Pippen: I wouldn't take lebron to the movies with me

[Straight_Ballin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-6859D8l40

1 min mark

:lol :applause:

[Hey Yo]

Outside of Detroit, I think people will be happy they’re not the reigning champions anymore. It’ll mean that we’re getting back to a clean game and getting the Bad Boy image away from the game. People don’t want this kind of basketball: the dirty play, the flagrant foul, the unsportsmanlike conduct.

It’s bad for basketball. People want to see that type of basketball out. I think because the Pistons have been so successful, other teams have tried to do it, and I don’t think it’s been good for the game.

[inclinerator]

Outside of Detroit, I think people will be happy they’re not the reigning champions anymore. It’ll mean that we’re getting back to a clean game and getting the Bad Boy image away from the game. People don’t want this kind of basketball: the dirty play, the flagrant foul, the unsportsmanlike conduct.

It’s bad for basketball. People want to see that type of basketball out. I think because the Pistons have been so successful, other teams have tried to do it, and I don’t think it’s been good for the game.

-smak

[Straight_Ballin]

[QUOTE=Hey Yo]Outside of Detroit, I think people will be happy they

[Hey Yo]

Yep, Jordan was mocking the Pistons because they couldn't stop him even with the dirty play, flagrant,and unsportsmanlike conduct. He knew that if teams couldn't do that to him, it would translate to less wear on his body and more rings. GOAT was so good he even predicted his own future.
Yep, so much less wear and tear on his body that he decided to quit the league 3yrs later with a chance to 4peat.

[ralph_i_el]

Yep, so much less wear and tear on his body that he decided to quit the league 3yrs later with a chance to 4peat.
Oooh killem

Pippen goes to movies in public:roll: LeBron probably has his own theater. Pippen stays regretting spending his career in MJ's shadow, doing the dirty work that made MJ a billionaire.

[Roundball_Rock]

Who cares who a player would take to the movies? Didn't Pippen put LeBron on his all-time "starting 5"?

[SugarHill]

LeBron would probably be loud as fvck at the movies

[AnaheimLakers24]

I wouldnt either. Hed probably pass me the popcorn all the time

[ProfessorMurder]

Bran would disappear from the theater with 25 minutes left in the movie.

[sammichoffate]

Bran would disappear from the theater with 25 minutes left in the movie.:lebronamazed:

[dubeta]

Pippen doesn't know what it's like to be with a true alpha, he's never had an alpha teammate before, would probably catch him off guard being with LeBron

[smoovegittar]

Bran would disappear from the theater with 25 minutes left in the movie.

:applause:

[Done_And_Done]

Bran would disappear from the theater with 25 minutes left in the movie.

:yaohappy:

[LBJFTW]

Who cares who a player would take to the movies? Didn't Pippen put LeBron on his all-time "starting 5"?

I think you missed the point Pippen was trying to make. He's basically saying that the only reason why Lebron will finish with more points than Jordan is because he didn't go to college, and that if given a choice to play with Jordan or Bron, he takes Jordan without question and wouldn't so much as go to the movies with Bron, let alone play with him. That's the way Pippen feels and we just have to accept it.

[Roundball_Rock]

Thanks, I did not click on the link. Nonetheless, why is Pippen viewed as objective on this? Of course he will have a bias towards Jordan.

[supernova5912]

Thanks, I did not click on the link. Nonetheless, why is Pippen viewed as objective on this? Of course he will have a bias towards Jordan.

You realize Pippen has said LeBron is better than Jordan, right? Since when are you so biased towards LeBron and against Jordan?

[Roundball_Rock]

You realize Pippen has said LeBron is better than Jordan, right?

Yeah--and he promptly retracted that statement.

http://www.trendingplayers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/pippen-jordan.jpeg

No bias? :oldlol:

So how many alts do you have? At least 3, right?

[TheMan]

Bran would disappear from the theater with 25 minutes left in the movie.
:oldlol:

[TheMan]

Thanks, I did not click on the link. Nonetheless, why is Pippen viewed as objective on this? Of course he will have a bias towards Jordan.
Why the flip flop? :oldlol:

When Pippen praised LBJ (shouldn't be surprising, Bran is basically Pip on steroids, especially offensively speaking), you ran with it non-stop. Now that he has clarified and said MJ is clearly the better player, you yell bias :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Why the flip flop? :oldlol:

When Pippen praised LBJ (shouldn't be surprising, Bran is basically Pip on steroids, especially offensively speaking), you ran with it non-stop. Now that he has clarified and said MJ is clearly the better player, you yell bias :roll:
I thought that nigguh was a Pippen fan? When dude speaks against the King, all of the suden RR gives his boy the cold shoulder? Shady. :no:

[Roundball_Rock]

Why the flip flop? :oldlol:

When Pippen praised LBJ (shouldn't be surprising, Bran is basically Pip on steroids, especially offensively speaking), you ran with it non-stop. Now that he has clarified and said MJ is clearly the better player, you yell bias :roll:

Simple: I didn't flip flop. When Pippen made that comment in 2011 I did not "run with it non-stop." I always take what players say with a grain of salt. Plus, there was that little detail of me being anti-LeBron circa 2011. :lol




I thought that nigguh was a Pippen fan? When dude speaks against the King, all of the suden RR gives his boy the cold shoulder? Shady.

And? Players have various biases. Only a true stan would simply swallow whatever opinion their favorite players have. Do you see me adopting Shaq's opinions even though I am a Shaq fan?

[TheMan]

You realize Pippen has said LeBron is better than Jordan, right? Since when are you so biased towards LeBron and against Jordan?
He has since clarified his statement many times...he said LBJ would most likely end up with more accumulated stats just based on the fact LBJ entered the league at 18 and most likely will have played many more years than Jordan but he said peak for peak, MJ is clearly the superior player and no doubt would rather play with him.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

And? Players have various biases. Only a true stan would simply swallow whatever opinion their favorite players have. Do you see me adopting Shaq's opinions even though I am a Shaq fan?

Don't be so sensitive dude. :oldlol: Pip was only ribbing LeBron; not sure why you felt the need to defend LeBron, as you yourself said you'd take Jordan over him.

[Roundball_Rock]

Don't be so sensitive dude. :oldlol: Pip was only ribbing LeBron; not sure why you felt the need to defend LeBron, as you yourself said you'd take Jordan over him.

The same fundamental reason I was in the Wilkins thread the other day (was that to defend the 15' Hawks and, say, Kyle Korver?). How many times are ISH'ers going to take the words of a retired player towards a player of his era or about his era as gospel? Have you ever heard a retired player say "my era sucked"? :lol

Sensitive is one guy sending me 3 messages in 3 minutes with his various alts over this thread. :roll:

[TheMan]

Simple: I didn't flip flop. When Pippen made that comment in 2011 I did not "run with it non-stop." I always take what players say with a grain of salt. Plus, there was that little detail of me being anti-LeBron circa 2011. :lol



And? Players have various biases. Only a true stan would simply swallow whatever opinion their favorite players have. Do you see me adopting Shaq's opinions even though I am a Shaq fan?
OK, I'll remember to remind you of that the next time you go around saying Big O says LeBron > MJ like you were doing a couple of weeks ago :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The same fundamental reason I was in the Wilkins thread the other day (was that to defend the 15' Hawks and, say, Kyle Korver?). How many times are ISH'ers going to take the words of a retired player towards a player of his era or about his era as gospel? Have you ever heard a retired player say "my era sucked"? :lol
I hear you dude, but lets be real, most of us who watched Mike would take him over Bron as well. Nothing Pip said needed defending, but that's just my opinion.


Sensitive is one guy sending me 3 messages in 3 minutes with his various alts over this thread. :roll:
Who 3ball? :confusedshrug:

[3ball]

as you yourself said you'd take Jordan over him.


It's no surprise that Pippen trusts MJ over Lebron.. Pippen has seen Jordan carry him and the team over the finish line too many times - this was common knowledge by everyone:


Chuck Daly: "It doesn't entail me playing you necessarily... it's our 5.... playing... you."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gCMWuCdsGQ&t=27m41s



Phil Jackson: "Don't leave Michael all alone yet.. It's not TIME yet."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOgJhzj4W9M&t=30m20s



Bill Laimbeer: "We didn't even think about Scottie Pippen. It was Michael Jordan and the Jordannaires - and you can't win championships like that with only 1 player."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h07m33s



Here's Pippen admitting he cost the Bulls a place in the 1990 Finals by choking in Game 7 of ECF:

Scottie Pippen: "Maybe it was the pressure.. As the pressure grew, the pounding grew."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h22m15s

[Straight_Ballin]

Lol 3ball, Jordan didn't carry Pippen and by saying so you are only insulting Jordan seeing as how he molded Pippen to become the player he wanted to.

[3ball]

Lol 3ball, Jordan didn't carry Pippen and by saying so you are only insulting Jordan seeing as how he molded Pippen to become the player he wanted to.
I'll take Bill Laimbeer, Phil Jackson, Chuck Daly, and many other people's word for it over your's... including the prevailing opinion by everyone at the time... But thanks though... Here's Isiah and Dumars also saying it was all about MJ:

Joe Dumars: "I talked to Isiah later that night (after Jordan had hit the GW in Game 3 of 1989 ECF) and Isiah said he went out to Michigan Avenue on the water out there, and he said he sat out there for 4-5 hours (thinking about MJ)"

Isiah Thomas: "Me and Dumars were on the phone for HOURS... talking about 23 in red."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h05m32s


Hmmmm... no mention of Scottie... :oldlol:



Lol 3ball, Jordan didn't carry Pippen and by saying so you are only insulting Jordan seeing as how he molded Pippen to become the player he wanted to.
Sure Jordan molded Pippen into the player Pippen became, but that player still needed to be carried a ton - that's why Jordan had the highest playoff and Finals scoring ever - he was carrying the team.

[Roundball_Rock]

OK, I'll remember to remind you of that the next time you go around saying Big O says LeBron > MJ like you were doing a couple of weeks ago

Link? Thanks in advance.


I hear you dude, but lets be real, most of us who watched Mike would take him over Bron as well.

So would I.


Who 3ball?

Nah, I doubt it was him. 3ball actually puts his energy into actually posted, even if a lot of it is pasted spam :oldlol: . I don't think it was any reputable poster so it wasn't TheMan or anyone like that in this thread.


Pippen has seen Jordan carry him and the team over the finish line too many times - this was common knowledge by everyone:

No doubt--but do you realize the rest of what you posted undercuts your argument? You took a fact, vastly exaggerated it to mythical proportions. How does this help Mike? :confusedshrug:

[TheMan]

I'll take Bill Laimbeer, Phil Jackson, Chuck Daly, and many other people's word for it over your's... including the prevailing opinion by everyone at the time... But thanks though... Here's Isiah and Dumars also saying it was all about MJ:

Joe Dumars: "I talked to Isiah later that night (after Jordan had hit the GW in Game 3 of 1989 ECF) and Isiah said he went out to Michigan Avenue on the water out there, and he said he sat out there for 4-5 hours (thinking about MJ)"

Isiah Thomas: "Me and Dumars were on the phone for HOURS... talking about 23 in red."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h05m32s


Hmmmm... no mention of Scottie... :oldlol:



Sure Jordan molded Pippen into the player Pippen became, but that player still needed to be carried a ton - that's why Jordan had the highest playoff and Finals scoring ever - he was carrying the team.
Come on 3Ball, those quotes are from when Pip wasn't yet an established player. That's why MJ and the Bulls couldn't get over the hump vs Detroit. You can't beat good teams by yourself. They finally beat the Pistons after Pippen and Grant started pulling their weight. Yes, MJ still had to do his share of heavy lifting on the scoring end to get the Bulls over the finish line but he didn't do it all by himself. You minimize what Pippen did,
on the opposite side you have the LeStans who troll be saying such idiotic things as the Bulls carried Jordan or you could replace him with Mitch Richmond and not skip a beat, which is among the most retarded things ever said here.

[3ball]

When comparing the talent on teams, role players like bj armstrong and bill wennington cancel each other out - they are the more easily replaceable talent and it's splitting hairs to compare them.

The top talent is the less replaceable talent.

For Jordan, Pippen was his second option.

Magic, Bird, KAJ, Kobe, Lebron, Wade - YOU NAME IT - they all had better a better #2 than Scottie (and a better #3 too).

I think Kenny Smith says it best.. Jordan never had a teammate that required a double-team, whereas all those other guys did - Jordan simply had to carry that extra burden of not having a #2 that required a double team to take pressure off - Jordan had to carry the entire load his whole career no one else has ever done that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12YcO9Epuys&t=1m54s
.

[Smoke117]

Bill Laimbeer: "We didn't even think about Scottie Pippen. It was Michael Jordan and the Jordannaires - and you can't win championships like that with only 1 player."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h07m33s]

You realize this quote does nothing for your argument right? You're an imbecile.

[Roundball_Rock]

When comparing the talent on teams, role players like bj armstrong and bill wennington cancel each other out - they are the more easily replaceable talent and it's splitting hairs to compare them.

The top talent is the less replaceable talent.

For Jordan, Pippen was his second option.

Magic, Bird, KAJ, Kobe, Lebron, Wade - YOU NAME IT - they all had better a better #2 than Scottie (and a better #3 too).

I think Kenny Smith says it best.. Jordan never had a teammate that required a double-team, whereas all those other guys did - Jordan simply had to carry that extra burden of not having a #2 that required a double team:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12YcO9Epuys&t=1m54s
.

See TheMan, this kind of BS is exactly why 94' keeps coming up. That will always be the rejoinder to the claims by Jordan mythologists that Jordan had little help. The problem MJ stans have is it is a tough claim to counter because it happened on the court. It isn't a hypothetical. He had no help but they almost won the #1 seed without him--and with a D-Leaguer replacing MJ. :rolleyes:

[Roundball_Rock]

You realize this quote does nothing for your argument right? You're an imbecile.


Teams tried positioning themselves to get a crack at Pippen.

``We tried desperately to move up to get him,`` said Detroit General Manager Jack McCloskey, whose Pistons don`t have a first-round pick. ``He is the most interesting and exciting player in the draft. If he doesn`t go in the top 10, something`s wrong. I think he is going to be a superstar.``


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-06-22/sports/8702150881_1_bulls-scottie-pippen-calvin-duncan

3all never mentions this. Cleveland was another team that wanted him. Imagine if Krause did not pull off that trade. You would have had a Cleveland team with Nance at PF, Pippen at SF, Daughtery at C, Harper at SG and Price at PG. :bowdown:

[97 bulls]

Come on 3Ball, those quotes are from when Pip wasn't yet an established player. That's why MJ and the Bulls couldn't get over the hump vs Detroit. You can't beat good teams by yourself. They finally beat the Pistons after Pippen and Grant started pulling their weight. Yes, MJ still had to do his share of heavy lifting on the scoring end to get the Bulls over the finish line but he didn't do it all by himself. You minimize what Pippen did,
on the opposite side you have the LeStans who troll be saying such idiotic things as the Bulls carried Jordan or you could replace him with Mitch Richmond and not skip a beat, which is among the most retarded things ever said here.
Great post. Now you see what we're talking about. I don't think anyone has ever stated that Richmond would be able to replace Jordan and they not miss a beat.

[Hey Yo]

When comparing the talent on teams, role players like bj armstrong and bill wennington cancel each other out - they are the more easily replaceable talent and it's splitting hairs to compare them.

The top talent is the less replaceable talent.

For Jordan, Pippen was his second option.

Magic, Bird, KAJ, Kobe, Lebron, Wade - YOU NAME IT - they all had better a better #2 than Scottie (and a better #3 too).

I think Kenny Smith says it best.. Jordan never had a teammate that required a double-team, whereas all those other guys did - Jordan simply had to carry that extra burden of not having a #2 that required a double team to take pressure off - Jordan had to carry the entire load his whole career no one else has ever done that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12YcO9Epuys&t=1m54s
.
So how in the hell did the Bulls, who lost the supposed greatest player ever (in the middle of his prime), barely decline by all of two wins the following season?

How was that possible?

[TheMan]

See TheMan, this kind of BS is exactly why 94' keeps coming up. That will always be the rejoinder to the claims by Jordan mythologists that Jordan had little help. The problem MJ stans have is it is a tough claim to counter because it happened on the court. It isn't a hypothetical. He had no help but they almost won the #1 seed without him--and with a D-Leaguer replacing MJ. :rolleyes:
Yeah well I don't suscribe to that school of thought. He certainly had help, as all GOAT players did but he certainly didn't have the most stacked team ever and his detractors claim. Especially on the first threepeat Bulls. He had Pippen, who was up and coming but not the same player he became in the mid 90s. Grant was a very good role player, certainly not up there with the elite PFs like Barkley or Malone though. Replace him with Oakley and the Bulls are still winning titles. Then after that you have BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Scott Williams, Bill Cartwright, Trent Tucker, Cliff Levingston, Will Purdue...not one of those are really difference makers.

Those first threepeat Bulls were really good but they weren't stacked as hell, not even relative to their competition...the 92 Blazers and 93 Suns were deeper.

[97 bulls]

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-06-22/sports/8702150881_1_bulls-scottie-pippen-calvin-duncan

3all never mentions this. Cleveland was another team that wanted him. Imagine if Krause did not pull off that trade. You would have had a Cleveland team with Nance at PF, Pippen at SF, Daughtery at C, Harper at SG and Price at PG. :bowdown:
Bill Russee wanted him on the Kings as well. He was a highly sought after prospect.

[TheMan]

Great post. Now you see what we're talking about. I don't think anyone has ever stated that Richmond would be able to replace Jordan and they not miss a beat.
I've never said MJ won on his own :confusedshrug:

[Roundball_Rock]

So how in the hell did the Bulls, who lost the supposed greatest player ever (in the middle of his prime), barely decline by all of two wins the following season?

How was that possible?

BTW, did you catch him saying Gasol>Pippen? :roll:

What mythologists like him ignore is the league had expanded by the 90's. You can't compare a 1983 roster to a 1993 roster with a straight face. The 83' roster will be deeper and have more at the top since it was a smaller league. The issue always is the strength of a team relative to the rest of the league.



Magic, Bird, KAJ, Kobe, Lebron, Wade - YOU NAME IT - they all had better a better #2 than Scottie (and a better #3 too).


We have the following data for some of these scenarios:

Worthy without Magic: 43-39, first round exit.
McHale without Bird: 42-40, first round exit. (Bird did play 6 games)
Kobe without Shaq: 24-29 from 2001-2004.
Wade without Shaq: 18-17 in 06' and 07'.
Heat without LeBron: 0.400, 9th place.
Pippen without Jordan: 51-21, on pace for the #1 seed with 58 wins in 94'.

Which one is not like the others? :oldlol:

Oh, and...

Jordan without Pippen: 24-11 (on pace for 56 wins; 69 wins the year before, 67 win pace with Pippen) in 98'.
Jordan without Pippen: 4-5 (on pace for 36 wins; 50 wins the year before, 48 win pace with Pippen) in 89'.

Yet MJ had the least help?

[TheMan]

So how in the hell did the Bulls, who lost the supposed greatest player ever (in the middle of his prime), barely decline by all of two wins the following season?

How was that possible?
Pretty easy...unlike most dynasties that just get old, the Bulls were hitting their peak/prime when MJ suddenly retired before 94. They got career years out of Pippen, Grant and Armstrong who made the ASG. This was a battle hardened championship team hellbent on proving they weren't garbage without MJ. They also added some quality players like Luc Longley and Toni Kukoc.

Predictably they fell short in the second round, and before I hear the tired argument that Hue Hollins gifted the Knicks that series, that call happened in GM 5, the Bulls still had a chance at winning the series in 7 but got blown out in the deciding GM 7. Plus even if they got to the ECFs or Finals, it wasn't a sure thing they'd even win those series.

[Roundball_Rock]

Wow, a Bulls fan downplaying the Hollins call. How sad. Even JVG has called it "horrible" but TheMan, Samurai, Indian Guy think it was no big deal to prop up Mike. And no, they were not blown out in Game 7. They lost by 10 and were within striking distance until the final couple of minutes. I think they actually led at halftime. This was during a 20 year or so stretch where no team won a Game 7 on the road.

No one expected them to make the playoffs entering the year. What you hear are hindsight arguments. Even with their age it was assumed that if you lost the GOAT you will drop well in the double digits in terms of wins. Phil Jackson himself said internally before the season that their best-case scenario was 42-40. Keep in mind they did not even find a NBA-caliber replacement for MJ. Imagine PEAK LeBron or PEAK Shaq retiring and their team replacing them with a D-Leaguer, not a Deng or Seiklay.

The motivation argument is interesting, as if that is the only team that wanted to prove it could win without X.

[TheMan]

Wow, a Bulls fan downplaying the Hollins call. How sad. Even JVG has called it "horrible" but TheMan, Samurai, Indian Guy think it was no big deal to prop up Mike. And no, they were not blown out in Game 7. They lost by 10 and were within striking distance until the final couple of minutes. I think they actually led at halftime. This was during a 20 year or so stretch where no team won a Game 7 on the road.

No one expected them to make the playoffs entering the year. What you hear are hindsight arguments. Even with their age it was assumed that if you lost the GOAT you will drop well in the double digits in terms of wins. Phil Jackson himself said internally before the season that their best-case scenario was 42-40. Keep in mind they did not even find a NBA-caliber replacement for MJ. Imagine PEAK LeBron or PEAK Shaq retiring and their team replacing them with a D-Leaguer, not a Deng or Seiklay.

The motivation argument is interesting, as if that is the only team that wanted to prove it could win without X.
The Hollins call was horrible but horrible calls always happen :confusedshrug: I hated it when it happened BUT the call didn't happen in GM 7, the Bulls still had a chance to get it done, right?

The Bulls were a really good team without MJ but ultimately fell short. With him they were an unbeaten Dynasty, (MJ's last 6 full season's as a Bulls starter ended in a chip) what is so hard to understand about that?

[Hey Yo]

Pretty easy...unlike most dynasties that just get old, the Bulls were hitting their peak/prime when MJ suddenly retired before 94. They got career years out of Pippen, Grant and Armstrong who made the ASG. This was a battle hardened championship team hellbent on proving they weren't garbage without MJ. They also added some quality players like Luc Longley and Toni Kukoc.

Predictably they fell short in the second round, and before I hear the tired argument that Hue Hollins gifted the Knicks that series, that call happened in GM 5, the Bulls still had a chance at winning the series in 7 but got blown out in the deciding GM 7. Plus even if they got to the ECFs or Finals, it wasn't a sure thing they'd even win those series.
Or maybe it had to do with defense?

The Chicago defense improved after Jordan quit. In 1993 the Bulls allowed 106.1 points per 100 possessions, 1.9 better than the league average and good for 7th in the NBA, but in '94 they pushed that number down to 102.7 pts/100 (3.6 better than avg., 6th).

Defense got better w/o Jordan.

[TheMan]

Losing by 10 vs those Knicks was pretty much a blow out if you remember the dynamics of that defensive team.

Like in football, if you're down 14 vs an average defensive team, it doesn't feel the same as being down 14 to a stud defense. If you're a football fan, you'll understand what I mean...

[TheMan]

Or maybe it had to do with defense?

The Chicago defense improved after Jordan quit. In 1993 the Bulls allowed 106.1 points per 100 possessions, 1.9 better than the league average and good for 7th in the NBA, but in '94 they pushed that number down to 102.7 pts/100 (3.6 better than avg., 6th).

Defense got better w/o Jordan.
Are you seriously trying to argue MJ was a terrible defender :oldlol:

[Hey Yo]

Are you seriously trying to argue MJ was a terrible defender :oldlol:
Didn't imply that all.

Just provided facts that the Bulls D was better the 1st year w/o MJ.

Still wondering how the greatest player ever to lace up the shoes in the NBA was only better than 2 games in his prime when he walked away.


till tomorrow

[JohnFreeman]

Pippen can't afford a movie ticket, plus he will leave with a migraine

[Roundball_Rock]

Losing by 10 vs those Knicks was pretty much a blow out if you remember the dynamics of that defensive team.

Like in football, if you're down 14 vs an average defensive team, it doesn't feel the same as being down 14 to a stud defense. If you're a football fan, you'll understand what I mean...

:coleman:

I think they were down only 4-5 entering the fourth. It was a fairly close game.

Other than MJ stans pretty much everyone agrees that was one of the worst calls in sports history. An ESPN survey a few years ago on the worst call in sports history had it #3 or #4--and the highest of any NBA calls. The reasons why it was so egregious were 1) it decided the game on a touch fall after the shot was released 2) those fouls were not called back then. So it was a game decided on a technicality. How often does that happen? Those fouls were not called halfway through games let alone on the final possession with the Knicks down 1 and the shooter being one of the best three point shooters in the league, who was a lock to make the FT's. Furthermore, for Bulls fans, it is even worse because Hollins had a long history of anti-Bulls officiating and the team complained to the NBA multiple teams.

No one disputes the team was weaker without MJ. What is always in dispute is how good the team was. I, and many others, think the team's success proves how strong MJ's "cast" was relative to the league; MJ stans think it basically was a fluke, or at least that is what they tell themselves. :cheers: I am always struck by how insecure MJ stans are. They won 55 games with a scrub at SG. With MJ that squad wins 65+ and is a lock for a title. How does this diminish MJ???

[TheMan]

Didn't imply that all.

Just provided facts that the Bulls D was better the 1st year w/o MJ.

Still wondering how the greatest player ever to lace up the shoes in the NBA was only better than 2 games in his prime when he walked away.


till tomorrow
What is the ultimate goal for every player, coach and team going into a season? To win a title, right?

[TheMan]

:coleman:

I think they were down only 4-5 entering the fourth. It was a fairly close game.

Other than MJ stans pretty much everyone agrees that was one of the worst calls in sports history. An ESPN survey a few years ago on the worst call in sports history had it #3 or #4--and the highest of any NBA calls. The reasons why it was so egregious were 1) it decided the game on a touch fall after the shot was released 2) those fouls were not called back then. So it was a game decided on a technicality. How often does that happen? Those fouls were not called halfway through games let alone on the final possession with the Knicks down 1 and the shooter being one of the best three point shooters in the league, who was a lock to make the FT's. Furthermore, for Bulls fans, it is even worse because Hollins had a long history of anti-Bulls officiating and the team complained to the NBA multiple teams.

No one disputes the team was weaker without MJ. What is always in dispute is how good the team was. I, and many others, think the team's success proves how strong MJ's "cast" was relative to the league; MJ stans think it basically was a fluke, or at least that is what they tell themselves. :cheers: I am always struck by how insecure MJ stans are. They won 55 games with a scrub at SG. With MJ that squad wins 65+ and is a lock for a title. How does this diminish MJ???
You're confusing me with 3Ball, I've never said they were scrubs, if they were MJ wouldn't have the chance to win titles. Again, without MJ, the Bulls were a really good team but certainly no lock for the Finals, much less winning it. With him, easily a championship caliber team because HE puts them over the hump.:confusedshrug:

[inclinerator]

What is the ultimate goal for every player, coach and team going into a season? To win a title, right?
to make the most money

[STATUTORY]

Or maybe it had to do with defense?

The Chicago defense improved after Jordan quit. In 1993 the Bulls allowed 106.1 points per 100 possessions, 1.9 better than the league average and good for 7th in the NBA, but in '94 they pushed that number down to 102.7 pts/100 (3.6 better than avg., 6th).

Defense got better w/o Jordan.

fewer matchup problem with Pippen's D compared to MJ's


like Madonna

[97 bulls]

I've never said MJ won on his own :confusedshrug:
Right. But you dont see why 94 is used as a rebuttal to morons that try to make the claim Jordan had a weak team around him. I mean 3ball callled Horace Grant a stiff for goodness sake.

[97 bulls]

We have the following data for some of these scenarios:

Worthy without Magic: 43-39, first round exit.
McHale without Bird: 42-40, first round exit. (Bird did play 6 games)
Kobe without Shaq: 24-29 from 2001-2004.
Wade without Shaq: 18-17 in 06' and 07'.
Heat without LeBron: 0.400, 9th place.
Pippen without Jordan: 51-21, on pace for the #1 seed with 58 wins in 94'.

Which one is not like the others? :oldlol:

Oh, and...

Jordan without Pippen: 24-11 (on pace for 56 wins; 69 wins the year before, 67 win pace with Pippen) in 98'.
Jordan without Pippen: 4-5 (on pace for 36 wins; 50 wins the year before, 48 win pace with Pippen) in 89'.

Yet MJ had the least help?
And to add, those team did have good players step in for those All-time greats. We get Pete Myers.

[Soundwave]

And to add, those team did have good players step in for those All-time greats. We get Pete Myers.

And Toni Kukoc. And Grant, Pippen, and Armstrong were still young and had room to grow in their game. Pippen and Grant were 28 and in their peak, Armstrong was 26, Kukoc was 25.

That's four players capable of dropping 15 points any given night.

They weren't the 80s Lakers or Celtics in raw talent though.

The Bulls were also trending up in '98 without Pippen, they were playing better the longer he was out, winning like 9 of their 11 or 12 previous to Pippen coming back. So who knows that group might've easily won 60+ games without Pippen and that's with a 34/35 year old Jordan.

They just started slow and Rodman was being a bit of an idiot (as per usual) earlier in the year, but by around Christmas they were right back on pace for another 60+ win season. Pretty much every Bulls team with Jordan from 1990 onwards was a 60+ win team.

Even in '95 when he stepped off a baseball diamond ... 13-4 with him prorates to a 62 win full season and two of those four losses I believe came in like his first 3 games back (shaking off the rust).

[andgar923]

The only thing RR is doing is proving that MJ made Pip and the Bulls (as I always stated). He got them to the point where they could stand on their own and be successful. If it wasn't for MJ sending Pip and Grant home in tears, they wouldn't have matured (like they eventually did) and become the players they became. Being an NBA champion takes more than raw talent. MJ not only helped improve their game, he molded their mentality and hearts as well (well... maybe not Pip's heart).

thanks RR :cheers:

[Straight_Ballin]

Right. But you dont see why 94 is used as a rebuttal to morons that try to make the claim Jordan had a weak team around him. I mean 3ball callled Horace Grant a stiff for goodness sake.

Horace grant would be a top 15 player in today's league. I already provided evidence of this in my other thread. Guy was underated as hell and had a money jumper and Dream Shake in his arsenal but was told to not use them and just be a 3rd option finisher.

[97 bulls]

And Toni Kukoc. And Grant, Pippen, and Armstrong were still young and had room to grow in their game. Pippen and Grant were 28 and in their peak, Armstrong was 26, Kukoc was 25.
So what's the point? Are you implying that Kukoc as a rookie and Pete Myers is tantamount to having Michael Jordan on your team? As far as the other teams that the 94 Bulls were compared to, were they old? 89 Celtics Mchale 31, Parish 35 (he would go on to play ten more years), Lewis 23, DJ 34, Ainge 29, Shaw 22.

92 Lakers, Threat 30, Green, 28, Worthy 30, Scott 30, Perkins 39, Divac 23, Campbell 23.

04 Lakers Bryant 26, Odom 25, Butler 24, Atkins 30, Mihm 25, Jones 25.

This years Heat Wade 33, Chalmers 28, Bosh 30 Dragic 28, Whiteside 25.

And let's not get started on their records, replacements and situations.


That's four players capable of dropping 15 points any given night.
You're preaching to the choir my friend. Im not the one implying that the Bulls sucked outside of Jordan.


They weren't the 80s Lakers or Celtics in raw talent though.
How are you quantifying "raw talent" ? Let me guess......... offense right? And not even offense, but scoring. Forget defense qnd rebounding. The only way a player can be considered talented is if thay can score.


The Bulls were also trending up in '98 without Pippen, they were playing better the longer he was out, winning like 9 of their 11 or 12 previous to Pippen coming back. So who knows that group might've easily won 60+ games without Pippen and that's with a 34/35 year old Jordan.
Once again you get no argument from me. I've always said the Bulls had a lot of depth. Rodman missed over 20 games in 97 and they still won 69 games.


Pretty much every Bulls team with Jordan from 1990 onwards was a 60+ win team.
Why weren't they a 60+ win team prior to 90? They still had Jordan.


Even in '95 when he stepped off a baseball diamond ... 13-4 with him prorates to a 62 win full season and two of those four losses I believe came in like his first 3 games back (shaking off the rust).
Right. So what's the point? I don't disagree with the gist of what your saying. Youre echoing my sentiments for the most part.

[Lebron23]

LeBron have his own movie theater. LBJ won't let Pippen enter his domain.

[TheMan]

Horace grant would be a top 15 player in today's league. I already provided evidence of this in my other thread. Guy was underated as hell and had a money jumper and Dream Shake in his arsenal but was told to not use them and just be a 3rd option finisher.
:biggums:

Are we talking about the same Horace Grant?

Sure he was a really good role player, had a nice jumper, could finish on the break and got a lot of his points on offensive rebound putbacks but for the life of me I can't recall Grant having anywhere near the kind of foot work in the low post to execute a dream shake :confusedshrug:

Grant wasn't a top 15 player back then nor would he be today. I firmly believe the Bulls would've been just as successful with, say Charles Oakley for example. Not trying to diminish Horace because he was an important piece because he and Cartwright provided the tough interior D that was necessary to be successful. Just don't exaggerate what Grant was.

[Lebron23]

:biggums:

Are we talking about the same Horace Grant?

Sure he was a really good role player, had a nice jumper, could finish on the break and got a lot of his points on offensive rebound putbacks but for the life of me and don't recall Grant having anywhere near the kind of foot work in the low post to execute a dream shake :confusedshrug:

Grant wasn't a top 15 player back then nor would he be today. I firmly believe the Bulls would've been just as successful with, say Charles Oakley for example. Not trying to diminish Horace because he was an important piece because he and Cartwright provided the tough interior D that was necessary to be successful. Just don't exaggerate what Grant was.


Dude just watched highlights videos.

[Straight_Ballin]

:biggums:

Are we talking about the same Horace Grant?

Sure he was a really good role player, had a nice jumper, could finish on the break and got a lot of his points on offensive rebound putbacks but for the life of me and don't recall Grant having anywhere near the kind of foot work in the low post to execute a dream shake :confusedshrug:

Grant wasn't a top 15 player back then nor would he be today. I firmly believe the Bulls would've been just as successful with, say Charles Oakley for example. Not trying to diminish Horace because he was an important piece because he and Cartwright provided the tough interior D that was necessary to be successful. Just don't exaggerate what Grant was.

47 sec into the video Grant shakes Barkley with some impressive footwork. A move that he could pull off whenever needed. So underrated.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TWVPhBnyZ5s

[TheMan]

47 sec into the video Grant shakes Barkley with some impressive footwork. A move that he could pull off whenever needed. So underrated.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TWVPhBnyZ5s
That video just reinforces what I'm saying. First off, the move you're refering to isn't a low post dream shake, he shook Barkley off with his back to the basket and about from the FT line for a sick jumper. Nice move but he hardly ever used that move. Most of his points in that video were finishing close to the rim being set up by MJ or Pippen. Obviously they didn't show him shooting that jumper he had enough. He also had that mini sky hook when he'd back his man down and flash across the lane but they weren't go to moves if he just used them sporadically.

It's great to see HoGrant get some love though, really solid player. He just wasn't a top 15 player then nor would he be now.

[Real14]

Pippen being REAL here:applause: plus that niguh might choke on tha damn popcorn or something in there anyway:lol

[Straight_Ballin]

That video just reinforces what I'm saying. First off, the move you're refering to isn't a low post dream shake, he shook Barkley off with his back to the basket and about from the FT line for a sick jumper. Nice move but he hardly ever used that move. Most of his points in that video were finishing close to the rim being set up by MJ or Pippen. Obviously they didn't show him shooting that jumper he had enough. He also had that mini sky hook when he'd back his man down and flash across the lane but they weren't go to moves if he just used them sporadically.

It's great to see HoGrant get some love though, really solid player. He just wasn't a top 15 player then nor would he be now.

Anytime the Bulls would come to cleveland, I would be at the game. Grant would just destroy Hot Rod, Brad, and Nance. No, the move is not a Dream Shake but let's be honest, Grant didn't have to use his offensive weapons that much with Jordan and Pippen taking the volume of shots that they did. Grant basically conserved energy and in today's soft league, he'd be putting up some serious numbers that would rival any numbers being put up by today's big men, assuming that he wasn't on a team that had people taking as many shots as pippen/Jordan would take. Not saying that pippen and Jordan shouldnt have shot as much, just the circumstance Grant was in.