90s Bulls without MJ--how bit a threat would they have been to winning a ring?

[sportjames23]

The reality was...MJ had STACKED rosters that could challenge for titles withOUT him.




Or is a multimillionaire like MJ living rent free in ol' Russ' mind?

[LoneyROY7]

Obviously they would have been a significant threat. Did you miss out on the '93-'94 season?

The old man's right. Respect your f*cking elders, b*tch.

[ProfessorMurder]

If you replace him with an average 2, they might get out of the east once... Doubt it though.

[Gileraracer]

They were good but not great.

[Dragonyeuw]

* Waits for 3ball to find this thread*

[andgar923]

Without MJ, like ever?

They aint even sniffing playoffs.

[GIF REACTION]

They might win 2 or 3 assuming they get a decent replacement for MJ...

[LAZERUSS]

Remove MJ from the Bulls, and the best player from every other team in that decade, and they likely win 6-8.

[Akrazotile]

Without MJ, like ever?

They aint even sniffing playoffs.



Dude, theres 8 teams in each conference that make the playoffs. In MJ's day, each conference only had like 7 teams to begin with.



Think about it...

[GIF REACTION]

Dude, theres 8 teams in each conference that make the playoffs. In MJ's day, each conference only had like 7 teams to begin with.



Think about it...
Holy shit he has a point

[ClipperRevival]

Dude, theres 8 teams in each conference that make the playoffs. In MJ's day, each conference only had like 7 teams to begin with.



Think about it...

:facepalm How old are you man? 12? There were 23 teams when MJ was a rookie and 29 by the time he retired in 1998.

[ClipperRevival]

Remove MJ from the Bulls, and the best player from every other team in that decade, and they likely win 6-8.

:facepalm The never ending need to degrade MJ and boost Wilt. :rolleyes:

[Dragonyeuw]

Dude, theres 8 teams in each conference that make the playoffs. In MJ's day, each conference only had like 7 teams to begin with.



Think about it...

:biggums:


Delete that before it's too late.

[Trollsmasher]

'94 Bulls would won the title if it wasn't for one bullshit call

and that was without an even average SG replacement for MJ

[Dragonyeuw]

Impossible to answer. The Bulls were constructed around MJ, remove him from the equation going back to 1984 and its likely the team would have a dramatically different roster. Who's to say Pippen or Grant gets drafted in 87, or any of the other moves they made? You can't just 'remove' MJ without considering how that would impact personnel moves.

[Dragonyeuw]

Holy shit he has a point

Yes, and a flat-out wrong one at that.

[ClipperRevival]

The 1st 3 peat Bulls really didn't have much outside of their big 3. Cartwright, Paxson and Armstrong were their next 3 best players, which saids a lot.

The 1989-90 Bulls might've made the Finals had Pippen not laid one of the biggest eggs ever in game 7 of the ECF Finals going 1/10 with 2 points in his famous "migraine" game. He even admitted he choked.

Grant didn't help much either in game 7, going 3/17. While MJ scored 31, 9 reb and 8 assists.

That's the story line for most of MJ's career pre-1990. He just had no help. It's not until Pippen and Grant matured enough where MJ finally had enough help to compete with the elite teams in 1991 foward.

[sdot_thadon]

Hard to say, I'd guess pretender until 93, perennial contender from there on. Everything else remaining the same, and possibly inproving depending on the caliber of the 2 they pickup in MJ's place. Scottie may have became an even greater player as lead dog from day one, albeit a less successful one.

[ClipperRevival]

Hard to say, I'd guess pretender until 93, perennial contender from there on. Everything else remaining the same, and possibly inproving depending on the caliber of the 2 they pickup in MJ's place. Scottie may have became an even greater player as lead dog from day one, albeit a less successful one.

Pip had a chance to show what he can do as "the man" in 1993-94 and most of 1994-95. And what we found out was that he is one of the most impactful wing players ever. He filled up the stat sheets. In those two years, he put up 21.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 5.4 apg, 2.9 spg and 1.0 bpg. That's pretty impressive.

But what we also found out was that he did NOT have the offensive game to carry the load and take over like an MJ/Kobe/Wade/McGrady, etc. could do. So in that sense, MJ and Pip complimented each other perfectly. MJ to carry the offensive load while Pip plays 2nd fiddle and doing a little bit of everything.

[sdot_thadon]

Pip had a chance to show what he can do as "the man" in 1993-94 and most of 1994-95. And what we found out was that he is one of the most impactful wing players ever. He filled up the stat sheets. In those two years, he put up 21.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 5.4 apg, 2.9 spg and 1.0 bpg. That's pretty impressive.

But what we also found out was that he did NOT have the offensive game to carry the load and take over like an MJ/Kobe/Wade/McGrady, etc. could do. So in that sense, MJ and Pip complimented each other perfectly. MJ to carry the offensive load while Pip plays 2nd fiddle and doing a little bit of everything.
Yeah, that's a given. If he was given the keys on day one though, I'd think he could have become a capable 1st option. He'd likely lose something else in exchange, like be a bit less impactful on defense. His game would develop with a different mentality for sure. This is also assuming Mj isn't in the league on an even better team than he had. I'm thinking a world without mj.

[ClipperRevival]

Yeah, that's a given. If he was given the keys on day one though, I'd think he could have become a capable 1st option. He'd likely lose something else in exchange, like be a bit less impactful on defense. His game would develop with a different mentality for sure. This is also assuming Mj isn't in the league on an even better team than he had. I'm thinking a world without mj.

Hmm, I don't know about that. The guy played 17 seasons and had a chance to be the man again from 1999 forward. I always say that your talent will warrant the minutes and touches you get. Meaning if you are that good offensively, you will get the touches. Pip just never had that iso game where he could break down a set defender with the D set and create his own shot. A lot of his points came within the flow of the offense like transition, cutting, put backs, jumpers, in the post, etc. He just needed that other scorer to carry the load. That's why MJ was perfect for him and vice versa.

I mean when he left Chicago after 1998, he averaged 11.5 ppg from 1999 through 2004, from the age of 33 through 38.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Depends on who you replace him with.

Somebody like Mitch Richmond, or Drexler at their absolute best would have the Bulls team at championship level.

They don't win as many as 6, and probably half, if that - but they'd STILL be fun to watch. Hell, throw Chris Mullin in there and things would get interesting all the same.

[LAZERUSS]

Depends on who you replace him with.

Somebody like Mitch Richmond, or Drexler at their absolute best would have the Bulls team at championship level.

They don't win as many as 6, and probably half, if that - but they'd STILL be fun to watch. Hell, throw Chris Mullin in there and things would get interesting all the same.

I don't think there is any question that you give the '94 Bulls almost any above average SG, and they waltz to a title.

[ClipperRevival]

I don't think there is any question that you give the '94 Bulls almost any above average SG, and they waltz to a title.

:oldlol: :facepalm

If they had lost in the finals, I might entertain that idea but that team got bounced in the 2nd round buddy. Keep hating on MJ. It's comedy.

[I<3NBA]

1st three-peat Bulls, no. Bulls with Rodman and Pip + a serviceable SG, yes.

[ClipperRevival]

Pippen in the 1994 2nd second put up these numbers.

21.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 4.7 apg, 2.0 spg.

Impressive right? But look at his FG% of only .405. Very inefficient. This is proof that the guy simply couldn't carry a team on his own past the 2nd round. And this was Pippen at his peak. He had every chance to do more but simply peaked at 22 ppg his entire career.

[Dragonyeuw]

I mean when he left Chicago after 1998, he averaged 11.5 ppg from 1999 through 2004, from the age of 33 through 38.

Yeah but in fairness, that back injury and surgery in 98 hampered him going forward, and he was already past prime anyway. Take that injury away, and he may have done a bit better in terms of scoring numbers but not much. And when he went to Houston and especially Portland at 34/35, he didn't have to carry any major offensive load at that point.

[LAZERUSS]

:oldlol: :facepalm

If they had lost in the finals, I might entertain that idea but that team got bounced in the 2nd round buddy. Keep hating on MJ. It's comedy.

The '94 Bulls went 55-27. BUT, Pippen and Grant missed a combined 22 games. Had those two been relatively healthy, and they likely would have won 60+ games. And that would have been HUGE. Why? Because they lost a close seven game series in the ECSF's to a 56-26 Knicks team. HOWEVER, they went 3-0 on their home court! And, they lost a game by one point in NY.

Incidently, they wiped out the Pacers in the regular season, 4-1. The same team that the Knicks disposed of in the ECF's.

Then, the 56-26 Knicks lost a road game seven by four points to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals...in a series in which they outscored Houston.

So, YES, the '94 Bulls were VERY CLOSE to winning a TITLE.


As for the "MJ hating"...I have him at #2 all-time. BUT, I am sick of these Jordanites who claim that he won six rings by himself, and with average rosters. He WON with EXCEPTIONAL rosters, that dominated from '91 thru '93 (and were the equal of any team in '94.)

[ClipperRevival]

The '94 Bulls went 55-27. BUT, Pippen and Grant missed a combined 22 games. Had those two been relatively healthy, and they likely would have won 60+ games. And that would have been HUGE. Why? Because they lost a close seven game series in the ECSF's to a 56-26 Knicks team. HOWEVER, they went 3-0 on their home court! And, they lost a game by one point in NY.

Incidently, they wiped out the Pacers in the regular season, 4-1. The same team that the Knicks disposed of in the ECF's.

Then, the 56-26 Knicks lost a road game seven by four points to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals...in a series in which they outscored Houston.

So, YES, the '94 Bulls were VERY CLOSE to winning a TITLE.


As for the "MJ hating"...I have him at #2 all-time. BUT, I am sick of these Jordanites who claim that he won six rings by himself, and with average rosters. He WON with EXCEPTIONAL rosters, that dominated from '91 thru '93 (and were the equal of any team in '94.)

Tell me what was so exceptional about the 1991-1993 Bulls roster outside of Pippen and Grant.

[andgar923]

Can some of you dumb f*cks get it through your idiotic skulls.

Without MJ to push the Bulls, Pippen does not become Pippen. So the every glorious 94 season does NOT happen.

The Bulls don't learn how to win because there's nobody pushing them.

The Bulls don't win because there's nobody SAVING them. How many times did he have to come up huge for them to win? hundreds of times during the regular and specially the post season.

Go ahead and replace MJ with any other 2 guard, that shit aint happening.

MJ had to perform at a GOAT level (hate to sound like 3Ball but he's right) for them to not just compete but to win. But take away all of the stats, the reason the Bulls were successful was due to the work they put in during practice and off season. Again, he pushed them and made them into winners. That shit aint happening with Mitch Richmond, Clyde or any other 2 guard. They aint making Pip into an all star let alone a HOF player.

Idiots.

[LAZERUSS]

Tell me what was so exceptional about the 1991-1993 Bulls roster outside of Pippen and Grant.

Let me ask you this...

Take Ewing and Hakeem away from their '94 teams, and how do the Bulls do in that post-season...

[kshutts1]

Can some of you dumb f*cks get it through your idiotic skulls.

Without MJ to push the Bulls, Pippen does not become Pippen. So the every glorious 94 season does NOT happen.

The Bulls don't learn how to win because there's nobody pushing them.


One of my favorite Jordanite claims :facepalm

Who pushed Billups? Zeke? Olajuwon? Wade? Dirk?

[ClipperRevival]

Let me ask you this...

Take Ewing and Hakeem away from their '94 teams, and how do the Bulls do in that post-season...

I didn't ask you about the 1994 Bulls. I asked you about the 1991-1993 Bulls. Please answer the question.

[kshutts1]

Pippen in the 1994 2nd second put up these numbers.

21.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 4.7 apg, 2.0 spg.

Impressive right? But look at his FG% of only .405. Very inefficient. This is proof that the guy simply couldn't carry a team on his own past the 2nd round. And this was Pippen at his peak. He had every chance to do more but simply peaked at 22 ppg his entire career.
Here are some stats...

20/11 on 40%
19/8 on 43%
24/10 on 42%

Could that player have carried a team to a title as the first option?

[kshutts1]

Hard to say, I'd guess pretender until 93, perennial contender from there on. Everything else remaining the same, and possibly inproving depending on the caliber of the 2 they pickup in MJ's place. Scottie may have became an even greater player as lead dog from day one, albeit a less successful one.
This remains the best answer in the thread.

[ClipperRevival]

Here are some stats...

20/11 on 40%
19/8 on 43%
24/10 on 42%

Could that player have carried a team to a title as the first option?

Obviously those are numbers from lead dogs who won.

[kshutts1]

Obviously those are numbers from lead dogs who won.
Obviously they are. They are Dirk.

My point was not that Pippen COULD have done it, but rather that your posting one inefficient series as proof is ridiculous.

[ClipperRevival]

Obviously they are. They are Dirk.

My point was not that Pippen COULD have done it, but rather that your posting one inefficient series as proof is ridiculous.

Please man. Come stronger. Pip peaked at 22ppg his entire freaken career. This series just solidifies my point.

How many career 30 and 40 point career games does he have?

[LAZERUSS]

I didn't ask you about the 1994 Bulls. I asked you about the 1991-1993 Bulls. Please answer the question.

As usual, MJ's numbers fell against the '91 Pistons, albeit, a crumbling Detroit team. However, it was Pippen and Grant ELEVATING their games that allowed the Bulls to finally get over the hump against the Bad Boys. And both of those guys were dominant against the declining and injury-plagued Lakers in the '91 Finals, as well.

As for other years...ask MJ about Paxson in game six of the '93 Finals. If Paxson doesn't hit that shot, it goes to a game seven on the Suns home floor. And then, who knows?

In any case...Pippen and Grant were HUGE contributors to those three straight titles, and you only have to look at their '94 season to see their IMPACT.

BTW, the '90's did not have the GREAT teams that the '80's had, either.

[Dbrog]

I didn't ask you about the 1994 Bulls. I asked you about the 1991-1993 Bulls. Please answer the question.

I think Laz's point is look at the league back then. The talent on each team was VERY topheavy due to the expansion. Even the best teams had HUGE dropoffs in talent once you got past their 1st or 2nd best player. The exception to this was probably the Cavs but still...were they going anywhere without Daugherty? During that time, given these factors, MJs teams were stacked. Definitely the best in the league. They were the Heatles (but led by MJ!) in a time where superteams had stopped existing.

[andgar923]

One of my favorite Jordanite claims :facepalm

Who pushed Billups? Zeke? Olajuwon? Wade? Dirk?

We do know it as a FACT.

You can cry about it all you want, but MJ made Pip the player he was.

Would Pip be as successful if he hadn't played with MJ?

MJ made it a mission to make him into a great player. He was criticized for not making players around him better like Magic and Bird so he went out to make him a great player by pushing him. He took him under his wing and worked out with him before and after practice, went over game tape, challenged him in practice and toughened him up both physically and 'mentally'.

MJ had to bring that out of him.

You think he could become the player he became on his own if he didn't even have the mental capacity to overcome shit?

Sure he may have the 'skills' necessary to be in the NBA, but he clearly didn't have the other overlooked factors that make a player successful. He'd go home crying after practice for f*cks sake! He'd tell MJ to take it easy on him in practice, he'd get bullied and punked by others.

One thing to also consider is how MJ and the triangle allowed him to flourish.

The triangle played to his strengths and MJ allowed him to make mistakes and take the pressure off him which allowed him to grow.

There's simply many pieces that have to fall into place for him to flourish.

At best, he becomes an all star.

[ClipperRevival]

As usual, MJ's numbers fell against the '91 Pistons, albeit, a crumbling Detroit team. However, it was Pippen and Grant ELEVATING their games that allowed the Bulls to finally get over the hump against the Bad Boys. And both of those guys were dominant against the declining and injury-plagued Lakers in the '91 Finals, as well.

As for other years...ask MJ about Paxson in game six of the '93 Finals. If Paxson doesn't hit that shot, it goes to a game seven on the Suns home floor. And then, who knows?

In any case...Pippen and Grant were HUGE contributors to those three straight titles, and you only have to look at their '94 season to see their IMPACT.

BTW, the '90's did not have the GREAT teams that the '80's had, either.

You still didn't answer my question. What made the 1991-1993 Bulls roster so exceptional.

[ClipperRevival]

I think Laz's point is look at the league back then. The talent on each team was VERY topheavy due to the expansion. Even the best teams had HUGE dropoffs in talent once you got past their 1st or 2nd best player. The exception to this was probably the Cavs but still...were they going anywhere without Daugherty? During that time, given these factors, MJs teams were stacked. Definitely the best in the league. They were the Heatles (but led by MJ!) in a time where superteams had stopped existing.

You do realize the Bulls added Kukoc, Kerr and Longley in 1994 right? They weren't there pre-1993. Right, but no one mentions this.

[Dbrog]

We do know it as a FACT.


...in your opinion

Phil has a history of bringing out the best in players too you know :pimp:

[Trollsmasher]

Can some of you dumb f*cks get it through your idiotic skulls.

Without MJ to push the Bulls, Pippen does not become Pippen. So the every glorious 94 season does NOT happen.

The Bulls don't learn how to win because there's nobody pushing them.

The Bulls don't win because there's nobody SAVING them. How many times did he have to come up huge for them to win? hundreds of times during the regular and specially the post season.

Go ahead and replace MJ with any other 2 guard, that shit aint happening.

MJ had to perform at a GOAT level (hate to sound like 3Ball but he's right) for them to not just compete but to win. But take away all of the stats, the reason the Bulls were successful was due to the work they put in during practice and off season. Again, he pushed them and made them into winners. That shit aint happening with Mitch Richmond, Clyde or any other 2 guard. They aint making Pip into an all star let alone a HOF player.

Idiots.
can we stop with this meme that Pippen would somehow develop into a 10/4/3 player if he never met Jordan?

[Dbrog]

You do realize the Bulls added Kukoc, Kerr and Longley in 1994 right? They weren't there pre-1993. Right, but no one mentions this.

How does this change what I said? The bulls had a three headed monster (by far the best one in the league btw). There wasn't another team with 3 players as good as them.

Edit: Was there even a team with 2 players greater than the Bulls 2 best? I say no..THEN you add Grant to the mix. Game over man. This is also the reason the Bulls were able to get so far with basically only playing 2 allstars when MJ retired the first time.

[ClipperRevival]

How does this change what I said? The bulls had a three headed monster (by far the best one in the league btw). There wasn't another team with 3 players as good as them.

You said that the league was top heavy and that if you took away a team's best or 2nd best player, they would experience a drop off. The Bulls didn't. To me, that suggests something. But I added that the Bulls added Kukoc, Longley and Kerr in 1994, which helped the team noticeably.

[Dbrog]

You said that the league was top heavy and that if you took away a team's best or 2nd best player, they would experience a drop off. The Bulls didn't. To me, that suggests something. But I added that the Bulls added Kukoc, Longley and Kerr in 1994, which helped the team noticeably.

I'm curious what it suggests to you that the Bulls didn't drop off much when MJ retired? Genuine question.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Can some of you dumb f*cks get it through your idiotic skulls.

Without MJ to push the Bulls, Pippen does not become Pippen. So the every glorious 94 season does NOT happen.

The Bulls don't learn how to win because there's nobody pushing them.

The Bulls don't win because there's nobody SAVING them. How many times did he have to come up huge for them to win? hundreds of times during the regular and specially the post season.

Go ahead and replace MJ with any other 2 guard, that shit aint happening.

MJ had to perform at a GOAT level (hate to sound like 3Ball but he's right) for them to not just compete but to win. But take away all of the stats, the reason the Bulls were successful was due to the work they put in during practice and off season. Again, he pushed them and made them into winners. That shit aint happening with Mitch Richmond, Clyde or any other 2 guard. They aint making Pip into an all star let alone a HOF player.

Idiots.

You and "3balls" are the only kiddies claiming this BS.


I’s often said Jordan needed Pippen and Pippen needed Jordan. I’m not sure Jordan didn’t need Pippen more than Pippen needed Jordan.” - Tex Winter

Now obviously Pippen needed Jordan more than the other way around, but this quote exemplifies how crazy some of you sound. Mitch Richmond and Clyde Drexler are HOFers and 2 of the ATG's at their position. :oldlol:

[ClipperRevival]

I'm curious what it suggests to you that the Bulls didn't drop off much when MJ retired? Genuine question.

First, Pip is an all time great, all around player. 2nd, Grant was damm good himself. Very athletic and impactful. BJ Armstrong started to come into his own. But they added Kukoc, Kerry and Longley. They weren't there in 1993.

[Dbrog]

First, Pip is an all time great, all around player. 2nd, Grant was damm good himself. Very athletic and impactful. BJ Armstrong started to come into his own. But they added Kukoc, Kerry and Longley. They weren't there in 1993.

But they lost possibly the GOAT player. What does this suggest to you about the league in general at that time?

[ClipperRevival]

But they lost possibly the GOAT player. What does this suggest to you about the league in general at that time?

That the NBA was fantastic? Remember the commercials?

[andgar923]

You and "3balls" are the only kiddies claiming this BS.





And so have other players, coaches and journalists.

They may not word it exactly like we do, but they basically hint at it.

[Dbrog]

That the NBA was fantastic? Remember the commercials?

:applause::oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

Hmm, I don't know about that. The guy played 17 seasons and had a chance to be the man again from 1999 forward. I always say that your talent will warrant the minutes and touches you get. Meaning if you are that good offensively, you will get the touches. Pip just never had that iso game where he could break down a set defender with the D set and create his own shot. A lot of his points came within the flow of the offense like transition, cutting, put backs, jumpers, in the post, etc. He just needed that other scorer to carry the load. That's why MJ was perfect for him and vice versa.

I mean when he left Chicago after 1998, he averaged 11.5 ppg from 1999 through 2004, from the age of 33 through 38.
Yes, but you're speaking under the premise of what actually happened. I see it in terms of not coming into a bulls team with the best player in the league already in place. I'm sure he came into the league with a support mentality. He was not walking in taking anything from mike. I think the rest of his career beyond playing with mike was a product of his time with him, his focus and view of the game and how to impact it were set. I couldn't imagine a drastic change into a volume scorer past his prime.Things would have to be different if he came into a team without a leader.


This remains the best answer in the thread.
:cheers:


We do know it as a FACT.

You can cry about it all you want, but MJ made Pip the player he was.

Would Pip be as successful if he hadn't played with MJ?

MJ made it a mission to make him into a great player. He was criticized for not making players around him better like Magic and Bird so he went out to make him a great player by pushing him. He took him under his wing and worked out with him before and after practice, went over game tape, challenged him in practice and toughened him up both physically and 'mentally'.

MJ had to bring that out of him.

You think he could become the player he became on his own if he didn't even have the mental capacity to overcome shit?

Sure he may have the 'skills' necessary to be in the NBA, but he clearly didn't have the other overlooked factors that make a player successful. He'd go home crying after practice for f*cks sake! He'd tell MJ to take it easy on him in practice, he'd get bullied and punked by others.

One thing to also consider is how MJ and the triangle allowed him to flourish.

The triangle played to his strengths and MJ allowed him to make mistakes and take the pressure off him which allowed him to grow.

There's simply many pieces that have to fall into place for him to flourish.

At best, he becomes an all star.
Bullshit like this is really unfair to pip, and really ridiculous to begin with. You gotta ask yourself a couple of questions bro. He was a lottery pick on his own, 5th to be exact.

Or wait did Mj visit him in college and make him a top prospect too?

If Mj could "make" Pippens at will.....why in the hell did he stop at just one?

Also why the hell didn't he "make" one in Washington so they could at least make the playoffs then?

[ClipperRevival]

Yes, but you're speaking under the premise of what actually happened. I see it in terms of not coming into a bulls team with the best player in the league already in place. I'm sure he came into the league with a support mentality. He was not walking in taking anything from mike. I think the rest of his career beyond playing with mike was a product of his time with him, his focus and view of the game and how to impact it were set. I couldn't imagine a drastic change into a volume scorer past his prime.Things would have to be different if he came into a team without a leader.


:cheers:


Bullshit like this is really unfair to pip, and really ridiculous to begin with. You gotta ask yourself a couple of questions bro. He was a lottery pick on his own, 5th to be exact.

Or wait did Mj visit him in college and make him a top prospect too?

If Mj could "make" Pippens at will.....why in the hell did he stop at just one?

Also why the hell didn't he "make" one in Washington so they could at least make the playoffs then?

I disagree about Pip. The guy played 17 seasons and had several seasons where he was given the keys to be "the man". He is what he is. He peaked at 22ppg. I don't know if having his own team from the start would've changed that. As you said, maybe sacrifice some D and other aspects and score a bit more points on less efficiency but that's not saying much. He just didn't have that iso game against set defenders and defenses.

[sdot_thadon]

I disagree about Pip. The guy played 17 seasons and had several seasons where he was given the keys to be "the man". He is what he is. He peaked at 22ppg. I don't know if having his own team from the start would've changed that. As you said, maybe sacrifice some D and other aspects and score a bit more points on less efficiency but that's not saying much. He just didn't have that iso game against set defenders and defenses.
Because it was never his job to do so early in his career. After a certain point you are what you are and won't change very much going forward. I can't think of a person going from a pippen role for 3 rings/5 years, then morph into a lead role successfully.

[ClipperRevival]

Because it was never his job to do so early in his career. After a certain point you are what you are and won't change very much going forward. I can't think of a person going from a pippen role for 3 rings/5 years, then morph into a lead role successfully.

Like I said, I can concede that he might've scored a bit more on less efficiency while sacrificing other parts of his game. If that's what you're also saying, we agree. But if you are saying he would've been some MJ/Kobe type scorer, I disagree. The guy never attempted more than 18 shots per game, even when he had his own team. He was always more comfortable being a facilitator and just picking his spots instead of dominating the ball.

[kshutts1]

Please man. Come stronger. Pip peaked at 22ppg his entire freaken career. This series just solidifies my point.

How many career 30 and 40 point career games does he have?
Again, not debating your point; I'm one of Pippen's biggest fans (not stans), and I am not sure he was cut out to be a #1 option. I do know that we don't have enough evidence to show either way, though.

I was railing against your flimsy definition of "proof".

Now that I think of it, "flimsy proof" seems to be a consistent thing amongst the Jordan crowd. And it's ironic, because it's not even needed, as it's nearly universally agreed that he's the GOAT.

[97 bulls]

You said that the league was top heavy and that if you took away a team's best or 2nd best player, they would experience a drop off. The Bulls didn't. To me, that suggests something. But I added that the Bulls added Kukoc, Longley and Kerr in 1994, which helped the team noticeably.
To be fair, the Bulls only "added" Kukoc. Longley replaced Cartwright and Kerr replaced Paxson.

[97 bulls]

Because it was never his job to do so early in his career. After a certain point you are what you are and won't change very much going forward. I can't think of a person going from a pippen role for 3 rings/5 years, then morph into a lead role successfully.
Even more. Pippen was a PG. That's what he was in high school and College. He was being compared to Magic and Rodman comming out of College.

[97 bulls]

I disagree about Pip. The guy played 17 seasons and had several seasons where he was given the keys to be "the man". He is what he is. He peaked at 22ppg. I don't know if having his own team from the start would've changed that. As you said, maybe sacrifice some D and other aspects and score a bit more points on less efficiency but that's not saying much. He just didn't have that iso game against set defenders and defenses.
Lol. Pippen had TWO legitimate seasons where he was the "man" 94 and 00. And he was 34 with a bunch of mileage and injuries by the time he joined Portland in 00. Some of you guys can be so unreasonable.

[guy]

Even if people want to argue that players like Pippen and Grant would've ended up the players they were regardless and didn't need Jordan "pushing" them, that doesn't mean that team as a whole unit develops exactly the same. Without Jordan there, they don't get the experience from getting deep into the playoffs every year and learning how to deal with high pressure situations and adversity against the better teams. That's not a lesson from Jordan, but just a normal lesson that all teams go through. Younger teams don't just jump from the lottery one year to the ECF/Finals within a few years unless maybe they have a transcendent talent i.e. Shaq (who needed another all-star anyway), Lebron (who did it in a historically weak conference) for example. A team like this year's Warriors might debunk that trend but they're an exception and are clearly more talented then any Jordanless Bulls teams.

That team is probably a ~30-35 win lottery team from 1988 to 1990, then a ~40-47 win 1st round team for a few years, then a ~48-55 2nd round win team for a few more years, then after Grant leaves and Rodman comes in, they get up to 60 wins and make a couple of conference finals and maybe 1 Finals. And that's not taking into account the reality that that core wouldn't have stayed together that long since the lack of any notable success wouldn't have justified management keeping it together and not making relatively significant changes.

Now if we just recreated the situation in 1994 where Jordan retired before every season from 91-98 with everything else still in place and they still have the same experience up until that point, here's how my educated guess:

1991: 40-44 wins 1st round exit
1992: 47-52 wins 2nd round exit
1993: 43-48 wins 2nd round exit
1996: 50-55 wins ECF
1997: 47-52 wins 1st round exit
1998: 37-42 wins no playoffs

I don't see them doing better then they did in 94 in any other year except for possibly 96. They had their best mix of experience+youth in 94.

[97 bulls]

Even if people want to argue that players like Pippen and Grant would've ended up the players they were regardless and didn't need Jordan "pushing" them, that doesn't mean that team as a whole unit develops exactly the same. Without Jordan there, they don't get the experience from getting deep into the playoffs every year and learning how to deal with high pressure situations and adversity against the better teams. That's not a lesson from Jordan, but just a normal lesson that all teams go through. Younger teams don't just jump from the lottery one year to the ECF/Finals within a few years unless maybe they have a transcendent talent i.e. Shaq (who needed another all-star anyway), Lebron (who did it in a historically weak conference) for example. A team like this year's Warriors might debunk that trend but they're an exception and are clearly more talented then any Jordanless Bulls teams.

That team is probably a ~30-35 win lottery team from 1988 to 1990, then a ~40-47 win 1st round team for a few years, then a ~48-55 2nd round win team for a few more years, then after Grant leaves and Rodman comes in, they get up to 60 wins and make a couple of conference finals and maybe 1 Finals. And that's not taking into account the reality that that core wouldn't have stayed together that long since the lack of any notable success wouldn't have justified management keeping it together and not making relatively significant changes.

Now if we just recreated the situation in 1994 where Jordan retired before every season from 91-98 with everything else still in place and they still have the same experience up until that point, here's how my educated guess:

1991: 40-44 wins 1st round exit
1992: 47-52 wins 2nd round exit
1993: 43-48 wins 2nd round exit
1996: 50-55 wins ECF
1997: 47-52 wins 1st round exit
1998: 37-42 wins no playoffs

I don't see them doing better then they did in 94 in any other year except for possibly 96. They had their best mix of experience+youth in 94.
Theres just too many variables to make an eduacted decision. Do theh get to be in the draft? Sign free agents etc? The fact is the Bulls without Jordan were a very good team. With one if the greatest. Why all this space time continuum nonsense?

[guy]

Theres just too many variables to make an eduacted decision. Do theh get to be in the draft? Sign free agents etc? The fact is the Bulls without Jordan were a very good team. With one if the greatest. Why all this space time continuum nonsense?

Well it's a hypothetical and the assumption is that it's just the exact same team but without Jordan. OP didn't say anything about replacing him with anybody. Obviously in reality you can't just assume that's how it would be, but that's the assumption here.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Without MJ, like ever?

They aint even sniffing playoffs.

:whatever:

[Smoke117]

Pip had a chance to show what he can do as "the man" in 1993-94 and most of 1994-95. And what we found out was that he is one of the most impactful wing players ever. He filled up the stat sheets. In those two years, he put up 21.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 5.4 apg, 2.9 spg and 1.0 bpg. That's pretty impressive.

But what we also found out was that he did NOT have the offensive game to carry the load and take over like an MJ/Kobe/Wade/McGrady, etc. could do. So in that sense, MJ and Pip complimented each other perfectly. MJ to carry the offensive load while Pip plays 2nd fiddle and doing a little bit of everything.

The 1994 Bulls weren't even constructed for Scottie to just "take over". The 1994 Bulls were successful because they played the most polished and pure form of the triangle I've ever seen. Scottie could have launched up 20-22 shots a game and scored 25-27 points a game, but what is the point? The team wasn't going to win that way after losing Michael Jordan and replacing him with god damn Pete Myers. That's without even mentioning the fact that the triangle offense is a slow down offense and they were playing even slower in 94 than they previously had. Pippens best asset as a scorer was always in the open court where he was basically unstoppable, so he literally has never played in an offense geared toward his skills. He would add a lot of stuff to his game between 93-95 though...he frankly was just always too unselfish.

Look at Antoine Walker and how many shots he was taking to get his points for instance: He averaged a career high 23.4 ppg...on 21.2 shots. Is he a better scorer than Pippen because he peaked at a higher ppg? (even though it was on laughable efficiency?) People are going to tell me Scottie couldn't have averaged 25+ points on 21 shots? If he actually wanted to shoot and score I believe he could have and at good efficiency. By that 93-94 season he had very good post game, had worked on his jumper to a consistent level, was great off the dribble, and unstoppable in the open court.

[97 bulls]

The 1994 Bulls weren't even constructed for Scottie to just "take over". The 1994 Bulls were successful because they played the most polished and pure form of the triangle I've ever seen. Scottie could have launched up 20-22 shots a game and scored 25-27 points a game, but what is the point? The team wasn't going to win that way after losing Michael Jordan and replacing him with god damn Pete Myers. That's without even mentioning the fact that the triangle offense is a slow down offense and they were playing even slower in 94 than they previously had. Pippens best asset as a scorer was always in the open court where he was basically unstoppable, so he literally has never played in an offense geared toward his skills. He would add a lot of stuff to his game between 93-95 though...he frankly was just always too unselfish.

Look at Antoine Walker and how many shots he was taking to get his points for instance: He averaged a career high 23.4 ppg...on 21.2 shots. Is he a better scorer than Pippen because he peaked at a higher ppg? (even though it was on laughable efficiency?) People are going to tell me Scottie couldn't have averaged 25+ points on 21 shots? If he actually wanted to shoot and score I believe he could have and at good efficiency. By that 93-94 season he had very good post game, had worked on his jumper to a consistent level, was great off the dribble, and unstoppable in the open court.
Exactly. Pippen felt the Bulls had a better chance if winning with the team playing through the offense. Not him going out and scoring 25-26 ppg on 44% shooting. Which he could've easily did. Again theh didnt win because of Pippen not scoring enough. They couldn't win because they didny fill the void Jordan left when he abruptly retired.

[DatAsh]

Without MJ, like ever?

They aint even sniffing playoffs.

Huh, they made the playoffs without him...that happened.