM

I realize any answer is nothing but pure speculation, but say Pippen never plays with MJ, the trade doesn't happen and he's a Sonic. Is he still THE Scottie Pippen, did MJ's work ethic and determination have a huge effect on him?

The skills and potential were both there. Scottie would have still been a great player, but Jordan motivated him to maximize his potential. While I believe Scottie still would have been great, I don't think he would have reached his full potential if he was a Sonic.

Desperado

02-10-2010, 01:33 AM

:wtf:

I wouldn't even rank him that high considering his team replaced him with a D-League scrub (Pete Myers) that hadn't even played in the NBA for 5 years and they did just fine without him.

They had no choice but to bring in a CBA player to take his place because he waited till the last minute to retire so the Bulls couldn't pick up a better free agent.

So the Bulls win 55 games after they replace Jordan with a CBA journeyman so just imagine if they had had the chance to pick up a better free agent. Then all the Bulls would need was some bum off the street to play SG in Jordan's place and they go on to win a title.

The 'clear GOAT' retires and his team goes from 57 wins to 55 :oldlol:

:roll: Really though..... the 'clear GOAT' is only worth two wins to his team? yeah right

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 01:35 AM

:wtf:

? I also said MJ could win a ring with Detlef Schrempf in this thread.

Now, did his absence not vastly alter the way that series would have played out had he not been ejected in game 3?

The Knicks played better without him in that game. :oldlol: I believe the Knicks did not come on in that game until the 4th quarter.

Surely a guy who was the final piece to a championship puzzle could have altered the results of games three and four, yes?

Game 4? He was not worth erasing a double digit deficit. The Bulls needed TWO more points from the SG position and the Hollins call never would have mattered. Harper could give that. Even if he couldn't due to having a bad game he would add more to the team because he was at least somewhat of an offensive threat. Myers was a "defensive specialist."

first you downplay Harper's absence in the 94 semis and then you go on a tangent talking about how vastly superior Harper was to Myers.

And? What is the inconsistency? Myers was a scrub. John Salmons>>Myers. Does that mean Salmons would suddenly make the Knicks world beaters?

e would have changed that series in the Knicks' favor had he been allowed to play.

Maybe it would have--although not in 4 and as I said I believe the Knicks played better without him in Game 3. Even if it did so what? He got in a fight. That is his fault. :oldlol: @ comparing that to a phantom foul.

. You want to claim that Pippen had no help and talk about how great Harper would have made the Bulls

Phil Jackson said the same thing in 1994. Is he a Pippen homer?

I realize any answer is nothing but pure speculation, but say Pippen never plays with MJ, the trade doesn't happen and he's a Sonic. Is he still THE Scottie Pippen, did MJ's work ethic and determination have a huge effect on him?

Jordan is the one who gave Pippen a work ethic and determination. :rolleyes: The guy came from nowhere--worked as a freaking equipment manager handing out towels in college--yet had no work ethic and determination. Jordan taught him that.

Who knows. Maybe he develops more as "the man" (like Rose has with Ben Gordon gone and Rose being forced to take over 4th quarters), maybe he does worse since he doesn't get tips from MJ.

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 01:37 AM

? I also said MJ could win a ring with Detlef Schrempf in this thread.
Bro, at minimum ... and I mean if you had to rank someone over him (which until the point, there is NO player clearly better than Jordan) the absolute lowest you could go is number 2. And even #2 is a mighty stretch among anyone in the basketball knowing community. With context of history included. No one has ultimately matched his overall dominance and influence on the game in the most difficult eras of pro basketball when there was a level playing field athletically.

InspiredLebowski

02-10-2010, 01:37 AM

Jordan is the one who gave Pippen a work ethic and determination. :rolleyes: The guy came from nowhere--worked as a freaking equipment manager handing out towels in college--yet had no work ethic and determination. Jordan taught him that.

Who knows. Maybe he develops more as "the man" (like Rose has with Ben Gordon gone and Rose being forced to take over 4th quarters), maybe he does worse since he doesn't get tips from MJ.
Stop insinuating. I'm fully aware of Pip's history. You can't deny that playing off a guy of MJ's ilk doesn't rub off on players, no matter how determined they were to begin with.

catch24

02-10-2010, 01:39 AM

Yet what we hear now is Penny>>Pippen, Paul Pierce>>>>>>Pippen, Caron Butler=Pippen, Stockton>>>Pippen, Pippen was never a top 5 player (even though K. Malone was during Pip's best years), 94' and 95' Barkley>94' and 95' Pippen, etc. I forgot to mention Durant. He is leading his team to 7th place and is ISH's new hero. He has scrubs they say. True (in the relative sense of course), but Westbrook/Green is comparable to Kukoc/Armstrong, no?

I definitely don't agree with "Penny > Pippen" or "Pierce > Pippen". Did they have more potential? Yeah, probably. Caron Butler being better is hilariously ridiculous though. Durant has more "talent" surrounded by him but they are far less experienced. Gasol had a decent supporting cast around him too (better than Pippen's? IMO no, given the experience).

The narrative is Pippen was overrated, a borderline top 10 player if he played today. 94' was a mysterious fluke over the course of 72 games. 95'! Now that is the real Pippen record. Let's get real. No one was going to win 55 games with that 95' team other than some of the top-tier greats but we are talking about second and third tier greats here.

That's true. Do you know how Pipp was playing prior to Jordan returning?

Desperado

02-10-2010, 01:43 AM

I honestly wonder who is more important to there team in the win/loss column...... Mike Jordan or some guy on the street who never did anything

CLTHornets4eva

02-10-2010, 01:43 AM

And? You pulled a statement out the blue. Did I say Jordan=Pippen? Jordan is top 3-4 all-time; Pippen top 20 imo.

You are an idiot. Yeah Jordan was not very good :roll: . There were def. a couple people that would have owned him.

magnax1

02-10-2010, 01:44 AM

I honestly wonder who is more important to there team in the win/loss column...... Mike Jordan or some guy on the street who never did anything
Then you should go to the doctor as soon as possible.

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 01:51 AM

I'm just saying that NOBODY has Payton ranked top 20. Payton is almost exactly the same player as Pippen. Why does Pippen rank Higher? He won more.

That is very simplistic reasoning. Havelick was a similar player to Pippen. Why is Havelick usually ahead of Pippen? I guess it was all due to Bill Russell?

Plus you act as if Payton had scrub teams. His teams just underperformed in the playoffs, except for 96'. He was on several teams that won 55-64 games in the regular season.

Stockton was the only consistant force for Utah in the playoffs.

You always know you have someone cornered when they start insulting your favorite player for no reason,

:oldlol: @ me being "cornered." I am simply curious, just as you likely would be if ShaqAtttack3432 said Wilt was overrated because Wilt sucked at FT's. It isn't your position; it is the arguments that are odd.

The skills and potential were both there. Scottie would have still been a great player, but Jordan motivated him to maximize his potential.

Jordan motivated him? It was Pippen who went to Jordan for advice--not Jordan deciding to help him.

No one has ultimately matched his overall dominance and influence on the game in the most difficult eras of pro basketball when there was a level playing field athletically.

He definitely has the best resume but that does not automatically mean he is a better player.

You can't deny that playing off a guy of MJ's ilk doesn't rub off on players, no matter how determined they were to begin with.

Who else did it rub off on in Jordan's 16 years in as a player in the NBAl?

I definitely don't agree with "Penny > Pippen" or "Pierce > Pippen". Did they have more potential? Yeah, probably. Caron Butler being better is hilariously ridiculous though. Durant has more "talent" surrounded by him but they are far less experienced. Gasol had a decent supporting cast around him too (better than Pippen's? IMO no, given the experience).

Those were just examples. I meant they were comparably weak.

That's true. Do you know how Pipp was playing prior to Jordan returning?

Just as well as in 94'. He just didn't get the same publicity in 95' because of the lesser team record and then because of MJ's return. Statistically he was at 22/8/5/3 compared to 22/9/6/3 in 94'. His rebounding relative to the league was better in 95' than in 94', although his absolute number declined slightly from 8.7 to something like 8.5 before MJ came back. Pippen was in the top 20 in rebounding at various points in the season. He was at 8.4 before the all-star break, averaged 9.0 in February. Still, 8.4 means a tied for 19th in the league. That is remarkable for a small forward! When MJ came back his scoring fell to just under 20 ppg, rebounding to 7 I suppose because of the transition to MJ being back. In 96' when healthy he was back to normal, although his rebounding would never be the same numbers-wise because Rodman gobbled up so many boards.

You are an idiot. Yeah Jordan was not very good . There were def. a couple people that would have owned him.

Top 3-4 all-time is "not very good"? In what world? I agree, though, Kareem, Wilt, and Russell have NO cases over Jordan. I heard it on ESPn.

AmazingManning

02-10-2010, 01:52 AM

RR, check out the hypothetically Pippen thread I made, Just curious on your take man.

catch24

02-10-2010, 01:57 AM

Just as well as in 94'. He just didn't get the same publicity in 95' because of the lesser team record and then because of MJ's return. Statistically he was at 22/8/5/3 compared to 22/9/6/3 in 94'. His rebounding relative to the league was better in 95' than in 94', although his absolute number declined slightly from 8.7 to something like 8.5 before MJ came back. Pippen was in the top 20 in rebounding at various points in the season. He was at 8.4 before the all-star break, averaged 9.0 in February. Still, 8.4 means a tied for 19th in the league. That is remarkable for a small forward! When MJ came back his scoring fell to just under 20 ppg, rebounding to 7 I suppose because of the transition to MJ being back. In 96' when healthy he was back to normal, although his rebounding would never be the same numbers-wise because Rodman gobbled up so many boards.

Very. Those are some Lebron numbers there (minus the scoring, though if he wanted to shoot more it's definitely plausible to believe he could get around 25-26ppg). Just upped this game from '97: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJK-qEh2cdA -- Pippen's 3PT shooting is another facet of his game that gets overlooked.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 02:03 AM

The Knicks played better without him in that game. :oldlol: I believe the Knicks did not come on in that game until the 4th quarter.

Yet you think he can bring a team a championship. Like I said, if he mattered so little, then his presence on the Bulls wouldn't have meant much, now would it?

Game 4? He was not worth erasing a double digit deficit. The Bulls needed TWO more points from the SG position and the Hollins call never would have mattered. Harper could give that. Even if he couldn't due to having a bad game he would add more to the team because he was at least somewhat of an offensive threat. Myers was a "defensive specialist."

How do you know Harper would have scored those additional two points? Their numbers in that series are virtually identical.

And? What is the inconsistency? Myers was a scrub. John Salmons>>Myers. Does that mean Salmons would suddenly make the Knicks world beaters?

What is the inconsistency? You are claiming that a man who averaged numbers similar to a D-Leaguer in a 7 game playoff series and who apparently cannot make an impact in a playoff game was going to be the last piece for a second round team to make the Finals and win a championship? If he can't make a difference with the Knicks, what makes you think he would have with the Bulls?

Maybe it would have--although not in 4 and as I said I believe the Knicks played better without him in Game 3. Even if it did so what? He got in a fight. That is his fault. :oldlol: @ comparing that to a phantom foul.

:rolleyes:

Phil Jackson said the same thing in 1994. Is he a Pippen homer?

Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't. All we know is New York won.

juju151111

02-10-2010, 02:03 AM

Round you still didn't prove how pip is better then Durant.

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 02:09 AM

The amazing thing is he did all that while playing legendary defense. He became the only perimeter player in history to lead the league in defensive rating that year. The Bulls had the #2 defense in the league that year--even after losing Horace Grant. This was because Pippen had one of the best defensive seasons ever in 95'. It isn't as if Will Perdue and Kukoc were intimidating in the paint. It was Pip's perimeter havoc that was the main reason for it.

Yeah, I think the two players most like him today are Lebron and Iggy. Great point on his scoring. People compare it at face value while ignoring that he played the de facto PG role on his Chicago teams (and actual PG in Portland in 2002 and 2003). His primary job was to pass, not shoot. People take this into account for official PG's so why not with Pippen?

I'll check it out. He did develop a solid three point shot from 94' onward. He was never great but he was good enough to be a threat from there. There was nothing that he could not do. Add to this his perfect height, which allowed him to play and guard 4 positions and his speed which allowed him to keep up with speedy guards and you have an amazing player. This stuff does not show up on the stat sheet.

How do you know Harper would have scored those additional two points?

He wouldn't have to. He was more of a threat than Myers. That could have led to someone else scoring 2 more.

You are claiming that a man who averages numbers similar to a D-Leaguer and who apparently cannot make an impact in a playoff game was going to be the last piece for a second round team to make the Finals and win a championship?

Since when does 11=7? Harper averaged 11 ppg in the 94' playoffs. You are cherry picking a bad series for him. There you go. 11 ppg in the playoffs (that means something like 13 outside the Bulls series). That sure would help against Indiana and Houston!

If Harper was out for the entire series you would have somewhat of a point (although Harper screwing himself is hardly the same as one of the worst foul calls ever--and according to ESPN viewers the worst call in NBA history) but :oldlol: @ him being the difference in Game 4 and in Game 3 the Knicks played better without him.

All we know is New York won.

Obviously but it was not a normal situation with the freak call as MJ fans make it out to be. They were not a run-of-the-mill second round team. That series has an asterik around it.

Round you still didn't prove how pip is better then Durant.

No one is talking about KD in this thread other than you? :confusedshrug:

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 02:11 AM

Top 3-4 all-time is "not very good"? In what world? I agree, though, Kareem, Wilt, and Russell have NO cases over Jordan. I heard it on ESPn.
ESPN slobs EVERY great player. They don't make an exception for Jordan's case. You act like they have an agenda to make MJ the GOAT ... Why? He doesn't make a case for himself anyway? Jordan's perfect storm of individual dominance as a GUARD (both ends of the floor), team success, individual achievments, influence on the league I think makes the case for itself that he's a top two player by virtually ANYONE's standards. And in terms of actual players, I wouldn't take any one of those players over Jordan when building a team. I think Jordan has a resume that's more impressive than those three CENTERS in terms of his case for GOAT.

catch24

02-10-2010, 02:14 AM

Round you still didn't prove how pip is better then Durant.

Durant is a better scorer, but from an overall standpoint? Pip is just as good of a rebounder, in his prime (when healthy), just as an efficient scorer, better passer and 5x the defender KD is. Durant is still young man.

juju151111

02-10-2010, 02:15 AM

The amazing thing is he did all that while playing legendary defense. He became the only perimeter player in history to lead the league in defensive rating that year. The Bulls had the #2 defense in the league that year--even after losing Horace Grant. This was because Pippen had one of the best defensive seasons ever in 95'. It isn't as if Will Perdue and Kukoc were intimidating in the paint. It was Pip's perimeter havoc that was the main reason for it.

Yeah, I think the two players most like him today are Lebron and Iggy. Great point on his scoring. People compare it at face value while ignoring that he played the de facto PG role on his Chicago teams (and actual PG in Portland in 2002 and 2003). His primary job was to pass, not shoot. People take this into account for official PG's so why not with Pippen?

I'll check it out. He did develop a solid three point shot from 94' onward. He was never great but he was good enough to be a threat from there. There was nothing that he could not do. Add to this his perfect height, which allowed him to play and guard 4 positions and his speed which allowed him to keep up with speedy guards and you have an amazing player. This stuff does not show up on the stat sheet.

He wouldn't have to. He was more of a threat than Myers. That could have led to someone else scoring 2 more.

Since when does 11=7? Harper averaged 11 ppg in the 94' playoffs. You are cherry picking a bad series for him. There you go. 11 ppg in the playoffs (that means something like 13 outside the Bulls series). That sure would help against Indiana and Houston!

If Harper was out for the entire series you would have somewhat of a point (although Harper screwing himself is hardly the same as one of the worst foul calls ever--and according to ESPN viewers the worst call in NBA history) but :oldlol: @ him being the difference in Game 4 and in Game 3 the Knicks played better without him.

Obviously but it was not a normal situation with the freak call as MJ fans make it out to be. They were not a run-of-the-mill second round team. That series has an asterik around it.

No one is talking about KD in this thread other than you? :confusedshrug:
You can;t prove shit thats why you not respondng. Like i said before He isn't top 5 owned.

Anyways Alot of series has asterik. Magic was injured in 89. Does that mean the pistons cheated??Isiah was injured in 88?? GTFO with this BS. U don't want to count it because of a fight??? Your a dumb troll who overrates Pippen and drops MJ every few months. Pippen is robin and nting more. Mj,Hakeem,Shaq,KAJ, etc.. are batman

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 02:16 AM

ESPN slobs EVERY great player.

Timing matters. When is the last time you heard Wilt or Russell mentioned on ESPn? Kareem only gets mentioned when he gets cancer. Jordan was recent; he lives on in our memories. The others are historical figures.

think makes the case for itself that he's a top two player by virtually ANYONE's standards.

Why are you quibbling over top 2 or top 3-4?

And in terms of actual players, I wouldn't take any one of those players over Jordan when building a team.

I would take Jordan over Wilt and Jordan over Russell. The only guy I would draft over MJ is Kareem.

The Russell thing is hard to assess because he doesn't have the flash or scoring that other top-tier greats have but the guy won everywhere he went--even with teams that did nothing before him and did nothing after he left. Jordan is the better player but Russell's can't be summarily dismissed. He had something special about him.

Look at who I am comparing MJ to. I am in the ballpark with him. It isn't as if I am saying David Robinson>>>Jordan and Chris Webber=Jordan.

Durant is a better scorer, but from an overall standpoint? Pip is just as good of a rebounder, in his prime (when healthy), just as an efficient scorer, better passer and 5x the defender KD is. Durant is still young man.

Good points. I would say Pippen was a better rebounder than Durant at this point. Pippen was vying for top 20 in rebounding at his peak. How many SF's do that? The other top Sf's actually averaged 5-6 boards in 94' (Wilkins, Mullin, Schrempf, Mashburn) to Pip's 9. Durant may wind up being better--he probably will--but peak Pippen>third year Durant. For some reason juju is obsessed with this because I once said peak Pippen would be a top 5 player if he played today. :confusedshrug:

Pippen is robin and nting more.

Call me up when KD leads a team to the playoffs. What a "superman" he has been thus far!

Al Thornton

02-10-2010, 02:17 AM

scottie pippen stirs up the most sh*t on this site i swear, pretty funny

juju151111

02-10-2010, 02:18 AM

Durant is a better scorer, but from an overall standpoint? Pip is just as good of a rebounder, in his prime (when healthy), just as an efficient scorer, better passer and 5x the defender KD is. Durant is still young man.
Durant is the way better scorer. Durant defense has improved which is why the Thunder defensive stats have increase arcoss the board. LOL He said if Pip was playing now he would be better then Durant. He might be better at being 2nd fiddle

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 02:19 AM

I would take Jordan over Wilt and Jordan over Russell. The only guy I would draft over MJ is Kareem.
:roll:

catch24

02-10-2010, 02:19 AM

Durant is the way better scorer. Durant defense has improved which is why the Thunder defensive stats have increase arcoss the board. LOL He said if Pip was playing now he would be better then Durant. He might be better at being 2nd fiddle

Pippen was a top 10 player during the 90's. During that particular decade, do you believe Durant would of been "top 10"?

juju151111

02-10-2010, 02:20 AM

Timing matters. When is the last time you heard Wilt or Russell mentioned on ESPn? Kareem only gets mentioned when he gets cancer. Jordan was recent; he lives on in our memories. The others are historical figures.

Why are you quibbling over top 2 or top 3-4?

I would take Jordan over Wilt and Jordan over Russell. The only guy I would draft over MJ is Kareem.

The Russell thing is hard to assess because he doesn't have the flash or scoring that other top-tier greats have but the guy won everywhere he went--even with teams that did nothing before him and did nothing after he left. Jordan is the better player but Russell's can't be summarily dismissed. He had something special about him.

Look at who I am comparing MJ to. I am in the ballpark with him. It isn't as if I am saying David Robinson>>>Jordan and Chris Webber=Jordan.

Good points. I would say Pippen was a better rebounder than Durant at this point. Pippen was vying for top 20 in rebounding at his peak. How many SF's do that? The other top Sf's actually averaged 5-6 boards in 94' (Wilkins, Mullin, Schrempf, Mashburn) to Pip's 9
LOL Your a tool round. MJ is the clear Goat imo. The combination of everything he has can't be matched.

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 02:21 AM

The only guy I would draft over MJ is Kareem.
Why?

What makes Kareem significantly the easier choice over Jordan?

Because Jordan won as MUCH, while being the CLEAR cut best player on his team EVERY season ... where as Kareem doesn't even have that leg to stand on in terms of all of his team success.

I even think Jordan brings more to the game individually than what you can do with Kareem.

Jordan can do ANYTHING on the court. The same can't be said for Kareem.

juju151111

02-10-2010, 02:22 AM

Pippen was a top 10 player during the 90's. During that particular decade, do you believe Durant would of been "top 10"?
yeah, why not. I am sure you think KB would be a top 10 player playing back then in his prime right??Durant is not even close to his prime either. He is a 6'10 dirk who can dribble good and get to the basket.

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 02:23 AM

:roll:
Wilt Chamberlain the amazing herculean alien from outer space who can bench 550+ lbs with one arm, could jump and dunk off one step from the top of the key!!! and bang 25,000 women, score 100 points against midgets, average 50 ppg for a season and only win 2 championship rings.

:oldlol:

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 02:27 AM

:roll:

?

The combination of everything he has can't be matched.

I said that. He clearly has the best resume.

What makes Kareem significantly the easier choice over Jordan?

He isn't a significantly easy choice. I would just take him simply because when in doubt you always go with the dominant center over the dominant wing.

Yeah, Kareem's team success as "the man" pales in comparisons to Jordan's but he didn't have the teams behind him that Jordan did in his prime. Kareem played with 0 all-stars from 1973-1979 and he never played with a PF who grabbed 10 boards a game.

Jordan can do ANYTHING on the court. The same can't be said for Kareem.

That is a legit point.

yeah, why not. I am sure you think KB would be a top 10 player playing back then in his prime right??

Why are you comparing KD to KB now? Durant is not top 5 today according to most people. He surely will be next season barring injury but we are talkjing about today. Durant is 6th or 7th this year. You are talking as if he were Wade.

1) Lebron

2) Wade
3) Kobe

4) Carmelo
5) Paul

Dirk and Durant are about the same right now imo for 6th-7th. Be patient. Durant has a chance to be WAY up there when he retires.

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 02:28 AM

Wilt Chamberlain the amazing herculean alien from outer space who can bench 550+ lbs with one arm, could jump and dunk off one step from the top of the key!!! and bang 25,000 women, score 100 points against midgets, average 50 ppg for a season and only win 2 championship rings.

:oldlol:

Are you also on the fictious, uneducated, myth spreading, Kobe loving, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar bandwagon? There is absolutely no excuse for any wise man to select Kareem over Jordan in an expansion draft, but not the Dipper, Russell, or Shaq.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 02:29 AM

He wouldn't have to. He was more of a threat than Myers. That could have led to someone else scoring 2 more.

Like who? I thought you said in previous threads that Pippen was being triple teamed and had little to no help?

Since when does 11=7? Harper averaged 11 ppg in the 94' playoffs. You are cherry picking a bad series for him. There you go. 11 ppg in the playoffs (that means something like 13 outside the Bulls series). That sure would help against Indiana and Houston!

If he managed to keep his average up, yes, but judging by his performance in parts of the Semis he could have just as likely been mediocre and underperformed.

If Harper was out for the entire series you would have somewhat of a point (although Harper screwing himself is hardly the same as one of the worst foul calls ever--and according to ESPN viewers the worst call in NBA history) but :oldlol: @ him being the difference in Game 4 and in Game 3 the Knicks played better without him.

So you think it's a joke that he could impact a series? :oldlol:

Obviously but it was not a normal situation with the freak call as MJ fans make it out to be. They were not a run-of-the-mill second round team. That series has an asterix around it/.

It's in the past and the Bulls won three championships after that. Why not put an asterix on the 88 Finals, or the 07 WSF, or the 87 ECF when Robert Parish punched Laimbeer and no foul was called on him.

catch24

02-10-2010, 02:30 AM

yeah, why not. I am sure you think KB would be a top 10 player playing back then in his prime right??Durant is not even close to his prime either. He is a 6'10 dirk who can dribble good and get to the basket.

Of course, but Kobe is a better all around player than Durant IMO. I still think Charles Barkley, Payton, Jordan, Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Hakeem, Shaq, Ewing and Robinson would be better than KD. I haven't seen KD play under pressure or seen how he takes physical play. He's a great scorer, but the guy is still suspect, after all he's 21.

catch24

02-10-2010, 02:32 AM

Why are you comparing KD to KB now? Durant is not top 5 today according to most people. He surely will be next season barring injury but we are talkjing about today. Durant is 6th or 7th this year. You are talking as if he were Wade.

1) Lebron

2) Wade
3) Kobe

When Wade is healthy physically and mentally (on an actual contending team), how far, if at all, do you think he is from Lebron?

juju151111

02-10-2010, 02:33 AM

Of course, but Kobe is a better all around player than Durant IMO. I still think Charles Barkley, Payton, Jordan, Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Hakeem, Shaq, Ewing and Robinson would be better than KD. I haven't seen KD play under pressure or seen how he takes physical play. He's a great scorer, but the guy is still suspect, after all he's 21.
True, the playoffs get pretty physical and players always talk about players saying " Playoffs are way more physical". So we will have to wait and see.(THe playoffs are still not has physical has the 90s tho)

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 02:34 AM

There is absolutely no excuse for any wise man to select Kareem over Jordan in an expansion draft, but not the Dipper, Russell, or Shaq.

Sure there. Kareem is reliable in late game situations; Shaq and Wilt are not due to their poor FT shooting. Kareem is a much better offensive player than Russell while still being dominant defensively.

Like who? I thought you said in previous threads that Pippen was being triple teamed and had little to no help?

That was Phil Jackson. I wonder why. He had help--just not at the end of games. We are talking about TWO more points over 48 minutes.

Yeah, it is a joke to think 94' Harper would swing a double digit result.

Why not put an asterisk on the 88 Finals, or the 07 WSF, or the 87 ECF when Robert Parish punched Laimbeer and no foul was called on him.

Why do you think I always call Horry "Cheap Shot Rob"? I like him but what he did was shameful and the NBA's decision was pathetic. The Suns almost won Game 5 without Amare. With Amare (who had something insane like 40/18 in Game 6)...

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 02:35 AM

He isn't a significantly easy choice. I would just take him simply because when in doubt you always go with the dominant center over the dominant wing.
That's the "trend" but its bucked in certain exceptions. Especially in the case of Michael Jordan. In fact, I wouldn't consider that at all. There is a few players in history I'd rather have had than a quote / un-quote "big man."

A super dominant wing can get to the bucket, finish, draw fouls, hit his free throws, get others involved more readily, more potent in the clutch, can handle the ball ...

Like I said, do ANYTHING on the court. Kareem isn't that guy. He's great at what he does, but MJ's a guard who can dominate from a pure numerical statistic perspective with the likes of big men (who stats should naturally come easier to them) and can do things big men simply can't do, places on the court they can't go, situations they CAN'T excel in compared to a dominant guard.

Yeah, Kareem's team success as "the man" pales in comparisons to Jordan's but he didn't have the teams behind him that Jordan did in his prime. Kareem played with 0 all-stars from 1973-1979 and he never played with a PF who grabbed 10 boards a game.
LMAO ... he won rings with some of the absolute best individual players to ever play the game. Oscar Robertson, Magic Johnson, James Worthy not to mention a slew of great role players ... are you kidding me?

MJ had Scottie Pippen. A star in his own right, but someone who certainly isn't a Oscar Robertson or Magic Johnson.

What about that CHIP the Lakers won with a rookie Magic when Kareem was hurt? Could you see that happening with a Jordan-less Bulls?

F*ck No

Luigi

02-10-2010, 02:37 AM

I see this thread is still completely on topic. :oldlol:

Samurai Swoosh

02-10-2010, 02:39 AM

Are you also on the fictious, uneducated, myth spreading, Kobe loving, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar bandwagon? There is absolutely no excuse for any wise man to select Kareem over Jordan in an expansion draft, but not the Dipper, Russell, or Shaq.
I didn't know the Kobe loving / KAJ love athon were one in the same. Yes, I'm a fan of Kobe. And no ... I wouldn't take Kareem over Jordan. I would however take Jordan over Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, and Shaquille O'Neal. From a total perspective, Jordan just brings more to the table than any of those guys. Each one of those fellas has weaknesses and gaps in their resume. Jordan does not ... then you throw context in there with the stats. And it isn't even close. If you lined up all the greats in their prime infront of me for a pickup game to save mankind. And I only get to choose one HOF player to win me a game. I'm taking MJ. Man was ferocious.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 02:42 AM

That was Phil Jackson. I wonder why. He had help--just not at the end of games. We are talking about TWO more points over 48 minutes.

Just two points? Why didn't any of the others do it, then? Kukoc, Grant, Armstrong, Pippen, why couldn't have those guys done it?

Yeah, it is a joke to think 94' Harper would swing a double digit result.

Well, he averaged 11 points a game and the bulls won by 12 in game four. You claimed he was a scoring threat, so how could he have not impacted that game?

Why do you think I always call Horry "Cheap Shot Rob"? I like him but what he did was shameful and the NBA's decision was pathetic. The Suns almost won Game 5 without Amare. With Amare (who had something insane like 40/18 in Game 6)...

I've never heard you talk about Robert Horry. So you think that team deserves an asterix, then?

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 02:45 AM

Sure there. Kareem is reliable in late game situations; Shaq and Wilt are not due to their poor FT shooting. Kareem is a much better offensive player than Russell while still being dominant defensively.

There is more to the game of basketball and especially the center position than ability to make clutch baskets. How about clutch defensive plays, or defensive prowess? There are 5 men on a basketball court and there is a rule against intentional fouls at the end of games. A potent pivotman not only scores every touch, but dishes off as well to a teammates freed up by his mere presence on the court. Wilt Chamberlain had the top season in the history of professional basketball playing this way.

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 02:47 AM

When Wade is healthy physically and mentally (on an actual contending team), how far, if at all, do you think he is from Lebron?

As a player not that far but Lebron has that special quality that allows him to elevate his team to punch for above his weight. Imo if Lebron was in Miami that team would be a title contender, not on the verge of missing the playoffs. There is no way to prove that but that is what I think. I don't see Williams/old Shaq/etc. being that much better than Beasely/J. O'Neal/etc.

I haven't seen KD play under pressure or seen how he takes physical play. He's a great scorer, but the guy is still suspect, after all he's 21.

Yeah, the playoff thing will be interesting. A lot of great players consistently underperformed in the playoffs like David Robinson, Karl Malone, and Chris Webber to name a few.

LMAO ... he won rings with some of the absolute best individual players to ever play the game. Oscar Robertson, Magic Johnson, James Worthy not to mention a slew of great role players ... are you kidding me?

Yes--but the question is "rings as the man." By the time he got Worthy he was too old to be the clear cut "man." Even when he got Magic he was 32. He had Oscar--but old Oscar and Oscar got hurt in the 72' playoffs so he couldn't help him from the bench. He had nothing for much of his prime. Jordan had nothing at the beginning and ends of his career but strong teams in the middle.

If you are going to count all of Kareem's rings then his team success is equal to if not greater than Jordan's. They both have 6 rings then and Kareem's teams did much better in his non-title seasons than Jordan's did.

I agree Jordan could do anything and he had NO weaknesses. Defensively, though, there is a gap between a dominant C and a dominant G.

What about that CHIP the Lakers won with a rookie Magic when Kareem was hurt? Could you see that happening with a Jordan-less Bulls?

That was one game. Kareem had something like 33/16/5 in the finals that year and was the MVP in 80'. Could I see that happening without Jordan? For one game, yes.

Well, he averaged 11 points a game and the bulls won by 12 in game four. You claimed he was a scoring threat, so how could he have not impacted that game?

You can't just add 11 points. You also have to subtract the extra points other players scored without him.

I've never heard you talk about Robert Horry. So you think that team deserves an asterix, then?

I called him Cheap Shot Rob in a reply to you in this thread. Those teams don't deserve an asterik. It isn't as if they cheated like Barry Bonds did. However, it has to be noted that they did not win in a normal fashion due to critical bad calls. If someone compares the 07' Spurs to the 06' Heat or 08' Lakers do you think the C.S. Rob incident won't be mentioned?

There is more to the center position than ability to make clutch baskets. How about clutch defensive plays, or defensive prowess? There are 5 men on a basketball court and there is a rule against intentional fouls at the end of games. A potent pivotman not only scores every touch, but dishes off as well to a teammates freed up by his mere presence on the court. Wilt Chamberlain had the top season in the history of professional basketball playing this way.

Kareem had all those. He had everything. As a total package I would prefer him, even though Wilt was better in terms of individual skill. The question is whether the difference offsets Wilt's big weakness?

Wilt may have had the GOAT season but when you are drafting you are looking at the long-term. Over a ten year period I think a team with Kareem would have more success than it would with Wilt.

Timmy D for MVP

02-10-2010, 02:53 AM

To be honest I do not see an equivalent in today's game in terms of his style. He was a great offensive weapon at his position, but also the best defender on the other side of the court.

It's tough to look at someone with his style that equates. Manu maybe? But that's a reach because they play different positions.

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 02:56 AM

I didn't know the Kobe loving / KAJ love athon were one in the same. Yes, I'm a fan of Kobe. And no ... I wouldn't take Kareem over Jordan. I would however take Jordan over Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, and Shaquille O'Neal. From a total perspective, Jordan just brings more to the table than any of those guys. Each one of those fellas has weaknesses and gaps in their resume. Jordan does not ... then you throw context in there with the stats. And it isn't even close. If you lined up all the greats in their prime infront of me for a pickup game to save mankind. And I only get to choose one HOF player to win me a game. I'm taking MJ. Man was ferocious.

As rookie prospects the obvious choice is the big men. At peak form however it can be an interesting choice for some along with the likes of Larry Bird and Oscar Robertson. The pivotman is the most potent weapon the court, and the Bulls did not win any rings until Jordan regularly was able to play there and create from there. He was the complete package, as was Larry Bird & Oscar Robertson. But he did undoubtedly run into some luck during his championship seasons, as did Bill Russell, Shaquille O'Neal, & Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

The idea of having many options (beit most complete skills) is a nice thought and ideal. But a team or player with less options can very easily be as potent or more potent. Some use this thinking to believe that peak Bryant is superior to peak Jordan (due to his superior 3pt. shooting).

The Big O for instance was not flashy. He made a living on backing his man down and scoring. As one great coach who's name escapes the wise man now said, "You knew where he was gonna go. You knew exactly what he was gonna do, but you couldn't stop him. That's greatness."

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 03:00 AM

Kareem had all those. He had everything. As a total package I would prefer him, even though Wilt was better in terms of individual skill. The question is whether the difference offsets Wilt's big weakness?

Wilt may have had the GOAT season but when you are drafting you are looking at the long-term. Over a ten year period I think a team with Kareem would have more success than it would with Wilt.

Wilt was simply a more potent weapon on both ends. His finger roll was at least as unguardable as Jabbar's hook. He just didn't make a living out of it his entire career. Fair opinion but the wise man cannot help but wonder how Kareem would perform with some of the cruel misfortune Chamberlain has faced in his career. He never played against Russell or the great Celtics.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 03:13 AM

You can't just add 11 points. You also have to subtract the extra points other players scored without him.

True, but then if he was such an offensive threat as you say he was that year, he would have also required coverage and that should have let others get open, right?

I called him Cheap Shot Rob in a reply to you in this thread. Those teams don't deserve an asterik. It isn't as if they cheated like Barry Bonds did. However, it has to be noted that they did not win in a normal fashion due to critical bad calls. If someone compares the 07' Spurs to the 06' Heat or 08' Lakers do you think the C.S. Rob incident won't be mentioned?

Sometimes, but I've begrudgingly let it go. It's in the past and we don't know how their opponents would have done had they advanced.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 03:18 AM

Wilt was simply a more potent weapon on both ends. His finger roll was at least as unguardable as Jabbar's hook. He just didn't make a living out of it his entire career. Fair opinion but the wise man cannot help but wonder how Kareem would perform with some of the cruel misfortune Chamberlain has faced in his career. He never played against Russell or the great Celtics.

Playing against Dave Cowens, John Havlicek, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Robert Parish in the Finals doesn't count?

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 03:24 AM

Yes, but none of them are Bill Russell, nor were their teams as great as the Celtics of the 1960's.

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 03:26 AM

Fair opinion but the wise man cannot help but wonder how Kareem would perform with some of the cruel misfortune Chamberlain has faced in his career. He never played against Russell or the great Celtics.

Yeah, that is another example why you can't just go by resume. If Wilt began his career in 1950, 1970, 1980, 1990, or 2000 instead of 1960 he would have won a lot more rings. He had the worst possible timing.

True, but then if he was such an offensive threat as you say he was that year, he would have also required coverage and that should have let others get open, right?

He wasn't a huge offensive threat. The guy was like 34 years old by then. He definitely was more of a threat than Myers.

Sometimes, but I've begrudgingly let it go. It's in the past and we don't know how their opponents would have done had they advanced.

It has to be considered when assessing those teams, though. The Hollins think only came up because someone, probably a MJ fan, acted as if the 94' Pippen-led Bulls were a big failure.

The Suns may not have even won that series if the suspensions did not happen. That requires more speculation. You can see them winning Game 5 but they lost Game 6 anyway. Who knows what would happen in a Game 7. The Hollins' thing requires much less speculation. The Bulls had the game won, fair and square and Hollins robbed them. Given the fact that the Knicks could not win in Chicago, plus it being Chicago Stadium's last game, it is very reasonable to assume they would have won Game 6.

Playing against Dave Cowens, John Havlicek, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Robert Parish in the Finals doesn't count?

Nothing compares to the 60's Celtics dynasty. Maybe the 90's Bulls if MJ didn't retire (7 titles in 8 years) but that is it. The 60's Celtics not only beat Wilt, they beat West/Baylor numerous times. That is how great they were. The only time they lost in the finals was when Russell got hurt. Other than that it was 11 championships in 12 seasons. Their only "real" loss was to 67' Wilt's team.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 02:46 PM

He wasn't a huge offensive threat. The guy was like 34 years old by then. He definitely was more of a threat than Myers.

By the way you described his performance in the semis, it certainly doesn't sound like it.

It has to be considered when assessing those teams, though. The Hollins think only came up because someone, probably a MJ fan, acted as if the 94' Pippen-led Bulls were a big failure.

No, Desperado brought up 94 and acted is if the Bulls had played the same way they had for the previous 3 seasons, which they hadn't. That was the only point I was making.

The Suns may not have even won that series if the suspensions did not happen. That requires more speculation. You can see them winning Game 5 but they lost Game 6 anyway. Who knows what would happen in a Game 7.

Likewise, it's pure speculation to assume Chicago would have won that series if it weren't for the Hue Hollins call. Also, in game three Harper scored only 4 points in a two point game. Had he played the full game, the Knicks may have actually been able to go up 3-0 in that series.

The Hollins' thing requires much less speculation. The Bulls had the game won, fair and square and Hollins robbed them. Given the fact that the Knicks could not win in Chicago, plus it being Chicago Stadium's last game, it is very reasonable to assume they would have won Game 6.

It's also reasonable to assume that had Harper been allowed to play the full series it would have been drastically altered, as well. Maybe the Bulls would have closed it in 6 games, maybe they wouldn't have. We'll never know at this point.

Nothing compares to the 60's Celtics dynasty. Maybe the 90's Bulls if MJ didn't retire (7 titles in 8 years) but that is it. The 60's Celtics not only beat Wilt, they beat West/Baylor numerous times. That is how great they were. The only time they lost in the finals was when Russell got hurt. Other than that it was 11 championships in 12 seasons. Their only "real" loss was to 67' Wilt's team.

1986 Celtics were always the GOAT Celtics lineup, imo.

Alhazred

02-10-2010, 02:49 PM

Yes, but none of them are Bill Russell, nor were their teams as great as the Celtics of the 1960's.

Larry matches Russell in greatness, in my opinion. Also, which 60s lineup could beat the 86 Celtics?

Abraham Lincoln

02-10-2010, 03:49 PM

Several of them, notably the '64 and '65 teams. And whilst the '86 team was one of the GOAT's, Jabbar never played a second of postseason action against them. Some of the misfortunes Chamberlain's teams faced can be read here (http://insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3684117&postcount=27).

bizil

02-10-2010, 04:22 PM

:oldlol: @ Dominique being better than Pippen. The Hawks were tied with the Bulls for first place in the East in 94' by the all-star break. The Hawks traded Wilkins for Danny Manning! If he was so great why would a title contender trade him for Danny Manning?

And that is more than Stockton did WITH Malone in 94'. :oldlol: @ these people acting as if 55 wins grow on trees. A Stockton fan should know this since it isn't as if the Jazz were winning 60 games every year even with malone and Stockton, not Horace Grant as their #2 guy.

Well Hawks management and Lenny Wilkens made a huge mistake! They learned the hard way that a better all around player doesn't always mean a better player. Danny at 6'10 could score, rebound, and drop dimes very well for a 6'10 cat. But the key is he wasn't known as clutch and was never known to grab a team by the throat and take over the game scoring. I hate to stress scoring but its the only stat that guarantees a win. Dominique is cut from the cloth of Doc, English, Gervin, and Bernard King. And that is an offensive force so unstoppable and clutch on the wing that they can carry a team in that fashion.

We must not lose sight of this when comparing them to other 2's and 3's like Pippen and Manning. Sure those two are better all around that Nique. But Nique has also put up 9 boards a game, an awesome number for a pure small forward in the 80's. The Iceman has been known to get 100 steals and 100 blocks in a season. So Nique, Ice, and Doc weren't great all around guys, but they were underrated in some aspects. But Manning and Pip never proved they could take over a game scoring and put a team on its back. You have guys like MJ, Kobe, Bron, T-Mac when right, Big O, Havlicek, Bird, Barry, G Hill when right, and Penny when right that can play 3 or 4 positions. All could run the point guard flat out or point forward. All were very good to great on D. So with these guys you get the scoring ability of Nique, Ice, Doc, King, or English to go with the all around play of a Pippen or Manning. Chris Broussard of ESPN said his top 5 perimeter players of all time are:

MJ
Magic
Bird
Kobe
Big O

All guys are in that 6'5 to 6'9 range. All could play multiple positions well. All were excellent passers And all could take over a game scoring and put a team on its back. Even though Magic ran the point, he was so versatile that he would pick up his scoring when playing 2-5. He proved that in the 1980 finals and a few times Magic put up 40 points and 20 assists in big games. That's what makes these five along with Bron, healthy T-Mac, healthy G Hill, Havlicek, and Barry special. You get take over scoring ability at it finest combined with the floor game that's the finest. With Pip and Manning you get the floor game at its finest. With Nique you get takeover, clutch scoring ability at its finest.

I know I'm gonna catch heat for this but me personally I would take Nique over Pippen when it comes to impact on a game. Pip is a better all around player. But MJ or Kobe can do everything Pip could do AND take over the scoring load. And I don't mean a Pippen type 23 a night. I mean if need be average 30 a night and on many of those nights going for 40, 50, 60 points. How ever many buckets the team needs or if these guys get super hot these are horses you can ride to great things. Pip is a first ballot HOFer and one of the top 10 SF's of all time. But me personally I prefer guys with premium, clutch takeover ability at the two and three. When they have top tier floor games to go with it these are the guys that are the greatest on the perimeter. But after that I would take the guys with the premium clutch takeover scoring ability. So there are three tiers of HOF guys or current superstars in this sense:

1st tier- MJ, West, Big O, Bird, Barry, Hondo

Current guys in this nature- Bron, Kobe, Wade

2nd tier- Nique, Doc, King, English, Gervin

Current guys of this nature- Melo, Durant

3rd tier- Pippen

Current guys of this nature- Iggy, Odom, Prince

This is just how I view HOF guys or current superstars and who I prefer. Think about it who would you rather have now Durant-Melo or a better all around player like Iggy. Give me Durant or Melo all day! Iggy is All-Star caliber and a top 10 SF or SG whichever he plays. Or lets go with centers who would you rather have Brad Daugherty or Shaq! Brad Daugherty is the better all around player but I'm taking Shaq. So when comparing Pippen to studs like Doc, Nique, and King don't be so quick to discount the dominant scoring that those guys provided. All around better doesnt' always mean MORE IMPACT all the time!

D.J.

02-10-2010, 04:33 PM

Well Hawks management and Lenny Wilkens made a huge mistake! They learned the hard way that a better all around player doesn't always mean a better player. Danny at 6'10 could score, rebound, and drop dimes very well for a 6'10 cat. But the key is he wasn't known as clutch and was never known to grab a team by the throat and take over the game scoring. I hate to stress scoring but its the only stat that guarantees a win. Dominique is cut from the cloth of Doc, English, Gervin, and Bernard King. And that is an offensive force so unstoppable and clutch on the wing that they can carry a team in that fashion.

We must not lose sight of this when comparing them to other 2's and 3's like Pippen and Manning. Sure those two are better all around that Nique. But Nique has also put up 9 boards a game, an awesome number for a pure small forward in the 80's. The Iceman has been known to get 100 steals and 100 blocks in a season. So Nique, Ice, and Doc weren't great all around guys, but they were underrated in some aspects. But Manning and Pip never proved they could take over a game scoring and put a team on its back. You have guys like MJ, Kobe, Bron, T-Mac when right, Big O, Havlicek, Bird, Barry, G Hill when right, and Penny when right that can play 3 or 4 positions. All could run the point guard flat out or point forward. All were very good to great on D. So with these guys you get the scoring ability of Nique, Ice, Doc, King, or English to go with the all around play of a Pippen or Manning. Chris Broussard of ESPN said his top 5 perimeter players of all time are:

MJ
Magic
Bird
Kobe
Big O

All guys are in that 6'5 to 6'9 range. All could play multiple positions well. All were excellent passers And all could take over a game scoring and put a team on its back. Even though Magic ran the point, he was so versatile that he would pick up his scoring when playing 2-5. He proved that in the 1980 finals and a few times Magic put up 40 points and 20 assists in big games. That's what makes these five along with Bron, healthy T-Mac, healthy G Hill, Havlicek, and Barry special. You get take over scoring ability at it finest combined with the floor game that's the finest. With Pip and Manning you get the floor game at its finest. With Nique you get takeover, clutch scoring ability at its finest.

I know I'm gonna catch heat for this but me personally I would take Nique over Pippen when it comes to impact on a game. Pip is a better all around player. But MJ or Kobe can do everything Pip could do AND take over the scoring load. And I don't mean a Pippen type 23 a night. I mean if need be average 30 a night and on many of those nights going for 40, 50, 60 points. How ever many buckets the team needs or if these guys get super hot these are horses you can ride to great things. Pip is a first ballot HOFer and one of the top 10 SF's of all time. But me personally I prefer guys with premium, clutch takeover ability at the two and three. When they have top tier floor games to go with it these are the guys that are the greatest on the perimeter. But after that I would take the guys with the premium clutch takeover scoring ability. So there are three tiers of HOF guys or current superstars in this sense:

1st tier- MJ, West, Big O, Bird, Barry, Hondo

Current guys in this nature- Bron, Kobe, Wade

2nd tier- Nique, Doc, King, English, Gervin

Current guys of this nature- Melo, Durant

3rd tier- Pippen

Current guys of this nature- Iggy, Odom, Prince

This is just how I view HOF guys or current superstars and who I prefer. Think about it who would you rather have now Durant-Melo or a better all around player like Iggy. Give me Durant or Melo all day! Iggy is All-Star caliber and a top 10 SF or SG whichever he plays. Or lets go with centers who would you rather have Brad Daugherty or Shaq! Brad Daugherty is the better all around player but I'm taking Shaq. So when comparing Pippen to studs like Doc, Nique, and King don't be so quick to discount the dominate scoring that those guys provided. All around better doesnt' always mean MORE IMPACT all the time!

Their impacts were actually almost identical. Dominique did have the clear edge in scoring, but Scottie also averaged over 20 a night in his prime. Scottie's clear edge on defense also needs to be factored. There's a saying "defense wins championships". Despite Dominique having a solid advantage in scoring, their efficiency rates were almost equal. Dominique's PER in his prime was 23-24, while Pippen's was 21-22. Not a big difference despite Dominique's 7-9 PPG advantage.

Overall, their impacts were identical and you could make an argument that Scottie had more of an impact. Even if he wasn't scoring, his defense and playmaking ability could easily make up for a 5-15 shooting night.

Roundball_Rock

02-10-2010, 05:02 PM

Well Hawks management and Lenny Wilkens made a huge mistake!

I won't look up their team record game-by-game so I will use the all-star break as a proxy since that is around when the trade happened. The Hawks were 34-13 before the ASG, 23-12 after it. That is a negligible difference, especially when you factor in the adjustment period after such a major trade. How dominant could Wilkins be if you could trade him for a two-time all-star and not skip a beat?

How about the Clippers? 16-29 before the ASG, 11-26 afterwards. His "dominance" had little impact on either team, even though he was putting up 29/7/2 on the Clippers.

Dominique is cut from the cloth of Doc, English, Gervin, and Bernard King. And that is an offensive force so unstoppable and clutch on the wing that they can carry a team in that fashion.

How many rings did English, Gervin, King, and Wilkins win? Gervin never reached the NBA finals. I think King and I know Wilkins never got out the second round. How could this be if they were "unstoppable", clutch and as dominant as you say they were?

Why are you comparing Pippen to players like Jordan, Kobe, Magic, and Oscar? No one has ever said he was at that level.

3rd tier- Pippen

Current guys of this nature- Iggy, Odom, Prince

That is very biased. You are comparing Wilkins to Carmelo and Durant and Pippen to non-all-stars like those three? Is Odom even averaging 10 points this year?

So when comparing Pippen to studs like Doc, Nique, and King don't be so quick to discount the dominate scoring that those guys provided. All around better doesnt' always mean MORE IMPACT all the time!

I understand your argument and it is a legitimate one but where are the results? If Wilkins was the dominant force you are making him out to be why did he never get out the second round? The Jordan card does not work. Pippen in one prime season without Jordan did much better than Wilkins did in his typical season.

Even if he wasn't scoring, his defense and playmaking ability could easily make up for a 5-15 shooting night.

Great point. If Wilkins had a bad shooting night he was useless. He averaged 2-3 assists in his prime and was not a great defender. Pippen could put up 10/4/4 and still dominate a game defensively (see Game 3 of the 98' finals). Or how about Game 1 one the 98' ECF when he scored only 4 points?

“It was an amazing defensive performance by our starters coming out in the third quarter, and that turned the game around,” remarked Bulls guard Steve Kerr. “It’s amazing to see how good Scottie is in particular. The guy shot 1-for-9 and scored four points and totally dominated the game. That’s what makes him one of the greatest players ever. He doesn’t have to score a point and he can control the whole game.”

http://www.nba.com/bulls/history/pippen10_980517.html

PHOENIX -- I walked up to each one of them and asked the question.

If you could be any other player here who would it be?

It was a question I'd asked 12 years ago to Dream Team III: Reggie Miller, Charles Barkley, Penny Hardaway, Gary Payton, Shaq.

Their answers lent insight into which players they respected, whose game they feared. Back then Scottie Pippen's name came up the most. Five out of the 12 players on that team wanted to be, even if for one game, Jordan's Green Hornet. When asked, "Why Pip?" it was Miller who explained it best: "Because Pippen can score only five points and still dominate a basketball game."

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jackson/090216

(Funny how all these Dream Team players wanted to be a "mere sidekick" who was never a "superstar." :oldlol: )

Dominique's PER in his prime was 23-24, while Pippen's was 21-22. Not a big difference

Keep in mind Pippen's PER was deflated by being his team's primary playmaker/ballhandler since that resulted in an increased number of turnovers. This is why no PG has ever led the league in PER and no PG is top 10 all-time in PER and only two are top 20.

Pippen made his teammates better. The things that separated him from typical 20 ppg scorers don't show up on the stat sheet: defense, leadership, defense, making his teammates better, defense, playmaking, defense. This is why he tends to be underrated.

You also can't just look at scoring because Pippen was the de facto PG of the Bulls. He was asked to facilitate first, score second. Wilkins' role was to score first so the 7-9 ppg difference can't be viewed at face value.

Brad Daugherty is the better all around player but I'm taking Shaq.

These are false choices because you are taking extreme cases like Shaq or Carmelo versus Iggy. It would be like saying would you rather have Bill Walton or Patrick Ewing? Prime Baron Davis or prime Jason Kidd? 10' Chris Kaman or 10' Dwight Howard? Danny Granger or Bill Russell? Troy Murphy or Dennis Rodman? Etc. The superior scorer is not always the better player. If you believe that then you have have to select Ewing, Davis, Kaman, Granger, and Murphy in these comparisons since they were/are much better scorers than the other guy.

I am not dissing Wilkins. I think he was a great player. I would take Pippen over him but I can see why someone would prefer Wilkins. I just think you are making Wilkins out to be far better than he was.

JustinJDW

02-10-2010, 05:29 PM

Danny GrangerThis.

raptorfan_dr07

02-10-2010, 06:28 PM

I honestly wonder who is more important to there team in the win/loss column...... Mike Jordan or some guy on the street who never did anything

I wonder the same thing when watching the Lakers and Kobe. The past two games I saw no Kobe Bryant, yet the Lakers defense was nothing sort of amazing and with Pau Gasol as the focal point, the Lakers offense was spectacular. Beautiful ball movement, cuts to the rim, no shot jacking from 20 feet, you name it! Not to mention those wins came against a Portland team IN Portland, that WITH Kobe they got smacked around by the last 4-5 YEARS, and a fully healthy San Antonio team that smacked this Laker team around by 20 points WITH Kobe back in January. Pau Gasol mentioned after the last game that they're having fun! It's great not having that loser Kobe around! Hell, Sasha Vujacic has gotten increased minutes and the team hasn't missed a beat! Put Shannon Brown in the starting lineup and this team is better than with Kobe!!!:eek: :eek: :eek:

It gets tiresome after a while having to correct your utter bullsh*t every time you post but I guess that's our job until you get banned again for the umpteenth time, that is until you come back under yet ANOTHER username with the same copy and paste bullsh*t. LMAO at Roundball Rock constantly replying to and agreeing with this obvious troll in yet another thread. They say misery loves company and I guess it's on full display here.

Fatal9

02-10-2010, 06:29 PM

3rd tier- Pippen

Current guys of this nature- Iggy, Odom, Prince

LOL!!

triangleoffense

02-10-2010, 06:32 PM

Odom is a better rebounder than Pippen. Pippen is a better shooter, defender, slasher. Pippen also has a higher basketball IQ and is more clutch than Odom. If AI version 2 focused entirely on defense for a couple of offseason then maybe he can be mentioned in the same breathe as pippen but for now there really is no one that comes close to the all around player pippen was, especially the defensive aspect of it.

rfoster24

02-10-2010, 06:35 PM

Wallace isn't all that close IMO. Pip was basically the Bulls point guard, Wallace is not in that league as a playmaker. Igoudala is probably the closest.

HA. Bulls point guard? Gimme a break

bizil

02-10-2010, 06:39 PM

I won't look up their team record game-by-game so I will use the all-star break as a proxy since that is around when the trade happened. The Hawks were 34-13 before the ASG, 23-12 after it. That is a negligible difference, especially when you factor in the adjustment period after such a major trade. How dominant could Wilkins be if you could trade him for a two-time all-star and not skip a beat?

How about the Clippers? 16-29 before the ASG, 11-26 afterwards. His "dominance" had little impact on either team, even though he was putting up 29/7/2 on the Clippers.

How many rings did English, Gervin, King, and Wilkins win? Gervin never reached the NBA finals. I think King and I know Wilkins never got out the second round. How could this be if they were "unstoppable", clutch and as dominant as you say they were?

Why are you comparing Pippen to players like Jordan, Kobe, Magic, and Oscar? No one has ever said he was at that level.

That is very biased. You are comparing Wilkins to Carmelo and Durant and Pippen to non-all-stars like those three? Is Odom even averaging 10 points this year?

I understand your argument and it is a legitimate one but where are the results? If Wilkins was the dominant force you are making him out to be why did he never get out the second round? The Jordan card does not work. Pippen in one prime season without Jordan did much better than Wilkins did in his typical season.

Great point. If Wilkins had a bad shooting night he was useless. He averaged 2-3 assists in his prime and was not a great defender. Pippen could put up 10/4/4 and still dominate a game defensively (see Game 3 of the 98' finals). Or how about Game 1 one the 98' ECF when he scored only 4 points?

http://www.nba.com/bulls/history/pippen10_980517.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jackson/090216

(Funny how all these Dream Team players wanted to be a "mere sidekick" who was never a "superstar." :oldlol: )

Keep in mind Pippen's PER was deflated by being his team's primary playmaker/ballhandler since that resulted in an increased number of turnovers. This is why no PG has ever led the league in PER and no PG is top 10 all-time in PER and only two are top 20.

Pippen made his teammates better. The things that separated him from typical 20 ppg scorers don't show up on the stat sheet: defense, leadership, defense, making his teammates better, defense, playmaking, defense. This is why he tends to be underrated.

You also can't just look at scoring because Pippen was the de facto PG of the Bulls. He was asked to facilitate first, score second. Wilkins' role was to score first so the 7-9 ppg difference can't be viewed at face value.

These are false choices because you are taking extreme cases like Shaq or Carmelo versus Iggy. It would be like saying would you rather have Bill Walton or Patrick Ewing? Prime Baron Davis or prime Jason Kidd? 10' Chris Kaman or 10' Dwight Howard? Danny Granger or Bill Russell? Troy Murphy or Dennis Rodman? Etc. The superior scorer is not always the better player. If you believe that then you have have to select Ewing, Davis, Kaman, Granger, and Murphy in these comparisons since they were/are much better scorers than the other guy.

Once again I never said the superior scorer was always the better player. Iggy is an All-Star caliber player. Odom is an All-Star player talent wise. Prince is an All Star player talent wise. They are the closest thing to what Pip represented in the L. And in my mind none of those three are as good as Pip. I realize you never said Pip was as good as MJ, Big O, or Bird. My point was I would rather take guys whose floor game is as good or damn close to Pip's AND are dominant scorers over a guy like Pip or dominant scorers like Nique. I then said between guys like Pip or a guy like Nique I feel Nique has more impact on the game in the clutch and can carry a team that way. Why is that so hard for you to comprhend. That's all I'm saying. Nique was also getting 7-9 boards a game, a damn good number for a three.

Now you are on some revisonist history stuff when it comes to Nique. Danny Manning was going to be a free agent on the Clippers. They felt Danny wasn't going to come back. The Hawks knew Nique was 34 and still putting up points. But they were thinking about the future and took a gamble on Manning who was just coming into his prime. You could still get something for Nique because he was still the highest scoring SF in the L. It was a terrible idea because they learned the importance of Nique. The Hawks had nobody on offense that could provide what Nique could. Manning needed to score more points on that team for it to be successful. Manning didn't even come back to the Hawks the next season. I've heard Mookie and Lenny thought Nique was selfish and had it engineered. But what the Hawks, Mookie, and Lenny fail to realize is that Nique was the reason the Hawks were in that spot. They had Mookie, Augmon, Willis, and the others playing great D and rebounding in Willis's case. They needed a takeover guy like Nique to score buckets, especially in the clutch. Nique used to win 50 games all the time. But the Hawks teams couldn't compare to what the Celtics, Pistons, and eventually the Bulls had to offer. You can't hold that against Nique. He often times didn't have as much talent on his teams. MJ was getting bounced early all the time until his talent around him got better. Kobe was ready to leave LA until Gasol and Co. showed up.

Once again I agree that Pip was the point forward and his job wasn't to score first. But when I called him the second option before you got all defensive. You can't have it both ways. MJ was the PG for the Bulls one year and guess what he put up 30+ point and 8+ assists. Lebron puts up 30 and 7 or 8 dimes all the time. Wade does too, Big O and West did too. Pip needed to put up that time of year when MJ was gone. Pip was a vet by then so I there are no excuses. He needed to score more in order for that team to go farther. Nique would have given that Bulls team more points and just as many boards. Kukoc could have picked up even more of the point forward duties. The team would have lost out on Pip's D I admit. But that team needed a guy to put up bigger scoring numbers in order for it to try and win a ring. Pip didn't flip on that take no prisoners, this game is mine, no one can stop me from scoring mentality.

There are too many great all around players who could, even some who ran the point like BigO, Frazier, Magic, Isiah, Payton, and even Nash. Pip didn't show that ability as much as even these guys. I've been comparing Pip to 2 and threes but let's compare him to the greatest PGs, since for all intensive purpose Pip was the PG for the Bulls. The PGs I just listed even showed more of an ability to take over a game scoring when needed. Magic's career high in points is just as much as Pip's. Isiah's and Payton's too. And all got more assists than Pip in those years. I'm not even gonna bring up the infamous Big O! So even when compared to PGs Pip takes a backseat when it comes to clutch, take a team by the throat, this game is mine, no one can stop me from scoring moments. And those guys are better passers than a great passer in Pip. You can deny this all you want but this is the main thing that holds Pip back historically. He's regarded anywhere from 30-50 all time. If he could have showed this ability more often he could be top 15 or 20 all time. Once again Pip is a first ballot HOFer, the greatest defensive SF ever, and top 10 SF of all time.

O.J A 6'4Mamba

02-10-2010, 06:46 PM

http://puertatras.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/rudy-gay-dunk11.jpg

NBA Comparison: Scottie Pippen
Aran Smith - 6/27/2006
Strengths: Elite run/jump athlete who finishes well above the rim ... High flyer ... Very versatile... Does everything well ... Complete offensive arsenal... Can hit the mid range jumper... Excellent at slashing to the hoop... Accurate passer who is very unselfish... Does the majority of his damage in the post ... Very tough to defend... Doesnt get pushed around down low ... Runs the floor well ... Tough on the boards... Works harder than everyone else on the court ... Will most likely play on the wing at the next level ... Extremely long (7-3 wingspan) and freakishly athletic ... Has shows tremendous potential. Late to the game, so his lack of a great feel could improve over time, he wasn't seriously coached until he was a junior in high school ...

He is everything scottie pippen wishes he was. His prime will truely be the improved version of Pippen. Right now he is not there though in his 4th year he is only 23 years old,but he has shown flashes of pure domination, a legit number #1 option something Pippen wasn't. I really believe he can average 25points 8 rebounds and 3 assists in his prime. He just needs to be a better team have a higher IQ for the game, stop settling for so many jumpers, drive more, playing defense and he will be there give him a few years. He won't be doing it for Memphis since it is Mayo's team and we are letting him go this offseason. But if he gets overpaid which he will to Twolves or Knicks he will explode and reach his Pippen potential.