Michael Jordan WON a championship by himself. Many are just Ignorant about it on ISH

[gengiskhan]

Biggest F'ing Joke. MJ couldn't win a ring without Pippen. :lol

Fact 1: 1991 NBA Champions, BULLS had only one a.k.a. Single All-star in their whole roster. His name was a SG called Michael Jeffery Jordan. rest were still 1987 -1991 "Jordanaires" (incl. Pippen)

Fact 2:In 1991, Scottie Pippen was NOT even good enough to secure all-star 2nd team spot. let alone becoming all-star starter from the East in 1991.

Fact 3:Pippen matured in 1992 season into an all-star starter & a legit threat as a complete player at both ends of the court. BUT. MJ has already won a ring by then. so pressure is off Scottie completely so he blossomed.

Fact 4: How did MJ won a ring by himself? He averaged 11.4 Asists after scoring 31.2 Pts & 6.6 Rebs[/U]

1991 NBA Finals. Besides Guarding Magic, Pippen had ZERO responsibility offensively. MJ dished out all the assists while taking over the clutch every single game & also making key steals.

Pippen was just not good enough yet in 1991. Many here FAIL to understand this very logic here.

Pippen became The Great Scottie Pippen from 1992 season NOT 1991.

& this is how MJ revolutionized the game forever. He did what bigger, taller Clyde in 1989 Finals. couldn't do as perimeter player despite having an all-star terry porter

Backcourt perimeter player like Magic needed 2 HOF all-stars to win titles.

Backcourt perimeter player like Bird needed 2 HOF all-stars to win titles.

Michael Jordan is the only "BACKCOURT PERIMETER" player in the NBA History to win a title by himself WITHOUT any help as a lone all-star on a bulls roster.... Hence the GOAT title forever.

This feat has NEVER been repeated even to this day. that incl. LBJ etc etc

Faaking Kobe as a lone all-star on LAL roster cound'nt even make it to POs.or if he did, lost the series being up 3-1 :roll:

Even though Dirk won as lone MAVs all-star in 2011 BUT he is a 7-footer playing forward in a weak era with rules in his favor.

Lone perimeter backcourt all-star will never do it again despite rules favoring him in today's era.

MJ IS THE ONLY ONE. :coleman:

[kmartshopper]

And so it begins. The great shitstorm of our time.

[ac_gold_26]

Nobody wins a championship by themselfs lol. You got no clue about basketball.

[selrahc]

who cares? why are you living in the past?

[gengiskhan]

And so it begins. The great shitstorm of our time.

No matter how much MJ haters, other stans, homers or kobe'tards or half retards try

facts are facts.

Pippen DID NOT make it to 1991 All-star line up even as a reserve.

Pippen WAS NOT injured in 1991 season.

MJ won 1991 title without a real sidekick.

MJ won 1991 title with the "same jordanaires" which incl. still maturing pippen & grant.

[Round Mound]

This is The Kind of Crap I Had to Put Up With In the 90s while Not Being a Jordan Fan :facepalm :rolleyes: . What Where Pippen`s Numbers In the 1991 Finals? Especially Would Like to See Those In Game 5....Someone?

[iamgine]

Many here FAIL to understand this very logic here
You fail to understand that Pippen not an all star is not equal MJ won by himself.

[gengiskhan]

This is The Kind of Crap I Had to Put Up With In the 90s while Not Being a Jordan Fan :facepalm :rolleyes: . What Where Pippen`s Numbers In the 1991 Finals? Especially Would Like to See Those In Game 5....Someone?

Live wit it bro.

Jordan didnt won anytihng wihtout Pippen is a joke.:roll: funny thing is, even Barkley says that on TNT & TBS & other interviews.

Pippen was already 25 yrs old in 1991. He still failed to make to all-star reserves list. He's being a pro since 1987.

By going by ISHers logic here, MJ should've lost 1991 NBA Finals & win the next year in 1992 as Pippen becomes a perfect combo to MJ.

[gengiskhan]

You fail to understand that Pippen not an all star is not equal MJ won by himself.

If 1991 Pippen is not 2000 Kobe to Shaq

If 1991 Pippen is not 2012 Wade to LBJ

then 1991 MJ won it by himself as Bulls were still called "MICHAEL & the Jordanaires"

BTW, this is no KNOCK on 1992-1998 Pippen who was a great player.

[funnystuff]

ISH should make a seperate "Historic players" forum.

[KOBE143]

Obvious trolling

Negged

[Doranku]

Negged

[Round Mound]

Live wit it bro.

Jordan didnt won anytihng wihtout Pippen is a joke.:roll: funny thing is, even Barkley says that on TNT & TBS & other interviews.

Pippen was already 25 yrs old in 1991. He still failed to make to all-star reserves list. He's being a pro since 1987.

By going by ISHers logic here, MJ should've lost 1991 NBA Finals & win the next year in 1992 as Pippen becomes a perfect combo to MJ.

:oldlol: Nice Try :facepalm :rolleyes:

Barkley Never Said What You Say About Pippen. Bull. He Actually Said Jordan Was Lucky to Play With Pippen in His Prime, as Well as Grant and Rodman!. Jordan had 2 All Stars Back Him Up In Their Primes and His Prime His Whole Career.

Pippen Became an All Star in 1990 In Case You Forgot and He Helped Jordan Win a Ring by Guarding Drexler and Magic the Best. out of those 1st Two Rings.

He Was the Best Defender in the Bulls by Far and The Best Perimeter Defender in the League.

He Had More Responsabilities than Jordan because He Was the Point-Forward Under a Trinagle that Diminished His Stats. He Had To Do More Stuff than Just Score. Create and Be the Best Defender in the Team is Something That Usually is Given to 2 Different Players, Yet Pippen Had No Problem With That and Did Both Jobs at a Great Level ( Not to Mention, Rebound, Score, Team Defend etc)

He Had To Create (Something Jordan finally Accepted since Phil Was Trying to Make Jordan Understand This and Finally It Happened), Be the 2nd Lead Scorer, Be The 2nd Lead Rebounder, Be The Best Defender, Be The Best Team Defender and Play as a Teamate More than a Star.

Pippen`s 1991 Stats while Being the Best Individual Defender For Those Play-Offs and Finals (Defensive Rating Agrees): 20.8 PPG (45.3% FG), 9.4 RPG, 6.6 APG, 2.4 SPG and 1.0 BPG.

If Those are Not All Star Level Stats Then What Are?

[9erempiree]

Jordan was playing against weak 6 footers. He was being guarded by these guys.:oldlol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFDTe5kqxKM

[LebronairJAMES]

Nobody wins a championship by themselfs lol. You got no clue about basketball.
THIS :applause:

[imdaman99]

team defense dude. yes jordan was by far the best player by then in the game, but team defense involves more than 1 guy. i dont care if he was defensive player of the year, mvp, horseradish of the year, basketball means you win with good role play from the rest of your team. this is no slight to him, believe that.

[gengiskhan]

This is The Kind of Crap I Had to Put Up With In the 90s while Not Being a Jordan Fan :facepalm :rolleyes: . What Where Pippen`s Numbers In the 1991 Finals? Especially Would Like to See Those In Game 5....Someone?

:facepalm :facepalm

How about Game 1. when Bulls went down 0-1

How about Game 3 OT numbers as MJ took over

Game 5 isn't the only game of NBA Finals.

reality is Pippen didnt mature into an all-star till age 26 in 1992.

[gengiskhan]

:oldlol: Nice Try :facepalm :rolleyes:

Barkley Never Said What You Say About Pippen. Bull. He Actually Said Jordan Was Lucky to Play With Pippen in His Prime, as Well as Grant and Rodman!. Jordan had 2 All Stars Back Him Up In Their Primes and His Prime His Whole Career.

Pippen Became an All Star in 1990 In Case You Forgot and He Helped Jordan Win a Ring by Guarding Drexler and Magic the Best. out of those 1st Two Rings.

He Was the Best Defender in the Bulls by Far and The Best Perimeter Defender in the League.

He Had More Responsabilities than Jordan because He Was the Point-Forward Under a Trinagle that Diminished His Stats. He Had To Do More Stuff than Just Score. Create and Be the Best Defender in the Team is Something That Usually is Given to 2 Different Players, Yet Pippen Had No Problem With That and Did Both Jobs at a Great Level ( Not to Mention, Rebound, Score, Team Defend etc)

He Had To Create (Something Jordan finally Accepted since Phil Was Trying to Make Jordan Understand This and Finally It Happened), Be the 2nd Lead Scorer, Be The 2nd Lead Rebounder, Be The Best Defender, Be The Best Team Defender and Play as a Teamate More than a Star.

Pippen`s 1991 Stats while Being the Best Individual Defender For Those Play-Offs and Finals (Defensive Rating Agrees): 20.8 PPG (45.3% FG), 9.4 RPG, 6.6 APG, 2.4 SPG and 1.0 BPG.

If Those are Not All Star Level Stats Then What Are?

EPIC FAIL.

1991 NBA all-defensive FIRST team: MICHAEL JORDAN.
1991 NBA all-defensive SECOND team: SCOTTIE PIPPEN.

OVERRATED Pippen could not even get to all-defensive first team in 1991 by age 25. It took him another year.

Barkley is full of cr@@p as usual. over crediting pippen to deliberately undermine MJ.

[KOBE143]

OP is so ****ing ignorant..

Nobody can win by himself even the Great Black Mamba needed a soft Power Forward, injury prone center and a worst starting PG in the league in order for him to win back 2 back title.. If Kobe cant win by himself then theres no way Jordan could..

[gengiskhan]

OP is so ****ing ignorant..

Nobody can win by himself even the Great Black Mamba needed a soft Power Forward, injury prone center and a worst starting PG in the league in order for him to win back 2 back title.. If Kobe cant win by himself then theres no way Jordan could..

damb phakkot

Cheap Copy Cryant as a lone all-star on LAL in 2006 season could not even make it to Playoffs live alone winning a PO series by himself.

Only thing this trash is good for is licking MJ's black mamba.

[Mr. Jabbar]

OP is so ****ing ignorant..

Nobody can win by himself even the Great Black Mamba needed a soft Power Forward, injury prone center and a worst starting PG in the league in order for him to win back 2 back title.. If Kobe cant win by himself then theres no way Jordan could..

repped :applause:

[Leviathon1121]

Good lord you make Jordan fans look bad.

Is this how Laker fans feel after a post from the usual Kobe stan suspects?

[OldSchoolBBall]

Pippen Became an All Star in 1990 In Case You Forgot and He Helped Jordan Win a Ring by Guarding Drexler and Magic the Best. out of those 1st Two Rings.

Jordan guarded Drexler the majority of the time in the '92 Finals, not Pippen.


He Was the Best Defender in the Bulls by Far and The Best Perimeter Defender in the League.

Not prior to Jordan's retirement he wasn't. Jordan was the best defender on the early 90's Bulls.


Create and Be the Best Defender in the Team is Something That Usually is Given to 2 Different Players, Yet Pippen Had No Problem With That and Did Both Jobs at a Great Level ( Not to Mention, Rebound, Score, Team Defend etc)

That's funny, because Jordan was a better creator than Pippen and a better defender. And he rebounded at an elite level for a guard. And was an all-time level scorer.

[gengiskhan]

Good lord you make Jordan fans look bad.

Is this how Laker fans feel after a post from the usual Kobe stan suspects?

my fav player is Clyde btw.

my fav teams in 1990s were portland & NYK btw. I hated the bulls.

Just the reality check. MJ won hist 1st with pippen still hasnt become an all-star till next year.

plain & simple.

so this garbage logic about MJ won jack shittee till pippen became Bull is illogical.

1991 Pippen could easily be replaced by another 1991 non-allstar Horace Grant-like player a.k.a. Oakley & MJ will still beat LAL in 6 games.

thats my point.

[AlexanderRight]

:facepalm So because Pippen wasn't an All Star in 1991 ( even though he was the year before) he's automatically a distant barely effective role player (as you suggest) even though he averaged 17 PPG, 7 RPG, and 6 APG during that season and 21 PPG, 9 RPG, 5 APG during the playoffs.

[gengiskhan]

:facepalm So because Pippen wasn't an All Star in 1991 ( even though he was the year before) he's automatically a distant barely effective role player (as you suggest) even though he averaged 17 PPG, 7 RPG, and 6 APG during that season and 21 PPG, 9 RPG, 5 APG during the playoffs.

Yes. totally!!

Just look at Kobe to Shaq

Just look at Wade to LBJ

a 24 yrs old 1990 all-star reserve MUST become a 25 yrs old all-star STARTER if not hold that RESERVE spot if injury is not an issue.

Otherwise,

It shows Pippen declined into a NON-allstar Horace Grant in the following year.

[Round Mound]

EPIC FAIL.

1991 NBA all-defensive FIRST team: MICHAEL JORDAN.
1991 NBA all-defensive SECOND team: SCOTTIE PIPPEN.

OVERRATED Pippen could not even get to all-defensive first team in 1991 by age 25. It took him another year.

Barkley is full of cr@@p as usual. over crediting pippen to deliberately undermine MJ.

Do You Think I Go By Votes and Selections? Save That to the Media and Dumb Fans...I Actually Watchted Those 1991 NBA Finals Myself LIVE and Pippen Was the Best Defender. Jordan Was Also a Monster Defender But So Was Pippen, The Best Defender in the Bulls... Statistically It Also Prooven that Pippen Was the Best Bulls Defender:


NBA & ABA Year-by-Year Playoff Leaders and Records for Defensive Rating

Year Lg Player DRtg Tm
2012 NBA Josh Smith 93.20 ATL
2011 NBA Dwight Howard 95.73 ORL
2010 NBA Dwight Howard 92.98 ORL
2009 NBA Dwight Howard 98.35 ORL
2008 NBA Tim Duncan 98.51 SAS
2007 NBA Jason Kidd 94.63 NJN
2006 NBA Alonzo Mourning 95.13 MIA
2005 NBA Ben Wallace 93.48 DET
2004 NBA Ben Wallace 83.91 DET
2003 NBA Ben Wallace 90.51 DET
2002 NBA Ben Wallace 86.41 DET
2001 NBA David Robinson* 92.42 SAS
2000 NBA David Robinson* 84.01 SAS
1999 NBA David Robinson* 87.33 SAS
1998 NBA David Robinson* 93.42 SAS
1997 NBA Alonzo Mourning 94.64 MIA
1996 NBA Scottie Pippen* 96.07 CHI
1995 NBA David Robinson* 97.53 SAS
1994 NBA Patrick Ewing* 94.34 NYK
1993 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 96.56 HOU
1992 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.35 DET
1991 NBA Scottie Pippen* 99.52 CHI
1990 NBA Bill Laimbeer 96.32 DET
1989 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.38 DET
1988 NBA Bill Laimbeer 99.51 DET
1987 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 102.24 HOU
1986 NBA Bill Walton* 100.62 BOS
1985 NBA Ralph Sampson* 97.16 HOU
1984 NBA Buck Williams 99.41 NJN
1983 NBA Moses Malone* 95.76 PHI
1982 NBA Larry Bird* 94.21 BOS
1981 NBA Truck Robinson 94.51 PHO
1980 NBA Larry Bird* 95.93 BOS
1979 NBA Gar Heard 90.53 PHO
1978 NBA Caldwell Jones 93.56 PHI
1977 NBA Bill Walton* 89.53 POR
1976 NBA Elvin Hayes* 88.11 WSB
ABA Mike Gale 100.65 SAA
1975 NBA George Johnson 87.05 GSW
ABA Artis Gilmore* 95.43 KEN
1974 NBA Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 89.90 MIL
ABA Wendell Ladner 88.92 NYA

The Only Modern SF To Ever Lead the League In Defensive Rating: The Rest Are All Big Men:

Defensive Rating

1990-91 NBA 101.7 (8)
1991-92 NBA 102.2 (8)
1993-94 NBA 96.9 (7)
1994-95 NBA 98.3 (1)
1995-96 NBA 100.7 (10)

With Jordan Out a Constant Top 7-4 Best Player in the Game

Player Efficiency Rating

1993-94 NBA 23.2 (4)
1994-95 NBA 22.6 (7)

[AlexanderRight]

Yes. totally!!

Just look at Kobe to Shaq

Just look at Wade to LBJ

a 24 yrs old 1990 all-star reserve MUST become a 25 yrs old all-star STARTER if not hold that RESERVE spot if injury is not an issue.

Otherwise,

It shows Pippen declined into a NON-allstar Horace Grant in the following year.
Holy fcuk! :roll: Just cause he wasn't an all star doesn't mean he's only as effective as Horrace Grant. I hope to god you are trolling.

[gengiskhan]

Holy fcuk! :roll: Just cause he wasn't an all star doesn't mean he's only as effective as Horrace Grant. I hope to god you are trolling.

Pippen learning curve as many think is not constantly UPWARDS in reality.

1990 all star reserve...shows promise of becoming a very good SUPPORT player.
1991. regressed !
1992. all-star STARTER. coming of age. Becomes top 5 NBA players.
1993. regressed STATs wise regular season.
1994. Best season STATs & MVP voting & DPOY voting
1995. Regressed AGAIN stats. Poor leadership. Bulls a .500 team MJ CAME BACK & everything is forgotten.

[sick_brah07]

And so it begins. The great shitstorm of our time.


FUKIN LOL :roll:

[Kovach]

No, it is not possible for a player to win a championship by himself. It is possible to win 60+ games and reach the finals, as repeated ad nauseum by fans of a certain player, but not win.

[AlexanderRight]

Pippen learning curve as many think is not constantly UPWARDS in reality.

1990 all star reserve...shows promise of becoming a very good SUPPORT player.
1991. regressed !
1992. all-star STARTER. coming of age. Becomes top 5 NBA players.
1993. regressed STATs wise regular season.
1994. Best season STATs & MVP voting & DPOY voting
1995. Regressed AGAIN stats. Poor leadership. Bulls a .500 team MJ CAME BACK & everything is forgotten.
... Scottie Pippen actually increased in PPG, RPG, and APG from 90' to 91' so he actually did not "regress". I love how you just say 'regressed" instead of actually adding substance to your statement. Here's a crazy thought. How about you actually value a player based on his impact and effectiveness on the court instead of a reserve spot in a meaningless game in February. And no, just because you don't make that all star game doesn't mean you're as good as Horrace Grant. You can't possibly be this stupid.

[gengiskhan]

... Scottie Pippen actually increased in PPG, RPG, and APG from 90' to 91' so he actually did not "regress". I love how you just say 'regressed" instead of actually adding substance to your statement. Here's a crazy thought. How about you actually value a player based on his impact and effectiveness on the court instead of a reserve spot in a meaningless game in February. And no, just because you don't make that all star game doesn't mean you're as good as Horrace Grant. You can't possibly be this stupid.

makes no sense.

Pip is an all star reserve a year ago. Then Pip looses the reserve position despite increasing his PPG, APG, RPG.

maybe bulls played lot more OT, 2OT, 3OT games in 1991 so Pippen stats maybe inflated in 1991.

anyways, thats not the argument. 1992 Pippen >> 1991 Pippen who was just a GOOD player like NYK's OAKLEY or CHI's GRANT which could've been replaced & MJ still beat LAL in 6 games in 1991 finals.

Point is. MJ wins 1991 ring without Pippen easily.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Faaking Kobe as a lone all-star on LAL roster cound'nt even make it to POs.or if he did, lost the series being up 3-1 :roll:
Kobe made it to the NBA Finals without an all-star or all-nba teammate on his team besides himself in 2008.

[KG215]

1991, in my opinion, was Pippen's true breakout season. To suggest he wasn't any kind of "help" for Jordan is absurd. Pippen averaged 21-9-7-2-1 in the Finals. Not to mention he had 32-13-7-5-1 in the deciding 5th game.

And I'll just quote myself from a thread I started back in the summer after re-watching the '91 Finals.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=275571


Game 1
Jordan has a very good NBA Finals debut going for 36-8-12-3 on 14/24 shooting; however, some of the younger Bulls admitted after the game to being very nervous, and it showed, most notably Horace Grant who had just 6 points on 3/8 shooting. Pippen went for 19-7-5 but on 7/19 shooting and was the only other Bull to score in double figures.

Sam Perkins hit a game winning three with about 15 seconds to go and Jordan had a 15-17 foot jumper go halfway down before rattling out, that would've given the Bulls a 93-92 lead with under 10 seconds to play. Four Lakers (Worthy, Perkins, Magic, and Vlade) scored 16+ points. Can't imagine all the overreaction threads on here if ISH existed back then after Jordan and the Bulls lost game one at home.


Game 2
The Jordan "Switches Hands in Mid-Air Iconic Floating Lay-Up" game. Bulls win in a blowout and Jordan goes for 33-7-13-2 on 15/18 shooting. Pippen and Grant both play much better, scoring 20 points apiece on 8/16 and 10/13 shooting respectively.


Game 3
This game was the most interesting to me for a couple of reasons. It felt like, about mid-way through the third quarter, that the Bulls were going to be blownout. The Lakers went on something like an 18-2 and 20-4 run to take a 14 point lead. They had all the momentum and the home crowd was into the game. Jordan was in the midst of an awful second half that would last up until the very final seconds of regulation. He wasn't just missing jumpers either, he was missing semi-easy layups and bunnies, too.

And, of all people, it was Cliff Levingston who I felt helped Pippen lead the Bulls comeback starting late in the 3rd quarter. He gave the Bulls some very good high energy minutes off the bench with a couple of blocks, and 6 or 8 points, including two offensive rebound putbacks; the type of energy/hustle plays that can wake a team up and get them going, which is exactly what I felt like his play during that stretch did. Again, could you imagine if ISH was around? There would've been 10 threads killing Jordan for missing shot after shot while his team was on the verge of getting blown out, and then there would've been another 5-10 threads killing him because it was Cliff Levingston and Craig Hodges who were "carrying" Jordan during the Bulls comeback.

Anyway, with the Bulls down two with 10 seconds to go, Jordan gets the inbounds pass, dribbles the lenght of the courth with Byron Scott pressuring him, and hits a 12 foot pull-up jumper over a closing Vlade Divac to send the game into OT. He was that close to losing the game on a 9/25 shooting performance (I think he went 2/3 in OT and finished 11/28) and being down 2-1 in his first NBA Finals with two more games to be played in LA. What happens if he misses that shot? Do the Lakers take that momentum to go on and win the series? And do the Bulls ever become "The Bulls"?

Jordan hits two big shots in OT, and they outscore the Lakers 12-4 in OT for the 104-96 win. Horace Grant had his best game of the series going for 22-11-3 on 9/11 shooting.


Game 4
Admittedly, I didn't watch much of this game. I could only find it on Youtube in "parts" and the way it's set-up through the PS3 app, it was damn near impossible to find the next part of the previous one finished. After about part 4 or 5 of 13 I gave-up. I knew the Bulls were up by 16 after the 3rd quarter and won by 15.


Game 5
This was just a really fun and exciting game from start to finish. Pippen was a beast (32 pts, 13 reb, 7 ast, 5 stl) and Jordan was Jordan. Their swarming defense wreaked havoc at crucial times, and led to one particular Jordan block, lead pass to Pippen, Pippen slam sequence that looked nearly identical to what some of the younger NBA fans have grown accustomed to seeing from Wade and LeBron.

It should also be noted that James Worthy and Byron Scott missed this game with an injury. Two rookies, Tony Smith and Elden Campbell, stepped up and played surprisingly well. Smith had 12 points on 5/6 shooting and Campbell had 21 points on 9/12 shooting.

But it wasn't Jordan or Pippen, or even Grant who hit the big shots down the stretch in the fourth quarter of a tight game. It was John Paxson who did what he had done most of the series by hitting long 2-point jumper after long 2-point jumper. I don't know why he didn't take the extra 1.5 step back and get set behind the 3P line, but he was money that series from 18-20 feet out. He scored either 8 or 10 of his 20 points in a 3-4 minute span in the fourth quarter to slowly extend the Bulls lead and give them a little bit of breathing room. Jordan did set him up nicely a few times off of penetration and kick-out where Paxson was wide-open. I've read/heard about how automatic Paxson was that series, but I didn't realize he hit several clutch jumpers in a row in the deciding game.


Obviously Jordan was phenomenal, but Pippen wasn't as bad as you're trying to make him sound, and John Paxson was on fire.

[KG215]

Kobe made it to the NBA Finals without an all-star or all-nba teammate on his team besides himself in 2008.
And that's just as ignorant as saying Jordan won it all by himself in 1991.

[AlexanderRight]

makes no sense.

Pip is an all star reserve a year ago. Then Pip looses the reserve position despite increasing his PPG, APG, RPG.

maybe bulls played lot more OT, 2OT, 3OT games in 1991 so Pippen stats maybe inflated in 1991.

anyways, thats not the argument. 1992 Pippen >> 1991 Pippen who was just a GOOD player like NYK's OAKLEY or CHI's GRANT which could've been replaced & MJ still beat LAL in 6 games in 1991 finals.

Point is. MJ wins 1991 ring without Pippen easily.
So, any good player such as Horrace Grant can average 21, 9, 7 in an NBA Finals series? That kind of production is easily replaceable? This is by far the stupidest argument I've ever seen anyone try to present.

[iamgine]

If 1991 Pippen is not 2000 Kobe to Shaq

If 1991 Pippen is not 2012 Wade to LBJ

then 1991 MJ won it by himself as Bulls were still called "MICHAEL & the Jordanaires"

BTW, this is no KNOCK on 1992-1998 Pippen who was a great player.
See you just made that up.

[ThaRegul8r]

ISH should make a seperate "Historic players" forum.

The guy who runs the site doesn't want one. All requests have been ignored.

[Deuce Bigalow]

And that's just as ignorant as saying Jordan won it all by himself in 1991.
No it isn't ignorant at all, it's fact. Kobe was the only All-star and/or All-NBA player on the 2007-08 Lakers, which reached the NBA Finals. That doesn't mean he got there by himself, just correcting the OP about what Kobe has done without an all-star.

[Lebron23]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ln20w9Q7vm1qk2ix2o1_400.gif

[Kovach]

The guy who runs the site doesn't want one. All requests have been ignored.
Shame.

[Smoke117]

1991 was actually Pippen's best playoffs: 21.6ppg 8.9rpg 5.8apg 2.5spg 1.1bpg .504%fg .792%ft and led the league during the playoffs in defensive rating. Most teams would be happy to have their BEST PLAYER put up stats like that.

[pauk]

It has never happened and never will... this is not tennis... You can be the greatest talent to ever lace up a pair of shoes, 7 foot Point-Guard dpoy defending pure shooting quadruple double average freak athlete... doesnt matter, if you dont have the required supporting cast around you then you wont get that championship....

Everybody knows this, yet everybody still keep ranking a player on their all-time lists based on championships being the #1 priority...... its funny... this would work only if all superstars/all-stars in NBA history had the same exact supporting cast............. you go ahead and take Bill Russell and ill go with Wilt Chamberlain, lets assume both have the exact supporting cast... see how that works out for you......

[Psileas]

1991 was actually Pippen's best playoffs: 21.6ppg 8.9rpg 5.8apg 2.5spg 1.1bpg .504%fg .792%ft and led the league during the playoffs in defensive rating. Most teams would be happy to have their BEST PLAYER put up stats like that.

But, but he was not an All-Star (you know, that crap which happens midseason), hence, he regressed. :oldlol: Which would mean that Jordan should bear the blame for his 1990 failure to win the title with a "better" Pippen.
Oh, so Pippen wasn't a starter in the 1990 ASG. Neither was Karl Malone. He lost to AC freaking Green and almost got less votes than McDaniel as well. This should say a lot about the credibility of judging players by their All-Star appearances.

Hakeem in '94 won the title with 0 all-star quality/level players, 0 all-NBA, 0 all-defensive team and 0 all-rookie guys. Rick Barry in '75 had 1 all-rookie teammate and that was all.

[LikeABosh]

Hey man, did you know that basketball is a 5 on 5 game?

[Calabis]

:oldlol: Nice Try :facepalm :rolleyes:

Barkley Never Said What You Say About Pippen. Bull. He Actually Said Jordan Was Lucky to Play With Pippen in His Prime, as Well as Grant and Rodman!. Jordan had 2 All Stars Back Him Up In Their Primes and His Prime His Whole Career.

Pippen Became an All Star in 1990 In Case You Forgot and He Helped Jordan Win a Ring by Guarding Drexler and Magic the Best. out of those 1st Two Rings.

He Was the Best Defender in the Bulls by Far and The Best Perimeter Defender in the League.

He Had More Responsabilities than Jordan because He Was the Point-Forward Under a Trinagle that Diminished His Stats. He Had To Do More Stuff than Just Score. Create and Be the Best Defender in the Team is Something That Usually is Given to 2 Different Players, Yet Pippen Had No Problem With That and Did Both Jobs at a Great Level ( Not to Mention, Rebound, Score, Team Defend etc)

He Had To Create (Something Jordan finally Accepted since Phil Was Trying to Make Jordan Understand This and Finally It Happened), Be the 2nd Lead Scorer, Be The 2nd Lead Rebounder, Be The Best Defender, Be The Best Team Defender and Play as a Teamate More than a Star.

Pippen`s 1991 Stats while Being the Best Individual Defender For Those Play-Offs and Finals (Defensive Rating Agrees): 20.8 PPG (45.3% FG), 9.4 RPG, 6.6 APG, 2.4 SPG and 1.0 BPG.

If Those are Not All Star Level Stats Then What Are?

First he guarded Magic less than Jordan and the switch was made because 2 early fouls on MJ in game 2...Pippen hardly stopped Magic, watch the game, Magic penetrated any time he wanted too, so much so, Jordan almost picked up his third foul when taking a charge after Pippen was blown by.

Drexler, lmao the only time he guarded Drexler was when Jordan was out of the game, his main defensive assignment was Kersey/Robinson

The one in red I do agree with, not because he was a better man defender than Jordan, just due to his size giving him the ability to guard multiple positions...but I guess the same can be said about Jordan who guarded Divac at times in the 91 Finals

[guy]

He obviously had help. But his help and how supposedly fortunate he was is greatly overstated, which is the case with a lot of the all time greats that have won multiple titles.

[Blue&Orange]

Who believes Pippen would have become the player that he was if he played an practiced alongside Kobe or Lebron?

[97 bulls]

First he guarded Magic less than Jordan and the switch was made because 2 early fouls on MJ in game 2...Pippen hardly stopped Magic, watch the game, Magic penetrated any time he wanted too, so much so, Jordan almost picked up his third foul when taking a charge after Pippen was blown by.

Drexler, lmao the only time he guarded Drexler was when Jordan was out of the game, his main defensive assignment was Kersey/Robinson

The one in red I do agree with, not because he was a better man defender than Jordan, just due to his size giving him the ability to guard multiple positions...but I guess the same can be said about Jordan who guarded Divac at times in the 91 Finals
Lol hardly stopped? Heres how Jordan's father felt about Pippens job on Magic.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-06-06/sports/9102200317_1_scottie-pippen-magic-johnson-bulls

You are the ONLY person who feels Pippen didnt stop Magic.

[97 bulls]

He obviously had help. But his help and how supposedly fortunate he was is greatly overstated, which is the case with a lot of the all time greats that have won multiple titles.
In what context is it "overstated"? Noone denies Jordan was the best player on the Bulls. But this isnt tennis. You dont win championships without help.

[bond10]

Wasn't Shaq pretty much a one man army in 2000?

[Jolokia]

Dwyane Wade won a finals with Antoine Walker being their second leading scorer at 13.8 ppg and Shaq only averaging 13/10. Wade at ~35/4/8 is the closest thing to MJ, and I don't care what anyone says regarding the whistle. The Heat had no offense but Wade ball. Anyone who watched it knows it was damn impressive what a 24 year old did to a prime Dirk squad.

[ralph_i_el]

Biggest F'ing Joke. MJ couldn't win a ring without Pippen. :lol

Fact 1: 1991 NBA Champions, BULLS had only one a.k.a. Single All-star in their whole roster. His name was a SG called Michael Jeffery Jordan. rest were still 1987 -1991 "Jordanaires" (incl. Pippen)

Fact 2:In 1991, Scottie Pippen was NOT even good enough to secure all-star 2nd team spot. let alone becoming all-star starter from the East in 1991.

Fact 3:Pippen matured in 1992 season into an all-star starter & a legit threat as a complete player at both ends of the court. BUT. MJ has already won a ring by then. so pressure is off Scottie completely so he blossomed.

Fact 4: How did MJ won a ring by himself? He averaged 11.4 Asists after scoring 31.2 Pts & 6.6 Rebs[/U]

1991 NBA Finals. Besides Guarding Magic, Pippen had ZERO responsibility offensively. MJ dished out all the assists while taking over the clutch every single game & also making key steals.

Pippen was just not good enough yet in 1991. Many here FAIL to understand this very logic here.

Pippen became The Great Scottie Pippen from 1992 season NOT 1991.

& this is how MJ revolutionized the game forever. He did what bigger, taller Clyde in 1989 Finals. couldn't do as perimeter player despite having an all-star terry porter

Backcourt perimeter player like Magic needed 2 HOF all-stars to win titles.

Backcourt perimeter player like Bird needed 2 HOF all-stars to win titles.

Michael Jordan is the only "BACKCOURT PERIMETER" player in the NBA History to win a title by himself WITHOUT any help as a lone all-star on a bulls roster.... Hence the GOAT title forever.

This feat has NEVER been repeated even to this day. that incl. LBJ etc etc

Faaking Kobe as a lone all-star on LAL roster cound'nt even make it to POs.or if he did, lost the series being up 3-1 :roll:

Even though Dirk won as lone MAVs all-star in 2011 BUT he is a 7-footer playing forward in a weak era with rules in his favor.

Lone perimeter backcourt all-star will never do it again despite rules favoring him in today's era.

MJ IS THE ONLY ONE. :coleman:


90-91 is before my time but pippen's line looks pretty damn good to me.

[97 bulls]

1991 was actually Pippen's best playoffs: 21.6ppg 8.9rpg 5.8apg 2.5spg 1.1bpg .504%fg .792%ft and led the league during the playoffs in defensive rating. Most teams would be happy to have their BEST PLAYER put up stats like that.
I think people need to let this sink in. 22/9/6/3/1 on 50% shooting. And led the playoffs in defensive rating.

And understand. He led the playoffs in defensive rating going up against Kiki Vandewghe, then Charles Barkley, Mark Aguire, and James Worthy. Obviously noone defends a guy exclusively, but these were the opposing SFs. As Smoke stated, Teams would be ecstatic if their best player had these kind of results.

[Burgz V2]

nobody wins by himself. basketball is 5 on 5.

logic fail

thread epic fail

troll success

now where is that neg button?

[Legends66NBA7]

Rick Barry in 1975
Hakeem Olajuwon in 1994
Tim Duncan in 2003
Dirk Nowtizki in 2011

Those are the closest anybody came in "winning it by himself" (yes, I know nobody wins it by himself). They had far inferior rosters compared to any Jordan championship team.

[Ne 1]

1991 Pippen:

Against the Knicks: 21/11/5/4/3 in the closeout game.
Against the Sixers: 28/8/6 in the closeout game.
Against the Pistons: Having memories of the “migraine game” fresh in his mind, Pippen had a great all-around performance in his first crack at the Pistons since that game. 18 points, 5 boards, only 2 assists but 6 steals and 5 blocks! He had 23/6/10 in the closeout game.

Against the Lakers (21/9/7 for the series):
*Game 2 of the 1991 NBA finals: After losing Game 1 the upstart Bulls suddenly stared the prospect of facing an 0-2 deficit against Magic Johnson's Lakers when Michael Jordan got into early foul trouble. Phil Jackson put Pippen on Johnson for that game and Pippen's long arms, size harassed Magic into having his worst game of the finals. http://www.basketball-reference.com/...stats_playoffs The Bulls won the game.




”Your defense on Magic Johnson changed the fortunes of the series.”-Phil Jackson

*Game 5 of the 1991 NBA finals: 32/13/7/5, including something like 26 or 28 second half points to finish off the Lakers.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Nobody wins a title by themselves, and as others have pointed out, Pippen was an all-star the previous season when he clearly wasn't as good as he was in '91. Pippen showed numerous improvements in '91 including becoming a smarter defender, a better outside shooter and taking on a greater playmaking role.

But by '90, he was already a fine all around player, just not as mature and consistent as '91. Pippen did play great through the first 2 playoff rounds in '90 as well. In fact, while it's an exaggeration, commentators during the Milwaukee series were already saying he'd be the man on most teams.

Jordan's '91 playoff run speaks for itself. Nobody questions the level he played at, or what he did for his team. You don't have to be insecure and start exaggerating.


If 1991 Pippen is not 2000 Kobe to Shaq

If 1991 Pippen is not 2012 Wade to LBJ

Funny because he easily had the best playoff run of the 3.


Rick Barry in 1975
Hakeem Olajuwon in 1994
Tim Duncan in 2003
Dirk Nowtizki in 2011

Those are the closest anybody came in "winning it by himself" (yes, I know nobody wins it by himself). They had far inferior rosters compared to any Jordan championship team.

I don't think they necessarily came closer to winning it "by themselves." I think people overlook when teams got contributions from a bunch of different guys as opposed to 2-3 stars. Usually when teams win a title without 2 legitimate all-stars they also have a bunch of guys step up at the right times.

[Rubio2Gasol]

Hakeem in 94 for me is the most I've ever seen a dude carry his team.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Hakeem in 94 for me is the most I've ever seen a dude carry his team.

His teams arguably revolved around him more than any other championship team that I've seen. He had to score about 30 per game, but they also played 4 out/1 in with the shooters getting looks from Hakeem's doubles. So the offense really relied on him whether he was scoring or not. Obviously, he also had to anchor the defense, and Houston wasn't the best rebounding team, partially to the 4 out/1 in system, so they relied on Hakeem to be a decent rebounding team as well. Although their system primarily took away offensive rebounding opportunities that first year, but that just shows how much more they had to rely on Hakeem for their offense.

Although the '95 team had more offensive firepower and a legit second all-star in Clyde Drexler, you could argue Hakeem had to carry them even more that year. Houston got themselves in a hole by finishing as the 6th seed and had to beat teams that won 60, 59, 62 and 57 games to win the title. And Houston had less defensive support and less rebounding around Hakeem this year because of the small lineup.

[Kblaze8855]

I have trouble accepting that people like this are serious.

I guess Carlos Boozer was alone on the Jazz when Deron was not an all star in 07, 08, and 09 while he was doing like 20/10 in the playoffs? Boozer an all star 2 of those years. all alone out there with no help...even if he might have been his teams second best player......

[dunksby]

OP is either an extremely frustrated Pippen fan or just a nut job, I go with the latter.

[Money 23]

Hakeem in '94 won the title with 0 all-star quality/level players, 0 all-NBA, 0 all-defensive team and 0 all-rookie guys. Rick Barry in '75 had 1 all-rookie teammate and that was all.
He didn't have all-star talent, but he had well placed role players, quality players, and basically a stacked roster ... which is different than being the most talented.

The '94 Knicks and '94 Rockets were mirror images of one another in terms of their talent, their rosters and how they were built.

Kenny Smith
Vernon Maxwell
Sam Cassell
Robert Horry
Otis Thorpe

That's a quality roster when it's built around Hakeem, the do it all center. Sometimes having a well balanced roster is better than having top heavy talent from a couple of superstars.

[guy]

In what context is it "overstated"? Noone denies Jordan was the best player on the Bulls. But this isnt tennis. You dont win championships without help.

In the context that when people refer to him having so much help, they act as if Jordan had absolutely nothing to do with his help being that good and him having that type of quality help around him was more due to dumb luck and he was just so much more fortunate then other superstars.

These people fail to point out that Jordan from the beginning established a winning culture and expectation in the organization with his level of play and competitiveness.

They bring up Scottie Pippen but fail to point out that Jordan was greatly instrumental in the development of Scottie Pippen, who entered the league as a DIV II raw college player. Now you can say Pippen would've ended up like that anyway or someone else would've done what Jordan did and help bring out his potential. But the fact is it was Jordan who did that, a DIV II college player succeeding the way Pippen did is extremely rare, and there isn't a similar story of a great player taking a teammate under his wing and helping him become a superstar thats anywhere near as documented as what Jordan did to Pippen (not saying it may have not happened, cause obviously Jordan's stories get more coverage, but regardless there's nothing we know of thats similar). And he didn't take him under his wing, but you can say that Jordan was very instrumental in the development of Horace Grant too just by getting to play together so much and the experience of going deep in the playoffs. Jordan was huge in the toughening up of Pippen and Grant that eventually won them championships.

They bring up Phil Jackson, but then fail to point out that Phil had zero head coaching experience before he got to Chicago and only 2 years as an assistant. He had less experience after the first championhip then Erik Spoelstra did.

They bring up Dennis Rodman in the 2nd three-peat, but then fail to point out that despite leading the league in rebounds for years, NO team wanted to touch him cause of his attitude. Only the Bulls felt they had the leadership to contain him, and Jordan was obviously a huge part of that leadership.

And then they bring up all these role players like BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Bill Cartwright, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, etc. and act like they were special players when the reality is that role players are clearly interchangeable. They aren't players that dramatically change a team. They have skillsets who's utilization is mostly a function of how star players and coaches use them. Now, people look back and think they were just these stacked rosters cause of players like this, when the reality is there were a number of players like this in the league, but they are mostly forgotten because they weren't as successful cause they didn't get to play on championship teams. I guess people will most likely say the same thing in 10-20 years about players like Udonis Haslem, Joel Anthony, Mario Chalmers, Norris Cole, etc if the Heat win a bunch of titles even though now most people say the Heat suck outside of the big 3.

Another thing people don't realize is that a huge reason for a team's success is continuity. Bulls had a formula that worked so they didn't need to fix it. When a team doesn't have to continuosly make adjustments, they are usually ahead of everyone else because of their experience together and playing a certain way, not necessarily because they are more talented. Compare that to the experience of someone like Charles Barkley or Karl Malone, who weren't as easy to build around and didn't have the same success, so they were constantly in different situations where their team was always looking for the right formula, whether it was on the same team in Malone's case or on multiple teams in Barkley's case. The continuity is also helped by the superstar who helps lay a solid foundation to build around, and Jordan was more of a ROCK to build around then a mental midget like Malone or Ewing, a player with poor work ethic like Barkley, a hot head like Hakeem, a nice guy like Robinson, etc.

People make way too much of a great player's "help". They act like its a black and white thing where that player has absolutely nothing to do with the help he's getting, when thats not the case at all. I'm not talking about this with just Jordan, but in the cases of other great players as well. People point to Magic having Kareem, not pointing out that many people believe that Magic significantly extended Kareem's career. People point to Bird with McHale and Parish, not pointing out that McHale wasn't even that good his first few years, and Parish wasn't even considered that good of player before he got to Boston. People point to Tim Duncan with Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, not pointing out that without a selfless leader like Duncan, those two may not have flourished like they did or buy into relatively limited roles in comparison to their peers. Then you got these stupid comparisons where people compare how a team does with and without their superstar and the bigger the dropoff dictates how valuable that player is to the team, which is completely stupid. In many cases it should be a negative reflection. Somehow when a team like the Bulls does well without Derrick Rose, it means he's not that valuable despite the fact that you can clearly see he positively influences that team's locker room with the way they seem to take on his attitude, work ethic, and demeanor. But then when the Magic last year were doing bad without Dwight Howard after he went down with his injury, it means he's very valuable despite the fact that maybe him destroying that locker room with his trade demands, coach firing requests, etc had something to do with it?

Anyway, like I said, people overstate these things. I'm obviously not saying a star player has everything to do with his help, cause thats impossible because the potential has to be there in the first place, plus in many cases they don't have much of an impact on it. I'm just saying people here make way too much of it, especially in Jordan's case.

[ShaqAttack3234]

That's a quality roster when it's built around Hakeem, the do it all center. Sometimes having a well balanced roster is better than having top heavy talent from a couple of superstars.

True, complementing your star with a system and supporting cast that suit him will be more effective than a team with several all-stars who don't fit together. Many people don't look at how well teams are built enough. Regardless, it required Hakeem to play incredible basketball all year because of how much the team revolved around him. He had players that complemented him and a system that brought out the best in him, but it takes a hell of a player to succeed with that type of responsibility.

[dunksby]

In the context that when people refer to him having so much help, they act as if Jordan had absolutely nothing to do with his help being that good and him having that type of quality help around him was more due to dumb luck and he was just so much more fortunate then other superstars.

These people fail to point out that Jordan from the beginning established a winning culture and expectation in the organization with his level of play and competitiveness.

They bring up Scottie Pippen but fail to point out that Jordan was greatly instrumental in the development of Scottie Pippen, who entered the league as a DIV II raw college player. Now you can say Pippen would've ended up like that anyway or someone else would've done what Jordan did and help bring out his potential. But the fact is it was Jordan who did that, a DIV II college player succeeding the way Pippen did is extremely rare, and there isn't a similar story of a great player taking a teammate under his wing and helping him become a superstar thats anywhere near as documented as what Jordan did to Pippen (not saying it may have not happened, cause obviously Jordan's stories get more coverage, but regardless there's nothing we know of thats similar). And he didn't take him under his wing, but you can say that Jordan was very instrumental in the development of Horace Grant too just by getting to play together so much and the experience of going deep in the playoffs. Jordan was huge in the toughening up of Pippen and Grant that eventually won them championships.

They bring up Phil Jackson, but then fail to point out that Phil had zero head coaching experience before he got to Chicago and only 2 years as an assistant. He had less experience after the first championhip then Erik Spoelstra did.

They bring up Dennis Rodman in the 2nd three-peat, but then fail to point out that despite leading the league in rebounds for years, NO team wanted to touch him cause of his attitude. Only the Bulls felt they had the leadership to contain him, and Jordan was obviously a huge part of that leadership.

And then they bring up all these role players like BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Bill Cartwright, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, etc. and act like they were special players when the reality is that role players are clearly interchangeable. They aren't players that dramatically change a team. They have skillsets who's utilization is mostly a function of how star players and coaches use them. Now, people look back and think they were just these stacked rosters cause of players like this, when the reality is there were a number of players like this in the league, but they are mostly forgotten because they weren't as successful cause they didn't get to play on championship teams. I guess people will most likely say the same thing in 10-20 years about players like Udonis Haslem, Joel Anthony, Mario Chalmers, Norris Cole, etc if the Heat win a bunch of titles even though now most people say the Heat suck outside of the big 3.

Another thing people don't realize is that a huge reason for a team's success is continuity. Bulls had a formula that worked so they didn't need to fix it. When a team doesn't have to continuosly make adjustments, they are usually ahead of everyone else because of their experience together and playing a certain way, not necessarily because they are more talented. Compare that to the experience of someone like Charles Barkley or Karl Malone, who weren't as easy to build around and didn't have the same success, so they were constantly in different situations where their team was always looking for the right formula, whether it was on the same team in Malone's case or on multiple teams in Barkley's case. The continuity is also helped by the superstar who helps lay a solid foundation to build around, and Jordan was more of a ROCK to build around then a mental midget like Malone or Ewing, a player with poor work ethic like Barkley, a hot head like Hakeem, a nice guy like Robinson, etc.

People make way too much of a great player's "help". They act like its a black and white thing where that player has absolutely nothing to do with the help he's getting, when thats not the case at all. I'm not talking about this with just Jordan, but in the cases of other great players as well. People point to Magic having Kareem, not pointing out that many people believe that Magic significantly extended Kareem's career. People point to Bird with McHale and Parish, not pointing out that McHale wasn't even that good his first few years, and Parish wasn't even considered that good of player before he got to Boston. People point to Tim Duncan with Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, not pointing out that without a selfless leader like Duncan, those two may not have flourished like they did or buy into relatively limited roles in comparison to their peers. Then you got these stupid comparisons where people compare how a team does with and without their superstar and the bigger the dropoff dictates how valuable that player is to the team, which is completely stupid. In many cases it should be a negative reflection. Somehow when a team like the Bulls does well without Derrick Rose, it means he's not that valuable despite the fact that you can clearly see he positively influences that team's locker room with the way they seem to take on his attitude, work ethic, and demeanor. But then when the Magic last year were doing bad without Dwight Howard after he went down with his injury, it means he's very valuable despite the fact that maybe him destroying that locker room with his trade demands, coach firing requests, etc had something to do with it?

Anyway, like I said, people overstate these things. I'm obviously not saying a star player has everything to do with his help, cause thats impossible because the potential has to be there in the first place, plus in many cases they don't have much of an impact on it. I'm just saying people here make way too much of it, especially in Jordan's case.
Says the topic sentence of the conclusion to a huge ass wall of text stating MJ's monumental influence on a bunch of retards that turned them into a 6 time championship team.

[The Iron Fist]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/bulls/photos/finals1991_100922.jpg

Who are the rest of those guys celebrating?

[Rubio2Gasol]

True, complementing your star with a system and supporting cast that suit him will be more effective than a team with several all-stars who don't fit together. Many people don't look at how well teams are built enough. Regardless, it required Hakeem to play incredible basketball all year because of how much the team revolved around him. He had players that complemented him and a system that brought out the best in him, but it takes a hell of a player to succeed with that type of responsibility.

He did but the system you described ain't really what it was.

Firstly - the 4 out 1 in system you're describing wasn't run. Otis was a banger who hustled inside, rebounded well and complimented well on D because he could defend the post and let him freelance. He never set foot outside the 3 PT line. He was an amazing outlet passer as well.

Vernon - I love him - but people like to make him seem like more than he actually was. He was as inconsistent a scorer you will ever see and while he was a x-factor for some games in that Knicks series and won the personal battle with Starks....he was neither a great fit with Hakeem nor a legit 2nd option. He would launch 3's but he didn't make them and he was best taking people off the dribble - something Rudy really gave him the room to do.

Horry was a good compliment, he shot OK crashed the offensive boards and defended.

Kenny was effectively a shooter. Cassel was a rookie backup point so just steer clear of that.

But in alll reason - as far as talent besides Hakeem - these teams were bare bones compared to the Portland or Phoenix teams they beat - the Bulls being discussed now or any team that won a chip since . Then you factor in that the performance of the others depended on his own - it's really pretty clear cut.

So "stacked" is not a word I'd use to describe them.

To me that's a word that should be reserved for teams like Shaq and Kobe's Lakers - which had the two best players in the game + glove fitted role players. The Bulls who had the best defenders everywhere to go with Jordan and Pippen. Bird's Celtics and Magic's Lakers.

This team was perhaps well constructed - in the same vein a Indiana currently is..but so were the ones I outlined. The difference is they had 3x the talent.

[TheCorporation]

And so it begins. The great shitstorm of our time.

:lol :lol

[Budadiiii]

ISH should make a seperate "Historic players" forum.
How would that fix the Kobe problem though? Maybe Jeff should add a "Historic players" forum AND a "Incredibly overrated NBA players" forum.

No more Rondo, Kobe, or Irving?

:applause:

[Maestro33]

MJ won 1991 title without a real sidekick.

Possibly the dumbest fuggin thing Ive ever seen on here and thats saying something.

[guy]

Says the topic sentence of the conclusion to a huge ass wall of text stating MJ's monumental influence on a bunch of retards that turned them into a 6 time championship team.

Where did I say or imply that he played with a bunch of "retards"? Yes, he had a huge influence as most star players do. And this is a message board, and obviously my huge ass wall of text wasn't long enough for you not to read it.

[97 bulls]

In the context that when people refer to him having so much help, they act as if Jordan had absolutely nothing to do with his help being that good and him having that type of quality help around him was more due to dumb luck and he was just so much more fortunate then other superstars.

These people fail to point out that Jordan from the beginning established a winning culture and expectation in the organization with his level of play and competitiveness.

They bring up Scottie Pippen but fail to point out that Jordan was greatly instrumental in the development of Scottie Pippen, who entered the league as a DIV II raw college player. Now you can say Pippen would've ended up like that anyway or someone else would've done what Jordan did and help bring out his potential. But the fact is it was Jordan who did that, a DIV II college player succeeding the way Pippen did is extremely rare, and there isn't a similar story of a great player taking a teammate under his wing and helping him become a superstar thats anywhere near as documented as what Jordan did to Pippen (not saying it may have not happened, cause obviously Jordan's stories get more coverage, but regardless there's nothing we know of thats similar). And he didn't take him under his wing, but you can say that Jordan was very instrumental in the development of Horace Grant too just by getting to play together so much and the experience of going deep in the playoffs. Jordan was huge in the toughening up of Pippen and Grant that eventually won them championships.

They bring up Phil Jackson, but then fail to point out that Phil had zero head coaching experience before he got to Chicago and only 2 years as an assistant. He had less experience after the first championhip then Erik Spoelstra did.

They bring up Dennis Rodman in the 2nd three-peat, but then fail to point out that despite leading the league in rebounds for years, NO team wanted to touch him cause of his attitude. Only the Bulls felt they had the leadership to contain him, and Jordan was obviously a huge part of that leadership.

And then they bring up all these role players like BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Bill Cartwright, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, etc. and act like they were special players when the reality is that role players are clearly interchangeable. They aren't players that dramatically change a team. They have skillsets who's utilization is mostly a function of how star players and coaches use them. Now, people look back and think they were just these stacked rosters cause of players like this, when the reality is there were a number of players like this in the league, but they are mostly forgotten because they weren't as successful cause they didn't get to play on championship teams. I guess people will most likely say the same thing in 10-20 years about players like Udonis Haslem, Joel Anthony, Mario Chalmers, Norris Cole, etc if the Heat win a bunch of titles even though now most people say the Heat suck outside of the big 3.

Another thing people don't realize is that a huge reason for a team's success is continuity. Bulls had a formula that worked so they didn't need to fix it. When a team doesn't have to continuosly make adjustments, they are usually ahead of everyone else because of their experience together and playing a certain way, not necessarily because they are more talented. Compare that to the experience of someone like Charles Barkley or Karl Malone, who weren't as easy to build around and didn't have the same success, so they were constantly in different situations where their team was always looking for the right formula, whether it was on the same team in Malone's case or on multiple teams in Barkley's case. The continuity is also helped by the superstar who helps lay a solid foundation to build around, and Jordan was more of a ROCK to build around then a mental midget like Malone or Ewing, a player with poor work ethic like Barkley, a hot head like Hakeem, a nice guy like Robinson, etc.

People make way too much of a great player's "help". They act like its a black and white thing where that player has absolutely nothing to do with the help he's getting, when thats not the case at all. I'm not talking about this with just Jordan, but in the cases of other great players as well. People point to Magic having Kareem, not pointing out that many people believe that Magic significantly extended Kareem's career. People point to Bird with McHale and Parish, not pointing out that McHale wasn't even that good his first few years, and Parish wasn't even considered that good of player before he got to Boston. People point to Tim Duncan with Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, not pointing out that without a selfless leader like Duncan, those two may not have flourished like they did or buy into relatively limited roles in comparison to their peers. Then you got these stupid comparisons where people compare how a team does with and without their superstar and the bigger the dropoff dictates how valuable that player is to the team, which is completely stupid. In many cases it should be a negative reflection. Somehow when a team like the Bulls does well without Derrick Rose, it means he's not that valuable despite the fact that you can clearly see he positively influences that team's locker room with the way they seem to take on his attitude, work ethic, and demeanor. But then when the Magic last year were doing bad without Dwight Howard after he went down with his injury, it means he's very valuable despite the fact that maybe him destroying that locker room with his trade demands, coach firing requests, etc had something to do with it?

Anyway, like I said, people overstate these things. I'm obviously not saying a star player has everything to do with his help, cause thats impossible because the potential has to be there in the first place, plus in many cases they don't have much of an impact on it. I'm just saying people here make way too much of it, especially in Jordan's case.
Im sorry Guy. I disagree with just about everything youve stated. Ill respond in full in a bit.

[ShaqAttack3234]

He did but the system you described ain't really what it was.

Firstly - the 4 out 1 in system you're describing wasn't run. Otis was a banger who hustled inside, rebounded well and complimented well on D because he could defend the post and let him freelance. He never set foot outside the 3 PT line. He was an amazing outlet passer as well.

Vernon - I love him - but people like to make him seem like more than he actually was. He was as inconsistent a scorer you will ever see and while he was a x-factor for some games in that Knicks series and won the personal battle with Starks....he was neither a great fit with Hakeem nor a legit 2nd option. He would launch 3's but he didn't make them and he was best taking people off the dribble - something Rudy really gave him the room to do.

Horry was a good compliment, he shot OK crashed the offensive boards and defended.

Kenny was effectively a shooter. Cassel was a rookie backup point so just steer clear of that.

But in alll reason - as far as talent besides Hakeem - these teams were bare bones compared to the Portland or Phoenix teams they beat - the Bulls being discussed now or any team that won a chip since . Then you factor in that the performance of the others depended on his own - it's really pretty clear cut.

So "stacked" is not a word I'd use to describe them.

To me that's a word that should be reserved for teams like Shaq and Kobe's Lakers - which had the two best players in the game + glove fitted role players. The Bulls who had the best defenders everywhere to go with Jordan and Pippen. Bird's Celtics and Magic's Lakers.

This team was perhaps well constructed - in the same vein a Indiana currently is..but so were the ones I outlined. The difference is they had 3x the talent.

I don't disagree with much of your assessment of the Rockets, but they still were running a 4 out/1 in type of offense. Otis obviously wasn't a 3 point shooter, and he rarely even took mid-range jumpers, but he'd often be away from the basket for spacing, and be used in screen/rolls, or he'd cut the basket. He'd get some touches inside as well, but a lot of his points by that point came in the way I described, or from running the floor.

But what's also true is that players such as Thorpe and Kenny Smith took on lesser roles, and didn't utilize their entire skill set to accommodate the offense revolving around Hakeem.

I never called Houston stacked either, but the Shaq/Kobe Lakers weren't either. Those teams relied as heavily on 2 players as any team I've seen. They had a few nice role players on each of the 3 championship teams, but they lacked a 3rd guy near all-star level, were a below average 3 point shooting team(one of the worst in the league in 2000), had some of the worst starting PFs in the league in 2000 and 2002, always had 2, if not 3 players starting who were below average starters at their position, and never had a 3rd scorer except for 2000 with Glen Rice who was past his prime, but even he didn't produce like one in the playoffs, didn't fit in the triangle at all, complained and was a liability defensively.

The team was special because of the duo and such a great coach, but stacked is definitely not the right word. An example of stacked teams would be the Portland and Sacramento teams they beat.

[Rubio2Gasol]

I don't disagree with much of your assessment of the Rockets, but they still were running a 4 out/1 in type of offense. Otis obviously wasn't a 3 point shooter, and he rarely even took mid-range jumpers, but he'd often be away from the basket for spacing, and be used in screen/rolls, or he'd cut the basket. He'd get some touches inside as well, but a lot of his points by that point came in the way I described, or from running the floor.

But what's also true is that players such as Thorpe and Kenny Smith took on lesser roles, and didn't utilize their entire skill set to accommodate the offense revolving around Hakeem.

I never called Houston stacked either, but the Shaq/Kobe Lakers weren't either. Those teams relied as heavily on 2 players as any team I've seen. They had a few nice role players on each of the 3 championship teams, but they lacked a 3rd guy near all-star level, were a below average 3 point shooting team(one of the worst in the league in 2000), had some of the worst starting PFs in the league in 2000 and 2002, always had 2, if not 3 players starting who were below average starters at their position, and never had a 3rd scorer except for 2000 with Glen Rice who was past his prime, but even he didn't produce like one in the playoffs, didn't fit in the triangle at all, complained and was a liability defensively.

The team was special because of the duo and such a great coach, but stacked is definitely not the right word. An example of stacked teams would be the Portland and Sacramento teams they beat.

I think Money 23 or someone called them stacked. He's a Jordan homer so it should be expected.

That's a different take from the 4 in 1 out system than I've ever seen. To me it usually involves a 3 pt threat because even if you set up away from the basket or set high picks - dudes have no incentive to cover you. So it was still relatively easy to double Hakeem.

Lakers for me were stacked - they had the two best players in the game for a couple years (something that never really happens). In 2000 they weren't and they honestly got lucky against Portland.

Kenny found his niche being a spot up shooter for that playoff run. That wasn't his game in it's entirety but I don't think he could have been better than he was at the time playing any other role.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I think Money 23 or someone called them stacked. He's a Jordan homer so it should be expected.

That's a different take from the 4 in 1 out system than I've ever seen. To me it usually involves a 3 pt threat because even if you set up away from the basket or set high picks - dudes have no incentive to cover you. So it was still relatively easy to double Hakeem.

Lakers for me were stacked - they had the two best players in the game for a couple years (something that never really happens). In 2000 they weren't and they honestly got lucky against Portland.

Kenny found his niche being a spot up shooter for that playoff run. That wasn't his game in it's entirety but I don't think he could have been better than he was at the time playing any other role.

The Rockets before they went small weren't quite a 4 out/1 in the way Orlando was with Dwight, but I consider it a variation, much like the mid 90's Magic, even though they had Grant. Although Grant while not a 3 point shooter, was a mid-range shooter unlike Thorpe, but not a post player.

The Lakers did arguably have the 2 best players in the game at one point(though I personally considered Duncan 2nd) however that's still not stacked to me. Stacked has to do with depth as well and talent throughout your rotation. The Lakers didn't have a 3rd player who was particularly talented individually, much less 4th, 5th and 6th guys like the '02 Kings for example. They did get good contributions from several role players in the 2001 playoffs(Fisher, Fox, Grant and Horry to a lesser extent) but in 2002, the role players didn't do anything outside of Horry and Fox. And again, you couldn't call any of those guys above average starters, and were all probably below average if you look at the other players starting at their positions.

[AlphaWolf24]

Reall Talk....

I remember watching the Bull's dominate in 91'....

It seemed unfair.....because ...



A) You had Michael F'ing Jordan......Hitting cot damn every shot imaginable....

I was like..." Hey we forced MJ Baseline!...we got this Mufaka in check....oh sh!T!!! ( MJ jumps in the air twists his body around 3 defenders and ends up with a F'ing soft azz layup)..what the F*** just happened?"


then like...

"Hey we forced MJ to take a 20' contested Jumper....( He rises up for like 3' off the ground.....swishes that sh!t)..WTF?....( he then hits a fadeaway off a reverse pivot)...Da FUQ?....Now MJ got accurate Fadeaways??"


B)Then you had this Long gangley Mufaka with go go gadget arms.....Pippen was blockin everyones shot....gettin all the damn rebounds.....then shuttin down little PG's....

I was like.........

WTF?......the Bull's got the 2 most dope'est Hard core MF'ers on the same team....


like someone else said.....anyone who saw the Bull's knew they had 2 PITBULLS......MJ might have been the DAD...but they def 2 full grown Game ready PITS!

[The Iron Fist]

Reall Talk....

I remember watching the Bull's dominate in 91'....

It seemed unfair.....because ...


A) You had Michael F'ing Jordan......Hitting cot damn every shot imaginable....

I was like..." Hey we forced MJ Baseline!...we got this Mufaka in check....oh sh!T!!! ( MJ jumps in the air twists his body around 3 defenders and ends up with a F'ing soft azz layup)..what the F*** just happened?"


then like...

"Hey we forced MJ to take a 20' contested Jumper....( He rises up for like 3' off the ground.....swishes that sh!t)..WTF?....( he then hits a fadeaway off a reverse pivot)...Da FUQ?....Now MJ got accurate Fadeaways??"


B)Then you had this Long gangley Mufaka with go go gadget arms.....Pippen was blockin everyones shot....gettin all the damn rebounds.....then shuttin down little PG's....

I was like.........

WTF?......the Bull's got the 2 most dope'est Hard core MF'ers on the same team....



like someone else said.....anyone who saw the Bull's knew they had 2 PITBULLS......MJ might have been the DAD...but they def 2 full grown Game ready PITS!
Back then, everyone thought of them as Dobermans. They were sleek, fast and vicious when need be.

[Money 23]

I think Money 23 or someone called them stacked. He's a Jordan homer so it should be expected.
No, that's just an honest assessment. I feel there is a difference between being "stacked" and more "talented" ... for instance, the Heat I feel are more talented due to LeBron, Wade, and Bosh than the Clippers and Knicks. But I feel the Clippers and Knicks are more stacked because of the well rounded talent at ALL positions and off the bench.

There is absolutely a significant difference to account for ... the early 2000s Lakers weren't stacked. They were just more talented. The Blazers had legit talent, albeit not superstar talent, at all five positions and off the bench. Thus, they were more stacked.

Hakeem's '94 Rockets had talent at all five positions, quality starters and role players. Defensive players, shooters, and size. They were a stacked team. As were the Knicks. New York didn't have a co superstar to pair with Ewing but they had tons of talent and quality role players. Jordan's Bulls were more talented than the Knicks, thanks to MJ and Pip. But outside of those two the Knicks had better players at all positions.

[Calabis]

Lol hardly stopped? Heres how Jordan's father felt about Pippens job on Magic.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-06-06/sports/9102200317_1_scottie-pippen-magic-johnson-bulls

You are the ONLY person who feels Pippen didnt stop Magic.

Now try watching the game and quit trying to rewrite history...Pippen did a good job, but this put the clamps down/stopped Magic is comical

Pippen D was great in the sense that he made Magic work in the back court, due to a bigger body

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRQ7v942W7o

26:15 Magic gets by Pippen, Grant comes over to alter layup

28:23 Magic posts up Pip spins inside, would have layup, great rotation by Grant again, forces Magic to pass

28:54 Magic goes by Pip who reaches, Jordan steps up and takes charge

I could keep going, but like I said, Pippen did a great job, but acting like Magic struggled because of Pippen is a myth, hell Jordan didn't let Magic score either in the first quarter, but he picked up two ticky tack fouls

[Doctor Rivers]

:oldlol: Nice Try :facepalm :rolleyes:

Barkley Never Said What You Say About Pippen. Bull. He Actually Said Jordan Was Lucky to Play With Pippen in His Prime, as Well as Grant and Rodman!. Jordan had 2 All Stars Back Him Up In Their Primes and His Prime His Whole Career.

Pippen Became an All Star in 1990 In Case You Forgot and He Helped Jordan Win a Ring by Guarding Drexler and Magic the Best. out of those 1st Two Rings.

He Was the Best Defender in the Bulls by Far and The Best Perimeter Defender in the League.

He Had More Responsabilities than Jordan because He Was the Point-Forward Under a Trinagle that Diminished His Stats. He Had To Do More Stuff than Just Score. Create and Be the Best Defender in the Team is Something That Usually is Given to 2 Different Players, Yet Pippen Had No Problem With That and Did Both Jobs at a Great Level ( Not to Mention, Rebound, Score, Team Defend etc)

He Had To Create (Something Jordan finally Accepted since Phil Was Trying to Make Jordan Understand This and Finally It Happened), Be the 2nd Lead Scorer, Be The 2nd Lead Rebounder, Be The Best Defender, Be The Best Team Defender and Play as a Teamate More than a Star.

Pippen`s 1991 Stats while Being the Best Individual Defender For Those Play-Offs and Finals (Defensive Rating Agrees): 20.8 PPG (45.3% FG), 9.4 RPG, 6.6 APG, 2.4 SPG and 1.0 BPG.

If Those are Not All Star Level Stats Then What Are?

battle of the bold text

[97 bulls]

These people fail to point out that Jordan from the beginning established a winning culture and expectation in the organization with his level of play and competitiveness.*
The Bulls hadnt won a playoff game the first few years of Jordans career. How did he establish a winning culture by himself?



They bring up Scottie Pippen but fail to point out that Jordan was greatly instrumental in the development of Scottie Pippen, who entered the league as a DIV II raw college player. Now you can say Pippen would've ended up like that anyway or someone else would've done what Jordan did and help bring out his potential. But the fact is it was Jordan who did that, a DIV II college player succeeding the way Pippen did is extremely rare,*
Again I think the disagreement isnt so much Jordans role in Pippens development. Its the notion that Pippen was "MADE" by Jordan. That without him, (Jordan) Pippen ends up being nothing more than a Tayshaun Prince or Gerald Wallace. But fail to look at the fact that Jordans and Pippens game are just totally different. Pippen has a PG mentality and likes to get others involved, as well as score. Jordan has a scorers mentality. But he can set up teammates. I do feel Jordan and Pippen playing each other in pracyice helped BOTH players games. Not just Pippens. Amd the Horace Grant thing is just wrong.


They bring up Phil Jackson, but then fail to point out that Phil had zero head coaching experience before he got to Chicago and only 2 years as an assistant. He had less experience after the first championhip then Erik Spoelstra did.*
Phil Jackson won two championships as head coach of the Albany Patroons. And most people feel helped mold Jordan into a team player.


They bring up Dennis Rodman in the 2nd three-peat, but then fail to point out that despite leading the league in rebounds for years, NO team wanted to touch him cause of his attitude. Only the Bulls felt they had the leadership to contain him, and Jordan was obviously a huge part of that leadership
Jack Haley gets credit for keeping Rodman under control in 96. He kicked the camerman in 97 which cost him 25 games. And to my recolection wasnt much of a problem in 98. I think Jackson should get most of the credit for Rodman staying under control during their run. For no other reason than that they let him be him.



And then they bring up all these role players like BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Bill Cartwright, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, etc. and act like they were special players when the reality is that role players are clearly interchangeable. They aren't players that dramatically change a team. They have skillsets who's utilization is mostly a function of how star players and coaches use them.*
They werent any different than any other role player on any other championship team. I do feel Kukoc couldve made a few Allstar games if he were in a different situation. He did avg 19/7/5 in 99. He shot 42%, but the league avg was roughly 43%.


Now, people look back and think they were just these stacked rosters cause of players like this, when the reality is there were a number of players like this in the league, but they are mostly forgotten because they weren't as successful cause they didn't get to play on championship teams. I guess people will most likely say the same thing in 10-20 years about players like Udonis Haslem, Joel Anthony, Mario Chalmers, Norris Cole, etc if the Heat win a bunch of titles even though now most people say the Heat suck outside of the big 3.
Id take Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Brian Williams, and Bill Wennington over alot of championship teams role players any day. The fact is these guys have been very successful outside of Chicago. Ron Harper was a 20 pt scorer and won two more championships with the Lakers. I remember Phil Jackson begged him no stay another season during their run with the Lakers. Steve Kerr is the career leader in three point shooting percentage and has two extra rings with the Spurs in which he played an integral role. Brian Williams was a dman good center with the Pistons who retired at 29. Kukoc was one of the best players in Europe. Lets not act like the Bulls FO found a bunch of bums on the street and Jordan molded them into this well oiled machine.

And as much as you hate to admit, the Bulls were extremely successful without Jordan. Why you overlook that is puzzling.

[97 bulls]

Now try watching the game and quit trying to rewrite history...Pippen did a good job, but this put the clamps down/stopped Magic is comical

Pippen D was great in the sense that he made Magic work in the back court, due to a bigger body

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRQ7v942W7o

26:15 Magic gets by Pippen, Grant comes over to alter layup

28:23 Magic posts up Pip spins inside, would have layup, great rotation by Grant again, forces Magic to pass

28:54 Magic goes by Pip who reaches, Jordan steps up and takes charge

I could keep going, but like I said, Pippen did a great job, but acting like Magic struggled because of Pippen is a myth, hell Jordan didn't let Magic score either in the first quarter, but he picked up two ticky tack fouls
Its not a myth. Pippen intentionally sent Magic toward help. Not to mention guys are still gonna get loose. I honestly dont think you know what youre talking about.

[La Frescobaldi]

The Bulls hadnt won a playoff game the first few years of Jordans career. How did he establish a winning culture by himself?



Again I think the disagreement isnt so much Jordans role in Pippens development. Its the notion that Pippen was "MADE" by Jordan. That without him, (Jordan) Pippen ends up being nothing more than a Tayshaun Prince or Gerald Wallace. But fail to look at the fact that Jordans and Pippens game are just totally different. Pippen has a PG mentality and likes to get others involved, as well as score. Jordan has a scorers mentality. But he can set up teammates. I do feel Jordan and Pippen playing each other in pracyice helped BOTH players games. Not just Pippens. Amd the Horace Grant thing is just wrong.

Phil Jackson won two championships as head coach of the Albany Patroons. And most people feel helped mold Jordan into a team player.

Jack Haley gets credit for keeping Rodman under control in 96. He kicked the camerman in 97 which cost him 25 games. And to my recolection wasnt much of a problem in 98. I think Jackson should get most of the credit for Rodman staying under control during their run. For no other reason than that they let him be him.



They werent any different than any other role player on any other championship team. I do feel Kukoc couldve made a few Allstar games if he were in a different situation. He did avg 19/7/5 in 99. He shot 42%, but the league avg was roughly 43%.


Id take Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Brian Williams, and Bill Wennington over alot of championship teams role players any day. The fact is these guys have been very successful outside of Chicago. Ron Harper was a 20 pt scorer and won two more championships with the Lakers. I remember Phil Jackson begged him no stay another season during their run with the Lakers. Steve Kerr is the career leader in three point shooting percentage and has two extra rings with the Spurs in which he played an integral role. Brian Williams was a dman good center with the Pistons who retired at 29. Kukoc was one of the best players in Europe. Lets not act like the Bulls FO found a bunch of bums on the street and Jordan molded them into this well oiled machine.

And as much as you hate to admit, the Bulls were extremely successful without Jordan. Why you overlook that is puzzling.

97Bulls schooling one and all little puppies & big trolls

[gengiskhan]

I've scanned through pretty much all the posts so far....

Facts are still facts.

1990 season: Pippen was All-star reserve

1991 season: Pippen was just a good player. Not even an all-star RESERVE calibre.

1992 season: Is the Pippens truest break through season.

Some here mentioned. 1991 is the real Pippen "coming of age" "break out" year just looking at the 1991 finals performance.

Nothing is further from the truth btw.

1992 is the Pippen's real true break out season.
1992 is when Pippen suddenly became a dominant force on both ends of the court.
1992 is when Pippen immediately rose to Top 5 players in the NBA.
1992 is when Pippen became "all-star STARTER" from being a NON-allstar previous year.

1992 Pippen >> 1991 Pippen.

until then.

1991 Michael Jordan (31.2 ppg, 11.4 apg) won the Ring by himself & helped other "Jordanaires (pippen & co btw 1987-1991)" collect the FIRST ring.

1992 -1998: Jordan-Pippen combo won rings.

This is the Truth.

[Rubio2Gasol]

When Bold is not enough






Colors!

[Doctor Rivers]

When Bold is not enough






Colors!

:roll:

[guy]

The Bulls hadnt won a playoff game the first few years of Jordans career. How did he establish a winning culture by himself?

They didn't even make the playoffs the previous 3 seasons, and their previous history's peaks were mediocre teams making the playoffs with no transcedent superstar to take them over the top. A transcedent talent with that fiery competitiveness completely changes expectations i.e. the culture. Those years of first round knockouts were disappointments. They wouldn't have been considered disappointments if they had someone like Reggie Miller instead. Even to this day that culture change is felt with the Bulls being considered disappointments every year since Jordan left, especially before Rose was drafted.



Again I think the disagreement isnt so much Jordans role in Pippens development. Its the notion that Pippen was "MADE" by Jordan. That without him, (Jordan) Pippen ends up being nothing more than a Tayshaun Prince or Gerald Wallace. But fail to look at the fact that Jordans and Pippens game are just totally different. Pippen has a PG mentality and likes to get others involved, as well as score. Jordan has a scorers mentality. But he can set up teammates. I do feel Jordan and Pippen playing each other in pracyice helped BOTH players games. Not just Pippens. Amd the Horace Grant thing is just wrong.

Well I never said Jordan "MADE" Pippen. The potential and the desire has to be there, which Pippen had. If that wasn't relevant, then Jordan could've done that to any average joe. And I did say that that doesn't mean Pippen wouldn't have been a good or great player anyway. Its just stupid when people use Pippen in a way to discredit Jordan, when people don't understand that it goes hand in hand because of Jordan's impact on Pippen's development. Doesn't make sense to me.

And Jordan was an established superstar before Pippen was even a Bull. He would've been a HOFer anyway and still one of the greatest players. Of course, Pippen helped Jordan become a better player, its probably impossible for that not to happen. Its just not even close to the same extent.

Why is what I said about Horace Grant wrong? So you think if Grant was playing on the Sacramento Kings not making the playoffs, it wouldn't have made a difference in his development? Whatever the case, Grant's not even close to the same level of Pippen, so I probably shouldn't have included him here. I probably should've included him with the interchangeable role players. Shit, they probably had a better version of him in Charles Oakley anyway.



Phil Jackson won two championships as head coach of the Albany Patroons. And most people feel helped mold Jordan into a team player.

Really? CBA championships matter now? Thats better then actual NBA head coaching experience? I never said Phil didn't help Jordan.



Jack Haley gets credit for keeping Rodman under control in 96. He kicked the camerman in 97 which cost him 25 games. And to my recolection wasnt much of a problem in 98. I think Jackson should get most of the credit for Rodman staying under control during their run. For no other reason than that they let him be him.

I don't think you understood my post, unless you think the Bulls were the only team in the league comfortable bringing him in because they were the only team with Jack Haley. I'm only talking about the actual decision to bring him in. I never said Jordan deserved all the credit, just that he was a big reason why they were the only team comfortable bringing him in. There's a reason why they were able to trade for Rodman with just freaking Will Perdue. Again, people also use Rodman to discredit Jordan, but people don't seem to understand that Jordan was one of the biggest reasons why they were the only team comfortable bringing him in. Doesn't make sense to me.



They werent any different than any other role player on any other championship team. I do feel Kukoc couldve made a few Allstar games if he were in a different situation. He did avg 19/7/5 in 99. He shot 42%, but the league avg was roughly 43%.

Actually, they weren't any different then any role player in general. They could probably find similar role players to assume those roles on almost every other team.

I've had this discussion with you about Toni Kukoc and I disagreed with it. Maybe he's not your average role player thats as easily replaceable, but he definitely wasn't this special star player you make him out to be.



Id take Steve Kerr, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Brian Williams, and Bill Wennington over alot of championship teams role players any day. The fact is these guys have been very successful outside of Chicago. Ron Harper was a 20 pt scorer and won two more championships with the Lakers. I remember Phil Jackson begged him no stay another season during their run with the Lakers. Steve Kerr is the career leader in three point shooting percentage and has two extra rings with the Spurs in which he played an integral role. Brian Williams was a dman good center with the Pistons who retired at 29. Kukoc was one of the best players in Europe. Lets not act like the Bulls FO found a bunch of bums on the street and Jordan molded them into this well oiled machine.

And you would take alot of other championship role players over them as well, and even role role players that didn't win any championships. Thats not really saying much. There isn't a significant difference between role players. Thats why they are role players.

Ron Harper was not a 20 ppg scorer in Chicago. Injuries caused his decline before he even came to Chicago. Replace him with someone like Doug Christie, Derek Harper, Doc Rivers, Nate McMillan, Craig Ehlo, or many more and there probably wouldn't be such a huge difference.

No doubt Steve Kerr was a great 3-point shooter. But he wasn't exactly filling a role that someone like Tim Legler, BJ Armstrong, Brent Price, Dale Ellis, Tracy Murray, Hubert Davis and others couldn't have filled at the time.

I really don't understand why you constantly bring up Brian Williams when he only played 9 games for the Bulls and then 19 games in the playoffs in less than 20 mpg.

Toni Kukoc being one of the best players from Europe didn't really mean much back then. Actually, it doesn't really mean much even now since the style of play is different.

I never said they were a bunch of bums on the street. I said they were mostly average role players that you can find on almost every team.



And as much as you hate to admit, the Bulls were extremely successful without Jordan. Why you overlook that is puzzling.

I don't overlook that. In fact, I addressed that later in my post. Did you read it? As I said, it should be considered more of a positive reflection on Jordan actually. The whole "record without star player dictating their value" comparison is so ridiculously stupid. Don't get me wrong, sometimes it does mean something, but alot times it doesn't. It should be more of a case by case basis. You think its a coincidence that many times the teams that see the biggest drop off without their star player are teams who's star players leadership abilities were questionable in the first place i.e. David Robinson, Charles Barkley, Vince Carter, Lebron James (before last year), Dwight Howard while on the other hand many times teams that still do well and don't see as much of a drop off are those who's star players are considered great leaders i.e. Michael Jordan, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Derrick Rose currently? I don't know what it is. Maybe in those cases, its cause those players don't add much to the team other then actual production on the court, and don't really lead before and after games framing the locker room culture and expectations a certain way. Of course, I'm not saying this always the case. Bird and Magic had injuries or retirements at times and there teams had big drop-offs, and the same thing just happened with CP3, and I wouldn't question their leadership skills. All I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily mean much, and its not like when teams do well without their star player, they would've played the exact same way had that player never even existed in the first place.

[Money 23]

guy just murked this entire thread. He's right about literally EVERYTHING.

[97 bulls]

Im in thr process of replying Guy. Hang on

[SpecialQue]

This thread is basically OP screaming "PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME!"

[97 bulls]

*
They didn't even make the playoffs the previous 3 seasons, and their previous history's peaks were mediocre teams making the playoffs with no transcedent superstar to take them over the top. A transcedent talent with that fiery competitiveness completely changes expectations i.e. the culture. Those years of first round knockouts were disappointments. They wouldn't have been considered disappointments if they had someone like Reggie Miller instead. Even to this day that culture change is felt with the Bulls being considered disappointments every year since Jordan left, especially before Rose was drafted.*
What the Bulls were doing in the mid 80s should not be seen as "establishing a winning culture". One of those years they werent even 500 and made the playoffs. That culture your refering to was established by Jackson, Jordan, and Pippen. They dont win in 91 without those three.




Jordan was an established superstar before Pippen was even a Bull. He would've been a HOFer anyway and still one of the greatest players. Of course, Pippen helped Jordan become a better player, its probably impossible for that not to happen. Its just not even close to the same extent.
Jordan was seen as a selfish ball hog before Jackson and Pippen came. Obviously he wouldve made the Hall of Fame regardless. But hes probably looked at as another George Gervin. Pippen wouldve been a Hofer as well, but probably along the line of James Worthy.



Why is what I said about Horace Grant wrong?
Its wrong in my opinion because of the kind of player Grant was. Hes always been a banger. What did Jordan teach him? How to be tough? Come on. Your assumptions are almost insulting. As if Grant was a little kid and Jordan was his Daddy.


Really? CBA championships matter now? Thats better then actual NBA head coaching experience? I never said Phil didn't help Jordan.*
I believe you stated Jackson had "NO" coaching experience. Not only did he have experience, but he won. And he was an assistant under Doug Collins. The fact is he was obviously ready.



Ron Harper was not a 20 ppg scorer in Chicago. Injuries caused his decline before he even came to Chicago. Replace him with someone like Doug Christie, Derek Harper, Doc Rivers, Nate McMillan, Craig Ehlo, or many more and there probably wouldn't be such a huge difference.
Harper was REDUCED to that role because 1. he had a hard time picking up the offense in 95, the 2. unlike the Cavs and Clippers, the Bulls offense wasnt condusive to Harpers strengths which was transition. If he could avg 11 ppg at 35 years old in 99, why couldnt he avg 15-17 if he were three years younger and played in an offense where they pushed the ball in transition?


I really don't understand why you constantly bring up Brian Williams when he only played 9 games for the Bulls and then 19 games in the playoffs in less than 20 mpg.*Because Williams was a 26 year old 6'11 center capable of avg 17/9 on 50% shooting. Something the Bulls never had. He didnt play much in the first round, but he avg 9/5 on 50% shooting the rest of the playoffs. In limited minutes mind you.


I don't overlook that. In fact, I addressed that later in my post. Did you read it? As I said, it should be considered more of a positive reflection on Jordan actually. The whole "record without star player dictating their value" comparison is so ridiculously stupid. Don't get me wrong, sometimes it does mean something, but alot times it doesn't. It should be more of a case by case basis. You think its a coincidence that many times the teams that see the biggest drop off without their star player are teams who's star players leadership abilities were questionable in the first place i.e. David Robinson, Charles Barkley, Vince Carter, Lebron James (before last year), Dwight Howard while on the other hand many times teams that still do well and don't see as much of a drop off are those who's star players are considered great leaders i.e. Michael Jordan, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Derrick Rose currently? I don't know what it is. Maybe in those cases, its cause those players don't add much to the team other then actual production on the court, and don't really lead before and after games framing the locker room culture and expectations a certain way. Of course, I'm not saying this always the case. Bird and Magic had injuries or retirements at times and there teams had big drop-offs, and the same thing just happened with CP3, and I wouldn't question their leadership skills. All I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily mean much, and its not like when teams do well without their star player, they would've played the exact same way had that player never even existed in the first place.
Then take it on a case by case basis. The fact is people always saw the Bulls as Jordan and his Jordanaiers. I cant tell you how many time I heard how bad the Bulls would be without Jordan. Well we saw how good The Bulls could be. And yet you still want to argue what we were able to see. The Bulls without Jordan were still a championship contending team. These are the facts Guy. Why do we have to debate something we actually got to see?

[Stuckey]

OP:

http://i.qkme.me/3571m2.jpg

[guy]

*
What the Bulls were doing in the mid 80s should not be seen as "establishing a winning culture". One of those years they werent even 500 and made the playoffs. That culture your refering to was established by Jackson, Jordan, and Pippen. They dont win in 91 without those three.


Obviously they didn't just go from a lottery team to championship or bust right when Jordan came, but the expectation for the Bulls ultimately changed because of Jordan. Right away he was seen as a player that could ultimately lead them to a title as the cornerstone, mainly because of his talent and attitude. It was something the organization had never came close to having before. That's a culture change.



Jordan was seen as a selfish ball hog before Jackson and Pippen came. Obviously he wouldve made the Hall of Fame regardless. But hes probably looked at as another George Gervin. Pippen wouldve been a Hofer as well, but probably along the line of James Worthy.


Wow. George Gervin? George Gervin was a one-dimensional unmotivated coke addict that didn't do much else but score. Jordan was one of the greatest all around players while also being a better scorer then Gervin ever was with a competitiveness and work ethic that almost no one in history has matched, and definitely not someone like George Gervin.

At worst, Jordan is looked at as someone like Oscar Robertson, Elgin Baylor, Kobe Bryant before his 4th title or Lebron James before he won his title. Of course thats assuming that Jordan never gets to play under a good enough coach and with good enough teammates to eventually win it all, which more likely than not wouldn't happen.

Its statements like this that are incredibly stupid and why I say people tend to really overstate "help".



Its wrong in my opinion because of the kind of player Grant was. Hes always been a banger. What did Jordan teach him? How to be tough? Come on. Your assumptions are almost insulting. As if Grant was a little kid and Jordan was his Daddy.

So if he started his career playing with the Sacramento Kings and not making the playoffs it wouldn't have made a difference?

Whatever the case, it doesn't really matter. Grant wasn't some unique player that couldn't be replaced by someone else. Bangers were all over the league at the time. As I said, they probably had a better banger player before Grant that they felt okay giving up because of Grant.



I believe you stated Jackson had "NO" coaching experience. Not only did he have experience, but he won. And he was an assistant under Doug Collins. The fact is he was obviously ready.


I was obviously talking about NBA head coaching experience. If you think there's no difference, then thats a joke.



Harper was REDUCED to that role because 1. he had a hard time picking up the offense in 95, the 2. unlike the Cavs and Clippers, the Bulls offense wasnt condusive to Harpers strengths which was transition. If he could avg 11 ppg at 35 years old in 99, why couldnt he avg 15-17 if he were three years younger and played in an offense where they pushed the ball in transition?


A player doesn't go from 20 ppg in 38 mpg to 7 ppg in 20 mpg cause of style of play, especially when they clearly could've used his scoring in 95 before Jordan came back. He clearly declined. And he averaged 11 ppg in 99 cause they were a horrible team. The year before he averaged 9 ppg in 98 on a good team.

Anyway, even if you think he was still capable of being a 20 ppg scorer, which is ridiculous, it doesn't change what I said. The role he played could've been played by everyone I mentioned.



Because Williams was a 26 year old 6'11 center capable of avg 17/9 on 50% shooting. Something the Bulls never had. He didnt play much in the first round, but he avg 9/5 on 50% shooting the rest of the playoffs. In limited minutes mind you.

Regardless, he didn't contribute much. Its just odd to me that you constantly bring him up when he barely had a part in the overall dynasty.



Then take it on a case by case basis. The fact is people always saw the Bulls as Jordan and his Jordanaiers. I cant tell you how many time I heard how bad the Bulls would be without Jordan. Well we saw how good The Bulls could be. And yet you still want to argue what we were able to see. The Bulls without Jordan were still a championship contending team. These are the facts Guy. Why do we have to debate something we actually got to see?

I think my post went completely over your head. Like I said, its not like when a team plays without their star player, its like they never played with that star player at all as if he never existed. Much of their success in 94 was due to the experience they gained while playing with him, significant experience that they probably don't have if he never played on that team in the first place.

[97 bulls]

Obviously they didn't just go from a lottery team to championship or bust right when Jordan came, but the expectation for the Bulls ultimately changed because of Jordan. Right away he was seen as a player that could ultimately lead them to a title as the cornerstone, mainly because of his talent and attitude. It was something the organization had never came close to having before. That's a culture change.



Wow. George Gervin? George Gervin was a one-dimensional unmotivated coke addict that didn't do much else but score. Jordan was one of the greatest all around players while also being a better scorer then Gervin ever was with a competitiveness and work ethic that almost no one in history has matched, and definitely not someone like George Gervin.

At worst, Jordan is looked at as someone like Oscar Robertson, Elgin Baylor, Kobe Bryant before his 4th title or Lebron James before he won his title. Of course thats assuming that Jordan never gets to play under a good enough coach and with good enough teammates to eventually win it all, which more likely than not wouldn't happen.

Its statements like this that are incredibly stupid and why I say people tend to really overstate "help".



So if he started his career playing with the Sacramento Kings and not making the playoffs it wouldn't have made a difference?

Whatever the case, it doesn't really matter. Grant wasn't some unique player that couldn't be replaced by someone else. Bangers were all over the league at the time. As I said, they probably had a better banger player before Grant that they felt okay giving up because of Grant.



I was obviously talking about NBA head coaching experience. If you think there's no difference, then thats a joke.



A player doesn't go from 20 ppg in 38 mpg to 7 ppg in 20 mpg cause of style of play, especially when they clearly could've used his scoring in 95 before Jordan came back. He clearly declined. And he averaged 11 ppg in 99 cause they were a horrible team. The year before he averaged 9 ppg in 98 on a good team.

Anyway, even if you think he was still capable of being a 20 ppg scorer, which is ridiculous, it doesn't change what I said. The role he played could've been played by everyone I mentioned.



Regardless, he didn't contribute much. Its just odd to me that you constantly bring him up when he barely had a part in the overall dynasty.



I think my post went completely over your head. Like I said, its not like when a team plays without their star player, its like they never played with that star player at all as if he never existed. Much of their success in 94 was due to the experience they gained while playing with him, significant experience that they probably don't have if he never played on that team in the first place.
I think youre giving wayyyyyy too much credit to Jordan for the Bulls success, The talent of the players, and the coach. Thats were we disagree. Obviously Jordan played huge role in the Bulls winning. But the fact is (and this is what you simply wont admit), From watching the Bulls from 94-98, THEY ALL WERE REPLACEABLE. They obviously dont win as much, or set the NBA record for wins, etc, but that team was talented enough to win more than one. championship if they had a suitable replacement for Jordan as we saw in 94, or Pippen as we saw in the first almost 40 games, and obviously the other players were replaceable.

You seem to feel you could put any good player around Jordan and hes gonna automatically win. Id like to ask you this.... Why didnt the Bulls win pre Pippen and Jackson when they had a good young scoring swingman in Orlando Wooldridge (who could be his Pippen), a good young big in Charles Oakley (who couldve been his Rodman or Grant), and a good young coach in Doug Collins. Even without being championship contenders. They only won 11 more games when Jordan was added. And stayed in playoff contention the year he broke his ankle and only played in 18 games. Again I think far too much credit is given to Jordan for the Bulls success. Basketball is a team sport. If your interest is winning, then this wouldnt be much of a conversation.

[guy]

I think youre giving wayyyyyy too much credit to Jordan for the Bulls success, The talent of the players, and the coach. Thats were we disagree. Obviously Jordan played huge role in the Bulls winning. But the fact is (and this is what you simply wont admit), From watching the Bulls from 94-98, THEY ALL WERE REPLACEABLE. They obviously dont win as much, or set the NBA record for wins, etc, but that team was talented enough to win more than one. championship if they had a suitable replacement for Jordan as we saw in 94, or Pippen as we saw in the first almost 40 games, and obviously the other players were replaceable.


I don't think I am. Thats not even my intention. I'm just pointing out that the things some people use to discredit or downplay what Jordan did is a little ridiculous because of the fact that he had a large hand in all that.

And as I said, aside from Pippen, who's development Jordan had a huge impact on, and Rodman, who's arrival to the only team that would take him was largely due to Jordan's presence, the Bulls weren't that talented in the sense that you couldn't find players like them littered across the league. Thats my point.

I'm not downplaying the coach. I brought him up because people on here act like Jordan's only way of winning was with Phil as his coach. I'm not saying any idiot could coach that team to a championship. But are we really supposed to believe that other well respected coaches at the time like Pat Riley, Chuck Daly, Larry Brown, Greg Popovich, Rick Adelman, George Karl, Jerry Sloan, Lenny Wilkens couldn't coach those teams to some championships? I don't know, I just think its highly doubtful.

Sure, you can say maybe everyone was replaceable in the timeframe you mentioned. But not to the same extent. You could replace Steve Kerr with like 15-30 players and still win 3 titles, while you could probably only replace Jordan with Hakeem and still win 3 titles. Thats always been my point. Everyone who works at Walmart is probably replaceable but replacing the CEO is alot harder then replacing the manager at one of their stores correct?



You seem to feel you could put any good player around Jordan and hes gonna automatically win. Id like to ask you this.... Why didnt the Bulls win pre Pippen and Jackson when they had a good young scoring swingman in Orlando Wooldridge (who could be his Pippen), a good young big in Charles Oakley (who couldve been his Rodman or Grant), and a good young coach in Doug Collins. Even without being championship contenders. They only won 11 more games when Jordan was added. And stayed in playoff contention the year he broke his ankle and only played in 18 games. Again I think far too much credit is given to Jordan for the Bulls success. Basketball is a team sport. If your interest is winning, then this wouldnt be much of a conversation.

No I never felt that way. I said when you have someone like Jordan as opposed to lesser players, its not as hard to find the right formula to win a championship i.e. find good enough players, good enough coaches, the right playing style, establish continuity, etc.

Orlando Woolridge was a cokehead who only played with Jordan in his first 2 seasons, one which Jordan missed almost the entirety of. Charles Oakley only played with Jordan for 3 seasons, from 86-88, one which Jordan missed almost the entirety of. All 3 only played the 86 season together, which Jordan missed almost the entirety of. Its a relatively small sample size and on top of that, Jordan himself was still growing as a player and a leader. This is a horrible example you've brought up. Jesus, its not like I said the Bulls became championship contenders right when they got Jordan. If Jordan actually got to play with those 2 together for much longer and as a better and more mature player as was the case with Pippen and Grant, its highly doubtful that they would've just remained 30-40 win teams losing in the first round every year.

And if you're implying that Jordan would've never been able to win a championship with Oakley like he did with Grant, let me ask, what exactly did Grant provide to the Bulls that Oakley was severely lacking? There's literally about nothing.

The Bulls under Doug Collins improved every single year for each of those 3 years. In the third season they reached the ECF with second year inexperienced Pippen and Grant as their 2nd and 3rd best players. For whatever reason they replaced Collins, but its really not far-fetched at all to think if they kept Collins around and Jordan, Pippen, and Grant all got better and more mature that they would've won titles anyway. Maybe not as many, maybe just as much, either way I don't think anyone would've actually bet that they had reached their ceiling under Collins.

In the current NBA, you could literally switch every team's best player with the Heat for Lebron James while also making minor switches for positional differences and about half of those teams would remain or become title contenders and probably most of them would be considered the favorites. It really wasn't that much different with Jordan in his time. Thats another reason why I say the "help" is greatly overstated.

[Bigsmoke]

OP lame as ****

[97 bulls]

I don't think I am. Thats not even my intention. I'm just pointing out that the things some people use to discredit or downplay what Jordan did is a little ridiculous because of the fact that he had a large hand in all that.
Thats because people put Jordan on this pedestal as if he was this god that created all things basketball. Like you. You credit Jordan with far to many things.



And as I said, aside from Pippen, who's development Jordan had a huge impact on, and Rodman, who's arrival to the only team that would take him was largely due to Jordan's presence, the Bulls weren't that talented in the sense that you couldn't find players like them littered across the league. Thats my point.
This is my point. Its no secret Jordan helped Pippen. But Pippen was gonna be Pippen regardless. His skillset was totally different from Jordan as was their mentality. And their leadership qualities. In fact, the thing Id credit Jordan with the most his one on one scoring, the biggest thing you and others like you like to penalize Pippen for. Jordan didnt instill Pippens work ethic (we know this because Pippen went from the towel manager of a small college to the number 5 pick in the NBA draft), his ability to run an offense (we know this because Pippen played PG in college), his help defense, his leadership qualities (their leadership qualities were totally different), and sure as hell not a winning attitude seeing as how neither were winning championships in the NBA right away. They grew together.



I'm not downplaying the coach. I brought him up because people on here act like Jordan's only way of winning was with Phil as his coach. I'm not saying any idiot could coach that team to a championship. But are we really supposed to believe that other well respected coaches at the time like Pat Riley, Chuck Daly, Larry Brown, Greg Popovich, Rick Adelman, George Karl, Jerry Sloan, Lenny Wilkens couldn't coach those teams to some championships? I don't now, I just think its highly doubtful.
You just named some of the greatest coaches of alltime. This isnt saying much.


Orlando Woolridge was a cokehead who only played with Jordan in his first 2 seasons, one which Jordan missed almost the entirety of. Charles Oakley only played with Jordan for 3 seasons, from 86-88, one which Jordan missed almost the entirety of. All 3 only played the 86 season together, which Jordan missed almost the entirety of. Its a relatively small sample size and on top of that, Jordan himself was still growing as a player and a leader. This is a horrible example you've brought up. Jesus, its not like I said the Bulls became championship contenders right when they got Jordan. If Jordan actually got to play with those 2 together for much longer and as a better and more mature player as was the case with Pippen and Grant, its highly doubtful that they would've just remained 30-40 win teams losing in the first round every year.*
Half the NBA was strung out on cocaine in the 80s. Obviously if they continued to play together they improve. But not to the point of winning a championship. Besides, this all stems from youre winning culture comment.


As far as the role players. I dont think theyre a dime a dozen. Remember, Kerr is the alltime leader in 3pt percentage in NBA history. And he and Pax hit some huge shots during the Bulls run. Now compare that with Kyle Korver. He couldnt hit the ocean if he were in a boat in 2011. Kukoc wasnt just a sixthman, he was at the least arguably the best sixthman in the league at the time. The Bulls also had a Hofer assistant coach in Tex Winter. The Bulls were much more than Jordan and some good players.

[Calabis]

Its not a myth. Pippen intentionally sent Magic toward help. Not to mention guys are still gonna get loose. I honestly dont think you know what youre talking about.

:roll: says the guy who who compares Pippen to Magic, Bird and Jordan.

You said he shut him down, and get out of here with that sent him to help bullshit, he did a great job in the backcourt, but he kept reaching/gambling, at which time Magic would penetrate or spin off him. Fortunate for him there was great help defense by Grant and Jordan on the plays I listed.

According to you Pippen is a combination of three of the TOP 10 players of all time:facepalm The way you talk about the guy, I swear he did more than lead a team to the second round of the playoffs and a 34-31 record the following year.

Pippen is a great player, but the lengths you go are incredible. I personally disagree with the OP, but after reading your posts, I swear Pip was GOAT.

[97 bulls]

:roll: says the guy who who compares Pippen to Magic, Bird and Jordan.

You said he shut him down, and get out of here with that sent him to help bullshit, he did a great job in the backcourt, but he kept reaching/gambling, at which time Magic would penetrate or spin off him. Fortunate for him there was great help defense by Grant and Jordan on the plays I listed.

According to you Pippen is a combination of three of the TOP 10 players of all time:facepalm The way you talk about the guy, I swear he did more than lead a team to the second round of the playoffs and a 34-31 record the following year.

Pippen is a great player, but the lengths you go are incredible. I personally disagree with the OP, but after reading your posts, I swear Pip was GOAT.

According to you Pippen is a combination of three of the TOP 10 players of all time
At some point you need to let it go. You're gonna believe what you wanna believe. It takes a real female to go out of their way to twist my word. And and a true bitch to continue to do it after I tell you my stance.

The fact is he was turning him to help intentionally. Any moron (besides you) can see it. He knew he could over commit because Magic would turn into help. It was really thing of beauty. And Magic fell for it hook line and sinker. Pippens main job was to not allow Magic to pick the Bulls apart by hitting open cutters and shooters and deter the fastbreak on the perimeter. Then turn him to help (baseline) in the post.

[SpecialQue]

i like how Jordan would give assists to himself and score every point himself.

[Calabis]

At some point you need to let it go. You're gonna believe what you wanna believe. It takes a real female to go out of their way to twist my word. And and a true bitch to continue to do it after I tell you my stance.

The fact is he was turning him to help intentionally. Any moron (besides you) can see it. He knew he could over commit because Magic would turn into help. It was really thing of beauty. And Magic fell for it hook line and sinker. Pippens main job was to not allow Magic to pick the Bulls apart by hitting open cutters and shooters and deter the fastbreak on the perimeter. Then turn him to help (baseline) in the post.

Bitch and a Moron:roll: dude really, your getting mad on the internet? Please tell me how the fvck did he turn him to help, when he's near the three point line and he's standing there watching Magic drive the lane while Jordan takes a charge? Do you even know what the fvck you are talking about? The Other play he reaches and gives up the lane, he's chasing Magic, if not for Grant playing great help defense coming off his man to alter the layup its a easy two. Let's not forget his horrible offensive performance that game

And his main job was to body him up in the back court, so by the time the Lakers set up their offense, they were well into the shot clock. As far as Pippen not letting him pick the Bulls apart...last time I checked 8 assists at halftime isn't to shabby.

Maybe you need to watch the game, I don't see some legendary performance by your hero...what I do see is Grant playing great help D throughout the game, Paxson shooting the ball very well at the right time and Jordan knocking down 13 shoots in a row.

[secund2nun]

Tell me again how the Bulls won 55 games after he retired and were one bad call away from advancing to the ECF to face Indy????

NO ONE wins titles by themselves. Get a grip. The closest someone has ever come to that is 1999-2000 Shaq and 1994-1995 Hakeem.

Pippen is one of the best defenders of all time and a nice passer, rebounder, and a good enough scorer. For comparison, after Jordan retired Pippen led the Bulls to 55 wins and past the first round, while prime Wade and prime Kobe could not led their teams past the first round in the multiple changes they had.

Get a grip.

[SpecialQue]

Hey, remember when Jordan came back from retirement in 95 and beat the Rockets in the finals because Jordan's just that awesome?

Also remember those awesome Wizards championships he won? Goddamn Jordan's awesome.

[97 bulls]

Bitch and a Moron:roll: dude really, your getting mad on the internet? Please tell me how the **** did he turn him to help, when he's near the three point line and he's standing there watching Magic drive the lane while Jordan takes a charge? Do you even know what the fvck you are talking about? The Other play he reaches and gives up the lane, he's chasing Magic, if not for Grant playing great help defense coming off his man to alter the layup its a easy two. Let's not forget his horrible offensive performance that game

And his main job was to body him up in the back court, so by the time the Lakers set up their offense, they were well into the shot clock. As far as Pippen not letting him pick the Bulls apart...last time I checked 8 assists at halftime isn't to shabby.

Maybe you need to watch the game, I don't see some legendary performance by your hero...what I do see is Grant playing great help D throughout the game, Paxson shooting the ball very well at the right time and Jordan knocking down 13 shoots in a row.
I never get mad bro. But you are acting like a female. I state something, you blow it way out of proportion, I put my statement into context and yet you still take it and run with it. Like a female youre only hearing what you wanna hear.


As far as Pippen not letting him pick the Bulls apart...last time I checked 8 assists at halftime isn't to shabbyMagic had 10 assists for the game bro.The fact is the one game that Pip defended Magic, he had his lowest assist total, shot his lowest percentage (31%), and the Lakers only scored 86 pts. Pippen did a great job on Magic

[guy]

Thats because people put Jordan on this pedestal as if he was this god that created all things basketball. Like you. You credit Jordan with far to many things.


No I'm not. I get the feeling you are taking my opinions to the extreme. You seem to think that I'm giving Jordan 100% credit for everything positive that happened with the Bulls and giving Pippen, Grant, Phil, Rodman, etc 0% credit for anything. Thats not what I'm saying. All I'm saying is for almost every contributing factor to the Bulls' success during those 15 years, Jordan directly or indirectly had some kind of hand in it, however minimal it may have been. Its literally impossible for that not to occur. And I don't say that about just Jordan, but many all-time greats in general. Thats why I say its extremely stupid to take two great players and compare the teams they had throughout their career and just automatically come to the conclusion that one was luckier then the other. Its not as simple as that.



This is my point. Its no secret Jordan helped Pippen. But Pippen was gonna be Pippen regardless. His skillset was totally different from Jordan as was their mentality. And their leadership qualities. In fact, the thing Id credit Jordan with the most his one on one scoring, the biggest thing you and others like you like to penalize Pippen for. Jordan didnt instill Pippens work ethic (we know this because Pippen went from the towel manager of a small college to the number 5 pick in the NBA draft), his ability to run an offense (we know this because Pippen played PG in college), his help defense, his leadership qualities (their leadership qualities were totally different), and sure as hell not a winning attitude seeing as how neither were winning championships in the NBA right away. They grew together.


Its highly doubtful Pippen would've been exactly who he was without Jordan, and its really being way too overconfident to say he would've been that way regardless as you've put it.

I get the feeling that your being sensitive and you think that when I say Jordan should deserve alot of credit for his role in the development of Pippen instead of having his accomplishments lessened due to playing with such a great player, that I'm saying Pippen's greatness should be diminished. I'm not at all. When I judge a player, it doesn't really matter who helped in his development, because that would be stupid since pretty much no one in life gets to success without people teaching them along the way. Diminishing Pippen for that would be just as stupid as diminishing Jordan cause he was helped by Dean Smith in his development. All I'm saying is its pretty stupid to diminish Jordan by mentioning his help with comments like if Barkley, Ewing, Drexler, etc had Pippen, then they would've beaten Jordan and won more rings too.



You just named some of the greatest coaches of alltime. This isnt saying much.


I just named what was like 1/3 of the league at one point :oldlol: It actually does say a lot. It says that its stupid to suggest that Phil Jackson was the only coach that could've ever coached Jordan to a title, which people on here do constantly.



Half the NBA was strung out on cocaine in the 80s. Obviously if they continued to play together they improve. But not to the point of winning a championship. Besides, this all stems from youre winning culture comment.


Why do you say they couldn't have won a championship? Why do you even come to that conclusion? I see no reason why it wouldn't have been possible assuming everyone was healthy, specifically Orlando. Its thinking like this that is flawed to me. Just because something didn't happen, doesn't mean it was so highly unlikely that it wouldn't have happened given more time.



As far as the role players. I dont think theyre a dime a dozen. Remember, Kerr is the alltime leader in 3pt percentage in NBA history. And he and Pax hit some huge shots during the Bulls run. Now compare that with Kyle Korver. He couldnt hit the ocean if he were in a boat in 2011. Kukoc wasnt just a sixthman, he was at the least arguably the best sixthman in the league at the time. The Bulls also had a Hofer assistant coach in Tex Winter. The Bulls were much more than Jordan and some good players.

So are you suggesting that the Bulls needed the all-time leader in 3pt % in NBA history to win all 3 of those titles? It HAD to be the all-time leader? Nobody else could've filled that role? Thats ridiculous to suggest. Yes, Steve Kerr isn't a dime a dozen in the sense that there's no greater 3pt % in NBA history. He was a dime a dozen in the role he played, because there's always been plenty of knockdown shooters in the league. Replacing a career 45% 3pt shooter who's role was to only take 2-3 per game with a career 42% 3pt shooter like Kyle Korver who you mentioned, would not have changed much, if anything.

Role players hit big shots on every championship team and even on other teams as well.

Yes, Toni Kukoc actually was the 6th man of the year, which means he was an above average role player and at the very least the 146th best player in the league :oldlol: Sorry, its always funny to me when people point to things like the 6MOY award and one of the best players from overseas, like that really means alot especially back then.

[Asukal]

Close this retarded thread... :facepalm

or ban the OP.

[SpecialQue]

Hey remember when Jordan won a championship in his rookie year and also won FMVP?

[97 bulls]

*
All I'm saying is for almost every contributing factor to the Bulls' success during those 15 years, Jordan directly or indirectly had some kind of hand in it, however minimal it may have been.
Its post like this that I vehemently disagree with. Jordan didnt teach Jackson and Winter their coaching philosophy. In fact, he tried to fight it at first. Jackson had to beg him to get Paxson the ball cuz he was open. He didnt teach Pax how to shoot. He didnt teach Cartwright and Grant how to defend the post. He didnt give Pippen his talent and work ethic. We're talking about huge reasons as to why the Bulls won. Jordans biggest influence on the Bulls was the confidence hed give to to his teammates and coach in knowing that they had the best player in the world on their side.



Its highly doubtful Pippen would've been exactly who he was without Jordan, and its really being way too overconfident to say he would've been that way regardless as you've put it.*

Again whats doubtful about it? They didnt even have the same mindset. They really didnt even have the same skillset. The way they approached the game was in stark contrast of each other. Pippen didnt try to be Jordan the year he retired. He ran the Bulls in his own way.




Why do you say they couldn't have won a championship? Why do you even come to that conclusion? I see no reason why it wouldn't have been possible assuming everyone was healthy, specifically Orlando. Its thinking like this that is flawed to me. Just because something didn't happen, doesn't mean it was so highly unlikely that it wouldn't have happened given more time.*
Because they were nowhere near contending. Unlike when Pippen and Grant came. You knew they had something going because they were going deep into the playoffs at a young age.



So are you suggesting that the Bulls needed the all-time leader in 3pt % in NBA history to win all 3 of those titles? It HAD to be the all-time leader? Nobody else could've filled that role? Thats ridiculous to suggest. Yes, Steve Kerr isn't a dime a dozen in the sense that there's no greater 3pt % in NBA history. He was a dime a dozen in the role he played, because there's always been plenty of knockdown shooters in the league. Replacing a career 45% 3pt shooter who's role was to only take 2-3 per game with a career 42% 3pt shooter like Kyle Korver who you mentioned, would not have changed much, if anything.*
No. And I see your point. My point is that were not talking about an avg three point shooter. PAX and Kerr were lights out and clutch. Korver missed alot of wide open threes.



Yes, Toni Kukoc actually was the 6th man of the year, which means he was an above average role player and at the very least the 146th best player in the league**Sorry, its always funny to me when people point to things like the 6MOY award and one of the best players from overseas, like that really means alot especially back then.

I gotta admit I got a chuckle out of this paragraph. However. Kukoc was much better than you give him credit for. And what was wrong with the Europen players back then? You do remember why they began to allow NBA players to start playing in the Olympics right? Because European teams started kicking our ass. Kukoc was more than capable of being a starter on an NBA team. Hell he avg 19/7/5 in his lone opportunity to be the man in the NBA. Some or even more most American players would kill to havd a statline like that for a season. Another classic example of you feeling what happened didnt really happen.

[Big#50]

That Bulls Roster was legit. Grant was already a great defenders at PF. Paxson was as good a shooter as anyone in the league. Pippen was already an all star and one of the best defender in the league.
Hakeem had a good cast as well. Shaq had a good cast as well. Duncan had a good cast. Sometimes a good all around cast is better than a top heavy team with no depth.
Nobody in this league has won a ring by themselves. Some just did it with weaker rosters.

[La Frescobaldi]

Winning rings is like a 3 legged stool. You gotta have these 3 legs to win a championship:

* Talent
* System/Coaching
* Injuries

If any one of those legs breaks, the stool falls. You do not get to pass Go, you do not get to collect $200... you do not get a championship.

It makes no sense to say one leg is more important than the other, because if any leg breaks, that stool won't bear weight.

***********************************

You can see examples of this in any season. Probably every season.

2010 - Kendrick Perkins breaks his knee in the Finals, the Celtics lose.
Now it could be debated whether the Celtics were going to win that series, but did anyone think they were going to win without Perk?

2011 - the Heat have a monster so-called Big 3 lineup... but lose to Dallas's smoother system. Spoelstra, in my opinion, didn't have a system in place, and he wasn't a strong enough coach to keep the motivation level high enough to finish.

88-89 Bulls had a great lineup, but they didn't have Phil Jackson. System/coaching cost them against the Pistons. Doug Collins, in my opinion, couldn't control his team.... and in 90, PJ was there but it took a full year to get rampaging egos to run his system.

The '71 Lakers also had a monster, so-called Big 3 lineup, with Baylor, West, and Chamberlain.... But Baylor & West both missed the entire playoffs, drawing DNP - injury.... and lost to Kareem's Bucks.

90s Shaq-Penny Magic got destroyed by injuries.

*********************

All three factors are out of the control of any individual player, no matter how great he is.

Using rings as a measurement of individual greatness is absurd.

That's been true for the 40+ years I've been watching hoops and it's still true today.

Of the three legs in the Bulls chair, there's no question in my mind, the most important for the 1991 championship was the second leg.
That ring was won by Phil Jackson & Tex Winter.

I severely doubt that any other coach could have won a championship with Michael Jordan on his team that year and that is still Phil Jackson's greatest accomplishment.

[andgar923]

I disagree with the OP.

I'm actually kinda embarrassed, since he's normally on point.

Having said that..

The overrating of Pip continues (to be fair, it is to counter the underrating of Pip).

The OP would've been correct if he stated that nobody's won a ring with less help. That can actually be debatable that can go either way. But MJ does have the distinction to have won with the worst front court of all time. No true dominant big man or all star front court.

[La Frescobaldi]

I disagree with the OP.

I'm actually kinda embarrassed, since he's normally on point.

Having said that..

The overrating of Pip continues (to be fair, it is to counter the underrating of Pip).

The OP would've been correct if he stated that nobody's won a ring with less help. That can actually be debatable that can go either way. But MJ does have the distinction to have won with the worst front court of all time. No true dominant big man or all star front court.

False.
DJ's Sonics squad had Jack Sikma who was a solid center but nowhere near top of the league.... and nothing else. Lonnie Shelton & Johnnie Johnson was what they had, Paul Silas was anciently old in '79 but played solid D.

Rick Barry's Warriors for certain, and most probably Dirk's Mavs had less help. And while both Barry & Dirk were forwards, their front courts were not better than what was on the '91 Bulls.
That's 3 teams without even looking into it very hard. There's probably more.

[andgar923]

False.
DJ's Sonics squad had Jack Sikma who was a solid center but nowhere near top of the league.... and nothing else. Lonnie Shelton & Johnnie Johnson was what they had, Paul Silas was anciently old in '79 but played solid D.

Rick Barry's Warriors for certain, and most probably Dirk's Mavs had less help. And while both Barry & Dirk were forwards, their front courts were not better than what was on the '91 Bulls.
That's 3 teams without even looking into it very hard. There's probably more.
I'd be a fool if I tried to comment on the Sonics and Warriors since I honestly can't say how they matched up against their peers at the time.

Dirk IS a 7 footer that caused tons of mismatch problems, but also had a very good front court considering their competition (Haywood and Chandler). Seriously, who did they play aside from perhaps Gasol and Bynum that were any threat in the front court? Dirk is equivalent to a HOF center impact wise, you have both Tyson and Haywood averaging a block per game and changing even more shots than that.

Considering the Bulls' competition they were basically a joke for the most part offensively. One can argue that they were good enough defensively, but their defense was anchored by their back court. Aside from Grant and Rodman they didn't have much defense in the front court. I can go down the list of forwards and centers and even then, they got lit up. It wasn't like they were a great presence at either end. Rodman and Grant were both tough, but neither was a force that altered shots in the paint. Nobody came down the lane fearing a Rodman or Grant block.

[97 bulls]

I'd be a fool if I tried to comment on the Sonics and Warriors since I honestly can't say how they matched up against their peers at the time.

Dirk IS a 7 footer that caused tons of mismatch problems, but also had a very good front court considering their competition (Haywood and Chandler). Seriously, who did they play aside from perhaps Gasol and Bynum that were any threat in the front court? Dirk is equivalent to a HOF center impact wise, you have both Tyson and Haywood averaging a block per game and changing even more shots than that.

Considering the Bulls' competition they were basically a joke for the most part offensively. One can argue that they were good enough defensively, but their defense was anchored by their back court. Aside from Grant and Rodman they didn't have much defense in the front court. I can go down the list of forwards and centers and even then, they got lit up. It wasn't like they were a great presence at either end. Rodman and Grant were both tough, but neither was a force that altered shots in the paint. Nobody came down the lane fearing a Rodman or Grant block.
This is ridiculous. Theres three front court positions in the NBA. The 96-98 Bulls have Hall of Famers at TWO of those positions. WTF?

The 91-93 Bulls had Grant who was an excellent defender and double double machine. And while Longley and Cartwright werent great, they were more than serviceable.

[andgar923]

This is ridiculous. Theres three front court positions in the NBA. The 96-98 Bulls have Hall of Famers at TWO of those positions. WTF?

The 91-93 Bulls had Grant who was an excellent defender and double double machine. And while Longley and Cartwright werent great, they were more than serviceable.

Do you not know how to read?

How did they compare vs their counterparts?

You wanna go through the list of match ups they faced? if you compare them to the top teams or teams they faced in the post season they're shit.

No strong presence in the middle, Mj and Pip were basically their best shot blockers. Their only threat offensively was MJ, it wasn't Luc, Bill, Rodman, Grant, none of them.

[The Iron Fist]

Hey remember when Jordan won a championship in his rookie year and also won FMVP?
I remember that Jordan was so good, he won back to back FMVPs with the Wizards.

[97 bulls]

Do you not know how to read?

How did they compare vs their counterparts?

You wanna go through the list of match ups they faced? if you compare them to the top teams or teams they faced in the post season they're shit.

No strong presence in the middle, Mj and Pip were basically their best shot blockers. Their only threat offensively was MJ, it wasn't Luc, Bill, Rodman, Grant, none of them.
So the games in which Rodman gave Shaq, Mourning, Kemp, Malone fits is just a myth right? Id say overall they matched up fine vs their competition. Which frontcourt was better than the Bulls?

[andgar923]

So the games in which Rodman gave Shaq, Mourning, Kemp, Malone fits is just a myth right? Id say overall they matched up fine vs their competition. Which frontcourt was better than the Bulls?
Giving them fits is different than dominating a la Shaq. Shaq wasn't even a great defensive beast, but teams still didn't challenge him when he was in the paint.

Hell the pacers with the Davis in the front court were better.

The bulls did enough to sneak by, let us not pretend the opponents were getting the clamps put on them and that teams were scrambling to double luc or grant.

[Heavincent]

I disagree with the OP.

I'm actually kinda embarrassed, since he's normally on point.

Having said that..

The overrating of Pip continues (to be fair, it is to counter the underrating of Pip).

The OP would've been correct if he stated that nobody's won a ring with less help. That can actually be debatable that can go either way. But MJ does have the distinction to have won with the worst front court of all time. No true dominant big man or all star front court.

:roll:

[97 bulls]

Giving them fits is different than dominating a la Shaq. Shaq wasn't even a great defensive beast, but teams still didn't challenge him when he was in the paint.

Hell the pacers with the Davis in the front court were better.

The bulls did enough to sneak by, let us not pretend the opponents were getting the clamps put on them and that teams were scrambling to double luc or grant.
So the Pacers is the only team you feel that was better than the Bulls where the frontcourt is concerned?

[DatAsh]

How did Jordan manage to rack up all those assists by himself?

[guy]

*
Its post like this that I vehemently disagree with. Jordan didnt teach Jackson and Winter their coaching philosophy. In fact, he tried to fight it at first. Jackson had to beg him to get Paxson the ball cuz he was open. He didnt teach Pax how to shoot. He didnt teach Cartwright and Grant how to defend the post. He didnt give Pippen his talent and work ethic. We're talking about huge reasons as to why the Bulls won.

Wow man, I didn't mean he raised them as children and was the first to put a basketball in their hand.

As I said, role players don't matter much. There's not much of a difference between their actual abilities. The greater the superstars they're supporting though, the easier it makes on them.

I've said multiple times now that that Jordan helping develop Pippen wouldn't have mattered much if Pippen didn't have the potential and work ethic in the first place. You keep glossing over that and like I said, taking what I said to the extreme.

Phil and Tex's coaching philosophy doesn't matter much if Jordan doesn't eventually buy in the first place. Shit, even when fighting it they still made it to game 7 of the ECF.

Like I said, he had a hand in almost every major contributing factor to their success, as in heightening the expectations of the organizations, helping in the development of Pippen, making things easier on his average role player teammates, buying into Phil's philosophy despite his lack of experience, helping the organization feel comfortable bringing in Rodman, etc. Thats not saying something extreme like he taught John Paxson how to shoot like you to think.



Jordans biggest influence on the Bulls was the confidence hed give to to his teammates and coach in knowing that they had the best player in the world on their side.


Yes. And that is HUGE yet you seem to downplay it. Ask John Starks, Charles Oakley, Pat Riley, Dan Majerle, Kevin Johnson, Paul Westphal, Terry Porter, Jerome Kersey, Rick Adelman, John Stockton, Jeff Hornacek, and Jerry Sloan if they felt anywhere near as confident cause I doubt it.

And if you really believe what you said right there, you're not really disagreeing with me.




Again whats doubtful about it? They didnt even have the same mindset. They really didnt even have the same skillset. The way they approached the game was in stark contrast of each other. Pippen didnt try to be Jordan the year he retired. He ran the Bulls in his own way.


They didn't have the same skillset? They both did pretty much everything except Jordan was a significantly better scorer. When Pippen was playing his absolute best, people would say it was like watching two Jordans out there. Throw in the many people, including Pippen himself, that say Jordan was huge in his development and Pippen probably wouldn't be as good as he was without him, and I think its highly doubtful that he would've been the same player. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have been good, just not as great as he was.



Because they were nowhere near contending. Unlike when Pippen and Grant came. You knew they had something going because they were going deep into the playoffs at a young age.


:oldlol: This is the type of stupid comments I'm talking about They weren't making it deep in the playoffs cause of Pippen and Grant. They were making it deep in the playoffs mainly cause Jordan was a better, more mature, and experienced player and leader that was at or near his peak. As a result they were doing better in the RS and got to avoid tougher competition in earlier rounds and they were just a better team overall. Thats mainly why they were making it deep, not cause Pippen and Grant were these hugely impactful players that soon like they were later on. Its not far-fetched at all that if it was 86 Woolridge and Oakley in their place that it would've been any different.

I don't think Oakley in Grant's place makes a difference. In fact, I think Oakley was a little better. Woolridge in Pippen's place of course makes a difference. If he doesn't clean up his act like he didn't, I highly doubt they can win it all. But if he does, they still wouldn't be as good with him instead of Pippen, but its not far-fetched that they could've won it all. That trio would've still been one of the best trios in the league in the early 90s.



No. And I see your point. My point is that were not talking about an avg three point shooter. PAX and Kerr were lights out and clutch. Korver missed alot of wide open threes.


So what exactly are you saying? You do think that if it was Korver in their place that they would've won less then 6 titles? Cause thats laughable.



I gotta admit I got a chuckle out of this paragraph. However. Kukoc was much better than you give him credit for. And what was wrong with the Europen players back then? You do remember why they began to allow NBA players to start playing in the Olympics right? Because European teams started kicking our ass. Kukoc was more than capable of being a starter on an NBA team. Hell he avg 19/7/5 in his lone opportunity to be the man in the NBA. Some or even more most American players would kill to havd a statline like that for a season. Another classic example of you feeling what happened didnt really happen.

All I'm saying is technically thats what the 6th man means. I think he was better clearly then the 146th best player in the league and capable of starting.

Umm, European players weren't doing shit to the NBA in the 90s.

You don't seem to understand that stats on the absolute worst team in the league doesn't really mean much. Of course his numbers were going to go up. When the Bulls lost Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman, they lost about 50 ppg/25 rpg/10 apg. Of course when they don't end up getting anyone better, that next best player is going to make up a big chunk of that, but it doesn't really say much when you are the absolute worst team in the league. Its one thing if he was putting up superstar numbers, or if he was putting up those numbers on a good team. But he wasn't. It doesn't say much. Tell me someone who put up those type of numbers on the worst team in the league and still made the ASG?

[Roundball_Rock]

It is hilarious how one of the 5 greatest players of all-time actually is overrated. :roll: Just see this thread and the one claiming Jordan could be a solid player at age 50.


But MJ does have the distinction to have won with the worst front court of all time. No true dominant big man or all star front court.

That is ridiculous. Jordan always had great forwards--when he was winning.

Jordan made Pippen a top 5 draft pick; Jordan is the reason Chicago traded for Pippen. Please. Only Jordan fans utter such nonsense. If Jordan is so great at player development why has he been a joke as a GM/owner? Why doesn't he "mint" another HOFer? He hasn't because he can't.

People act as if Doug Collins didn't exist. Collins went out of his way to develop Pippen and Grant. You know, being the coach...Sure Jordan helped Pippen (and as Jordan himself noted, Pippen helped make Jordan better) but that happens all the time with teammates. Only in Jordan's case is it hyped to a ridiculous degree, but that seems to be the case with all things Jordan.


Fact 2:In 1991, Scottie Pippen was NOT even good enough to secure all-star 2nd team spot. let alone becoming all-star starter from the East in 1991.

Fact: After the 1991 season Pippen was part of first four players picked for the Dream Team.

Fact: Pippen posted near triple double stats in the 1991 NBA Finals. He averaged 21/9/7/2/1.

The real question is why so many absurdities surround Jordan. It only happens with him and Wilt. If Jordan is the "clear GOAT" why not let him stand on his record? It should suffice. Why the need for all these myths to prop him up?

[97 bulls]

Wow man, I didn't mean he raised them as children and was the first to put a basketball in their hand.

As I said, role players don't matter much. There's not much of a difference between their actual abilities. The greater the superstars they're supporting though, the easier it makes on them.

I've said multiple times now that that Jordan helping develop Pippen wouldn't have mattered much if Pippen didn't have the potential and work ethic in the first place. You keep glossing over that and like I said, taking what I said to the extreme.

Phil and Tex's coaching philosophy doesn't matter much if Jordan doesn't eventually buy in the first place. Shit, even when fighting it they still made it to game 7 of the ECF.

Like I said, he had a hand in almost every major contributing factor to their success, as in heightening the expectations of the organizations, helping in the development of Pippen, making things easier on his average role player teammates, buying into Phil's philosophy despite his lack of experience, helping the organization feel comfortable bringing in Rodman, etc. Thats not saying something extreme like he taught John Paxson how to shoot like you to think.



Yes. And that is HUGE yet you seem to downplay it. Ask John Starks, Charles Oakley, Pat Riley, Dan Majerle, Kevin Johnson, Paul Westphal, Terry Porter, Jerome Kersey, Rick Adelman, John Stockton, Jeff Hornacek, and Jerry Sloan if they felt anywhere near as confident cause I doubt it.

And if you really believe what you said right there, you're not really disagreeing with me.




They didn't have the same skillset? They both did pretty much everything except Jordan was a significantly better scorer. When Pippen was playing his absolute best, people would say it was like watching two Jordans out there. Throw in the many people, including Pippen himself, that say Jordan was huge in his development and Pippen probably wouldn't be as good as he was without him, and I think its highly doubtful that he would've been the same player. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have been good, just not as great as he was.



:oldlol: This is the type of stupid comments I'm talking about They weren't making it deep in the playoffs cause of Pippen and Grant. They were making it deep in the playoffs mainly cause Jordan was a better, more mature, and experienced player and leader that was at or near his peak. As a result they were doing better in the RS and got to avoid tougher competition in earlier rounds and they were just a better team overall. Thats mainly why they were making it deep, not cause Pippen and Grant were these hugely impactful players that soon like they were later on. Its not far-fetched at all that if it was 86 Woolridge and Oakley in their place that it would've been any different.

I don't think Oakley in Grant's place makes a difference. In fact, I think Oakley was a little better. Woolridge in Pippen's place of course makes a difference. If he doesn't clean up his act like he didn't, I highly doubt they can win it all. But if he does, they still wouldn't be as good with him instead of Pippen, but its not far-fetched that they could've won it all. That trio would've still been one of the best trios in the league in the early 90s.



So what exactly are you saying? You do think that if it was Korver in their place that they would've won less then 6 titles? Cause thats laughable.



All I'm saying is technically thats what the 6th man means. I think he was better clearly then the 146th best player in the league and capable of starting.

Umm, European players weren't doing shit to the NBA in the 90s.

You don't seem to understand that stats on the absolute worst team in the league doesn't really mean much. Of course his numbers were going to go up. When the Bulls lost Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman, they lost about 50 ppg/25 rpg/10 apg. Of course when they don't end up getting anyone better, that next best player is going to make up a big chunk of that, but it doesn't really say much when you are the absolute worst team in the league. Its one thing if he was putting up superstar numbers, or if he was putting up those numbers on a good team. But he wasn't. It doesn't say much. Tell me someone who put up those type of numbers on the worst team in the league and still made the ASG?
All Im saying is the Bulls had great players outside of Jordan. The notion that these players were what they were because of Jordan is idiotic. Especially when they were successful without him.

As far as Kukoc, he did hover around 13/4/4 in a limited role for a championship team as a third option. His per 36 min numbers were 17/5/5 on those same championship teams. Id say his stats in 99 were legit. And woulve been better had he had better players around him. But Im sure the facts dont matter cuz according to you, what we saw isnt really what we saw

As far as role players impact. I see it like this. If youre gonna get blame for losses, you should get credit for wins. For instance, take prime Jordan and put him on those mid 80s squads. Do they win championships? If not why not?

Why does Jordan get a pass but the role players get held accountable for losing to the Pistons in the late 80s if role players dont matter?

[La Frescobaldi]

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1991.htm

G1
CHICAGO MN FG-FGA FT-FTA 0R DR RB AS PF ST TO BL PTS
Pippen 41 7-19 5-7 2 5 7 5 5 1 3 0 19
Grant 40 3-8 0-0 3 7 10 1 1 2 1 0 6
Cartwright 34 3-8 0-0 0 4 4 2 4 0 0 1 6
Paxson 30 3-7 0-0 1 3 4 2 2 2 0 0 6
Jordan 40 14-24 7-9 2 6 8 12 5 3 4 0 36
Levingston 20 1-2 0-0 1 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 2
Hodges 13 2-5 0-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4
Perdue 12 2-2 2-2 0 4 4 0 2 0 0 1 6
Team
TOTALS 35-75 14-18 9 30 45 23 19 10 10 3 91

Is this the same team ?

G2
CHICAGO MN FG-FGA FT-FTA 0R DR RB AS PF ST TO BL PTS
Pippen 44 8-16 4-4 1 4 5 10 4 1 5 0 20
Grant 40 10-13 0-0 3 2 5 1 1 2 1 0 20
Cartwright 24 6-9 0-0 1 4 5 1 1 2 2 0 12
Paxson 25 8-8 0-0 0 0 0 6 2 1 0 0 16
Jordan 36 15-18 3-4 1 6 7 13 4 2 4 1 33
Levingston 22 0-2 0-0 0 1 1 2 4 2 0 0 0
Williams 15 1-1 0-0 1 2 3 0 2 0 0 0 2
Hodges 11 1-6 0-0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2
Perdue 11 1-3 0-0 3 4 7 1 0 0 1 0 2
Armstrong 7 0-2 0-0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
King 3 0-3 0-0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0
Hopson 2 0-0 0-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Team
TOTALS 50-81 7-8 11 25 45 35 20 10 14 1 107

[97 bulls]

The real question is why so many absurdities surround Jordan. It only happens with him and Wilt. If Jordan is the "clear GOAT" why not let him stand on his record? It should suffice. Why the need for all these myths to prop him up?
Exactly. You dont see any other fan of a player go out of their way to attack their favorite players teammates. You dont see Bird fans attacking Mchale, Parrish, and Co. Or Magic fans going after Worthy and Jabaar. Its just dumb

[guy]

All Im saying is the Bulls had great players outside of Jordan. The notion that these players were what they were because of Jordan is idiotic. Especially when they were successful without him.

They had 2 great players outside of Jordan, Pippen, who Jordan was instrumental in his development, and Rodman, who Jordan was instrumental in his arrival, and Rodman was only there for half the championship. Everyone else was basically average in that they were very replaceable. Its funny that you keep arguing with me about this when the Bulls ACTUALLY DID replace everyone outside of Jordan and Pippen.

The notion that these players were what they were 100% because of Jordan isn't something that I said. But go ahead and keep on overexaggerating what I said.

And go ahead and keep thinking to your self that when a team plays without their superstar they are playing as if that superstar never existed on their team in the first place.



As far as Kukoc, he did hover around 13/4/4 in a limited role for a championship team as a third option. His per 36 min numbers were 17/5/5 on those same championship teams. Id say his stats in 99 were legit. And woulve been better had he had better players around him. But Im sure the facts dont matter cuz according to you, what we saw isnt really what we saw


What is this BULLSHIT of me saying what we saw isn't really what we saw? Did I say he didn't put up those numbers? All I did was the point out the context surrounding it. Do stats just dictate everything and context doesn't matter? You're acting like he did what James Harden is doing this year. No, its not even close to that.



As far as role players impact. I see it like this. If youre gonna get blame for losses, you should get credit for wins. For instance, take prime Jordan and put him on those mid 80s squads. Do they win championships? If not why not?

Why does Jordan get a pass but the role players get held accountable for losing to the Pistons in the late 80s if role players dont matter?

Probably not cause his teammates weren't as good. When did I ever say they were as good? They'd be better then they were though.

This isn't about credit. We're not talking about credit because superstars and role players aren't held accountable to the same extent. There's obviously more expected of the superstar. If the Bulls lost a game and Michael Jordan and John Paxson both had only 8 points, I wouldn't say both players deserve equal blame.

From the beginning, all I've said was its stupid to compare two superstars' teams and come to the conclusion that the one that had the better teams must've just been luckier then the other. Its incredibly stupid. It ignores the the fact there is a ripple effect. To ignore this is incredibly simple-minded.

[gengiskhan]

I disagree with the OP.

I'm actually kinda embarrassed, since he's normally on point.

Having said that..

The overrating of Pip continues (to be fair, it is to counter the underrating of Pip).

The OP would've been correct if he stated that nobody's won a ring with less help. That can actually be debatable that can go either way. But MJ does have the distinction to have won with the worst front court of all time. No true dominant big man or all star front court.

Bro

I wanted to make a STATEMENT!

In 1991, MJ won his "FIRST" ring without all-star great Pippen because frankly, pippen had ZERO offensive resposibilty hence as a primary ball handler , MJ had the 11.4 APG.

Pippen was overcredited, overrated to undermine MJs supreme 1991 NBA Finals performance. 1991 pippen was never at 1992 Pippens level.

With even laughable front court. MJ won it on his own as 1991 Pistons got too old & too slow.

[97 bulls]

And go ahead and keep thinking to your self that when a team plays without their superstar they are playing as if that superstar never existed on their team in the first place.*
I think you put too much stock in Jordans spirit willing the Bulls to the season they had even though he wasnt there.



What is this BULLSHIT of me saying what we saw isn't really what we saw? Did I say he didn't put up those numbers? All I did was the point out the context surrounding it. Do stats just dictate everything and context doesn't matter? You're acting like he did what James Harden is doing this year. No, its not even close to that.*

Ok. But you also stated you feel he only put up those numbers because he was on a bad team. When his per 36min stats show that he was more than capable of being a 18/6/6 player. A championship team no less. Explain that away.





They had 2 great players outside of Jordan, Pippen, who Jordan was instrumental in his development, and Rodman, who Jordan was instrumental in his arrival, and Rodman*

Lol you still cant allow players to stand on their own merit.




Everyone else was basically average in that they were very replaceable. Its funny that you keep arguing with me about this when the Bulls ACTUALLY DID replace everyone outside of Jordan and Pippen.*
Lol I feel THEY ALL WERE REPLACEABLE. With a caveat that they wouldnt win as much or as many championships.



This isn't about credit. We're not talking about credit because superstars and role players aren't held accountable to the same extent. There's obviously more expected of the superstar. If the Bulls lost a game and Michael Jordan and John Paxson both had only 8 points, I wouldn't say both players deserve equal blame.*

Sure we are talking about credit. Heres the problem. And I stated this before. When a team wins a championship, the best player gets all the credit. When they lose, its cuz they didnt have enough help. Ive seen you post this very same sentiment. And its dumb. For instance, the 2011 Mavs. If I didnt watch that series, Id think Dirk played by himself. Hes held as a savior. Even though he really didnt shoot all that well in the finals. And all the Mavs shot light out throughout the earlier rounds. Not just Dirk. But countless time Ive read Dirks fans argue about hiw he didnt have any help or sufficient help during his career. That same idiotic rule is applied for Jordan. The Bulls win, He gets all the credit. They lose, its cuz his supporting cast wasnt good enough. Kobe Bryant fans are the same way.



From the beginning, all I've said was its stupid to compare two superstars' teams and come to the conclusion that the one that had the better teams must've just been luckier then the other. Its incredibly stupid. It ignores the the fact there is a ripple effect. To ignore this is incredibly simple-minded.
Then what is it then? If not luck of the draw? How often can a player handpick their roster?

[tmacattack33]

Interesting, i was unaware that pippen didn't even make the all-star team or an all-nba team that year.

[BlueandGold]

There's a fair amount of people who believe Jordan made Pippen into an all-star. I don't agree with the point in that extent but he definitely had a role in shaping Pippen's development. It's also quite amusing that unlike any pair of players who have won that many championships together Pippen never won a single FMVP and only 3 1st team all-nba rosters.

[97 bulls]

Bro

I wanted to make a STATEMENT!

In 1991, MJ won his "FIRST" ring without all-star great Pippen because frankly, pippen had ZERO offensive resposibilty hence as a primary ball handler , MJ had the 11.4 APG.

Pippen was overcredited, overrated to undermine MJs supreme 1991 NBA Finals performance. 1991 pippen was never at 1992 Pippens level.

With even laughable front court. MJ won it on his own as 1991 Pistons got too old & too slow.
You cant be this friggn dumb Ghengis. Pippen avgd almost a triple double. Grant avg 17/9. Paxson shot lightsout. How can you possibly take the stance?

If you feel the Pistons were old then you cant count.

[97 bulls]

There's a fair amount of people who believe Jordan made Pippen into an all-star. I don't agree with the point in that extent but he definitely had a role in shaping Pippen's development. It's also quite amusing that unlike any pair of players who have won that many championships together Pippen never won a single FMVP and only 3 1st team all-nba rosters.
He didnt deserve a FMVP. Maybe in 98. But his hurting his back really killed that. Rodman deserved the FMVP in 96

[DatAsh]

Exactly. You dont see any other fan of a player go out of their way to attack their favorite players teammates. You dont see Bird fans attacking Mchale, Parrish, and Co. Or Magic fans going after Worthy and Jabaar. Its just dumb

I see it a lot more with Kobe fans than I do Jordan fans. There's really only 4ish guys that do this for Jordan and the Bulls.

[gengiskhan]

You cant be this friggn dumb Ghengis. Pippen avgd almost a triple double. Grant avg 17/9. Paxson shot lightsout. How can you possibly take the stance?

If you feel the Pistons were old then you cant count.

Like I said. many still dont get it.

1991 LAL defense was plain average, 21 ppg as 2nd fiddle might look good but was just above average.

2000 Kobe with MJ, as 2nd fiddle will ave 26 ppg as 2nd scoring option easily against 1991 LAL defense.

Lemme put it this way. 1992 Pippen against 1991 LAL defense would've average 25+PPG as 2nd fiddle with triple double.

1991 Pippen was clearly underdeveloped although he performed better than 1990 Pippen in Post-season. 1991 Pippen was no way close to 1992 Pippen that played against well oiled, run-&-gun team like 1992 PORTLAND which has inside presence too.

many still dont get it.

A reason why I still consider 1991 MJ WON a ring by himself with help from supporting cast.

[guy]

I think you put too much stock in Jordans spirit willing the Bulls to the season they had even though he wasnt there.


Whether I do or not, you seem to think that it had zero effect, which is absolutely stupid.



Ok. But you also stated you feel he only put up those numbers because he was on a bad team. When his per 36min stats show that he was more than capable of being a 18/6/6 player. A championship team no less. Explain that away.


Wow, are you an idiot? Putting up 18/6/6 per 36 min on a championship team is not the same as ACTUALLY putting up 18/6/6 on a championship team. There's a reason WHY he wasn't playing 36 mpg. Wow, I cannot believe you really thought this was a good point.

Yes, I do think he put up those numbers only cause he was on a bad team. There's plenty of players in history that put up good stats on bad teams but probably weren't capable of doing it on better teams. The reason being if they were on better teams they wouldn't get as many minutes, as many shots, as many touches, etc. When they do get more of that because there's not better players on the team, that also means the team isn't as good. Its not very difficult logic.




Lol you still cant allow players to stand on their own merit.


I guess you just completely glossed over my previous post where I said Jordan helping Pippen doesn't take anything away from Pippen.

Once again, me saying it shouldn't take anything away from Jordan doesn't mean I'm saying it should diminish Pippen.

So for like the 3rd time, do you get that?



Lol I feel THEY ALL WERE REPLACEABLE. With a caveat that they wouldnt win as much or as many championships.

They wouldn't win as much? No other combination of teammates around Jordan could've won as much or more? You're so sure of that? So you're basically saying Jordan had the most perfect roster around him possible. Do you understand that with over +400 players in the league every year, that that would be like a 1 in a billion chance of happening?



Sure we are talking about credit. Heres the problem. And I stated this before. When a team wins a championship, the best player gets all the credit. When they lose, its cuz they didnt have enough help. Ive seen you post this very same sentiment. And its dumb. For instance, the 2011 Mavs. If I didnt watch that series, Id think Dirk played by himself. Hes held as a savior. Even though he really didnt shoot all that well in the finals. And all the Mavs shot light out throughout the earlier rounds. Not just Dirk. But countless time Ive read Dirks fans argue about hiw he didnt have any help or sufficient help during his career. That same idiotic rule is applied for Jordan. The Bulls win, He gets all the credit. They lose, its cuz his supporting cast wasnt good enough. Kobe Bryant fans are the same way.

No, we're not really talking about credit. Because I'm not comparing Jordan to role players. I'm comparing Jordan to other superstars. In fact, alot more superstars got the excuse of their teammates not playing well alot more then Jordan.



Then what is it then? If not luck of the draw? How often can a player handpick their roster?

Wow, obviously I've addressed why I think its stupid to say its luck, but I guess I've been talking to a wall this whole time.

I'll try one more time to help you understand by asking you this question. Do you think its a coincidence that the players that are considered the greatest ever happened to also be considered to have the most help and greatest teammates and coaches ever?

[97 bulls]

Whether I do or not, you seem to think that it had zero effect, which is absolutely stupid.*
No. Jordan most definitely had an effect. I disagree with the assumption that Jordan and only Jordan couldve helped his teammates. Remember this all stems from what you and others like you feel about how well the Bulls played WITHOUT Jordan. The thought is that they wouldn't have been as good, as successful, if Jordans holy spirit hadn't been in them. teammates help other teammates, as well as coaches. How do you know Pippen couldnt have evolved into the player that people felt he was seeing as how he was a top 5 pick from a little known small college. That says a hell of a lot about how scouts saw Pippen. And dont forget Grant was a lottery pick as well. Jordan mentored Pippen. And in time even learned from him as well. Something he makes known. But Im sure you dont care to acknowledge.




Wow, are you an idiot? Putting up 18/6/6 per 36 min on a championship team is not the same as ACTUALLY putting up 18/6/6 on a championship team. There's a reason WHY he wasn't playing 36 mpg. Wow, I cannot believe you really thought this was a good point.
The problem is you can't count. If he could put up 14/4/4 in a limited role, why couldn't or wouldnt he improve statitically with more playing time? And you gotta remember, that team wasnt built to his strengths. He catered and limited his game to Jordan Pippen and Rodman. The fact is he was a good player. Id say along the lines of a Rudy Gay or Luol Deng if he were in a different situation. Not as far as skillset mind you, but status.



I guess you just completely glossed over my previous post where I said Jordan helping Pippen doesn't take anything away from Pippen.*Once again, me saying it shouldn't take anything away from Jordan doesn't mean I'm saying it should diminish Pippen.*[/QUOT
Thats what youre saying. But your context states something totally different.



[QUOTE]They wouldn't win as much? No other combination of teammates around Jordan could've won more? You're so sure of that? So you're basically saying Jordan had the most perfect roster around him possible. Do you understand that with over +400 players in the league every year, that that would be like a 1 in a billion chance of happening?*
It would depend. I don't thing if you put lesser role players around Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman or Jordan, Pippen, Grant, theyd win as much. Case and point the 11 Heat vs the 12 Heat. Adding Battier, and Chalmers evolving really helped.



Do you think its a coincidence that the players that are considered the greatest ever happened to also be considered to have the most help and greatest teammates and coaches ever?
Nope. That's what seperates the alltime greats from each other.

[b0bab0i]

Jordan sucks at baseball

http://gameunderrepair.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/michael-jordan-baseball-cover-si.jpg

[andgar923]

So the Pacers is the only team you feel that was better than the Bulls where the frontcourt is concerned?

You didn't read my post did you?

[guy]

No. Jordan most definitely had an effect. I disagree with the assumption that Jordan and only Jordan couldve helped his teammates. Remember this all stems from what you and others like you feel about how well the Bulls played WITHOUT Jordan. The thought is that they wouldn't have been as good, as successful, if Jordans holy spirit hadn't been in them. teammates help other teammates, as well as coaches.

I never said Jordan was the only one that could've helped his teammates, in fact I said that superstars in general help their teammates. I said he was the one that helped those specific teammates and that there's not that many players they could've played with to gain that much experience by the time 94 came around. That team went to two straight ECF and then three straight Finals. If it was anyone else at the time in Jordan's place, its highly doubtful they are that experienced, and if its no one in Jordan's place, its pretty much a certainty that they aren't that experienced. And experience makes teams better. I've explained this numerous times and now even more thoroughly, so you can drop all that holy spirit bullshit as if what I'm saying isn't understandable. You just continue to make yourself look like a bigger idiot by overdramatizing my position.



How do you know Pippen couldnt have evolved into the player that people felt he was seeing as how he was a top 5 pick from a little known small college. That says a hell of a lot about how scouts saw Pippen. And dont forget Grant was a lottery pick as well. Jordan mentored Pippen. And in time even learned from him as well. Something he makes known. But Im sure you dont care to acknowledge.

I've said numerous times now that Pippen could've still been good or great. But with so many writers, coaches, players, and Pippen himself saying so much how much Jordan helped Pippen, more accounts of this then I've heard between another set of players, and coupled with the fact that he probably gained more valuable experience playing with Jordan then he would've playing with lesser players, I just don't think he would've been as great.

By the way, you're right he was a top 5 pick from a small DIV II college. And Scottie Pippen is the only draft pick in NBA HISTORY to come from that school. The likelihood that someone like that would make the NBA was already as small as it was, so the likelihood that he would end up being an all-time great was probably even smaller. So yes, I would think part of the reason he succeeded so much came from who he learned from.

I did acknowledge that Jordan learned from Pippen. I just think its obviously not close to the same extent given what he was before he even met Pippen.



The problem is you can't count. If he could put up 14/4/4 in a limited role, why couldn't or wouldnt he improve statitically with more playing time? And you gotta remember, that team wasnt built to his strengths. He catered and limited his game to Jordan Pippen and Rodman. The fact is he was a good player. Id say along the lines of a Rudy Gay or Luol Deng if he were in a different situation. Not as far as skillset mind you, but status.

You pointed to him putting up 18/6/6 per 36 min on a good team to counter my belief that he could only average 18/6/6 on a bad team. Are you really dumb enough to not see how completely flawed that counterargument is?

He's in a more limited role with less playing time because a good team requires better players for the bigger roles and more minutes. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?!? :banghead:



Thats what youre saying. But your context states something totally different.


No it doesn't. Its your thinking that thinks giving someone credit instead of diminishing them for something automatically means you're diminishing someone else.

I even said that diminishing Pippen for who he learned from means you can diminish anyone for the same reason, including Jordan.



It would depend. I don't thing if you put lesser role players around Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman or Jordan, Pippen, Grant, theyd win as much. Case and point the 11 Heat vs the 12 Heat. Adding Battier, and Chalmers evolving really helped.

No it doesn't depend. Do some Math. It would literally be at least a 1 in a billion chance that Jordan got the absolute perfect combination of teammates. And the fact that they made moves every season and he was still getting the perfect combination of teammates would be like a 1 in a zillion chance of happening. I think you're not comprehending again.

Sure, if you put lesser role players around them they would be worse. But as I said, role players are average and not hard to find.



Nope. That's what seperates the alltime greats from each other.

Wow, so what are you saying? That the only difference between Group A (Jordan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Kobe, Lebron) and Group B (Malone, Barkley, West, Oscar, KG, Dirk, Robinson, Ewing, Drexler, Kidd, AI, Nique, Nash) is that Group A had better teammates? You can't be serious.

[97 bulls]

I never said Jordan was the only one that could've helped his teammates, in fact I said that superstars in general help their teammates. I said he was the one that helped those specific teammates and that there's not that many players they could've played with to gain that much experience by the time 94 came around. That team went to two straight ECF and then three straight Finals. If it was anyone else at the time in Jordan's place, its highly doubtful they are that experienced, and if its no one in Jordan's place, its pretty much a certainty that they aren't that experienced. And experience makes teams better.
But Jordan didnt do that alone Guy. They did that together. You keep trying to paint this picture of Jordan winning 50-60 games and bow out in multiple seven game series too the Pistons and Celtics before Pippen and Grant joined. When thats just not the case. Youre argument would be valid if Jordan was at that stage in his career before Pippen and Grant showed up. He wasnt. And barely making .500 and then getting swept in the first round is no indication theyd be the dynasty of the 90s.



I've said numerous times now that Pippen could've still been good or great. But with so many writers, coaches, players, and Pippen himself saying so much how much Jordan helped Pippen, more accounts of this then I've heard between another set of players, and coupled with the fact that he probably gained more valuable experience playing with Jordan then he would've playing with lesser players, I just don't think he would've been as great.

What those writers, coaches, etc meant was Jordan mentored Pippen. I agree. But that doesnt mean Pippen couldve developed just the same in another situation. He had the twk most importnt things to make that happen. Talent and Determination/ Work Ethic. Again you paint thus picture of Jordan being a savy seasoned championship decorated vet. When the truth is he was learning on the fly as well.



You pointed to him putting up 18/6/6 per 36 min on a good team to counter my belief that he could only average 18/6/6 on a bad team. Are you really dumb enough to not see how completely flawed that counterargument is?*
He was on roughly the same pace. Why you cant comprehend that is beyond me




He's in a more limited role with less playing time because a good team requires better players for the bigger roles and more minutes. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?!?*
He played Behind Pippen and Rodman. Most fans see Pippen being top 5-8 SF alltime. and Rodmans probably top 15. Just in case you cant figure it out, Theres only 8 SFs that most fans would take to start over Pippen AT THE MOST. 15 for Rodman. Youre point is worthless.



Wow, so what are you saying? That the only difference between Group A (Jordan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Kobe, Lebron) and Group B (Malone, Barkley, West, Oscar, KG, Dirk, Robinson, Ewing, Drexler, Kidd, AI, Nique, Nash) is that Group A had better teammates? You can't be serious.
Yes thats exactly whay Im saying. Do you think its a coincidence that the players in Group A had at least two Hall of Fame teammates and Group B in most case had 1 at the most.

Your problem Guy is you have a primitive mindset.

[guy]

But Jordan didnt do that alone Guy. They did that together.


And I never said they didn't. In fact, you can apply what I've said about Jordan to basically every player in the league, including Jordan's teammates. All players make it either easier or harder for whoever their teammates are in comparison to other players. The reason I emphasize Jordan over everyone else though is cause he was clearly the most irreplaceable of them all. In 88 or 89, you could replace Pippen, Grant and or any other role player with countless different players and you would probably get around the same success, while with Jordan there were at most only a few players in the league you could replace him with and get the same success. From 90-93, you couldn't replace them as easily due to the already built in cohesion and chemistry they had, especially Pippen who was clearly far more irreplaceable then he was before due to his improvement into a superstar, but clearly Jordan was still by far the most irreplaceable of them all.

I'm not pointing out anything wrong or degrading. I'm just pointing out a fact. In no business is everyone equally valuable. Sports is no different. You can keep bringing up your cliche theme of it being a team sport, which is absolutely true, but it being a team sport doesn't mean every member of the team is of the same value.



You keep trying to paint this picture of Jordan winning 50-60 games and bow out in multiple seven game series too the Pistons and Celtics before Pippen and Grant joined. When thats just not the case. Youre argument would be valid if Jordan was at that stage in his career before Pippen and Grant showed up. He wasnt. And barely making .500 and then getting swept in the first round is no indication theyd be the dynasty of the 90s.

There's also no indication that they wouldn't be a dynasty. There's this stupid hypothesis people continuously bring up that since Jordan didn't get to a +.500 record and get out of the first round without Pippen, that means he would've never been able to without Pippen. Its incredibly stupid. Jordan only getting to that point once Pippen and Grant came along is a coincidence, not cause Pippen and Grant at the time were these huge impact players that made the difference. You're making it seem like those losing seasons Jordan had lasted like a decade. It was a relatively small sample size of 3 seasons, all 3 of them with a different coach, significantly different rosters throughout, 1 of which he didn't play much in, and in the 2 he played fully in had a different best teammate. The biggest reasons they improved were because of Jordan's continous improvement, development, maturity as a player and leader and continuity from having the same coach for once, relatively the same core of players, etc. It wasn't cause of Pippen and Grant who weren't even playing half the game on average.

The improvement of the Bulls and Jordan from 85-87 to 88-89 isn't much different then the improvement of the Cavs and Lebron from 04-05 to 06-08 and the Thunder and Durant from 08-09 to 10-11. The Cavs and the Thunder not doing well and then having that improvement like they did has way more to do with their superstars improving and maturing then who was put around them. Saying the Bulls improved that much cause of the arrival of Pippen and Grant would be like saying the Cavs only improved cause of the arrival of Larry Hughes and the Thunder only improved cause of the arrival of James Harden and Serge Ibaka. Its stupid.

You're right, they weren't winning 50 games and going deep into they playoffs before they got Pippen and Grant, but as I said, that was more of a coincidence then actually the cause of the result. Jordan was at that point of his career, just as Lebron and Durant were, where it didn't really matter that much who was around them, more then likely they were going to lead their team to at least around 50 wins and give their team a good chance of winning a round or two and possibly going deep in the playoffs.




What those writers, coaches, etc meant was Jordan mentored Pippen. I agree. But that doesnt mean Pippen couldve developed just the same in another situation. He had the twk most importnt things to make that happen. Talent and Determination/ Work Ethic. Again you paint thus picture of Jordan being a savy seasoned championship decorated vet. When the truth is he was learning on the fly as well.

Yes, he was learning on the fly, but you don't have to not be learning as well to have a significant impact mentoring someone.



He was on roughly the same pace. Why you cant comprehend that is beyond me

Being on the same per minute pace isn't the same as actually doing it. You're ignoring that you can't just look at the per 36 min stats and assume thats exactly what he'd average cause of fatigue and the strategy would change. You can say the same about plenty of players in history.

In fact, this isn't hard to check:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pgl_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=kukocto01&match=combined&year_min=1996&year_max=1998&age_min=0&age_max=99&team_id=&opp_id=&is_playoffs=N&round_is_ec1=Y&round_is_ecs=Y&round_is_ecf=Y&round_is_wc1=Y&round_is_wcs=Y&round_is_wcf=Y&round_is_fin=Y&game_num_type=&game_num_min=&game_num_max=&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&is_starter=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos_is_G=&pos_is_GF=&pos_is_F=&pos_is_FG=&pos_is_FC=&pos_is_C=&pos_is_CF=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=36&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=pts

Do the math and in games where he played more then 36 minutes from 96-98 he averaged 13/4/4.




He played Behind Pippen and Rodman. Most fans see Pippen being top 5-8 SF alltime. and Rodmans probably top 15. Just in case you cant figure it out, Theres only 8 SFs that most fans would take to start over Pippen AT THE MOST. 15 for Rodman. Youre point is worthless.

I never said he couldn't start for a good team. In fact, he did. I said no team that is aiming to be good is going to depend on him that much i.e. expect him to take 15-17 shots per game, lead them in rebounds, lead them in assists, have a large defensive role, etc.



Yes thats exactly whay Im saying. Do you think its a coincidence that the players in Group A had at least two Hall of Fame teammates and Group B in most case had 1 at the most.

Your problem Guy is you have a primitive mindset.

Do you even know what primitive means? Because you're the one with this ancient, simple, dumbass mindset that superstars are just lucky to be on the right team and there's no such thing as a ripple effect that is greatly caused by that superstar. This is the more common, flawed thinking that people have here, not what I've laid out.

You really think there's no difference between those two groups? First of all, many of those Hall of Fame teammates probably would not be in the HOF if it wasn't for the team success they experienced with one of those top 10 players of all-time I mentioned, so thats not very relevant.

Second of all, you have to be an idiot if you think there isn't a difference between the two groups. Take their teammates out of it so the team success doesn't cloud any judgment. What puts Barkley on Jordan's level? Nash on Magic's? Nique on Bird's? Dirk on Duncan's? Drexler on Kobe's? Ewing on Hakeem's? Robinson on Shaq's? KG on Lebron's? You can't see a clear difference between them?

[Roundball_Rock]

I love how MJ fans act as if Pippen magically wound up being a fluke top 5 pick from a small school--and MJ is so great he managed to convince Seattle to draft Pippen so Chicago could trade for him! :bowdown:

Reality check: 1987 draft

1) D. Robinson
5) Pippen
6) Kenny Smith
7) Kevin Johnson
10) Horace Grant
11) Reggie Miller
12) Mugsy Bogues
18) Mark Jackson
22) Reggie Lewis

So to recap: Pippen was drafted ahead of 5 all-stars, two other good players in Bogues and Smith and was drafted ahead of HOF'er in Miller and two HOF caliber players in Johnson and Lewis. Yet it was all Mike! :bowdown:

Only Jordan fans would seriously act as if a top 5 pick winding up being an elite player is a shock. You don't necessarily expect a HOF'er with a top 5 pick, but it certainly is possible and you certainly are hoping to acquire an all-star player with such a high pick.

Look at other players during those years who were picked around the 5th pick.

1984: Barkley (5th)
1988: Mitch Richmond (5th)
1989: Glen Rice (4th)

Only MJ fans would act as if a team spent a top 5 pick, and another team traded for that player, to get a role player. :roll:

Watch what was said when he was drafted yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qchnEgRqb4k

[Round Mound]

NBA & ABA Year-by-Year Playoff Leaders and Records for Defensive Rating

Year Lg Player DRtg Tm
2012 NBA Josh Smith 93.20 ATL
2011 NBA Dwight Howard 95.73 ORL
2010 NBA Dwight Howard 92.98 ORL
2009 NBA Dwight Howard 98.35 ORL
2008 NBA Tim Duncan 98.51 SAS
2007 NBA Jason Kidd 94.63 NJN
2006 NBA Alonzo Mourning 95.13 MIA
2005 NBA Ben Wallace 93.48 DET
2004 NBA Ben Wallace 83.91 DET
2003 NBA Ben Wallace 90.51 DET
2002 NBA Ben Wallace 86.41 DET
2001 NBA David Robinson* 92.42 SAS
2000 NBA David Robinson* 84.01 SAS
1999 NBA David Robinson* 87.33 SAS
1998 NBA David Robinson* 93.42 SAS
1997 NBA Alonzo Mourning 94.64 MIA
1996 NBA Scottie Pippen* 96.07 CHI
1995 NBA David Robinson* 97.53 SAS
1994 NBA Patrick Ewing* 94.34 NYK
1993 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 96.56 HOU
1992 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.35 DET
1991 NBA Scottie Pippen* 99.52 CHI
1990 NBA Bill Laimbeer 96.32 DET
1989 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.38 DET
1988 NBA Bill Laimbeer 99.51 DET
1987 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 102.24 HOU
1986 NBA Bill Walton* 100.62 BOS
1985 NBA Ralph Sampson* 97.16 HOU
1984 NBA Buck Williams 99.41 NJN
1983 NBA Moses Malone* 95.76 PHI
1982 NBA Larry Bird* 94.21 BOS
1981 NBA Truck Robinson 94.51 PHO
1980 NBA Larry Bird* 95.93 BOS
1979 NBA Gar Heard 90.53 PHO
1978 NBA Caldwell Jones 93.56 PHI
1977 NBA Bill Walton* 89.53 POR
1976 NBA Elvin Hayes* 88.11 WSB
ABA Mike Gale 100.65 SAA
1975 NBA George Johnson 87.05 GSW
ABA Artis Gilmore* 95.43 KEN
1974 NBA Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 89.90 MIL
ABA Wendell Ladner 88.92 NYA

The Only Modern SF To Ever Lead the League In Defensive Rating: The Rest Are All Big Men:

Defensive Rating

1990-91 NBA 101.7 (8)
1991-92 NBA 102.2 (8)
1993-94 NBA 96.9 (7)
1994-95 NBA 98.3 (1)
1995-96 NBA 100.7 (10)

With Jordan Out a Constant Top 7-4 Best Player in the Game

Player Efficiency Rating

1993-94 NBA 23.2 (4)
1994-95 NBA 22.6 (7)

[Doranku]

How is this thread 10 pages? Pippen put up 22/9/6/3/1 on 50% from the field during the playoffs while being the best defensive player on the team.

Guess Kobe won TWO rings by himself because those numbers are far superior to anything Gasol has ever posted in the playoffs. :oldlol:

[OldSchoolBBall]

How is this thread 10 pages? Pippen put up 22/9/6/3/1 on 50% from the field during the playoffs while being the best defensive player on the team.

Guess Kobe won TWO rings by himself because those numbers are far superior to anything Gasol has ever posted in the playoffs. :oldlol:

Pippen was not better than Jordan defensively in 1991. 1993 is the first year you can say he has a case as being MJ's equal. And no, those numbers aren't "far superior" to Gasol's - Gasol averaged 18.3 pts/10.8 reb/2.0 blk/58% FG in the 2009 postseason, which is very comparable. In 2010 he posted 20/11/4/2 on 54% FG. Again, equal if not better by the numbers.

[97 bulls]

I love how MJ fans act as if Pippen magically wound up being a fluke top 5 pick from a small school--and MJ is so great he managed to convince Seattle to draft Pippen so Chicago could trade for him! :bowdown:

Reality check: 1987 draft

1) D. Robinson
5) Pippen
6) Kenny Smith
7) Kevin Johnson
10) Horace Grant
11) Reggie Miller
12) Mugsy Bogues
18) Mark Jackson
22) Reggie Lewis

So to recap: Pippen was drafted ahead of 5 all-stars, two other good players in Bogues and Smith and was drafted ahead of HOF'er in Miller and two HOF caliber players in Johnson and Lewis. Yet it was all Mike! :bowdown:

Only Jordan fans would seriously act as if a top 5 pick winding up being an elite player is a shock. You don't necessarily expect a HOF'er with a top 5 pick, but it certainly is possible and you certainly are hoping to acquire an all-star player with such a high pick.

Look at other players during those years who were picked around the 5th pick.

1984: Barkley (5th)
1988: Mitch Richmond (5th)
1989: Glen Rice (4th)

Only MJ fans would act as if a team spent a top 5 pick, and another team traded for that player, to get a role player. :roll:

Watch what was said when he was drafted yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qchnEgRqb4k
Great post. I cant stress enough that the commentators were penciling him at PG. He said he wanted to eventually be a PG. He had those skills already. People were comparing him to Dennis Rodman. But more polished offensively. The proof is right there. What Jordan did for Pippen i.e. mentoring him showing him some offensive moves, techniques couldve been done by any veteran. And as Rock says why was Jordan only able to develop Pippen? What about the other draft picks the Bulls had? Why didnt he help someone on the Wizards?

[Leviathon1121]

I love how MJ fans act as if Pippen magically wound up being a fluke top 5 pick from a small school--and MJ is so great he managed to convince Seattle to draft Pippen so Chicago could trade for him! :bowdown:

Reality check: 1987 draft

1) D. Robinson
5) Pippen
6) Kenny Smith
7) Kevin Johnson
10) Horace Grant
11) Reggie Miller
12) Mugsy Bogues
18) Mark Jackson
22) Reggie Lewis

So to recap: Pippen was drafted ahead of 5 all-stars, two other good players in Bogues and Smith and was drafted ahead of HOF'er in Miller and two HOF caliber players in Johnson and Lewis. Yet it was all Mike! :bowdown:

Only Jordan fans would seriously act as if a top 5 pick winding up being an elite player is a shock. You don't necessarily expect a HOF'er with a top 5 pick, but it certainly is possible and you certainly are hoping to acquire an all-star player with such a high pick.

Look at other players during those years who were picked around the 5th pick.

1984: Barkley (5th)
1988: Mitch Richmond (5th)
1989: Glen Rice (4th)

Only MJ fans would act as if a team spent a top 5 pick, and another team traded for that player, to get a role player. :roll:

Watch what was said when he was drafted yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qchnEgRqb4k

Only one person in this 10 page thread has alluded to anything close to this. Maybe you need to change your stance to MJ FAN, instead of FANS. Roundball Rocks crusade against basically one or two fans on this entire site continues!

[Leviathon1121]

Great post. I cant stress enough that the commentators were penciling him at PG. He said he wanted to eventually be a PG. He had those skills already. People were comparing him to Dennis Rodman. But more polished offensively. The proof is right there. What Jordan did for Pippen i.e. mentoring him showing him some offensive moves, techniques couldve been done by any veteran. And as Rock says why was Jordan only able to develop Pippen? What about the other draft picks the Bulls had? Why didnt he help someone on the Wizards?

He tried, Kwame Brown for example couldn't handle it. I think Pippen was one of the few that had the mental toughness to handle MJ's competitiveness on a day to day basis. They began feeding and learning from one another while they went at each other in practices.

You claiming that what Pippen got from getting to go at Jordan and learn from him every day in practices is something he could have gotten from any veteran is completely laughable though. Seriously, like I said earlier, it is statements like that that make you as bad as the OP.

[97 bulls]

He tried, Kwame Brown for example couldn't handle it. I think Pippen was one of the few that had the mental toughness to handle MJ's competitiveness on a day to day basis. They began feeding and learning from one another while they went at each other in practices.

You claiming that what Pippen got from getting to go at Jordan and learn from him every day in practices is something he could have gotten from any veteran is completely laughable though. Seriously, like I said earlier, it is statements like that that make you as bad as the OP.
This is fair Leviathon. I do feel having to defend Jordan daily made Pippen evolve from what people considered a great man defender to greatest perimeter defender ever. Great post.

[jlip]

How scouts and GMs viewed Pippen before he was drafted (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7724453&postcount=103)

[andgar923]

We wouldn't be mentioning Pip's name today if it wasn't for MJ, plain and simple.

So he was drafted 5th, so what?

There's been plenty of players drafted just as highly and higher that turned out to be shit. Go look at Pip's rookie and even 2nd year numbers

[chazzy]

:oldlol:

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=andgar923]We wouldn't be mentioning Pip's name today if it wasn't for MJ, plain and simple.

So he was drafted 5th, so what?

There's been plenty of players drafted just as highly and higher that turned out to be shit. Go look at Pip's rookie and even 2nd year numbers

[andgar923]

Scouts were alreasy predicting what he would become before he set foot in the League. Dennis Rodman defense, with a more polished offense, and PG skills in a 6'8 body similar to Magic Johnson.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

And we saw those numbers as a rookie and 2nd year player. Gotcha!

You'd have an excellent argument if he came in ripping it, basically playing that way from get go

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=andgar923]And we saw those numbers as a rookie and 2nd year player. Gotcha!

You'd have an excellent argument if he came in ripping it, basically playing that way from get go

[andgar923]

This an excerpt from the articles jlip posted


The Bulls have purposely tried not to rush Pippen's development, though through last weekend he had played an average of 21.5 minutes in Chicago's first nine games. His scoring average was 8.6, and*he was showing some good defensive moves,*averaging nearly two steals per game. (Last season's leader, Alvin Robertson of San Antonio, averaged 3.2.) Pippen has spent most of his time subbing for Brad Sellers, who may be the league's first 7-foot small forward, but coach Doug Collins has also used Pippen,*who did it all at the University of Central Arkansas, at both guard spots.


And this one
Jerry Krause, the Bulls vice-president for basketball operations, says Pippen is "not afraid of anybody in the NBA because he doesn't know who most of these guys are." In fact, when*Krause complimented Pippen on the defensive job he had just done in one of last spring's college all-star games, Pippen seemed blas�. "I guess guys who play on national TV get a lot of publicity," he says. "I was expecting more from them."

But were supposed to believe some fool on the internet.

Stats don't lie, game films don't lie.

Krause once said Stacey King was the future.

He wouldn't be shit without MJ, plain and simple.

Get mad

[97 bulls]

Stats don't lie, game films don't lie.

Krause once said Stacey King was the future.

He wouldn't be shit without MJ, plain and simple.

Get mad
Lol Krause never said such. You sound worse than some of the Kobe trolls.

[Roundball_Rock]

How scouts and GMs viewed Pippen before he was drafted (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7724453&postcount=103)

Excellent stuff, Jlip! :applause: Let's add Chuck Daly to the list, who early on pegged, correctly, Pippen as a future superstar and realized Detroit was on borrowed time to a large degree because of that.

Pippen was an all-star by his third year and an elite player by his fourth. He was a scrub in high school. I guess it was Mike who took him from a high school scrub to a top 5 pick after college? :rolleyes: Pippen was a unique case where his body developed very late and he did not come from an elite college program as a result. He didn't have a Dean Smith or Bob Knight teaching him in college. Given the facts of Pippen's life, it is not exactly surprising that he developed later than most. The question is whether it was inevitable or a fluke? The evidence suggests the former. You don't get drafted ahead of Reggie Miller, Kevin Johnson, Reggie Lewis, and co. without being perceived as a likely future all-star.

It is funny how MJ fans ignore that Pippen was not even a starter for all of the 1989 season (his second season). They throw his complete statistics out there without providing that important context. As a starter, which he was for most of the season after an early stint on the bench, he posted 16/7/4/2 in 36 minutes. Are these great numbers? No. Are they good, especially for a second year player on a team where one guy took 22 FGA and 10 FTA a game? Yes.

Pippen's per 36 minute production in 1990, his first full season as a starter, resembled his 1989 numbers, with the exception of an increase in assists. The reason his 1990 numbers look better is he averaged 38 minutes a game compared to 33 in 1989.

Did Pippen improve in 1990? Yes, but he wasn't a light years better player in 1990 than 1989 as the "Pippen was a scrub" narrative would have you believe. What he lacked early in his career was minutes. Let's remember his first ever start was Game 5 of the first round in 1988--and Pippen had a huge game as the Bulls finally got out the first round for the first time in the Jordan era (three consecutive first round exits and they were 2-2 and headed to a fourth before Scottie was inserted into the starting lineup).

Another funny thing about this narrative is it pretends every great player posted all-star numbers out the gate. Clyde Drexler averaged 8/3/1 as a rookie--and was deemed as having enough potential that they didn't need to draft Jordan.

Let's also remember MJ himself was not considered the next "sliced bread" player like Shaq, Kareem, or Wilt, for example, were. He was the #3 pick. Jordan did not dominate college or high school like Kareem did. Maybe Dean Smith is what elevated Jordan to the top 5 all-time? That is what the "Jordan made Pippen" logic would suggest. He definitely was not that caliber of a player in, say, 1982. The GOAT, Kareem, was the most dominant player at all three levels of basketball.

[LeBird]

[QUOTE=andgar923]We wouldn't be mentioning Pip's name today if it wasn't for MJ, plain and simple.

So he was drafted 5th, so what?

There's been plenty of players drafted just as highly and higher that turned out to be shit. Go look at Pip's rookie and even 2nd year numbers

[Round Mound]

See This is Why Media Sucks...I Had To Live and Listen to Jordan Stans (Not Real Basketball Fans) For Years. None of Them Knew How Good Pippen Was Because He Wasn`t Scoring 30 PPG but For Real NBA Fans Who Knew The Game and Watched The Whole Scenario We Knew How Good Pippen Was and in 1993-94 It Was Prooven That He Was Easily a Top 6 Player in the League and In a Time Way More Competitive than the 00s and 10s. You had Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq etc. Tough Competition and Pippen Prooved How Good of a Team Player He Is By Making Others Better More than Jordan Could, Rebounding, Stealing, Being the Best Perimeter Defender in the Game, Scoring, Driving to the Basket, Passing the Ball and Handling It With Great Notion etc. Pippen was a Superstar in his Own Right.

[andgar923]

Lol Krause never said such. You sound worse than some of the Kobe trolls.

Yes he did. Ray Clay mentioned this during an interview. He wanted the scorekeepers to pad his stats yelling at them that he was the future of the Bulls.

[andgar923]

What about the other way round? Would we mention Jordan as a GOAT candidate without Pippen?

To answer that question myself, I think we might have...but I'd be leaning towards 'no'. Pippen was the perfect fit for someone of Jordan's skills/temperament. Without Pippen being able to mould himself into a great player who didn't get in Jordan's way of persistent possession and aggressive scoring; and allowed Jordan to play his natural game to its highest level... Jordan could have just been another Elgin Baylor: great stats, 0 titles.
Who knows if he would've won without Pip. Nobody is saying that MJ didn't need him to win.

But there's a difference in making somebody a HOF player, and being instrumental in helping in winning rings. MJ was already killing the league before Pip. People were already saying how special he was, he was already being hailed and breaking records. Some even said he was the best player of all time before he won a ring.

[andgar923]

See This is Why Media Sucks...I Had To Live and Listen to Jordan Stans (Not Real Basketball Fans) For Years. None of Them Knew How Good Pippen Was Because He Wasn`t Scoring 30 PPG but For Real NBA Fans Who Knew The Game and Watched The Whole Scenario We Knew How Good Pippen Was and in 1993-94 It Was Prooven That He Was Easily a Top 6 Player in the League and In a Time Way More Competitive than the 00s and 10s. You had Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq etc. Tough Competition and Pippen Prooved How Good of a Team Player He Is By Making Others Better More than Jordan Could, Rebounding, Stealing, Being the Best Perimeter Defender in the Game, Scoring, Driving to the Basket, Passing the Ball and Handling It With Great Notion etc. Pippen was a Superstar in his Own Right.

Nobody is saying he wasn't a great player (superstar is a big reach). What some of us have mentioned is, he wouldn't have been that without MJ.

You wouldn't know about making teammates better since Chuck never did that.

Btw… everything people hail Pip for doing MJ did better.

Yeah including passing and defense.

Pip would get torched far too frequently compared to MJ. Both great help defenders, MJ just better.

[Round Mound]

Nobody is saying he wasn't a great player (superstar is a big reach). What some of us have mentioned is, he wouldn't have been that without MJ.

You wouldn't know about making teammates better since Chuck never did that.

Btw… everything people hail Pip for doing MJ did better.

Yeah including passing and defense.

Pip would get torched far too frequently compared to MJ. Both great help defenders, MJ just better.

:no: :facepalm :rolleyes:

Pippen Was A Better Natural Play-Maker than Jordan and Ofcourse Defender. Don`t Give Me This Crap. His LEAD THE WHOLE PLAY-OFFS IN DEFENSIVE RATING AS A SF and Averaged Great Numbers in the 1991 NBA Finals. He Was a Superstar. Don`t Give Me This Media Fan Boy Hype Crap About Jordan Being Perfect I Was There To Watch Both Join Forces.

Jordan is the Superstar that Benefited the Most By Playing with Great Teamates from 87 on Like Very Few of His Peers from that Era. Having Pippen a Legit Top 6 Player in the Game is Blessing for Any Player, Let Alone the Best Player.

Barkley Not Making Teamates Better? What Drugs Are You Using? Cocaine? Marijuana? Mushrooms?

"for 3 years from 87- 90 Charles was the overall most dominating player in the league when you factored in all categories- points, rebounds, assist, blocks, steals and fg% that is why he won the Schick MVP award for the overall best team player 3 straight years."

Barkley has a Higher Winning% than Jordan, Pippen and Grant from 1987 to 1990 With Weaker Casts. Barkley is 2nd to Magic Ever for Offensive Rating Efficiency Per Possesion All Time (and he had no Jabbar, Worthy, McAdoo and Scorers like that). How is That Not Making Others Better? Barkley Averaged 7 RPG more than Jordan and 1.5 Assist Less while Being the Same Height as Jordan.

Jordan Leaves The Bulls in 1993-94 = Just 2 Wins Less and Pippen Was Robbed Play after Play From the NBA Finals in 7 Games vs the Knicks.

Barkley Leaves Phily what Happened to the Sixers in 1992-93?

Jordan Was Lucky to Play With Pippen in HIS WHOLE PRIME AND PIPS PRIME. LUCKY!!!

[gengiskhan]

:no: :facepalm :rolleyes:

Pippen Was A Better Natural Play-Maker than Jordan and Ofcourse Defender. Don`t Give Me This Crap. His LEAD THE WHOLE PLAY-OFFS IN DEFENSIVE RATING AS A SF and Averaged Great Numbers in the 1991 NBA Finals. He Was a Superstar. Don`t Give Me This Media Fan Boy Hype Crap About Jordan Being Perfect I Was There To Watch Both Join Forces.

Jordan is the Superstar that Benefited the Most By Playing with Great Teamates from 87 on Like Very Few of His Peers from that Era. Having Pippen a Legit Top 6 Player in the Game is Blessing for Any Player, Let Alone the Best Player.

Barkley Not Making Teamates Better? What Drugs Are You Using? Cocaine? Marijuana? Mushrooms?

"for 3 years from 87- 90 Charles was the overall most dominating player in the league when you factored in all categories- points, rebounds, assist, blocks, steals and fg% that is why he won the Schick MVP award for the overall best team player 3 straight years."

Barkley has a Higher Winning% than Jordan, Pippen and Grant from 1987 to 1990 With Weaker Casts. Barkley is 2nd to Magic Ever for Offensive Rating Efficiency Per Possesion All Time (and he had no Jabbar, Worthy, McAdoo and Scorers like that). How is That Not Making Others Better? Barkley Averaged 7 RPG more than Jordan and 1.5 Assist Less while Being the Same Height as Jordan.

Jordan Leaves The Bulls in 1993-94 = Just 2 Wins Less and Pippen Was Robbed Play after Play From the NBA Finals in 7 Games vs the Knicks.

Barkley Leaves Phily what Happened to the Sixers in 1992-93?

Jordan Was Lucky to Play With Pippen in HIS WHOLE PRIME AND PIPS PRIME. LUCKY!!!

Fact 1: Pipped LOOKED naturally better playmaker because all focus on offense & defense was on MJ. MJ was the REAL & ONLY Natural leader & playmaker of Bulls.

another example, Kobe looked terrific 30 ppg player as Shaq's 2nd fiddle when all the offense & defensive focus was built built on stopping shaq.

Same Pippen struggled to be natural leader & playmaker for PORTLAND & 1994-1995 BULLS without MJ. With MJ, with all the main responsibility of offense & winning on MJ, Pippen LOOKED good. But not soo good without MJ as BULL & BLAZER & ROCKET!

in other words, Pippen is EXTREMELY LUCKLY to play as a side kick of GOAT.Other players like Clyde, Barkley, Ewing etc etc would've probably become better side kick than Pippen playing alongside GOAT. we'll never know.

[LeBird]

Who knows if he would've won without Pip. Nobody is saying that MJ didn't need him to win.

But there's a difference in making somebody a HOF player, and being instrumental in helping in winning rings. MJ was already killing the league before Pip. People were already saying how special he was, he was already being hailed and breaking records. Some even said he was the best player of all time before he won a ring.

Jordan didn't make Pippen a HOFer. Pippen would've likely gotten there himself. Heck, he was arguably the MVP the year Jordan left. I don't think we saw Pippen reach his ceiling because of the role he played for Jordan and for his team to win.

While Jordan was the better player, I think the irony is that Jordan would've had a worse career had he not met Pippen and I think Pippen would've had a better career without Jordan. Not in the sense that Pippen would've won more titles elsewhere, but in the sense that people wouldn't view him as simply Jordan's sidekick and people like yourself wouldn't say such things as "Jordan made Pippen".

[SilkkTheShocker]

It must suck to be a Jordan stan. Your favorite player is done for playing good. So all you can do is root for the other great players to fail :oldlol:

[Magic 32]

It must suck to be a Jordan stan. Your favorite player is done for playing good. So all you can do is root for the other great players to fail :oldlol:

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

This performance is literally worth 50 regular season games with +60% shooting.

[Calabis]

Scouts and GM's take??? :roll: Should I post Kwame Brown's

Of course Pip had talent, but acting like Jordan had no influence or didn't help mold it, is comical. Its been said Pip admired Jordan, how Jordan took him under his wing and would work with him after practice. He saw Pip's potential and after getting his ass handed too him, had a player who listened and wasn't scared to learn. Pip himself stated most of his instincts came from going against Jordan daily, how his defense improved from guarding Jordan daily. Yet according to you guys none of this benefited Pippen:oldlol:

With fellow Bull Michael Jordan as a motivational and instructional mentor, Pippen refined his skills and slowly developed many new ones over his career. Jordan and Pippen frequently played one-on-one outside of team practices simply to hone each other's skills on offense and defense


Michael Jordan took Pippen under his wing, and became his mentor along with a competitive teammate. Both the players were known to practice alone in order to work on each other’s skills and abilities. As time went on, Pippen worked on improving his skills.

I love how people use the 94 season as proof....last time I checked that player was a result of what tireless workout sessions with Jordan and seeing a all time great play every night.

From Pip himself: While Jordan’s torrid scoring would slightly slow over the years and he learned to put greater reliance on teammates, it was the endless practice sessions that Pippen said in which the greatest improvements were made.

“He was very competitive, so he went at me and that helped me learn,” said Pippen. “You continue to compete against the very best every day, and you will get better, or you’ll be embarrassed.”

“A lot of my instincts came from guarding Michael all the time in practice,” he added.

[guy]

Maybe Dean Smith is what elevated Jordan to the top 5 all-time? That is what the "Jordan made Pippen" logic would suggest.

I got out of this discussion with 97 Bulls cause I wasn't really getting any good responses back to my points and was basically stating the same thing over and over again. But I just want to point out, whether you think I'm overstating Jordan's impact on Pippen or not, with all the perceived discrediting of Pippen I was accused of just cause I brought up Jordan being instrumental to Pippen's success, I brought up this Dean Smith/Jordan example multiple times to illustrate that it doesn't take anything away from Pippen cause then you could apply that same logic to Jordan with Dean Smith, and really anyone in history cause they usually learn from someone. I just don't think it should diminish Jordan at all by assuming that any other superstar would've done the same thing or to the same extent.

[guy]

While Jordan was the better player, I think the irony is that Jordan would've had a worse career had he not met Pippen and I think Pippen would've had a better career without Jordan. Not in the sense that Pippen would've won more titles elsewhere, but in the sense that people wouldn't view him as simply Jordan's sidekick and people like yourself wouldn't say such things as "Jordan made Pippen".

There's really no one from the late 80s-90s that is mentioned more then Pippen except for Jordan, and probably the only players from that era that people definitely rank over him are Jordan and Hakeem, and most rank Barkley and Malone over him as well. Players like David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, John Stockton, Clyde Drexler, and Gary Payton are mentioned nowhere near as much and most of the time are considered below them. If Pippen is on another team, he's most likely rarely ever mentioned just like those other players with barely as many people expressing such a high opinion for him.

By the way, I left out Shaq cause most of his career and success and came after the 90s.

[andgar923]

I got out of this discussion with 97 Bulls cause I wasn't really getting any good responses back to my points and was basically stating the same thing over and over again. But I just want to point, whether you think I'm overstating Jordan's impact on Pippen or not, with all the perceived discrediting of Pippen I was accused of just cause I brought up Jordan being instrumental to Pippen's success, I brought up this Dean Smith/Jordan example multiple times to illustrate that it doesn't take anything away from Pippen cause then you could apply that same logic to Jordan with Dean Smith, and really anyone in history cause they usually learn from someone. I just don't think it should diminish Jordan at all by assuming that any other superstar would've done the same thing or to the same extent.

I doubt anybody is arguing that Dean made MJ into a better player. Hell, we can even go as far as to say that Larry Jordan (his brother) pushed MJ to become better.

These Pippen fans get so upset over it, even tho it is a FACT. Pip, Mj, coaches, teammates, players, journalists, they've all stated this. Not something we made up or are exaggerating.

They simply will never understand this.

They take it as a slap in the face "Oh you Jordan stans are the worst!!!" but we're simply stating the FACTS. But

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Jordan didn't make Pippen a HOFer. Pippen would've likely gotten there himself. Heck, he was arguably the MVP the year Jordan left. I don't think we saw Pippen reach his ceiling because of the role he played for Jordan and for his team to win.

While Jordan was the better player, I think the irony is that Jordan would've had a worse career had he not met Pippen and I think Pippen would've had a better career without Jordan. Not in the sense that Pippen would've won more titles elsewhere, but in the sense that people wouldn't view him as simply Jordan's sidekick and people like yourself wouldn't say such things as "Jordan made Pippen".

Right. Just like Lebron would've had a worse career had he not joined forces w/ Wade and Miami. One could also argue Wade would've had a better career.

Matter of fact, now that I think about it, the same applies for Bird / Mchale. Crazy.

[gengiskhan]

Jordan didn't make Pippen a HOFer. Pippen would've likely gotten there himself. Heck, he was arguably the MVP the year Jordan left. I don't think we saw Pippen reach his ceiling because of the role he played for Jordan and for his team to win.

While Jordan was the better player, I think the irony is that Jordan would've had a worse career had he not met Pippen and I think Pippen would've had a better career without Jordan. Not in the sense that Pippen would've won more titles elsewhere, but in the sense that people wouldn't view him as simply Jordan's sidekick and people like yourself wouldn't say such things as "Jordan made Pippen".

Fact # 1: Because Pippen never had a proper offensive skillset like Kobe, wade etc, he was bound to make it to all-star RESERVES or 1-2 years as all-star STARTER in his absolute peak prime.

THATS ABOUT IT !!!!!.

Pippen's offensive was mostly in transition, attacking the basket. Pippen struggled with his jump shot throughout his career. Pippen's decision making was often criticized in very close game as he did not had proper post-up game or even a pull-up jumper or even a mid-range game.

Pippen's whole career, you see his scoring bounces off MJs primary offensive moves. He wanted to score but he was NOT wade-like, LBJ-like, Durant-like or Kobe-like. His release on his jumpshot was awkward too like too stiff & wooden hence hit the iron harder & bounced off it wasnt swishing. His FT% even more horrendrous.

The following things happened as Jordan took Pippen into his wings & improved him in practices:

-Pippen immitated MJ in head fakes, fake moves, jab step fake & footwork.
-Pippen immitated MJ around the basket to finish off dunks & up & under lay ups.
-Pippen's defense became unstoppable as he guarded MJ in every practice.
-Pippen became a HOF player because of MJ.
-Pippen became Top 5 NBA Players in his peak prime because of MJ.
-Pippen consistantly became an all-star STARTER because of MJ.
-Pippen was rated ahead of better players than him like Dominique, Ewing, Clyde, Barkley etc etc whom all had better jumpers, offense & team leadership than Scottie ever did.

despite practicing with MJ & playing 11 yrs along side MJ. Pippen still had glaring difficulty in shooting mid-range to long range Jumpshots.

-His release was still too hard & awkward.
-He barely got 6 inches in the air for "jump"shot. :facepalm hence his shots hit the rim harder more often than

A reason why despite signing 65 million dollar 4 yrs contract with HOU & PORTLAND, pippen failed in his leadership badly. His jumpshot was exposed. His leadership was badly exposed by KINGS & Shaq & Kobe led LAL in post-season.

[trabash]

Basketball is a team sport. No one has and no one will ever win a game, a series or championship by himself.

[gengiskhan]

Basketball is a team sport. No one has and no one will ever win a game, a series or championship by himself.

But still.

-MJ made Pippen a 1st ballot HOF.
-MJ made Pippen a Top 20 NBA players ever.
-MJ made Pippen into Top 5 NBA players in his peak prime.

What Pippen made of himself:

-All-star RESERVE
-All-star STARTER for 2-3 season.

which he was GOOD ENOUGH for.

Rest of the Pippen's career is all thanks to playing alongside GOAT.

I can see 1990 - 1998 MJ winning 6 rings with following duos:

-Jordan/Drexler
-Jordan/'Nique
-Jordan/Barkley
-Jordan/Ewing
-Jordan/Mourning

[97 bulls]

Right. Just like Lebron would've had a worse career had he not joined forces w/ Wade and Miami. One could also argue Wade would've had a better career.

Matter of fact, now that I think about it, the same applies for Bird / Mchale. Crazy.
So why is this logic only applied to Scottie Pippen?

[97 bulls]

The problem is Guy, Andgar, and Ghengis feel that only Michael Jordan could mold Scottie Pippen into the player we saw. That I disagree with. Did he help in the development of Pippen? Emphatically YES. But I stop short at this assumption that Jordan and Jordan only couldve shown Pip the way. As if another franchise couldn't find.another great player to mentor him. And this doesn't even factor in why Pippen was the only player Jordan was able to help.

Whats more, the very things you guys penalize Pippen for, scoring and man defense, is the thing id credit Jordan for having the biggest hand in. Whay made Pippen great was his versatility. And his great help defense. As well as his ability to be a 6'8'PG.

[Duncan21formvp]

No one ever won a title by themselves because there are 4 other players on the floor at the same time with you. If winning a title by yourself means the team won a title and you were the only player who made the allstar team, then just say so and so won a title as the only player who actually was an allstar that season.

[chazzy]

There are some really absurd things being said here. You guys really think MJ's a god.. he didn't rest on the 7th day, he handcrafted Pippen right? :lol

[AussieG]

It doesn't even matter, which is true. Who cares.

It's like the MVP for this season.. if it's LeBron or Durant.. who cares.. one of them will win it. It's not that big of a deal with either way. Both of them are the top 2 players in the league.. MVP doesn't change that.

Doesn't need a daily report on the progress of it, and who is now leading the race.

All of this type of stuff is just fanboy logic.. that people use to argue shit in their favour.. because they have too much time on their hands. And no one really gives a shit either way.

[guy]

The problem is Guy, Andgar, and Ghengis feel that only Michael Jordan could mold Scottie Pippen into the player we saw. That I disagree with. Did he help in the development of Pippen? Emphatically YES. But I stop short at this assumption that Jordan and Jordan only couldve shown Pip the way. As if another franchise couldn't find.another great player to mentor him. And this doesn't even factor in why Pippen was the only player Jordan was able to help.

Whats more, the very things you guys penalize Pippen for, scoring and man defense, is the thing id credit Jordan for having the biggest hand in. Whay made Pippen great was his versatility. And his great help defense. As well as his ability to be a 6'8'PG.

I've never said Jordan and only Jordan could've molded Pippen that way. I've said that I highly doubt that that many people could, specifically other superstars, which was the main argument in the beginning because the whole comparison I was pointing to was Jordan and other superstars, specifically their teammates and how fortunate they supposedly were relative to the other.

Maybe I haven't expanded on my position enough but to me its because as far as Pippen's defense goes, who better to practice against then the greatest wing scorer of all-time and who better to learn from then arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all-time? As far as his scoring goes, who better to practice against then arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all-time and who better to learn from then the greatest wing scorer of all-time? On top of that, it was with someone that was a fierce competitor and tireless work ethic, which makes a much bigger difference then if it was with someone like Charles Barkley, Tracy McGrady, Dwyane Wade, etc. On top of that, as far as experience goes, he was less likely get the experience of going deep in the playoffs every year with another superstar other then Jordan at the time, unless it was with another superstar that had an already established roster which means there's a good chance he has a lesser role, and that experience makes players better.

And just to clarify, I've never said that if he couldn't become the player he was with Jordan, that he wouldn't have still been a good or great player.

[TheMan]

Jordan was playing against weak 6 footers. He was being guarded by these guys.:oldlol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFDTe5kqxKM
Eric Snow?

[TheMan]

There are some really absurd things being said here. You guys really think MJ's a god.. he didn't rest on the 7th day, he handcrafted Pippen right? :lol
He is THE basketball GOD, bow you lowly subject with your worship of the false god known as Gawdbe!
Burn in the hell fires of Hades you ignorant lot, you worshippers of a leper messiah! Your soul will suffer infinite deaths for ever thinking Gawdbe was our true God and savior! Die you maggot infested heretics!

BURN!!!
http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/7b/10/86/michael-jordan-statue.jpg

[TheMan]

It must suck to be a Jordan stan. Your favorite player is done for playing good. So all you can do is root for the other great players to fail :oldlol:
Isn't that what you basically do when trashing LBJ's current competition?:oldlol:

Hypocrite:facepalm

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

He is THE basketball GOD, bow you lowly subject with your worship of the false god known as Gawdbe!
Burn in the hell fires of Hades you ignorant lot, you worshippers of a leper messiah! Your soul will suffer infinite deaths for ever thinking Gawdbe was our true God and savior! Die you maggot infested heretics!

BURN!!!
http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/7b/10/86/michael-jordan-statue.jpg

http://i.minus.com/ibz6e8ev4lfuwa.gif

[TheMan]

http://i.minus.com/ibz6e8ev4lfuwa.gif
:cheers:
A fellow believer whose soul shall be spared the wrath of GOD
http://canastad2.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/michael-jordan-acrylic.jpg

[Calabis]

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/7b/10/86/michael-jordan-statue.jpg

http://images.wildammo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/080326-jordan-dunk.gif

[Calabis]

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkyu2e2R801qc15q3o1_400.gif

I hope I can sit at the feet of our savior, for posting these two gifs and believing he is the best player I saw

[LeBird]

Right. Just like Lebron would've had a worse career had he not joined forces w/ Wade and Miami. One could also argue Wade would've had a better career.

Matter of fact, now that I think about it, the same applies for Bird / Mchale. Crazy.

Sure, but there is a difference: Bird was going to win no matter what. Even without McHale/Parish he took his team to the #1 best record in his Rookie season. He wasn't reliant on a specific teammate. That's the point. I think Jordan has a very small list of players he could have had as teammates to have succeeded and he was lucky he got the best one - Pippen, who was willing to be a lesser player in order to win more.

Bird, Lebron, they just needed a good team. It didn't necessarily matter the kind of players they got because they are so adjustable. Jordan was one-track for most of his career.

[97 bulls]

I've never said Jordan and only Jordan could've molded Pippen that way. I've said that I highly doubt that that many people could, specifically other superstars, which was the main argument in the beginning because the whole comparison I was pointing to was Jordan and other superstars, specifically their teammates and how fortunate they supposedly were relative to the other.

Maybe I haven't expanded on my position enough but to me its because as far as Pippen's defense goes, who better to practice against then the greatest wing scorer of all-time and who better to learn from then arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all-time? As far as his scoring goes, who better to practice against then arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all-time and who better to learn from then the greatest wing scorer of all-time? On top of that, it was with someone that was a fierce competitor and tireless work ethic, which makes a much bigger difference then if it was with someone like Charles Barkley, Tracy McGrady, Dwyane Wade, etc. On top of that, as far as experience goes, he was less likely get the experience of going deep in the playoffs every year with another superstar other then Jordan at the time, unless it was with another superstar that had an already established roster which means there's a good chance he has a lesser role, and that experience makes players better.

And just to clarify, I've never said that if he couldn't become the player he was with Jordan, that he wouldn't have still been a good or great player.
You always start your post by stating you never said yada, yada, yada. But then everything you post afterward goes contrary to that statement. At least the other two are man enough to admit they feel Jordan made Pippen.

Fact is none of us know how Pippen wouldve faired without Jordans influence. All signs point to his being successful. Hell he became everything scouts felt hed become. And this was before he even met Michael Jordan.

Most importantly, why does this need to become an issue? Im sure Bird and Mchale practiced post moves on each other. Who gets penalised? Jabaar taught Magic how to do that baby hook shot. Do we penalize Magic? Jordan stated Pippen helped his game as well. Mainly teamwork. Do we penalize Jordan?

Thats what teammates do. Thats why they practice.

[97 bulls]

Sure, but there is a difference: Bird was going to win no matter what. Even without McHale/Parish he took his team to the #1 best record in his Rookie season. He wasn't reliant on a specific teammate. That's the point. I think Jordan has a very small list of players he could have had as teammates to have succeeded and he was lucky he got the best one - Pippen, who was willing to be a lesser player in order to win more.

Bird, Lebron, they just needed a good team. It didn't necessarily matter the kind of players they got because they are so adjustable. Jordan was one-track for most of his career.
Be realistic bro. Bird wasnt the sole reason the Celtics fortunes began to turn. If you feel that way, youre no better than them

[LeBird]

We've had this discussion before; Bird was far and away the most important factor in that turnaround. It's not really arguable.

All players - be it Bird or Jordan - need teammates to achieve things. That's not the point though.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Sure, but there is a difference: Bird was going to win no matter what. Even without McHale/Parish he took his team to the #1 best record in his Rookie season. He wasn't reliant on a specific teammate. That's the point. I think Jordan has a very small list of players he could have had as teammates to have succeeded and he was lucky he got the best one - Pippen, who was willing to be a lesser player in order to win more.

Bird, Lebron, they just needed a good team. It didn't necessarily matter the kind of players they got because they are so adjustable. Jordan was one-track for most of his career.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Not gonna even bother with this bullshit, because that's what IT is, bullshit.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Bird, Lebron, they just needed a good team. It didn't necessarily matter the kind of players they got because they are so adjustable. Jordan was one-track for most of his career.

**** outta here with this noise. :oldlol: You can't look at what ACTUALLY HAPPENED (Jordan winning with a certain team) and conclude that that's the way it HAD TO happen. Fact is, Jordan simply never had a good team around him aside from the championship years and '90.

[LeBird]

Many players didn't have good teams and got them to far more success than Jordan did. That's just a fact. Bird, Lebron, Russell, etc got what they had and made do.

Jordan couldn't even get to .500 without Pippen and Grant. The Jordan fans rewriting history...what else is new?

[andgar923]

Many players didn't have good teams and got them to far more success than Jordan did. That's just a fact. Bird, Lebron, Russell, etc got what they had and made do.

Is this a joke?

Jordan couldn't even get to .500 without Pippen and Grant. The Jordan fans rewriting history...what else is new?

This is extremely misleading on many levels.

[Replay32]

No one has won a championship by themselves. That's retarded. Basketball is a team sport. MJ didn't score every point, grab every rebound, or guard all 5 offensive players at the same time.

This thread is dumb.

:coleman:

[gengiskhan]

Many players didn't have good teams and got them to far more success than Jordan did. That's just a fact. Bird, Lebron, Russell, etc got what they had and made do.

Jordan couldn't even get to .500 without Pippen and Grant. The Jordan fans rewriting history...what else is new?

this is f'ked up on so many levels, its not even funny.

no wonder why MJ said "give me mchale & parish or Kareem & worthy & I'll start winning rings too. all I got is pippen & grant"

[DatAsh]

We've had this discussion before; Bird was far and away the most important factor in that turnaround. It's not really arguable.

All players - be it Bird or Jordan - need teammates to achieve things. That's not the point though.

There's simply no way a rookie Bird was anywhere near solely responsible for that 12.15 SRS turaround. Hell, not even prime Bird comes close to being anywhere near that valuable - or any player for that matter.

Also, you don't really understand Jordan or Lebron's game very well if you think that Lebron is the more transferable or adjustable player. Jordan's all time great off ball play would allow him to fit in on almost any team. Lebron - no offense to one of the best players ever - is probably one of the least transferable superstars that I've seen since I started watching basketball. This is probably Lebron's single biggest weakness as an all time great, and it's something I've discussed in depth on other boards. Up until this year, and even this year to an extent, Lebron has to have the ball in his hands to be effective. Until he really learns to play off the ball and within the flow of an offense, it's always going to be that way.

Bird is a different story. Bird really could fit in almost anywhere I'd imagine, but so could Jordan. Jordan's defense and off ball play are a big reason for that.

[97 bulls]

this is f'ked up on so many levels, its not even funny.

no wonder why MJ said "give me mchale & parish or Kareem & worthy & I'll start winning rings too. all I got is pippen & grant"
Lol he never said that GTFO

[97 bulls]

Also, you don't really understand Jordan or Lebron's game very well if you think that Lebron is the more transferable or adjustable player. Jordan's all time great off ball play would allow him to fit in on almost any team. Lebron - no offense to one of the best players ever - is probably one of the least transferable superstars that I've seen since I started watching basketball. This is probably Lebron's single biggest weakness as an all time great, and it's something I've discussed in depth on other boards. Up until this year, and even this year to an extent, Lebron has to have the ball in his hands to be effective. Until he really learns to play off the ball and within the flow of an offense, it's always going to be that way.






Very true We saw this in 11. James doesnt play off the ball well at all

[guy]

You always start your post by stating you never said yada, yada, yada. But then everything you post afterward goes contrary to that statement. At least the other two are man enough to admit they feel Jordan made Pippen.

And I wouldn't have to keep saying that if you didn't continuously ignore that I've said it previously multiple times.

No it doesn't. You just can't help but spin anything said that's neutral, not positive or negative, toward Pippen into something negative.



Fact is none of us know how Pippen wouldve faired without Jordans influence. All signs point to his being successful. Hell he became everything scouts felt hed become. And this was before he even met Michael Jordan.

I never said he could never be successful without Jordan.



Most importantly, why does this need to become an issue? Im sure Bird and Mchale practiced post moves on each other. Who gets penalised? Jabaar taught Magic how to do that baby hook shot. Do we penalize Magic? Jordan stated Pippen helped his game as well. Mainly teamwork. Do we penalize Jordan?

Thats what teammates do. Thats why they practice.

I'VE SAID MULTIPLE TIMES HE SHOULDN'T BE PENALIZED. DO YOU NOT ****ING READ?

[guy]

Many players didn't have good teams and got them to far more success than Jordan did. That's just a fact. Bird, Lebron, Russell, etc got what they had and made do.

Jordan couldn't even get to .500 without Pippen and Grant. The Jordan fans rewriting history...what else is new?

:oldlol: he only played 2 full seasons before he started playing with Pippen and Grant and in his first winning season with them they only played 20 mpg.

I swear some people act like Pippen saved Jordan from becoming Stephon Marbury. :oldlol:

[Heavincent]

You can't look at what ACTUALLY HAPPENED (Jordan winning with a certain team) and conclude that that's the way it HAD TO happen.

Isn't that what you guys do with Kobe? Even though he won with 2 completely different teams? I see people acting like Kobe was just Joe Johnson playing on loaded teams.

[jlip]

There's simply no way a rookie Bird was anywhere near solely responsible for that 12.15 SRS turaround.

What is that stat? What does it actually measure?

[Legends66NBA7]

What is that stat?

Simple Rating System.


What does it actually measure?

On basketball reference, there is a simple definition:

"A rating that takes into account average point differential and strength of schedule. The rating is denominated in points above/below average, where zero is average."

And a more detailed one:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=37

You can also go to the glossary section on b-ball ref, to look up other definitions of these stats (like strength of schedule, as well).

[LeBird]

There's simply no way a rookie Bird was anywhere near solely responsible for that 12.15 SRS turaround. Hell, not even prime Bird comes close to being anywhere near that valuable - or any player for that matter.

Also, you don't really understand Jordan or Lebron's game very well if you think that Lebron is the more transferable or adjustable player. Jordan's all time great off ball play would allow him to fit in on almost any team. Lebron - no offense to one of the best players ever - is probably one of the least transferable superstars that I've seen since I started watching basketball. This is probably Lebron's single biggest weakness as an all time great, and it's something I've discussed in depth on other boards. Up until this year, and even this year to an extent, Lebron has to have the ball in his hands to be effective. Until he really learns to play off the ball and within the flow of an offense, it's always going to be that way.

Bird is a different story. Bird really could fit in almost anywhere I'd imagine, but so could Jordan. Jordan's defense and off ball play are a big reason for that.

We've disagreed on this (and many other things) in the past so its no surprise. Your overrating of Jordan's off the ball ability is quite humorous. How many players shoot more than Jordan per game? How many non-PG players dominate the ball as much as Jordan? You talk about Jordan's off the ball skills in terms of his ability to make plays when he doesn't have the ball. My point is that unless he is the overwhelming main focus of the side when attacking he can't adjust.

And whilst Lebron acts as a defacto PG at times he is a legit play-maker and not someone who offloads when he can't drive to the basket.

But yeh, Lebron who can basically guard all positions (and play them) who is his team's #1 passer, #1 scorer and #1 rebounder is very one-dimensional. :lol


:oldlol: he only played 2 full seasons before he started playing with Pippen and Grant and in his first winning season with them they only played 20 mpg.

I swear some people act like Pippen saved Jordan from becoming Stephon Marbury. :oldlol:

How many seasons did the aforementioned players take before their teams turned into contenders?

Yeah, exactly.

[guy]

We've disagreed on this (and many other things) in the past so its no surprise. Your overrating of Jordan's off the ball ability is quite humorous. How many players shoot more than Jordan per game? How many non-PG players dominate the ball as much as Jordan? You talk about Jordan's off the ball skills in terms of his ability to make plays when he doesn't have the ball. My point is that unless he is the overwhelming main focus of the side when attacking he can't adjust.

And whilst Lebron acts as a defacto PG at times he is a legit play-maker and not someone who offloads when he can't drive to the basket.

But yeh, Lebron who can basically guard all positions (and play them) who is his team's #1 passer, #1 scorer and #1 rebounder is very one-dimensional. :lol

Shooting the ball alot doesn't mean someone is ball dominant.

Lebron can't guard all positions. He can guard one more position then Jordan can. Lebron's ability to guard to centers is so grossly overexaggerated.

And there's no evidence that Jordan couldn't play with another great player and that he couldn't adjust to someone like that. Its just that there was no reason for him to adjust to that level. And although Lebron isn't as aggressive of a scorer as Jordan, that doesn't mean he's easier to adjust to, in fact in some ways, you can say he's harder to.

From what we've seen, unlike Jordan, Lebron actually has to be BOTH his team's #1 scorer and #1 passer. The one season where it seemed like he was splitting one of those duties with someone, scoring with Wade in 2011, it caused so much confusion between the two and ultimately led to arguably the worse Finals ever by a superstar. Once they established that someone had to be clearly defined as their primary scorer, it was Wade that took the step back, not Lebron despite the fact that he was clearly their best passer and could've just assumed that role. Its not a coincidence that both Wade and Bosh have taken a step back individually the last 2 years, and the Heat have been more successful as a result.

If Lebron was in Jordan's place, Scottie Pippen wouldn't have been able to play that point forward and wouldn't have flourished offensively as much.



How many seasons did the aforementioned players take before their teams turned into contenders?

Yeah, exactly.

Bird, Lebron, and Russell?

Russell played in a 8 team league, so he should have a bigger impact on the league then on a 25-30 team league. Plus, the Celtics were the 2nd best team in the league the year before anyway, and had the current MVP.

Lebron? His teams followed the same trajectory as Jordan's in the beginning. They weren't really contenders until about his 6th season like Jordan's as well. Sure, they made the Finals in 07, but that had much more to do with an extremely weak conference. Switch the 07 Cavs and the 88 Bulls, and the 88 Bulls are probably making the Finals as well while the 07 Cavs are probably losing in the 2nd round.

Bird? Even with the turnaround, you can easily argue that Bird had a better starting point to work because they had more established vets, they had the same coach for the entire season and didn't have any significant roster changes like the previous season which somewhat overstates the turnaround, and Red Auerbach was their GM and leader of that organization. With that said, if you want to say Bird was a faster learner and better team player earlier on, I'm not going to argue.

Its this type of talk about Jordan that is really stupid. A player's first 2-3 seasons when he's in questionable situations anyway doesn't define someone, especially when he won 6 titles later on. This idea that they were only improving because they got Pippen is really laughable. Teams led by transcedent young phenoms usually improve anyway as that young phenom improves and matures anyway. They were going to improve that year without Pippen's 20 mpg regardless. And its really easy to say other players led their teams to contending earlier on without providing any context. Out of all the GOAT level players, only Jordan and Lebron played their first few years in as bad of a situation.

[DatAsh]

But yeh, Lebron who can basically guard all positions (and play them) who is his team's #1 passer, #1 scorer and #1 rebounder is very one-dimensional. :lol


You're misinterpreting what I've written. I didn't call him one dimensional - he's anything but that - I said his game is less adjustable than Jordan and Birds, which is true.

Jordan or Bird for instance would be a much better fit than James on the current Heat as neither would hinder Wade's game by forcing him to play off ball, in a position he's clearly not as comfortable with. The same would be true for any of the teams with great PGs or ball dominant SGs: Bulls, Lakers, Celtics, Thunder, Spurs, Clippers, Cavs, ect.

Lebron is probably at his best when surrounded by good off ball players, shooters, defenders, and rebounders, and though he's improved his off ball play significantly these past couple of years, he still has trouble fitting in(without hindering)with great ball handlers.

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE]Its this type of talk about Jordan that is really stupid. A player's first 2-3 seasons when he's in questionable situations anyway doesn't define someone, especially when he won 6 titles later on. This idea that they were only improving because they got Pippen is really laughable. Teams led by transcedent young phenoms usually improve anyway as that young phenom improves and matures anyway. They were going to improve that year without Pippen's 20 mpg regardless. And its really easy to say other players led their teams to contending earlier on without providing any context. Out of all the GOAT level players, only Jordan and Lebron played their first few years in as bad of a situation.****[QUOTE]


I dont think anyone is even remotely trying to imply Pippen was the only reason for the Bulls early success. The point is they did improve and Pippen was a part of that. And its a response to posters trying to preach this nonsense that Jordan was the sole reason for the Bulls improvement.

[Lebron23]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/bulls/photos/pippen_100812.jpg

[Roundball_Rock]

How many players shoot more than Jordan per game?


This graphic says it all:

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/t73ObkdKgFE/mqdefault.jpg


How many seasons did the aforementioned players take before their teams turned into contenders?

Great question. Let's define "contender" as at least making the conference finals.

Kareem: 1
Russell: 1
Wilt: 1
Bird: 1
Magic: 1
Duncan: 1
Shaq: 2
Hakeem: 2
Jordan: 4

Which one is not like the others?


Lebron? His teams followed the same trajectory as Jordan's in the beginning. They weren't really contenders until about his 6th season like Jordan's as well.

Lebron came out of high school...Still, let's compare his team's improvement straight up with Jordan's:

Cleveland

Before Lebron: 17 wins
After Lebron: 35, 42, 50, 50 (NBA finals)

Chicago

Before Jordan: 27 wins
After Jordan: 38, 30 (9-9 with MJ), 40, 50

Are these really similar? One team reached the NBA finals in year 4 while the other didn't get past the 1st round until year 4. Moreover, Lebron came out of high school so one would assume his impact would be less than Jordan's, if the claims made about Jordan are accurate...

The "weak conference" excuse is a common one from MJ partisans in this comparison, but how strong was the 88' East? In 1988 only 1 Eastern team won more than 54 games, only 2 won more than 50 and only 4 more than 42. Not exactly a competitive conference...The 2007 East was weak too, but it did have the Pistons, who were in the midst of their run of 5 straight appearances in at least the ECF.

Saying Jordan had an unusually bad situation is a bit misleading. All these guys entered bad or not-so-great situations, except for Magic. After all, they were all very high picks. Kareem joined a 27 win expansion team; had them at 56 wins and the conference finals as a rookie. Wilt's team was 32-40 before him, Bird's had 29 wins, Shaq's 20, and so on. The big difference is, well, those players managed to improve their teams by much more than +11 like Jordan did as a rookie.

The same trend exists when you take these players away later in their career. The Celtics without Bird could not play 0.500 ball, the Lakers without Magic barely did so, the Celtics went from champs to missing the playoffs without Russell, Orlando was not heard from for over a decade after Shaq, and so on. Jordan left and his team still nearly won the #1 seed.
Cleveland without Lebron? :roll:

As to Pippen's role, look at the win totals for Chicago: 27 pre-MJ, 38, 30, 40, 50, 47. Not exactly impressive...

Here are Chicago's win totals in the five seasons after Pippen became an all-star in 1990: 55, 61, 67, 57, 55 (without Mike).

The numbers speak for themselves.

[guy]

This graphic says it all:

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/t73ObkdKgFE/mqdefault.jpg



Great question. Let's define "contender" as at least making the conference finals.

Kareem: 1
Russell: 1
Wilt: 1


You can't compare the immediate impact a player in an 8-14 team league would have on his team vs. a player in an 23-29 team league.



Bird: 1


I've already addressed this.



Magic: 1
Duncan: 1
Shaq: 2
Hakeem: 2
Jordan: 4


Magic had Kareem, Duncan had Robinson, Shaq had Penny, Hakeem had Sampson, i.e. all HOF players or at least someone that was playing at a HOF level and probably would've made it if it weren't for injuries (Penny). How is this even comparable?

If you want to encompass Jordan's career into just his first few seasons, go ahead and use that idiotic approach. You wouldn't be the first.



Lebron came out of high school


So what? He was a transcedent talent right away and was a foundation established that his team could start building around right away.

By the way, if age matters now, how come we don't mention that Bird was older as a rookie then most usually were? At his debut, he was 2 months shy of 23 while Jordan 4 months shy of 22. Thats a 1 year, 2 month difference.



...Still, let's compare his team's improvement straight up with Jordan's:

Cleveland

Before Lebron: 17 wins
After Lebron: 35, 42, 50, 50 (NBA finals)

Chicago

Before Jordan: 27 wins
After Jordan: 38, 30 (9-9 with MJ), 40, 50


According to this logic, Wizards Jordan was better then rookie Jordan and more comparable to rookie Lebron :oldlol:



Are these really similar? One team reached the NBA finals in year 4 while the other didn't get past the 1st round until year 4. Moreover, Lebron came out of high school so one would assume his impact would be less than Jordan's, if the claims made about Jordan are accurate...

The "weak conference" excuse is a common one from MJ partisans in this comparison, but how strong was the 88' East? In 1988 only 1 Eastern team won more than 54 games, only 2 won more than 50 and only 4 more than 42. Not exactly a competitive conference...The 2007 East was weak too, but it did have the Pistons, who were in the midst of their run of 5 straight appearances in at least the ECF.


How competitive a conference is isn't determined by just the top 2-3 teams. From 85-88, the average amount of wins per Eastern Conference team in each season was 42, 42, 42, 42, and from 04-07 it was 37, 39, 39, 39. Thats a pretty big difference. From 85-88, the East was above the league average which is always 41, while they were below that from 04-07. And either way, the 2 teams ahead of the Bulls in 88 were better then the 1 team ahead of the Cavs in 07. That can easily make the difference between one team getting eliminated in the 2nd round and another team making the Finals. Do we really think the 88 Bulls wouldn't beat the 41-41 Wizards and Nets :oldlol: ? And its completely possible that the 88 Bulls would've beaten the 07 Pistons who after Larry Brown always got complacent at the end of the playoffs and didn't really have the hunger to outlast teams that just wanted it more. Now, do we really think the 07 Cavs beat the 88 Pistons and then the 88 Celtics to get to the Finals?



Saying Jordan had an unusually bad situation is a bit misleading. All these guys entered bad or not-so-great situations, except for Magic. After all, they were all very high picks. Kareem joined a 27 win expansion team; had them at 56 wins and the conference finals as a rookie. Wilt's team was 32-40 before him, Bird's had 29 wins, Shaq's 20, and so on. The big difference is, well, those players managed to improve their teams by much more than +11 like Jordan did as a rookie.

The same trend exists when you take these players away later in their career. The Celtics without Bird could not play 0.500 ball, the Lakers without Magic barely did so, the Celtics went from champs to missing the playoffs without Russell, Orlando was not heard from for over a decade after Shaq, and so on. Jordan left and his team still nearly won the #1 seed.
Cleveland without Lebron? :roll:

As to Pippen's role, look at the win totals for Chicago: 27 pre-MJ, 38, 30, 40, 50, 47. Not exactly impressive...

Here are Chicago's win totals in the five seasons after Pippen became an all-star in 1990: 55, 61, 67, 57, 55 (without Mike).

The numbers speak for themselves.

Whoever said Jordan had an unusually bad situation? I didn't. I've mostly said that it was pretty normal in comparison to most other superstars.

The numbers don't speak for themselves. They speak for the idiotic, shallow, black-and-white arguments that people like you continuously use where a player's value is dictated by how big the drop off is for his team when they aren't playing. For you to bring up all those numbers means you probably haven't read the whole thread and/or you're just ignoring the numerous times in the past when people shut down this dumb argument you've used by showing how ridiculously stupid and unintelligent it is and how much this argument lacks greater thinking and depth.

All I'll say is according to that stupid logic of yours, Michael Jordan was a better player in 2002 then he was in 1985 and 1993, Magic Johnson was a better player in 1996 then he was in 1981, Mo Williams and Vince Carter were two of the absolute best players in the league in 2009, the Lakers from 00-02 were a better team without Kobe Bryant, Lebron had a better supporting cast in 2009 and 2010 then he did in 2011, Kobe had a better supporting cast in 2006 and 2007 then he has in 2013, Dwight Howard who basically destroyed his locker room in 2012 was a more valuable player then Derrick Rose who's team didn't really lose anything more when he was out, James Harden and Serge Ibaka are better players then Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook, and so many other ridiculously stupid things to claim. But go ahead, keep using this stupid logic that says all the above and disagrees with many smart NBA people.