Teams that can win 55 games WITHOUT star player (low impact stars)

[ELITEpower23]

Kawhi Spurs
2011 Spurs won 61 without Kawhi

Kawhi Raptors
2018 Raptors won 59 games without Kawhi (And had a 60+ win pace in 2019 when he did not play)

Jordan Bulls
1994 Bulls won 55 games without Jordan

Durant Warriors
2016 Warriors won 73 games without Durant

[ArbitraryWater]

2014 Spurs won 62 games with Kawhi playing 29 minutes for 13 ppg

[LAmbruh]

2017 Celtics - no Kyrie (51 wins)

2018 Cavs - no Kyrie (50 wins)

2020 Celtics - no Kyrie (50+ win pace)

[ELITEpower23]

2014 Spurs won 62 games with Kawhi playing 29 minutes for 13 ppg

Bingo.

He's a nice piece. But that's it. They can still achieve a lot without him. I'm curious to see what other "stars" had teams that could win 55 without them.

[ELITEpower23]

2017 Celtics - no Kyrie (51 wins)

2018 Cavs - no Kyrie (50 wins)

2020 Celtics - no Kyrie (50+ win pace)

I see a trend

:hammertime: :lebronamazed:

[Docs Orders]

Lakers with Shaq/No Kobe: 36-8


Lakers with Kobe/No Shaq: 53-45

[Roundball_Rock]

Lakers with Shaq/No Kobe: 36-8


Lakers with Kobe/No Shaq: 53-45

The numbers are similar for the Heat with Shaq, without Wade and with Wade, without Shaq. Shaq is an all-time great impact player.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

If regular season is that valuable to you, LeBron should never be considered goat level. None of LeBron's teams have ever been #1 offense ranked. How come Dirk can lead a #1 offense in regular season with Josh Howard? You are either overrating regular season or overrating LeBron.

[Roundball_Rock]

If regular season is that valuable to you, LeBron should never be considered goat level. None of LeBron's teams have ever been #1 offense ranked. How come Dirk can lead a #1 offense in regular season with Josh Howard? You are either overrating regular season or overrating LeBron.

That ignores the obvious: what that regular season performance would be without LeBron. There is a reason Miami isn't on the list of teams mentioned here.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

That ignores the obvious: what that regular season performance would be without LeBron. There is a reason Miami isn't on the list of teams mentioned here.

So LeBron just needed Josh Howard huh? You still failed to tell me why Dirk can lead #1 offenses but LeBron can't do it.

[Roundball_Rock]

So LeBron just needed Josh Howard huh? You still failed to tell me why Dirk can lead #1 offenses but LeBron can't do it.

When was Dallas #1?

[Stanley Kobrick]

https://yt3.ggpht.com/4Yhb0N_n9O_Errhk9aqsHqu1bl4Nu2qkivOJgEwIPjTGc3oE6r Ll7uBKR1SSRv90iJW28DyQss1j=s640-nd-rwa

[ELITEpower23]

If regular season is that valuable to you, LeBron should never be considered goat level. None of LeBron's teams have ever been #1 offense ranked. How come Dirk can lead a #1 offense in regular season with Josh Howard? You are either overrating regular season or overrating LeBron.

Are you really not getting the theme of the thread? I can spell it out for you slowly, as you seem a bit confused.

Lebron never played for a super team. LeBron's teams looked super BECAUSE of him. But his teams were not great.
KD, MJ, and Kawhi played on super teams. They teams were great with our without them.
Is it sinking in better?

[ELITEpower23]

That ignores the obvious: what that regular season performance would be without LeBron. There is a reason Miami isn't on the list of teams mentioned here.

Yeah, like how does he not get the point?


Me: LeBron's team sucks without him. Other stars had far better teams

HBK: SO WHY DIDN'T LEBRON DO AS GOOD

Me: Um..."LeBron's teams suck without him." :lol

[ELITEpower23]

Lakers with Shaq/No Kobe: 36-8


Lakers with Kobe/No Shaq: 53-45

Yikes

Dat ShaqImpact

[HBK_Kliq_2]

When was Dallas #1?

2005-06 regular season via basketball reference

[ELITEpower23]

2005-06 regular season via basketball reference

All of Kawhi's teams win 55 games without him. Response? :lol Or running away now?

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Are you really not getting the theme of the thread? I can spell it out for you slowly, as you seem a bit confused.

Lebron never played for a super team. LeBron's teams looked super BECAUSE of him. But his teams were not great.
KD, MJ, and Kawhi played on super teams. They teams were great with our without them.
Is it sinking in better?

In Miami LeBron went on a team with a player who already won a finals MVP in Wade and all-star Bosh. Clearly a super team.

2016 LeBron had all nba player Kevin Love and all-star Irving who averaged 27PPG in finals and made the biggest shot in game 7. Another super team.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

All of Kawhi's teams win 55 games without him. Response? :lol Or running away now?

Clipper had Gallo and also Harris til all-star break. Two 20PPG scorers and they still didn't win 50 games. Everything about them was slight above average at best.

You add Kawhi with a inconsistent injured Paul George, they are top 5 in offense/defense/SRS

As far as spurs, they were too busy being the grizzles bitch before drafting kawhi. 1st round losing to 8th seed and Duncan averaged like 12 points hahaha

[ELITEpower23]

In Miami LeBron went on a team with a player who already won a finals MVP in Wade and all-star Bosh. Clearly a super team.

2016 LeBron had all nba player Kevin Love and all-star Irving who averaged 27PPG in finals and made the biggest shot in game 7. Another super team.

2016 actually had only 1 all star and 1 all nba player on the entire team. His name? LeBron James. So you're mistaken (which is your trend)

Irving is a good, not great. Catch up on current basketball. Watch his last playoff series in Boston.

[ELITEpower23]

Clipper had Gallo and also Harris til all-star break. Two 20PPG scorers and they still didn't win 50 games. Everything about them was slight above average at best.

You add Kawhi with a inconsistent injured Paul George, they are top 5 in offense/defense/SRS

As far as spurs, they were too busy being the grizzles bitch before drafting kawhi. 1st round losing to 8th seed and Duncan averaged like 12 points hahaha

Are you talking about the same 2019 Clippers that took a Fully Loaded 2019 Warriors to 6 games? And then that Clippers team added Kawhi and PG13 for free (draft picks) and you're wondering why they improved? Clueless.

[Roundball_Rock]

2005-06 regular season via basketball reference

That is interesting. I assumed it would be when Nash or Kidd were on the time.

FWIW Miami went from 5th in offense in 14' to 21st in 15'. Miami's 15' numbers mask how bad that roster was without LeBron because they traded for Dragic at the deadline and Whiteside emerged as a full-time starter in late January. They did a lot better in the second half of the season as a result. Scoring wise they improved from 96.6 to 98.4. So the actual falloff of the team was much worse that looks less because of the infusion of talent made the team better (they then added Joe Johnson in 16').


In Miami LeBron went on a team with a player who already won a finals MVP in Wade and all-star Bosh. Clearly a super team.

So what happened when LeBron left then?

Real super teams are teams that are so strong they can succeed without their best player.


Clipper had Gallo and also Harris til all-star break. Two 20PPG scorers and they still didn't win 50 games. Everything about them was slight above average at best.

You add Kawhi with a inconsistent injured Paul George, they are top 5 in offense/defense/SRS

They didn't win 50--they won 48. Their improvement with George, Kawhi added is similar to Miami's with LeBron, Bosh joining the team. 47-48 wins to 56-58 (they were on pace for 56; Miami won 58).

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Are you talking about the same 2019 Clippers that took a Fully Loaded 2019 Warriors to 6 games? And then that Clippers team added Kawhi and PG13 for free (draft picks) and you're wondering why they improved? Clueless.

They surprised warriors with a 35 point comeback or whatever but it was still a 1st round knockout. Regular season clippers 2019 offensive rating, defense rating, SRS were nothing to write home about.

Irving was 1st option with Celtics and led them to 50 wins? How does that prove LeBron carried him. 2nd option irving made the biggest shot in the finals and average 27 PPG. Kawhi never had a 20PPG scorer in 3/4 series and made the biggest shots instead of his sidekick.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

That is interesting. I assumed it would be when Nash or Kidd were on the time.

FWIW Miami went from 5th in offense in 14' to 21st in 15'. Miami's 15' numbers mask how bad that roster was without LeBron because they traded for Dragic at the deadline and Whiteside emerged as a full-time starter in late January. They did a lot better in the second half of the season as a result. Scoring wise they improved from 96.6 to 98.4. So the actual falloff of the team was much worse that looks less because of the infusion of talent made the team better (they then added Joe Johnson in 16').



So what happened when LeBron left then?

Real super teams are teams that are so strong they can succeed without their best player.



They didn't win 50--they won 48. Their improvement with George, Kawhi added is similar to Miami's with LeBron, Bosh joining the team. 47-48 wins to 56-58 (they were on pace for 56; Miami won 58).

Heat offense with Wade taking just as many shots as LeBron in 2011 was top 3.

LeBron took full control in 2012 with Wade only playing 49 games and the offense drops all the way to 8th.

LeBron had it easy in 2012 leading 8th best offense and getting away with it.

2013 finals heat have a worse offensive rating then spurs. 1 ray Allen shot away from losing series 4-2.

Miami run by LeBron was overrated.

[Roundball_Rock]

Irving was 1st option with Celtics and led them to 50 wins? How does that prove LeBron carried him

Irving "led" Boston to being worse with him than without him. The same thing happened in Brooklyn. That speaks volumes.

People keep hyping the win total for Boston with Kyrie while ignoring 1) they were better without him 2) they won 53 the year before with IT (55 in 18'). Isn't Kyrie supposed to>>>IT and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Terry Rozier or Dinwiddie?


Heat offense with Wade taking just as many shots as LeBron in 2011 was top 3.

The offense sucked without LeBron. All you guys care about is individual scoring. Playmaking is a key part of offense. LeBron was by far the more important offensive player, shots be damned.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Irving "led" Boston to being worse with him than without him. The same thing happened in Brooklyn. That speaks volumes.

People keep hyping the win total for Boston with Kyrie while ignoring 1) they were better without him 2) they won 53 the year before with IT (55 in 18'). Isn't Kyrie supposed to>>>IT and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Terry Rozier or Dinwiddie?



The offense sucked without LeBron. All you guys care about is individual scoring. Playmaking is a key part of offense. LeBron was by far the more important offensive player, shots be damned.

Irving as a 1st option scorer isn't what you want but he was still decent at that as proved in Boston. Irving as a 2nd option scorer is an absolute luxury and instant super team.

Why did Heat offense drop all the way to 8th in 2012 when Wade missed time? 8th is bad for a title team, he was lucky it was a weak year or no ring.

[Roundball_Rock]

Irving as a 1st option scorer isn't what you want but he was still decent at that as proved in Boston

They played better with Rozier when Kyrie was there and with Kemba when Kyrie left.


Why did Heat offense drop all the way to 8th in 2012 when Wade missed time?

Who knows. He missed time every year. They were 3rd and 5th in offense the next two years with him missing time. There is always going to be some yearly variance.

What was their offensive production in the games Wade missed? That would tell us something. What we do know is the Heat's W-L record didn't change without Wade.

[light]

Pippen was so good in 1994 that he turned Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong into All-Stars. Talk about making your teammates better.

Bulls record on Feb 17, 1993: 35-17 (.673, #2 in East)
Bulls record on Feb 17, 1994: 34-14 (.708, #1 in East)

https://s7.gifyu.com/images/Pippen-Best.png

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen was so good in 1994 that he turned Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong into All-Stars. Talk about making your teammates better.

Pippen, Grant, Armstrong, Kerr*, Myers, and arguably also Scott Williams had the best seasons of their career in 1994. I wonder what it was about that specific season? Does anyone have any guesses?

*With the NBA 3 point line too. With the WNBA line of 1995-1997 Kerr would have scored in double digits.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

They played better with Rozier when Kyrie was there and with Kemba when Kyrie left.



Who knows. He missed time every year. They were 3rd and 5th in offense the next two years with him missing time. There is always going to be some yearly variance.

What was their offensive production in the games Wade missed? That would tell us something. What we do know is the Heat's W-L record didn't change without Wade.

2011 Wade is arguably the best player

2013 Miami has worse offensive rating then spurs in finals

2014 biggest finals loss in NBA history

So again, I fail to see the dominance besides that 2012 lockout year. Lebron's teams lacks dominance in playoffs or regular season. Zero 1st ranked offenses in regular season and worse offensive rating in finals series (2013).

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Pippen was so good in 1994 that he turned Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong into All-Stars. Talk about making your teammates better.

Bulls record on Feb 17, 1993: 35-17 (.673, #2 in East)
Bulls record on Feb 17, 1994: 34-14 (.708, #1 in East)

https://s7.gifyu.com/images/Pippen-Best.png

Popularity vote from the 3peat reputation i think. BJ definitely didn't deserve to be an all-star ever.

[Roundball_Rock]

Popularity vote from the 3peat reputation i think. BJ definitely didn't deserve to be an all-star ever.

So where were those popularity votes in every other year of his career? Also, why didn't that apply to Grant? He was not even top 10 in F voting.

1994 voting leaders for EC guards: BJ 529 k, Anderson 494 k, Price 423k

In 1995 BJ wasn't even in the top 10 for guards (basketballreference only lists the top 10). The popularity vanished overnight?

[3ball]

Irving "led" Boston to being worse with him than without him. The same thing happened in Brooklyn. That speaks volumes.

People keep hyping the win total for Boston with Kyrie while ignoring 1) they were better without him 2) they won 53 the year before with IT (55 in 18'). Isn't Kyrie supposed to>>>IT and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Terry Rozier or Dinwiddie?



The offense sucked without LeBron. All you guys care about is individual scoring. Playmaking is a key part of offense. LeBron was by far the more important offensive player, shots be damned.

With Lebron, the team is held captive in a ball-dominator brand, which kills them when the ball-dominator leaves or gets hurt

Lebron's AAU skillset doesn't allow ball movement systems that win 50+ on sheer effectiveness of their brand, aka 20' Raps, 94' Bulls, 15' Spurs, or the 15-16' Warriors without Curry (still over .500)... These are all the cutting edge brands of their era, which is required of any goat-caliber team.

[light]

Popularity vote from the 3peat reputation i think. BJ definitely didn't deserve to be an all-star ever.

Nah, I think that line of thinking is largely a product of MJ myth preservation. The Bulls kept winning because other players stepped up to fill the void created by Jordan's departure. They were playing quality team basketball at a high level and the fans rewarded the top members with votes.

Armstrong emerged as a stout leader. Over the first 20 games he averaged 19 points and 5 assists per game and by the time of the All-Star break he was averaging 16/4 on the #1 team in the East. He looked like a star and people liked him so they voted for him (in general, fans always liked Armstrong's baby-faced assassin aesthetic).

And, look, Mookie Blaylock was also an All-Star that year for the first and only time and he wasn't on the three-peat Bulls. Play well and people will vote for you.

[3ball]

Nah, I think that line of thinking is largely a product of MJ myth preservation. The Bulls kept winning because other players stepped up to fill the void created by Jordan's departure. They were playing quality team basketball at a high level and the fans rewarded the top members with votes.

Armstrong emerged as a stout leader. Over the first 20 games he averaged 19 points and 5 assists per game and by the time of the All-Star break he was averaging 16/4 on the #1 team in the East. He looked like a star and people liked him so they voted for him (in general, fans always liked Armstrong's baby-faced assassin aesthetic).

And, look, Mookie Blaylock was also an All-Star that year for the first and only time and he wasn't on the three-peat Bulls. Play well and people will vote for you.

Since when is 16/4 looking like a star?

BJ never looked like a star and people that didn't attend the games (and therefore vote) didn't think he was anything... People attending the games obviously voted for him because Da Bulls

[ELITEpower23]

They surprised warriors with a 35 point comeback or whatever but it was still a 1st round knockout. Regular season clippers 2019 offensive rating, defense rating, SRS were nothing to write home about.

Irving was 1st option with Celtics and led them to 50 wins? How does that prove LeBron carried him. 2nd option irving made the biggest shot in the finals and average 27 PPG. Kawhi never had a 20PPG scorer in 3/4 series and made the biggest shots instead of his sidekick.

Boston made the ECF in 2018 and was 1 game away from the Finals w/o Kyrie

Added him to the 2019 playoffs and lost in the ECSF

Keep up. I beg you to keep up.

[ELITEpower23]

Heat offense with Wade taking just as many shots as LeBron in 2011 was top 3.

LeBron took full control in 2012 with Wade only playing 49 games and the offense drops all the way to 8th.

LeBron had it easy in 2012 leading 8th best offense and getting away with it.

2013 finals heat have a worse offensive rating then spurs. 1 ray Allen shot away from losing series 4-2.

Miami run by LeBron was overrated.

2012 LBJ: Only player in playoffs history that averaged 30-10-5 on 50% for entire playoffs to win FMVP

2013: Faced three consecutive top 6 defenses in a row en route to chip. (ECSF, ECF, Finals) and carried the second lowest #2 option in NBA history throught playoffs. (Wade, 15.8 ppg for the entire playoffs).

Quit it

[3ball]

2012 LBJ: Only player in playoffs history that averaged 30-10-5 on 50% for entire playoffs to win FMVP

2013: Faced three consecutive top 6 defenses in a row en route to chip. (ECSF, ECF, Finals) and carried the second lowest #2 option in NBA history throught playoffs. (Wade, 15.8 ppg for the entire playoffs).

Quit it

MJ averaged 31/7/8 in 1991 > 30/10/5 with less oreb

And Pippen scored less than 13' Wade numerous times when you account for pace

13' Wade had prime Pippen stats in the Finals... Lebron never beat a good team (top 5 SRS) without great stats from sidekick

[BigShotBob]

How did Lebron lose to Dallas in 2011 with a Super Team?

[Roundball_Rock]

I think that line of thinking is largely a product of MJ myth preservation. The Bulls kept winning because other players stepped up to fill the void created by Jordan's departure. They were playing quality team basketball at a high level and the fans rewarded the top members with votes.

Exactly. The popularity argument is BS because Armstrong was never a top vote getter in any other year. He got those votes in 94' because fans rewarded his play.


And, look, Mookie Blaylock was also an All-Star that year for the first and only time and he wasn't on the three-peat Bulls.

Yup. What is the common denominator between Mookie and BJ? Both were on the 1st place team at the break (they were tied).

[Round Mound]

Horace Grant was a Top 10 Defensive PF before MJ left, It was Pippen's playmaking that made Horace and BJ All Stars. I knew how good Pippen was since 1990 and i knew he would be one of the best without MJ. Only MJ stans and dickeriders think Pippen sucks or was not a top 10 player in the 90's.

[Roundball_Rock]

Horace Grant was a Top 10 Defensive PF before MJ left, It was Pippen's playmaking that made Horace and BJ All Stars. I knew how good Pippen was since 1990 and i knew he would be one of the best without MJ. Only MJ stans and dickeriders think Pippen sucks or was not a top 10 player in the 90's.

:applause:

They are losing touch with reality. It is sad and laughable at the same time.

[3ball]

Horace Grant was a Top 10 Defensive PF before MJ left, It was Pippen's playmaking that made Horace and BJ All Stars. I knew how good Pippen was since 1990 and i knew he would be one of the best without MJ. Only MJ stans and dickeriders think Pippen sucks or was not a top 10 player in the 90's.

You're lying... All of you are

It's one big lying circle-jerk

Pippen's peak was borderline top 10 because MVP is different from player rankings.. he was #3 in MVP because his cast was weaker than most teams that year, while the 3-peat system allowed enough wins for consideration.. but he was never better than Ewing in any season - that alone makes him never higher than #8... Again, that's borderline top 10 and easily out of it when you consider Penny or Hill or Kemp or Payton

And Horace at #2 option is worse than Oakley at #2 in 88'... The difference is that the 94' Bulls had 3-peat system and know-how, so they didn't need 35/6/6/dpoy from Pippen to win 50+ like the 88' bulls needed from MJ ... 22/8/5 is enough.. Jimmy Butler numbers

[Round Mound]

You're lying... All of you are

It's one big lying circle-jerk

Pippen's peak was borderline top 10 because MVP is different from player rankings.. he was #3 in MVP because his cast was weaker than most teams that year, while the 3-peat system allowed enough wins for consideration.. but he was never better than Ewing in any season - that alone makes him never higher than #8... Again, that's borderline top 10 and easily out of it when you consider Penny or Hill or Kemp or Payton

And Horace at #2 option is worse than Oakley at #2 in 88'... The difference is that the 94' Bulls had 3-peat system and know-how, so they didn't need 35/6/6/dpoy from Pippen to win 50+ like the 88' bulls needed from MJ ... 22/8/5 is enough.. Jimmy Butler numbers

:facepalm

[3ball]

:facepalm

What year was he better than Ewing

Waiting

[ELITEpower23]

Horace Grant was a Top 10 Defensive PF before MJ left, It was Pippen's playmaking that made Horace and BJ All Stars. I knew how good Pippen was since 1990 and i knew he would be one of the best without MJ. Only MJ stans and dickeriders think Pippen sucks or was not a top 10 player in the 90's.

Big facts

[3ball]

Pippen's playmaking that made Horace and BJ All Stars.





APG

Pippen 1992... 7.0
Pippen 1993... 6.3
Pippen 1994... 5.6


Assists per 100

Pippen 1992... 9.2
Pippen 1993... 8.4
Pippen 1994... 7.6


So Pippen was less of a playmaker in 1994... Which means you were making shit up... Lying like I said

It's amazing that Pippen, Grant and BJ barely saw an increase in stats without the goat scorer - it shows they played to capacity alongside MJ... Pippen actually saw lower raw production in 94' compared to his high alongside MJ (22.0 and 5.6 apg vs 21.0 and 7.0 in 92')

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Horace Grant was a Top 10 Defensive PF before MJ left, It was Pippen's playmaking that made Horace and BJ All Stars. I knew how good Pippen was since 1990 and i knew he would be one of the best without MJ. Only MJ stans and dickeriders think Pippen sucks or was not a top 10 player in the 90's.

Nobody but 3ball says this. On here anyway.

Pippen was a Top 10 player in the 90s. So no, he didn't suck.

The problem here is there are 1-2 people operating on MULTIPLE alts, trolling. Saying ridiculous crap like Pippen had more impact than Jordan AND Pippen was the 2nd best player in the 90s. Or 'arguably' the 2nd best wing in the 90s. Nobody who was around then would argue that. Maybe for a SINGLE season, but again NOBODY legitimately believed that as a whole. Especially come playoff time.

Its why most of those players on Open Court, Barkley included, never had Pippen in their 90s 'best players' lists.

[3ball]

Nobody but 3ball says this. Not on here anyway.

Pippen was a Top 10 player in the 90s. So no, he didn't suck.

The problem here is there are 1-2 people operating on MULTIPLE alts, trolling. Saying ridiculous crap like Pippen had more impact than Jordan AND Pippen was the 2nd best player in the 90s. Or 'arguably' the 2nd best wing in the 90s. Nobody who was around then would argue that. Maybe for a SINGLE season, but again NOBODY legitimately believed that as a whole. Especially come playoff time.

Its why most of those players on Open Court, Barkley included, never had Pippen in their 90s 'best players' lists.

And he was never considered better than Ewing... Ever

Its quite preposterous for people to be saying that now

Most people thought Zo was better or at least equal... Ditto with Tim Hardaway - Pippen wasn't considered better than him in 97'.. and KJ was flat-out better in his prime... There's no debate - he won 55 many times and made the WCF twice including upsetting Magic's 1 seeded Lakers... Pippen has nothing like that on his resume.. KJ/MJ would've beaten Magic in 91' and the bad boys in 89/90

[ELITEpower23]

And he was never considered better than Ewing... Ever

Its quite preposterous for people to be saying that now

Most people thought Zo was better or at least equal... Ditto with Tim Hardaway - Pippen wasn't considered better than him in 97'.. and KJ was flat-out better in his prime... There's no debate - he won 55 many times amd made the WCF twiceas including upsetting Magic's 1 seeded Lakers... Pippen has nothing like that on his resume

What is Ewing's best MVP voting? 4th? Pippen was 3rd in 94.

[3ball]

What is Ewing's best MVP voting? 4th? Pippen was 3rd in 94.

MVP isn't player ranking

It's based on who has the shittiest cast and is therefore more "valuable"

Pippen was never ranked higher than Ewing as a player and never did anything that matched Ewing's accomplishments as top dog

[ELITEpower23]

MVP isn't player ranking

It's based on who has the shittiest cast and is therefore more "valuable"

Pippen was never ranked higher than Ewing as a player and never did anything that matched Ewing's accomplishments as top dog

Why do you dance about when I ask a straight forward question?

What is Ewing's best MVP voting, 4th? Pippen was 3rd in 94.

[3ball]

Why do you dance about when I ask a straight forward question?

What is Ewing's best MVP voting, 4th? Pippen was 3rd in 94.

Why would I answer a question you already know the answer to?

I'm explaining why your thinking is wrong

Pippen was never as good as Ewing, and it's preposterous for anyone today to say he was

MJ would've won 10 in a row with Ewing without a break because Ewing could carry a team himself on both ends

[ELITEpower23]

Why would I answer a question you already know the answer to?

I'm explaining why your thinking is wrong

Pippen was never as good as Ewing, and it's preposterous for anyone today to say he was

MJ would've won 10 in a row with Ewing without a break because Ewing could carry a team himself on both ends

3rd in MVP or better:
Pippen Yes
Ewing No

[Roundball_Rock]

What is Ewing's best MVP voting? 4th? Pippen was 3rd in 94.

Not only that, Pippen was all-NBA 1st team 3x and Ewing 1x.

These people are delusional in their echo chamber. They will keep saying no one ever thought Pippen was better than Malone or Barkley but the all-NBA data clearly tells us the voters did during his peak years (which is backed up by MVP voting those years).


Most people thought Zo was better or at least equal... Ditto with Tim Hardaway

Not in the real world. :oldlol: Zo' and Hardaway were traded--anyone can look up what their trades involved and compare those to Pippen trade proposals at the same time and see what respective trade value these players commanded. Hardaway was traded mid-season with Chris Gatling for Kevin Willis and Bimbo Coles. For reference:

Willis in 96' in MIA: 10/9/1
Coles in 96' in MIA: 13/4/6

Hardaway in 96' in GS: 14/7/1
Gatling in 96' in GS: 9/5/1

It basically was equal production being swapped...now let's compare the Pippen trade proposal people talk the most about.

Pippen in 94': 22/9/6

Kemp in 94': 18/11/3
Pierce in 94': 15/2/2

So Seattle was giving up 33/13/5 to get Pippen; Miami 23/13/7 and in order to do the trade GS had to throw in a second player. The Pippen trade was a 2:1 trade.

Mourning was traded for Glen Rice (with 2 scrubs attached to each centerpiece in a 3 for 3 trade). That speaks for itself.


MVP isn't player ranking

All-NBA is the closest thing we have to an official player ranking.

We have to recognize Jordanstan's echo chamber has detached them from the real world but they need to be held accountable for their avalanche of lies so they don't deceive younger posters.

[ELITEpower23]

Not only that, Pippen was all-NBA 1st team 3x and Ewing 1x.

These people are delusional in their echo chamber. They will keep saying no one ever thought Pippen was better than Malone or Barkley but the all-NBA data clearly tells us the voters did during his peak years (which is backed up by MVP voting those years).



Not in the real world. :oldlol: Zo' and Hardaway were traded--anyone can look up what their trades involved and compare those to Pippen trade proposals at the same time and see what respective trade value these players commanded. Hardaway was traded mid-season with Chris Gatling for Kevin Willis and Bimbo Coles. For reference:

Willis in 96' in MIA: 10/9/1
Coles in 96' in MIA: 13/4/6

Hardaway in 96' in GS: 14/7/1
Gatling in 96' in GS: 9/5/1

It basically was equal production being swapped...now let's compare the Pippen trade proposal people talk the most about.

Pippen in 94': 22/9/6

Kemp in 94': 18/11/3
Pierce in 94': 15/2/2

So Seattle was giving up 33/13/5 to get Pippen; Miami 23/13/7 and in order to do the trade GS had to throw in a second player. The Pippen trade was a 2:1 trade.

Mourning was traded for Glen Rice (with 2 scrubs attached to each centerpiece in a 3 for 3 trade). That speaks for itself.



All-NBA is the closest thing we have to an official player ranking.

We have to recognize Jordanstan's echo chamber has detached them from the real world but they need to be held accountable for their avalanche of lies so they don't deceive younger posters.

We must not allow the false MJ lies to infiltrate reality. Great work here.

[Roundball_Rock]

We must not allow the false MJ lies to infiltrate reality. Great work here.

Yup, and that is the entire ball game for them. They know there aren't many fan bases as large as MJ's. Only LeBron and Kobe fans are comparable in size. A lot of LeBron fans are too young to know the real deal about when MJ played. Some Kobe fans are old enough but Kobe fans stopped being anti-MJ a long time ago so they aren't on the battlefield.

What is revealing is flat out lies are exposed and then the next day or the next week the same posters will be out there saying exactly the same thing. It is a shameless.

It is always worth remembering why they have to go to these pathetic lengths: insecurity that LeBron is better than MJ and fear that the public will conclude the same. You don't see any other fan base doing what MJ stans do.

[ELITEpower23]

Yup, and that is the entire ball game for them. They know there aren't many fan bases as large as MJ's. Only LeBron and Kobe fans are comparable in size. A lot of LeBron fans are too young to know the real deal about when MJ played. Some Kobe fans are old enough but Kobe fans stopped being anti-MJ a long time ago so they aren't on the battlefield.

What is revealing is flat out lies are exposed and then the next day or the next week the same posters will be out there saying exactly the same thing. It is a shameless.

It is always worth remembering why they have to go to these pathetic lengths: insecurity that LeBron is better than MJ and fear that the public will conclude the same. You don't see any other fan base doing what MJ stans do.

Precisely. Their attempt to bend reality, when convenient, is indicative of an individual lacking integrity and confidence. The walls are closing in, their time is up.

[Roundball_Rock]

Precisely. Their attempt to bend reality, when convenient, is indicative of an individual lacking integrity and confidence. The walls are closing in, their time is up.

Yup--and it will only get worse since LeBron probably has 2-3 more superstar seasons left and a couple more all-star seasons after that (so maybe 3-5 more quality seasons). If LeBron is this big a threat to them now--what will it be by the time LeBron retires?

[3ball]

.
Ewing vs Pippen


REGULAR SEASON STATS - Ewing (by a shit-ton)

PLAYOFF STATS - Ewing (by a shit-ton)

REGULAR SEASON RUNS AS #1 OPTION - Ewing

PLAYOFF RUNS AS #1 OPTION - Ewing

DEFENSIVE IMPACT - Ewing (2.1 to 4.0 blocks per game for 12 straight years and 10+ rebs)

OFFENSIVE IMPACT - Ewing

[Roundball_Rock]

Again, we have to separate the Jordanstan echo chamber from the real world.

Pippen (1991-1998): 20/7/6 with 2 steals, 1 block
Ewing (1988-1997): 24/11/2 with 1 steal, 3 blocks

So fairly similar. MJ stans' don't understand this concept, but an assist counts as much as a basket for the team. Let's say an assist was worth 2.2 points back then. In that case:

Pippen: generated roughly 33 points for his team
Ewing: generated roughly 28 points for his team

Pippen with the greater direct offensive impact.

There are other indirect factors. Ewing's boards resulted in extra possessions for his teams. Pippen's playmaking increased the offense's efficiency overall and that of his teammates in particular. There are no neat stats for these things. Ewing was durable in his heyday so we don't have any Knicks data minus Ewing to compare to the Bulls without Pippen in 94' and 98'.

One note: I used 1988-1997 for Ewing as that covers the span he was an all-NBA player.

Accolades

All-NBA: 7 each
All-NBA 1st team: Pippen 3, Ewing 1
Top 5 in MVP: Ewing 6, Pippen 2 (Pippen's high was 3rd; Ewing's 4th)
Top 10 in MVP: Ewing 7, Pippen 5
All-star: Ewing 10, Pippen 7
All-D: Pippen 10, Ewing 3 (8 first teams for Pippen, 0 for Ewing)

They were selected near each other for the Dream Team. Ewing was 2nd, Pippen 4th. https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/sports/nba-season-preview-pippen-s-stunning-leap-into-jordan-s-league.htm Pippen was higher on Daly's list (3rd, behind MJ and Magic).

Pippen was the superior defender on top of generating more offense.

On net, you would have to give Ewing the edge in accolades. However, Ewing was the #1 option while Pippen's accolades were deflated by being a #2 option, as were his stats. Here is what they did during the brief time both were #1 options:

Pippen 1994, 1995: 22/8/5 (this includes a nosedive courtesy of MJ in late 95')
Ewing 1994, 1995: 24/11/3

Pippen was all-NBA 1st team both years, Ewing was not all-NBA in either season. Pippen was 3rd in MVP in 94' and 7th in 95'; Ewing was 5th and 4th those years.

So Pippen outperformed him when both were #1 options.

All-time wise it isn't close. The verdict is in for both: Pippen is top 20-30 all-time while Ewing is in the top 30-40 range.

[LAmbruh]

Again, we have to separate the Jordanstan echo chamber from the real world.

Pippen (1991-1998): 20/7/6 with 2 steals, 1 block
Ewing (1988-1997): 24/11/2 with 1 steal, 3 blocks

So fairly similar. MJ stans' don't understand this concept, but an assist counts as much as a basket for the team. Let's say an assist was worth 2.2 points back then. In that case:

Pippen: generated roughly 33 points for his team
Ewing: generated roughly 28 points for his team

Pippen with the greater direct offensive impact.

There are other indirect factors. Ewing's boards resulted in extra possessions for his teams. Pippen's playmaking increased the offense's efficiency overall and that of his teammates in particular. There are no neat stats for these things. Ewing was durable in his heyday so we don't have any Knicks data minus Ewing to compare to the Bulls without Pippen in 94' and 98'.

One note: I used 1988-1997 for Ewing as that covers the span he was an all-NBA player.

Accolades

All-NBA: 7 each
All-NBA 1st team: Pippen 3, Ewing 1
Top 5 in MVP: Ewing 6, Pippen 2 (Pippen's high was 3rd; Ewing's 4th)
Top 10 in MVP: Ewing 7, Pippen 5
All-star: Ewing 10, Pippen 7
All-D: Pippen 10, Ewing 3 (8 first teams for Pippen, 0 for Ewing)

They were selected near each other for the Dream Team. Ewing was 2nd, Pippen 4th. https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/sports/nba-season-preview-pippen-s-stunning-leap-into-jordan-s-league.htm Pippen was higher on Daly's list (3rd, behind MJ and Magic).

On net, you would have to give Ewing the edge in accolades. However, Ewing was the #1 option while Pippen's accolades were deflated by being a #2 option, as were his stats. Here is what they did during the brief time both were #1 options:

Pippen 1994, 1995: 22/8/5
Ewing 1994, 1995: 24/11/3

Pippen was all-NBA 1st team both years, Ewing was not all-NBA in either season. Pippen was 3rd in MVP in 94' and 7th in 95'; Ewing was 5th and 4th those years.

So Pippen outperformed him when both were #1 options.

All-time wise it isn't close. The verdict is in for both: Pippen is top 20-30 all-time while Ewing is in the top 30-40 range.
God damn, what a post:applause:

[Roundball_Rock]

God damn, what a post:applause:

:cheers:

[3ball]

Yup--and it will only get worse since LeBron probably has 2-3 more superstar seasons left and a couple more all-star seasons after that (so maybe 3-5 more quality seasons). If LeBron is this big a threat to them now--what will it be by the time LeBron retires?

lebron will have numerous all-star seasons remaining, but only 1 more season as a top 5 player, or maybe this year was his last.. (assuming you still think he's top 5)

At 37-38, he'll be top 15, and completely done at 39.. barely any value above replacement player

And who gives a shit... Still nowhere near the levels MJ reached, which is why MJ has twice as many rings as the best player and higher rate of production (the goat rate of production)

[Roundball_Rock]

lebron will have numerous all-star seasons remaining, but only 1 more season as a top 5 player, or maybe this year was his last.

He keeps proving doubters wrong. Kareem was a all-NBA 1st team/MVP caliber player as late as his age 38 season. If LeBron matches that, that is 3 more seasons.


At 37-38, he'll be top 15, and completely done at 39.. barely any value above replacement player

Impossible to know. Kareem is the gold standard for longevity. His age 38 season was mentioned above. In 87' at age 39 he was still a legit all-star, scoring 18 PPG in the RS, 19 in the PO, and 22 in the finals. He didn't become a role player until his age 40 season. If LeBron matches that, that is 5 more seasons.

LeBron has the advantage of nutrition, his $1 million per year body preservation, etc. that Kareem did not have. LeBron, though, has the disadvantage of having already logged more NBA mileage coming from high school.

[LAmbruh]

Roundball_Rock = 3balls WORST nighmare :oldlol:

[3ball]

Roundball_Rock = 3balls WORST nighmare :oldlol:

Are you kidding me? I love this guy

He gives action

That's all a competitor ever wants...

That's why mj cried in the doc - "if you don't want to play that way...." :lol

He just wanted guys to give him action, not take their ball and go home, or act like it wasn't important

And I just killed Roundball in the other thread... He posted quotes and misperceptions that people initially had, where coaches said the triangle would allow more winning because MJ wouldn't be scoring champ in that system and he'd shoot less...... So I posted stats showing that MJ shot more under Phil, and used more possesssions, thus proving the coaches wrong who thought the triangle would reduce his shots and stop him from being scoring champ..

They didn't realize that his fundamentally-sound game fit the system perfectly, so he was able to take more shots and be more effective than ever before... He wasn't a gunner that hogged the ball - he was an off-ball player and goat assist target that infact increased teammate assists and facilitated ball movement.. teammates were infact growing by leaps and bounds next to him - only mj had to grow single-digit rookies to all-star caliber to win (Pippen, Grant, BJ)

[Round Mound]

Are you kidding me? I love this guy

He gives action

That's all a competitor ever wants...

That's why mj cried in the doc - "if you don't want to play that way...." :lol

He just wanted guys to give him action, not take their ball and go home, or act like it wasn't important

And I just killed Roundball in the other thread... He posted quotes and misperceptions that people initially had, where coaches said the triangle would allow more winning because MJ wouldn't be scoring champ in that system and he'd shoot less...... So I posted stats showing that MJ shot more under Phil, and used more possesssions, thus proving the coaches wrong who thought the triangle would reduce his shots and stop him from being scoring champ..

They didn't realize that his fundamentally-sound game fit the system perfectly, so he was able to take more shots and be more effective than ever before... He wasn't a gunner that hogged the ball - he was an off-ball player and goat assist target that infact increased teammate assists and facilitated ball movement.. teammates were infact growing by leaps and bounds next to him - only mj had to grow single-digit rookies to all-star caliber to win (Pippen, Grant, BJ)

How come all those players had their best season without MJ? Does it have to do with the fact Jordan had a great team from 88 onwards? Or was it Pippen the system that made them better in 93-94 having 55 wins just 2 less without Jordan? Which is it?

[3ball]

How come all those players had their best season without MJ? Does it have to do with the fact Jordan had a great team from 88 onwards? Or was it Pippen the system that made them better in 93-94 having 55 wins just 2 less without Jordan? Which is it?

They had their "best" season (2nd Rd) because MJ's goat volume was removed from the team, yet their averages barely increased!!

That's the point... We know their averages will go up without MJ, but it makes MJ look good that their averages barely increased from their highs alongside Jordan.. that's how we know MJ's goat usage was needed - players weren't being marginalized by him and playing close to capacity

you realize MJ played off-ball a lot right? And that allowed teammates to hold the ball and get assists? This is largely why they played to capacity next to him and lebron's don't

Compare the difference - Love/Bosh/Jamison/Hughes/Mo went from respected players pre-Lebron, to players that everyone thought sucked after their tenure with lebron...Otoh, Pippen/Grant/BJ were super-respected after playing with Jordan.. jordan elevated his teammates, while lebron turns his into less-respected nobodies... That's what AAU-style stat accumulation does

[Axe]

Denver won 57 games in 2013.

Who was their 'star player' in that roster?

Not melo, obviously. Their highest win with him was only 54 games.

[ELITEpower23]

Roundball_Rock = 3balls WORST nighmare :oldlol:

Big facts!! :cheers:

[3ball]

Big facts!! :cheers:

He's nothing

I can blow him away any time I want

I could bump so many threads and keep him in his Mom's basement for weeks trying to respond.. I have a lot of content

Most of his arguments are weak so I don't respond.. he's a very inefficient poster and tends to run or blow you off when you corner him

[Axe]

He's nothing

I can blow him away any time I want

I could bump so many threads and keep him in his Mom's basement for weeks trying to respond.. I have a lot of content

Most of his arguments are weak so I don't respond.. he's a very inefficient poster and tends to run or blow you off when you corner him
The saga just continues with your hysterical counterpart lmao

[Round Mound]

They had their "best" season (2nd Rd) because MJ's goat volume was removed from the team, yet their averages barely increased!!

That's the point... We know their averages will go up without MJ, but it makes MJ look good that their averages barely increased from their highs alongside Jordan.. that's how we know MJ's goat usage was needed - players weren't being marginalized by him and playing close to capacity

Compare the difference - Love/Bosh/Jamison/Hughes/Mo went from respected players pre-Lebron, to players that everyone thought sucked after their tenure with lebron... That was frequently the narrative... Otoh, Pippen/Grant/BJ were super-respected after playing with Jordan.. jordan elevated hos teammates, while lebron turns his into less-respected nobodies... That's what AAU-style stat accumulation does

Whatever. I think its because Pippen's playmaking ability. Don't give me assists stats i watched that whole season and Pippen was a Top 6 player in the league without Jordan that season. Pippen was a better passer-playmaker than Jordan (not individual offense as a scorer and then passing it at the last second but making the right passes from a ballhandling standing and timing point of view). Also Pippen had a bigman effect defensively for the Bulls: He was much more vertaile defensive wise than any Bull while also playmaking as a Point-Forward and rebounding 7-8 RPG. Lets not forget his shot blocking and stealing ability as a help defender aswell.

[Roundball_Rock]

He posted quotes and misperceptions that people initially had, where coaches said the triangle would allow more winning because MJ wouldn't be scoring champ in that system and he'd shoot less...... So I posted stats showing that MJ shot more under Phil, and used more possesssions, thus proving the coaches wrong who thought the triangle would reduce his shots and stop him from being scoring champ..

This is a lot of BS in a few sentences. For one I wasn't the one who posted the quotes. This guy can't get any facts straight.


How come all those players had their best season without MJ?

Did any player have their best year with MJ? Paxson perhaps but he spent basically his entire career with MJ. When MJ retired, Paxson was constantly injured and barely played.


That's the point... We know their averages will go up without MJ,

That's not the point. The point is their averages and efficiency went up without MJ. In theory as their volume increased their efficiency would decrease. That is not what happened...


Whatever. I think its because Pippen's playmaking ability.

98' suggests that was the case. The offensive decline without Pippen>the decline without MJ. These guys only care about shot jacking. One of the major problems the Bulls had without Pippen is efficiency fell for the team as a whole and for individuals. For example, Kerr shot 40% without Pippen and 50% with Pippen.

[ELITEpower23]

He's nothing

I can blow him away any time I want

I could bump so many threads and keep him in his Mom's basement for weeks trying to respond.. I have a lot of content

Most of his arguments are weak so I don't respond.. he's a very inefficient poster and tends to run or blow you off when you corner him

Ever since 2016 you've been extra melty and emotional. Give it a rest. Top 5 aint bad for MJ: LBJ, KAJ, Russell, Bird, Magic, MJ Stop being emotional.

Remember when you posted this?

"Hey bitch - if I catch you or anyone else from this loser ass board following me, I will beat you down in self defense. You will be in the hospital if I catch you following me as anyone that is following me I will deem a threat to my health

I've already filed police reports against your screen name and others I suspect. Im also getting restraining orders to ban the screen name from playing on the site where you outed yourself as my stalker

Don't let me catch you, you tiny tiny man. You'll be even tinier when I get done with you."

[Axe]

Ever since 2016 you've been extra melty and emotional. Give it a rest. Top 5 aint bad for MJ: LBJ, KAJ, Russell, Bird, Magic, MJ Stop being emotional.

Remember when you posted this?

"Hey bitch - if I catch you or anyone else from this loser ass board following me, I will beat you down in self defense. You will be in the hospital if I catch you following me as anyone that is following me I will deem a threat to my health

I've already filed police reports against your screen name and others I suspect. Im also getting restraining orders to ban the screen name from playing on the site where you outed yourself as my stalker

Don't let me catch you, you tiny tiny man. You'll be even tinier when I get done with you."
See?

Told ya this was the naughty dude with a fvcking banned dup

[Rico2016]

Again, we have to separate the Jordanstan echo chamber from the real world.

Pippen (1991-1998): 20/7/6 with 2 steals, 1 block
Ewing (1988-1997): 24/11/2 with 1 steal, 3 blocks

So fairly similar. MJ stans' don't understand this concept, but an assist counts as much as a basket for the team. Let's say an assist was worth 2.2 points back then. In that case:

Pippen: generated roughly 33 points for his team
Ewing: generated roughly 28 points for his team

Pippen with the greater direct offensive impact.

There are other indirect factors. Ewing's boards resulted in extra possessions for his teams. Pippen's playmaking increased the offense's efficiency overall and that of his teammates in particular. There are no neat stats for these things. Ewing was durable in his heyday so we don't have any Knicks data minus Ewing to compare to the Bulls without Pippen in 94' and 98'.

One note: I used 1988-1997 for Ewing as that covers the span he was an all-NBA player.

Accolades

All-NBA: 7 each
All-NBA 1st team: Pippen 3, Ewing 1
Top 5 in MVP: Ewing 6, Pippen 2 (Pippen's high was 3rd; Ewing's 4th)
Top 10 in MVP: Ewing 7, Pippen 5
All-star: Ewing 10, Pippen 7
All-D: Pippen 10, Ewing 3 (8 first teams for Pippen, 0 for Ewing)

They were selected near each other for the Dream Team. Ewing was 2nd, Pippen 4th. https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/sports/nba-season-preview-pippen-s-stunning-leap-into-jordan-s-league.htm Pippen was higher on Daly's list (3rd, behind MJ and Magic).

Pippen was the superior defender on top of generating more offense.

On net, you would have to give Ewing the edge in accolades. However, Ewing was the #1 option while Pippen's accolades were deflated by being a #2 option, as were his stats. Here is what they did during the brief time both were #1 options:

Pippen 1994, 1995: 22/8/5 (this includes a nosedive courtesy of MJ in late 95')
Ewing 1994, 1995: 24/11/3

Pippen was all-NBA 1st team both years, Ewing was not all-NBA in either season. Pippen was 3rd in MVP in 94' and 7th in 95'; Ewing was 5th and 4th those years.

So Pippen outperformed him when both were #1 options.

All-time wise it isn't close. The verdict is in for both: Pippen is top 20-30 all-time while Ewing is in the top 30-40 range.

https://i.postimg.cc/Znx3zhGg/yuyuyuyuyu.gif

[3ball]

https://i.postimg.cc/Znx3zhGg/yuyuyuyuyu.gif

Right

He just said Ewing is much better than Pippen

On both sides of the ball.. peak Ewing averaged 4 blocks and 30 points

[Soundwave]

"Scottie Pippen outplayed Patrick Ewing" ...

It's amazing then how magically Ewing's team beat Pippen's team in the playoffs head to head and then went on to game 7 of the Finals. It's also amazing that in the Bulls-Knicks series somehow this:

Ewing: 23 ppg/12 rpg/3 apg/2 bpg on 53% shooting and a 18.7 game score for the series is somehow less than

Pippen: 21.7 ppg/7.7 rpg/4.7 apg/2 spg on 40.5% shooting and a 15.6 game score for the series (Horace Grant actually was higher) =

Pippen > Ewing somehow. I think Patrick would've done just fine if he had Michael Jordan on his team.

This is "reality", lol?

[Reggie43]

Pippen better than Ewing? I guess he is even more delusional than I thought :facepalm

[Soundwave]

The Orlando Magic won 55/81 games that Penny Hardaway played in 95-96 and 96-97 without Shaquille O' Neal in the lineup. And Penny had some serious knee issues creeping up by that 96-97 season to boot.

The knee problems a really sad turn for a very good player, think he was headed to being a 24/25 ppg guy who could also pass the ball and rebound if that hadn't hit him hard.

Atlanta Hawks won 57 games in 93-94 while dumping Dominque Wilkins for Danny Manning as the no.1 option.

Grant Hill led the Pistons to 54 wins.

Dwight Howard led the Magic to back to back 59 win seasons and 1 NBA Finals appearance beating LeBron James en route without a superstar no.2 option.

[Soundwave]

Pippen better than Ewing? I guess he is even more delusional than I thought :facepalm

It kinda just shows you too how arbitrary the "top 50" lists get after the top 10-12 players ... Patrick Ewing was better than Scottie Pippen in basically every season he played in including 93-94 and 94-95 before Jordan came back. He beat Pippen head to head in the playoffs while outplaying him, got the Knicks to winner takes all game 7 NBA Finals, had better numbers in the regular season too, and his team won more games that year.

But he gets ranked 10-20 spots lower than Pippen on these lists because he didn't have Michael Jordan to play with despite being the better actual player.

And somehow Pippen is the one that's "underrated", when he's getting listed over players clearly better than him because he the good luck of playing with a better player.

That's not being "underrated". Scottie had a wonderful career, but "underrated" he is not. He is consistently ranked above players that were flat out better players than him.

[Axe]

Pippen better than Ewing? I guess he is even more delusional than I thought :facepalm
Err...in the rings argument, i suppose?

[Roundball_Rock]

He just said Ewing is much better than Pippen

:lol blatant lying.


It's amazing then how magically Ewing's team beat Pippen's team in the playoffs head to head and then went on to game 7 of the Finals. It's also amazing that in the Bulls-Knicks series somehow this:

Ewing: 23 ppg/12 rpg/3 apg/2 bpg on 53% shooting and a 18.7 game score for the series is somehow less than

Pippen: 21.7 ppg/7.7 rpg/4.7 apg/2 spg on 40.5% shooting and a 15.6 game score for the series (Horace Grant actually was higher) =

Pippen > Ewing somehow. I think Patrick would've done just fine if he had Michael Jordan on his team.

A prime example of the bad faith of MJ stans. Using his own logic, Ewing sucks. Derek Harper, Oakley and Starks outplayed Ewing himself on the biggest stage just two rounds later. Ewing shot a shockingly bad 36% as a center.

Rewind the tape. We were just told Pippen shooting 41% as a perimeter player is terrible (actually better than MJ the previous year against the same team BTW). What does that logically make 36% for a center?

Don't expect a response since there are bad faith arguments but you can see the logical conclusion of their poor logic here. How weak was MJ's era where trash like Ewing and Pippen were considered superstars?


Pippen better than Ewing?

Yes, that is the consensus on all-time lists. Do you need a cookie to process that? I know it is hard but there is a big, big world outside of the MJ stan circle jerk.


Patrick Ewing was better than Scottie Pippen in basically every season he played in including 93-94 and 94-95 before Jordan came back.

This is more revisionism. Most people had Pippen Ewing of him. For example, Pippen was 1st team all-NBA both years; Ewing made no all-NBA teams those seasons.

[Roundball_Rock]

He beat Pippen head to head in the playoffs while outplaying him, got the Knicks to winner takes all game 7 NBA Finals, had better numbers in the regular season too, and his team won more games that year.

This level of deception deserves to be separated out. First, using his own logic Pippen must>peak Drexler in 92'. Pippen>Worthy in 91'. Yet he is arguing the opposite in another thread as we speak. :oldlol Let's go down the line. Pippen>Ewing in 93' (so Pippen improved, Ewing declined yet Ewing becomes better?). Pippen>Stockton in 97' and 98'. Pippen>Mourning. Pippen>Isiah in 91'. Pippen>Penny 96'). All players the very same people will tell you Pippen sucks relative to.

The Knicks "won more games" because Pippen missed 10 and his team was at a 33 win pace without him. This kind of impact is used against Pippen. :lol With Pippen the Bulls had a 58 win pace; New York won 57.

The other thing that is concealed is the 82nd game for both teams was a meaningless game as NY had the tiebreaker (NY won game 82).

With respect to numbers, that myth was shattered earlier.

Finally, the Knicks played with a full deck; the Bulls were handicapped when their starting SG bounced weeks before the season.

Unfortunately, Pippen and Ewing play different positions but we can use Malone as a proxy. Pippen received 94 all-NBA votes; Malone about 68 that same year. Yet the same people saying Ewing>Pippen will tell you Malone>Pippen and Barkley>Pippen the same year and how that was the consensus then and each year.

[Reggie43]

Pathetic Lebrontard calling me a Jordan stan when I rooted against the Bulls/Jordan all my life :facepalm The older you get the more you appreciate basketball in hindsight which is enough to be called a stan nowadays?

Again using alltime rankings to compare Ewing and Pippen? Who is better regardless of rings?

[dbugz]

A team can win 70+ in the regular season but if you don't have player who can help you win playoffs games and championship it means nothing.

At the end of the day this is all that matters

https://media1.tenor.com/images/c972f01549cfeb41af2d5abbc42bc21c/tenor.gif

6/6 > 3/9 (not even 50% winning :roll: )

[Roundball_Rock]

First, stipulate that only MJ stans think Pippen is ranked where he was because of "55" wins. We have to make sure we don't fall into their deceptive traps.


Grant Hill led the Pistons to 54 wins.

And 0 playoff series wins. :lol What did he do in the one year his team had RS success in the PO?

1997 Hill in the PO: 23.6 PPG/6.8/5.4/0.8/1.0 on 43.7% FG/43.7% eFG/49.1% TS
1994 Pippen in the PO: 22.8 PPG/8.3/4.6/2.4/0.7 on 43.4% FG/46.4% eFG/52.1% TS (against an all-time great defense)

Remarkable. So we have MJ stans going on and on about Pippen sucking in the 94' playoffs and then they praise a player who was worse across the board. Less production, less efficient and the stats don't even show you Pippen's large defensive superiority over Hill. (New York had a better dRating by about 5 versus Atlanta in those years.)

Yet the very same people will praise Hill.

Also note he "led to 54 wins" in 97'. What about the rest of his prime? 28, 46, 54, 37, 48 (full season win pace), 42. If Pippen did that you know what they would say. :oldlol:



The Orlando Magic won 55/81 games that Penny Hardaway played in 95-96 and 96-97 without Shaquille O' Neal in the lineup

Notice the fusing of two years? This is why: the Magic actually went 45-37 and lost in the first round without Shaq--with Rony Seiklay (17/10) replacing Shaq, not Pete Myers.

For reference, we can play the same game with the Rose-era Bulls. If we fuse together the games without Rose in 12' (55 win pace without him) and the games in 13' where they played poorly without Rose over a full season we get a similar number.

At any rate, Penny was considered a bona fide superstar--as these guys will be quick to tell you--even if he had struggles as a #1.


The knee problems a really sad turn for a very good player, think he was headed to being a 24/25 ppg guy who could also pass the ball and rebound if that hadn't hit him hard.

His efficiency crashed hard in the #1 role. He went from 51% to 45% and actually scored less on more volume because he was so inefficient.

It is comical Pippen is being criticized for his performance as a #1 and Penny praised but what do you expect from MJ stans?


Atlanta Hawks won 57 games in 93-94 while dumping Dominque Wilkins for Danny Manning as the no.1 option.

That is because they were on a 59 win pace with Wilkins; 53 with Manning. BTW Wilkins was traded for Danny Manning. Weren't you in another thread saying how highly thought of Wilkins was?


Dwight Howard led the Magic to back to back 59 win seasons

He was a top 3 player. What a shocker!

So look at the (cherry picked) examples: prime Howard, prime Hill, prime Penny, prime Wilkins. This is all for an argument that Pippen sucked? Compare him to all these great superstars? :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Again using alltime rankings to compare Ewing and Pippen? Who is better regardless of rings?

Bad faith again. So first we hear Pippen is ranked where he is over 55 wins; now it is rings. Who said this? It is one factor but to say this implies Ewing would be top 20-30 with a ring. Top 30? Sure but in no world does Ewing get to 20th or 21st. Ask David Robinson, a better player who won rings. Yet we are hearing Ewing would>Robinson if he had a ring (with no mention of Ewing's choking being why he doesn't have a ring in a thread where we have heard chapter and verse Pippen sucks for having a better series than Ewing did in the finals :lol ).

The resumes of the two players was compared earlier, independent of rings (shocking: discussing players without boiling it down to rings).

These are the same people saying Ewing>Pippen when Pippen was making 1st team all-NBA and Ewing not even the third team. That has nothing to do with "rings."

I will say, using the logic put forward by MJ stans (and affiliated posters/accounts), Ewing is not worth being compared to Pippen. Way too many chokes in the playoffs.

This is what your ilk fail to grasp: all-time lists have to apply the same standards to every player. You can't do what we are seeing in this thread where the standards shift on a sentence to sentence basis at times.

[Reggie43]

Bad faith again. So first we hear Pippen is ranked where he is over 55 wins; now it is rings. Who said this? It is one factor but to say this implies Ewing would be top 20-30 with a ring. Top 30? Sure but in no world does Ewing get to 20th or 21st. Ask David Robinson, a better player who won rings. Yet we are hearing Ewing would>Robinson if he had a ring (with no mention of Ewing's choking being why he doesn't have a ring in a thread where we have heard chapter and verse Pippen sucks for having a better series than Ewing did in the finals :lol ).

The resumes of the two players was compared earlier, independent of rings (shocking: discussing players without boiling it down to rings).

These are the same people saying Ewing>Pippen when Pippen was making 1st team all-NBA and Ewing not even the third team. That has nothing to do with "rings."

I will say, using the logic put forward by MJ stans (and affiliated posters/accounts), Ewing is not worth being compared to Pippen. Way too many chokes in the playoffs.

This is what your ilk fail to grasp: all-time lists have to apply the same standards to every player. You can't do what we are seeing in this thread where the standards shift on a sentence to sentence basis at times.

You are drowning in bullshit that you cant even answer a simple question :facepalm

[Roundball_Rock]

We literally have it being argued, by implication, that prime Pippen>prime Hill/prime Ewing/prime Penny. By his detractors. :cheers:

:lol Pippen is/was better. I didn't think that needed to be spelled out given my posts on the two...

Criteria, achievements is not "BS". These are serious people who put together all-time lists. They can't go from series to series, year to year or sentence to sentence with 50 different standards. We literally have seen players praised numerous times in this thread for doing things worse than what Pippen was attacked for by the very same people. :lol

There is another version of Pippen in history. Havlicek is top 30-35 all-time but being held down by era bias (if he played in the 80's or after he would be where Pippen is all-time) but that gives you an idea of how a player with a similar profile is perceived. Only in the minds of Pippen detractors is there this artificial boost Pippen is getting, as if Pippen is/was a media darling. The only boost he gets is era bias--but that is generational, not player specific.

[Reggie43]

We literally have it being argued, by implication, that prime Pippen>prime Hill/prime Ewing/prime Penny. By his detractors. :cheers:

:lol Pippen is/was better. I didn't think that needed to be spelled out given my posts on the two...

Criteria, achievements is not "BS". These are serious people who put together all-time lists. They can't go from series to series, year to year or sentence to sentence with 50 different standards. We literally have seen players praised numerous times in this thread for doing things worse than what Pippen was attacked for by the very same people. :lol

There is another version of Pippen in history. Havlicek is top 30-35 all-time but being held down by era bias (if he played in the 80's or after he would be where Pippen is all-time) but that gives you an idea of how a player with a similar profile is perceived. Only in the minds of Pippen detractors is there this artificial boost Pippen is getting, as if Pippen is/was a media darling. The only boost he gets is era bias--but that is generational, not player specific.

How about quit the ruse of liking Pippen and suck off Lebron straight up?

[Rico2016]

How about quit the ruse of liking Pippen and suck off Lebron straight up?

By using your own questioning: Who is your top 5?
And, rings aside, who is better mj or lbj?

[Roundball_Rock]

How about quit the ruse of liking Pippen and suck off Lebron straight up?

You just chided me for calling you a MJ stan. Why do you assume it is a ruse? I obviously was watching basketball in the 90's, before LeBron. So I had to have a favorite player then. Guess who?

What is your case for Ewing over Pippen? That isn't crazy. Mourning or Kemp is but Ewing is reasonable.

I do think the evidence shows Pippen didn't get special treatment for being Pippen. If anything his accolades and recognition were decreased by MJ (compare 94' and 95' to the rest of his prime). We have Pippen 1.0 in Havlicek in the 60's and 70's. We had Pippen without the defense in Hill from 1995-2000 (who MJ stans will say was going to be the next MJ). All three players were considered superstars, elite, etc. Havlicek was top 20-25 all-time until a decade ago when era bias had him fall back behind a raft of 90's, 00's, and 10's players but it is notable Havlicek is ranked ahead of Ewing on most lists.

Pippen has a strong record--which is why we see such poor arguments against him where he is criticized for things other players are praised for by the same people. This is the rub with any Pippen comparisons: if you want to compare Ewing and Pippen we have to apply the same standards to both. I suspect you would not be interested in that exercise...

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is an analysis from Backpicks which doesn't account for rings, although he factors in a player's impact on his teams. He has Pippen 25th, Ewing 28th now (they are down a few spots since he wrote the pieces 2-3 years ago).

He values player impact on teams, assesses how well players could contribute in different areas (scoring, defense, playmaking), how players fit on differently constructed teams, how they scale up and how portable their skills are, and looks at both peaks and longevity. These are good criteria.

People forget the portability issue. Ewing's more limited skill-set makes it harder for him to fit on a random team than Pippen. Ewing's team success all came on the same type of team: a hard-nosed elite defensive team devoid of any offense, which made them reliant on Ewing to do all the scoring. This was a huge flaw since Ewing lacked the passing ability to make teams pay for double teams and the roster construction meant they lacked the talent to make those shots anyway when he did get the ball out...if you are drafting a team from scratch, Pippen is the choice since you can build a variety of teams around him and have success.

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Pippen-GOAT-card.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Ewing-player-card.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Pippen-seasonal-valuations.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/P-Ewing-seasonal-valuations.png

Pippen closing:


In total, Pippen’s perimeter defense, rebounding and strong passing make him a highly scalable asset, capable of supercharging all kinds of teams. He played second fiddle on excellent offenses alongside Jordan, spent most of his prime leading good or great defenses, and his brush with the MVP in 1994 is inline with my estimation of his peak as a weak MVP candidate. However, Pippen’s prime was shortened by injuries, and his last high-level year was in 1997. (He was stellar at times in 1998 until his back flared up in the postseason.)

He’s entrenched in the group of players from 22-26, with a peak strong enough to edge out Stockton, but one that lags behind the players ahead of him. After his back surgery, he churned out two more All-Star level seasons, giving him 11 or 12 by my count. That’s just enough longevity to earn the nod over a similar-peak challenger, Moses Malone, for the No. 23 spot on the list.

https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/

Ewing closing:


For my money, he strung together 10 consecutive All-Star seasons, with four weak-MVP years and a top-30 peak of all time. I don’t love his portability, nor that he failed to play on a really good offense. To scale well, Ewing would need to curtail his isolation frequency, and I have doubts that he could. I could also see devaluing his mid-’90s defense slightly more, which could push him as low as 30th. Nonetheless, he packaged strong scoring with a top-20 defensive peak, just enough to land him here.

https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/

[Roundball_Rock]

As to Pippen vs. Kemp, they were forwards so we can use all-NBA and they were in a proposed trade so we can glean how they were perceived at the time relative to each other easily. Some quotes shortened due to the character limit but full quotes at the links.

All-NBA Teams for Pippen/Kemp

1990: N/A
1991: N/A
1992: Pippen 2nd
1993: Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1997: Pippen 2nd
1998: Pippen 3rd

So as you can see, Pippen was considered better their entire primes by all-NBA voters. Kemp lasted as an elite player a grand total of three seasons and was never a top 5 or MVP caliber player. Pippen was both and lasted a lot longer as an elite player.

Top 5 MVP finishes: Pippen 2, Kemp 0
Top 10 MVP finishes: Pippen 5, Kemp 3
Peak MVP finish: Pippen 3rd, Kemp 7th

Different classes of players--despite both being #2 options for most of their primes.

Here is how they were perceived during the proposed trade (the background is Jackson wanted the challenge of rebuilding from scratch, the Bulls were mad at Pippen for his 1.8 second "strike"; Seattle was looking to get over the hump after losing to an 8 seed with Kemp shooting 37% as a big man in the series):


league observers said it would benefit Seattle more right now because Pippen is so superior in ability to Kemp.

Kemp is regarded as primarily a Western Conference open-court player who fares badly in half-court play because he has no post-up game and doesn't like physical play-something of a Dominique Wilkins with less overall ability at power forward. But in the right system, the feeling is his game could still develop because he is only 24.

:oldlol: at the Wilkins comp, given the gas MJ stans throw to him too. Flashy players but not winning players.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1994-07-01-9407010179-story.html


The Chicago GM, who’d visited me in Spain, had a proposal: Kemp, Pierce, and our number one for Scottie Pippen. Pippen was the best small forward, or 3, in the league. Nothing he wasn’t good at. During one of Michael’s retirements, Scottie led his team in all five of the main categories—rebounds, scoring, blocks, steals, and assists—so rare that it had only happened once before in NBA history...

So I called Michael. We talked about minor-league baseball, North Carolina basketball, and golf. Then we talked about the big deal on the table. Should we do this?

“Do it,” he said. “Scottie can make your other players better. Kemp can’t.”

Notice the proposal: Pippen alone for Kemp, Pierce (15 PPG in 94' and their leading scorer in 93'), and a first round pick. These weren't equal players you swap straight up, despite Kemp being 4 years younger.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2016/12/28/george-karl-michael-jordan-endorsed-scottie-pippen-to-sonics-trade/

Finally, another thing that sets the two apart is Kemp failed to scale up as a #1 option, just like we saw with Penny and Worthy earlier in the thread. His efficiency went down the tubes. Pippen became more efficient as a #1 option, despite the increased volume.

All this yet we are delusional for saying Pippen>Kemp?

[3ball]

As to Pippen vs. Kemp, they were forwards so we can use all-NBA and they were in a proposed trade so we can glean how they were perceived at the time relative to each other easily. Some quotes shortened due to the character limit but full quotes at the links.

All-NBA Teams for Pippen/Kemp

1990: N/A
1991: N/A
1992: Pippen 2nd
1993: Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1997: Pippen 2nd
1998: Pippen 3rd

So as you can see, Pippen was considered better their entire primes by all-NBA voters. Kemp lasted as an elite player a grand total of three seasons and was never a top 5 or MVP caliber player. Pippen was both and lasted a lot longer as an elite player.

Top 5 MVP finishes: Pippen 2, Kemp 0
Top 10 MVP finishes: Pippen 5, Kemp 3
Peak MVP finish: Pippen 3rd, Kemp 7th

Different classes of players--despite both being #2 options for most of their primes.

Here is how they were perceived during the proposed trade (the background is Jackson wanted the challenge of rebuilding from scratch, the Bulls were mad at Pippen for his 1.8 second "strike"; Seattle was looking to get over the hump after losing to an 8 seed with Kemp shooting 37% as a big man in the series):



:oldlol: at the Wilkins comp, given the gas MJ stans throw to him too. Flashy players but not winning players.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1994-07-01-9407010179-story.html



Notice the proposal: Pippen alone for Kemp, Pierce (15 PPG in 94' and their leading scorer in 93'), and a first round pick. These weren't equal players you swap straight up, despite Kemp being 4 years younger.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2016/12/28/george-karl-michael-jordan-endorsed-scottie-pippen-to-sonics-trade/

Finally, another thing that sets the two apart is Kemp failed to scale up as a #1 option, just like we saw with Penny and Worthy earlier in the thread. His efficiency went down the tubes. Pippen became more efficient as a #1 option, despite the increased volume.

All this yet we are delusional for saying Pippen>Kemp?

It was a swap of picks and pierce was only included to make salaries match

More importantly, krause made many more offers after the sonics initially declined, and was offering literally millions in cash by the end of it

George Karl talks about how Krause was committed (https://670thescore.radio.com/chicago-bulls-jerry-krause-trade-scottie-pippen-1994-seattle-supersonics-george-karl) to trading Pippen wand kept upping the offer

But all we have to do is look at how Kemp and Pippen played... Kemp was just a lot better and this showed clearly in the playoffs, especially the 96' Finals.. it was a Hakeem/Robinson-level beat down, albiet not head-to-head

[Roundball_Rock]

They were trading him because of what he did quitting and to rebuild. Jackson conditioned his return on wiping the slate clean. He wanted a challenge with no players from the first threepeat teams.


But all we have to do is look at how Kemp and Pippen played

Exactly. It isn't even close. One player was then, later, and today considered vastly superior. Kemp had one very good playoff run but what did he do the rest of his career? He got exposed as a #1 option away from Payton/Schrempf.

[3ball]

They were trading him because of what he did quitting and to rebuild. Jackson conditioned his return on wiping the slate clean. He wanted a challenge with no players from the first threepeat teams.



Exactly. It isn't even close. One player was then, later, and today considered vastly superior. Kemp had one very good playoff run but what did he do the rest of his career? He got exposed as a #1 option away from Payton/Schrempf.

No Pippen was considered worse than kemp, which is why krause wanted the trade and also why Pippen was stomped in the 96' Finals and had weaker stats in general.. he has no case over Kemp except for rings that anyone would win with MJ.. anyone else would win much easier, because Pippen's stats were so bad

Pippen let Schrempf go off in those Finals too - he was bad on both ends... During the 2nd three-peat, Pippen was a Schrempf-level player that averaged 17 on 40% for the entire 96-98' playoffs

[Roundball_Rock]

:lol only in Jordanstan was Pippen considered worse than Kemp. Let's consult all-NBA voters for their views:

All-NBA Teams for Pippen/Kemp

1990: N/A
1991: N/A
1992: Pippen 2nd
1993: Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1997: Pippen 2nd
1998: Pippen 3rd

But whatever makes the pain of the LeBron threat slightly less for MJ stans terrified of the LeBron train. :lol

[Turbo Slayer]

:lol only in Jordanstan was Pippen considered worse than Kemp. Let's consult all-NBA voters for their views:

All-NBA Teams for Pippen/Kemp

1990: N/A
1991: N/A
1992: Pippen 2nd
1993: Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1997: Pippen 2nd
1998: Pippen 3rd

But whatever makes the pain of the LeBron threat slightly less for MJ stans terrified of the LeBron train. :lol :lol

[Axe]

You just chided me for calling you a MJ stan.
#MyChosenWordOfWisdom

[BigShotBob]

:lol only in Jordanstan was Pippen considered worse than Kemp. Let's consult all-NBA voters for their views:

All-NBA Teams for Pippen/Kemp

1990: N/A
1991: N/A
1992: Pippen 2nd
1993: Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1997: Pippen 2nd
1998: Pippen 3rd

But whatever makes the pain of the LeBron threat slightly less for MJ stans terrified of the LeBron train. :lol

As first options who were better?

Oh right, Kemp.

/end thread.

Also Kemp didn't even enter his prime until 94'. Dude was a rookie in 90' :roll:

This guy here doesn't know anything.

Krause wanted to trade Pippen for Kemp because he was better. Sorry. That was the consensus back then. Jordan just preferred to play with Pippen due to familiarity since he knew the Triangle already.

[Roundball_Rock]

As first options who were better?

Oh right, Kemp.

This is laughable. Kemp's efficiency cratered as a first option and he did not even make all-NBA as a first option (1 all-star team in 3 years). Pippen was 1st team all-NBA twice as a first option, a MVP candidate in 94'. Pippen's efficiency increased as a #1 option as did his accolades as MJ wasn't taking all the credit.

Kemp as a second option (1994-1997): 19/11/2 on 54.1% eFG
Kemp as a first option (1998-2000): 19/9/2 on 44.2% eFG

This is almost historically bad efficiency for a PF/post player...So his top line numbers stayed similar but he needed a ton more volume to offset his stunning loss of efficiency. Kemp got exposed badly as a #1 option with no Payton or Schrempf/Pierce around.

Kemp's accolades as a second option (1994-1997): 3x all-NBA (2nd teams), 4x all-star
Kemp's accolades as a first option (1998-2000): 0x all-NBA, 1x all-star

Cleveland paid a high price for the trade. A perennial playoff team dating back to the 80's was in shambles by the end of the "Kemp era".

Regarding the consensus that was posted earlier:


league observers said it would benefit Seattle more right now because Pippen is so superior in ability to Kemp.

The all-NBA voting speaks for itself. Kemp was always a tier or two behind Pippen, year in, year out. He was a good player but limited, as league experts understood.

Notice MJ stans talk about a fictional consensus but never post a shred of evidence to support this supposed consensus? Hard to post what doesn't exist. :lol


Also Kemp didn't even enter his prime until 94'.

His numbers in 93' were identical to his in 94' and that is when he made his first all-star team but it can be argued 94' was his first prime year.

[Rico2016]

:lol only in Jordanstan was Pippen considered worse than Kemp. Let's consult all-NBA voters for their views:

All-NBA Teams for Pippen/Kemp

1990: N/A
1991: N/A
1992: Pippen 2nd
1993: Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Kemp 2nd
1997: Pippen 2nd
1998: Pippen 3rd

But whatever makes the pain of the LeBron threat slightly less for MJ stans terrified of the LeBron train. :lol

Imagine someone really being that dumb :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Imagine someone really being that dumb :lol

:lol

The "consensus" was that Kemp was better, doe!

[3ball]

Imagine someone really being that dumb :lol

They gave malone mvp but mj deserved it

They gave it to Nash but Shaq deserved it

And on and on

They gave Kobe 1st team defense every year... undeserved

And why? Because it's entertainment... The media votes on this stuff and literally WWF's it for you guys, so you have a nice little story and entertainment... And you lap it up good... Good doggy... Good boooyyy.. :applause:

But the real way to enjoy the game is to see what's actually happening, rather than what a bunch of nerdy journalism majors are telling you

Kemp > Pippen... Krause knew it.... The Sonics knew it... I know it... And anyone watching Kemp play at a Finals-MVP level in 96' knows it..

[Rico2016]

They gave malone mvp but mj deserved it

They gave it to Nash but Shaq deserved it

And on and on

They gave Kobe 1st team defense every year... undeserved

And why? Because it's entertainment... The media votes on this stuff and literally WWF's it for you guys, so you have a nice little story and entertainment... And you lap it up good... Good doggy... Good boooyyy.. :applause:

But the real way to enjoy the game is to see what's actually happening, rather than what a bunch of nerdy journalism majors are telling you

Kemp > Pippen... Krause knew it.... The Sonics knew it... I know it... And anyone watching Kemp play at a Finals-MVP level in 96' knows it..

You're a complete fool.

Let me get this straight again baldy boy. Pippen "sucked" yet he had more rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks than MJ from 91-93 and 96-98 (all 6 Finals years) so what does that say about Mike? Pippen also had a better defensive rating than MJ every, single, run to the Finals. So if Pippen sucks, but he did EVERYTHING more than MJ, what does that say about MJ...Think wisely my son.

[BigShotBob]

This is laughable. Kemp's efficiency cratered as a first option and he did not even make all-NBA as a first option (1 all-star team in 3 years). Pippen was 1st team all-NBA twice as a first option, a MVP candidate in 94'. Pippen's efficiency increased as a #1 option as did his accolades as MJ wasn't taking all the credit.

Kemp as a second option (1994-1997): 19/11/2 on 54.1% eFG
Kemp as a first option (1998-2000): 19/9/2 on 44.2% eFG

This is almost historically bad efficiency for a PF/post player...So his top line numbers stayed similar but he needed a ton more volume to offset his stunning loss of efficiency. Kemp got exposed badly as a #1 option with no Payton or Schrempf/Pierce around.

Kemp's accolades as a second option (1994-1997): 3x all-NBA (2nd teams), 4x all-star
Kemp's accolades as a first option (1998-2000): 0x all-NBA, 1x all-star

Cleveland paid a high price for the trade. A perennial playoff team dating back to the 80's was in shambles by the end of the "Kemp era".

Regarding the consensus that was posted earlier:



The all-NBA voting speaks for itself. Kemp was always a tier or two behind Pippen, year in, year out. He was a good player but limited, as league experts understood.

Notice MJ stans talk about a fictional consensus but never post a shred of evidence to support this supposed consensus? Hard to post what doesn't exist. :lol



His numbers in 93' were identical to his in 94' and that is when he made his first all-star team but it can be argued 94' was his first prime year.

Kemp was at WORST 1A to Payton's 1B in Seattle. And his postseason performances destroy Pippen's head to head anyways.

In the 96' Finals while Pippen was doing his usual migraine "shrinking" routine he put up an AMAZING, top 10 90's.....

15 points on 34% shooting......

Kemp put up 23/10 on 55% shooting.

The

End.

[Rico2016]

Kemp was at WORST 1A to Payton's 1B in Seattle. And his postseason performances destroy Pippen's head to head anyways.

In the 96' Finals while Pippen was doing his usual migraine "shrinking" routine he put up an AMAZING, top 10 90's.....

15 points on 34% shooting......

Kemp put up 23/10 on 55% shooting.

The

End.

Careful on judging someone on ONE series. That doesn't work so well for Curry.

[3ball]

Careful on judging someone on ONE series. That doesn't work so well for Curry.


It isn't just 1 series - it's nearly every big series he ever played:



1988 RD 1 vs. CLE......10.6 on 47.1%
1988 ECSF vs. DET...... 9.4 on 45.8%

1989 RD 1 vs. CLE......15.0 on 39.8%
1989 ECF vs. DET........ 9.7 on 40.2%


1990 ECF vs DET........16.6 on 42.8%

1992 ECSF vs NYN.....16.0 on 40.2%

1993 RD 1 vs. ATL..... 15.0 on 42.2%

1995 ECSF vs ORL.....19.0 on 40.9%

1996 ECSF vs NYN.... 15.6 on 33.0%
1996 FINAL vs SEA... 15.7 on 34.3%

1997 RD 1 vs WAS.....16.7 on 38.3%
1997 ECF vs. MIA..... 16.8 on 41.7%

1998 ECF vs IND....... 16.6 on 39.2%
1998 FINAL vs UTA... 15.7 on 41.0%

1999 RD 1 vs LAL...... 18.3 on 32.9%


we blame lebron's teammates whenever lebron loses, so why not blame Pippen for when the bulls lose? He's the guy playing horrible, not MJ

every close series or loss was because of Pippen's poor play - MJ would've won much easier with a better-performing sidekick

[Axe]

we blame lebron's teammates whenever lebron loses, so why not blame Pippen for when the bulls lose? He's the guy laying the egg, not MJ
:roll:

[3ball]

:roll:

What's so funny

[Roundball_Rock]

Both Seattle and Chicago's GM's evaluated Pippen as being nearly as good as Jordan. If Kemp>Pippen that means Kemp>Jordan or at least Kemp=Jordan. What MJ stans are backing themselves into (as usual) is saying MJ played in a weak era.

Kemp was not 1b to Payton. Kemp was never 1st team all-NBA. Hell, he was all-NBA 3 times total. Kemp was never a MVP candidate. It does a disservice to compare Kemp to superstars like Payton and Pippen. Kemp was on par with a guy like Vin Baker, who Seattle ultimately replaced him with (and won more games with).

Re the Pippen trade, MJ stans have a cartoonish view of the world. The real story is the Bulls were trying to use the trade to accomplish a ton:

1) Get Kemp, a 25 year old top 10 player at the time.
2) Use Seattle's higher pick to move up in the draft to draft Eddie Jones as their SG of the future.
3) Since they would have Eddie Jones they would not need to spend big money to sign Ron Harper at SG and could use that money to sign a good player at another position (presumably C or PG since Kemp, Jones, Kukoc would be their PF, SG, and SF).

All this is boiled down to "Pippen sucks." Read the above for yourself. They knew Kemp couldn't get the job done himself because he was a limited player as "league observers" understood.

They were using the trade to make several chess moves to rebuild the team. In theory, Kemp-Jones would form a strong foundation along with Kukoc and the guy they would sign with the Harper money. In reality, Kemp was later exposed as incapable of being a #1 option and Jones never as good as expected but neither was known at the time. This was a good idea for a rebuilding team (Jackson wanted the challenge of starting from scratch with anyone from the championship teams--it was a condition of him coming back to coach--and Pippen was being punished for sitting out the final play of Game 3).

For Seattle, it made sense too. They realized they were failing to get over the hump with Kemp, last seen scoring 15 PPG on 37% shooting (as a PF/post player) in an all-time bad choke job to the 8 seed 42-40 Nuggets. Seattle had prime Payton, Schrempf, a decent SG in Hawkins. Pippen would put them over the top.

Phil Jackson had "doubts" about Kemp, worrying Kemp wouldn't be willing to give up scoring to focus on defense and rebounding. (Kemp was about a 19 PPG scorer for reference on the type of scoring we are talking about.)

So to recap: both GM's in the trade thought Pippen was far superior; both coaches thought Pippen was far superior (a view MJ shared with his buddy George Karl as well). Nobody involved thought Kemp was the better player, a laughable concept compared to a MVP candidate and 1st team all-NBA player who got 94 first team votes to 68 for K. Malone (Barkley was on the 2nd team--Kemp was the fourth forward...). If all-NBA voters thought Pippen>Malone/Barkley at the time, according to MJ stans that means Kemp>Malone, Kemp>Barkley then (more hilarity).

The only reason the trade did not happen was the Seattle owner got cold feet because Kemp, a flashy dunker (think Blake Griffin), was popular with local fans and Pippen was unpopular nationally in the aftermath of the "1.8" second strike. Seattle would never get over the hump with Kemp, traded him for Vin Baker years later.

This is the nuance of life but it is boiled down to comically bad idiocy in Jordanstan.

[BigShotBob]

You're talking about irrelevant things and distracting from the point.

Who cares how bad Kemp performed his fourth year in the league when he barely was entering his prime when Pippen at his PEAK could barely do better against the Knicks in the ECSF that same year in 94'.

Yet you want us to gloss over Pippen averaging 8 points in the post season his rookie year (barely 8 iirc), coming off the bench, then 10 the year after that, then choking against the Pistons the year after that.

Fact of the matter is Pippen played like complete dog shit against Seattle and Kemp severely outplayed him. The only player that didn't quite live up to par on Seattle was GP himself. Kemp was the third best player that entire series behind MJ and Rodman.

You can't be top 10 and drop 15 points on 35% shooting in the Finals. Sorry.

[Roundball_Rock]

The Jordanian fleet throws a lot out there but it is worth revisiting these gems. A lot of Twilight Zone stuff.

Jordan Stans Say the Darndest Things: Part I

Claim: Ewing>Pippen because of efficiency in the 94' playoffs.
Reality: Pippen was more efficient, despite being a SF and Ewing a C. Yet we are hearing an argument for the less efficient player on efficiency grounds during the same postseason. So efficiency matters--except we are going to crown the less efficient player better anyway. :roll:

Claim: Ewing>Pippen in part because his team had more regular season success.
Reality: the Bulls with Pippen were more successful--which these people know--but they keep pretending Pippen didn't miss 10 games. So by that very argument, Pippen>Ewing yet we are seeing the less successful team regular season as an argument for that player.

Claim: Kemp was considered better than Pippen then. That was the "consensus" we are told.
Reality: no scintilla of evidence has been presented to support this hallucination. All-NBA voting--covering the entire primes for each--showed Pippen ahead every season (even when he missed half a season :oldlol: ). Their respective GM's and coaches thought Pippen>Kemp. The Tribune article noted the consensus around the league was Pippen was vastly superior to Kemp.

Claim: Kemp was more successful as a #1 option.
Reality: this laugher was debunked pretty easily.

Claim: Pippen was given more credit than he deserved because he played with MJ.
Reality: Pippen's accolades were greater when MJ was retired--suggesting the opposite, that MJ deflated his recognition and accolades.

Claim: Pippen=Mourning, Pippen=Kemp (different posters: one said Kemp>Pippen, the other that they were equal), Ewing>Mourning/Pippen/Kemp.
Reality: completely baseless but worth noting the lunacy.

Claim: Pippen was made more efficient by Jordan.
Reality: his efficiency increased across the board without Jordan, when Jordan returned it decreased. Orwellian stuff here: less is more and more is less.

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan Stans Say the Dardnest Things Part II

Claim: Pippen sucks because he was less efficient as a #1 option, but we love Penny, Worthy, and Kemp who were true #1 options.
Reality: Pippen became more efficient as a #1 option; Penny, Worthy, and Kemp saw their efficiency crash as #1 options. Yet efficiency as a #1 is an argument for the other guys? :oldlol:

Claim: Grant Hill once was on a 54 win team, throw him a parade.
Reality: Hill's teams sucked outside of that year, and he won a grand total of zero playoff series in his prime.

Claim: Hill was efficient; Pippen wasn't.
Reality: their playoff #'s are dead ringers for each other, except Pippen played defense too.

Claim: if you take 30 or so games from one year, and 50 or so from another you can cobble together 50+ wins for the Magic with Penny on the roster, without Shaq.
Reality: you can do the same for Joakim Noah if you fuse two separate years. The reality is the Bulls without Rose, Magic without Penny both went 45-37--except unlike Penny's team, Noah's won a playoff series. Noah>Penny>Pippen then if he played in that era?

Claim: Ewing would be higher than where Pippen is on the all-time list if he had rings.
Reality: That scenario exists: Robinson, a clearly better player by "consensus" (real) at the time, won rings and is ranked right around Pippen. This also glosses over the fact that the reason Ewing has no ring is his own choking.

Claim: the Bulls' offensive woes without Jordan show Pippen sucked as an offensive player.
Reality: the Bulls' offensive decline was even worse without Pippen than without Jordan. Using this very logic, MJ is being dissed by his own fans. :lol

Claim: Dominique Wilkins was once on a 57 win team.
Reality: this is actually true. However, he also played 14 other seasons and his teams did little. For his career his teams won 3 whole playoff series. This is the bigotry of low expectations for Nique': 3 playoff wins in 15 seasons, all of them coming from 86-88', and this should be celebrated? So Pippen, a 6x champion, is a loser but Wilkins and Hill are winners for winning...nothing but press clippings.

[Smoke117]

Jordan Stans Say the Dardnest Things Part II

Claim: Pippen sucks because he was less efficient as a #1 option, but we love Penny, Worthy, and Kemp who were true #1 options.
Reality: Pippen became more efficient as a #1 option; Penny, Worthy, and Kemp saw their efficiency crash as #1 options. Yet efficiency as a #1 is an argument for the other guys? :oldlol:

Claim: Grant Hill once was on a 54 win team, throw him a parade.
Reality: Hill's teams sucked outside of that year, and he won a grand total of zero playoff series in his prime.

Claim: Hill was efficient; Pippen wasn't.
Reality: their playoff #'s are dead ringers for each other, except Pippen played defense too.

Claim: if you take 30 or so games from one year, and 50 or so from another you can cobble together 50+ wins for the Magic with Penny on the roster, without Shaq.
Reality: you can do the same for Joakim Noah if you fuse two separate years. The reality is the Bulls without Rose, Magic without Penny both went 45-37--except unlike Penny's team, Noah's won a playoff series. Noah>Penny>Pippen then if he played in that era?

Claim: Ewing would be higher than where Pippen is on the all-time list if he had rings.
Reality: That scenario exists: Robinson, a clearly better player by "consensus" (real) at the time, won rings and is ranked right around Pippen. This also glosses over the fact that the reason Ewing has no ring is his own choking.

Claim: the Bulls' offensive woes without Jordan show Pippen sucked as an offensive player.
Reality: the Bulls' offensive decline was even worse without Pippen than without Jordan. Using this very logic, MJ is being dissed by his own fans. :lol

Claim: Dominique Wilkins was once on a 57 win team.
Reality: this is actually true. However, he also played 14 other seasons and his teams did little. For his career his teams won 3 whole playoff series. This is the bigotry of low expectations for Nique': 3 playoff wins in 15 seasons, all of them coming from 86-88', and this should be celebrated? So Pippen, a 6x champion, is a loser but Wilkins and Hill are winners for winning...nothing but press clippings.

I find it ironic these dumb shits bring up Pippen's efficiency vs the Knicks in the 94 ECSF when he had the same exact efficiency Jordan had a year earlier vs the Knicks in the playoffs. The Difference? Jordan had a star to help while Pippen had a bunch of role players. Also, Gary Payton was never close to being a superstar. He never had close to that kind of impact.

[Roundball_Rock]

I find it ironic these dumb shits bring up Pippen's efficiency vs the Knicks in the 94 ECSF when he had the same exact efficiency Jordan had a year earlier vs the Knicks in the playoffs

Which has been mentioned several times; no reply from them. They live in their bubble, any information that contradicts what is in their bubble does not go through. :oldlol:

1993 ECF efficiency vs. the Knicks: Jordan 43.2%, Pippen 52.6% eFG,
1994 ECSF efficiency vs. the Knicks: Pippen 44.7% eFG


The Difference? Jordan had a star to help while Pippen had a bunch of role players

Yup, and there is where the timing of MJ's retirement hosed the Bulls. There was no second scorer available at the last minute. Kendall Gill said he would have signed with the Bulls if MJ retired earlier. That would provide the Bulls' with a viable second option, moving Grant and Armstrong into roles they fit better.

Their response will be Kukoc. In their "world" Kukoc apparently had an awesome series and playoff run.

1994 ECSF: Pippen 22/8/5 on 44.7% eFG; Kukoc 9/3/3 on 46.7% eFG
1994 playoffs : Pippen 23/8/5 on 46.4% eFG; Kukoc 9/4/4 on 50.7% eFG

Kukoc was playing a mere 19 MPG in the NY series while Pippen was playing 38 but these geniuses think if Kukoc doubled his playing time his performance would also double. No loss in efficiency. Crazy, isn't it?

What they fail to grasp is some of these advanced stats involve ridiculous assumptions. BPM says Kukoc would be the same over 100 possessions as he was over 33 possessions. So BPM calculates 27/12/11 as Kukoc's line, as if he was Oscar Robertson. :lol As a result, he led the team in playoff BPM when in the real world he was a role player who got badly outplayed by New York's 6th man (Mason).

Pippen vs. Ewing (94' Playoffs)

Here are the efficiency numbers for Pippen and Ewing in the 94' playoffs BTW:

1994 playoffs: Pippen 23/8/5 on 46.4% eFG, 52.1% TS
1994 playoffs: Ewing 22/12/3 on 44.1% eFG, 49.5% TS

How is a SF more efficient than a C? Pippen took a lot more difficult shots than Ewing did.

If we assume an assist is worth 2.2 points, Pippen generated roughly 34 points of offense and Ewing roughly 29 (both would be slightly less since I rounded).

Other playoff numbers for 1994:

PER: Pippen 22.8, Ewing 20.6
VORP per 82 games: Pippen 5.7, Ewing 5.6
BPM: Pippen 5.6, Ewing 4.4
WS per 82 games: Ewing 10.5, Pippen 9.8

So by metric after metric that these very people cite Pippen>Ewing. In other words, by their own logic Pippen>Ewing but then they will turn around and compare him unfavorably to guys like Kemp, Mourning.


Also, Gary Payton was never close to being a superstar

Borderline superstar then? What I was getting at is he had a level of impact, a peak, etc. that was a tier above Kemp's. Plus Payton lasted as an elite player; Kemp flamed out pretty quickly.

[Reggie43]

Pippen being nearly as good as Jordan? When will this lunacy end?

Kemp being traded for Baker doesnt mean he is on par with him. I remember reading an article about the playoff series between Seattle and the Lakers wherein someone from the Lakers said they had a harder time against Kemp because they had to double him compared to Baker who they just played straight up.

Does Pippen being traded for garbage reflect his value?

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen being nearly as good as Jordan?

Their evaluations as successful GM's... One was on a podcast so I can't link it but here is the Seattle GM (Portland at the time of the quote but Seattle during the proposed trade).


"No one is even challenging them," says Adubato. "Pippen and Jordan are like they're in a playground enjoying themselves." Pippen, who through Sunday was averaging 21.6 points (16th in the league), 6.5 assists (16th) and 6.7 rebounds, is having perhaps the best season of his career, which Jordan, who seems to have appointed himself Pippen's MVP campaign manager, has repeatedly pointed out. Jordan has gone so far as to call the Bulls Pippen's team. That may be a stretch, but Pippen has proved himself to be more than a mere member of Jordan's supporting cast. "I think Pippen could be an MVP candidate, but as long as Michael's there, because of his personality and confidence and competitiveness, there's nobody better," says Whitsitt. "I'd still defer to Michael, but it's 1 and 1A. It used to be 1 and 2."


https://vault.si.com/vault/1996/01/29/toy-story-the-bulls-are-making-childs-play-of-foes-as-they-shoot-for-a-record-70-wins

We also had "league observers" mentioned in the 94' article--in other words, that there was a consensus among NBA people (GM's, coaches, scouts would be the type of "observers" a reporter would talk about this stuff to.)

Yet we are told the "consensus" was Kemp, Mourning, and all these second-tier stars were better than Pippen. Meanwhile this is what people were saying at the time--comparing Pippen favorably to MJ, saying he was "1a to MJ's 1", saying Pippen was a MVP candidate even as a sidekick (Kemp never was a MVP level player...). :lol


Kemp being traded for Baker doesnt mean he is on par with him

Seattle doing basically the same (slightly better actually) with Baker does. So do their resumes.

All-NBA: Kemp 3, Baker 2
All-NBA 1st team: 0 each
All-star: Kemp 5, Baker 4
Top 5 MVP: 0 each

Baker on SEA in 98' (61 wins): 19/8/2 on 54.3% eFG
Kemp on SEA in 97' (57 wins): 19/10/2 on 51.6% eFG

Baker's efficiency went up 3% going to Seattle; Kemp's went down 7% going to Cleveland.

Both didn't last long in their primes but here are their numbers in their primes.

Kemp 93'-98': 19/11/2 51.5% eFG
Baker 95'-98': 20/10/3 50.7% eFG

They were what they were: legitimate, perennial all-stars for a while but never superstars, never the type of players who make all-NBA 1st teams or contend for MVP's. Kemp made 3 all-NBA teams total and people are comparing him to top 20-30 all-time players. :roll:

The difference is Baker wasn't flashy so he didn't make Sportscenter as much and people aren't watching his YT highlights 20+ years later but production wise they were similar.


Does Pippen being traded for garbage reflect his value?

He was traded for 7-8 players so it adds up but it does reflect his value had decreased a lot by age 34 and 2000.

Drexler, Mourning, Hardaway were all traded in their primes. Pippen was in proposed trades. Pippen commanded by far the most trade value but we are hearing Pippen was inferior or equal to these players.

We have yet to see an iota of evidence to support the faux "consensus" we keep hearing about...

[Reggie43]

You like putting words on peoples mouths dont you? If somebody said Pippen, Kemp, Mourning, Drexler are in the same tier in terms of impact and ability does it mean one is better than the other? What part of the word "same" dont you understand?

7-8 average/bad role players add up to Pippen?
The same Pippen that some of you proclaimed was the best player of a 59 win Portland team?

Trying to prove Baker is on par with Kemp is idiotic and just proves how garbage your posts are.

[Smoke117]

You like putting words on peoples mouths dont you? If somebody said Pippen, Kemp, Mourning, Drexler are in the same tier in terms of impact and ability does it mean one is better than the other? What part of the word "same" dont you understand?

7-8 average/bad role players add up to Pippen?
The same Pippen that some of you proclaimed was the best player of a 59 win Portland team?

Trying to prove Baker is on par with Kemp is idiotic and just proves how garbage your posts are.

You act like Shawn Kemp was some superstar or something. He was a second tier star who has become massively overrated because of nostalgia. Settle down.

[Reggie43]

You act like Shawn Kemp was some superstar or something. He was a second tier star who has become massively overrated because of nostalgia. Settle down.

Saying that Kemp is close in impact and ability to Pippen plus saying that Kemp is clearly better than Baker has you triggered?

[Smoke117]

Saying that Kemp is close in impact and ability to Pippen plus saying that Kemp is clearly better than Baker has you triggered?

Sure if you say so. Kemp was never close to Pippen in impact game in game out. Anyone who thinks that is an idiot and not even worth my time. And Baker was close to Kemp at the time of the trade. Kemp had devolved into a huge coke head who couldn't keep his shit straight anymore.

[Reggie43]

Sure if you say so. Kemp was never close to Pippen in impact game in game out. Anyone who thinks that is an idiot and not even worth my time. And Baker was close to Kemp at the time of the trade. Kemp had devolved into a huge coke head who couldn't keep his shit straight anymore.

What happened in the 96 Finals then "game in game out"

Kemp 55% 23.3ppg 10rbs 2.2ast 1.3stl 2.0blk
Pippen 34% 15.7ppg 8.2rbs 5.3ast 2.3stl 1.3blk

Baker and Kemp are close in numbers but not on impact. Baker was pretty skilled but was too inlove with his jumper compared to Kemp who attacked the basket and forced double teams. Not even mentioning the disparity on the defensive end.

[Axe]

In the past two months, the board has had a user who did nothing but kept lurking and bumping threads, leaving piles of copypasta crap about the same shit most of the time 24/7. The meltdown has been going here for sometime already.

It's so apparent that the dude only does this for a living...

Like, do you get $1 for every related thread you bump or massive texts that you compose? Damn, what a lame ass job for some desperate bummer.. 🥴

[Smoke117]

What happened in the 96 Finals then "game in game out"

Kemp 55% 23.3ppg 10rbs 2.2ast 1.3stl 2.0blk
Pippen 34% 15.7ppg 8.2rbs 5.3ast 2.3stl 1.3blk

Baker and Kemp are close in numbers but not on impact. Baker was pretty skilled but was too inlove with his jumper compared to Kemp who attacked the basket and forced double teams. Not even mentioning the disparity on the defensive end.

Because using one series is all you really need, right? It's clear as day to anyone who watched both of them the difference in level. That's all beside the point that Pippen was beat to hell throughout the 96 playoffs. He couldn't do what he did early in the season when he dominated the Sonics.

[Reggie43]

Because using one series is all you really need, right? It's clear as day to anyone who watched both of them the difference in level. That's all beside the point that Pippen was beat to hell throughout the 96 playoffs. He couldn't do what he did early in the season when he dominated the Sonics.

Dominating the Sonics is equals to one good game? (29pts 60%)
Whats the excuse earlier in the season (18pts .438%) in a loss?

You really love to make up shit to prove a point dont you? Season series tied at one game a piece with Pip always being inconsistent having a bad and good game is called dominating?

Because using one game is all you really need, right?

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen was being compared to Jordan favorably; why weren't these other players (except Drexler)? Of course it is "madness" when experts compared Pippen to Jordan; but these stans 25 years later saying Kemp>Pippen or Kemp=Pippen are the voices of reason and sagacity on fantasy island (aka Jordanstan).

The amusing thing about MJ stans/MJ stan echoers is they struggle so badly to bend reality their own arguments boomerang back against them to Pippen's favor. Earlier we saw them say Ewing>Pippen but by their own logic Pippen>Ewing. Now it is Rodman>Kemp and Pippen>Drexler, Worthy, K. Johnson, Stockton, K. Malone (97'). :lol


Kemp was never close to Pippen in impact game in game out. Anyone who thinks that is an idiot and not even worth my time. And Baker was close to Kemp at the time of the trade

Exactly. Pippen was always in another galaxy than Kemp, Baker was in the same tier as Kemp. Was Kemp better than Baker? Sure, but only slightly. There is a reason Seattle didn't skip a beat with him.

The people who thought Pippen was vastly better than Kemp: Bob Whitsitt, Jerry Krause (the GM's for both teams), Phil Jackson, George Karl, all-NBA voters, "league observers"

The people who thought Kemp was better or equal than Pippen: 3ball, BSBob, Reggie43

Which group has more credibility? :roll:


What part of the word "same" dont you understand?

What part of "the consensus was Kemp was better" don't you understand? That was the statement made several times by 3ball/BSBob.


Trying to prove Baker is on par with Kemp is idiotic and just proves how garbage your posts are.

I am producing evidence, including quotes from people at the time (we have yet to see a single quote from the opposing side) for my claims; you, as usual, have nothing but ranting.


What happened in the 96 Finals then "game in game out"

Kemp was outplayed by his counterpart--according to Kemp's own coach Rodman is the reason the Bulls won (and why Seattle lost then). :lol

Pippen had one poor finals in 6, when he had foot, neck, and back injuries. It is amusing MJ stans want to invoke finals performances when the players they tout usually have worse records.


Because using one series is all you really need, right?

When convenient. Using his own logic, Pippen>Drexler but we heard earlier Pippen and Drexler were "in the same tier" from him and others in this thread consistently say Drexler>Pippen. Same story with Stockton. Pippen outplays him two years in a row. They say Stockton>Pippen and never mention their finals performance. Pippen outplayed Malone in 97'. Same story. Kevin Johnson in 93'. Same story. Worthy in 91'. Same story.

Don't forget the ECF's too where we can play the same game. Where was Mourning in the 97' ECF again, for example? Getting outplayed by Ron Harper (per game score). :lol


Baker and Kemp are close in numbers but not on impact

Seattle with Kemp: 57 wins and a second round loss
Seattle with Baker: 61 wins and a second round loss

You can't have it, yet again, both ways. Pippen is one of the highest impact players of his era. So if impact is your criteria why are we having this discussion? You mentioned Drexler. His teams did the same with or without him. So impact matters for Kemp/Baker (no evidence presented) but doesn't matter for Pippen compared to others?

[ImKobe]

In the past two months, the board has had a user who did nothing but kept lurking and bumping threads, leaving piles of copypasta crap about the same shit most of the time 24/7. The meltdown has been going here for sometime already.

It's so apparent that the dude only does this for a living...

Like, do you get $1 for every related thread you bump or massive texts that you compose? Damn, what a lame ass job for some desperate bummer.. ��

Jeff's keeping Simon off the streets, what a nice guy.

[Turbo Slayer]

Jeff's keeping Simon off the streets, what a nice guy. Wtf is Simon?

Some made up bullshit.

[Rico2016]

What happened in the 96 Finals then "game in game out"

Kemp 55% 23.3ppg 10rbs 2.2ast 1.3stl 2.0blk
Pippen 34% 15.7ppg 8.2rbs 5.3ast 2.3stl 1.3blk

Baker and Kemp are close in numbers but not on impact. Baker was pretty skilled but was too inlove with his jumper compared to Kemp who attacked the basket and forced double teams. Not even mentioning the disparity on the defensive end.

Dont mention 96 Finals around MJ stains. Kemp outplayed MJ. Had a better game score too

[Roundball_Rock]

Take your pick of borderline top 10 player. Imagine 25 years later idiots trying to claim that they were equal or better (depending on the level of idiocy) to Harden or Kawhi and that was the "consensus" circa 2020. That is what they are doing with Pippen. With Pippen/Kemp tiers are blended--but Reggie43 thinks it is an affront to Kemp to compare a borderline top 10 player to a top 15 player. with basically an identical resume to Kemp's.

Anyone notice suddenly we aren't hearing a peep about scoring?

MJ stans: "Pippen sucked at scoring. His career high was only 22.0 PPG. Therefore, Pippen was a poor offensive player."
MJ stans: "Kemp! Kemp! He was so awesome!"
Reality: Kemp's career high was 20.5 PPG. Hence scoring suddenly doesn't matter. :oldlol:

Here is what Seattle's paper said about the Baker-Kemp trade at the time:


In what he said "ranks among the biggest deals you can find," the Sonics acquired 6-foot-11 Vin Baker from Milwaukee and sent the disgruntled Kemp to Cleveland.


What matters to the Sonics is they brought in a player who averaged 21 points and 10.3 rebounds last season, which is about what Kemp delivered here. That was Walker's primary criterium, trading talent for similar talent.

So Seattle's GM at the time rated Kemp=Baker. So we have a GM evaluating them as =, we have a raft of experts saying Pippen>>>Kemp. On the other hand, we have 3ball/BSBob, Reggie 43. Let's weight the two camps.


The hidden benefit is that it provides addition by subtraction. Kemp's antics last season - missing team flights, being late for practices and meetings, uninspired play - may have worn on his teammates. The change could be positive for both.

https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19970926&slug=2562608

[Rico2016]

In the past two months, the board has had a user who did nothing but kept lurking and bumping threads, leaving piles of copypasta crap about the same shit most of the time 24/7. The meltdown has been going here for sometime already.

It's so apparent that the dude only does this for a living...

Like, do you get $1 for every related thread you bump or massive texts that you compose? Damn, what a lame ass job for some desperate bummer.. ��

Who hurt you?

[Reggie43]

Keep clinging to that 55 win second round exit as your basis for Pippen being better than his peers. Trying to spin regular season wins as actual impact :oldlol:

Kemp leading his team farther in the playoffs in his career mean anything to you? Baker come playoff time was being outscored by a 35 year old Detlef of all people never averaging above 16 ppg in a playoff run for his career.

You have Pippen better than Ewing which means he is in the next tier with Barkley, Malone, Robinson? Just to be clear which players am I allowed to compare him to considering you get offended if I line him up with Kemp, Mourning, Drexler?

[Roundball_Rock]

Dont mention 96 Finals around MJ stains. Kemp outplayed MJ. Had a better game score too

While Kemp watched his counterpart outplay him. I cut some stuff out to get under the character limit but links for everything.


it wasn't Michael Jordan or Scottie Pippen who carried the team to a championship, it was Rodman, The Worm. Oh sure, Pippen was back in all-star form Sunday night with 17 points, 8 rebounds, 5 assists and 4 steals. And the record will show that Jordan was voted the NBA Finals MVP...

But Chicago's Dream Team Poster Boyz aren't the story of the Bulls' fourth championship in six years. The story, the whole story and nothing but the story is Rodman...


What he did in Game 6 was tear the Seattle SuperSonics apart with 19 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 steals, extraordinary energy for a 35-year-old, a blocked shot and no turnovers in 38 minutes.


Jordan would miss, Rodman would rebound. Pippen would miss, Rodman would rebound, Harper and Kerr and Kukoc would miss, Rodman would rebound. Seattle would miss, Rodman would rebound. This is the way, the only way, you can shoot 39.7 percent and win an NBA title.

You want reviews?

Teammate Luc Longley: "I thought Dennis did everything to win the MVP. He was sensational. Without him, there's no doubt we wouldn't have won tonight."

Seattle Coach George Karl: "Dennis Rodman won them two ballgames in this series. Game 2 and tonight, he was the reason they were successful. We controlled Michael Jordan for the most part in the series. We put him on the foul line a lot {where he was 11 for 12 on Sunday night}, but without that he had a pretty mediocre game."

Bulls Coach Phil Jackson: "It seems like we always got the ball back. Control of the ball was the factor in this game."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/sports/1996/06/17/the-worm-turns-into-a-hero/cc04214f-c758-4987-871c-72b8a1e8367f/Hersey Hawkins?

Another article about Rodman beasting in the finals. https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/08/sports/nba-finals-once-again-rodman-is-most-valuable-bull.html

More quotes from a post on another site:


So Dennis was the best Bulls player in two wins (G2 and G6), Jordan in one (G3 blowout) and basically whole team played great in game 1 blowout win.

After the finals George Karl said: “As you evaluate the series, Dennis Rodman won two basketball games. Game 2 and tonight, he was the reason they were successful.” And some quotes after game 2: “Rodman was definitely the difference,” Hershey Hawkins said. “Rodman killed us,” said Vincent Askew. “There is no question he was the MVP of the game,” Karl said. “His offensive rebounds hurt us. A lot of possessions, the momentum of the game, the style of the game, and even the scoreboard might have changed.”


https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1291915

Where was Shawn Kemp again when all this was happening? No wonder Phil Jackson worried about his (relative lack) of rebounding ability...

[Rico2016]

Keep clinging to that 55 win second round exit as your basis for Pippen being better than his peers. Trying to spin regular season wins as actual impact :oldlol:

Kemp leading his team farther in the playoffs in his career mean anything to you? Baker come playoff time was being outscored by a 35 year old Detlef of all people never averaging above 16 ppg in a playoff run for his career.

You have Pippen better than Ewing which means he is in the next tier with Barkley, Malone, Robinson? Just to be clear which players am I allowed to compare him to considering you get offended if I line him up with Kemp, Mourning, Drexler?

Pippen nearly matched Ewings entire playoff success after one year as a #1 option

[Roundball_Rock]

Keep clinging to that 55 win second round exit as your basis for Pippen being better than his peers. Trying to spin regular season wins as actual impact

Who said that? These are more MJ stan hallucinations.

Playoff wins would be even better impact but Pippen only missed 1 playoff game (loss). There were two he basically missed where he went out after 1 minute (loss), 7 minutes (CHI won but their margin was built in those 7 minutes--Miami fought them to a draw without Pippen).

With Pippen all the available evidence points to him being a high impact player. We haven't seen any provided to show the same for all the other players mentioned.


Kemp leading his team farther in the playoffs in his career

Payton was the #1 option. Now suddenly the #2 deserves equal credit? Wow. :D


Baker come playoff time was being outscored by a 35 year old Detlef of all people never averaging above 16 ppg in a playoff run for his career.

The same Detlef who outscored Kemp in the 94' playoffs? See, cherry picking works both ways.

Baker had only 1 playoff run in his prime, which was 98'.

Kemp>Baker but they were in similar tiers, as Seattle understood.

:lol at Kemp being painted as this playoff god when his team was the biggest playoff chokers of the era.


compare him to considering you get offended if I line him up with Kemp, Mourning, Drexler?

I compared him to Drexler myself. Drexler<Pippen but Drexler at least is a legitimate comparison, same with Ewing. I did several posts comparing Ewing. There was never a response since the purpose here isn't to discuss this players or to discuss Pippen: it is to diss Pippen.

The Kemp, Mourning stuff is just comical. You draw a distinction between Kemp and Baker but not Pippen and Kemp?

As stated several times, we have yet to see any evidence presented for this Kemp hype. It is because it doesn't exist. :lol

[Reggie43]

Quotes taken out of context wont help your case. Put Kemp on the Bulls in place of Rodman and vice versa and the Sonics would have gotten blown out in 4 games

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen nearly matched Ewings entire playoff success after one year as a #1 option

While playing better in the same playoffs. Pippen showed up for 5 of 6 finals; Ewing 0 of 1. Pippen actually won, Ewing never did (rings only matter when MJ and LeBron are discussed, evidently :oldlol:). Pippen was higher in MVP, all-NBA, you name it than Ewing when both were #1 options. Using their own metrics, Pippen>Ewing. :cheers:

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1994

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

Yet the "consensus" was Kemp was better? That means Kemp>Malone, Kemp>Barkley too then, right? :roll:


Quotes taken out of context wont help your case.

What is out of context?

I have a case; you all don't. It is sad.

[Reggie43]

Cant even come up with a tier of players to compare Pippen to aside from Drexler?

I guess that proves how much you overrated his abilities and dont want to get caught comparing him to players that has won Mvps in their careers.

[Roundball_Rock]

The biggest tribute to Pippen is their utter inability to formulate an honest, coherent argument against him. They apply selective criteria towards him and routinely self-own themselves when others notice it and apply it to the players they tout. They cherry pick series--but notice you only hear about a handful? The guy was in the playoffs year after year. It is because even they know his record is strong.

Someone responded to one of their threads by looking at David Robinson's peak playoff series; Robinson struggled in literally half of them. (Needless to say, there was no response--as I said earlier, the goal here isn't to compare players but to toss out a range of names just to diss Pippen, facts be damned).

Here is a chart on player impact. I don't see Kemp, Mourning, or Ewing on here. I see Drexler and Reggie Miller (another favorite of Reggie 43 and co.)--but behind Pippen. Pippen is right behind Hakeem, Kobe and right ahead of Barkley, Allen.

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Jordan-v-GOAT-on-off-results-91-93-50g.png

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is a comparison that not a single MJ stan or you responded to. The Pippen/Ewing discussion ended after facts showed up (just like Pippen/Kemp). :lol


Again, we have to separate the Jordanstan echo chamber from the real world.

Pippen (1991-1998): 20/7/6 with 2 steals, 1 block
Ewing (1988-1997): 24/11/2 with 1 steal, 3 blocks

So fairly similar. MJ stans' don't understand this concept, but an assist counts as much as a basket for the team. Let's say an assist was worth 2.2 points back then. In that case:

Pippen: generated roughly 33 points for his team
Ewing: generated roughly 28 points for his team

Pippen with the greater direct offensive impact.

There are other indirect factors. Ewing's boards resulted in extra possessions for his teams. Pippen's playmaking increased the offense's efficiency overall and that of his teammates in particular. There are no neat stats for these things. Ewing was durable in his heyday so we don't have any Knicks data minus Ewing to compare to the Bulls without Pippen in 94' and 98'.

One note: I used 1988-1997 for Ewing as that covers the span he was an all-NBA player.

Accolades

All-NBA: 7 each
All-NBA 1st team: Pippen 3, Ewing 1
Top 5 in MVP: Ewing 6, Pippen 2 (Pippen's high was 3rd; Ewing's 4th)
Top 10 in MVP: Ewing 7, Pippen 5
All-star: Ewing 10, Pippen 7
All-D: Pippen 10, Ewing 3 (8 first teams for Pippen, 0 for Ewing)

They were selected near each other for the Dream Team. Ewing was 2nd, Pippen 4th. https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/sports/nba-season-preview-pippen-s-stunning-leap-into-jordan-s-league.htm Pippen was higher on Daly's list (3rd, behind MJ and Magic).

Pippen was the superior defender on top of generating more offense.

On net, you would have to give Ewing the edge in accolades. However, Ewing was the #1 option while Pippen's accolades were deflated by being a #2 option, as were his stats. Here is what they did during the brief time both were #1 options:

Pippen 1994, 1995: 22/8/5 (this includes a nosedive courtesy of MJ in late 95')
Ewing 1994, 1995: 24/11/3

Pippen was all-NBA 1st team both years, Ewing was not all-NBA in either season. Pippen was 3rd in MVP in 94' and 7th in 95'; Ewing was 5th and 4th those years.

So Pippen outperformed him when both were #1 options.

All-time wise it isn't close. The verdict is in for both: Pippen is top 20-30 all-time while Ewing is in the top 30-40 range.

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is an analysis from Backpicks which doesn't account for rings, although he factors in a player's impact on his teams. He has Pippen 25th, Ewing 28th now (they are down a few spots since he wrote the pieces 2-3 years ago).

He values player impact on teams, assesses how well players could contribute in different areas (scoring, defense, playmaking), how players fit on differently constructed teams, how they scale up and how portable their skills are, and looks at both peaks and longevity. These are good criteria.

People forget the portability issue. Ewing's more limited skill-set makes it harder for him to fit on a random team than Pippen. Ewing's team success all came on the same type of team: a hard-nosed elite defensive team devoid of any offense, which made them reliant on Ewing to do all the scoring. This was a huge flaw since Ewing lacked the passing ability to make teams pay for double teams and the roster construction meant they lacked the talent to make those shots anyway when he did get the ball out...if you are drafting a team from scratch, Pippen is the choice since you can build a variety of teams around him and have success.

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Pippen-GOAT-card.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Ewing-player-card.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Pippen-seasonal-valuations.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/P-Ewing-seasonal-valuations.png

Pippen closing:



https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/

Ewing closing:



https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/

...

[Reggie43]

Says the dude who thinks Pippen is nearly as good as Jordan :oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

Says the dude who thinks Pippen is nearly as good as Jordan :oldlol:

I didn't say that (I have MJ #2 all-time, Pippen around 23-26). I said that is what the GM's of the Bulls and Sonics thought (Whitsitt and Krause--the Whitsitt quote was posted earlier via an article; Krause said it on a podcast). Take it up with them.


So we have Krause, Whitsitt on one side; Reggie43 and 3ball on the other. Whose opinion to believe? :roll:

You have nothing. No counter case. :pimp: I understand it because your buddies were burned badly when they made a cherry picked attempt that wound up arguing for Pippen inadvertently.

[Reggie43]

You think your walls of bullshit is a counter case? That shit would work on a kid not born yet on the 90s but not on someone who lived the era.

[Reggie43]

How stupid could you get if you think a Pacers/Reggie Miller fan could be a Jordan stan?

[Roundball_Rock]

Again, you have nothing. You can't string together even a couple sentences making a real case for Ewing.

That is the beauty of constructing a case: I and people like me can cite other experts (Backpicks reached the same conclusion I did--I shared their analysis), cite quotes and reporting from the time, cite data, etc. Then let people reach their own conclusion.

You and your crew can't construct a case. When the attempt was made, it backfired badly and you guys lacked the ability to even see that you were often implicitly arguing Pippen>Ewing by your logic (like your logic on the finals saying Pippen>Malone, Drexler, Worthy, KJ, Stockton using your own standard to say Kemp>Pippen). :lol

To be fair, I have a big advantage: I am operating within reality so it isn't hard for me to find mountains of evidence of support my arguments.

[Reggie43]

Again how stupid could you get if you think a Pacers/Reggie Miller fan could become a Jordan stan?

Try living in the 90s when everyone is a Bulls/Jordan fan while supporting the Pacers. Have gotten to huge arguments with friends and almost fistfights with my brother just because of those Bulls Pacers games always pointing out the preferential treatment from the refs Jordan received, his bad attitude and his ballhogging among other things and yet 20 something years after I get called a Jordan stan by some random dude on the net because I did not agree with his agenda :facepalm

[Turbo Slayer]

I disagree with Rodman but he said in a interview with Jackie MacMullan...


"If LeBron was playing during the '90s, I'd still say Scottie Pippen was the second-best player behind Michael Jordan" - Rodman. Huge words from Rodman.

[Roundball_Rock]

I disagree with Rodman but he said in a interview with Jackie MacMullan...

Huge words from Rodman.

Yeah and you can find reporting from back then saying the same too. For example, Bill Walton said it back in 92'. I posted Bob Whitsitt saying it in 96' (Portland's GM then, Seattle's before then) earlier in the thread. Jordan himself said Pippen was the best player in 95' and should be MVP in 96'. We can go on down the line. All day long. Yet Reggie43 and others are swearing up and down Pippen was in the same tier as Kemp, Mourning was not in the same class as Ewing, etc. Yet we are the ones out of touch with reality? :confusedshrug: Where are the quotes to support their "positions"?

The Krause comment (that Pippen was nearly as good as MJ) was from a 2017 podcast with Woj, so confirmed 20 years later.

Reggie43 still has nothing. He is afraid of touching the stove: if he puts forward an argument on Ewing, he will expose his hypocrisy like others did earlier in this thread.

[Reggie43]

Pippen said Kobe is better than Jordan multiple times so do we take it as gospel?

Roundball/3ball whats the difference? Both are some of the worst posters in this board that uses walls of bullshit to prove a point. Just because they belong on different sides doesnt mean one is worse than the other.

A Lebron stan who thinks Pippen is nearly as good as Jordan is probably not worth discussing anything basketball related anyways so this is probably my last say on this.

[Roundball_Rock]

You have nothing. :lol


Pippen said Kobe is better than Jordan multiple times so do we take it as gospel?

We take everything in context. Pick up a history book. They show quotes from the time, newspaper coverage from the time, etc. to illustrate what people thought then. Could you find a newspaper article saying that George Washington sucked? Sure, but that wasn't the consensus.

The Pippen quotes are evidence of Pippen being considered an elite, elite player in a way Kemp or Mourning never were. Drexler achieved the same level--he just didn't last as long at it like Pippen. When a reporter for a major paper says "league observers think..." that is another way of saying "expert consensus." You won't find Kemp being compared to MJ. Guess why?


A Lebron stan who thinks Pippen is nearly as good

Several blatant lies, but goes to your (lack of) integrity. I said I had MJ #2; Pippen 23-26. Anyone can read that. The people who said Pippen was nearly as good happened to be the very people who were the GM's for the Pippen/Kemp trade.

So we heard Kemp! Kemp! Kemp! that and then the facts come out about what the GM's thought and now evidently Whitsitt and Krause are "LeBron stans." I guess Whitsitt's successor is a LeBron stan too for thinking Baker=Kemp? Pippen haters on the internet 25 years later know best!

Finally, I am not a LeBron stan. I am pro-LeBron but I argue against him and his fans at times (like the Wilt thread the other day, Kareem weeks ago). You are identical to MJ stans down to hallucinations about Kemp regarding Pippen. I wonder why? Frankly, you appear to be an alt.

You have an instinct to fight but you have zero tools to bring to a fight.

[Turbo Slayer]

Pippen said Kobe is better than Jordan multiple times so do we take it as gospel?

Roundball/3ball whats the difference? Both are some of the worst posters in this board that uses walls of bullshit to prove a point. Just because they belong on different sides doesnt mean one is worse than the other.

A Lebron stan who thinks Pippen is nearly as good as Jordan is probably not worth discussing anything basketball related anyways so this is probably my last say on this. No one said that Pippen was on the level of Jordan.

There's different levels to this.

[Roundball_Rock]

No one said that Pippen was on the level of Jordan.

There's different levels to this.

Exactly. The point was simple. These guys were arguing Kemp>Pippen or Kemp=Pippen. I pointed to the GM's of their respective teams thinking Pippen was "nearly" as good as MJ as an example of how highly they rated Pippen. I thought it would help them process it better: Pippen rated so highly to be worthy of comparison to the player they love. What better example of Pippen being on another level than Kemp?

This was backed up by reporting at the time where "league observers" by consensus thought Pippen "so superior in ability" to Kemp. Three years later, Seattle's new GM evaluated Kemp as equal to Baker.

The net of all this is to clearly show Pippen was on another level than Kemp, just as MJ was compared to Pippen.

The response? Reggie43 melts down, the others run for the hills. We have yet to see a single shred of evidence to support the claims made about how Pippen was "really" perceived then and for Kemp. Jordanstan is Fantasy Island. :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan stans themselves do the same thing: whenever Drexler comes up they will be quick to point out that Drexler was so good he was compared to MJ at one point. They aren't then saying Drexler>MJ or Drexler=MJ. They simply are saying what I did here: Drexler was so great he at one point was worthy of that comparison. There are only a handful of players in that class, which is why MJ stans proudly point to that (as a prelude to MJ demolishing Drexler in the 92' finals).

So why the double standard? You know why. #badfaith. Which is why the Ewing discussion died: they got exposed.

[Axe]

Who hurt you?
Man, go fvck yourself.

[Axe]

Jeff's keeping Simon off the streets, what a nice guy.
Who is he exactly?