Pippen could have won a championship as the 1st option

[G-Funk]

The year Jordan retired Pippen could have won a championship if he had a legit 2nd option, as good as him or near his level. Most franchise players who won a championship had the luxury to play along side a Gasol, Kobe, Kareem, Pippen... That year Pippen was impressive and should have won MVP as well.

So stop hating on the guy, dude was a straight up leader.

[L.A. Jazz]

no-one hates Pipp. he is a very nice guy. and one of my favorite players all time. but "could have won" means nothing in pro sports.

[olddangerfield]

no-one hates Pipp. he is a very nice guy. and one of my favorite players all time. but "could have won" means nothing in pro sports.

This, Wilt could have won 9 championships, yet he didn't.

[Melo Screwed Us]

nobody hates on pip unless people are using him as ammo for their kobe agenda. kinda like you are right now.

[jlauber]

This, Wilt could have won 9 championships, yet he didn't.

No other player came as close, so often, as Chamberlain. FOUR game seven losses to the greatest Dynasty in professional sports history, by a combined NINE points. On top of that, had the officials not handed game five of the '70 Finals to the Knicks, Chamberlain's 45 point, 20-27 shooting game, on 27 rebounds, in a 135-113 game six win, would have given him another ring.

You could also argue that injuries killed his '71 team (BOTH Baylor and West were out the entire playoffs.)

[guy]

The year Jordan retired Pippen could have won a championship if he had a legit 2nd option, as good as him or near his level. Most franchise players who won a championship had the luxury to play along side a Gasol, Kobe, Kareem, Pippen... That year Pippen was impressive and should have won MVP as well.

So stop hating on the guy, dude was a straight up leader.

Like who?

[jlauber]

Like who?

I think he was referring to Pippen having a second best option player, like he, himself was, to MJ.

In other words, Pippen and Pippen, instead of MJ and Pippen.

[guy]

I think he was referring to Pippen having a second best option player, like he, himself was, to MJ.

In other words, Pippen and Pippen, instead of MJ and Pippen.

Right. I'm asking for an example.

[97 bulls]

Right. I'm asking for an example.
Hoow bout mitch richmond? Latrell sprewell? Both would've put the bulls over the top and neither would've trumped pippen as the best player on the team.

[magnax1]

No. He couldn't have without a player better then him, or a bunch of other pieces added to the 94 Bulls. They lost in the second round to a team they lost too in 7, where the year before with the best player ever they still only won in 6, and then Jordan had to put up an epic performance to beat the Suns.

[97 bulls]

This, Wilt could have won 9 championships, yet he didn't.
Very true. But to me its how you look at it. Pippen never really had a chance. Wilt had a full career as the best player on a team.

[97 bulls]

No. He couldn't have without a player better then him, or a bunch of other pieces added to the 94 Bulls. They lost in the second round to a team they lost too in 7, where the year before with the best player ever they still only won in 6, and then Jordan had to put up an epic performance to beat the Suns.
Did you read my post?

[guy]

Hoow bout mitch richmond? Latrell sprewell? Both would've put the bulls over the top and neither would've trumped pippen as the best player on the team.

Are we just talking about the 94 season? I still doubt they win that year even with one of those guys.

[magnax1]

Did you read my post?
About Richmond? They wouldn't have come that close with Richmond. Maybe get out of the second round, maybe the finals, but they don't win for sure.

[Sarcastic]

Patrick Ewing could have won a championship if he ever played with someone as good as Pippen as well.

[Melo Screwed Us]

Patrick Ewing could have won a championship if he ever played with someone as good as Pippen as well.
in that situation, ewing would be the 1st option though

[G-Funk]

Maybe a Clyde?

[Melo Screwed Us]

Maybe a Clyde?
clyde would be the 1st option too. and that duo wouldn't win a title. it would have to be some kind of big man to team up with pip.

[Melo Screwed Us]

i'd say pip + gasol could win some chips.

[Ne 1]

Certainty would have been possible.

After Jordan abruptly retired in October in '93, Pippen led Chicago to 55 wins and if not for one of the most controversial foul calls in sports history would have led the Bulls to the Finals. This was with Pete Myers being Jordan's replacement and Horace Grant as his second best player.

Even with Pippen losing Grant the next year he had Chicago on pace for 40+ wins before Jordan returned with Armstrong/Kukoc as his best players.

Also Pippen past his prime at 34 years old won 59 games and was one quarter away from the Finals as the leader of Portland.

[97 bulls]

Are we just talking about the 94 season? I still doubt they win that year even with one of those guys.
I have a feeling that you'd doubt anyone other than jordan and god could've took the bulls over the top. Regardless of the year.

But I don't see how adding mitch richmond to the bulls in 94 doesnt get them a championship.

[Ne 1]

clyde would be the 1st option too. and that duo wouldn't win a title. it would have to be some kind of big man to team up with pip.

If terms like "#1 option" are going to be thrown around we need to define them. "#1 option". Option for what?

[97 bulls]

If terms like "#1 option" are going to be thrown around we need to define them. "#1 option". Option for what?
Good question. I think "first option" and "best player" or "leader" get misunderstood for each other

[iamgine]

Meh, could have are plenty. Trade Bulls squad for Rockets and Hakeem won a lot more while MJ won much less.

[OldSchoolBBall]

What the ****, people. Every freaking week we need to have multiple Pippen topics. Get over it. Jesus...

Why do we never see topics like this about Worthy, McHale, Manu etc.?

[t-rex]

Yes!

Pippen absolutely could have been a first option.


In 1993 the Chicago Bulls went 57-25 and won the NBA Championship over the Phoenix Suns in 6 games. Scotty Pippen playing as the second option to Jordan averaged 18.6 pts per game.


Michael Jordan (The greatest player of all time:oldlol: ) retired.


In 1994 with essentially the same team minus Jordan, Scotty Pippen led the Bulls to 55-27 record. They lost a tough 7 game series to the Knicks in the semifinal round, in a playoff contest most noted for one of the worst calls in NBA history that many feel cost the Bulls the series. (The old timers here know what I am talking about.) The Knicks went on to the NBA finals and lost to the Rockets in 7 games.


Scotty Pippen averaged 22 points per game that year. And there was only a 2 game regular season difference between the Bulls with Jordan, and the Bulls without Jordan.

In addition Pippen was

All NBA 1st team
All Defensive 1st team
The 1994 All Star game MVP
Finished 3rd in MVP voting


Could you imagine what Scotty Pippen and the 1994 Bulls could have done if Pippen had as good a wing man as Jordan was fortunate enough to have?:D


Scotty Pippen is probably one of the most underrated players in NBA history. He and Jordan provided one of the best 1-2 combos in the history of the sport.

Yes… Pippen could have won a championship as a 1st option. And thanks to Jordan's retirement, we have a rare historic chance (in an apples to apples comparison) to see just how good Pippen and the Bulls really were, without one of the greatest players of all time at the helm.



http://sfj70.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515ddf69e2012875a0d924970c-500wi

An all time great player, and more than "just" a #2 option.

[Ne 1]

Good question. I think "first option" and "best player" or "leader" get misunderstood for each other

I think some misinformed people automatically assume that leading scorer = team leader.

There are many kind of leaders. Offensive, defensive, vocal, locker room, scoring, positional, etc.

[97 bulls]

What the ****, people. Every freaking week we need to have multiple Pippen topics. Get over it. Jesus...

Why do we never see topics like this about Worthy, McHale, Manu etc.?
Then make a topic about them. Its sad that a scottie pippen thread makes you so mad you need to curse lol. Im as big a jordan fan as you and I can still respect pippen and what he sacrificed.

[guy]

I have a feeling that you'd doubt anyone other than jordan and god could've took the bulls over the top. Regardless of the year.

No not at all. I think switching Jordan with a number of players could've produced a championship depending on the year.



But I don't see how adding mitch richmond to the bulls in 94 doesnt get them a championship.

Kind of like how many couldn't see how giving Wade and Bosh to a guy that could lead scrubs to over 60 wins wouldn't guarantee a championship?

I think they would definitely be better, but I don't think its a guarantee they get past the Knicks or Pacers, and even if they did, I don't think they beat the Rockets.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Then make a topic about them. Its sad that a scottie pippen thread makes you so mad you need to curse lol. Im as big a jordan fan as you and I can still respect pippen and what he sacrificed.

It's just that it's EVERY FREAKING WEEK. It's absurd. lol @ "what he sacrificed". Pippen wouldn't have even been known if not for Jordan. He would have become a good, possibly all-star level player without MJ, but he wouldn't have been as good an all-around and defensive player as he was, and he certainly doesn't get nearly as much talk without being part of a dynasty. He didn't sacrifice anything - he's remembered far more fondly now than if he had never played for Chicago.

[guy]

It's just that it's EVERY FREAKING WEEK. It's absurd. lol @ "what he sacrificed". Pippen wouldn't have even been known if not for Jordan. He would have become a good, possibly all-star level player without MJ, but he wouldn't have been as good an all-around and defensive player as he was, and he certainly doesn't get nearly as much talk without being part of a dynasty. He didn't sacrifice anything - he's remembered far more fondly now than if he had never played for Chicago.

Seriously. Pippen's been retired for 7 years, and hasn't been that relevant for over a decade. His 94 season was 17 freaking years ago, and people talk about it like it was one of the greatest seasons ever and just happened a few years ago. If he didn't play for the Bulls, and was just another star player in the 90s, people would talk about him as much as they talk about guys like Clyde Drexler or Chris Mullin.

[97 bulls]

No not at all. I think switching Jordan with a number of players could've produced a championship depending on the year.



Kind of like how many couldn't see how giving Wade and Bosh to a guy that could lead scrubs to over 60 wins wouldn't guarantee a championship?

I think they would definitely be better, but I don't think its a guarantee they get past the Knicks or Pacers, and even if they did, I don't think they beat the Rockets.
Lol are you kidding me guy? Replace pete myers with richmond and you don't think it a guarantee they get past the knicks or win a championship?

You put richmond or any other shooting on the bulls and they'd win championships. Maybe not as dominanta s they were with jordan but the bulls were that good. And obviously that deep.

[guy]

Lol are you kidding me guy? Replace pete myers with richmond and you don't think it a guarantee they get past the knicks or win a championship?


No I don't think so. Why do you?




You put richmond or any other shooting on the bulls and they'd win championships. Maybe not as dominanta s they were with jordan but the bulls were that good. And obviously that deep.

Wow. No. Maybe Drexler or Miller, but thats about it, and it would depend on the year, and where Jordan is playing.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Seriously. Pippen's been retired for 7 years, and hasn't been that relevant for over a decade. His 94 season was 17 freaking years ago, and people talk about it like it was one of the greatest seasons ever and just happened a few years ago. If he didn't play for the Bulls, and was just another star player in the 90s, people would talk about him as much as they talk about guys like Clyde Drexler or Chris Mullin.

Yup. And Pippen wasn't even as good as Drexler (prime vs. prime). Probably better than Mullin, however, though Mullin was a superior offensive player.

[Melo Screwed Us]

you could replace kobe with pip on the current lakers and they fourpeat. just sayin.

[97 bulls]

No I don't think so. Why do you?




Wow. No. Maybe Drexler or Miller, but thats about it, and it would depend on the year, and where Jordan is playing.
Because richmond was 10xs better than myers. Its simple math. Like I said, the bulls would've won, but they wouldn't have been as dominant. No 70 or 69 win season. And they wouldn't have won in 62 in 98 cuz pippen missed half th the season.

[97 bulls]

Yup. And Pippen wasn't even as good as Drexler (prime vs. prime). Probably better than Mullin, however, though Mullin was a superior offensive player.
Yes he was. Pippen was better than drexler even in their prime.

[hitmanyr2k]

No. He couldn't have without a player better then him, or a bunch of other pieces added to the 94 Bulls. They lost in the second round to a team they lost too in 7, where the year before with the best player ever they still only won in 6, and then Jordan had to put up an epic performance to beat the Suns.

So I guess you're going to ignore the fact that when the Bulls were down 0-2 in the series against the Knicks facing a very must-win Game 3 Jordan came out shooting blanks and ended up with 3-18 shooting game? Must have been nice for him to have another star player that could put up 30 and make up for it.

Or how about when Mike couldn't hit jack in the 2nd half of Game 6 (ended up 8-25) against the Knicks in that same series. Must have been nice to have another star player that could put up 25 and close the Knicks out down the stretch...you think?
Did Pippen have that luxury in '94?

[97 bulls]

It's just that it's EVERY FREAKING WEEK. It's absurd. lol @ "what he sacrificed". Pippen wouldn't have even been known if not for Jordan. He would have become a good, possibly all-star level player without MJ, but he wouldn't have been as good an all-around and defensive player as he was, and he certainly doesn't get nearly as much talk without being part of a dynasty. He didn't sacrifice anything - he's remembered far more fondly now than if he had never played for Chicago.
That's only how you see it. Pippen is highly regarded. You see him as a tayshaun prince or somethin close to that. And stop with the jordan made pippen stupidity. I could say that about any player. Nobody gets better playing against themself. Your just upset cuz pippen gets credit for his role in those championships.

[Ne 1]

Some players that I think Pippen could have won with during his time:

Mitch Richmond -

Some may be surprised to see him here, but Richard was the most proficient scoring guard in the NBA in the 1990s. His 16,173 points between 1990 and 2000 put him well ahead of Reggie Miller in that department and he has nearly 1,000 more points than Jordan. Richmond was a six time all-star with the Kings and Wizards and a consistent 20 points a night scorer with a career high of 26 points per game in 1997. The biggest knock on Richard was that his teams were always bad. The Kings made a playoff appearance in 1996 but lost in the fist round, but his last year in the NBA he did win a title with the Los Angeles Lakers but appeared in only two playoff games. He was also the 1995 All-star game MVP.


Reggie Miller -

The second highest scoring guard in the decade behind Richmond, Miller was 5 time all-star and helped guide the Pacers to the 2000 NBA finals. He played his entire career with the Pacers and that may have hurt him in getting recognition because 5 times in his career did he average over 20 points a game and did not make the all-star team. Miller was also a fantastic shooter, he loved to curl off of screens and knock down the three ball.

John Starks -

Offensively Starks was just an average player at best, but he was a fantastic defensive player giving players like Michael Jordan a hard time in the playoffs for many years. Starks defensive tenacity is part of the reason the NBA outlawed hand checking in the mid 1990s. Starks was a one time All-star while playing for the New York Knicks in 1994, the same year he and the Knicks made the NBA finals.

Clyde Drexler -

The Glyde is one of the most successful players of the 90s, he won a NBA title with the Rockets in 1995 and was 7 time all-star in the 1990s and made the All-NBA team once. He helped Portland make the finals twice, once in 1990 and again in 1992.

Latrell Sprewell-

One of the most talented players of the 90s, Sprewell had attitude problems which hurt his on the floor performance; most notably being when in 1998 he choked his head coach PJ Carlisimo. Despite these short comings, Sprewell was a solid player making the All-star team four time and making the all NBA team in 1994. Sprewell was awesome part of the 1999 New York Knicks which were an eight seed that made a run to the NBA finals only to lose to the Spurs.

[Melo Screwed Us]

Seriously. Pippen's been retired for 7 years, and hasn't been that relevant for over a decade. His 94 season was 17 freaking years ago, and people talk about it like it was one of the greatest seasons ever and just happened a few years ago. If he didn't play for the Bulls, and was just another star player in the 90s, people would talk about him as much as they talk about guys like Clyde Drexler or Chris Mullin.
usually just kobe fans trolling as usual. since kobe's game can't get him close to michael they gotta artificially try and help him out by revising history.

[guy]

Because richmond was 10xs better than myers. Its simple math. Like I said, the bulls would've won, but they wouldn't have been as dominant. No 70 or 69 win season. And they wouldn't have won in 62 in 98 cuz pippen missed half th the season.

Dwyane Wade is 10x better then Mo Williams. So the Heat should be like 57-5 right now. But they're not. Not even close. There's other examples of this you can see as well throughout history where a player's team isn't that much more successful or more successful at all with an upgrade to one of his teammates. Simple math doesn't necessarily work in the NBA.

I'm pretty sure I already know the answer, but tell me why exactly you think Richmond on the 94 Bulls would've guaranteed them getting past the Knicks?

I did say the Bulls might've won with certain SGs in Jordan's place. Depends on who it is, and more importantly it might depend on where Jordan is playing. You can't just assume Jordan doesn't exist at all. For example, I would say Drexler would've easily been been the best SG replacement that would've gotten them the most success, but I can also argue that Jordan on Drexler's teams could've won just as many championships or more.

[guy]

usually just kobe fans trolling as usual. since kobe's game can't get him close to michael they gotta artificially try and help him out by revising history.

Alot it is Kobe fans. But Pippen is brought up alot cause he's associated and had a ton of success with Jordan, who they constantly try to compare him to Kobe. My point stands. Its not just Kobe fans either, its everyone because Pippen was part of one of the greatest dynasties and played with arguably the GOAT. I don't think its crazy that he gets brought up that much. I just think he definitely wasn't sacrificing or his legacy would've somehow been better off not ever playing with Jordan. He would barely ever be mentioned today if he wasn't in that situation.

[Harion]

even if the Bulls went past the Knicks, they were meeting the Rockets in the Finals. you'd think they would've won that? :lol

[nbacardDOTnet]

Patrick Ewing could have won a championship if he ever played with someone as good as Pippen as well.

IF Derek Harper (instead John Starks) played more and more in game 7, Ewing might be able to get one champ.

no brainer Pat Riley
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xZ11GZBKaU

[97 bulls]

Dwyane Wade is 10x better then Mo Williams. So the Heat should be like 57-5 right now. But they're not. Not even close. There's other examples of this you can see as well throughout history where a player's team isn't that much more successful or more successful at all with an upgrade to one of his teammates. Simple math doesn't necessarily work in the NBA.

I'm pretty sure I already know the answer, but tell me why exactly you think Richmond on the 94 Bulls would've guaranteed them getting past the Knicks?

I did say the Bulls might've won with certain SGs in Jordan's place. Depends on who it is, and more importantly it might depend on where Jordan is playing. You can't just assume Jordan doesn't exist at all. For example, I would say Drexler would've easily been been the best SG replacement that would've gotten them the most success, but I can also argue that Jordan on Drexler's teams could've won just as many championships or more.
The heat should be 57-5 on nba 2k. The heat are making my point for me. There's more to basketball than just scoring. There's alot of people that believed that heat heat would be exactly what they are. They don't compliment each other well. If they ain't scoreing they ain't effective.

the game revolves around scoring not winning

Which brings me back to your question as to why I feel the bulls would've won with richmond. Easy, he's a drastic upgrade over myers. And he could play a similar role like jordans. Not to mention he was a solid defender. Unlike you wade bron comparison, he'd compliment pippen well.

[97 bulls]

Alot it is Kobe fans. But Pippen is brought up alot cause he's associated and had a ton of success with Jordan, who they constantly try to compare him to Kobe. My point stands. Its not just Kobe fans either, its everyone because Pippen was part of one of the greatest dynasties and played with arguably the GOAT. I don't think its crazy that he gets brought up that much. I just think he definitely wasn't sacrificing or his legacy would've somehow been better off not ever playing with Jordan. He would barely ever be mentioned today if he wasn't in that situation.
No, pippens legacy probably would've been stronger. Or at least in the context that gets respected on this forum. And this is beacause people like you and oldschool would give more respect to a career that consisted of 25 ppg an mvp and 1 finals mvp over a career that consist of 6 championships along with 20 ppg

[OldSchoolBBall]

No, pippens legacy probably would've been stronger. Or at least in the context that gets respected on this forum. And this is beacause people like you and oldschool would give more respect to a career that consisted of 25 ppg an mvp and 1 finals mvp over a career that consist of 6 championships along with 20 ppg

Pippen is not having a career average of 25 ppg, nor is he winning a Finals MVP (or title) with Jordan in the league. Doubtful he wins an MVP either.

[guy]

The heat should be 57-5 on nba 2k. The heat are making my point for me. There's more to basketball than just scoring. There's alot of people that believed that heat heat would be exactly what they are. They don't compliment each other well. If they ain't scoreing they ain't effective.

the game revolves around scoring not winning

Which brings me back to your question as to why I feel the bulls would've won with richmond. Easy, he's a drastic upgrade over myers. And he could play a similar role like jordans. Not to mention he was a solid defender. Unlike you wade bron comparison, he'd compliment pippen well.

The Heat are a great team defensive team as well. There main issue isn't that they are ineffective when they don't score. Its just that they don't close out games well.

Fair point either way. But back to my question, how does Mitch Richmond guarantee that the Bulls would've beaten the Knicks in 94?

[guy]

No, pippens legacy probably would've been stronger. Or at least in the context that gets respected on this forum. And this is beacause people like you and oldschool would give more respect to a career that consisted of 25 ppg an mvp and 1 finals mvp over a career that consist of 6 championships along with 20 ppg

Well he's probably not doing any of those things so no, his legacy isn't better in any context. And I've ranked plenty of worse scorers over better scorers, so I don't understand why you think that of me.

[magnax1]

So I guess you're going to ignore the fact that when the Bulls were down 0-2 in the series against the Knicks facing a very must-win Game 3 Jordan came out shooting blanks and ended up with 3-18 shooting game? Must have been nice for him to have another star player that could put up 30 and make up for it.

Or how about when Mike couldn't hit jack in the 2nd half of Game 6 (ended up 8-25) against the Knicks in that same series. Must have been nice to have another star player that could put up 25 and close the Knicks out down the stretch...you think?
Did Pippen have that luxury in '94?
So you think that Mitch Richmond would've done better?
:lol
Okay. It's not an insult to Pippen to realize that them having trouble beating NY in 93 with the best player ever means that it's pretty unlikely they'd win in 94 with another different player.

[GiveItToBurrito]

He could have, probably wouldn't have though. Look at some guys who won as a real first option - Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and MJ are about it for the last twenty years - and Pippen was nowhere near the scorer any of them other than maybe Duncan were. Pippen was a great player, but he wasn't an elite scorer per se. Great faciliator and rebounder on offense who could score when needed, but he was more good than elite as a scorer. Only way he would have won as the unquestioned first option is if he'd teamed up with two or three other elite defenders - maybe Payton and Kemp? - and just won the same way the Pistons and 2008 Celtics did by scoring 90 or 95 points a night while giving up 80 or 85.

[97 bulls]

Well he's probably not doing any of those things so no, his legacy isn't better in any context. And I've ranked plenty of worse scorers over better scorers, so I don't understand why you think that of me.
Ok then why couldn't pippen lead a team to a championship? Why couldn't he get a finals mvp? Or a league mvp? I mean, it took an all world season from olajuwan and robinson to deny him the 1 year he did have an opportunity.

[97 bulls]

Pippen is not having a career average of 25 ppg, nor is he winning a Finals MVP (or title) with Jordan in the league. Doubtful he wins an MVP either.
Oh come on jordan couldn't win a championship by himself. He had 6 years to do it. Now I understand why he couldn't. But don't act like he was single-handedly winning championships by himself. Like I said, that team was just deep. And im sure pippen wouldn't avg a career 25 ppg. I was more comparing his career to dwayne wades.

[97 bulls]

He could have, probably wouldn't have though. Look at some guys who won as a real first option - Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and MJ are about it for the last twenty years - and Pippen was nowhere near the scorer any of them other than maybe Duncan were. Pippen was a great player, but he wasn't an elite scorer per se. Great faciliator and rebounder on offense who could score when needed, but he was more good than elite as a scorer. Only way he would have won as the unquestioned first option is if he'd teamed up with two or three other elite defenders - maybe Payton and Kemp? - and just won the same way the Pistons and 2008 Celtics did by scoring 90 or 95 points a night while giving up 80 or 85.
The back to back pistons didn't have an offensive juggernaut player.or how bout the spurs? Or the 04 pistons?

[Samurai Swoosh]

The year Jordan retired Pippen could have won a championship if he had a legit 2nd option, as good as him or near his level.
Possible ...


So stop hating on the guy, dude was a straight up leader.
This, not so much ... even in 1994 he was pretty immature, my dude. Leadership, and mental toughness wasn't always there for Pippen. Jordan had to work that stuff into his DNA as he got older.

Truth.

[Da_Realist]

It's just that it's EVERY FREAKING WEEK. It's absurd. lol @ "what he sacrificed". Pippen wouldn't have even been known if not for Jordan. He would have become a good, possibly all-star level player without MJ, but he wouldn't have been as good an all-around and defensive player as he was, and he certainly doesn't get nearly as much talk without being part of a dynasty. He didn't sacrifice anything - he's remembered far more fondly now than if he had never played for Chicago.

From Playing For Keeps by David Halberstam pages 227-228


The Jordan-Pippen relationship was quite different, more like teacher-student. Jordan could see Pippen's raw talent, and he knew Pippen lacked all the advantages that he had enjoyed because of the richness of the Carolina program. He set out not only to work with Pippen on the most elemental drills but to teach him the sort of toughness the NBA demanded. (There was, though, one move Pippen could make that Jordan could not: If they both stood out of bounds under the basket holding the ball and leaped out on the court, Pippen, without ever touching the ground, could slam the ball through with his left hand, and Jordan could not. Johnny Bach thought it might be that Pippen's hands were slightly larger.)
The more Jordan sensed that Pippen was becoming serious, the more he was willing to invest in him. That took some time, because for a long time Jordan was not entirely sure of Pippen's toughness, nor of his heart, nor of the totality of his and Grant's commitment. They were teammates, bonded by their talents but not really friends, the social gap between them still very large. Jordan was innately confident in all aspects of his life, as confident off the floor as he was on it; Pippen was very tentative in so many ways, the stamp of Arkansas poverty still deep in him.
Ever so slowly, the two came around to each other: Jordan just a little wary about commiting himself to a player he was still unsure of, and Pippen gradually accepting Jordan as, if not teacher, then certainly role model. More and more frequently, Collins saw the two of them working with together after practice, working on their jumpshots, or Jordan working with Pippen on the most elemental of moves, such as how to break the double team or how to swing either way when pressed by the defense along the baseline. Years later, after watching Pippen's game improve incrementally year after year, even after the championship years, Collins realized that in some ways Michael Jordan, working with a player who had a degree of hunger and talent none of them fully appreciated, had virtually cloned himself. The player who came out on the floor alongside Jordan later in their careers might as well have been a product of Dean Smith's Carolina program.

[97 bulls]

Possible ...


This, not so much ... even in 1994 he was pretty immature, my dude. Leadership, and mental toughness wasn't always there for Pippen. Jordan had to work that stuff into his DNA as he got older.

Truth.
I kinda agree with this assesment. Although still, I know your refering to him sitting out that last play in the playoffs vs the knicks. I know what he did wasn't right, but I think its justified.

Pippen was a number 1 player playing a number 2 role. I think he felt like he finally had his opportunity and it was taken away. It was more out of frustration. Besides, what he did was no more immature than other guys getting coaches fired (magic), costing your team multiple championships due to ego (shaq/kobe).

[97 bulls]

From Playing For Keeps by David Halberstam pages 227-228
Like I said before, everybodies learned from somebody. Jordan said he credits his brother for his greatest strength. His will. We gonna knock jordan for that? Besides, it says in that clip that jordan saw his raw talent.

[NBASTATMAN]

The year Jordan retired Pippen could have won a championship if he had a legit 2nd option, as good as him or near his level. Most franchise players who won a championship had the luxury to play along side a Gasol, Kobe, Kareem, Pippen... That year Pippen was impressive and should have won MVP as well.

So stop hating on the guy, dude was a straight up leader.


Pippen was a great player but TWO Pippens would not work.. They would pass the ball back to each other and never shoot in clutch situations.. A big like Ewing who could score in the low post would have done the trick..

[NBASTATMAN]

I kinda agree with this assesment. Although still, I know your refering to him sitting out that last play in the playoffs vs the knicks. I know what he did wasn't right, but I think its justified.

Pippen was a number 1 player playing a number 2 role. I think he felt like he finally had his opportunity and it was taken away. It was more out of frustration. Besides, what he did was no more immature than other guys getting coaches fired (magic), costing your team multiple championships due to ego (shaq/kobe).


Pippen should have accepted his role.. Kukoc made like 4 game winners that season and usually hit the big shots for that team the year after Mj left.. I kind of understand it but if Pippen takes that last shot than The bulls could have been swept...

Kukoc was soft and all but he was clutch.. Pippen was everything but clutch..

[97 bulls]

Pippen should have accepted his role.. Kukoc made like 4 game winners that season and usually hit the big shots for that team the year after Mj left.. I kind of understand it but if Pippen takes that last shot than The bulls could have been swept...

Kukoc was soft and all but he was clutch.. Pippen was everything but clutch..
Pippen hit some big shots too. It was 20 yrs ago but I remember him hitting one against the pacers.

[Da_Realist]

Like I said before, everybodies learned from somebody. Jordan said he credits his brother for his greatest strength. His will. We gonna knock jordan for that? Besides, it says in that clip that jordan saw his raw talent.

You don't see the difference? MJ's brother didn't teach him how to play the game.

Pippen was raw when he got to the league. Jordan put in the time and effort to mold Pippen into one of the best all around players in the game. Jordan doesn't deserve sole credit for Pippen (Pippen had the athleticism, skills, drive and temperament to want to work with the most demanding player in the NBA day after day), but it shouldn't go unmentioned either.

I think Jordan's work with Pippen is the biggest reason Jordan won six rings. The first three would have come anyway. Pippen was still learning. But during the last three, Pippen was able to play a much larger role and he allowed Jordan to be Jordan. Not just on the floor, but off it. Pippen was another coach. The Bulls two greatest players might as well have been on the coaching staff. They worked out together (along with Ron Harper, they called it the "Breakfast Club". The three would meet at Jordan's house, work out and then eat breakfast prepared by Jordan's personal chef and talk strategy -- before team practice.) Having two players that could do everything allowed them to be interchangeable for 95% of the game. They were able to lean on each other much more than in the 1st threepeat.

Jordan would have won two or three anyway, but he would have only won six with Pippen, in my opinion. I'm not sure another supporting player would have had the commitment to work with Jordan through the years. Lead dogs would have had too much ego...and other supporting players would not have wanted the extra responsibility. Remember, Pippen was a supporting player with leader responsibilities. That's a heavy burden for a player that does not get the leader credit.

[crosso√er]

One thing I'm positive of; without Jordan, Pippen would have had a greater legacy, in terms of individual accomplishments. Possibly a top twenty player of All-Time.

It really does limit your reputation when you play in Jordan's shadow.

[Da_Realist]

One thing I'm positive of; without Jordan, Pippen would have had a greater legacy, in terms of individual accomplishments. Possibly a top twenty player of All-Time.

It really does limit your reputation when you play in Jordan's shadow.

From Playing For Keeps by David Halberstam pages 227-228


The Jordan-Pippen relationship was quite different, more like teacher-student. Jordan could see Pippen's raw talent, and he knew Pippen lacked all the advantages that he had enjoyed because of the richness of the Carolina program. He set out not only to work with Pippen on the most elemental drills but to teach him the sort of toughness the NBA demanded. (There was, though, one move Pippen could make that Jordan could not: If they both stood out of bounds under the basket holding the ball and leaped out on the court, Pippen, without ever touching the ground, could slam the ball through with his left hand, and Jordan could not. Johnny Bach thought it might be that Pippen's hands were slightly larger.)
The more Jordan sensed that Pippen was becoming serious, the more he was willing to invest in him. That took some time, because for a long time Jordan was not entirely sure of Pippen's toughness, nor of his heart, nor of the totality of his and Grant's commitment. They were teammates, bonded by their talents but not really friends, the social gap between them still very large. Jordan was innately confident in all aspects of his life, as confident off the floor as he was on it; Pippen was very tentative in so many ways, the stamp of Arkansas poverty still deep in him.
Ever so slowly, the two came around to each other: Jordan just a little wary about commiting himself to a player he was still unsure of, and Pippen gradually accepting Jordan as, if not teacher, then certainly role model. More and more frequently, Collins saw the two of them working with together after practice, working on their jumpshots, or Jordan working with Pippen on the most elemental of moves, such as how to break the double team or how to swing either way when pressed by the defense along the baseline. Year later, after watching Pippen's game improve incrementally year after year, even after the championship years, Collins realized that in some ways Michael Jordan, working with a player who had a degree of hunger and talent none of them fully appreciated, had virtually cloned himself. The player who came out on the floor alongside Jordan later in their careers might as well have been a product of Dean Smith's Carolina program.

[97 bulls]

You don't see the difference? MJ's brother didn't teach him how to play the game.

Pippen was raw when he got to the league. Jordan put in the time and effort to mold Pippen into one of the best all around players in the game. Jordan doesn't deserve sole credit for Pippen (Pippen had the athleticism, skills, drive and temperament to want to work with the most demanding player in the NBA day after day), but it shouldn't go unmentioned either.

I think Jordan's work with Pippen is the biggest reason Jordan won six rings. The first three would have come anyway. Pippen was still learning. But during the last three, Pippen was able to play a much larger role and he allowed Jordan to be Jordan. Not just on the floor, but off it. Pippen was another coach. The Bulls two greatest players might as well have been on the coaching staff. They worked out together (along with Ron Harper, they called it the "Breakfast Club". The three would meet at Jordan's house, work out and then eat breakfast prepared by Jordan's personal chef and talk strategy -- before team practice.) Having two players that could do everything allowed them to be interchangeable for 95% of the game. They were able to lean on each other much more than in the 1st threepeat.

Jordan would have won two or three anyway, but he would have only won six with Pippen, in my opinion. I'm not sure another supporting player would have had the commitment to work with Jordan through the years. Lead dogs would have had too much ego...and other supporting players would not have wanted the extra responsibility. Remember, Pippen was a supporting player with leader responsibilities. That's a heavy burden for a player that does not get the leader credit.
I never said that jordan didn't help pip. Im sayn so what? What if jordan didn't get his will and determination loosing to his older broher as a kid? What if he didn't go to north carolina and learn a team game from dean smith? Pippen could've easily been in a better situation too. He obviously had the skills. Go back and look at the basketball road pippen took to get to being a hall of fame basketball player. And compare it to other greats. He wouldve went farther.

[Disaprine]

No other player came as close, so often, as Chamberlain. FOUR game seven losses to the greatest Dynasty in professional sports history, by a combined NINE points. On top of that, had the officials not handed game five of the '70 Finals to the Knicks, Chamberlain's 45 point, 20-27 shooting game, on 27 rebounds, in a 135-113 game six win, would have given him another ring.

You could also argue that injuries killed his '71 team (BOTH Baylor and West were out the entire playoffs.)
well said. :applause:

[guy]

Ok then why couldn't pippen lead a team to a championship? Why couldn't he get a finals mvp? Or a league mvp? I mean, it took an all world season from olajuwan and robinson to deny him the 1 year he did have an opportunity.

Hakeem and Robinson had multiple seasons that were at the very least close to what they did in 94. Pippen was a superstar and HEALTHY for 7 seasons, 91-97. In that time, Jordan won 3 MVPs, and Barkley, Malone, Robinson, and Hakeem won 1 MVP each. In each of those seasons, they were better then Pippen. Thats why I say he wouldn't have won an MVP.

As far as Finals MVP goes, let me restate what I said. If Jordan has a good team behind him, which he probably would, then his team is still dominating the 90s. Maybe not as dominant, but still dominant. That obviously would decrease Pippen's chances. I don't think Pippen couldn't have won a Finals MVP, but it wouldn't be in the dominant manner that Jordan, Bird, Magic, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, Wade, and Kobe have won Finals MVPs. I could see him winning a championship as the best player in a situation where its not really clear who the best player is and its more of an ensemble team and a Finals MVP thats more along the lines of the Finals MVPs that Billups, Parker, and Pierce have won. I definitely don't think winning 1 or 2 titles and Finals MVPs in a situation like that is better for his legacy then being part of the 2nd greatest dynasty ever, winning 6 championships but having no Finals MVPs.

[Burgz]

no one wins a championship on their own

there are 11 other options on an NBA team that matter just as much

[97 bulls]

Hakeem and Robinson had multiple seasons that were at the very least close to what they did in 94. Pippen was a superstar and HEALTHY for 7 seasons, 91-97. In that time, Jordan won 3 MVPs, and Barkley, Malone, Robinson, and Hakeem won 1 MVP each. In each of those seasons, they were better then Pippen. Thats why I say he wouldn't have won an MVP.

As far as Finals MVP goes, let me restate what I said. If Jordan has a good team behind him, which he probably would, then his team is still dominating the 90s. Maybe not as dominant, but still dominant. That obviously would decrease Pippen's chances. I don't think Pippen couldn't have won a Finals MVP, but it wouldn't be in the dominant manner that Jordan, Bird, Magic, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, Wade, and Kobe have won Finals MVPs. I could see him winning a championship as the best player in a situation where its not really clear who the best player is and its more of an ensemble team and a Finals MVP thats more along the lines of the Finals MVPs that Billups, Parker, and Pierce have won. I definitely don't think winning 1 or 2 titles and Finals MVPs in a situation like that is better for his legacy then being part of the 2nd greatest dynasty ever, winning 6 championships but having no Finals MVPs.

This all goes back to why I feel pippen is disrespected. Just man up and say you see him as being nothing more than a billups, parker, etc.

This is why im sooo happy james joined the heat. What james and wade are doing just shows how valuable and great he was. Why? Cuz I really feel, eventually those two are gonna figure it out and win some championships. But it ain't gonna be this yr. The difference between the two is pippen only had one yr to accomplish that feat. Not 5 like you stated cuz he played in jordans shadow. Or the multiple years that james and wade are gonna have.

Its frustrating when people say he couldn't have cuz he didn't do it in one yr. Why doesnt he get a pass? Wade, jordan, james, bryant, oneal, bird, erving, and whoever else you want to name all had multiple chhances with the best talent in the league. Especially when you look at what he had to work with. Go compare his help to that of any other superstar. Especially 95. Compare his roster to kobes or wade. They're very similare and pippen got better results. Which is why I say he could've. Not would've or its a definate. But to say he couldn't is just not a fair assesment. The fact is he faired far better with similar talent.

[scm5]

As ridiculous as it sounds, and I realize the vast majority of the people wouldn't agree, I don't think there are more than 20 players in NBA history you would take over Pippen, knowing what he gave you.

You could build a team around Pippen and know it would be good defensively and solid offensively. Pair him with a solid scorer like Boozer or Amar'e and he would be deadly. He was like a one man zone defense, capable of disrupting an entire team's offense, not just the offense of one player.

There might be better scorers, rebounds, and passers than Pippen, but there are others like them that are maybe slightly worse. Pippen was one of a kind.

[97 bulls]

As ridiculous as it sounds, and I realize the vast majority of the people wouldn't agree, I don't think there are more than 20 players in NBA history you would take over Pippen, knowing what he gave you.

You could build a team around Pippen and know it would be good defensively and solid offensively. Pair him with a solid scorer like Boozer or Amar'e and he would be deadly. He was like a one man zone defense, capable of disrupting an entire team's offense, not just the offense of one player.

There might be better scorers, rebounds, and passers than Pippen, but there are others like them that are maybe slightly worse. Pippen was one of a kind.
I fimrly believe the only difference between Scottie Pippen and other do all types like him ie james, johnson, bird etc. Is that they scored more than 25 ppg. And he makes up for that defensively. And he'd be a 24 to 25 ppg scorer if he committed himself to it, didn't play with a jordan, and or played in the stat inflated 80s. Or in this perimeter friendy era.

[guy]

This all goes back to why I feel pippen is disrespected. Just man up and say you see him as being nothing more than a billups, parker, etc.

Its frustrating when people say he couldn't have cuz he didn't do it in one yr. Why doesnt he get a pass? Wade, jordan, james, bryant, oneal, bird, erving, and whoever else you want to name all had multiple chhances with the best talent in the league. Especially when you look at what he had to work with. Go compare his help to that of any other superstar. Especially 95. Compare his roster to kobes or wade. They're very similare and pippen got better results. Which is why I say he could've. Not would've or its a definate. But to say he couldn't is just not a fair assesment. The fact is he faired far better with similar talent.

I think Pippen is considerably better then Billups and Parker. There's plenty of players that haven't won Finals MVP that I think are better then those two. In fact, there's plenty of players that never won a Finals MVP, so its really not ridiculous at all to have my opinion.

I'm not basing my opinion on the results of those 1-2 years. Actually, the people that think he's as good as those players are the ones that base it alot on those years. I'm basing it on who he was as a player.

[SkyR#1fanCapCou]

The Bulls would have still had to beat the Pacers in (what would have been) the 1994 ECF.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

You don't see the difference? MJ's brother didn't teach him how to play the game.

Pippen was raw when he got to the league. Jordan put in the time and effort to mold Pippen into one of the best all around players in the game. Jordan doesn't deserve sole credit for Pippen (Pippen had the athleticism, skills, drive and temperament to want to work with the most demanding player in the NBA day after day), but it shouldn't go unmentioned either.

I think Jordan's work with Pippen is the biggest reason Jordan won six rings. The first three would have come anyway. Pippen was still learning. But during the last three, Pippen was able to play a much larger role and he allowed Jordan to be Jordan. Not just on the floor, but off it. Pippen was another coach. The Bulls two greatest players might as well have been on the coaching staff. They worked out together (along with Ron Harper, they called it the "Breakfast Club". The three would meet at Jordan's house, work out and then eat breakfast prepared by Jordan's personal chef and talk strategy -- before team practice.) Having two players that could do everything allowed them to be interchangeable for 95% of the game. They were able to lean on each other much more than in the 1st threepeat.

Jordan would have won two or three anyway, but he would have only won six with Pippen, in my opinion. I'm not sure another supporting player would have had the commitment to work with Jordan through the years. Lead dogs would have had too much ego...and other supporting players would not have wanted the extra responsibility. Remember, Pippen was a supporting player with leader responsibilities. That's a heavy burden for a player that does not get the leader credit.
Exactly. Pippen became the great player he is today because of Jordan's nurturing. Yes Pippen could have won without MJ being an alpha dog, depends on the 2nd option.

[Roundball_Rock]

:oldlol: @ the same MJ fans in every Pippen thread.

Also :lol at the obsession with crediting Jordan for everything Pippen did. Now Jordan is even getting credit for Pippen's leadership, which was the exact opposite of Jordan's style? Jordan is such a great teacher that whether you emulate him or wind up completely opposite it is all because of the lord and savior MJ! :bowdown:


I mean, it took an all world season from olajuwan and robinson to deny him the 1 year he did have an opportunity.

He missed 10 games and the Bulls went 4-6 in them even with a soft schedule during that period. That cost them the #1 seed. If the Bulls, who were on pace for 58 wins (the #1 seed won 57 games; Chicago won 55) when Pippen played, won the #1 seed with MJ replaced with a D-Leaguer as the starting SG Pippen very likely would have won the 94' MVP.


This is why im sooo happy james joined the heat.

Me too. MJ fans can no longer run around claiming plugging any all-star SF in place of Pippen would lead to similar results. The Heat have the equivalent of Jordan, Barkley (top 3 player at his best, never #1, though), along with a Shawn Kemp type third player and are still only a very good team.

It is amusing to see several MJ fans definitively declare that with Jordan in the league Pippen would never win a ring. Based on what scenario? Jordan in Chicago without Pippen? Jordan where? With who? The best player Cleveland could acquire for Lebron was Jamison. The notion that the lord and savior Jordan was preordained to have a superstar player fall from the sky and ride shotgun with him on the way to multiple rings is ridiculous when you try to get away from fantasy and try to construct realistic scenarios for Jordan to get another superstar. What was MJ going to do? Force the Rockets to trade Hakeem for Horace Grant (the Bulls' best trade asset), Craig Hodges, and a bag of chips? Was MJ going to leave the Bulls a la Lebron? To where? Where would the $$$$ come from to pay MJ's salary and that of the incumbent superstar in his new team? What sacrifices would a team have to make to support two such salaries? Would it be Jordan+X and scrubs?


It's not an insult to Pippen to realize that them having trouble beating NY in 93 with the best player ever means that it's pretty unlikely they'd win in 94 with another different player.

What relevance does 93' have to this question? The Bulls narrowly lost to the Knicks, primarily due to one foul call. If the Bulls replaced a D-Leaguer at starting SG with an all-star like Richmond or even an all-NBA first team player like 94' Sprewell they stil would have achieved the same result? In theory acquiring such players would easily push them past the Knicks. Theory does not always work in reality, as the 2011 Heat are proving, but if one says the Bulls were, say, 95% as good as Knicks and get such a massive upgrade at their weakest position surely the odds are high that they would get past them.


ook at some guys who won as a real first option - Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, and MJ are about it for the last twenty years -

Isiah won "2" right before that window and he is a comparable player in terms of ability to Pippen.

:oldlol: at MJ fans arguing that if Pippen did not play on the Bulls he would have been just another great player, not so fondly remembered today. One, I thought you guys said Pippen did not have any real fans? They are all closet Kobe fans, right? Now you are implying he was one of the most popular players of the 90's. Two, of course he would not be remembered as much if he did not play on a dynasty. And? The argument that if Pippen did not play with MJ he would not be remembered as much is correct but that cuts two ways. Without Pippen Jordan may very well have been the 90's version of Lebron. Or, if he did win rings it would be very unlikely to have been 6. Jordan with 2-3 rings would be remembered about as much as Magic and Bird are today.

[97 bulls]

I think Pippen is considerably better then Billups and Parker. There's plenty of players that haven't won Finals MVP that I think are better then those two. In fact, there's plenty of players that never won a Finals MVP, so its really not ridiculous at all to have my opinion.

I'm not basing my opinion on the results of those 1-2 years. Actually, the people that think he's as good as those players are the ones that base it alot on those years. I'm basing it on who he was as a player.
Say what? Now your just being unreasonable. Your saying you doubt he could lead a team to a championship. And if im correcet, your basing it cuz he played with jordan? That's an even worse excuse. Nobody was gonna userp (I hope I spelled that right) what jordan had already established. No player. You see the standard that your holding pippen too?

The fact is that there's only 1 ball. Someones gonna have to take a step back and do something else. Pippen obliged. Not saying he was 30 ppg capable. But he was a better than 20 ppg scorer. And he was just as capable of leading a team as others.

All signs point to the only reason pippen didn't have an mvp and lead his own team to a championship on his own (he was the co leader of the 72,69, and 62 win bulls that won 3 championships) is cuz he didn't have multiple opportunities. Hell he was 3rd one yr and 5th another. And that year he finished 5th, im sure jordan canibalized his chances.

[97 bulls]

:oldlol: @ the same MJ fans in every Pippen thread.

Also :lol at the obsession with crediting Jordan for everything Pippen did. Now Jordan is even getting credit for Pippen's leadership, which was the exact opposite of Jordan's style? Jordan is such a great teacher that whether you emulate him or wind up completely opposite it is all because of the lord and savior MJ! :bowdown:



He missed 10 games and the Bulls went 4-6 in them even with a soft schedule during that period. That cost them the #1 seed. If the Bulls, who were on pace for 58 wins (the #1 seed won 57 games; Chicago won 55) when Pippen played, won the #1 seed with MJ replaced with a D-Leaguer as the starting SG Pippen very likely would have won the 94' MVP.



Me too. MJ fans can no longer run around claiming plugging any all-star SF in place of Pippen would lead to similar results. The Heat have the equivalent of Jordan, Barkley (top 3 player at his best, never #1, though), along with a Shawn Kemp type third player and are still only a very good team.

It is amusing to see several MJ fans definitively declare that with Jordan in the league Pippen would never win a ring. Based on what scenario? Jordan in Chicago without Pippen? Jordan where? With who? The best player Cleveland could acquire for Lebron was Jamison. The notion that the lord and savior Jordan was preordained to have a superstar player fall from the sky and ride shotgun with him on the way to multiple rings is ridiculous when you try to get away from fantasy and try to construct realistic scenarios for Jordan to get another superstar. What was MJ going to do? Force the Rockets to trade Hakeem for Horace Grant (the Bulls' best trade asset), Craig Hodges, and a bag of chips? Was MJ going to leave the Bulls a la Lebron? To where? Where would the $$$$ come from to pay MJ's salary and that of the incumbent superstar in his new team? What sacrifices would a team have to make to support two such salaries? Would it be Jordan+X and scrubs?



What relevance does 93' have to this question? The Bulls narrowly lost to the Knicks, primarily due to one foul call. If the Bulls replaced a D-Leaguer at starting SG with an all-star like Richmond or even an all-NBA first team player like 94' Sprewell they stil would have achieved the same result? In theory acquiring such players would easily push them past the Knicks. Theory does not always work in reality, as the 2011 Heat are proving, but if one says the Bulls were, say, 95% as good as Knicks and get such a massive upgrade at their weakest position surely the odds are high that they would get past them.



Isiah won "2" right before that window and he is a comparable player in terms of ability to Pippen.

:oldlol: at MJ fans arguing that if Pippen did not play on the Bulls he would have been just another great player, not so fondly remembered today. One, I thought you guys said Pippen did not have any real fans? They are all closet Kobe fans, right? Now you are implying he was one of the most popular players of the 90's. Two, of course he would not be remembered as much if he did not play on a dynasty. And? The argument that if Pippen did not play with MJ he would not be remembered as much is correct but that cuts two ways. Without Pippen Jordan may very well have been the 90's version of Lebron. Or, if he did win rings it would be very unlikely to have been 6. Jordan with 2-3 rings would be remembered about as much as Magic and Bird are today.
Great post rock.

[catch24]

Nah, he wouldn't have - unless of course he was surrounded with a couple of all-stars at or slightly below his level.

Either or, it's impossible to say. He's never been a legit 1st option for more than ONE season (not counting the 1995 year where MJ came back).

[97 bulls]

Nah, he wouldn't have - unless of course he was surrounded with a couple of all-stars at or slightly below his level.

Either or, it's impossible to say. He's never been a legit 1st option for more than ONE season (not counting the 1995 year where MJ came back).
Lol like every other guy that's lead a team to a championship

[Bigsmoke]

put Pippen on the 2004 Pistons.

[catch24]

Lol like every other guy that's lead a team to a championship

Not everyone. I'm talking about multiple all-stars. I don't think he was good enough to 'lead' a team to a championship being the teams number one scoring option and/or playmaker. That's just my opinion though.

[97 bulls]

Not everyone. I'm talking about multiple all-stars. I don't think he was good enough to 'lead' a team to a championship being the teams number one scoring option and/or playmaker. That's just my opinion though.
Ooooooohhhhhhhhh here we go again. He was good enough. Just never had a legitimate shot. Unlike lebron james for example.

[ginobli2311]

Pippen would not have been able to carry a team to a title the way some superstars have....mainly duncan/hakeem/jordan.

Pippen absolutely could have been the best player on a great team and won a title.

Did any of you watch Pippen? He was a better version of grant hill.

Put it his way:

Surround Pippen with this team in 94:

Armstrong
Richmond
Pippen
Dale Davis
Mutombo

give him a few decent role players and that team cruises to a title. Pippen is easily the best player on that team.

yes, its a great team, but so are most title teams. so why should pippen be forced in this hypothetical to win without a lot of help?

anyone here think that team loses in 94?

[catch24]

Ooooooohhhhhhhhh here we go again. He was good enough. Just never had a legitimate shot. Unlike lebron james for example.

How do you know he was good enough? And yes, he did have a "legitimate shot". He took over a Bulls team who just came off 3x championships, and had 2 other all-stars on his teams while having the games best coach.

[catch24]

Surround Pippen with this team in 94:

Armstrong
Richmond
Pippen
Dale Davis
Mutombo

Yup, that was my point. If you surrounded him with a couple solid all-stars and scorers he could have.

[guy]

Say what? Now your just being unreasonable. Your saying you doubt he could lead a team to a championship. And if im correcet, your basing it cuz he played with jordan? That's an even worse excuse. Nobody was gonna userp (I hope I spelled that right) what jordan had already established. No player. You see the standard that your holding pippen too?

What? No you're not correct. It has nothing to do with Jordan. I'm saying he couldn't lead a team to a title in the manner certain other players have done because he's not as dominant.



The fact is that there's only 1 ball. Someones gonna have to take a step back and do something else. Pippen obliged. Not saying he was 30 ppg capable. But he was a better than 20 ppg scorer. And he was just as capable of leading a team as others.

His ppg highs without Jordan, which happened in the prime of his career, are less then a point more this ppg highs with Jordan. Its a myth that he was sacrificing his game playing with Jordan.



All signs point to the only reason pippen didn't have an mvp and lead his own team to a championship on his own (he was the co leader of the 72,69, and 62 win bulls that won 3 championships) is cuz he didn't have multiple opportunities.

What? Are you serious? All signs don't point to that. What kind of ridiculous assumption is that? In Pippen's superstar years, 91-98, there were only TWO players that led there teams to championships, Jordan and Hakeem, and 5 different MVPs, Jordan, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, and Malone. What signs point to Pippen leading teams to championships and winning MVPs over those players if he had more opportunities? Whatever situation he would be in if he wasn't playing with Jordan is a total hypothetical. The signs don't point to either argument.

[ginobli2311]

Yup, that was my point. If you surrounded him with a couple solid all-stars and scorers he could have.

ok. cool.

but then i'm confused. that is what it takes to win titles for even the bird's and magic's and kobe's and shaq's and jordan's.

why should pippen do it with less?

correct me if i'm not reading your properly.

[97 bulls]

Pippen would not have been able to carry a team to a title the way some superstars have....mainly duncan/hakeem/jordan.

Pippen absolutely could have been the best player on a great team and won a title.

Did any of you watch Pippen? He was a better version of grant hill.

Put it his way:

Surround Pippen with this team in 94:

Armstrong
Richmond
Pippen
Dale Davis
Mutombo

give him a few decent role players and that team cruises to a title. Pippen is easily the best player on that team.

yes, its a great team, but so are most title teams. so why should pippen be forced in this hypothetical to win without a lot of help?

anyone here think that team loses in 94?
Finally, a voice of reason. Pippen would take over a game in a variety of ways. Maybe not like other all time greats. But thats not out of the norm. Magic didnt lead his team to wins by dropping 30 a night. It was through scoring and setting his teammates up. Duncan dominated defesively and scored but didnt set his teammates up. Whose to say which way is better? Both got the job done. Pippen wasnt gonna get you 30 a night. But it would be mainly through defense and getting his team good shots by putting them in the best possible scoring position. This is all I've ever maintained.

Look at it this way, why knock duncan cuz he couldn't go out on the perimeter and scpre off the dribble? NOBODY knocks magic for his lackluster defense. Which has cost his teams games. Why knock pip?

[Roundball_Rock]

ok. cool.

but then i'm confused. that is what it takes to win titles for even the bird's and magic's and kobe's and shaq's and jordan's.

why should pippen do it with less?

correct me if i'm not reading your properly.

Great question--and it is funny how it seems only Pippen is held to such an unrealistic standard in these hypotheticals.

The 94' Bulls with a NBA-caliber SG easily make the NBA finals and would have a shot at winning the title, especially of that SG was someone like Richmond, Sprewell, Hornacek, or Miller. It isn't as if Pippen would need Shaq, Barkley, and Mark Price to win. Prime Pippen on the 00' Blazers would win with Rasheed Wallace and Steve Smith.


Why knock pip?

MJ fans are insecure.

[Ne 1]

Don't know why Jordan fans are so insecure. Saying that Pippen was good enough to win without Jordan, or win as the best player on a team isn't a knock on Jordan at all. Just says how good Pippen was. As far as him not being the "number one scoring option" or averaging more point I don't see how that matters. Pippen was the Bulls de facto PG. His job was to facilitate first and score second.

[97 bulls]

How do you know he was good enough? And yes, he did have a "legitimate shot". He took over a Bulls team who just came off 3x championships, and had 2 other all-stars on his teams while having the games best coach.
Come on catch. What he had was similar to what james had in clevland. He was missing that second star player. You can't take a player the caliber of jordan off the team and hand the reigns over to pippen without replacing him and then say pippen can't lead a team.

Look at the 91 lakers. You excuse them loosing to the bulls cuz the didn't have kareem. And they did replace him with quality bigs. Wow the biases

[catch24]

ok. cool.

but then i'm confused. that is what it takes to win titles for even the bird's and magic's and kobe's and shaq's and jordan's.

why should pippen do it with less?

correct me if i'm not reading your properly.

Yeah, you are, but a little out of context. As you pointed out - MJ, and Hakeem did NOT need that kind of help (they are exceptions ofc), while Pippen would need the roster you listed to even get to the Finals. The players you had would be a loaded squad for Pipp - kind of like Kobe and his Lakers.

[G-Funk]

That just comes to show that some aren't even Bulls fans, just MJ homers.

[catch24]

Come on catch. What he had was similar to what james had in clevland. He was missing that second star player.

LMAO! So Mo Williams, Varejeo, Antawn Jamison => '95 Horace Grant, BJ Armstrong, and Kukoc???

You're out of your mind dude.

[catch24]

To add onto that list - Shaq in 2000 winning a title with just Kobe and a washed up Glen Rice (who was like a Mo Williams, just less efficient). AC Green, Rick Fox, Derek Fisher, Robert Horry, etc. Lots of role players (who were good in their own right), but nevertheless role players.

[ginobli2311]

Yeah, you are, but a little out of context. As you pointed out - MJ, and Hakeem did NOT need that kind of help (they are exceptions ofc), while Pippen would need the roster you listed to even get to the Finals. The player you had would be a loaded squad for Pipp - kind of Kobe and his Lakers.

but that roster is on par or slightly worse than many title teams though. so i'm still confused on why bird could have as good or better rosters. magic as good or better rosters...etc.

so please explain your point.

my take is this. no, pippen could not win a title without an all-nba teammate the way that jordan/hakeem/duncan did. but no other superstar has done that other than those three guys really in the last 31 years.

but if you gave pippen an all-nba teammate and a solid team with a good coach, i see no reason why he couldn't win multiple titles. hell, he was close enough in 94. put sprewell on the 94 bulls and i would bet they win it all actually.

so again...i'm confused.

[ginobli2311]

To add onto that list - Shaq in 2000 winning a title with just Kobe and a washed up Glen Rice (who was like a Mo Williams, just less efficient). AC Green, Rick Fox, Derek Fisher, Robert Horry, etc. Lots of role players (who were good in their own right), but nevertheless role players.

no. sorry...no.

kobe made 2nd team all nba in 2000. combined with super clutch role players like fisher and horry and a former star in glen rice that was hardly terrible.

that doesn't fit. the lakers that year meet every single historical criteria to win titles. throwing in the best coach ever doesn't hurt either.

the only players to win without an all-nba teammate are jordan/duncan/hakeem in the last 31 years. thats it. and even then, 91 pippen was definitely elite and so were parker/manu in 05 and 07.

its really hard to win titles even as all time greats.

[catch24]

but that roster is on par or slightly worse than many title teams though. so i'm still confused on why bird could have as good or better rosters. magic as good or better rosters...etc.

my take is this. no, pippen could not win a title without an all-nba teammate the way that jordan/hakeem/duncan did. but no other superstar has done that other than those three guys really in the last 31 years.


so please explain your point.


I'm texting on my phone so I'm kind of typing just to respond (apologies if you didn't understand what I was trying to say). I feel some of the guys you listed (Richmond and Mutumbo, especially in their primes) would be just as important if not better than Pippen. So to say he could lead his teams as the "number one option"... I don't know, I just don't see it.

[ginobli2311]

I'm texting on my phone so I'm kind of typing just to respond (apologies if you didn't understand what I was trying to say). I feel some of the guys you listed (Richmond and Mutumbo, especially in their primes) would be just as important if not better than Pippen. So to say he could lead his teams as the "number one option"... I don't know, I just don't see it.

then take off richmond and put in sprewell. and no, mutombo is nowhere near pippen.

[97 bulls]

What? No you're not correct. It has nothing to do with Jordan. I'm saying he couldn't lead a team to a title in the manner certain other players have done because he's not as dominant.



His ppg highs without Jordan, which happened in the prime of his career, are less then a point more this ppg highs with Jordan. Its a myth that he was sacrificing his game playing with Jordan.



What? Are you serious? All signs don't point to that. What kind of ridiculous assumption is that? In Pippen's superstar years, 91-98, there were only TWO players that led there teams to championships, Jordan and Hakeem, and 5 different MVPs, Jordan, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, and Malone. What signs point to Pippen leading teams to championships and winning MVPs over those players if he had more opportunities? Whatever situation he would be in if he wasn't playing with Jordan is a total hypothetical. The signs don't point to either argument.
Well your obviously not accounting for the fact that jordan was there. Which canibalizes pippens rankings. And as far as his scoring, I maintain that it would've gone up as the season progressed. Rock already stated that he was at 23 ppg in 95. I believe he finished at 21 cuz jordan came back. Maybe rock can chime in on why he dropped to 21.

And go look at guys that put up similar scoring numbers to pip. They all hovered around 20 then would have a few high spikes. In the 25 to 27 ppg range. Ill take a look when I get a chance.

Also. Why do you continue to compare the way jordan dominated for example to the way pippen dominated? They controlled the game in different ways. Pip was dominant in a different way

[catch24]

no. sorry...no.

kobe made 2nd team all nba in 2000. combined with super clutch role players like fisher and horry and a former star in glen rice that was hardly terrible.

???? Those are role players, just like Kerr, Kukoc, and Armstrong were. Glen Rice was a FORMER allstar - look at his production in the post season for instance. He was a shell of his former self.

That's just my opinion, though. To be honest, going by your logic, only Hakeem and Duncan won without another 'allstar' type player beside him.

[ginobli2311]

???? Those are role players, just like Kerr, Kukoc, and Armstrong were. Glen Rice was a FORMER allstar - look at his production in the post season for instance. He was a shell of his former self.

That's just my opinion, though. To be honest, going by your logic, only Hakeem and Duncan won without another 'allstar' type player beside him.

my logic? its just a fact. hakeem in 94 and duncan in 03 are the only superstar players to win without an elite 2nd option.

so i guess my problem is that you are saying its unfair for pippen to have the same caliber of team that other players had.

i guess i don't get it. so magic can have a deep team and kareem and worthy...but you have a problem with pippen having richmond and mutombo?

doesn't make sense to me. and sorry, pippen is definitely superior to both of those guys.

[catch24]

then take off richmond and put in sprewell. and no, mutombo is nowhere near pippen.

Pre injuries Mutombo (in Denver) was a beast and impacted the game in many ways - 15/12/4 (so yes, he'd be just as critical to the Bulls success as Pippen).

Why take out Richmond? And no, I don't think "plugging in Sprewell" would guarantee them a championship or even an automatic Finals spot. For his volume, Sprewell was incredibly inefficient.

[catch24]

my logic? its just a fact. hakeem in 94 and duncan in 03 are the only superstar players to win without an elite 2nd option.

I'm not denying that Duncan and Hakeem won alone, but you also Put Jordan on that list. That's faulty logic. Jordan had Pippen on his teams - an allstar level player.

I'd take a prime Glen Rice and Mitch Richmond over Pippen all day.

[ginobli2311]

Pre injuries Mutumbo impacted (in Denver) was a beast and impacted the game in many ways - 15/12/4 (so yes, he'd be just as critical to the Bulls success as Pippen).

Why take out Richmond? And no, I don't think "plugging in Sprewell" would guarantee them a championship or even an automatic Finals spot. For his volume, Sprewell was incredibly inefficient.

so then by your logic, gasol is as valuable as kobe currently. i mean, 19 points 11 boards 4 assists 2 blocks for gasol this year. sorry...i don't buy it.

in 94, mutombo put up 12/12/4.

mutmobo was good, but he's not as good as pippen. there is nothing unfair about pippen having mutombo. why can magic have kareem? i'm sorry. this doesn't make sense.

[ginobli2311]

I'm not denying that Duncan and Hakeem won alone, but you also Put Jordan on that list. That's faulty logic. Jordan had Pippen on his teams - an allstar level player.

I'd take a prime Glen Rice and Mitch Richmond over Pippen all day.

no. i put jordan on the list of players that won without an all-nba teammate. its not logic. its a fact. pippen didn't make all-nba in 91.

but that even furthers my point.

in 94, richmond made 2nd team all nba...pippen made first. richmond was good, but not as good as pippen.

so no, richmond would not equal pippen. and then mutombo was very good as well, but again, not on pippen's level and a combination of those three with solid role players is simply not historically unfair. in fact, i'd argue that its not even that great historically.

[catch24]

so then by your logic, gasol is as valuable as kobe currently. i mean, 19 points 11 boards 4 assists 2 blocks for gasol this year. sorry...i don't buy it.

What do people say about the Lakers and what their 'key to their sucess' is? The Lakers front line. BTW how is my logic equal to saying Gasol is just as important to Kobe? Gasol never played the defense Mutombo did, nor did he rebound as well.


in 94, mutombo put up 12/12/4.

His rookie year he put up 16/12/3. That's pretty f*cking awesome on both ends.


mutmobo was good, but he's not as good as pippen. there is nothing unfair about pippen having mutombo. why can magic have kareem? i'm sorry. this doesn't make sense.

Who said anything about it being "unfair"? :wtf:

[catch24]

no. i put jordan on the list of players that won without an all-nba teammate. its not logic. its a fact. pippen didn't make all-nba in 91.

It doesn't matter whether or not someone makes an allstar game. It's a fan vote dude. Look at Pippen's numbers in '91 - they were 'allstar' like. He made the AS game the previous season, putting up inferior numbers.

[ginobli2311]

It doesn't matter whether or not someone makes an allstar game. It's a fan vote dude. Look at Pippen's numbers in '91 - they were 'allstar' like. He made the AS game the previous season, putting up inferior numbers.

all-nba is not all-star. that is what you are missing. all-nba is not a fan vote mate.

all-nba has three teams.

ok. so mutombo is now equal to pippen.

i just think you under-rate pippen, but whatever. basically you just have a perception based view of how all these superstars have won titles.

i suggest you really go back and look at the rosters around larry/magic/shaq/mj/moses/kg......they are pretty ****ing loaded.

[Ne 1]

I'd take a prime Glen Rice and Mitch Richmond over Pippen all day.

Wow, you gotta be shitting me.

:facepalm

[catch24]

all-nba is not all-star. that is what you are missing. all-nba is not a fan vote mate.

That's my bad. Thought you said making the all-star team. Either or, I'm not sure that's fair. Pippen in '91 made an all-defensive team, and his offense (interms of passing and scoring was productive and mad efficient).

We can agree to disagree - and no I don't think Pippen = Mutombo, but I do believe both at 100% were on par as far as impact goes. Maybe that's just me? I don't know.

I also think Shaq in 2000 won without a lot of help (not like Hakeem or Duncan, but that 2000 team was freaking carried by Shaq like a backpack).

[catch24]

Wow, you gotta be shitting me.

:facepalm

Peak Rice = 27/4/2 on 47/47/86% shooting

Dude put the ball in the hoop pretty effectively.

[ginobli2311]

That's my bad. Thought you said making the all-star team. Either or, I'm not sure that's fair. Pippen in '91 made an all-defensive team, and his offense (interms of passing and scoring was productive and mad efficient).

We can agree to disagree - and no I don't think Pippen = Mutombo, but I do believe both at 100% were on par as far as impact goes. Maybe that's just me? I don't know.

I also think Shaq in 2000 won without a lot of help (not like Hakeem or Duncan, but that 2000 team was freaking carried by Shaq like a backpack).

so right. you are saying that pippen couldn't carry a team to a title in the way that a jordan/duncan/hakeem/shaq did. and i totally agree. i think there are like 8 players in history that could do that an all of them are bigs other than jordan.

but in terms of the historical criteria to win a title as a perimeter player, i think pippen was more than capable of winning with an all nba teammate like richmond. hell, i think the 94 bulls might win it all with richmond inserted into the sg position with the rest of the team staying the same.

the bulls certainly are a legit contender with that roster....and pippen would certainly be the best player.

[97 bulls]

LMAO! So Mo Williams, Varejeo, Antawn Jamison => '95 Horace Grant, BJ Armstrong, and Kukoc???

You're out of your mind dude.
Lol don't forget shaq, big z, west, and jj hickson. Id take williams, jamison, varejo, shaq, big z, hickson, west and parker over grant, kukoc, myers, armsrtong, scott williams, stacy king, and cartwright any day.

And even still at worse their help was similar. And what was the result? 60+ wins for the cavs and a second round exit. And 55 wins for the bulls and a second round exit. And pips team mayve gotton to 60 if he didn't miss 10 games.

Like I said, there's no difference.

[Ne 1]

Peak Rice = 27/4/2 on 47/47/86% shooting

Dude put the ball in the hoop pretty effectively.

Peak Pippen = 22/9/6/3 with elite defense, elite play making and excellent all-around play. 3rd in MVP voting (1st amongst non-centers), 4th in defensive player of the year voting (1st amongst non-centers), 8th in scoring, 23rd in rebounding, 19th in assists, 2nd in steals.

Not to mention his team was 4-6, on pace for 33 wins and the lottery without him, and 51-21 on pace for 58 wins and the #1 seed with him.

During his peak, Pippen was a phenomenal player. He could dominate a game just by playing defense.

"Pippen could score 5 points and still dominate a basketball game" - Reggie Miller

[catch24]

Lol don't forget shaq, big z, west, and jj hickson. Id take williams, jamison, varejo, shaq, big z, hickson, west and parker over grant, kukoc, myers, armsrtong, scott williams, stacy king, and cartwright any day.

Yeah, don't forget Wennington, Kerr, and Longley (who all contributed by the way). But yeah, I wouldn't. When you factor in defense, championship experience, and other intangibles, nah, no way.


And even still at worse their help was similar. And what was the result? 60+ wins for the cavs and a second round exit. And 55 wins for the bulls and a second round exit. And pips team mayve gotton to 60 if he didn't miss 10 games.

Like I said, there's no difference.

There's no way Pippens all around game was as impactful as LeBron's when we include the gap in scoring. I heavily disagree with the idea of the Cavs advancing deeper if you were to replace LeBron with Pippen.

We are def not gonna agree here. I'm out.

[guy]

Well your obviously not accounting for the fact that jordan was there. Which canibalizes pippens rankings.

What? How am I doing that?



And as far as his scoring, I maintain that it would've gone up as the season progressed. Rock already stated that he was at 23 ppg in 95. I believe he finished at 21 cuz jordan came back. Maybe rock can chime in on why he dropped to 21.

Well he's wrong. He averaged 21.9 ppg before Jordan came back. Its pretty much the same as it was in 94. My point still stands.



And go look at guys that put up similar scoring numbers to pip. They all hovered around 20 then would have a few high spikes. In the 25 to 27 ppg range. Ill take a look when I get a chance.

He has had 1 MONTH in his entire career where he averaged in that range, 25.5 ppg in December 95 (with Jordan). The most he ever averaged after that in a month was 23.7 in the 95 season on a team where he had nobody. Even if he was playing with Jordan, he would've still had alot more stretches of this type of play if he was capable of doing it for an entire year.



Also. Why do you continue to compare the way jordan dominated for example to the way pippen dominated? They controlled the game in different ways. Pip was dominant in a different way

I don't. I haven't mentioned anything comparing HOW they dominated. I know they dominated differently, but that doesn't mean Pippen was as dominant as Jordan and others.

[Ne 1]

And 55 wins for the bulls and a second round exit. And pips team mayve gotton to 60 if he didn't miss 10 games.

Like I said, there's no difference.


Thanks to Hue Hollins:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/zunxn4.jpg

[OldSchoolBBall]

I fimrly believe the only difference between Scottie Pippen and other do all types like him ie james, johnson, bird etc. Is that they scored more than 25 ppg. And he makes up for that defensively. And he'd be a 24 to 25 ppg scorer if he committed himself to it, didn't play with a jordan, and or played in the stat inflated 80s. Or in this perimeter friendy era.

Pippen is not 25 ppg scorer material. Question: why did Pippen only score 32 or more points just 8 times (and > 35 pts just 4 times) during the '94 and '95 seasons when Jordan was gone? I bet the Bulls could have used some more scoring from him many times during those two seasons...



Armstrong
Richmond
Pippen
Dale Davis
Mutombo

give him a few decent role players and that team cruises to a title. Pippen is easily the best player on that team.

Pippen was not "easily" better than Mitch Richmond. Get real. Better? Maybe - I'd say probably, even. But "easily"? No. Richmond was on Pippen's general level.

[Ne 1]

Peak Pippen was actually very close to mid 80s Magic statistically speaking...

'94 Pippen:

22/9/6/3 on 49%
All-defensive first team
23.2 PER (lets use PER since MJ fans love this statistic)
Bulls were 51-21 in games he played, and 4-6 without him

'85 Magic:

18/6/13/2 on 56%
23.2 PER
Lakers were 57-20 in games he played, and 5-0 without him

Magic is obviously the better offensive player (and would go on to become an even better player after '87), but Pippen has a huge huge edge defensively. But had Pippen's prime come in the mid 80s, against a worse league defensively and while playing on a faster pace (imagine even more transition scoring opportunities for Scottie), is a 24/10/7 season on 50+% really out of the question here? Maybe even something like 25/10/8 if he played in the mid 80s run and gun Western Conference (defensively those were some of the worst conferences in NBA history, almost every team gave up 110+ ppg). Pippen can lock down Magic in a one on one matchup as we've already seen in '91, but can you say the same is true the other way around? I think '87-'89 Magic > any version of Pippen, but mid 80s Magic vs. Pippen is a really good comparison imo. Both players can dominate a game while taking less than 10 shots too.

[MiseryCityTexas]

Dwyane Wade is 10x better then Mo Williams. So the Heat should be like 57-5 right now. But they're not. Not even close. There's other examples of this you can see as well throughout history where a player's team isn't that much more successful or more successful at all with an upgrade to one of his teammates. Simple math doesn't necessarily work in the NBA.

I'm pretty sure I already know the answer, but tell me why exactly you think Richmond on the 94 Bulls would've guaranteed them getting past the Knicks?

I did say the Bulls might've won with certain SGs in Jordan's place. Depends on who it is, and more importantly it might depend on where Jordan is playing. You can't just assume Jordan doesn't exist at all. For example, I would say Drexler would've easily been been the best SG replacement that would've gotten them the most success, but I can also argue that Jordan on Drexler's teams could've won just as many championships or more.


because mitch richmond was a character guy, and not a player with an extremely big ego, or a team/lockeroom cancer like todays players, so he could have easily worked in a championship system. plus mitch richmond was a much, much, much better player than john starks by far regardless of how great a defender starks was in his prime.

[guy]

He missed 10 games and the Bulls went 4-6 in them even with a soft schedule during that period. That cost them the #1 seed. If the Bulls, who were on pace for 58 wins (the #1 seed won 57 games; Chicago won 55) when Pippen played, won the #1 seed with MJ replaced with a D-Leaguer as the starting SG Pippen very likely would have won the 94' MVP.

Soft stretch? They played 7 of those 10 games on the road, and 5 of those 10 games against playoff teams, including 2 games against the two best teams in the West. Thats hardly a soft stretch.

I've said it before, but there's so much wrong with your pace argument especially with a small sample size. You're talking about a 3 game difference in results. Thats not much of a difference, and the Bulls could've easily still started out with a record like that considering the huge change going into the season and the road games. In fact they went through a stretch in February and March where they went 3-8 WITH PIPPEN. They did play 8 of 11 games against playoff teams, but they also played 8 games at home. Teams have bad stretches sometimes, it happens.

And even if they won 58 games, Hakeem still probably wins the MVP. Rockets won 58 games as well.



Me too. MJ fans can no longer run around claiming plugging any all-star SF in place of Pippen would lead to similar results. The Heat have the equivalent of Jordan, Barkley (top 3 player at his best, never #1, though), along with a Shawn Kemp type third player and are still only a very good team.

Its completely different. Those 3 players you mentioned are not similar to each other like Wade and Lebron are, and neither of them were the soft pansy that Bosh is. And Wade or Lebron are NOT Jordan. They haven't shown that they can change their playing style and more specifically play off the ball. And if it was Jordan who teamed up with one of those two, it wouldn't be a question on who the leader of the team was like it has been with Wade and Lebron, which has been a huge part of the problem.



It is amusing to see several MJ fans definitively declare that with Jordan in the league Pippen would never win a ring. Based on what scenario? Jordan in Chicago without Pippen? Jordan where? With who? The best player Cleveland could acquire for Lebron was Jamison. The notion that the lord and savior Jordan was preordained to have a superstar player fall from the sky and ride shotgun with him on the way to multiple rings is ridiculous when you try to get away from fantasy and try to construct realistic scenarios for Jordan to get another superstar. What was MJ going to do? Force the Rockets to trade Hakeem for Horace Grant (the Bulls' best trade asset), Craig Hodges, and a bag of chips? Was MJ going to leave the Bulls a la Lebron? To where? Where would the $$$$ come from to pay MJ's salary and that of the incumbent superstar in his new team? What sacrifices would a team have to make to support two such salaries? Would it be Jordan+X and scrubs?

Its not definite. But almost all great players do have contending teams around them for a great part of their career and depending on the success of the team and the greatness of that player, the longer they usually stay together. Its not like Jordan would've just continued playing with scrubs his entire career, whether it be with the Bulls or with another team. And I don't see how its ridiculous to think that Pippen chances would've been greatly lower due to playing against the best player in the league (assuming he's on a good enough team) instead of with him. Its common sense.



What relevance does 93' have to this question? The Bulls narrowly lost to the Knicks, primarily due to one foul call.

Okay, after looking at this whole ordeal even more, this whole series and that bad call has been overblown to death.

People like you like to say that that one call would've turned this series from a 4-3 Knicks win to a 4-2 Bulls win. First of all, that series could've easily been a 4-0 sweep for the Knicks if a Bulls scrub JoJo White didn't start a fight with the Knicks starting PG, Derek Harper, who you and others say could've gotten the Bulls a championship if they had gotten him in the offseason. Harper was ejected in game 3 and suspended in game 4. Game 3 was decided on the last play of the game, so who knows what the game would've looked like if he wasn't kicked out. Greg Anthony started in Harper's place in game 4 and went a horrid 2-13.

Second, people automatically assume that the Bulls would've still won game 6 after winning game 5, because thats what did happen. In doing that, they COMPLETELY ignore the fact that many times teams play significantly differently with a 3-2 lead going on the road as opposed to a 2-3 deficit going on the road, with a game 7 at home. Boston and LA have proven this plenty of times over the past few years. Even the Knicks proved this the very next round against the Pacers.

Third, something else that is glossed over is that IT WAS A FOUL. Go back and watch the video and you'll hear Hubie Brown, one of the brightest minds in basketball, acknowledge more then once that it was a foul. Was it a foul that should've have been called? Probably not. But it was technically a foul, so its hardly the screwjob that everyone makes it out to be.




:oldlol: at MJ fans arguing that if Pippen did not play on the Bulls he would have been just another great player, not so fondly remembered today. One, I thought you guys said Pippen did not have any real fans? They are all closet Kobe fans, right? Now you are implying he was one of the most popular players of the 90's. Two, of course he would not be remembered as much if he did not play on a dynasty. And? The argument that if Pippen did not play with MJ he would not be remembered as much is correct but that cuts two ways. Without Pippen Jordan may very well have been the 90's version of Lebron. Or, if he did win rings it would be very unlikely to have been 6. Jordan with 2-3 rings would be remembered about as much as Magic and Bird are today.

So Jordan would still be remembered as a top 5-10 player of all-time and still possibly the GOAT? Thats not much of a fall. On the other hand, good chance Pippen is barely even mentioned today. So it doesn't really cut two ways.

[Micku]

Magic is obviously the better offensive player (and would go on to become an even better player after '87), but Pippen has a huge huge edge defensively. But had Pippen's prime come in the mid 80s, against a worse league defensively and while playing on a faster pace (imagine even more transition scoring opportunities for Scottie), is a 24/10/7 season on 50+% really out of the question here? Maybe even something like 25/10/8 if he played in the mid 80s run and gun Western Conference (defensively those were some of the worst conferences in NBA history, almost every team gave up 110+ ppg). Pippen can lock down Magic in a one on one matchup as we've already seen in '91, but can you say the same is true the other way around? I think '87-'89 Magic > any version of Pippen, but mid 80s Magic vs. Pippen is a really good comparison imo. Both players can dominate a game while taking less than 10 shots too.

1. People overrate that. He couldn't stop Magic, nobody could. He would just pass the ball or do a lay up. Team defense is what slowed down Magic. He used to spin off Pippen like he did with Jordan. The difference is that Pippen would bother his count version slightly better and bump him and Jordan was quicker, but once Magic got to the right or left block with Pippen, he would just go pass him. Magic missed a lot of lay ups in game 2. In game 3, Magic got Pippen in foul trouble and he fouled out.

2. Pippen was never really that type of scorer player. In his early years, he was a driver. He wasn't a better driver than Wilkins or a better shooter than Alex English, but he had a good wingspan. He get the to the FT line, but he he couldn't really shoot. Even in his prime, he couldn't truly score that much.


But who knows for sure. Around the mid 90s, he was able to shoot anywhere from the floor. But in the 80s people didn't take a lot of 3s. I'm guessing he would do score about 20 points with 50%+ shooting. Pippen scoring 24 ppg is not really out of the question, but I doubt it. As you said, if he did then it might've been at his peak.

Would he be the number 1 option though on a championship team? Yeah sure. He is one of the best SF in history. But it depends on the team and the layout. Like if he was on...a team like the 80s Pistons, 00s Pistons or like the current Celts, then yeah.

[raptorfan_dr07]

you could replace kobe with pip on the current lakers and they fourpeat. just sayin.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Pip was superior to Kobe in every aspect of the game, with the exception of scoring. Give him a stacked team like the current Lakers, and maybe Pippen is able to win titles as the primary option.

[97 bulls]

:facepalm
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Pip was superior to Kobe in every aspect of the game, with the exception of scoring. Give him a stacked team like the current Lakers, and maybe Pippen is able to win titles as the primary option.
Ill tell you this. He'd make bynum a beast.

[NoName22]

[QUOTE=t-rex]Yes!

Pippen absolutely could have been a first option.


In 1993 the Chicago Bulls went 57-25 and won the NBA Championship over the Phoenix Suns in 6 games. Scotty Pippen playing as the second option to Jordan averaged 18.6 pts per game.


Michael Jordan (The greatest player of all time:oldlol: ) retired.


In 1994 with essentially the same team minus Jordan, Scotty Pippen led the Bulls to 55-27 record. They lost a tough 7 game series to the Knicks in the semifinal round, in a playoff contest most noted for one of the worst calls in NBA history that many feel cost the Bulls the series. (The old timers here know what I am talking about.) The Knicks went on to the NBA finals and lost to the Rockets in 7 games.


Scotty Pippen averaged 22 points per game that year. And there was only a 2 game regular season difference between the Bulls with Jordan, and the Bulls without Jordan.

In addition Pippen was

All NBA 1st team
All Defensive 1st team
The 1994 All Star game MVP
Finished 3rd in MVP voting


Could you imagine what Scotty Pippen and the 1994 Bulls could have done if Pippen had as good a wing man as Jordan was fortunate enough to have?:D


Scotty Pippen is probably one of the most underrated players in NBA history. He and Jordan provided one of the best 1-2 combos in the history of the sport.

Yes

[97 bulls]

Pippen is not 25 ppg scorer material. Question: why did Pippen only score 32 or more points just 8 times (and > 35 pts just 4 times) during the '94 and '95 seasons when Jordan was gone? I bet the Bulls could have used some more scoring from him many times during those two seasons...




Pippen was not "easily" better than Mitch Richmond. Get real. Better? Maybe - I'd say probably, even. But "easily"? No. Richmond was on Pippen's general level.
Well damn maybe if he didn't have to do every pthing he'd be able to concentrate more on scoring. The man was the bulls best man defender, help defender, lead his team in steals, and blocks, he was their best full court press guy, ans well as trapping. He was the best passer, ran the offense, best rebounder, be the coach on the floor, as well as be the bulls best scorer. And he was a solid 3pt shooter and shot a very good fg%. Cut the man some slack. No other player has had to do more for their team.

And richmond was not as good as pip. Even as the go to guy he was only 2 to 3 points better than pip in scoring. Meanwhile, pippen was better at everything else. Except 3pt shooting and fts. Pip doubles richmond in rebounds and almost triple his assists avgs. As well as steals and blocks. Come on. And let's not even start on the defensive side of the ball.

[Nevaeh]

Lol @ Jordan stans avoiding this post like the plague :roll: :roll:

What's there to avoid? It's just another "woulda, coulda shoulda" scenario that you can use with a lot of players. the "Fact" still remains that he "didn't" win a ring without MJ who was MVP all 6 times they made it to the Finals. That's not a knock on Pip though, who I respect a lot as a player. That's just the reality.

Take a look at the team's numbers. Although Pip did his thing, it was hardly what you would call "Dominating". It was a total team effort, not unlike the 2004 Pistons, or the current Celtics, in that you didn't know who was gonna get hot and go off on you. They were simply a team that thrived within the structure of the Triangle offense and accepted their roles.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/1994.html

Could they have won a ring with a better SG? Maybe, but there's been plenty of teams throughout history that "should've" accomplished something but didn't. Now, had they won a ring that year, then I could see making the regular season record such a big deal.

[ginobli2311]

Well damn maybe if he didn't have to do every pthing he'd be able to concentrate more on scoring. The man was the bulls best man defender, help defender, lead his team in steals, and blocks, he was their best full court press guy, ans well as trapping. He was the best passer, ran the offense, best rebounder, be the coach on the floor, as well as be the bulls best scorer. And he was a solid 3pt shooter and shot a very good fg%. Cut the man some slack. No other player has had to do more for their team.

And richmond was not as good as pip. Even as the go to guy he was only 2 to 3 points better than pip in scoring. Meanwhile, pippen was better at everything else. Except 3pt shooting and fts. Pip doubles richmond in rebounds and almost triple his assists avgs. As well as steals and blocks. Come on. And let's not even start on the defensive side of the ball.

i don't get the richmond vs pippen debate. as good as mitch was, he was simply not in pippen's league as a player. but that is just my opinion.

to pippen. i love pippen. i have no doubt that he could have let teams to titles. what hurts pippen is that he really only had 8 elite years. maybe 9 if we are generous.

that hurts him in all time rankings, but that is not what this is about. this is about putting prime pippen on a contender as the best player.

in 94, add a guy like sprewell or richmond to the bulls roster and i think they have a legit title chance. and that is hardly a loaded roster by any means.

is anyone disputing that?

[NoName22]

U mad cheese eyes was 1-9 in the PO & had 5 of 5 losing seasons without Pippen ?

Yes you are

[ShaqAttack3234]

no. sorry...no.

kobe made 2nd team all nba in 2000. combined with super clutch role players like fisher and horry and a former star in glen rice that was hardly terrible.

that doesn't fit. the lakers that year meet every single historical criteria to win titles. throwing in the best coach ever doesn't hurt either.

the only players to win without an all-nba teammate are jordan/duncan/hakeem in the last 31 years. thats it. and even then, 91 pippen was definitely elite and so were parker/manu in 05 and 07.

its really hard to win titles even as all time greats.

Uh Fisher didn't do shit in 2000, he shot under 35% in the regular season and ended up as the Lakers 4th guard behind Kobe, Harper and Shaw in the playoffs.

Rice pretty much sucked in the playoffs. He was benched late in games due to his defense and because of his lack of movement without the ball and contributed just 12/4/2 on 41% shooting(and pretty much completely disappeared after the first round. He never fit in either.

Even Phil Jackson said that he thought Portland, Indiana, Phoenix, Sacramento and New York all had more talent than the Lakers did that year as far as their top 8-9 guys.





Peak Pippen was actually very close to mid 80s Magic statistically speaking...

'94 Pippen:

22/9/6/3 on 49%
All-defensive first team
23.2 PER (lets use PER since MJ fans love this statistic)
Bulls were 51-21 in games he played, and 4-6 without him

'85 Magic:

18/6/13/2 on 56%
23.2 PER
Lakers were 57-20 in games he played, and 5-0 without him

Magic is obviously the better offensive player (and would go on to become an even better player after '87), but Pippen has a huge huge edge defensively. But had Pippen's prime come in the mid 80s, against a worse league defensively and while playing on a faster pace (imagine even more transition scoring opportunities for Scottie), is a 24/10/7 season on 50+% really out of the question here? Maybe even something like 25/10/8 if he played in the mid 80s run and gun Western Conference (defensively those were some of the worst conferences in NBA history, almost every team gave up 110+ ppg). Pippen can lock down Magic in a one on one matchup as we've already seen in '91, but can you say the same is true the other way around? I think '87-'89 Magic > any version of Pippen, but mid 80s Magic vs. Pippen is a really good comparison imo. Both players can dominate a game while taking less than 10 shots too.

Pippen on an 80's run and gun team could've approached those numbers, IMO. He averaged 21/8/7 on 51% shooting on the '92 Bulls and that team's pace factor was 94.4, his season 22/9/6/49 FG% season in '94 came on a team with a pace factor of 91.9.

Now if we use '85 for comparison, the Nuggets played at the fastest pace(107.6) and the Showtime Lakers were only the 9th fastest team(103.2).

So a 21-22 ppg, 8-9 rpg, 6-7 apg going from a structured slower paced offensive to a fastbreak team with 10-15 extra possessions to work with. Your estimates for his numbers don't sound unrealistic at all.

Actually, Fatal posted Michael Cooper's numbers when he played without Magic from '83-'86, and this is a 30 game sample size, he put up 10.6 apg.

[Nevaeh]

U mad cheese eyes was 1-9 in the PO & had 5 of 5 losing seasons without Pippen ?

Yes you are

Dude, what is there to be "mad" about? Jordan came into the league and inherited a team that was already struggling. He worked his way from the bottom, getting pieces added here and there, which made the Bulls a contender which then led to championships.

I'm glad it happened that way because it totally destroys the myth that MJ was the league's "Golden Child" from day 1. He actually worked his way to the top, and stayed there during his Bulls years. Another reason why fans love him is because he was the underdog who didn't inherit stacked teams like Players from Franchises with a rich tradition of getting star players year after year.

Who were the Bulls before Michael Jordan? You can ask that of any of the Laker Greats, and every decade since the beginning of the league, they were "Somebody". Not so with the Bulls though. But back on topic, Jordan and Pip were simply made for each other like Magic and Kareem were. As Lebron and Wade are proving (at least now), Just because 2 players look great together on paper, that's no guarantee that their skills will compliment each other's.

[97 bulls]

What's there to avoid? It's just another "woulda, coulda shoulda" scenario that you can use with a lot of players. the "Fact" still remains that he "didn't" win a ring without MJ who was MVP all 6 times they made it to the Finals. That's not a knock on Pip though, who I respect a lot as a player. That's just the reality.

Take a look at the team's numbers. Although Pip did his thing, it was hardly what you would call "Dominating". It was a total team effort, not unlike the 2004 Pistons, or the current Celtics, in that you didn't know who was gonna get hot and go off on you. They were simply a team that thrived within the structure of the Triangle offense and accepted their roles.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/1994.html

Could they have won a ring with a better SG? Maybe, but there's been plenty of teams throughout history that "should've" accomplished something but didn't. Now, had they won a ring that year, then I could see making the regular season record such a big deal.

Pippen was the heart and soul of that team. What your saying makes no sense. And im still trying to figure out how arnstrong made the all-star game. 15 pts 2rbds 3assts on 48% shooting? Wow

[ginobli2311]

Uh Fisher didn't do shit in 2000, he shot under 35% in the regular season and ended up as the Lakers 4th guard behind Kobe, Harper and Shaw in the playoffs.

Rice pretty much sucked in the playoffs. He was benched late in games due to his defense and because of his lack of movement without the ball and contributed just 12/4/2 on 41% shooting(and pretty much completely disappeared after the first round. He never fit in either.

Even Phil Jackson said that he thought Portland, Indiana, Phoenix, Sacramento and New York all had more talent than the Lakers did that year as far as their top 8-9 guys.







Pippen on an 80's run and gun team could've approached those numbers, IMO. He averaged 21/8/7 on 51% shooting on the '92 Bulls and that team's pace factor was 94.4, his season 22/9/6/49 FG% season in '94 came on a team with a pace factor of 91.9.

Now if we use '85 for comparison, the Nuggets played at the fastest pace(107.6) and the Showtime Lakers were only the 9th fastest team(103.2).

So a 21-22 ppg, 8-9 rpg, 6-7 apg going from a structured slower paced offensive to a fastbreak team with 10-15 extra possessions to work with. Your estimates for his numbers don't sound unrealistic at all.

Actually, Fatal posted Michael Cooper's numbers when he played without Magic from '83-'86, and this is a 30 game sample size, he put up 10.6 apg.

We have discussed this team before. No reason to rehash it. I'm not claiming the 2000 Lakers to be a great team. I was simply responding to the poster that claimed shaq's 2000 title was won completely on his own. It wasn't. His team met most historical criteria for winning titles. Yes, Shaq was clearly the guy, but even Kobe had become a very good player at that point. Certainly worthy of his all-nba selection.

My point was simple. That team had an all-nba teammate by Shaq which keeps him off of the list i was talking about.

I also think guys like harper/horry/shaw are more valuable than stats. and while rice to play awful at times, he did stretch the floor...which was his main job.

[ShaqAttack3234]

We have discussed this team before. No reason to rehash it. I'm not claiming the 2000 Lakers to be a great team. I was simply responding to the poster that claimed shaq's 2000 title was won completely on his own. It wasn't. His team met most historical criteria for winning titles. Yes, Shaq was clearly the guy, but even Kobe had become a very good player at that point. Certainly worthy of his all-nba selection.

My point was simple. That team had an all-nba teammate by Shaq which keeps him off of the list i was talking about.

I also think guys like harper/horry/shaw are more valuable than stats. and while rice to play awful at times, he did stretch the floor...which was his main job.

Yeah, I'm not suggesting he it on his own, nobody wins it on their own. But it was basically Shaq and Kobe and role players who sometimes impacted the game and sometimes didn't. The team seriously lacked 3 point shooting and were below average at 3 of the 5 positions. And while Kobe was already very good(arguably top 10 already), it wasn't the superstar Kobe we saw in 2001 and 2002 that made up more for the Lakers lack of a 3rd option.

The most impressive title to me considering the contributions from his cast and the talent of opponents is Hakeem's '94 title, I'd have to look into Rick Barry's '75 run a little closer to compare.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Well damn maybe if he didn't have to do every pthing he'd be able to concentrate more on scoring. The man was the bulls best man defender, help defender, lead his team in steals, and blocks, he was their best full court press guy, ans well as trapping. He was the best passer, ran the offense, best rebounder, be the coach on the floor, as well as be the bulls best scorer. And he was a solid 3pt shooter and shot a very good fg%. Cut the man some slack. No other player has had to do more for their team.

That's irrelevant to the point I was addressing. 97 Bulls (and you) makes the point that Pippen was a 25 ppg caliber scorer when he wasn't. If he was, he would have scored > 31 points more than 8 times in 2 seasons. The Bulls definitely needed that scoring from him more than 8 times in 2 years. But he didn't provide it. Period. A 25 ppg caliber scorer would have, however. For example, Drexler (a legit 25 ppg talent) scored 32+ ppg 16 times in 1992 alone. Mullin (another legit 25 ppg talent) scored 32+ ppg 11 times in 1993 alone and 17 times in 1992 alone. Pippen did it 8 times in 2 seasons on a team that needed his scoring more than Drexler/Mullin's teams needed their scoring.

So you can say that he "would have" done whatever, but the evidence doesn't point that way. 97 Bulls is saying that Pip "would have" been a 25 ppg scorer, but that he STILL would have put up a similar all-around stat-line and playe dthe same caliber of defense. Here you're saying that if he DIDN'T have to do all that, he would have scored more. Don't you see the inconsistency there? In my opinion Pippen just wasn't a 25 ppg talent. No shame in that, as few players are.

[97 bulls]

That's irrelevant to the point I was addressing. 97 Bulls (and you) makes the point that Pippen was a 25 ppg caliber scorer when he wasn't. If he was, he would have scored > 31 points more than 8 times in 2 seasons. The Bulls definitely needed that scoring from him more than 8 times in 2 years. But he didn't provide it. Period. A 25 ppg caliber scorer would have, however. For example, Drexler (a legit 25 ppg talent) scored 32+ ppg 16 times in 1992 alone. Mullin (another legit 25 ppg talent) scored 32+ ppg 11 times in 1993 alone and 17 times in 1992 alone. Pippen did it 8 times in 2 seasons on a team that needed his scoring more than Drexler/Mullin's teams needed their scoring.

So you can say that he "would have" done whatever, but the evidence doesn't point that way. 97 Bulls is saying that Pip "would have" been a 25 ppg scorer, but that he STILL would have put up a similar all-around stat-line and playe dthe same caliber of defense. Here you're saying that if he DIDN'T have to do all that, he would have scored more. Don't you see the inconsistency there? In my opinion Pippen just wasn't a 25 ppg talent. No shame in that, as few players are.
Go back at reread some of my post. I said he have some seasons where hed spike. Im basing this on guys like olajuwan, duncan, miller, hill, drexler, richmond etc. All hovered around 22 to 23 ppg per season, then would spike to anywhere from 25 to 27 ppg for a few seasons.

Let's say jordan never came back, then I see pippen evolving into or having seasons like this. 94 22ppg, 95 22, 96 25, 97 26, 98 24, 99 22 then he'd start to fall back down to the high teens. Obviously this is based on him getting enough help to where didn't need to do all the things he had to do in 94 and 95. Maybe if he got a center the quality of mutombo, he wouldn't need to full court press as much cuz he'd have a great defensive center. It doesn't make him any less versitle. He just wouldnt be asked to do as much.

I also say if you keep the bulls as they were (with jordan) and just put them in the 80s pip would've scored about 24 ppg for a few season as well as get an xtra rebound or 2 and an asst cuz the tempo of the league was alot higher.

[RainierBeachPoet]

pippen trivia:

the sonics drafted him and traded him, that day, to the bulls for olden polynice

[ShaqAttack3234]

That's irrelevant to the point I was addressing. 97 Bulls (and you) makes the point that Pippen was a 25 ppg caliber scorer when he wasn't. If he was, he would have scored > 31 points more than 8 times in 2 seasons. The Bulls definitely needed that scoring from him more than 8 times in 2 years. But he didn't provide it. Period. A 25 ppg caliber scorer would have, however. For example, Drexler (a legit 25 ppg talent) scored 32+ ppg 16 times in 1992 alone. Mullin (another legit 25 ppg talent) scored 32+ ppg 11 times in 1993 alone and 17 times in 1992 alone. Pippen did it 8 times in 2 seasons on a team that needed his scoring more than Drexler/Mullin's teams needed their scoring.

So you can say that he "would have" done whatever, but the evidence doesn't point that way. 97 Bulls is saying that Pip "would have" been a 25 ppg scorer, but that he STILL would have put up a similar all-around stat-line and playe dthe same caliber of defense. Here you're saying that if he DIDN'T have to do all that, he would have scored more. Don't you see the inconsistency there? In my opinion Pippen just wasn't a 25 ppg talent. No shame in that, as few players are.

If you put Pippen on Mullin's '92 Warriors? I don't see why he couldn't have averaged 25 ppg. You have said that pace in extreme cases such as the mid 80's Nuggets and Lakers(two examples you've cited) will probably make a difference. Well, the '92 Warriors were right around the mid 80's Lakers pace. And Pippen was great in the open court. In a structured half court offense? I'm not sure if he would have ever been a legit 25+ ppg scorer on good efficiency, but there are definitely situations where I could see him averaging 25.

[che guevara]

If you put Pippen on Mullin's '92 Warriors? I don't see why he couldn't have averaged 25 ppg. You have said that pace in extreme cases such as the mid 80's Nuggets and Lakers(two examples you've cited) will probably make a difference. Well, the '92 Warriors were right around the mid 80's Lakers pace. And Pippen was great in the open court. In a structured half court offense? I'm not sure if he would have ever been a legit 25+ ppg scorer on good efficiency, but there are definitely situations where I could see him averaging 25.
Yeah, he probably could have but Pippen benefited hugely from the triangle IMO, he got a lot of good open looks and layups off of cuts in the offense that he wouldn't be getting on the TMC Warriors or 80's Nuggets. Pippen knew the triangle better than almost anybody and it was one of the reasons why he was so effective.

Anyway, the real point here is that Pippen wasn't a high rate scorer, sure he could probably score 25 ppg on the '80s Nuggets, but 2009 Wade would be scoring 35 a game, '87 Jordan 40+, etc.

[Kevin_Gamble]

Yeah, he probably could have but Pippen benefited hugely from the triangle IMO, he got a lot of good open looks and layups off of cuts in the offense that he wouldn't be getting on the TMC Warriors or 80's Nuggets. Pippen knew the triangle better than almost anybody and it was one of the reasons why he was so effective.

Anyway, the real point here is that Pippen wasn't a high rate scorer, sure he could probably score 25 ppg on the '80s Nuggets, but 2009 Wade would be scoring 35 a game, '87 Jordan 40+, etc.

If Sasha Vujacic can score 30 ppg if he wants to, then surely Pippen is capable of 25ppg.

[97 bulls]

Yeah, he probably could have but Pippen benefited hugely from the triangle IMO, he got a lot of good open looks and layups off of cuts in the offense that he wouldn't be getting on the TMC Warriors or 80's Nuggets. Pippen knew the triangle better than almost anybody and it was one of the reasons why he was so effective.

Anyway, the real point here is that Pippen wasn't a high rate scorer, sure he could probably score 25 ppg on the '80s Nuggets, but 2009 Wade would be scoring 35 a game, '87 Jordan 40+, etc.
It all depends on the situation. With the nuggets, he'd be closer to 30. In his role with the bulls, he's probably doing about 24 a game in the 80s overall. And the fast break offense that teams like the warriors, nuggets and lakers played is gonna bring higher scoring numbers.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Yeah, he probably could have but Pippen benefited hugely from the triangle IMO, he got a lot of good open looks and layups off of cuts in the offense that he wouldn't be getting on the TMC Warriors or 80's Nuggets. Pippen knew the triangle better than almost anybody and it was one of the reasons why he was so effective.

Anyway, the real point here is that Pippen wasn't a high rate scorer, sure he could probably score 25 ppg on the '80s Nuggets, but 2009 Wade would be scoring 35 a game, '87 Jordan 40+, etc.

I brought up Mullin's Warriors pace because he mentioned Mullin as a comparison and he's also mentioned those mid 80's teams(one of them being the Lakers) as teams that played at fast enough paces to make a difference statistically, and Mullin's Warriors played at that pace.

I'm not comparing Pippen to Jordan or Wade as a scorer either, I don't even care about numbers in that comparison, anyone with eyes can see that Pippen wasn't the scorer either of them are/were.

[Micku]

I don't know whatever Pippen is a 24/25 point guy caliber. He never really seem that type of scorer to me. I mean, I don't think he ever had a month where he average 24 pts or above. Even when Jordan and Grant out, he never average above 24 pts.

Put him in the 80s then I think his FG% would go up because he would take shots closer to the basket, but I'm not sure if he will score above 24 points. Even Larry Bird and Julius Erving would only score 24-25 points with their offensive arsenal. I doubt Pippen would do same as those guys. Mainly because Pippen couldn't hit FTs. Even if he took roughly around the same shots as them, he would average less points because of his FTs.

[97 bulls]

I don't know whatever Pippen is a 24/25 point guy caliber. He never really seem that type of scorer to me. I mean, I don't think he ever had a month where he average 24 pts or above. Even when Jordan and Grant out, he never average above 24 pts.

Put him in the 80s then I think his FG% would go up because he would take shots closer to the basket, but I'm not sure if he will score above 24 points. Even Larry Bird and Julius Erving would only score 24-25 points with their offensive arsenal. I doubt Pippen would do same as those guys. Mainly because Pippen couldn't hit FTs. Even if he took roughly around the same shots as them, he would average less points because of his FTs.
Good point on his fts. But if his fg% goes up to let's say 52% wouldn't that get him an xtra 4 points? Cuz if his fg% goes up (which means he converting more of his shots) why is a jump of 20 to let's say 24 that far fetched? And even still, if he's a 70% ft shooter, more shots means more ft attempts. He'd get 4 easy.

[ginobli2311]

Yeah, I'm not suggesting he it on his own, nobody wins it on their own. But it was basically Shaq and Kobe and role players who sometimes impacted the game and sometimes didn't. The team seriously lacked 3 point shooting and were below average at 3 of the 5 positions. And while Kobe was already very good(arguably top 10 already), it wasn't the superstar Kobe we saw in 2001 and 2002 that made up more for the Lakers lack of a 3rd option.

The most impressive title to me considering the contributions from his cast and the talent of opponents is Hakeem's '94 title, I'd have to look into Rick Barry's '75 run a little closer to compare.

That is exactly what I was getting it. Well said.

[hitmanyr2k]

I don't know whatever Pippen is a 24/25 point guy caliber. He never really seem that type of scorer to me. I mean, I don't think he ever had a month where he average 24 pts or above. Even when Jordan and Grant out, he never average above 24 pts.


Actually in '96 Pippen won Player of the month in December averaging 26 points, 8 boards, and 6 assists when he was being mentioned as an MVP candidate along with Jordan. His scoring really only took a down turn when he started battling injuries in Febraury - March which lasted the rest of the season.


It all depends on the situation. With the nuggets, he'd be closer to 30. In his role with the bulls, he's probably doing about 24 a game in the 80s overall. And the fast break offense that teams like the warriors, nuggets and lakers played is gonna bring higher scoring numbers.

I think there's something to that because Pippen used to thrive against Western Conference teams that liked to get out in the open court. He used to kill teams like the Lakers, Golden State, Phoenix, etc.

Take for example, look at the numbers he put up against West teams on a 7 game road trip in '95.....

Warriors - 27 points (9-13 shooting), 11 rebs, 7 assists, 5 steals
Lakers - 34 points (12-21), 13 rebs,6 assists, 1 steal, 1 block
Kings - 22 points (7-16), 11 rebs, 3 assists, 3 steal, 2 blocks
Suns - 28 points (11-22), 11 rebs, 7 assists, 5 steals, 2 blocks
Warriors - 35 points (15-24), 11 rebs, 6 assists, 2 steals, 3 blocks
Blazers - 26 points (10-17), 10 rebs, 8 assists, 2 steals
Sonics - 24 points (9-19), 9 rebs, 9 assists, 5 steals, 1 block

Everyone knew the West teams were all free-flowing open court play (which played to his strengths) and the East was the grind it out defensive conference (much like today). Put Pippen on a West coast team and I don't have any doubt his numbers would go up in that pace.

[RainierBeachPoet]

The most impressive title to me considering the contributions from his cast and the talent of opponents is Hakeem's '94 title, I'd have to look into Rick Barry's '75 run a little closer to compare.

what about the '04 pistons who do not have a HOF level guy; also, DJ as the best player on the 79 sonics?

walton on the '77 blazers with his slight cast (who beat a team of all stars in the 76ers!) is noteworthy too

[ShaqAttack3234]

what about the '04 pistons who do not have a HOF level guy; also, DJ as the best player on the 79 sonics?

walton on the '77 blazers with his slight cast (who beat a team of all stars in the 76ers!) is noteworthy too

I meant as far as the individual player leading them, as far as being a total team effort, the '04 Pistons are among the best I've seen, though they did have four top 25 players that year(Ben, Chauncey, Sheed, Rip) and excellent depth. I'll have to look into the '79 Sonics team more. I've seen a good amount of Walton era Blazers games and yes I'll throw them onto there. Walton led that team in a different way than Hakeem in '94 and Barry in '75, but they were 5-12 without Walton and 44-21 with him in the regular season and we know what they did in the playoffs. Walton was so well rounded, arguably the best passing big man ever, elite rebounder and defender, versatile offensive game including a jump hook, bank shot, mid-range jumper and some ball fakes, but he had a great basketball IQ and always looked to play the team game with his outlet passing and passing from the high/low post instead of dominating with his scoring despite having the arsenal to average 25 a game if he wanted, IMO. That got the most out of a relatively limited cast.

And the '77 Blazers record with and without Walton was no fluke. They went 48-10 with him in '78 and 10-14 without him.

Thanks for bringing him up, one of my all time favorite players and definitely relevant to that discussion.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Yeah, he probably could have but Pippen benefited hugely from the triangle IMO, he got a lot of good open looks and layups off of cuts in the offense that he wouldn't be getting on the TMC Warriors or 80's Nuggets. Pippen knew the triangle better than almost anybody and it was one of the reasons why he was so effective.

Yeah, I think that this tends to get overlooked. Pippen generated a good deal of his offense through the triangle, because he knew where to be, when to cut etc. In a less structured offense, I see him being less successful as a scorer, not more (all things being equal, e.g. pace, quality of teammates etc.).

[Cowboy Thunder]

http://i53.tinypic.com/wrcjl5.gif

[97 bulls]

Yeah, I think that this tends to get overlooked. Pippen generated a good deal of his offense through the triangle, because he knew where to be, when to cut etc. In a less structured offense, I see him being less successful as a scorer, not more (all things being equal, e.g. pace, quality of teammates etc.).
This is crazy. How is putting pippen in an open court offense where he could use his leaping ability, his length, his ball handling, his ability to finish on the fastbreak, basically catering to his strengths gonna hurt him? Not to mention the xtra shot attempts that an up tempo offense brings. Just dumb

And how does him being successful in the triangle suggest that he wouldn't flourish in a fastbreak offense?

[Micku]

Actually in '96 Pippen won Player of the month in December averaging 26 points, 8 boards, and 6 assists when he was being mentioned as an MVP candidate along with Jordan. His scoring really only took a down turn when he started battling injuries in Febraury - March which lasted the rest of the season.


Ah! So, I am corrected! I thought he never averaged above 24 points in a month span.


Good point on his fts. But if his fg% goes up to let's say 52% wouldn't that get him an xtra 4 points? Cuz if his fg% goes up (which means he converting more of his shots) why is a jump of 20 to let's say 24 that far fetched? And even still, if he's a 70% ft shooter, more shots means more ft attempts. He'd get 4 easy.

Depends on the flow of the game. Dr. J and Bird average around 50% too, and they shot better than Pippen at the FT yet they got around 20-25 points. Dr. J was better at finishing at the rim and Bird could shoot anywhere from the floor. Dr. J 76ers was also one of the highest tempo teams in the league when he won MVP.

I don't really see Pippen scoring more. And simply just shooting more isn't that easy, and I doubt Pippen would shoot more than 18 shots a game. He is the type of player who's strength is to do other things on the court than creating his own shot and shooting the ball.

But who knows. If the coach tells him to shoot more than he would I guess. In his peak, then he developed a good jumper so who knows. I just don't think Pippen would average 24-25 points, but if my guess he would do it maybe once but it's hard to tell when that year would be in his career.

[OldSchoolBBall]

This is crazy. How is putting pippen in an open court offense where he could use his leaping ability, his length, his ball handling, his ability to finish on the fastbreak, basically catering to his strengths gonna hurt him? Not to mention the xtra shot attempts that an up tempo offense brings. Just dumb

And how does him being successful in the triangle suggest that he wouldn't flourish in a fastbreak offense?

Did you miss the part where I said "all other things being equal"? Meaning playing in the triangle at, say, a 94 pace versus playing in a less structured offense at a 94 pace. Not the triangle versus a fastbreak team.

[97 bulls]

Ah! So, I am corrected! I thought he never averaged above 24 points in a month span.



Depends on the flow of the game. Dr. J and Bird average around 50% too, and they shot better than Pippen at the FT yet they got around 20-25 points. Dr. J was better at finishing at the rim and Bird could shoot anywhere from the floor. Dr. J 76ers was also one of the highest tempo teams in the league when he won MVP.

I don't really see Pippen scoring more. And simply just shooting more isn't that easy, and I doubt Pippen would shoot more than 18 shots a game. He is the type of player who's strength is to do other things on the court than creating his own shot and shooting the ball.

But who knows. If the coach tells him to shoot more than he would I guess. In his peak, then he developed a good jumper so who knows. I just don't think Pippen would average 24-25 points, but if my guess he would do it maybe once but it's hard to tell when that year would be in his career.
He had a solid jumper. He had that we bank shot. I mean were talkin about roughly 3 pts here. In an era where his team would get roughly an xtra 15 shot attempts a night. Whose gonna take the xtra shots just jordan?

[Soundwave]

I'm dubious about Pippen winning a title as the sole no.1 option. Great, great player, but this thread is full of people glossing over *a lot* and a lot of people who probably were too young to even have watched that era (ahem, Kobe nutriders).

Pippen had two of the biggest playoff meltdowns in recent history. In '94 he refused to go back into the game with the Bulls down because Phil Jackson called a play for Kukoc instead of him. He parks his butt on the bench with Bill Cartwright screaming his lungs out at Pippen.

Kukoc hits the shot and that's the only reason that series became a series, otherwise the Knicks would've been up 3-0. Can you imagine if LeBron got upset and opted not to go into the game because the coach called the final shot play for Wade? This board would MELT DOWN. Sorry Pip, but you don't get a pass for that.

Then in 2000, the Blazers are up by 20+ in the 4th quarter of game 7 ... and he watches helplessly as his team collapses and loses the game. Arguably the biggest choke job ever in NBA playoff history. You can bet your ass a 34-year-old Jordan, Hakeem, or even Ewing or Barkley would've put their foot down and won that game.

Also in no way were the 93-94 Bulls as good as the 92-93 Bulls ... I don't care what the win-loss totals says. By 92-93, Pippen and Grant had slacked off forcing Jordan to carry more of the load because they were coasting through the regular season. In 93-94, they were motivated to prove they weren't chumps and no one expected anything from them.

Also lets give Horce Grant some friggin' credit here too. After he left the Bulls, Pippen's Bulls were barely even a .500 team until Jordan came back and lifted them back to playoff contention.

And you would think that in '95, with Jordan back and being rusty, Scottie could carry Michael *for once* ... but nope.

[Javat_90]

The biggest and most annoying MJ stan in the forum (OldSchoolRetard) getting pwned by real Chicago Bulls fans in this thread.

Priceless.

:oldlol:

[ILLsmak]

This 1st option stuff is so stupid...

but yes, you could build a team around pippen. However, I think pippen would be better suited alongside a less talented player who could play the MJ scoring role. He'd still be the best player, though.

I think you need Pip + main scorer + big man to win a ring, actually.

-Smak

[Fuhqueue]

The reason Scottie flourished in the triangle was because he was an intelligent player with a broad skillset who learned to impact the game in a variety of ways within the system. I have a hard time believing a player of his ball IQ transplanted to a new system wouldn't adjust his play accordingly and produce in whatever way needed, he had the versatility to do virtually everything on a basketball court to a very high level

[Ne 1]

About Pippen being able to be a 25 ppg scorer or not, what I don't think people realize is what separates Pippen from even typical 20ppg scorers from Pippen is that he 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, play making, defense. Pippen was the de facto PG of the Bulls, his job was to facilitate first and score second.



......

The Kukoc thing, and the meltdown against Portland are some blunders, although I still think Pippen at 34 past his prime, hobbled with a bad back leading Portland to 59 games and being one quarter away from the Finals is impressive. It toke Shaq and Kobe, the best 1-2 punch in NBA history to deny him a chance at a 7th ring.

And of course Pippen had his ups and downs in the clutch department just like every other player, so let's look at the other end of the spectrum.

Pippen has come up huge on both ends in many playoff games, many times when Jordan wasn't able to get the job done, here are some examples:

Jordan scores 1 point in the 4th qtr in this game. Pippen hit three straight 3 pointers to get them back in the game in the first place, plays great defense on Atlanta when they were trying to take the lead and then hit the dagger 3 in the end over Mutombo. Huge game because the Bulls actually lost Game 2 of this series and could have easily been down 0-2.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyufleA6UlA#t=3m06s

The game before the one above against the Wizards in Game 3 Pippen hit a huge 3 to cut the lead and on the final play Jordan lost the ball going up for the shot. Pippen gets the ball and takes it in for the game winning dunk smacking his back hard on the floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Df_BHT0AP8#t=7m17s

Also, the countless big shots he hit in the NY series in the '93 ECF when Jordan couldn't hit the broad side of a barn in this series. Good thing he had Pippen to close the Knicks out when he was busy going 8-25 shooting. Listen to Marv Albert's and Fratello's commentary. They know what the hell they're talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llgnf6gY_gM

I'll also mention Pippen leading the Bulls back from the 15 point deficit (and hitting big shots down the stretch against the Blazers in Game 6 of the '92 Finals, closing out the Cavs in Game 6 of the '92 ECF, the big shots down the stretch against the Pacers in Game 7 of the '98 ECF, closing out the Cavs in Game 5 of his rookie season in '88 etc. You'll never see stuff like this though because the NBA was never on the Pippen bandwagon. The critics and media would rather concentrate on Pippen's faults to boost Jordan. Real fans know whenever #23 was off #33 was there to step in.

Scottie didn't have someone like that to step up for him in '94 and '95 when he was the best player of the Bulls.

[97 bulls]

I'm dubious about Pippen winning a title as the sole no.1 option. Great, great player, but this thread is full of people glossing over *a lot* and a lot of people who probably were too young to even have watched that era (ahem, Kobe nutriders).

Pippen had two of the biggest playoff meltdowns in recent history. In '94 he refused to go back into the game with the Bulls down because Phil Jackson called a play for Kukoc instead of him. He parks his butt on the bench with Bill Cartwright screaming his lungs out at Pippen.

Kukoc hits the shot and that's the only reason that series became a series, otherwise the Knicks would've been up 3-0. Can you imagine if LeBron got upset and opted not to go into the game because the coach called the final shot play for Wade? This board would MELT DOWN. Sorry Pip, but you don't get a pass for that.

Then in 2000, the Blazers are up by 20+ in the 4th quarter of game 7 ... and he watches helplessly as his team collapses and loses the game. Arguably the biggest choke job ever in NBA playoff history. You can bet your ass a 34-year-old Jordan, Hakeem, or even Ewing or Barkley would've put their foot down and won that game.

Also in no way were the 93-94 Bulls as good as the 92-93 Bulls ... I don't care what the win-loss totals says. By 92-93, Pippen and Grant had slacked off forcing Jordan to carry more of the load because they were coasting through the regular season. In 93-94, they were motivated to prove they weren't chumps and no one expected anything from them.

Also lets give Horce Grant some friggin' credit here too. After he left the Bulls, Pippen's Bulls were barely even a .500 team until Jordan came back and lifted them back to playoff contention.

And you would think that in '95, with Jordan back and being rusty, Scottie could carry Michael *for once* ... but nope.
"Scottie and horace slacked off" What a dumb statement bro. (Don't get me wrong, yoour still my boy). But come on. Your just pulling stuff out you ass. Just like old school feeling that cuz pippen was great in the triangle offense, that somehow that means he wouldn't be good in an court offense.

And while I do agree that 94 was a meltdown. The blazers in 00 were up by 16. And if you call that a meldown, how bout when the celtics came back from being down by like 25 pts in 08 vs the kobe bryant led lakers? And that was prime kobe. Pippen was like 34 or 35 yrs old in 00. Or how bout lebron james leading 2 60 plus win teams to 2nd round exits?.

Then you bring up 95? I feel 95 was pippens best season. That team sucked. And pippen was literally that teams best everything. You name it, pippen was the best at everything for that team. And he had them at 34-31 when jordan came back. Which if they finished that pace leaves then with about a 43-39 record roughly. As a point of emphasis, here's the starting 5 of the 95 bulls pre jordan and the 05 lakers starting 5 led by kobe bryant who finished 34-58.

PG Armstrong vs. Atkins
SG Myers/Harper vs. Bryant (harper only played 20 min per cuz he couldn't fig out the offense)
SF Pippen vs. Butler
PF Kukoc vs. Odom
C Perdue vs. Mihm

And I acknowledge that kobe missed 16 games. But even if he played in those 16 games and the lakers won every single one, which I highly doubt that puts them at 500. Still under the bulls record.

But yeah pippen can't lead a team to a championship. Like I said give him comparable talent to guys like kobe and james, and he have won too.

[97 bulls]

This 1st option stuff is so stupid...

but yes, you could build a team around pippen. However, I think pippen would be better suited alongside a less talented player who could play the MJ scoring role. He'd still be the best player, though.

I think you need Pip + main scorer + big man to win a ring, actually.

-Smak
Exactly mitch richmond

[97 bulls]

About Pippen being able to be a 25 ppg scorer or not, what I don't think people realize is what separates Pippen from even typical 20ppg scorers from Pippen is that he 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, play making, defense. Pippen was the de facto PG of the Bulls, his job was to facilitate first and score second.




The Kukoc thing, and the meltdown against Portland are some blunders, although I still think Pippen at 34 past his prime, hobbled with a bad back leading Portland to 59 games and being one quarter away from the Finals is impressive. It toke Shaq and Kobe, the best 1-2 punch in NBA history to deny him a chance at a 7th ring.

And of course Pippen had his ups and downs in the clutch department just like every other player, so let's look at the other end of the spectrum.

Pippen has come up huge on both ends in many playoff games, many times when Jordan wasn't able to get the job done, here are some examples:

Jordan scores 1 point in the 4th qtr in this game. Pippen hit three straight 3 pointers to get them back in the game in the first place, plays great defense on Atlanta when they were trying to take the lead and then hit the dagger 3 in the end over Mutombo. Huge game because the Bulls actually lost Game 2 of this series and could have easily been down 0-2.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyufleA6UlA#t=3m06s

The game before the one above against the Wizards in Game 3 Pippen hit a huge 3 to cut the lead and on the final play Jordan lost the ball going up for the shot. Pippen gets the ball and takes it in for the game winning dunk smacking his back hard on the floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Df_BHT0AP8#t=7m17s

Also, the countless big shots he hit in the NY series in the '93 ECF when Jordan couldn't hit the broad side of a barn in this series. Good thing he had Pippen to close the Knicks out when he was busy going 8-25 shooting. Listen to Marv Albert's and Fratello's commentary. They know what the hell they're talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llgnf6gY_gM

I'll also mention Pippen leading the Bulls back from the 15 point deficit (and hitting big shots down the stretch against the Blazers in Game 6 of the '92 Finals, closing out the Cavs in Game 6 of the '92 ECF, the big shots down the stretch against the Pacers in Game 7 of the '98 ECF, closing out the Cavs in Game 5 of his rookie season in '88 etc. You'll never see stuff like this though because the NBA was never on the Pippen bandwagon. The critics and media would rather concentrate on Pippen's faults to boost Jordan. Real fans know whenever #23 was off #33 was there to step in.

Scottie didn't have someone like that to step up for him in '94 and '95 when he was the best player of the Bulls.

Great post. Id also like to add game 5 of the 91 nba finals. It was pippen who took over in the 3rd and 4th quarter of that close out game in which the lakers were winning. And finished with 31 pts 13 rebounds 7 assists and 5 steals. But pippen couldn't take over games.

[LA_Showtime]

Did you miss the part where I said "all other things being equal"? Meaning playing in the triangle at, say, a 94 pace versus playing in a less structured offense at a 94 pace. Not the triangle versus a fastbreak team.

This is basketball, not Economics.

[Soundwave]

"Scottie and horace slacked off" What a dumb statement bro. (Don't get me wrong, yoour still my boy). But come on. Your just pulling stuff out you ass. Just like old school feeling that cuz pippen was great in the triangle offense, that somehow that means he wouldn't be good in an court offense.

And while I do agree that 94 was a meltdown. The blazers in 00 were up by 16. And if you call that a meldown, how bout when the celtics came back from being down by like 25 pts in 08 vs the kobe bryant led lakers? And that was prime kobe. Pippen was like 34 or 35 yrs old in 00. Or how bout lebron james leading 2 60 plus win teams to 2nd round exits?.

Then you bring up 95? I feel 95 was pippens best season. That team sucked. And pippen was literally that teams best everything. You name it, pippen was the best at everything for that team. And he had them at 34-31 when jordan came back. Which if they finished that pace leaves then with about a 43-39 record roughly. As a point of emphasis, here's the starting 5 of the 95 bulls pre jordan and the 05 lakers starting 5 led by kobe bryant who finished 34-58.

PG Armstrong vs. Atkins
SG Myers/Harper vs. Bryant (harper only played 20 min per cuz he couldn't fig out the offense)
SF Pippen vs. Butler
PF Kukoc vs. Odom
C Perdue vs. Mihm

And I acknowledge that kobe missed 16 games. But even if he played in those 16 games and the lakers won every single one, which I highly doubt that puts them at 500. Still under the bulls record.

But yeah pippen can't lead a team to a championship. Like I said give him comparable talent to guys like kobe and james, and he have won too.

I'm just saying as a point of reference, Pip and Grant phoned it in during the 92-93 regular season, they both had down years. Phil even called them out on it during that year.

They had won 2 titles in a row and most of the Bulls were sleepwalking that regular season just waiting for the playoffs to start. They had become complacent.

Jordan was forced to shoot/score more that year despite playing a good chunk of the year with a sore right wrist.

[97 bulls]

I'm just saying as a point of reference, Pip and Grant phoned it in during the 92-93 regular season, they both had down years. Phil even called them out on it during that year.

They had won 2 titles in a row and most of the Bulls were sleepwalking that regular season just waiting for the playoffs to start. They had become complacent.

Jordan was forced to shoot/score more that year despite playing a good chunk of the year with a sore right wrist.
Ok I stand corrected. I see where your coming from. So cuz pip and grant phoned it in as you say, that means pippen can't lead a team to a championship? Even though with comparable talen he's done better than kobe as the leader of his teams?

[Ne 1]

I'm just saying as a point of reference, Pip and Grant phoned it in during the 92-93 regular season, they both had down years. Phil even called them out on it during that year.

This is actually sort of true. In 92-93 the Bulls coasted for some of the regular season due to Mike and Scottie coming off of the Olympics as well as back to-back Finals runs. It's fairly well documented.

Still amazing though that Pippen led Chicago to 55 wins (they were 4-6, on pace for 33 wins and the lottery without him, and 51-21 on pace for 58 wins and the #1 seed with him) especially considering everyone predicted gloom and doom for the Bulls and them not being able to get a legitimate replacement because he retired at the last minute.

A lot of sports critics thought Chicago wouldn't even make the playoffs after MJ abruptly retired in October of '93 (I was one of those critics).

Even Phil Jackson predicted the Bulls would slip 15 games in his autobiography based on how other past teams fell apart after their star player left.

[Soundwave]

Well the "real" Bulls I'd argue would be the ones that won 67 games in 91-92, so going from that to 55 wins is almost a 15 game decrease. Lets be honest too -- there probably were more than a handful of teams that took the 93-94 Bulls for granted thinking they'd waltz into Chicago and get an easy regular season W because MJ was gone.

Whereas with MJ, everyone and their grandma brought circled that game against the Bulls on the calendar months in advance.

I'm not saying Pip wasn't great at what he did, but just because you lead a team to one 50+ game win season doesn't mean you can lead a team to a championship. LeBron, T-Mac, Vince Carter, have won 50+ games in a season as no.1 options too I believe.

There is a big jump from that to willing a team to victory in the darkest, toughest moments of the playoffs.

I don't just gloss over what happened in the '94 playoffs or the 2000 playoffs.

[catch24]

Well the "real" Bulls I'd argue would be the ones that won 67 games in 91-92, so going from that to 55 wins is almost a 15 game decrease. Lets be honest too -- there probably were more than a handful of teams that took the 93-94 Bulls for granted thinking they'd waltz into Chicago and get an easy regular season W because MJ was gone.

Whereas with MJ, everyone and their grandma brought circled that game against the Bulls on the calendar months in advance.

I'm not saying Pip wasn't great at what he did, but just because you lead a team to one 50+ game win season doesn't mean you can lead a team to a championship. LeBron, T-Mac, Vince Carter, have won 50+ games in a season as no.1 options too I believe

There is a big jump from that to willing a team to victory in the darkest, toughest moments of the playoffs.

I don't just gloss over what happened in the '94 playoffs or the 2000 playoffs.

Exactly. With the right amount of talent (just like some of those guys), he might be able to go all the way. The Point is nothing is for certain; Pippen's Bulls were barely hovering over .500 in '95 right before MJ made his comeback.

[Ne 1]

Something else interesting is that if Pippen and Grant played as many games as they did in '93 in that year, the Bulls would have won 59-61 games in '94 (they were a ridiculous 44-16 in games Pippen and Grant played). Not only would they have topped the win total of the '93 Bulls by replacing Jordan with Pete Myers, but also would have the second best record in the league and #1 seed in the East.

It's just speculation if they could have won it all with a legitimate replacement, but it's certainly not unreasonable speculation. Especially considering the type of player Pippen was and that he's a proven winner. (6 rings, 9 conference finals, and 16 consecutive years in the playoffs.)

As far as the '95 team, they lost their 2nd best player. Even then Pippen had them on pace for 40+ wins and I believe the 5th or 6th seed in the East with a cast of Toni Kukoc, BJ Armstrong, Ron Harper and Bill Wennington before Jordan came back.

[hitmanyr2k]

Also lets give Horce Grant some friggin' credit here too. After he left the Bulls, Pippen's Bulls were barely even a .500 team until Jordan came back and lifted them back to playoff contention.


Can we please stop with this myth? I don't know how many times I've seen people say this. Jordan didn't lift anything back into playoff contention because the Bulls were already 6th seed in the East and had won 8 of their last 10 games before Jordan had even come back. And that coincided with them getting Luc Longley acclimated to the rotation again.

The Bulls didn't just lose Horace after '94. They lost Cartwright to retirement. They lost Scott Williams to free agency. They lost Luc Longley the first week of the season to a fracture in his foot. That left them with a donut hole in the middle for half the season with guys like Will Perdue, Greg Foster, Larry Krystowiak, and Dickey Simpkins having spot duty at the 4 and 5 positions. Pippen basically had to put up his best defensive season ever just to keep the Bulls afloat and they were never in danger of missing the playoffs.

[catch24]

the Bulls

By any chance are you AJ (the guy who uploads Pippen mixes/edits)?

[hitmanyr2k]

By any chance are you AJ (the guy who uploads Pippen mixes/edits)?

That would be me. And since I have so many games from yesteryear I have first hand knowledge of what was going on back then :oldlol:

[catch24]

That would be me. And since I have so many games from yesteryear I have first hand knowledge of what was going on back then :oldlol:

Figured there was no coincidence you and him (well you now that I know) were the only few knowledgeable posters when talking about Pipp's legacy and historical ranking. Great videos though man; I watch them all the time, haha.

www.youtube.com/user/mayhem8z <--- Not sure if you've come across my channel before, but if you haven't, there might be some stuff you'd like - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJK-qEh2cdA#t=0m27sec.

[ginobli2311]

This 1st option stuff is so stupid...

but yes, you could build a team around pippen. However, I think pippen would be better suited alongside a less talented player who could play the MJ scoring role. He'd still be the best player, though.

I think you need Pip + main scorer + big man to win a ring, actually.

-Smak

If you put mitch richmond on the 94 bulls they'd be 50/50 to win the title probably.

I honestly don't think this is up for debate. Pippen definitely could have won a title as the best player.

He just couldn't carry a team to a title the way that a few (very few actually) superstars have like hakeem and duncan..... and shaq in 00 and jordan in 91 to an extent did.

But come on. Give pippen a guy like sprewell/richmond and grant and a decent center with solid role players and they are title material for sure in 94.

[97 bulls]

Well the "real" Bulls I'd argue would be the ones that won 67 games in 91-92, so going from that to 55 wins is almost a 15 game decrease. Lets be honest too -- there probably were more than a handful of teams that took the 93-94 Bulls for granted thinking they'd waltz into Chicago and get an easy regular season W because MJ was gone.

Whereas with MJ, everyone and their grandma brought circled that game against the Bulls on the calendar months in advance.

I'm not saying Pip wasn't great at what he did, but just because you lead a team to one 50+ game win season doesn't mean you can lead a team to a championship. LeBron, T-Mac, Vince Carter, have won 50+ games in a season as no.1 options too I believe.

There is a big jump from that to willing a team to victory in the darkest, toughest moments of the playoffs.

I don't just gloss over what happened in the '94 playoffs or the 2000 playoffs.
Tmac is a bad example cuz of injuries. Vince carter has had his chances. He teamed up with jason kidd and richar jefferson on the nets and just couldn't get it done. Not to mention, if you look at the cast he had with him in toronto, its far better than what pippen had in 95 and 94. He had some pretty good team with the raptors. Not championship level but pretty good. And he neve accomplished what pip did in 1.5 yrs. Just for example, he lead a 45 win raptor team that had a young tmac, a solid ppg in alvin williams, antonio davis, keon clark, oakley, doug christie. And the best he could get is 45 wins. That only 2 wins better than the 95 bulls in which pip had a young kukoc, harper/myers, armstrong, perdue, krystowiak, and corie blount.
I think what pippen did in 94 and 95 was a strong indication that he could've lead a team to a championship.

James career leading teams isn't over. He's gotton many passes with the cavs cuz his teammates weren't up to par (allegdedly). And it looks like he wont win this yr even though he has wade. But unlike pip, he gonna have a few years to get it done. Just like kobe, mj, shaq, etc.

Like I said before. Pippen is held to a standard that no other great has had to endure. And gets very little respect. And this is a travesty.

[97 bulls]

Figured there was no coincidence you and him (well you now that I know) were the only few knowledgeable posters when talking about Pipp's legacy and historical ranking. Great videos though man; I watch them all the time, haha.

www.youtube.com/user/mayhem8z <--- Not sure if you've come across my channel before, but if you haven't, there might be some stuff you'd like - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJK-qEh2cdA#t=0m27sec.
Lol im not a knowledgeable pippen fan? Wow

[Soundwave]

Tmac is a bad example cuz of injuries. Vince carter has had his chances. He teamed up with jason kidd and richar jefferson on the nets and just couldn't get it done. Not to mention, if you look at the cast he had with him in toronto, its far better than what pippen had in 95 and 94. He had some pretty good team with the raptors. Not championship level but pretty good. And he neve accomplished what pip did in 1.5 yrs. Just for example, he lead a 45 win raptor team that had a young tmac, a solid ppg in alvin williams, antonio davis, keon clark, oakley, doug christie. And the best he could get is 45 wins. That only 2 wins better than the 95 bulls in which pip had a young kukoc, harper/myers, armstrong, perdue, krystowiak, and corie blount.
I think what pippen did in 94 and 95 was a strong indication that he could've lead a team to a championship.

James career leading teams isn't over. He's gotton many passes with the cavs cuz his teammates weren't up to par (allegdedly). And it looks like he wont win this yr even though he has wade. But unlike pip, he gonna have a few years to get it done. Just like kobe, mj, shaq, etc.

Like I said before. Pippen is held to a standard that no other great has had to endure. And gets very little respect. And this is a travesty.

I have a ton of respect for Scottie, I'm just saying, if we're handing out championships to everyone who led a team to 50+ wins, you might as well give one to Barkley, Ewing, Nash, Malone, Grant Hill, LeBron, Reggie Miller, T-Mac, etc. too.

Most of those guys likely would've won multiple titles paired with Jordan as well, I'm sure most of them would've killed to have the benefit of playing with MJ for several years.

Just for the record too, I'm pretty certain a 34 or even 36 year old Jordan would've taken those 2000 Trail Blazers to the title.

[ConanRulesNBC]

The year Jordan retired Pippen could have won a championship if he had a legit 2nd option, as good as him or near his level. Most franchise players who won a championship had the luxury to play along side a Gasol, Kobe, Kareem, Pippen... That year Pippen was impressive and should have won MVP as well.

So stop hating on the guy, dude was a straight up leader.

Agree.

[OldSchoolBBall]

lol @ saying that Pippen "led" the 200 Blazers to 59 wins. Sorry, but that was an ensemble cast with no defined leader. Yeah, I'm sure Pippen's 12 pts/6 reb/5 ast/45% FG warrants him getting credit as the leader of that team. :oldlol:

[ConanRulesNBC]

The Blazers had an amazing team that season but Pippen was definitely the leader.

[97 bulls]

lol @ saying that Pippen "led" the 200 Blazers to 59 wins. Sorry, but that was an ensemble cast with no defined leader. Yeah, I'm sure Pippen's 12 pts/6 reb/5 ast/45% FG warrants him getting credit as the leader of that team. :oldlol:
I do think the blazer were lead by committee. Maybe pip was the leader due to age, but his role with them wasn't the one of go to guy or anywhere near the role that he had in chicago.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I do think the blazer were lead by committee. Maybe pip was the leader due to age, but his role with them wasn't the one of go to guy or anywhere near the role that he had in chicago.

At least you're not completely oblivious. Unlike ConanRules, apparently.

ConanRules, are you using the term "leader" in the sense of "best player," which is how it's commonly used? If Pippen wins a title with the 2000 Blazers, do you think he'd get (or deserves) equal credit to guys like MJ/Duncan/Shaq for that title, or even equal credit to a guy like Isiah in '89/'90? My answer is that no, he wouldn't have deserved it.

[guy]

I have a ton of respect for Scottie, I'm just saying, if we're handing out championships to everyone who led a team to 50+ wins, you might as well give one to Barkley, Ewing, Nash, Malone, Grant Hill, LeBron, Reggie Miller, T-Mac, etc. too.

Most of those guys likely would've won multiple titles paired with Jordan as well, I'm sure most of them would've killed to have the benefit of playing with MJ for several years.

Just for the record too, I'm pretty certain a 34 or even 36 year old Jordan would've taken those 2000 Trail Blazers to the title.

Great post, especially the bolded. I can literally name 15-20 players that aren't as highly regarded as Pippen that have done exactly that.

[ShaqAttack3234]

At least you're not completely oblivious. Unlike ConanRules, apparently.

ConanRules, are you using the term "leader" in the sense of "best player," which is how it's commonly used? If Pippen wins a title with the 2000 Blazers, do you think he'd get (or deserves) equal credit to guys like MJ/Duncan/Shaq for that title, or even equal credit to a guy like Isiah in '89/'90? My answer is that no, he wouldn't have deserved it.

Of course he wasn't that caliber of player, but he was the best player on that team and a top 15-20 player, IMO as well as arguably the best perimeter defender even then.

[97 bulls]

Great post, especially the bolded. I can literally name 15-20 players that aren't as highly regarded as Pippen that have done exactly that.
Try it, better yet just give 5. He gave his and I punched huge holes in each one. Your not in my league as a debater guy. I guarantee ill make you look silly.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Of course he wasn't that caliber of player, but he was the best player on that team and a top 15-20 player, IMO as well as arguably the best perimeter defender even then.

Pippen was not the best player on the 200 Blazers. That would be Rasheed. Pippen/Sabonis/Stoudamire all were roughly on the same level. Pippen certainly was not the best player to any meaningful (or noticeable) degree.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Pippen was not the best player on the 200 Blazers. That would be Rasheed. Pippen/Sabonis/Stoudamire all were roughly on the same level. Pippen certainly was not the best player to any meaningful (or noticeable) degree.

Sabonis and Stoudamire roughly on Pippen's level in 2000? :wtf:

I'd take Pippen over Sheed that year. More of a leader, had a bigger impact on his teammates as a facilitator, was Portland's most important defender, IMO, their smartest player and he only averaged 0.7 fewer rpg than Sheed. In fact, Scottie averaged more rebounds than Sheed in the playoffs

Sheed was a great low post scorer back then, very good defensively and good range for a big man, but he was inconsistent and a head case.

You brought up Pippen's stats, but were Sheed's any better?

Pippen
Regular Season- 13/6/5, 1.4 spg, 0.5 bpg, 45 FG%, 53 TS%
Playoffs- 15/7/4, 2 spg, 0.4 bpg, 42 FG%, 52 TS%

Sheed
Regular Season- 16/7/2, 1.3 bpg, 1.1 spg, 52 FG%, 56 TS%
Playoffs- 18/6/2, 1.3 bpg, 0.9 spg, 49 FG%, 55 TS%

And I'd definitely give the intangibles edge to Scottie. Steve Smith was the 3rd best player on that team, ahead of both Stoudamire and Sabonis.

And I don't think the gap was big between Pippen and Sheed, but I've always thought that Scottie was the best player on the 2000 Blazers, and after 10+ years, I don't see myself changing my mind on that one.

We did see a lot of what Sheed was capable of in the WCF when he dominated the Lakers power forwards(which was a big weakness for the 2000 Lakers), but Pippen's overall defensive impact was at least as impressive in that series.

[guy]

Try it, better yet just give 5. He gave his and I punched huge holes in each one. Your not in my league as a debater guy. I guarantee ill make you look silly.

LOL okay tough guy. Every one of the following players have led teams to 50+ wins in a season:

Dominique Wilkins
Alonzo Mourning
Dikembe Mutombo
Reggie Miller
Chris Mullin
Grant Hill
Kevin Johnson
Glen Rice
Gary Payton
Chris Webber
Jason Kidd
Allen Iverson
Dirk Nowitzki
Steve Nash
Tracy McGrady
Yao Ming
Chris Paul
Ray Allen
Carmelo Anthony
Brandon Roy
Deron Williams
Joe Johnson
Kevin Durant

Thats actually 23 players. Where are the holes? I'm not arguing who had more help or not. I'm just pointing out that a star or superstar leading a team to over 50+ wins isn't some ridiculously rare accomplishment that automatically shows they could lead a team to a title.

[97 bulls]

LOL okay tough guy. Every one of the following players have led teams to 50+ wins in a season:

Dominique Wilkins
Alonzo Mourning
Dikembe Mutombo
Reggie Miller
Chris Mullin
Grant Hill
Kevin Johnson
Glen Rice
Gary Payton
Chris Webber
Jason Kidd
Allen Iverson
Dirk Nowitzki
Steve Nash
Tracy McGrady
Yao Ming
Chris Paul
Ray Allen
Carmelo Anthony
Brandon Roy
Deron Williams
Joe Johnson
Kevin Durant

Thats actually 23 players. Where are the holes? I'm not arguing who had more help or not. I'm just pointing out that a star or superstar leading a team to over 50+ wins isn't some ridiculously rare accomplishment.
I thought you were gonna give me guys that lead their team to 50 wins with similar talent to pippen 94 bulls. Even still all those guys have 2 MAJOR advantages over pippen and didn't get it done.

1. They had another quality guy to help them.

2. They had 5 to 7 years to try to win a championship.

Guys like durant, williams, johnson. Guys that are playing now. The jury is still out.

[guy]

I thought you were gonna give me guys that lead their team to 50 wins with similar talent to pippen 94 bulls. Even still all those guys have 2 MAJOR advantages over pippen and didn't get it done.

1. They had another quality guy to help them.

2. They had 5 to 7 years to try to win a championship.

Guys like durant, williams, johnson. Guys that are playing now. The jury is still out.

1. The game isn't played with just 2 players. There's more then just 2 players. Pippen still had much of a championship core and one of the greatest coaches behind him. His team wasn't filled with enormous talent, but they were still solid, experienced, and well-coached. For example, Ray Allen wasn't in a better situation in 2005 when he led the Sonics to 52 wins just cause he had Rashard Lewis, who's probably better then any of Pippen's teammates in 94. And even with all that being said, some of those players didn't have a teammate any better then Horace Grant. Some of those players were not in better situations then Pippen in 94. For example, I definitely know for sure that I wouldn't say Hill in 97, Rice in 97, AI in 01, Ray in 05, or Nash in 06 were in better situations.

2. First of all, alot of those guys weren't in that situation for that long, or they had that one season where the team overachieved in comparison to their talent. Thats why for many years they were leading there teams to under 50 wins. Second, you kind of prove my point. ALOT of really good players have led teams with just average or above average talent to over 50 wins and have had the opportunity to do that for multiple years, but they never led a team to a championship. Thats why that just because Pippen led a team to 55 wins, that doesn't mean its very strong evidence that he could've led a team to a title as the best player. (Let me reiterate, I'm not saying he couldn't have done it all. If Chauncey Billups could technically do it, I'm sure Pippen could. I just don't think he could've done it in the dominant fashion as most of the best players on championship teams and would've needed more help.)

Every decade, there's only a few players that have a led a team to a championship as that dominant no. 1. In the 60s, it was Russell and Wilt only. In the 70s, it was Kareem, Barry, and Walton (most of the other teams its very arguable who was the best on those teams). In the 80s, it was Kareem, Bird, Moses, and Magic. In the 90s, it was Jordan, Hakeem, and Duncan. In the 00s, it was Shaq, Duncan, Wade, and Kobe. But there's a BUNCH of players that have led teams to over 50 wins but not always a champioship in each decade. In this year alone, there's about 6 guys doing it (Rose, Lebron, Howard, Dirk, Kobe, Durant). So its not outrageous or an insult to think a Pippen-led team couldn't have won a champioship.

[97 bulls]

1. The game isn't played with just 2 players. There's more then just 2 players. Pippen still had much of a championship core and one of the greatest coaches behind him. His team wasn't filled with enormous talent, but they were still solid, experienced, and well-coached. For example, Ray Allen wasn't in a better situation in 2005 when he led the Sonics to 52 wins just cause he had Rashard Lewis, who's probably better then any of Pippen's teammates in 94. And even with all that being said, some of those players didn't have a teammate any better then Horace Grant. Some of those players were not in better situations then Pippen in 94. For example, I definitely know for sure that I wouldn't say Hill in 97, Rice in 97, AI in 01, Ray in 05, or Nash in 06 were in better situations.

2. First of all, alot of those guys weren't in that situation for that long, or they had that one season where the team overachieved in comparison to their talent. Thats why for many years they were leading there teams to under 50 wins. Second, you kind of prove my point. ALOT of really good players have led teams with just average or above average talent to over 50 wins and have had the opportunity to do that for multiple years, but they never led a team to a championship. Thats why that just because Pippen led a team to 55 wins, that doesn't mean its very strong evidence that he could've led a team to a title as the best player. (Let me reiterate, I'm not saying he couldn't have done it all. If Chauncey Billups could technically do it, I'm sure Pippen could. I just don't think he could've done it in the dominant fashion as most of the best players on championship teams and would've needed more help.)

Every decade, there's only a few players that have a led a team to a championship as that dominant no. 1. In the 60s, it was Russell and Wilt only. In the 70s, it was Kareem, Barry, and Walton (most of the other teams its very arguable who was the best on those teams). In the 80s, it was Kareem, Bird, Moses, and Magic. In the 90s, it was Jordan, Hakeem, and Duncan. In the 00s, it was Shaq, Duncan, Wade, and Kobe. But there's a BUNCH of players that have led teams to over 50 wins but not always a champioship in each decade. In this year alone, there's about 6 guys doing it (Rose, Lebron, Howard, Dirk, Kobe, Durant). So its not outrageous or an insult to think a Pippen-led team couldn't have won a champioship.
Again, all the guys you've named had more than 1 year to get it done. Just cherry picking one particular year isn't really a strong measurement to determine that this guy couldn't do it or not. Now if pippen was the man for a good 5 years id put him in the same boat. 55 wins in 94 or not.

Obviously you need talent and talented help. But you also need time. Pippen didn't have neither. Especially the second. I mean, kobe didn't win in his 1st or second year as the leader of a team. In fact, the lakers flat out sucked. And he had at least 500 talent. Kobes only won cuz he's been on the best team the last few years. Its the same with jordan. He gets a pass for not winning in his first few years cuz he didn't have sufficient help. Which I agree with. Its just hypocritical.

And even still let's say pippen does win a championship as the clear cut best player on his team and puts up 22/9/8 on 49% and is a defensive beast. How is that not dominant? Cuz it ain't 30 ppg? That magic johnson/larry bird type numbers.

[guy]

Again, all the guys you've named had more than 1 year to get it done.

Get what done? Win a title? Grant Hill, Allen Iverson, Ray Allen, Glen Rice, Chris Mullin, Carmelo Anthony, Joe Johnson, Deron Williams had no chance winning titles with the teams they've been on. Winning over 50 games? Sure. Winning titles? Hell no. And alot of those guys didn't have that many chances. They played on good teams for a few years here and there, but its not like they were in those situations for there whole career, and its not like they were always the leader. I would not say those players had significantly greater chances then Pippen regardless of them actually playing more years as the undisputed leader.




Just cherry picking one particular year isn't really a strong measurement to determine that this guy couldn't do it or not.

Its mainly the people that say Pippen could dominate to the degree of Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Magic, et.c that do this.



Obviously you need talent and talented help. But you also need time. Pippen didn't have neither. Especially the second. I mean, kobe didn't win in his 1st or second year as the leader of a team. In fact, the lakers flat out sucked. And he had at least 500 talent. Kobes only won cuz he's been on the best team the last few years. Its the same with jordan. He gets a pass for not winning in his first few years cuz he didn't have sufficient help. Which I agree with. Its just hypocritical.

The Lakers were a mess in 2005 with injuries, coaching changes, and they didn't really have that much talent. His 06 team definitely wasn't .500 talent.

And who's being hypocritical? I don't think anyone thinks Pippen had enough help in 94 to win a championship. I don't think anyone is crazy enough to have expected that. I'm not basing that much of my opinion on what he could do as the clear best player of a team for multiple years on that.



And even still let's say pippen does win a championship as the clear cut best player on his team and puts up 22/9/8 on 49% and is a defensive beast. How is that not dominant? Cuz it ain't 30 ppg? That magic johnson/larry bird type numbers.

Those aren't Magic or Bird numbers except for maybe a few years in their career when they weren't in their prime. Its not just scoring 30 ppg, and its not necessarily just about numbers. Those are great numbers, but its still hard for me to see Pippen ever winning a championship in the dominant manner we've discussed. He was dominant, just not that dominant.

[97 bulls]

Get what done? Win a title? Grant Hill, Allen Iverson, Ray Allen, Glen Rice, Chris Mullin, Carmelo Anthony, Joe Johnson, Deron Williams had no chance winning titles with the teams they've been on. Winning over 50 games? Sure. Winning titles? Hell no. And alot of those guys didn't have that many chances. They played on good teams for a few years here and there, but its not like they were in those situations for there whole career, and its not like they were always the leader. I would not say those players had significantly greater chances then Pippen regardless of them actually playing more years as the undisputed leader.




Its mainly the people that say Pippen could dominate to the degree of Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Magic, et.c that do this.



The Lakers were a mess in 2005 with injuries, coaching changes, and they didn't really have that much talent. His 06 team definitely wasn't .500 talent.

And who's being hypocritical? I don't think anyone thinks Pippen had enough help in 94 to win a championship. I don't think anyone is crazy enough to have expected that. I'm not basing that much of my opinion on what he could do as the clear best player of a team for multiple years on that.



Those aren't Magic or Bird numbers except for maybe a few years in their career when they weren't in their prime. Its not just scoring 30 ppg, and its not necessarily just about numbers. Those are great numbers, but its still hard for me to see Pippen ever winning a championship in the dominant manner we've discussed. He was dominant, just not that dominant.

2 things. 1st, let's start from the top. If you don't think pippen could lead a team to a championship, please say on what basis you'd make that claim. What did pippen do in his career that would leave you that impression?

2nd. Compare scottie pippens 22 9 and 7 and being the best defender on the pererimeter, to magics 23 6 11 and terrible defense. And mind you the diferent reas the two played in. And please explain to me why magics is more dominant.

Also, please stop using guys like ray allen, glen rice, and grant hill in your argument. In no way shape or form are they on pippens level. Hill was but his prime was killed by injuries. I think guys like ewing, barkley, malone and robinson are more on pippens level. And those guys had ample opportunities to win.