The Reason why The Bulls won 72 games

[97 bulls]

Theres a video posted on YouTube dated in 1998 where Isiah Thomas said that Scottie Pippen was the second best player in the league over the last five years.

Jordan had plenty of help

[3ball]

please respond to post 171


LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER

How many teams in 1994 had more talent than the Bulls????.. Like, everyone..... This gives you the answer you need - the Bulls didn't win 55 games in 1994 based on talent.. Instead, the Bulls won due to goat chemistry, enabled by the triangle.

But in the playoffs, chemistry alone wasn't enough, so they lost in the 2nd Round... They went from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round... A massive decline.. Then MJ came back and returned the team to 3-peat glory - don't say it was Rodman, because MJ had already 3-peated with Grant.

[97 bulls]

LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER LOOK AT THE 1994 ROSTER

How many teams in 1994 had more talent than the Bulls????.. Like, everyone..... This gives you the answer you need - the Bulls didn't win 55 games in 1994 based on talent.. Instead, the Bulls won due to goat chemistry, enabled by the triangle.

But in the playoffs, chemistry alone wasn't enough, so they lost in the 2nd Round... They went from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round... A massive decline.. Then MJ came back and returned the team to 3-peat glory - don't say it was Rodman, because MJ had already 3-peated with Grant.
Lol. Chemistry helps. But its not gonna get you 55 wins bro. At least you backed off the assumption that Jordan was the reason for their success. The fact is the Bulls were a mid 50 win team without Jordan. Point blank. Plain and simple.

[3ball]

Just for a refresher. Heres how Rodman impacted the 98 Finals. Shutting down Karl Malone in 4 of 6 games



Stats in 1998 Finals:


MALONE.: 25 ppg.. 11 rpg.. 51%
RODMAN:. 3 ppg.... 8 rpg.. 46%


Malone played great, while Rodman was AIDS

[97 bulls]

Stats in 1998 Finals:


MALONE.: 25 ppg.. 11 rpg.. 51%
RODMAN:. 3 ppg.... 8 rpg.. 46%


Malone played great, while Rodman was AIDS
Werent you the one accusing someone of only looking at stats???? I posted 4 of the 6 games of that series. The videos clearly show that Malone could not score on Rodman. He did his damage on Longley.

[3ball]

The fact is the Bulls were a mid 50 win team without Jordan


We know for a FACT that the 1994 Bulls won based on chemistry, because many teams had more talent!!!!!!

Can you comprehend that????... If many teams had more talent than the Bulls, then the Bulls won based on chemistry... Are you capable of understanding this basic concept??





Chemistry helps. But its not gonna get you 55 wins bro.


Chemistry can absolutely get you 55 wins... Seriously, you know nothing - chemistry is more important than talent.. It's the most important thing in basketball.

Chemistry is what allowed all those international teams to beat the NBA's best repeatedly from 2002-2006... And chemistry is what allows those same teams to almost beat the USA today, even though none of their players could even MAKE team usa..





At least you backed off the assumption that Jordan was the reason for their success.


Where did I do that?... Jordan was the reason they went from 2nd Round exit to 3-peat dynasty in 1996-1998... Don't say it was Rodman, because Jordan already 3-peated from 1991-1993 with Grant.. Unless you think that was coincidence.
.

[97 bulls]

We know for a FACT that the 1994 Bulls won based on chemistry, because many teams had more talent!!!!!!

Can you comprehend that????... If many teams had more talent than the Bulls, then the Bulls won based on chemistry... Are you capable of understanding this basic concept??



Chemistry can absolutely get you 55 wins... Seriously, you know nothing - chemistry is more important than talent.. It's the most important thing in basketball.

Chemistry is what allowed all those international teams to beat the NBA's best repeatedly from 2002-2006... And chemistry is what allows those same teams to almost beat the USA today, even though none of their players could even MAKE team usa..



Where did I do that?... Jordan was the reason they went from 2nd Round exit to 3-peat dynasty in 1996-1998... Don't say it was Rodman, because Jordan already 3-peated from 1991-1993 with Grant.. Unless you think that was coincidence.
.
Hold on. What the Bulls did in 94 and what happened in the Olympics is two totally different things. The Olympic team had NO CHEMISTRY. You're acting like the Bulls were the only team with chemistry in 94. Come on. And the factor this....how much chemisrty can a team have when they got five new players????

[97 bulls]

Where did I do that?... Jordan was the reason they went from 2nd Round exit to 3-peat dynasty in 1996-1998... Don't say it was Rodman, because Jordan already 3-peated from 1991-1993 with Grant.. Unless you think that was coincidence.
Jordan was a large part. But as has been said. Why didnt they win in 95????

[3ball]

Jordan was a large part. But as has been said.


He carried the Bulls in the 1996-1998 playoffs more than any player has ever carried ANY team, except Shaq's 3-peat and MJ's first 3-peat.





Why didnt they win in 95????


MJ's efficiency in those playoffs was way down because of his 2-year layoff and he had uncharacteristic turnovers...

Most people don't know about an amazing fact about the Orlando series in 1995 - those turnovers he had were his VERY FIRST turnovers on a final possession in his entire career... Compare that to Lebron, Kobe and others, who turn it over all the time on the last possession.

But the rust wasn't going to be there forever - once he had a full season, it was standard procedure - 3-peat - just like he did from 1991-1993
.

[eeeeeebro]

east was way better than west back then. THATS WHY west is so good now CAUSE way back then they tanked and tanked and tanked and tanked for decades the west was terrible

[97 bulls]

He carried the Bulls in the 1996-1998 playoffs more than any player has ever carried ANY team, except Shaq's 3-peat and MJ's first 3-peat.



MJ's efficiency in those playoffs was way down because of his 2-year layoff and he had uncharacteristic turnovers...

Most people don't know about an amazing fact about the Orlando series in 1995 - those turnovers he had were his VERY FIRST turnovers on a final possession in his entire career... Compare that to Lebron, Kobe and others, who turn it over all the time on the last possession.

But the rust wasn't going to be there forever - once he had a full season, it was standard procedure - 3-peat - just like he did from 1991-1993
.
As my coach used to say. You shouldn't have been in that position in the first place. Lol Lol come on bro. Are you really saying the Bulls lost 4 games in that series because of two uncharacteristic plays by Jordan???? Unbelievably unbelievable. Regardless of all your excuses they LOST. The Bulls knew they needed help and went out and got Rodman. When they played Orlando again with Rodman, it wasnt close.

Again for emphasis George Karl said Rodman was the reason for the Bulls success.

[3ball]

Are you really sayung the Bulls lost 4 games in that series becaouse of two uncharacteristic plays by Jordan????


Can you read?... I said: "MJ's efficiency in those playoffs was way down because of his 2-year layoff and he had uncharacteristic turnovers..."

Most people don't know about an amazing fact about the Orlando series in 1995 - those turnovers he had were his VERY FIRST turnovers on a final possession in his entire career... Compare that to Lebron, Kobe and others, who turn it over all the time on the last possession.

But the rust wasn't going to be there forever - once he had a full season, it was standard procedure - 3-peat - just like he did from 1991-1993

[97 bulls]

Can you read?... I said: "MJ's efficiency in those playoffs was way down because of his 2-year layoff and he had uncharacteristic turnovers..."

Most people don't know about an amazing fact about the Orlando series in 1995 - those turnovers he had were his VERY FIRST turnovers on a final possession in his entire career... Compare that to Lebron, Kobe and others, who turn it over all the time on the last possession.

But the rust wasn't going to be there forever - once he had a full season, it was standard procedure - 3-peat - just like he did from 1991-1993
How was he rusty???? He averged 32 ppg on 48 percent shooting.

[GIF REACTION]

It wasn't until the Bulls revamped their roster

Common myth that Jordan was unfit during the 1994-1995 NBA season

He had actually been training for 6 months prior... The national media didn't know about it but it was reported at a local media outlet

[3ball]

Common myth that Jordan was unfit (rusty) during the 1994-1995 NBA season


Here was Jordan's standard efficiency and win shares during the 2nd three-peat:


Jordan 1996-1998 RS: 119 ORtg.. 56.0 ts.. 27.4 PER.. 0.279 ws/48
Jordan 1996-1998 PS: 118 ORtg.. 54.3 ts.. 27.3 PER.. 0.268 ws/48

Jordan 1996 RS: 124 ORtg.. 58.2 ts.. 29.4 PER.. 0.317 ws/48
Jordan 1996 PS: 123 ORtg.. 56.4 ts.. 26.7 PER.. 0.306 ws/48


Here was Jordan during the fragmented 1995 season:

Jordan 1995 RS: 109 ORtg.. 49.3 ts.. 22.1 PER.. 0.167 ws/48
Jordan 1995 PS: 110 ORtg.. 55.7 ts.. 24.8 PER.. 0.150 ws/48


Again, he was rusty from the 2-year layoff so he couldn't hit the broadside of a barn (by his standards)

[97 bulls]

Here was Jordan's standard efficiency and win shares during the 2nd three-peat:


Jordan 1996-1998 RS: 119 ORtg.. 56.0 ts.. 27.4 PER.. 0.279 ws/48
Jordan 1996-1998 PS: 118 ORtg.. 54.3 ts.. 27.3 PER.. 0.268 ws/48

Jordan 1996 RS: 124 ORtg.. 58.2 ts.. 29.4 PER.. 0.317 ws/48
Jordan 1996 PS: 123 ORtg.. 56.4 ts.. 26.7 PER.. 0.306 ws/48


Here was Jordan during the fragmented 1995 season:

Jordan 1995 RS: 109 ORtg.. 49.3 ts.. 22.1 PER.. 0.167 ws/48
Jordan 1995 PS: 110 ORtg.. 55.7 ts.. 24.8 PER.. 0.150 ws/48


Again, he was rusty from the 2-year layoff so he couldn't hit the broadside of a barn (by his standards)
Oh save it. His FG% was on par with his previous two years. What hurt the Bulls most was not having a competent big and lack of chemistry.

[Elosha]

Oh save it. His FG% was on par with his previous two years. What hurt the Bulls most was not having a competent big and lack of chemistry.

I think both of you are making valid points. There are multiple reasons why the Bulls did not have success in 1995 against Orlando. Lack of an adequate power forward/rebounding was one of them. Lack of chemistry was another. Jordan was adjusting to brand new teammates at the tail end of the season and they were adjusting to him. And yes, Jordan was truly rusty. That's where the stats are misleading.

Jordan had been training for baseball for the last two years, and his muscle memory, reflexes, and general athleticism was just -- off. You would see flashes of his brilliance but he couldn't really sustain it. His ball handling was shaky, at times he looked uncomfortable bringing the ball up the court, like when Nick Anderson stole the ball and the game in Game 1. Even though he had some very good play in games 2, 4, and 5, he was inconsistent. And Jordan was really inconsistent in Game 6, missing some, what for him were easy (but crucial) shots, down the stretch of the game. He just wasn't as comfortable or overall as dominant on the floor.

So -- you combine a motivated and much better conditioned/trained Jordan to the 96 squad, give them time to jell over the off-season, and add Rodman, and you have the powerhouse you got. In my opinion, Jordan fully returning to form was the biggest factor, but it certainly wasn't the only one.

[3ball]

So -- you combine a motivated and much better conditioned/trained Jordan to the 96 squad, give them time to jell over the off-season, and add Rodman, and you have the powerhouse you got. In my opinion, Jordan fully returning to form was the biggest factor, but it certainly wasn't the only one.


it didn't have to be Rodman - it could've been Horace Grant - MJ 3-peated with Horace too.. this is proof that you guys overrate Rodman's value and replaceability.





That's where the stats are misleading.


No they aren't - MJ's efficiency in 1995 regular season and postseason are FAR worse than his other years.. His PER was 22... His ORtg was 109... These numbers are ridiculous for Jordan.





So -- you combine a motivated and much better conditioned/trained Jordan to the 96 squad, give them time to jell over the off-season


Exacty - jelling was the most important thing because the Bulls 1996 roster was NOT a 72-win roster based on talent - numerous teams had more talent, which proves the Bulls won based on superior chemistry:


.............Bulls PPG in 1996:


................ RS.......... PO

Jordan...... 30.4........ 30.7
Pippen...... 19.1........ 16.9
Kukoc....... 13.1........ 10.8
Longley...... 9.1.......... 8.4
Harper....... 7.4.......... 8.8
Rodman..... 5.5.......... 7.5
S Kerr........ 8.4......... 6.8
Wenngton... 5.3.......... 3.0

Also, the superior chemistry of the team was based on the triangle - but the dominance of the triangle cannot be realized without player capable of getting 30 ppg WITHIN the triangle - MJ, Shaq and Kobe all averaged 30 ppg+ during their championship years and runs.. The triangle also requires a dominant post presence (MJ, Shaq, Pau).

[kennethgriffin]

.
Expansion team records in 1996:


Orlando Magic 60-22

Miami Heat 42-40

Charlotte Hornets 41-41

Minnesota Timberwolves 25-57

Toronto Raptors 21-61

Vancouver Grizzlies 15-67



Bottom 6 records in 2015:


New York Knicks 17-65

Philadelphia 76'ers 18-64

Minnesota Timberwolves 21-61

Los Angeles Lakers 21-61

Orlando Magic 25-57

Sacramento Kings 29-51


The top 450 players in the world made the NBA in the mid-late 90's (30 teams and 15 players per team), and the top 450 players make the NBA today... There's no difference.. How is it different?

Now if there were LESS players in today's league, then it would be tougher - a 300-player league means only the top 300 in the world make the league - so 150 players from today's league would get cut in a 300-player league (the 80's).. The Bulls won their rings in a league that had less players, so they won their rings in a less diluted league.

Also, expansion happened before the 90's... Expansion has happened ever since the first 8 teams were introduced back in 1949.. Kobe, Lebron, Wade - you name it - they all won rings in the expansion era.. They won in a 30-team (fully-expanded) league.

New fans can't have it both ways - so which championships should be discounted??... Should we discount the rings achieved in a smaller league with less teams (the Bulls 1st three-peat), or the ones achieved in a fully-expanded 30-team league where weaker players make the league (Bulls 2nd three-peat and every ring since)?
.


equal records between different eras doesnt equal the same competition


are the 2015 atlanta hawks that went 60-22 better than the 2001 lakers that went 56-26



infact. records dont say shit even when theyre 2 teams from the same season

[Elosha]

it didn't have to be Rodman - it could've been Horace Grant - MJ 3-peated with Horace too.. this is proof that you guys overrate Rodman's value and replaceability.



No they aren't - MJ's efficiency in 1995 regular season and postseason are FAR worse than his other years.. His PER was 22... His ORtg was 109... These numbers are ridiculous for Jordan.



Exacty - jelling was the most important thing because the Bulls 1996 roster was NOT a 72-win roster based on talent - numerous teams had more talent, which proves the Bulls won based on superior chemistry:


.............Bulls PPG in 1996:


................ RS.......... PO

Jordan...... 30.4........ 30.7
Pippen...... 19.1........ 16.9
Kukoc....... 13.1........ 10.8
Longley...... 9.1.......... 8.4
Harper....... 7.4.......... 8.8
Rodman..... 5.5.......... 7.5
S Kerr........ 8.4......... 6.8
Wenngton... 5.3.......... 3.0

Also, the superior chemistry of the team was based on the triangle - but the dominance of the triangle cannot be realized without player capable of getting 30 ppg WITHIN the triangle - MJ, Shaq and Kobe all averaged 30 ppg+ during their championship years and runs.. The triangle also requires a dominant post presence (MJ, Shaq, Pau).

Huh, I see you changed quite a bit from your original response to my post. Whatever... You're misinterpreting some of what I state. I said the Bulls were missing an adequate power forward in 95 and that they added Rodman in 1996. I actually agree that Horace could have provided similar impact at the 4 position, but obviously we both know Horace or Rodman were excellent fits with the Bulls. Rodman may have been a bit more of what they needed in the second threepeat, but Horace would have been great too. So I'm not "overrating" Rodman at all, I'm simply pointing out that it was good for the Bulls to acquire a power forward of Rodman's stature. Good thing Jordan and Phil could keep Rodman under control, unlike other teams he played for.

What I meant by stats being misleading is that Jordan put up some very big games both against Charlotte and Orlando in 95 but he couldn't sustain it. And as you rightly point out, the advanced stats show a marked decline from his usual standards of excellence. He wasn't consistent, because he wasn't in prime game condition and he wasn't really fully integrated with the team. The eye test truly backs up the advanced stats in this case.

It's really remarkable how quickly it came together in 96. I don't believe any other GOAT candidate could have ushered in the same degree of excellence in 96 as Jordan did. The team jelled at an astronomical rate of success, and proved it was no fluke by winning 69 games the following year.

[97 bulls]

I think what happened was a combination of things. Add Jordan, an improved Kukoc, an upgrade from Grant to Rodman. And the added Chemistry. And you get 70+ wins

[Da_Realist]

Huh, I see you changed quite a bit from your original response to my post. Whatever... You're misinterpreting some of what I state. I said the Bulls were missing an adequate power forward in 95 and that they added Rodman in 1996. I actually agree that Horace could have provided similar impact at the 4 position, but obviously we both know Horace or Rodman were excellent fits with the Bulls. Rodman may have been a bit more of what they needed in the second threepeat, but Horace would have been great too. So I'm not "overrating" Rodman at all, I'm simply pointing out that it was good for the Bulls to acquire a power forward of Rodman's stature. Good thing Jordan and Phil could keep Rodman under control, unlike other teams he played for.

What I meant by stats being misleading is that Jordan put up some very big games both against Charlotte and Orlando in 95 but he couldn't sustain it. And as you rightly point out, the advanced stats show a marked decline from his usual standards of excellence. He wasn't consistent, because he wasn't in prime game condition and he wasn't really fully integrated with the team. The eye test truly backs up the advanced stats in this case.

It's really remarkable how quickly it came together in 96. I don't believe any other GOAT candidate could have ushered in the same degree of excellence in 96 as Jordan did. The team jelled at an astronomical rate of success, and proved it was no fluke by winning 69 games the following year.

Agreed with everything you said, but you're missing one thing -- that defense. They suffocated opponents. Long, quick, physical, versatile, smart and determined out on the perimeter, they just made it difficult for teams to even start their offense. And the defense grew smarter the more times they played an opponent. They closed off the ring and forced teams to play in a small box. Teams couldn't score. Never a night off. It kept them in games even when they struggled offensively.

[97 bulls]

Huh, I see you changed quite a bit from your original response to my post. Whatever... You're misinterpreting some of what I state. I said the Bulls were missing an adequate power forward in 95 and that they added Rodman in 1996. I actually agree that Horace could have provided similar impact at the 4 position, but obviously we both know Horace or Rodman were excellent fits with the Bulls. Rodman may have been a bit more of what they needed in the second threepeat, but Horace would have been great too. So I'm not "overrating" Rodman at all, I'm simply pointing out that it was good for the Bulls to acquire a power forward of Rodman's stature. Good thing Jordan and Phil could keep Rodman under control, unlike other teams he played for.

What I meant by stats being misleading is that Jordan put up some very big games both against Charlotte and Orlando in 95 but he couldn't sustain it. And as you rightly point out, the advanced stats show a marked decline from his usual standards of excellence. He wasn't consistent, because he wasn't in prime game condition and he wasn't really fully integrated with the team. The eye test truly backs up the advanced stats in this case.

It's really remarkable how quickly it came together in 96. I don't believe any other GOAT candidate could have ushered in the same degree of excellence in 96 as Jordan did. The team jelled at an astronomical rate of success, and proved it was no fluke by winning 69 games the following year.
Very true. Just shows how great the 94-98 Bulls were. Even in 95. That team was on pace to win 44 games before Jordan and without Grant or Rodman. Theres not a doubt that they win 53-56 games with either of those two there. And they were on a 60 win pace when Jordan returned.

[3ball]

Horace could've provided similar impact as Rodman at the 4 position


Exactly.. Btw, remember that Horace was an 11/8 player - that was his average alongside MJ and for his career.. So that's all Jordan needed at the PF to 3-peat.. And his teams with Horace were supposedly less talented than his 2nd three-peat teams..

But I think Horace > 1996-1998 Rodman.. A far better play-finisher, including elbow jumper.... Horace was all-star in 1995, while Rodman's last all-star appearance was 1992.





It's really remarkable how quickly it came together in 96. I don't believe any other GOAT candidate could have ushered in the same degree of excellence in 96 as Jordan did.


To people in Chicago at the time, it wasn't a surprise how quickly the team came together - the organization had recently 3-peated and had a ton of confidence/swagger, just like any organization that had just won 3 rings..

Furthermore, there was 3-peat know-how within the coaching staff and organization, and the top 2 players had mastered a strategically superior offense.. This type of laser-focus at the top of the organization and MJ/Scottie's 3-peat mastery of the triangle steamlined the entire process for low ppg role players like Rodman, Kukoc, and Kerr.

Anyone that saw the first 3-peat knew that players like Grant, Paxson and Armstrong were replaceable role players within the triangle - and that's no different from any role player on any team.. Replaceability is part of the definition of "role" player.... Otoh, Pippen was less replaceable, while MJ was the difference between 2nd round and 3-peat.
.

[97 bulls]

Exactly.. Btw, remember that Horace was an 11/8 player - that was his average alongside MJ and for his career.. So that's all Jordan needed at the PF to 3-peat.. And his teams with Horace were supposedly less talented than his 2nd three-peat teams..

But I think Horace > 1996-1998 Rodman.. A far better play-finisher, including elbow jumper.... Horace was all-star in 1995, while Rodman's last all-star appearance was 1992.



To people in Chicago at the time, it wasn't a surprise how quickly the team came together - the organization had recently 3-peated and had a ton of confidence/swagger, just like any organization that had just won 3 rings..

Furthermore, there was 3-peat know-how within the coaching staff and organization, and the top 2 players had mastered a strategically superior offense.. This type of laser-focus at the top of the organization and MJ/Scottie's 3-peat mastery of the triangle steamlined the entire process for low ppg role players like Rodman, Kukoc, and Kerr.

Anyone that saw the first 3-peat knew that players like Grant, Paxson and Armstrong were replaceable role players within the triangle - and that's no different from any role player on any team.. Replaceability is part of the definition of "role" player.... Otoh, Pippen was less replaceable, while MJ was the difference between 2nd round and 3-peat.
.
All players are replaceable. Some players roles are just harder to replace. Regardless. All players must do their job. Why trivialize this? If Kerr and Paxson missed their shots like Kyle Korver did in 2011, you'd be repeatedly making threads about him.

[dhsilv]

Neither can Korver.


At the most elementary, basketball is broken down in three facets. Offense, Defense, and Rebounding. Rodman is one of the greatest at two.

Korver is a much better defender than Kerr due mostly to being bigger adn stronger and not being asked to guard fast point guards, but still he's far better. He's also better at small things like setting screens.

Kerr started 30 games his whole career. Korver is even if you don't respect the all star game, he's a legit NBA starter on a good team.

Now just to be clear Kerr one 4 nba titles, was a great role player, and played over 900 nba games. He was not a scrub!

[dhsilv]

Pippen had two HUGE roles on the second repeat which don't really lend themselves to traditional stats.

1. He was the primary ball handler and initiated the offense. Keep in mind that the triangle is not going to reward that role with assist as there are normally additional passes once it is setup. Now at the same time this role is important it is not as valuable as a more traditional point guard role on other teams.
2. He was just an exceptional defensive player.

The problem is very few stats do a good job of capturing these elements. Since 3ball is either blind or never actually saw the bulls play (I'm seriously wondering) I can't really illustrate pippen's play and I'm not going to spend a few hours on youtube. Plus I have the 96 finals videos on my other computer and I kinda hate screen capping videos.

That said what was interesting was just glancing at some of pippen's playoff stats. They're actually pretty interesting. As I've said on the boards before I don't really like playoff stats due to difficulty of schedule not being consistent, playing fewer teams, etc. Still they generally match what we saw.

So no surprise but Pippen shot poorly in the playoffs with TS% of 47.3 52.6 and 50 the three years.

Remember the primary ball handler role? He did this with only 2.3 2.9 and 2.4 turnovers a game.

PER does not like Pippen which given the shooting is somewhat believable. 19.4 18.1 and 19.5. Generally an all star in the regular season is going to be 20, whoever most players do drop off in the post season (though the top tier guys generally go the other way but this is in large part to higher usage imo).

Then we have WS/48 which really liked Pippen in 96 (I'm honestly not sure why I'm talking about the playoffs in a thread about the regular season but I guess I let someone distract me). .195 .145 and .166. 96's stats are pretty exceptional. The other years are nothing to write home about, but well above average.

It should be pointed out he lead the playoffs in DWS in 96

Now as I'm sure most know, BPM and the aggregated VORP is our "best" single stat tool without having play by play data (and the 90's are choppy with that). And again small sample sizes are a problem. Still I rarely see huge issues.

anyway what jumps off the page is Pippen had a BPM of 9.3 in the 96 playoffs which is exceptional! It was higher than Jordans as was his total VORP of 2.1

What the VORP stats are showing or at least what I assume they are capturing based on the on off data is that Pippen being on the court made the bulls a LOT better and it seems to reason that it was due to his ball handling and defensive skill sets which often are generally harder to capture.

[3ball]

2. Pippen was just an exceptional defensive player.

The problem is very few stats do a good job of capturing these elements. Since 3ball is either blind or never actually saw the bulls play



Pippen couldn't handle quick wings with good handle like Hill or Kobe:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-10-2015/NZrhCv.gif

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-09-2015/5FXjSn.gif



Here's Kobe shaking his head after breaking Pippen BADLY in 99' - Pippen is joke to him:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-10-2015/DtKoPr.gif..



Otoh, Jordan had no problem stuffing Kobe's crossover in 98' ASG:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-10-2015/EStPHq.gif


The reason MJ was so much better defending quick ballhandlers like Hill, Kobe or Westbrook is because he was a 2-guard, and was the frequently the primary, all-game defender on quick point guards.

For example, MJ was matched up against Gary Payton from the TIP-OFF in Game 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meL62CUehuw&t=0m48s) and Game 5 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFiqeJcgXfg) of the NBA Finals and was the main defender throughout the game.. MJ was also the main defender and matched up from the tip-off against Isiah Thomas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9MfhFFE7fc&t=0m28s) and Rod Strickland (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3JqY3CECW8).. And we all know he was matched up from tip-off against Magic, when he guarded Magic for 14 of 20 quarters (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11713075&postcount=45) (70%) in the 1991 Finals.

MJ's far greater experience playing quick ballhandling guards and his superior athleticism made him a better perimeter defender than Pippen..

[Gileraracer]

Pippen couldn't handle quick wings with good handle like Hill or Kobe:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-10-2015/NZrhCv.gif




36 year old Pippen vs 22 year old Kobe. Couldn't find a better example :applause:

[JohnFreeman]

36 year old Pippen vs 22 year old Kobe. Couldn't find a better example :applause:
Was just about to point this out

[3ball]

Was just about to point this out



Pippen can't handle Grant off-the-dribble - he can't stay in front:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-09-2015/5FXjSn.gif



But MJ can - he stays in front of Grant every step of the way and forces wild shot:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-10-2015/n1LWjI.gif


There's a million of Pippen getting destroyed - here, watch Jamal Mashburn drop 50 points, all on Pippen..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRR3Jx8RvoI


Guys went off for big games on Pippen all the time.. But guys rarely went off for a big game on MJ... Certainly never 50 points.. I think Drexler had 2 games of 42 and 38 points on MJ, but MJ dropped 50 both games, so....
.

[90sgoat]

3Ball is right about this one.

Pippen really was not a good shooter, in fact he was a poor mid range shooter. Shot a decent 3 ball, had a good post game, but most of his points came on drives and he was elite in the open floor. This is fact, Pippen was a demonstrable poor mid range shooter.

I don't see how this can be refuted, he simply was not a good shooter.

[dhsilv]

3Ball is right about this one.

Pippen really was not a good shooter, in fact he was a poor mid range shooter. Shot a decent 3 ball, had a good post game, but most of his points came on drives and he was elite in the open floor. This is fact, Pippen was a demonstrable poor mid range shooter.

I don't see how this can be refuted, he simply was not a good shooter.
Other than nobody is claiming he was a great shooter.... He was the best three point shooter on the starting roster which wasn't ideal.

[bond10]

Pippen can't handle Grant off-the-dribble - he can't stay in front:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-09-2015/5FXjSn.gif



But MJ can - he stays in front of Grant every step of the way and forces wild shot:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-10-2015/n1LWjI.gif


There's a million of Pippen getting destroyed - here, watch Jamal Mashburn drop 50 points, all on Pippen..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRR3Jx8RvoI


Guys went off for big games on Pippen all the time.. But guys rarely went off for a big game on MJ... Certainly never 50 points.. I think Drexler had 2 games of 42 and 38 points on MJ, but MJ dropped 50 both games, so....
.


Love this guy's posts. Those gifs pretty much back up everything he said...Same guy with the SAME crossover, but Pippen couldn't stay with him.

Good grief Jordan was quick in that gif...

[3ball]

1. Pippen was the primary ball handler and initiated the offense.


^^^ Myth - Pippen was a basic ballhandler, not a pg-level creator.. Pippen's "offense initiation" consisted of tossing the ball to MJ so he could playmake from the post or wing - the offense ran through MJ.. If Pippen was lucky, he'd rack up an assist just by tossing it to MJ, since MJ could score so quick.. That's why there's very little footage of Pippen passing highlights or dimes - he couldn't create off-the-dribble like MJ.

This shouldn't be a surprise - MJ was a guard and the team's best ballhandler and creator, so he handled the ball the most.. Pippen's offense initiation is merely *noticed and pointed out more* because it comes from the forward position, where ballhandling is more of a novelty.

It should be noted that MJ assisted on a higher percentage of teammate FG's during the first and second 3-peat - this is statistical fact (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11713019&postcount=44).. Again, don't be surprised - MJ was a guard and the teams' best ballhandler/creator, so it was standard.





I don't really like playoff stats due to difficulty of schedule not being consistent, playing fewer teams, etc. Still they generally match what we saw.

So no surprise but Pippen shot poorly in the playoffs with TS% of 47.3 52.6 and 50 the three years.. :facepalm


Pippen's stats during the 1996-1998 playoffs were 17/7/5 on 40.8%... That's horrible specifically because of HOW LONG the bad offense lasted.

For three straight years during the 2nd three-peat, Pippen's overall stats and many playoffs series were the worst of all time for a 2nd option (such as 1996 and 1998 Finals, among many others).. This isn't excusable..





Remember the primary ball handler role? He did this with only 2.3 2.9 and 2.4 turnovers a game.


Who cares - Pippen handled the ball far less than MJ because he was a forward and a far worse ballhandler/creator than MJ.. Btw, here's the gap between MJ and Pippen in 1996:

JORDAN IN 1996 PLAYOFFS: 30.7 ppg.. 45.9 fg.. 56.4 ts.. 123 ortg.. 26.7 PER.. 0.306 ws/48
PIPPEN. IN 1996 PLAYOFFS: 16.9 ppg.. 39.0 fg.. 47.3 ts.. 111 ortg.. 19.4 PER.. 0.195 ws/48


Also, the stats that measure Pippen's "impact" are irrelevant because they reflect his impact ALONGSIDE Jordan - the calculation of Pippen's impact assumes Jordan's 31 ppg on 47% is already in place as the foundation of the offense.. Without MJ's goat production setting the foundation for the offense, Pippen's impact would be much different.. This is just one of the reasons impact stats like VORP and BPM are garbage and result in crazy determinations - i.e. Baron Davis has higher BPM than Kareem, Duncan, and Shaq.. Drexler has higher VORP than Shaq and Duncan... Horry and Hornacek > Ewing, Durant and CP3.... and on, and on, and on.. There are more of these than actual correct assessments.

Also, offensive rebounds aren't shown above, but Pippen's are really high, and high offensive rebounding rate significantly increases a team's ORtg because of the extra possession - this is statistical fact.. So Pippen's great scavenger ability artificially increases his impact stats.. He needs the offensive rebounds too because he can't shoot!!!... He's a horrible shooter, which is why he was frequently anemic offensively.





PER does not like Pippen which given the shooting is somewhat believable. 19.4 18.1 and 19.5. Generally an all star in the regular season is going to be 20, whoever most players do drop off in the post season (though the top tier guys generally go the other way but this is in large part to higher usage imo).

Then we have WS/48 which really liked Pippen in 96 (I'm honestly not sure why I'm talking about the playoffs in a thread about the regular season but I guess I let someone distract me). .195 .145 and .166. 96's stats are pretty exceptional. The other years are nothing to write home about, but well above average.


:rolleyes: :facepalm

More ****ing excuses for potty pippen... unbelievable.. it sounds so weak..

Btw, the reason why PER "doesn't like" Pippen, is because he CAN'T SHOOT!!!!.. Mechanical, stone hands touch... Not as bad as Dwight Howard, but not far off..

Look at his stats during the 2nd three-peat at the higher competition level (playoffs) - they're horrible - many of his series FOR THREE STRAIGHT YEARS were literally the worst of all time for a 2nd option.





It should be pointed out he lead the playoffs in DWS in 96


But Pippen was a defensive specialist... Anyone who shoots 34% in Finals but plays good defense, is a defensive specialist.. So it's easier for him focus on defense when there's zero burden or standard for him to play to on offense.

Look at Pippen's playoff stats from the 2nd three-peat - he was NOT an elite offensive player, or anywhere near - he couldn't shoot!!!!.. Again, he had mechanical stone hands, not a soft touch.

Pippen's horrible offense is why MJ had more clutch moments during that 2nd three-peat than any other player has in their entire careers.. He had to carry that team repeatedly... Who cares about the occasional big game from some supporting cast member.. Jordan's AVERAGES tower above his teammates more than any other star player.





Now as I'm sure most know, BPM and the aggregated VORP is our "best" single stat tool without having play by play data (and the 90's are choppy with that). And again small sample sizes are a problem. Still I rarely see huge issues.

anyway what jumps off the page is Pippen had a BPM of 9.3 in the 96 playoffs which is exceptional! It was higher than Jordans as was his total VORP of 2.1


Again, the stats that measure Pippen's "impact" will reflect his impact alongside MJ - the calculation of Pippen's impact assumes Jordan's 31 ppg on 47% is already in place as the foundation of the offense.. Without MJ's goat production setting the foundation for the offense, Pippen's impact would be much different..

Get it?... So those stats are garbage, and that's why they result in crazy determinations - i.e. Baron Davis has higher BPM than Kareem, Hakeem, Duncan.. Drexler has higher VORP than Shaq and Duncan... Horry and Hornacek > Ewing, Durant and CP3.... and on, and on, and on.. There are more of these than actual correct assessments.

Also, VORP and BPM are based on the very box score stats like ts% and ppg that you've been trying to downplay for Pippen because they're so horrible.. You're stats are simply wrong and can't be used to compare players.

[dhsilv]

^^^ Myth - Pippen was a basic ballhandler, not a pg-level creator.. Pippen's "offense initiation" consisted of tossing the ball to MJ so he could playmake from the post or wing - the offense ran through MJ.. If Pippen was lucky, he'd rack up an assist just by tossing it to MJ, since MJ could score so quick.. That's why there's very little footage of Pippen passing highlights or dimes - he couldn't create off-the-dribble like MJ.

This shouldn't be a surprise - MJ was a guard and the team's best ballhandler and creator, so he handled the ball the most.. Pippen's offense initiation is merely *noticed and pointed out more* because it comes from the forward position, where ballhandling is more of a novelty.

It should be noted that MJ assisted on a higher percentage of teammate FG's during the first and second 3-peat - this is statistical fact (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11713019&postcount=44).. Again, don't be surprised - MJ was a guard and the teams' best ballhandler/creator, so it was standard.



Pippen's stats during the 1996-1998 playoffs were 17/7/5 on 40.8%... That's horrible specifically because of HOW LONG the bad offense lasted.

For three straight years during the 2nd three-peat, Pippen's overall stats and many playoffs series were the worst of all time for a 2nd option (such as 1996 and 1998 Finals, among many others).. This isn't excusable..



Who cares - Pippen handled the ball far less than MJ because he was a forward and a far worse ballhandler/creator than MJ.. Btw, here's the gap between MJ and Pippen in 1996:

JORDAN IN 1996 PLAYOFFS: 30.7 ppg.. 45.9 fg.. 56.4 ts.. 123 ortg.. 26.7 PER.. 0.306 ws/48
PIPPEN. IN 1996 PLAYOFFS: 16.9 ppg.. 39.0 fg.. 47.3 ts.. 111 ortg.. 19.4 PER.. 0.195 ws/48


Also, the stats that measure Pippen's "impact" are irrelevant because they reflect his impact ALONGSIDE Jordan - the calculation of Pippen's impact assumes Jordan's 31 ppg on 47% is already in place as the foundation of the offense.. Without MJ's goat production setting the foundation for the offense, Pippen's impact would be much different.. This is just one of the reasons impact stats like VORP and BPM are garbage and result in crazy determinations - i.e. Baron Davis has higher BPM than Kareem, Duncan, and Shaq.. Drexler has higher VORP than Shaq and Duncan... Horry and Hornacek > Ewing, Durant and CP3.... and on, and on, and on.. There are more of these than actual correct assessments.

Also, offensive rebounds aren't shown above, but Pippen's are really high, and high offensive rebounding rate significantly increases a team's ORtg because of the extra possession - this is statistical fact.. So Pippen's great scavenger ability artificially increases his impact stats.. He needs the offensive rebounds too because he can't shoot!!!... He's a horrible shooter, which is why he was frequently anemic offensively.



:rolleyes: :facepalm

More ****ing excuses for potty pippen... unbelievable.. it sounds so weak..

Btw, the reason why PER "doesn't like" Pippen, is because he CAN'T SHOOT!!!!.. Mechanical, stone hands touch... Not as bad as Dwight Howard, but not far off..

Look at his stats during the 2nd three-peat at the higher competition level (playoffs) - they're horrible - many of his series FOR THREE STRAIGHT YEARS were literally the worst of all time for a 2nd option.



But Pippen was a defensive specialist... Anyone who shoots 34% in Finals but plays good defense, is a defensive specialist.. So it's easier for him focus on defense when there's zero burden or standard for him to play to on offense.

Look at Pippen's playoff stats from the 2nd three-peat - he was NOT an elite offensive player, or anywhere near - he couldn't shoot!!!!.. Again, he had mechanical stone hands, not a soft touch.

Pippen's horrible offense is why MJ had more clutch moments during that 2nd three-peat than any other player has in their entire careers.. He had to carry that team repeatedly... Who cares about the occasional big game from some supporting cast member.. Jordan's AVERAGES tower above his teammates more than any other star player.



Again, the stats that measure Pippen's "impact" will reflect his impact alongside MJ - the calculation of Pippen's impact assumes Jordan's 31 ppg on 47% is already in place as the foundation of the offense.. Without MJ's goat production setting the foundation for the offense, Pippen's impact would be much different..

Get it?... So those stats are garbage, and that's why they result in crazy determinations - i.e. Baron Davis has higher BPM than Kareem, Hakeem, Duncan.. Drexler has higher VORP than Shaq and Duncan... Horry and Hornacek > Ewing, Durant and CP3.... and on, and on, and on.. There are more of these than actual correct assessments.

Also, VORP and BPM are based on the very box score stats like ts% and ppg that you've been trying to downplay for Pippen because they're so horrible.. You're stats are simply wrong and can't be used to compare players.


Can you rewrite this without doing something stupid like comparing Pippen and Jordan?

Thanks! Also can you read up on stats before you make stupid comments? Oh and cite the versions used so if I get drunk tonight and want to argue with stupid comments I'll not have to look all over to find where you're making stuff up from?

Thanks!

Oh yeah, and when you rewrite it, can you not repeat what I already said but write it in an argument style as if I hadn't already said it?

[dhsilv]

Love this guy's posts. Those gifs pretty much back up everything he said...Same guy with the SAME crossover, but Pippen couldn't stay with him.

Good grief Jordan was quick in that gif...

I see pippen getting beat with no help defender and I see Jordan getting beat with a help defender....

[97 bulls]

I see pippen getting beat with no help defender and I see Jordan getting beat with a help defender....
That's exactly what I see. And its one play in game that started out as a blowout.

[97 bulls]

Love this guy's posts. Those gifs pretty much back up everything he said...Same guy with the SAME crossover, but Pippen couldn't stay with him.

Good grief Jordan was quick in that gif...
It was one play. Good grief. So if I post a clip of Jordan missing a shot it means hes not a great scorer???? What kind of ignorant shit is this????

[90sgoat]

Love this guy's posts. Those gifs pretty much back up everything he said...Same guy with the SAME crossover, but Pippen couldn't stay with him.

Good grief Jordan was quick in that gif...

Yep, Jordan had amazing foot speed on defense.