Decline & Fall: Malone and Stockton's Efficiency in the Playoffs

[Roundball_Rock]

These two were among the most efficient players during the regular season but both saw large declines in the playoffs. What gives?

Playoff Efficiency for Malone & Stockton

RS efficiency in parentheses throughout this post.

By eFG% (adjusts for 3’s being worth more)

Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 51.0% (56.0%)

By TS%

Malone 88’-99’: 53.1% (59.1%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 57.3% (62.0%)

These are massive declines. Even David Robinson declined less than they did. Let's compare them to their best positional peers.

By eFG% (adjusts for 3’s being worth more)

Barkley 87’-95’: 53.3% (57.2%)
Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)

By TS

Barkley 87’-95’: 58.3% (62.6%)
Malone 88’-99’: 53.1% (59.1%)

So Barkley against playoff defenses basically is as efficient as Malone was in the regular season. There is a fall-off, albeit smaller, with Barkley but he is starting from a GOAT level of efficiency. How about Stockton and PG's?

eFG %

Penny 95’-97’: 52.5% (53.4%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 51.0% (56.0%)
T. Hardaway 91’-98’: 48.5% (49.7%)
Payton 94’-02’: 50.3% (50.6%)

TS %

Payton 94’-02’: 53.5% (53.7%)
Penny 95’-97’: 57.2% (58.9%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 57.3% (62.0%)
T. Hardaway 91’-98’: 52.9% (53.8%)

So his peers stay remarkably consistent (since most players' efficiency is notably worse in the playoffs). However, they are coming from lower starting points. Unlike Malone/Barkley, though, we are not comparing equal volume. Stockton had extremely low volume for a star of his caliber. His eye-popping efficiency numbers come with a big caveat. Backpicks' explains in its profile of Stockton:


But Stockton’s regular season efficiency is deceptive. He wasn’t an unstoppable force like Shaq, nor did he gain an advantage with marksmanship like Reggie Miller or Steph Curry. Instead, his efficiency was fueled by conservatism — he shot well because he only took premium shots. Look at what happens to Stockton’s profile in the playoffs — it (literally) shrinks. Despite the selectivity, his efficiency fell off along with his scoring:

And:


Stockton’s inability to pressure opponents and create havoc in the lane significantly dampened his impact as an offensive dynamo. Great players don’t have to score, but their threat to score generates global impact. Stockton simply wasn’t capable of this: He scored over 30 points just 11 times in his 11-year prime (1.2 percent of games), and hoisted over 20 true shot attempts just 2.4 percent of the time. This pales in comparison to the great 3-point era point guards, who could call their own number if the defense didn’t respect their scoring enough.

As that chart hints at, the playoffs exposed these weaknesses in Stockton. In 87 postseason games against teams with a defensive rating under 105, Stockton averaged 13.5 points per 36 on 57 percent true shooting, down from 15.5 and 62 percent in the regular season against such competition. Perhaps most importantly, his Box Creation in those games was only around 5 per 100, more inline with the sampling from the scouting report and drastically below some of his regular season estimations. In other words, he wasn’t breaking down defenses the way his assist numbers would suggest.

https://backpicks.com/2018/01/25/backpicks-goat-25-john-stockton/

All this strongly implies choking.

[Roundball_Rock]

In the finals it got even worse:

97' RS efficiency for Malone: 55.0% eFG, 60.0% TS
97' finals efficiency for Malone: 44.3% eFG, 48.5% TS

98' RS efficiency for Malone: 53.1% eFG, 59.7% TS
98' finals efficiency for Malone: 50.4%, 55.3%

97' RS efficiency for Stockton: 59.8% eFG, 65.6% TS
97' Finals efficiency for Stockton: 54.8% eFG, 61.3% TS

98' RS efficiency for Stockton: 56.7% eFG, 62.8% TS
98' Finals efficiency for Stockton: 51.0% eFG, 53.9% TS

Malone's 98' decline is worse because his RS numbers are deflated by Stockton missing the first 18 games. Without Stockton he shot 52.3%; with Stockton 53.2%.

Malone's numbers are shockingly bad for a PF/post player. Here are some other post players:

eFG %

Barkley 87’-95’: 53.3% (57.2%)
Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)
Ewing 88’-97’: 48.3% (51.6%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 53.8% (51.5%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 48.1% (52.5%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.2% (58.0%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 49.4% (53.0%)

TS %

Barkley 87’-95’: 58.3% (62.6%)
Malone 88’-99’: 53.1% (59.1%)
Ewing 88’-97’: 52.8% (56.3%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 54.9% (59.0%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.7% (58.4%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 54.8% (58.7%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 57.8% (55.8%)

[tpols]

your using their Finals numbers against one of the best defensive teams ever and comparing them to other stars against the whole field of teams.

and overall they dont seem that bad in the playoffs at all, their efficiencies are middle of the pack compared to their peers.

[Roundball_Rock]

your using their Finals numbers against one of the best defensive teams ever and comparing them to other stars against the whole field of teams.

That isn't what I did. These are numbers for the playoffs, with RS numbers as a comparison in parentheses. I threw in the finals later on as further evidence of choking--they shriveled even more on the biggest stage.

They did play the Bulls twice but so what? Look at the names here. Who didn't play the Bulls? The WC was the weaker conference defensively so the Jazz never faced the Knicks or Pistons defenses, for instance.


their efficiencies are middle of the pack compared to their peers

That is one way to interpret it (not sure how you reached that conclusion?). The other way is they choked. Nobody else on this list declined as much as they did.

eFG %

Barkley 87’-95’: 53.3% (57.2%)
Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)
Ewing 88’-97’: 48.3% (51.6%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 53.8% (51.5%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 48.1% (52.5%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.2% (58.0%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 49.4% (53.0%)

TS %

Barkley 87’-95’: 58.3% (62.6%)
Malone 88’-99’: 53.1% (59.1%)
Ewing 88’-97’: 52.8% (56.3%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 54.9% (59.0%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.7% (58.4%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 54.8% (58.7%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 57.8% (55.8%)

In absolute eFG%, Malone is at the bottom by far. In TS % he is second to last, ahead of only Ewing. You don't see a problem with 46.5% eFG% from a power forward?

Stockton's efficiency always looks good but he declined almost as much as Malone and his "efficiency" is a result of cherry picking shots in a way no other star PG of his era did.

[Lebron23]

Great posts. They got their numbers due to the Sloan System, but as a duo they under achieved in the post season. Stockton cherry picked his shots unlike his contemporaries Isiah Thomas and Magic Johnson. Thomas was more successful than him because he actually tried to score in the playoffs even playing with an injury.

[tpols]

when the Jazz gave the Bulls as tough a challenge as any team they ever beat, it's hard to hate on them.

numbers going down against a GOAT defense is to be expected. The reason they were ATG defense was because they statistically suppressed opposing teams offenses.

[Roundball_Rock]

Great posts. They got their numbers due to the Sloan System, but as a duo they under achieved in the post season. Stockton cherry picked his shots unlike his contemporaries Isiah Thomas and Magic Johnson. Thomas was more successful than him because he actually tried to score in the playoffs even playing with an injury.

Yup, great points. I am surprised these two get complete passes for being chokers. Robinson gets some accountability but these guys a complete pass.


when the Jazz gave the Bulls as tough a challenge as any team they ever beat

The Jazz would have won if Malone, Stockton, and Hornacek showed up.

The Jazz almost got the Bulls to Game 7 but the same can be said about the Blazers, Suns. The Knicks, Pacers actually did so and of course the Magic, Pistons actually beat them. So not as impressive as it sounds in full context.


numbers going down against a GOAT defense is to be expected

:coleman:

Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 51.0% (56.0%)

That is 139 games for Malone, 128 for Stockton. What happened in the other 127/116 games not against the Bulls?

[Roundball_Rock]

Just separate out 97' and 98' altogether for a quick comparison in eFG%.

Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 51.0% (56.0%)

Malone 88'-96': 47.6%
Malone 96'-97': 45.4%

How about through the first three rounds (raw FG % only since we don't have advanced stats via game logs)? Regular season FG % in parentheses.

Malone in 97': 43.2% (55.0%)
Malone in 98': 45.8% (53.0%)

From 88'-99' Malone's regular season FG % was 52.9%; it dipped to 46.5% in the playoffs. So his level of choking these years was worse than his usual, even if you take the Bulls out.

No matter how you slice it, Malone choked (if we broke out Stockton's numbers to remove the Bulls we would find the same). The Bulls' excuse doesn't fly. They faced the Bulls twice but Ewing faced the Bulls half a dozen times (including four years in a row). Barkley, Shaq, Mourning, Penny, T. Hardaway all faced the Bulls at least twice (Mourning faced them three years in a row). Payton played the Bulls once. The only guys listed here who never played the Bulls in the postseason were Hakeem and Robinson.

[Lebron23]

Original Trash Bros.

[RRR3]

Original Thrash Bros.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6c/98/89/6c9889d7e9a02a64d9f622af21c39a08.jpg

[Real14]

Original Trash Bros.

That's blasphemy and you know it!

[Reggie43]

Pippen "fan" thinking of somebody else's decline and fall of efficiency in the playoffs? What an agenda driven hypocrite.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Pippen "fan" thinking of somebody else's decline and fall of efficiency in the playoffs? What an agenda driven hypocrite.

Pippen had a 52%TS and shot 44% in the playoffs. You wont ever hear bitchass OP call it choking :lol

[Round Mound]

Great Info. As i said before Barkley was the 2nd best player from 89 to 93 and 3rd best player from 93 to 95.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen "fan" thinking of somebody else's decline and fall of efficiency in the playoffs? What an agenda driven hypocrite.

Pippen's decline was -2.5 in TS % (which constitutes "choking" per MJ stans). So Pippen is hammered for the small decrease--yet nothing on -6%? -5%? -4%?

Here are the Pippen #'s compared to superstar SF's of his era, since MJ stans (which you surely are not one of), are obsessed with Pippen's efficiency (but not of any other basketball player's).

Wilkins 86’-94’: 50.9% (54.4%)
Pippen 91’-98’: 52.1% (54.6%)
Pippen 94’: 52.1% (54.4%)
Hill 95’-00’: 51.6% (54.4%)

So Pippen's decline was less than his peers--peers who MJ stans rave about. :lol As usual, the road of "Pippen Sucks Avenue" leads to MJ stans inadvertently ripping his own era and other superstars of that time. Talk about agenda driven hypocrisy.


Pippen had a 52%TS

Exactly. If 52% TS sucks for a SF, what does that make 53% TS for a post playing PF (whose norm was 59% TS, not 54%)? :lebronamazed:

Thank you both for exposing the Pippen criticism is #badfaith. Pippen is a choker for the 2.5% decline; Malone, Robinson, Stockton, Ewing, etc. are all playoff heroes for declining much worse. Malone is a clutch god!

Finally, I know it is news to MJ stans, but there are players other than Pippen, LeBron, and Jordan worth discussing. Not every single thread has to be about 3 players, 2 of them long retired.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Exactly. If 52% TS sucks for a SF, what does that make 53% TS for a PF (whose norm was 59% TS, not 54%)? :lebronamazed:

We know it sucks. :lol Now admit that Pippen was also a choker lol

[Reggie43]

Pippen's decline was -2 in TS % (which constitutes "choking" per MJ stans). So Pippen is hammered for the -2%--yet nothing on -6%? -5%? -4%? Here are the Pippen #'s compared to superstar SF's of his era, since MJ stans (which you surely are not one of), are obsessed with Pippen's efficiency (but not of any other basketball player's).

Wilkins 86’-94’: 50.9% (54.4%)
Pippen 91’-98’: 52.1% (54.6%)
Pippen 94’: 52.1% (54.4%)
Hill 95’-00’: 51.6% (54.4%)

So Pippen's decline was less than his peers--peers who MJ stans rave about. :lol As usual, the road of "Pippen Sucks Avenue" leads to MJ stans inadvertently ripping his own era and other superstars of that time.



Exactly. If 52% TS sucks for a SF, what does that make 53% TS for a PF (whose norm was 59% TS, not 54%)? :lebronamazed:

give me his numbers on the 2nd 3peat then

[StrongLurk]

We know 94-99 was the weakest part of the modern era (intro of 3 point line). No surprise that old Malone and Stockton finally made the finals after never making it at their peaks.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

'96-98 Pippen in the regular-season: .464% shooting
'96-98 Pippen in the playoffs: .408% shooting

TS% in the regular-season: .548%
TS% in the playoffs: .500%TS

Heck, 3ball may be right. Looks like Mike carried this 'choker' :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

We know 94-99 was the weakest part of the modern era (intro of 3 point line). No surprise that old Malone and Stockton finally made the finals after never making it at their peaks.


Yup. People always forget that they only started making finals after Hakeem, Barkley, Drexler all got old. They couldn't beat them when everybody was in their primes.


Great Info. As i said before Barkley was the 2nd best player from 89 to 93 and 3rd best player from 93 to 95.

How many players in history have been that efficient in the playoffs on superstar volume? :bowdown:

If we want to cherry pick years, let's update the OP for Malone.

Malone 1996, 1997 playoffs TS: 50.0% (58.8%)
Malone 1996-1999 playoffs TS: 50.8% (58.9%)

8-9% declines. Ouch! So we all agree Malone was a choker--especially in the years his teams had the best shot to win titles (2 finals, 3 WCF, and in 99' he was MVP again and Utah tied for the best record in the NBA).

[Reggie43]

'96-98 Pippen in the regular-season: .464% shooting
'96-98 Pippen in the playoffs: .408% shooting

TS% in the regular-season: .548%
TS% in the playoffs: .500%TS

Heck, 3ball may be right. Looks like Mike carried this 'choker' :lol

He even has Jordan to take away all the defensive attention from him but he still chokes anyway.

[Roundball_Rock]

Good point. So Malone is playing with the all-time leading assists player to feed him baskets and still declines in a way no other superstar of his era did? Meanwhile, Stockton cherry picks shots to begin with, is playing with the #2 all-time scorer and still falls off massively? How did Barkley and Hakeem do it without having a Stockton?

Maybe I missed a superstar but so far this thread has had the prime numbers for 10-12 players and the only player who approaches Malone is...Stockton. Surprise, surprise: they never won a ring.

[Reggie43]

We all know his 2nd 3peat numbers but op acts like Pippen is some sort of irreplaceable legend who was at his peak for all their runs :oldlol:

[Reggie43]

Is there anything worse than an agenda driven hypocrite on a message board?

[Roundball_Rock]

So you guys agree with the OP. If -2% for an entire prime is choking, and -5% during a cherry picked 3 year time frame is, what does that make 6% for an entire prime and 8-9% for cherry picked samples (one of them being a 4 year sample)?

P.S. you guys aren't bright enough to grasp it, but you are exposing yourself as hypocritical. A PF going from 59% to 53% is not even worth commenting on but a SF going from 54% to 52% is massive choking. There is a word for that. :lol

[Reggie43]

2nd 3peat numbers dont mean much to you? Do you not realize how important that was for the Bulls? But whatever suits your agenda I guess:oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

This is a thread about Malone & Stockton. I acknowledged your own standard--Malone's decline was nearly twice as bad when the same cherry picking was done with him.

If you want to discuss Pippen's efficiency, feel free to create another thread. This thread is not about him but :lol at how MJ stans are obsessed with Pippen. Threads about Malone, Stockton, Isiah, Drexler, Miller all become about Pippen to these nuts.

[Reggie43]

The thread is about your hypocrisy and you rightfully got called out for it.

[3ball]

Pippen had a 52%TS and shot 44% in the playoffs. You wont ever hear bitchass OP call it choking :lol

42% in the Finals for pip

Worst 2nd option stats ever.... 16/6/5

[Roundball_Rock]

The thread is about your hypocrisy and you rightfully got called out for it.

What hypocrisy? I am consistent.

Your own data points to the answer for your own question. If he was -5% for 1996-1998, and -2.5% for the full 8 year prime, that means...?

Pippen playoff TS (1991-1995): 53.5% (54.6%)
Pippen playoff TS (1996-1998): 50.0% (54.8%)

So he remained pretty consistent in the RS and PO for five years. His RS efficiency remained consistent the entire 8 year prime. The delta was three playoff runs. So what was different about those 3 playoff samples versus the prior 5 and versus the 8 RS samples?

Spoiler alert: he was hurt each of those playoff runs. For example, he got hurt around March of the 96' season. His TS % before the all-star break (47 games) was 58.0%; afterwards (30 games) it was 50.0%.

To put this to the test, let's expand the sample to Portland (another 4 seasons since he was making the playoffs outside of Chicago). His PO TS % was 52.4%. His RS TS % was...52.4%.

How about another year? In 90' his PO TS % was 56.9%; in the RS it was 52.8%.

So the guy for his entire career performs consistent in the RS relative to the playoffs--except the 3 playoff runs he was hurt.

What's the explanation for Malone and Stockton? We are talking 10-11 year samples of two players famous for never getting hurt...

As usual, when MJ stans' claims are put under the microscope, they crumble.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

42% in the Finals for pip

Worst 2nd option stats ever.... 16/6/5

You can't use numbers from the Finals.

They're cherry-picked you know? :lol

Poor OP. Created this thread thinking he was making some revelation. Now has to leave here with his down, in shame. Do better next time.

[Reggie43]

When presented with Pippen's weaknesses you act like its not worth anything then you proceed to attack his peers with the same deficiencies with walls of bullshit.

Hypocrisy at its finest :facepalm

[Roundball_Rock]

You guys are not that bright. Do you clowns realize that smart people can see why you are cherry picking 1 out of 6 finals? :lol Or that it is always cherry picking? We never see prime vs. prime comparisons of peers like in the OP. Smart people know why (another one just got exposed in my previous post). You guys are only fooling your fellow echo chamber idiots.

Notice the smart MJ stans (e.g., guy) stay away from that stuff?


When presented with Pippen's weaknesses you act like its not worth anything

What weaknesses? That he started breaking down after making the playoffs ever year without taking years off in the middle?


you proceed to attack his peers with the same deficiencies

If you don't understand mathematics or history, sure (as if -1 or even -2.5% is this Earth shattering decline to anyone with knowledge). The OP is for high IQ individuals.

The beauty of knowledge and command of facts is you can pick the terrain and don't outflank yourself like MJ stans (other than the smart ones) comically do time and again.

[Reggie43]

What weaknesses?

:roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen (SF) career playoff TS %: 52.4% (53.6%)
Malone (PF) career playoff TS %: 52.6% (57.7%)

Pippen is the choker, ladies and gentlemen! :roll:

That is a delta of -1.2%. If that is choking, then who doesn't choke (see the OP #'s--playoff efficiency goes down across the board as the worst half of teams are removed)? This is the issue with your idiocy and why Pippen has become more respected on ISH as the years go by: you keep setting standards by which he comes off coming like a rose because you lack the tools necessary to see implications of your own arguments.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Pippen shot 50%TS in the finals.

I didn't even check the other numbers. But its clear you're desperate now, which is why you're outright LYING :oldlol: MJ haters have no shame.

[tpols]

When presented with Pippen's weaknesses you act like its not worth anything then you proceed to attack his peers with the same deficiencies with walls of bullshit.

Hypocrisy at its finest :facepalm

the funniest thing is pippen's efficiency was totally piss poor against the Jazz. Who were a below average defensive team.

He was putting up 101 ORTG. really bad. To make matters worse, Utah was not elite defensively at all.

So Stockton and Malone put up better numbers against superior defense. GOAT defense.

:facepalm

[Roundball_Rock]

which is why you're outright LYING

What lie? Thanks in advance.


Pippen shot 50%TS in the finals.

Link? I was posting playoff numbers versus RS so I haven't looked at finals. Finals numbers will fall even more relative to PO, since the defenses then are even better.


the funniest thing is that pippen's efficiency was totally piss poor against the Jazz.


So Stockton and Malone put up better numbers

Let's put that to the test.

97' Finals

Player A: 53.2%
Player B: 54.1%
Player C: 48.5%
Player D: 61.8%

98' Finals

Player A: 51.6%
Player B: 50.2%
Player C: 55.3%
Player D: 53.9%

Who is who? These are the four HOF players (Rodman excluded). Since you made the strong claim, you should easily be able to identify which is Pippen, Malone, Jordan, or Stockton. :cheers:


To make matters worse, Utah was not elite defensively at all.

Post a thread about these players against top 5 defenses...

[tpols]

Pippen (SF) career playoff TS %: 52.4% (53.6%)
Malone (PF) career playoff TS %: 52.6% (57.7%)

Pippen is the choker, ladies and gentlemen! :roll:

That is a delta of -1.2%. If that is choking, then who doesn't choke (see the OP #'s--playoff efficiency goes down across the board as the worst half of teams are removed)? This is the issue with your idiocy and why Pippen has become more respected on ISH as the years go by: you keep setting standards by which he comes off coming like a rose because you lack the tools necessary to see implications of your own arguments.

by your very own numbers pippen is worse in playoff efficiency. On way lower volume.

While playing with Michael Jordan.

:biggums:

You... really need to take your L and move on.

[Roundball_Rock]

by your very own numbers pippen is worse in playoff efficiency

:roll: at comparing a perimeter player's efficiency to a post player's. You guys are comical. Watch some basketball games. Youtube.com has a bunch. As if Malone took the same shots (he wasn't a "stretch 4" like you see in today's game) a SF did. Hill, Wilkins are the comps for Pippen for his era.


While playing with Michael Jordan.

So his efficiency must have decreased when MJ left and increased when MJ returned, right? Oh wait...

[Roundball_Rock]

Let's put that to the test.

97' Finals

Player A: 53.2%
Player B: 54.1%
Player C: 48.5%
Player D: 61.8%

98' Finals

Player A: 51.6%
Player B: 50.2%
Player C: 55.3%
Player D: 53.9%

Who is who? These are the four HOF players (Rodman excluded). Since you made the strong claim, you should easily be able to identify which is Pippen, Malone, Jordan, or Stockton. :cheers:

You can't do it, can you? :D Just admit it: everything you know about those series comes from the MJ stan echo chamber on Fantasy Island.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What lie? Thanks in advance.

You posted Malone, Ewing and Pippen's finals efficiency and asked which one was best.

So why did you delete that post? :lol


Link? I was posting playoff numbers versus RS so I haven't looked at finals. Finals numbers will fall even more relative to PO, since the defenses then are even better.

You also posted his finals efficiency. "54%TS" - and then quickly deleted it.

Here you go:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01/gamelog-advanced/1991/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01/gamelog-advanced/1992/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01/gamelog-advanced/1993/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01/gamelog-advanced/1996/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01/gamelog-advanced/1997/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01/gamelog-advanced/1998/

Calculate his total TS% in the finals and divide the numbers by 6. You get 50%TS. That's right. 50%TS.

So '90-98 Pippen, or Pippen in his PRIME, went from 55%TS in the regular-season to 50%TS in the finals. :lol According to you, he isn't a choker though.

[Roundball_Rock]

Calculate his total TS% in the finals and divide the numbers by 6. You get 50%TS. That's right. 50%TS.

Good stuff. -5% is choking in the finals--the standard set by MJ stans themselves. So what is the corresponding decline for his superstar peers in the finals? You have the links up to cover some of them. Why didn't you post the info? :D

[Rico2016]

True Trash Bros strike again

[Reggie43]

What weaknesses? That he started breaking down after making the playoffs ever year without taking years off in the middle?


This dude just implied that the only weakness in Pippen's game are injuries.

How more delusional can you get :facepalm

[Roundball_Rock]

I'll help the effort out.

Ewing: 39.0% finals TS; 55.1% career TS
Malone: 47.8% finals TS: 57.7% career TS

So that is -16.1% and -9.9%. Damn. So if -5% is choking, what is this? :lol

Silly MJ stans. You keep moving the goal posts...and the answer keeps being the same.


True Trash Bros strike again

By their own standards. :roll: They are dumb enough to think they are somehow defending them by moving the goal posts.


This dude just implied that the only weakness in Pippen's game are injuries.

Nope, any intelligent poster can see what I said and what I am doing. :D

[tpols]

Choking is an observable thing. A mental breakdown everybody can see.

Just performing statistically worse than usual against elite defense... isnt choking.

Choking is when you should've won, and lost. Because the pressure to win became to great.

OP is seriously deluded on his definitions and i think based on the responses in this thread that is a verifiable fact.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Good stuff. -5% is choking in the finals--the standard set by MJ stans themselves. So what is the corresponding decline for his superstar peers in the finals? You have the links up to cover some of them. Why didn't you post the info? :D

Do you know?

According to you THAT is choking in the finals. So there's gotta be some guideline you're using here. :confusedshrug:

[Roundball_Rock]

Just performing worse than usual against elite defense... isnt choking.

Fair enough. The problem is, where is your evidence the defense was elite over the course of these 139/127 playoff games? All you have discussed is 9% of the sample size.

That is the problem with your argument: the evidence won't show that your rationale holds up, which you must know.

Interesting point. So we have to factor in quality of defenses now for finals %'s? This is a new standard that has been promulgated. I have seen finals %'s each day on ISH and this is the first I have heard of this new standard.

[Reggie43]

Nope, any intelligent poster can see what I said and what I am doing. :D

Then what are the weaknesses in Pippen's game? Surely an intelligent poster like yourself can be objective and tell us what his deficiencies are?

We all know this and its welll documented in the media but surely a Pippen "superfan" can give more details from what we already know.

*outside of injuries of course :oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

Do you know?

According to you THAT is choking in the finals. So there's gotta be some guideline you're using here :confusedshrug:

No, that is not what I said. I have not looked at finals #'s so I can't comment on what the level of decline is on average for superstars. Logically, finals defenses>>>playoff defenses>>>RS defenses on average. So you would see a decline as the defenses improve. The question is what is the extent of the decline? Is 5% the cut-off for choking? 10? Is it 16% as we saw with Ewing?

You guys invoked the finals (after ceding the playoffs comparison). You tell me: what is the MJ stan standard? It is always great to compare players against the MJ stan standards since the results time and again backfire on MJ stans. :lol

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Well you created the thread. Setting your arbitrary standards.

So...how many percentage points less, playoffs or finals, is considered a 'choke'?

Compared to the regular-season, Pippen had a 5% dropoff in the finals. Does it have to be a 6 or 7% dropoff to meet your criteria? :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Then what are the weaknesses in Pippen's game? Surely an intelligent poster like yourself can be objective and tell us what his deficiencies are?

*Streaky shooter--shot was too flat.
*Relatively poor FT shooter. If he shot 80% instead of 72-73% that would have made a meaningful difference.
*Replacement level 3 point shooter from the NBA 3 point line. If he was just a few ticks better (let's say 37-38%), on his volume, that would have made a difference.
*Good scorer but not a great scorer because of the things listed above.

The problem is idiots rip him apart without doing the analysis of his peers (which would unearth their flaws). So we wind up with people praising other people for being the same or worse at X that he is criticized for.

So we hear daily Pippen is a choker because his TS % fell 2.5% in the playoffs during his prime, which we find out on inspection was driven almost entirely by injuries in 3 of 8 prime playoffs runs (i.e., outside those years he was remarkably consistent in the playoffs relative to the RS year after year). So when someone says "Hey, let me compare Pippen to other superstars" it turns out Pippen is on the low end of declines.

[Roundball_Rock]

Well you created the thread. Setting your arbitrary standards.

The thread was playoffs versus RS numbers because I did the #'s for every 90's superstars and Malone, Stockton were at the bottom. I would have to look at finals numbers and see what the average decline is and who the players on each end of the curve are to develop an idea. If they are at the absolute worst, and there are no proven extenuating circumstances, what would they be called?


Compared to the regular-season, Pippen had a 5% dropoff in the finals.

I suspect the average decrease for superstars in the finals is statistically significantly worse then 5% in the finals...don't you? Look at the #'s in the OP. Look at the playoff declines. Then look at the type of defenses that tend to make the finals. It is pretty likely those 3-4% declines will balloon.

Thus far we have data for 3 superstars:

Pippen -5%
Malone -10%
Ewing -16%

That is an average of 10%. We need a larger sample size, but suppose 10% is the average for all superstars. In that case, 5% is...what?

[Reggie43]

*Streaky shooter--shot was too flat.
*Relatively poor FT shooter. If he shot 80% instead of 72-73% that would have made a meaningful difference.
*Replacement level 3 point shooter from the NBA 3 point line. If he was just a few ticks better (let's say 37-38%), on his volume, that would have made a difference.
*Good scorer but not a great scorer because of the things listed above.

The problem is idiots rip him apart without doing the analysis of his peers (which would unearth their flaws). So we wind up with people praising other people for being the same or worse at X that he is criticized for.

So we hear daily Pippen is a choker because his TS % fell 2.5% in the playoffs during his prime, which we find out on inspection was driven almost entirely by injuries in 3 of 8 prime playoffs runs (i.e., outside those years he was remarkably consistent in the playoffs relative to the RS year after year). So when someone says "Hey, let me compare Pippen to other superstars" it turns out Pippen is on the low end of declines.

No mention of his problems dealing with high pressure games? Getting bullied mentally and physically? Pretty sure a dozen articles have been written about it so why dont you mention it seeing how you love getting quotes from diff sources?

[warriorfan]

Decline of Bron. Joining up with the 2nd and 4th highest PER and getting outscored by Jason Terry in the Finals and losing. Game over.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The thread was playoffs versus RS numbers because I did the #'s for every 90's superstars and Malone, Stockton were at the bottom. I would have to look at finals numbers and see what the average decline is and who the players on each end of the curve are to develop an idea.



I suspect the average decrease for superstars in the finals is statistically significantly worse then 5% in the finals...don't you? Look at the #'s in the OP. Look at this playoff declines. Then look at the type of defenses that tend to make the finals. It is pretty likely those 3-4% declines will balloon.

Thus far we have data for 3 superstars:

Pippen -5%
Malone -10%
Ewing -16%

That is an average of 10%. We need a larger sample size, but suppose 10% is the average for all superstars. In that case, 5% is...what?

Not gonna make any claims without evidence. I might do some for other players and post the numbers here later.

Keep in mind though, those players didn't have Jordan to lean on. For scoring. But that probably didn't compute with your data :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Keep in mind though, those players didn't have Jordan to lean on. For scoring. But that probably didn't compute with your data

Here is what the evidence on Pippen's efficiency with/without MJ shows:

*When MJ retired Pippen became more efficient.
*When MJ returned Pippen became less efficient.

What conclusion is to be reached from this? Moreover, it isn't just Pippen. Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, Williams all became more efficient without MJ. Armstrong is the only one who regressed (on higher volume). If the claim about MJ was accurate, their efficiency would plummet without MJ (like happened to Lakers when Magic left or LeBron's teammates when he leaves).

MJ isn't the type of player who raises his teammate's efficiency (I suspect the same thing would be the case with Kobe's teammates). Facilitators do that. Why no mention from you guys about Stockton's impact on Malone or vice versa? They both had safety valves and still collapsed. :lol


No mention of his problems dealing with high pressure games?

We saw the numbers throughout the thread. If we are looking at Pippen's performance in the playoffs relative to the RS, he comes out basically the same. -1% is evidence of trouble dealing with high pressure games? If we plotted out the career RS/PO numbers for Pippen and other superstars, Pippen's decline would be among the smallest.

By MJ stan's own admission, you have to isolate 3 playoff runs where he was injured because MJ stans can't use the rest of his playoff career when he was healthy. :lol

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Here is what the evidence on Pippen's efficiency with/without MJ shows:

*When MJ retired Pippen became more efficient.
*When MJ returned Pippen became less efficient.

What conclusion is to be reached from this? Moreover, it isn't just Pippen.

From '90 to '93, with Jordan, Pippen in the playoffs shot 48%.
In '94, without Jordan, Pippen in the playoffs shot 43%.

You're not a very good liar :lol

[Reggie43]

Getting bullied mentally and physically goes well beyond the numbers. Migraine game, sitting out the last seconds of a playoff game, choking a 15 point 4th quarter lead to the Lakers as the proclaimed best player on a stacked team, constantly asking for trades in his run with the Bulls etc. Jordan said it best when he talked about how Pippen needed someone to stand next to him to make him stronger probably because he never had it in him to face the physical and mental pressure on his own.

Does any of these things matter to you? There is a reason he got traded for garbage well below his value because teams dont want to deal with the type of baggage he brings to a team.

[Roundball_Rock]

From '90 to '93, Pippen in the playoffs shot 48%FG. With Jordan
In '94, without Jordan, Pippen in the playoffs shot 43%.

Jordan didn't raise his efficiency though. Good one guy :lol

Wait--so now it is about raw FG %? I repeatedly get told by MJ stans you need to use advanced stats (even with unrelated players, like Miller). You know Pippen started taking 3's in 94' so his raw FG % isn't an apples to apples comparison.

First, playoffs are small samples with different opponents. In 94' they faced the #1 defense for 7/10 games. Tpols has been jumping up and down about the Bulls being the #4 and #3 defense so what about the #1 defense? Let's look at the raw data, though, before interpreting things.

Pippen in 93': 47.3% FG, 51.0% TS (with MJ)
Pippen in 94': 49.1% FG, 54.4% TS (no MJ)
Pippen in 95': 48.0% FG, 55.9% TS (no MJ for 80% of the season)
Pippen in 96': 46.3% FG, 55.1% TS (with MJ)

Pippen in 93' playoffs: 46.5% FG, 50.4% TS
Pippen in 94' playoffs: 43.4% FG, 52.1% TS (53.7% against Cleveland)
Pippen in 95' playoffs: 44.3% FG, 54.9% TS
Pippen in 96' playoffs: 39.0% FG, 47.3% TS

So basically all you have to work with is his playoff efficiency increased in 95' versus 94' but they weren't facing the #1 defense in 95' (7 games against the #1 defense, 3 against the #11 defense). Orlando was average (13th of 27, 6 games against them), Charlotte 9th (4 games against them).

MJ stans themselves concede the point: they always talk about his playoff efficiency from 1996-1998. Notice 1994 isn't included in the deal? :lol

Any legit comparison has to include other players and it is clear why we never see that from MJ stans. Tpols is running from the finals efficiency stats for that reason.


#bad faith

Cherry picking. You have to apply the same to any player to get an idea. You guys will go chapter and verse on Pippen but not say a word about other players usually--and if you do it is to praise players for doing worse or the same as what you attack Pippen for.

That isn't serious history and it is why MJ stans are badly losing the war of opinion on ISH. People see throught it. :pimp:


There is a reason he got traded for garbage well below his value because teams dont want to deal with the type of baggage he brings to a team.

Fact check: Portland traded for him to get them over the top.

[Reggie43]

#Cherry picking hypocrite...

[Roundball_Rock]

Entire primes is cherry picking? :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Wait--so now it is about raw FG %? I repeatedly get told by MJ stans you need to use advanced stats (even with unrelated players, like Miller). You know Pippen started taking 3's in 94' so his raw FG % isn't an apples to apples comparison.

I could have posted his TS% too.

:confusedshrug:

Pippen's TS%, in the playoffs and with Jordan, was higher from '90-93...than in 94.

Why are you confused? Or is this all just an act, because you were caught lying again? :lol

[Reggie43]

You didnt even answer the question. What do those well documented massive chokes mean to you? Heck I would probably be on your side without the type of mental baggage that he has given the fact that Pippen and Penny are my fave players in terms of playstyle and I still have Ultimate Defender 1 and 2 plus Complete player 2 saved on my phone.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen's TS%, in the playoffs and with Jordan, was higher from '90-93...than in 94.

:lol Look at that cherry picking. What does his 90' production tell us about him in 94' (which was against the #1 defense for 70% of games)? Even this has a big tell here: notice he wants to use before 94' but not after 94'? After these guys spend each day telling us how "bad" he was in 1996-1998 with MJ? Let's play this game. The small tell? 90' is included. Why? He shot 56.9% in TS that run so need to smuggle that in there. Let the record show this is the first time a MJ stan said anything positive about Pippen in the 90' playoffs. :oldlol:

1991-1993 playoffs TS: 53.6%
1994 playoffs TS: 52.1%
1995-1998 playoffs TS: 50.7%

So even by this weird method the results are mixed. His efficiency was down in 94' compared to prior years against the #1 defense (shocking, right?) but then MJ comes back and it goes down even more.


lying again

"Lying" to MJ stans unable to process information that doesn't fit their agenda.

Pippen in 93': 47.3% FG, 51.0% TS (with MJ)
Pippen in 94': 49.1% FG, 54.4% TS (no MJ)
Pippen in 95': 48.0% FG, 55.9% TS (no MJ for 80% of the season)
Pippen in 96': 46.3% FG, 55.1% TS (with MJ)

Pippen in 93' playoffs: 46.5% FG, 50.4% TS
Pippen in 94' playoffs: 43.4% FG, 52.1% TS (53.7% against Cleveland)
Pippen in 95' playoffs: 44.3% FG, 54.9% TS
Pippen in 96' playoffs: 39.0% FG, 47.3% TS

That is "lying" because it is inconvenient. :lol

BTW, if you do what you did with Pippen and "average the averages" for finals appearances here is what the picture looks like for others in TS % so far:

Pippen: 50.2% (54.6%)
Ewing: 39.0% (55.1%)
K. Malone: 47.8% (57.7%)
Drexler: 55.7% (55.3%)
Payton: 43.4% (53.7%)

It looks like, yet again, using their own standard Pippen comes out looking good.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Hold up. You think using numbers from a players prime...is cherry-picking? lol

'90-93 was Pippen's prime. Same with '94 - his first playoff run without Mike. AND he shot worse. You originally claimed Jordan didn't raise his efficiency...and as we see here, were wrong. Pippen's playoff efficiency IMMEDIATELY dipped without Mike.

So I'll ask again: Where is the confusion???? :confusedshrug:

[Roundball_Rock]

Let's use his own standard with other MJ teammates.

Grant playoff TS % 1991-1993: 59.0%
Grant playoff TS % 1990-1993: 57.7%
Grant playoff TS % 1994-1996: 59.7%

Armstrong playoff TS % 1990-1993: 54.9%
Armstrong playoff TS % 1994-1995: 59.8% (no playoffs in 96' or even 97')

Kukoc playoff TS % 1994: 56.7%
Kukoc playoff TS % 1995-1998: 52.9%

Cartwright playoff TS % 1990-1993: 50.0%
Cartwright playoff TS % 1994: 41.0%

You have Cartwright at least?

How about we do the same analysis to their nemesis' teammates?

Wade playoff TS % 2007-2010: 57.1% (3 playoff runs)
Wade playoff TS % 2011-2014: 53.9%
Wade playoff TS % 2016-2018: 51.5% (no playoffs in 2015)

Bosh playoff TS % 2007-2008: 52.3% (no playoffs in 2009, 2010)
Bosh playoff TS % 2011-2014: 55.9% (no playoffs after 2014)

Irving playoff TS % 2015-2017: 57.3%
Irving playoff TS % 2019: 48.8% (no playoffs before LeBron, only 19' since)

Jamison playoff TS % 2006-2008: 51.4% (no playoffs in 2009)
Jamison playoff TS % 2010: 54.2% (no playoffs in 2011, 2012)

Allen playoff TS % 2010-2012: 58.0%
Allen playoff TS % 2013-2014: 59.0%

Love hasn't made the playoffs without LeBron so we have nothing with him.

With LeBron we have a mixed verdict on Wade when we blend years. Bosh, Jamison, Allen became more efficient with LeBron. Irving became less efficient without him (nothing before LeBron).

Playoffs is a bad way to do it because of small sample sizes and different opponents but it is funny doing it this way shows a different trend with LeBron than MJ.

[Roundball_Rock]

You originally claimed Jordan didn't raise his efficiency...and as we see here, were wrong. Pippen's playoff efficiency IMMEDIATELY dipped without Mike.

Notice how quality of defense faced suddenly doesn't matter, folks? :lol

Pippen in 93': 47.3% FG, 51.0% TS (with MJ)
Pippen in 94': 49.1% FG, 54.4% TS (no MJ)
Pippen in 95': 48.0% FG, 55.9% TS (no MJ for 80% of the season)
Pippen in 96': 46.3% FG, 55.1% TS (with MJ)

Pippen in 93' playoffs: 46.5% FG, 50.4% TS
Pippen in 94' playoffs: 43.4% FG, 52.1% TS (53.7% against Cleveland)
Pippen in 95' playoffs: 44.3% FG, 54.9% TS
Pippen in 96' playoffs: 39.0% FG, 47.3% TS

"Immediately dipped". How dumb do they think people are?

As to the focus on Pippen, the last post shows why. They know whenever the sample is expanded to allow for comparisons...it rarely comes out in favor of their TP.


You think using numbers from a players prime...is cherry-picking?

1991-1998 was his prime, you can argue 1990. Either way, you are cutting it off halfway at 1994. It is obvious why as ISH is reminded of his FG % in the 1996-1998 playoffs daily (1995 too if it is 3ball--but only FG %. No TS for that year!). :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Hakeem:
56%TS from '88-97 (regular-season)
54%TS in the finals (94 and 95 finals)

Drexler:
55%TS from '87-97 (regular-season)
56%TS in the finals (90, 92, and 95 finals)

Miller:
62%TS from '90-00 (regular-season)
59%TS in the finals (2000 finals)

Shaq:
58%TS from '95-05 (regular-season)
61%TS in the finals (95, 00-02, 04 finals)

Robinson:
59%TS from '90-99 (regular-season)
52%TS in the finals (1999 finals)

Payton
54%TS from '93-00 (regular-season)
53%TS in the finals (1996 finals)

Stockton
62%TS from '88-98 (regular-season)
58%TS in the finals (97 and 98 finals)

These are some of the numbers I got. Shaq and Drexler actually raised their efficiency in the finals. Payton and Hakeem didn't see much of a dropoff while Miller was still efficient. Robinson's efficiency definitely declined though.

I'll probably do some for 80s players too, i.e., Magic/Kareem/Bird/Isiah.

[Roundball_Rock]

Payton
54%TS from 93-00 (regular-season)
53%TS in the finals (1996 finals)



Payton and Hakaeem didn't see much of a dropoff

Which excludes 2 of his 3 finals. The #'s for the other two are not pretty...his total "average of averages" is Payton: 43.4% (53.7%, using 94'-02'--he was a role player in 93')...



Robinson:
59%TS from 90-99 (regular-season)
52%TS (1999 finals)

Excludes half his finals. His TS % was great in 03'--just on tiny volume.

This is the problem we will run into. Small sample sizes for most players, some of the sample is old/low volume (which should increase efficiency in theory), and then you have the list of all the superstars with 0 finals. Wilkins, Hill, etc.

RS to PO numbers gives us a large sample.


Robinson's efficiency definitely declined.

Stockton is down 4% too. Is 4% good, 5% terrible? :lol

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Notice how quality of defense faced suddenly doesn't matter, folks? :lol

So now you're moving goal posts.

Pretty convenient after the facts ate your narrative. :lol

The first playoff run for Pippen, without Jordan, and his efficiency declines. Ouch!


Which excludes 2 of his 3 finals. The #'s for the other two are not pretty...his total "average of averages" is Payton: 43.4% (53.7%, using 94'-02'--he was a role player in 93')...

Of course it does. This lists only covers prime play. Just like your OP :oldlol:

You alright dude? Hang in there...


Excludes half his finals. His TS % was great in 03'--just on tiny volume.

Same thing above.


Stockton is down 4% too. Is 4% good, 5% terrible? :lol

I mean, your OP already calls Stockton a 'choker'. So why are you asking me? :confusedshrug:

[Roundball_Rock]

The firs playoff run for Pippen, without Jordan, his efficiency declined

People can read numbers themselves.

Pippen in 93' playoffs: 46.5% FG, 50.4% TS
Pippen in 94' playoffs: 43.4% FG, 52.1% TS (53.7% against Cleveland)

It went up despite facing the #1 defense for 7/10 games. The raw FG % went down but he started taking 3's by 1994.

Plus, narrowing to playoff numbers (to get 7 games of 10 against the #1 defense) concedes the RS (72 game sample size versus 10) numbers improved without MJ. Like it did with nearly every Bull on both teams.


So now you're moving goal posts.

False, I always say to factor in quality of defenses. What I said to tpols is if he can show evidence that quality of defense is what hindered Malone & Stockton--because their numbers outside of 97' and 98' show a stark decline as do their 97' and 98' numbers through three rounds. We clearly can't blame the Bulls' defense for all those declines against other teams...it remains possible, in theory, that they were facing unusually tough defenses but if you are talking 139 games (versus 10), that is highly unlikely.

We still haven't heard an answer on why the Bulls' defense is to blame for their poor performances. That tells me there isn't evidence supporting that notion, that they did the same against other teams. tpols just makes random statements, like saying Pippen had terrible efficiency in the Finals without knowing the #'s for Malone, MJ, and Stockton.


I mean, you already called Stockton a 'choker' in your OP. So why are you asking me? lol

Because I know a MJ stan can't bring himself to say the same about another player with their standard for Pippen...it is amusing to watch the dodging of your own criterions. :lol


This lists only covers prime play.

That makes the tiny sample sizes even smaller.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

People can read numbers themselves.

Pippen in 93' playoffs: 46.5% FG, 50.4% TS
Pippen in 94' playoffs: 43.4% FG, 52.1% TS (53.7% against Cleveland)

Yes they can.

Prime Pippen during the '90-93 Playoffs: 54%TS
Prime Pippen in the '94 Playoffs: 52%TS (first playoff run without Jordan)

Any more questions? :lol


Because I know a MJ stan can't bring himself to say the same about another player with their standard for Pippen...it is amusing to watch the dodging of your own criterions. :lol

I don't play the fanboy sweepstakes like you and other trolls do here. That's all you, guy.

BTW, my criteria? Apparently finals play is a touchy subject for you. What's the problem? lol

[Roundball_Rock]

All the numbers are there for people to read. You basically concede the point by not showing the numbers when MJ came back. The amusing thing is, why? We see those numbers posted a dozen times each day on ISH. :lol You aren't fooling anyone when they see the numbers daily and can see how 52% TS compares to that. In this very thread MJ stans were going on and on about the 1996-1998 numbers pages ago before the goal post shifted to ending his career in 1994. :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Hey man. I'm good knowing I have command over the facts. And that's with having no horse in this race.

:confusedshrug:

Like I said earlier, I'll post some numbers for 80s players ...For research only... :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

The best interpretation you can get for your numbers is 94' was part of a decline trend that continued even with MJ. :lol Knowing those facts doesn't help you--people can easily detect why you are concealing the "after" numbers despite knowing them.

People also will notice the comparisons made by pro-Pippen people include "before" and "after" numbers; MJ stans want to hide the "after" numbers as if people on ISH don't know them by heart by now.

People see through it all. Which is why Pippen's stock keeps rising on ISH, thanks to the "work" of MJ stans. :cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

If you want to pretend '90-92 doesn't exist, you know, Pippen's prime? Do you.

Meanwhile, back over here in reality, people saw Pippen's efficiency immediately decline...his first playoff run without Mike.

[Smoke117]

If you want to pretend '90-92 doesn't exist, you know, Pippen's prime? Do you.

Meanwhile, back over to reality, people see that Pippen's efficiency immediately declined...his first playoff run without Mike.

Pippen had the same exact efficiency vs the Knicks as Jordan did just a year prior. The difference? Jordan actually had a 2nd star while Pippen had role players.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen had the same exact efficiency vs the Knicks as Jordan did just a year prior. The difference? Jordan actually had a 2nd star while Pippen had role players.

He knows that too. :oldlol: He also knows Pippen's efficiency increased in 94' relative to 93' and that when MJ came back it got worse. What he is doing is blending "1990-1992" with 1993 so he can snake in two great % years (even though MJ stans blame Pippen for 90'). But he is hiding the years after 1995-1998 to cut off half his prime and 2/3 his peak--despite MJ stans always bringing up his efficiency numbers in the 1996-1998 playoffs (as you see repeatedly)--because he knows MJ came back, Pippen became less efficient.

The comical thing is MJ stans like Reggie43 fall for transparently deceptive arguments like that; no one outside their bubble does.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Pippen had the same exact efficiency vs the Knicks as Jordan did just a year prior. The difference? Jordan actually had a 2nd star while Pippen had role players.

That's the difference if you are on drugs.

Jordan also averaged 10 more points 'just a year prior'. 32 to Pippen's 22 in 1994.

[Reggie43]

Still waiting on what the massive chokejobs mean for this Pippen "superfan" Everything well documented on the media. Is the"Migraine game" an injury? How about quitting on your team on a playoff game? Also whining about something that he is the one responsible for (signing a bad contract) Asking for trades in the middle of their runs etc.

Whats the effect of all of these in terms of his value? Do teams disregard all of these or are they afraid of the baggage?

Personally if he doesnt have most of that I agree that he is as good as you present him to be but unfortunately shit happens :oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

The net change tells the tale.

MJ TS % against NY 93': 52.2% (boosted heavily by Game 4)
MJ TS % against ATL/CLE 93': 57.6%
MJ TS % against PHX 93': 55.8%
MJ TS % 1993 season: 56.4%

No matter how you slice it, MJ was down noticeably. 4% against his season average, 6% compared to the rest of the EC, and 4% compared to the Suns.

This was a weaker version of the same defense. The 94' team defense was 2 points better.

When they next faced a #1 defense (1997 Heat):

MJ: 47.5% TS (12% on threes)
Pippen: 52.6% TS
Kukoc: 30.3% TS

[Smoke117]

That's the difference if you are on drugs.

Jordan also averaged 10 more points 'just a year prior'. 32 to Pippen's 22 in 1994.

Yeah, he also took 7 more shots. And besides that huge scoring game in game 4 he was pretty much awful scoring wise. In the 5 other games he was averaging 27.8ppg on 25 shot attempts. Iverson like. When they were down 0-2 and went home he was 3/18 for 22 points. An 43%ts. Pippen on the other hand was 10/12 for 29 points with a 88%ts. He had a game high 15.6bpm. Jordan had a 8.7. It's just hilarious to see people getting on Pippen's case in 94 vs the Knicks considering how Jordan was in the playoffs vs them just a year prior.

[Roundball_Rock]

Yeah, he also took 7 more shots. And besides that huge scoring game in game 4 he was pretty much awful scoring wise. In the 5 other games he was averaging 27.8ppg on 25 shot attempts. Iverson like.

He just couldn't stop shooting, even if he was shooting 35% outside of Game 4. He did it on the DT and in all-star games. He had to take the most shots, by far, no matter what.


It's just hilarious to see people getting on Pippen's case in 94 vs the Knicks considering how Jordan was in the playoffs vs them just a year prior.

Yup, and then always tout how great the Knicks' defense was in other threads about MJ's comp but not a peep about that defense in 94' (the best version of any of those Knicks' defenses to boot!)...

[Overdrive]

[...]

ITT you pretty much showed that you're the 3ball of Jordan haters. You made an seeminingly unrelated topic to push your agenda and presetented selective data for certain players. That's all 3ball does aswell. His data is never wrong, but it doesn't present honest points either.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Yeah, he also took 7 more shots. And besides that huge scoring game in game 4 he was pretty much awful scoring wise. In the 5 other games he was averaging 27.8ppg on 25 shot attempts. Iverson like. When they were down 0-2 and went home he was 3/18 for 22 points. An 43%ts. Pippen on the other hand was 10/12 for 29 points with a 88%ts. He had a game high 15.6bpm. Jordan had a 8.7. It's just hilarious to see people getting on Pippen's case in 94 vs the Knicks considering how Jordan was in the playoffs vs them just a year prior.

What is your point? That a better scorer took more shots? lol

Pippen could only muster 22 on the same efficiency Jordan had. The variance here is Mike outscored him by 10 ****ing points. The difference between a good scorer and the GOAT scorer.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Here are some 80s players...for anyone interested.

Bird
57%TS from 82-90 (regular-season)
54%TS in the finals (81/84/85/86/87 finals)

Magic
61%TS from 82-90 (regular-season)
60%TS in the finals (82/83/84/85/87/88/89/91 finals)

Isiah Thomas
52%TS from 84-92 (regular-season)
57%TS in the finals (88/89/90 finals)

Moses Malone
57%TS from '80-90 (regular-season)
52%TS in the finals (81/83 finals)

Doctor J
57%TS from '80-85 (regular-season)
56%TS in the finals (80/82/83 finals)

So far Pippen and maybe 3 of the other 10 players I posted....had a 5%+ decline in efficiency. Don't know if you can label any of this stuff as 'choking'. Still cool to see names you KNEW were big stage players.

[ELITEpower23]

ITT you pretty much showed that you're the 3ball of Jordan haters. You made an seeminingly unrelated topic to push your agenda and presetented selective data for certain players. That's all 3ball does aswell. His data is never wrong, but it doesn't present honest points either.

3ball's data is never wrong?

Looks like a 3ball alt is spotted :lol His data is ALWAYS skewed and ALWAYS wrong. That's his schtick. He lies.

[Smoke117]

ITT you pretty much showed that you're the 3ball of Jordan haters. You made an seeminingly unrelated topic to push your agenda and presetented selective data for certain players. That's all 3ball does aswell. His data is never wrong, but it doesn't present honest points either.

That's actually not true at all. He's posted plenty of numbers that were wrong. Sometimes he doesn't even have the right season even.

[Overdrive]

3ball's data is never wrong?

Looks like a 3ball alt is spotted :lol His data is ALWAYS skewed and ALWAYS wrong. That's his schtick. He lies.

It's skewed, because it's selective, arbitrary. He's like "look at MJ's numbers in games played on monday with red shoes on. Wow 46ppg on 53%, Pippen sucks compared to that." Doesn't make them wrong, doesn't make them representive either.

You couldn't be more wrong about me being his alt. I doubt I live within 10.000km of him. I also don't like Jordan. I just don't like dishonest arguments both for and against players.


That's actually not true at all. He's posted plenty of numbers that were wrong. Sometimes he doesn't even have the right season even.

The stats he posts are real. He just picks them arbitrarely to present his agenda.

[Smoke117]

It's skewed, because it's selective, arbitrary. He's like "look at MJ's numbers in games played on monday with red shoes on. Wow 46ppg on 53%, Pippen sucks compared to that." Doesn't make them wrong, doesn't make them representive either.

You couldn't be more wrong about me being his alt. I doubt I live within 10.000km of him. I also don't like Jordan. I just don't like dishonest arguments both for and against players.



The stats he posts are real. He just picks them arbitrarely to present his agenda.

He's posted wrong numbers, too. I've seen him do it plenty of times when he's attacking a player to undervalue him. Either way, you're right about what you said. He basically disregards context of any kind to prop up his deity. Like he'll give you Pippen's overall stats in the 98 finals without mentioning that he was playing great through the first four games before he hurt his back in game 5.

[HoopsNY]

Yup. People always forget that they only started making finals after Hakeem, Barkley, Drexler all got old. They couldn't beat them when everybody was in their primes.

Let's not forget that Stockton and Malone took the Lakers to 7 games in 1988 and beat Blazers team that a young Drexler-Duckworth-Kersey-Porter. Clyde was in his prime then.

In 1994 they beat a Spurs team with a prime Rodman and Robinson.

In 1996 they beat prime Robinson again.

In 1997 they beat a 57 win Rockets team that had Clyde, Charles, and Hakeem. And while those guys were older, what were Stockton and Malone? Young?

They also beat a prime Shaq in 1997 and in 1998 beat Duncan/Robinson and a prime Shaq again.

[Smoke117]

Let's not forget that Stockton and Malone took the Lakers to 7 games in 1988 and beat Blazers team that a young Drexler-Duckworth-Kersey-Porter. Clyde was in his prime then.

In 1994 they beat a Spurs team with a prime Rodman and Robinson.

In 1996 they beat prime Robinson again.

In 1997 they beat a 57 win Rockets team that had Clyde, Charles, and Hakeem. And while those guys were older, what were Stockton and Malone? Young?

They also beat a prime Shaq in 1997 and in 1998 beat Duncan/Robinson and a prime Shaq again.

Those Spurs teams only even seemed so good because Robinson was so dominant and carried those teams...as the 97 season showed. Spurs in 96 with Robinson...59 wins 3rd in defense, 9th in offense. Spurs in 97 where he plays 8 games at limited mins... 20 wins dead last in defense (29/29), 27th in offense. That kind of fall is the definition of dominance and impact. The Jazz threw double after double at Robinson in the playoffs as they knew none of those other scrubs could beat them.

[Roundball_Rock]

ITT you pretty much showed that you're the 3ball of Jordan haters. You made an seeminingly unrelated topic to push your agenda and presetented selective data for certain players. That's all 3ball does aswell. His data is never wrong, but it doesn't present honest points either.

Really? 1) What does the OP have to do with MJ? 2) Yeah--or I could have done research (try it sometime--you need the education) and found these two are the bottom of the pack. I am going to do a thread on who #1 was. Does that have to do with MJ? I suppose it will-everything does with you nutjobs.

I did not "preselect selective data." I used data for their entire primes. What a moron. :lol Selective data would have been cherry picking 1996-1999 for Malone, for example. Educate yourself about the facts so you know what you are talking about, for once.

Breaking news: Jordan played for 15 years. That meant, at some point, he played almost every superstar in the playoffs. That doesn't make everything about Jordan. Get his dick out your mouth.


Looks like a 3ball alt is spotted His data is ALWAYS skewed and ALWAYS wrong. That's his schtick. He lies.

Yup, and notice he objects to using Malone's entire prime (1989-1999) but not a word about isolating Pippen to 3 years (done in this very thread but by MJ stans day in day, out without a peep from him)? #badfaith He is an "alt" who poses as the objective defender of truth and then complains about a full prime sample size without a word about cherry picking 3 years because the truth is inconvenient, the 3 year deception is convenient.

Also notice not a single one of these MJ stan accounts has anything of substance to say about Malone, Stockton. You can post about Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Isiah, Miller, or anyone else and all they will say is "Pippen! Pippen!". Pippen has them shook. :pimp:

[Roundball_Rock]

The argument MJ stans/MJ stan alts like Overdrive make seems to be this: if a player played against MJ at any point, and if you are critical of him, therefore that is part of a nefarious anti-MJ scheme! :mad: You can't make that level of stupid up.

Yes, I have posted critical things about Malone, Stockton, Miller. Dun, dun, dun! Guilty! Guilty! All three played against MJ, therefore the only explanation for the criticism is to make MJ's competition look bad.

Except for the facts. I also have been favorable to Shaq, Barkely, Isiah, Drexler, Bird. So what is the angle here? Making MJ's competition look good, now?

Then you have the handful of superstars who MJ never faced in the playoffs. Hakeem? Mixed on him. Robinson? Critical. Hill? Mixed. So what is the agenda here? Criticizing Robinson to make MJ's competition look bad--when they never met in the playoffs? :oldlol:

That doesn't even get to that MJ doesn't cover all of basketball history. I have posted favorably and critically of players of other eras. The connection to MJ is...?

Drop the charade. The real goal of MJ stans is to de facto ban criticism of any 90's players but Pippen. Pippen we can go chapter and verse on day in, day out--using the most cherry picked data sets, never showing the numbers for his peers, never showing the numbers for others in the series, never showing you his full prime numbers, never mentioning injuries. Why, all that is a grand ball! Let's go to the daily "Pippen sucks" parade.

Say a word critical of anyone else, even on an issue they claim to deeply care about (playoff efficiency decreases)? Bring out the guillotine.

[Overdrive]

Really? 1) What does the OP have to do with MJ? 2) Yeah--or I could have done research (try it sometime--you need the education) and found these two are the bottom of the pack. I am going to do a thread on who #1 was. Does that have to do with MJ? I suppose it will-everything does with you nutjobs.

I did not "preselect selective data." I used data for their entire primes. What a moron. :lol Selective data would have been cherry picking 1996-1999 for Malone, for example. Educate yourself about the facts so you know what you are talking about, for once.

Breaking news: Jordan played for 15 years. That meant, at some point, he played almost every superstar in the playoffs. That doesn't make everything about Jordan. Get his dick out your mouth.



Yup, and notice he objects to using Malone's entire prime (1989-1999) but not a word about isolating Pippen to 3 years (done in this very thread but by MJ stans day in day, out without a peep from him)? #badfaith He is an "alt" who poses as the objective defender of truth and then complains about a full prime sample size without a word about cherry picking 3 years because the truth is inconvenient, the 3 year deception is convenient.

Also notice not a single one of these MJ stan accounts has anything of substance to say about Malone, Stockton. You can post about Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Isiah, Miller, or anyone else and all they will say is "Pippen! Pippen!". Pippen has them shook. :pimp:

https://i.ibb.co/4srLNZD/20200612-120524.jpg

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?480943-Isiah-Thomas-or-Clyde-Drexler-on-the-Dream-Team&p=14021244&viewfull=1#post14021244

Doubt 3ball lives anywhere close to europe.

Ever since you supposedly came back you paranoidly attack MJ stans while, aside from 3ball and bullettooth, there aren't any left on this board.

I several times argued with 3ball about Jordan. There was an infamous off ball passer thread when he was new.

I told you several times that I don't like either MJ, Kobe or Lebron. I hate idolization, but I also think it's stupid tearing down opponents or teammates. MJ's dick in my mouth. If you knew me personally, you'd laugh at that notion if someone else said that to me. I just think Jordan is unfairly attacked by the horde of Lebron dickriders here and you did nothing to seperate yourself from them rehashing the same points daily.

I never attacked the prime point. I said selective data and you interpreted it about being the years. Karl Malone was a big time choker, but I wouldn't call Stockton one. The biggest problem for his efficiency, that's where the "selective data" comes in play, was that a choking Malone meant that he had to take shots he didn't take else. He was a cherry picker, but for a good reason. Stockton was smart enough to know when he shouldn't take a shot.

Another reason for calling the data selective is leaving out Barkley's '96 season. He still put up almost the same RS numbers as in 95, but his efficiency in the playoffs tanked.

Also way to ignore my follow up post.

[HoopsNY]

Those Spurs teams only even seemed so good because Robinson was so dominant and carried those teams...as the 97 season showed. Spurs in 96 with Robinson...59 wins 3rd in defense, 9th in offense. Spurs in 97 where he plays 8 games at limited mins... 20 wins dead last in defense (29/29), 27th in offense. That kind of fall is the definition of dominance and impact. The Jazz threw double after double at Robinson in the playoffs as they knew none of those other scrubs could beat them.

I understand your point, but the notion that Malone/Stockton were only beating top players when they went over the hill simply isn't true (in response to Roundball's post).

Their finals appearances weren't because they got lucky or guys got over the hill. They got there because they had great teams that worked excellently under the Jerry Sloan system.

Sometimes I think we overthink some players and teams' success. Most of the time, they were just great teams or great players doing great things.

[Roundball_Rock]

You have exposed your faux pose. This thread is fully of nothing but cherry picking, people applying one standard to one player but to no other, etc. Not a peep from you, the self-appointed police commissioner of ISH. Your big beef is apparently 96' should have been included for Barkley, as if that makes a material difference.


MJ stans while, aside from 3ball and bullettooth, there aren't any left on this board.

Only a MJ stan alt account would make such a dumb statement. :lol


I said selective data and you interpreted it about being the years. Karl Malone was a big time choker, but I wouldn't call Stockton one.

Sorry, I can't call -6% choking and then act like -5% is fine--especially since Stockton was known to cherry pick shots. Data is what data is. Unless someone can point to legitimate mitigating circumstances, I can't issue a pass based on the available data.


Malone meant that he had to take shots he didn't take else.

That is an argument in his defense--people are open to provide context and mitigating factors. Instead what we got is an army of MJ stans ranting about Pippen.

The problem with your argument is he always took those shots, so why the nose dive in efficiency? Also, why did no other superstar of the era have the same level of decrease in efficiency?


He was a cherry picker, but for a good reason. Stockton was smart enough to know when he shouldn't take a shot.

No, because he didn't have the skill set to operate on the volume all his PG peers did. Backpicks covered this in his profile.


Another reason for calling the data selective is leaving out Barkley's '96 season.

That is exactly why I put the years so people can contest them if they wish. To be frank, when you are looking at that large a sample a year doesn't make a difference.

1996 he was down to 3rd team all-NBA after being 1st/2nd team all-NBA from 1986-1995. So clearly a decline in 96'. Why did I start at 88', not 86'? That was his first 1st team year.

Your logic is poor: stats. A player can decline but their stats look similar on the surface for a bit longer. I did that with MJ and included 97' and 98' and they howled. So I tightened up the definition of "prime."

If you cared so deeply about it, why didn't you take 60 seconds and add 96' in?


I understand your point, but the notion that Malone/Stockton were only beating top players when they went over the hill simply isn't true

That isn't what anyone says. What we say is they weren't making it out the WC until all those other superstars got old.


In 1994 they beat a Spurs team with a prime Rodman and Robinson.

Robinson had an all-time great meltdown--going from 30 PPG in the RS to 20 PPG in the playoffs--but we never hear about it because Overdrive's buddies are too busy telling us about 22 PPG to 22 PPG in another series the same year.

[HoopsNY]

That isn't what anyone says. What we say is they weren't making it out the WC until all those other superstars got old.

Beating a 25 year old prime Clyde Drexler suddenly doesn't count? Beating a prime Shaq/Jones doesn't count? Beating a prime Robinson/Rodman doesn't count? Or prime Duncan/Robinson?

And it's funny how his WCF opponents suddenly got older, but Stockton and Malone got ......younger? :/

[Roundball_Rock]

What is the explanation for their large playoff declines in efficiency? We have heard Pippen, Pippen, Pippen but nothing on the OP. Malone was down -7%, -6% by the two advanced measures of efficiency. Those are massive declines. Robinson is considered a choker by many and his declines were noticeably smaller. We also hear that -2% is choking. So what is -7%?

It counts but beating one team doesn't get you to the finals. You have to beat three.


And it's funny how his WCF opponents suddenly got older, but Stockton and Malone got ......younger?

In auto racing you can see cars with the same # of laps on their tires but some drivers start making large gains at the end of a tire run because their efficiency did not decline nearly as much as their opponents. So same amount of mileage, but less wear and tear. That is what happened with Malone and Stockton. This was broken down in another thread. Malone actually improved late in his career--his MVP's were at age 33 and 35. His peak was 1997-1999 when he was 1st, 2nd, 1st in MVP voting. Let's compare Malone and Barkley since they were each other's superstar PF rivals and drafted within a year.

First all-NBA year: Barkley 86', Malone 88',
First all-NBA 1st team: Barkley 88', Malone 89'
MVP year(s): Barkley 93', Malone 97'/99'
Last all-NBA 1st team: Barkley 93', Malone 99'
Last all-NBA 2nd team: Barkley 95', Malone 00'
Last year top 5 in MVP: Barkley 93', Malone 00'
Last all-star season: Barkley 97', Malone 02'

Malone simply kept going, and arguably improved (Hakeem also peaked late), as Barkley started to break down. It is striking that Malone was winning MVP in 99'--Barkley would retire early in the very next season.

[HoopsNY]

Malone actually improved late in his career--his MVP's were at age 33 and 35. His peak was 1997-1999 when he was 1st, 2nd, 1st in MVP voting. Let's compare Malone and Barkley since they were each other's superstar PF rivals and drafted within a year.

So Malone sustained a high level of play as he continued, which is somehow to his detriment? I thought you were big on longevity?

I agree that he choked in the playoffs (or maybe faced tougher defenses?). But the notion that they got as far as they did just off the strength of the other guys getting "old and tired" is wrong.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I never attacked the prime point. I said selective data and you interpreted it about being the years. Karl Malone was a big time choker, but I wouldn't call Stockton one. The biggest problem for his efficiency, that's where the "selective data" comes in play, was that a choking Malone meant that he had to take shots he didn't take else. He was a cherry picker, but for a good reason. Stockton was smart enough to know when he shouldn't take a shot.

Another reason for calling the data selective is leaving out Barkley's '96 season. He still put up almost the same RS numbers as in 95, but his efficiency in the playoffs tanked.

Also way to ignore my follow up post.

This.

People can read the thread over for context. Its clear OP just wants to use hyperbole, and ignore data challenging his narrative. I'm game for a good discussion. A back and forth where posters can learn from each other. Rockball isn't really interested in that though.


Even this has a big tell here: notice he wants to use before 94' but not after 94'?

Here's another example.

Makes a claim that Jordan didn't raise Pippen's efficiency...

Yet in the playoffs, Pippen's efficiency decreased right after Mike retired.

'90-93 Pippen shot 54%TS in the playoffs
'94 Pippen shot 52%TS in the playoffs

So clearly you were wrong there. But for sake of argument, if you wanted to go past '94, Pippen shot 55% in '95 - with Jordan :lol

So you were wrong before and wrong now :confusedshrug:

[NBAGOAT]

Malone gets a bit too much blame. Stocktons fall off is quite large however. A big drop in efficiency on his typical role player volume. His assists help for sure but impact is mitigated for me when Utah was usually not impressive offensively in the playoffs and i don’t mean just the Bulls series.

Tbf he was legitimately very good in 97 while Malone wasn’t and should get credit there. 97 being one of the best chances for Utah to win a title means ofc tht year will get a lot of attention.

On to pippen his offensive numbers for sure go down in the po’s but people here know he’s not a choker. So much of his value is the other stuff defense impactful playmaking etc. Malone and Stockton don’t have the defense.

Edit: and on to kunivas finals numbers. They are just too a small sample size even if you play a lot like 5 of them to be super confident.

Like no I don’t believe Isiah is one of the greatest elevators by tht efficiency increase(though his playoff numbers do improve and thts rare).

It’s a 16 game sample size for finals games. We already argue about sample size issues for playoff stats let alone final ones

[Roundball_Rock]

So Malone sustained a high level of play as he continued, which is somehow to his detriment? I thought you were big on longevity?

I am. Which is why I have Malone ahead of Barkley all-time, even though Barkley was the better player.

It is simply context for their team success (separate from individual success--the MVP's he won were tough, one against MJ). You see this in sports all the time. A group of competitors, one outlasts the others. People will note X couldn't beat Y prime versus prime. If the Jazz actually won a championship that would be different but what changed is instead of losing in the WCF they lost one round further.


I agree that he choked in the playoffs (or maybe faced tougher defenses?)

Tougher defenses is the only possible explanation but I find it highly unlikely. With Malone we have 139 playoff games from 1989-1999 in this sample (if you cherry pick 1996-1999 his decline is even worse--remember those -6, -7 percentage numbers are average decreases). So I don't think he faced materially tougher defenses than Hakeem, Robinson, Drexler did in the WC (and Barkley while he was in the WC). If we were comparing a EC player to a WC player that could be a factor as the EC seemed to have tougher defenses. That doesn't help Malone since, if true (and I haven't studied it so don't know for sure the EC defenses were tougher), since Barkley was in the EC for a large chunk of his prime while Malone never was.


Stocktons fall off is quite large however. A big drop in efficiency on his typical role player volume.

That is what is striking about him. He already cherry picked shots, he already had low volume (no other star of that era comes close, except probably Mutumbo) yet his efficiency still nose-dived? Backpicks' explanation is the playoffs exposed limitations in his game as a scorer, limitations that his all-time PG peers didn't have.


Tbf he was legitimately very good in 97 while Malone wasn’t and should get credit there. 97 being one of the best chances for Utah to win a title means ofc tht year will get a lot of attention.

True but he was terrible in 98', as was Hornacek, while Malone showed up that time.


On to pippen his offensive numbers for sure go down in the po’s but people know he’s not a choker

That basically is a MJ stan creation. His decrease is average or slightly lower than average if you compare to other stars of the era. Moreover, it is driven largely by him being injured in the 96'-98' playoff runs (really 96', 98' since in 97' he was still more efficient than MJ):

Pippen's TS % in the playoffs from 1990-1995: 54.0% (54.3%)
Pippen's TS % in the playoffs from 1996-1998: 50.0% (54.8%)
Pippen's TS % in the playoffs in Portland (00-03'): 52.4% (52.4%)

The whole "Pippen went down!" TP is driven by 1996-1998--which is why you keep hearing about those years. Even with that, the decrease is -2.5% for 1991-1998 and -1.9% from 1990-1998. If that is choking, then basically everybody except Hakeem, MJ, 1-2 others is a choker.

He was consistent in the RS/PO for the bulk of his career. That is not the sign of a choker (chokers don't have 6 rings either). Chokers consistently fall off.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Malone gets a bit too much blame. Stocktons fall off is quite large however. A big drop in efficiency on his typical role player volume. His assists help for sure but impact is mitigated for me when Utah was usually not impressive offensively in the playoffs and i don’t mean just the Bulls series.

Tbf he was legitimately very good in 97 while Malone wasn’t and should get credit there. 97 being one of the best chances for Utah to win a title means ofc tht year will get a lot of attention.

On to pippen his offensive numbers for sure go down in the po’s but people here know he’s not a choker. So much of his value is the other stuff defense impactful playmaking etc. Malone and Stockton don’t have the defense.

Edit: and on to kunivas finals numbers. They are just too a small sample size even if you play a lot like 5 of them to be super confident.

Like no I don’t believe Isiah is one of the greatest elevators by tht efficiency increase(though his playoff numbers do improve and thts rare).

It’s a 16 game sample size for finals games. We already argue about sample size issues for playoff stats let alone final ones

I think its fair to call them elevators...if you mean big stage players. Players that objectively up their efficiency in the finals.

Magic basically remained a constant...and played in what? 8 or 9 finals? Isiah played in 3 straight. Shaq in 3 straight and 5 total during his prime.

The sample isn't an 82 game regular-season, but the playoffs are naturally going to smaller. Its hard for anyone to ignore postseason and Finals play.

[Roundball_Rock]

I will note the reason I looked into this data is MJ stans keep hammering Pippen as a playoff decliner--but I noticed they never showed the data for any player. Knowing MJ stans, that is always a tell (they hate Pippen--if they can find data to make look him bad, they will use it, so if there is an omission that means the full data doesn't suit them :lol ). So I looked it up for sixteen players. That exercise showed Malone, Stockton as the worst and Hakeem, Barkley as standouts (for different reasons).

In the interest of transparency, because we have dishonest posters acting like Malone & Stockton are getting deceptively hosed here, here is the raw data (players grouped together by position--I'll place a gap between them to make it easy for younger posters to identify the positional groups):

RS efficiency in parentheses.

By eFG% (adjusts for 3’s being worth more)

Barkley 87’-95’: 53.3% (57.2%)
Malone 88’-99’: 46.5% (53.1%)

Ewing 88’-97’: 48.3% (51.6%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 53.8% (51.5%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 48.1% (52.5%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.2% (58.0%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 49.4% (53.0%)

Jordan 87’-96’: 51.4% (52.5%)
Drexler 88’-95’: 48.4% (49.9%)

Wilkins 86’-94’: 44.0% (48.2%)
Pippen 91’-98’: 47.2% (51.4%)
Hill 95’-00’: 46.4% (48.0%)

Penny 95’-97’: 52.5% (53.4%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 51.0% (56.0%)
T. Hardaway 91’-98’: 48.5% (49.7%)
Payton 94’-02’: 50.3% (50.6%)


By TS%

Barkley 87’-95’: 58.3% (62.6%)
Malone 88’-99’: 53.1% (59.1%)

Ewing 88’-97’: 52.8% (56.3%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 54.9% (59.0%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.7% (58.4%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 54.8% (58.7%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 57.8% (55.8%)

Jordan 87’-96’: 57.7% (58.6%)
Drexler 88’-95’: 54.1% (55.3%)

Wilkins 86’-94’: 50.9% (54.4%)
Pippen 91’-98’: 52.1% (54.6%)
Pippen 94’: 52.1% (54.4%)
Hill 95’-00’: 51.6% (54.4%)

Payton 94’-02’: 53.5% (53.7%)
Penny 95’-97’: 57.2% (58.9%)
Stockton 88’-98’: 57.3% (62.0%)
T. Hardaway 91’-98’: 52.9% (53.8%)

You tell me: what conclusions do you reach about playoff declines? Am I supposed to jack off to Space Jam and ignore who comes out the worst? Why even do the exercise if you are banned from reaching conclusions? :oldlol:

These nutjobs are so MJ obsessed they see anything as anti-MJ. The fact is MJ played against everybody on this list, except Hakeem and Robinson. Does that mean if you criticize one that is "anti-MJ"? If so, if you praise one does that mean you are "pro-MJ"? By that logic, me posting pro-Shaq threads means I am pro-MJ, right? :lol

I also knew MJ stans can't help it: they would expose themselves as hypocritical. Suddenly 52% TS for a SF is choking; 53% TS for a PF or C is fine and dandy. :roll: -7% is great; execute the -2% guy!

Playoff choking is a common discussion so this is a good exercise. I will do the same for today's players--but don't expect MJ stans to enter that thread. ; )

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I'll give credit where its due. Good job posting those numbers, Rockball.

I'm a nerd for that type of stuff. :lol No surprise seeing Jordan, Shaq and Glide basically play at the same level. And arguably up their play (Jordan averaged 2 more points in the playoffs; Shaq was a behemoth in the finals). Ditto with both Hardaway's and Payton. Malone and Robinson are two players known for erratic postseason play so again, no shocker there. Wilkins and Hakeem really stand out though. For me anyway. Nique for the poor efficiency and Hakeem for the clear uptick.

[NBAGOAT]

Yea not advocating for ignoring playoff play but variance has to be considered. One of the simplest things to look at it jump shot percentage.

I guess you can argue you could shoot worse due to psychological pressure but you shouldn’t really be able to shoot better suddenly. It’s a hot streak.

I agree some guys can play better in the playoffs but I don’t attribute it to them “elevating”. I don’t have statistical evidence but personally see it as a result of some stars coasting more during the Rs. Malone and Stockton didn’t play on particularly stacked rosters. I think they went all out during the rs( not missing any games is decent evidence). Magic bird and Isiah meanwhile have all admitted to coasting at times on talented teams.

Lebron didn’t suddenly become a guy who could really “elevate” the last 5 years though his numbers show it. He’s really gotten better as an offensive player but it didn’t show up in his rs numbers a lot because he was coasting more than before

[HoopsNY]

I will note the reason I looked into this data is MJ stans keep hammering Pippen as a playoff decliner--but I noticed they never showed the data for any player. Knowing MJ stans, that is always a tell (they hate Pippen--if they can find data to make look him bad, they will use it, so if there is an omission that means the full data doesn't suit them ). So I looked it up for sixteen players. That exercise showed Malone, Stockton as the worst and Hakeem, Barkley as standouts (for different reasons).

So it goes back to MJ for you....again. smh

[Roundball_Rock]

I guess you can argue you could shoot worse due to psychological pressure but you shouldn’t really be able to shoot better suddenly. It’s a hot streak.

Good points. That is another issue with playoff numbers. You have small samples to begin with, the samples are different for different players, players on better teams actually get punished (tougher defenses as you advance in the playoffs), injuries are more of an issue in the playoffs due to the smaller sample size (so a 2 week injury is a big deal in the PO, not over 82 games), and then you have streakiness too. A player can got hot for a couple games in a 6 game series and look like a monster on paper.

But the obsession on ISH has been postseason numbers, at least with one player, so I wanted to see how that level of decline compared to others. I didn't know Malone, Stockton would come out looking so terrible. I thought Robinson would be there with Malone, Ewing right behind them. That isn't what the data showed.


So it goes back to MJ for you..

Well, if you are talking to people on ISH each day about Pippen's playoff decrease (-2% in his prime in TS)--who day in, day out call him a "choker" going back to when I first started on ISH in 2009, wouldn't you want to know what the corresponding decreases were for every other star of the same era? Especially since you know the intellectual "integrity" of these people? They can't do it. They can't bring themselves to apply their own standards on Pippen to other players. There was some hilarity re Pippen vs. Ewing in another thread on this front. Among other things, it was argued Ewing>Pippen due to playoff efficiency in one run (94'). Guess who actually was the more efficient player (hint: not the center!)? :lol

My regret is not being better able to detect their "tells" of deception earlier on but it helped to get off ISH and go to social media and see another group of MJ stans pushing the same TP. The one defense of myself is MJ stans were not nearly this bad 10 years ago or even 5 years ago. They snapped as LeBron made "GOAT" a debate.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Yea not advocating for ignoring playoff play but variance has to be considered. One of the simplest things to look at it jump shot percentage.

I guess you can argue you could shoot worse due to psychological pressure but you shouldn’t really be able to shoot better suddenly. It’s a hot streak.

I agree some guys can play better in the playoffs but I don’t attribute it to them “elevating”. I don’t have statistical evidence but personally see it as a result of some stars coasting more during the Rs. Malone and Stockton didn’t play on particularly stacked rosters. I think they went all out during the rs( not missing any games is decent evidence). Magic bird and Isiah meanwhile have all admitted to coasting at times on talented teams.

Lebron didn’t suddenly become a guy who could really “elevate” the last 5 years though his numbers show it. He’s really gotten better as an offensive player but it didn’t show up in his rs numbers a lot because he was coasting more than before

This is all fair. The bold is absolutely a real thing though. Russell and Wilt used to talk about nerves before big games. Rod Strickland used to throwup before every one of them.

Some players react different to pressure obviously.

I'm generally big on postseason play though. So to each their own.

[NBAGOAT]

This is all fair. The bold is absolutely a real thing though. Russell and Wilt used to talk about nerves before big games. Rod Strickland used to throwup before every one of them.

Some players react different to pressure obviously.

I'm generally big on postseason play though. So to each their own.

Yea I understated it tbf. It’s mostly agreed upon. Some guys are more consistent than others in how often they can play their A game. Jordan was obviously one of the best there. He and the others obviously deserve more credit.

I just don’t believe in improving to another level past your A game. Also I don’t want to give someone too much credit to a guy who’s just making every jumpshot. He deserves some credit but it has little predictive value.

That even happened with kawhi last year. He dominated the first two rounds of the playoffs especially Philly but then cooled off a bit to his normal self. A lot of that came from shooting 58% from midrange and it’s not like he fixed some flaw in his jumpshot. It was a hot streak.

[Roundball_Rock]

That even happened with kawhi last year. He dominated the first two rounds of the playoffs especially Philly but then cooled off a bit to his normal self. A lot of that came from shooting 58% from midrange and it’s not like he fixed some flaw in his jumpshot. It was a hot streak.

Which makes focusing on the even smaller sample size of one series even more shaky. Kawhi is a good example. There was a discussion of 11' Wade the other day where the same point came up. He roasted the #2 Celtics defense in the ECSF, struggled against the #1 Bulls in the ECF, and was good again against the #8 Mavericks in the finals. So literally series by series up and down. Same player the entire time, though.

There also can be mixed results. A player's FG % can decrease while his FT % increase or vice versa. So the nerves only apply in one case? :lol

Most declines are driven by PO defenses>>>RS defenses. Only when you get to a massive decline like the ones in the OP do you have to start asking other questions.

[NBAGOAT]

Which makes focusing on the even smaller sample size of one series even more shaky. Kawhi is a good example. There was a discussion of 11' Wade the other day where the same point came up. He roasted the #2 Celtics defense in the ECSF, struggled against the #1 Bulls in the ECF, and was good again against the #8 Mavericks in the finals. So literally series by series up and down. Same player the entire time, though.

There also can be mixed results. A player's FG % can decrease while his FT % increase or vice versa. So the nerves only apply in one case? :lol

Most declines are driven by PO defenses>>>RS defenses.

I do agree with that last point. On average everyone should decline a bit because they’re playing better teams and therefore better defenses.

Then there’s other factors like po defenses trying harder, refs calling the games differently and no b2bs etc that range from mostly agreed upon to debatable.

[Roundball_Rock]

I do agree with that last point. On average everyone should decline a bit because they’re playing better teams and therefore better defenses.

Then there’s other factors like po defenses trying harder, refs calling the games differently and no b2bs etc that range from mostly agreed upon to debatable.

True, great points.

Out of curiosity, here are the defenses that made the playoffs last year (82 game sample size, versus this season):

East: 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 15th
West: 2nd, 4th, 10th, 13th, 16th, 18th, 19th, 21st
EC average: 8th
WC average: 13th

How about 1995, given the OP?

East: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 9th, 13th, 21st
West: 5th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 19th
EC average: 7th
WC average: 11th

So in both cases defenses are better than league average, EC defenses>WC defenses. Moreover, I listed all the playoff teams. If you broke it down to the 8 teams that won a playoff series those defenses would be much better.

It also shows how much of a difference the bracket can make in a player's postseason efficiency in a given season. What if one player faces the 2nd and 6th best defenses and the other the 14th and 19th best? Are we to compare their PO numbers at face value?

[NBAGOAT]

True, great points.

Out of curiosity, here are the defenses that made the playoffs last year (82 game sample size, versus this season):

East: 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 15th
West: 2nd, 4th, 10th, 13th, 16th, 18th, 19th, 21st
EC average: 8th
WC average: 13th

How about 1995, given the OP?

East: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 9th, 13th, 21st
West: 5th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 19th
EC average: 7th
WC average: 11th

So in both cases defenses are better than league average, EC defenses>WC defenses. Moreover, I listed all the playoff teams. If you broke it down to the 8 teams that won a playoff series those defenses would be much better.

It also shows how much of a difference the bracket can make in a player's postseason efficiency in a given season. What if one player faces the 2nd and 6th best defenses and the other the 14th and 19th best? Are we to compare their PO numbers at face value?

Well Taylor’s analysis did a decent job getting tht out of the way in his player analysis with rTS%. It’s an oversimplification to just define a defense by opponent TS% but it’s a good start.

On the flip side, a team may be strong defensively because they never give up offensive rebounds but tht shouldn’t matter for an single stars efficiency.

There can be small holes with everything like variance being a factor even during the RS. Sometimes teams will just be good defending the 3 yet the tracking stats show they’re average at contesting. Just have to do the best you can with analysis

[Roundball_Rock]

Is there a place to get rTS% numbers for every player's career? That would break things open a lot more than raw TS %.

[NBAGOAT]

Is there a place to get rTS% numbers for every player's career? That would break things open a lot more than raw TS %.

You just have to do the tedious calculations manually unfortunately or write a good program that takes the data from basketball reference.

[Roundball_Rock]

You just have to do the tedious calculations manually unfortunately or write a good program that takes the data from basketball reference.

Or petition BBallreference to include that. That is a big omission, especially given all the talk about playoff efficiency. That is the most crucial piece of context since players' face different opponents.

You probably should do it by eFG%, since you can't credit an opposing defense for a decline in FT %.

[Overdrive]

You have exposed your faux pose. This thread is fully of nothing but cherry picking, people applying one standard to one player but to no other, etc. Not a peep from you, the self-appointed police commissioner of ISH. Your big beef is apparently 96' should have been included for Barkley, as if that makes a material difference.

Yes, it's full of cherry picking by (what 2 or 3 people? - one being 3ball - check the link, there's one of my rare responses to him in it) people, who are worthless to argue with and kuniva, who's actually a decent poster most of the time. IIRC he's another Lakers guy, who wasn't high on Kobe up until recently.

I think permantely attacking Pippen is one of the most retarded things by some people. He was neither a choker - he got that label for 1 game and a situation, where he didn't even choke - nor was he the scrub 3ball portays him as. Ironically you told 3ball in a thread you respect his opinion, because he keeps it real or something like that.



Only a MJ stan alt account would make such a dumb statement. :lol

Tell me who the stans are? ClippersRevival? Rarely posts any more, but yes he was a stan. SportJames23? He was a stan. Doesn't post anymore after he was gangraped with his '16 bet in any thread he entered. 3ball is a stan, but on a totally different level - reminds me of DeNiro in that one baseball movie. Bullettooth is, but he also posts less. Guy and da-realist aren't stans. Just fans. Never heard much bad about Pippen by them, they just praise Jordan.

I personally don't have any MJ apparel, shoes or anything, while I've got Lebron stuff. When I was a kid I hated MJ and now I'm pretty much impartial. I just hate that the board became a Lebron circle jerk fest in recent years, while these people only do a bunch of things: Prop up Lebron, while leaving out his plunders, diminish his teammates; diminish Jordan, without acknowledging anything positive, prop up his teammates to extreme levels, prop up Lebron's opponents, diminish Jordan's. That's ISH since 2013 for you.

In the first discussion you did partake in I told you it was the first good discussion about Pippen in years, because it wasn't much about Jordan or Lebron, but pretty soon your maintheme became suspecting anyone who doesn't agree with you has to be an MJ stan.



Sorry, I can't call -6% choking and then act like -5% is fine--especially since Stockton was known to cherry pick shots. Data is what data is. Unless someone can point to legitimate mitigating circumstances, I can't issue a pass based on the available data.

I'm not saying it's fine, I'm saying Malone choking led to Stockton choking. If you gave Stockton a guy who could hold up steadier performances I doubt his efficiency drops as much. I'm sure if you give him '94 to '02 Shaq for his best years he wouldn't choke as much.

[Overdrive]

That is an argument in his defense--people are open to provide context and mitigating factors. Instead what we got is an army of MJ stans ranting about Pippen.

The problem with your argument is he always took those shots, so why the nose dive in efficiency? Also, why did no other superstar of the era have the same level of decrease in efficiency?

He took more shots in the playoffs, he played more minutes. There are few outliers in your timespan, but generally the more shots he takes the less efficient he is.
I already once posted, most players have a cap, where they are effiecient when it comes to scoring. Great scorers hit that ceiling later. Stockton's cap for most of his career was pretty low.




No, because he didn't have the skill set to operate on the volume all his PG peers did. Backpicks covered this in his profile.


Pretty much my point. Malone being himself pretty much put pressure on Stockton to be something he wasn't(capable of).



That is exactly why I put the years so people can contest them if they wish. To be frank, when you are looking at that large a sample a year doesn't make a difference.

1996 he was down to 3rd team all-NBA after being 1st/2nd team all-NBA from 1986-1995. So clearly a decline in 96'. Why did I start at 88', not 86'? That was his first 1st team year.

Your logic is poor: stats. A player can decline but their stats look similar on the surface for a bit longer. I did that with MJ and included 97' and 98' and they howled. So I tightened up the definition of "prime."

The whole OP is about stats. Of course Barkley declined and his playoff outing wasn't great. TBH I don't really remember that much as I just started watching back then, but I knew and know he declined by '96 or rather if IIRC he started to decline during the ongoing season and it culmulated in the playoffs.
Schoolfriend of mine was huge on him and that stood out.

But Malone also declined by '99. His MVP was given to him for a lack of a better candidate. Shaq's usual 20(don't how much they were that year to be tbh) missed games cost him alot of MVP chances. The 2000s generation wasn't ready yet and the 90s candiates were either gone or well past their (statistical) prime. Malone put up good stats, because the Jazz' system centered around him, but I doubt he wins that MVP most other years.

Aside from that I think Malone, was highly overrated troughout his career. Great athlete, but perennial underperformer. Not even taking in account his unsportsmanlike behaviour.



If you cared so deeply about it, why didn't you take 60 seconds and add 96' in?


I mostly post from my phone. CBA to check bkref or anything like that on that.

[Overdrive]

Robinson had an all-time great meltdown--going from 30 PPG in the RS to 20 PPG in the playoffs--but we never hear about it because Overdrive's buddies are too busy telling us about 22 PPG to 22 PPG in another series the same year.

Now they're my buddies? Thought I was their alt. Did I ever bash Pippen or call him a choker? Can you bring forth a quote?

I'd also never bash Robinson. First I liked him and he got the choker label while he was the sole real offense on a scrub team. Robinson was in Lebron's 1st Cleveland situation in a conference that was stuffed with better casts(than the Spurs) sans their best player. Still not excuseable to drop that much some runs, but I also think it's unfair. As you posted here, below, playoffs mean a great player like Robinson can't collect wins against the Clippers et al.



So in both cases defenses are better than league average, EC defenses>WC defenses. Moreover, I listed all the playoff teams. If you broke it down to the 8 teams that won a playoff series those defenses would be much better.

wtf can't post more than 3500 characters while there are posts obviously longer. :biggums:

[Roundball_Rock]

Yes, it's full of cherry picking b

I am the one you accused of cherry picking. On what grounds? I made a good faith effort to approximate their primes. There is no clear cut certification of "prime" so there will sometimes be dispute around the edges--that is why I posted the years. If people had issues we could always run the numbers adding/subtracting a year.

The issue with what MJ stans are trying to do is to de facto censor any criticism of any 90's player except Pippen, who is bashed 24/7. This is due to insecurity (they must think MJ's era was weak and its stars would crumble under scrutiny), partly due to their agenda of building up every other star while cherry picking Pippen to diminish him (e.g., if people started applying their logic to other stars, then Pippen looks better--so we can't have any discussions of the flaws of anyone else!). Look at their response.

The OP mentions several players; Pippen wasn't one of them yet they made it a Pippen thread. They haven't said a single thing of substance regarding them, just cherry picking 3 years for Pippen to get to the career average of Stockton and still keep Pippen 1-2% shy of Malone. They don't have the horses to grasp you can cherry pick any player, including the Utah ones, down to 2, 3, 4 year misleading samples-but some of us have intellectual integrity so we post legit sample sizes. Yet that is who you attack?


Tell me who the stans are?

Someone already gave you the list weeks ago. A good rule of thumb, simply go into any Pippen thread and see who routinely is in it. I posted a thread about Hakeem that is the "other end" of this thread--MJ stans aren't ranting and raving there.


pretty soon your maintheme became suspecting anyone who doesn't agree with you has to be an MJ stan.

A distinction without a difference. The people I classify as that are either admitted MJ stans or suspected ones who all fall in the same bucket. There isn't a dimes worth of difference in their stances on Pippen (comparing him to Kemp, that he is a choker, MJ won by himself, the whole 9 yards). What difference does it make to me if 10% or 20% of them are not actually MJ stans (especially when some are alts)? They--as you would say--functionally are acting like MJ stans in those type of MJ or Pippen threads.


I'm saying Malone choking led to Stockton choking. If you gave Stockton a guy who could hold up steadier performances I doubt his efficiency drops as much

That is a reasonable argument. Hard to disentangle since they played together so long--but we do have Malone in LA to look at and he sucked in the finals there (not sure about the whole playoffs).


The whole OP is about stats.

Your accusation was of deceitful data manipulation--which was baseless--and appeared aimed to further the agenda mentioned earlier in the post about suppressing criticisms of any non-Pippen star of the 90's.

[Roundball_Rock]

. Of course Barkley declined and his playoff outing wasn't great. TBH I don't really remember that much as I just started watching back then, but I knew and know he declined by '96 or rather if IIRC he started to decline during the ongoing season and it culmulated in the playoffs.

The issue is Barkley had begun declining after the 93' season. So where do you draw the line? There isn't a clear demarcation. When in doubt, I use accolades. He snapped a long streak of being 1st or 2nd team all-NBA so that is why I cut it off there. 1988-1995 is a sufficient sample size anyway and there was nothing materially different by including/excluding 1996.


But Malone also declined by '99. His MVP was given to him for a lack of a better candidate.

He won his 2nd of 2 MVP's and was 1st, 2nd, 1st in MVP. If that doesn't count for a prime comparison, then nothing does for Malone.


Now they're my buddies? Thought I was their alt. Did I ever bash Pippen or call him a choker? Can you bring forth a quote?

The accusation of me for data manipulation--when I am over there doing the work of looking up their pages and making a good faith effort to attempt to approximate primes--was highly suspect, especially when you said nothing about actual data manipulation.

[Overdrive]

I am the one you accused of cherry picking. On what grounds? I made a good faith effort to approximate their primes. There is no clear cut certification of "prime" so there will sometimes be dispute around the edges--that is why I posted the years. If people had issues we could always run the numbers adding/subtracting a year.

Already replied in the other thread. Your recent "paranoia" made me paranoid myself. Attacking "the original trash brothers" is en vogue on ISH for the sole purpose of propping up Lebron. I took it as that. Your most recent data actually shows that most stars, aside from a select few declined in the playoffs. I won't touch the clowns who trash Pippen with a stick. I - just as in the Melo thread - already told you once that I hate that Pippen became a proxy to bash or prop up Jordan/Lebron. He was a great, greater than most, in his own right.



The issue with what MJ stans are trying to do is to de facto censor any criticism of any 90's player except Pippen, who is bashed 24/7. This is due to insecurity (they must think MJ's era was weak and its stars would crumble under scrutiny), partly due to their agenda of building up every other star while cherry picking Pippen to diminish him (e.g., if people started applying their logic to other stars, then Pippen looks better--so we can't have any discussions of the flaws of anyone else!). Look at their response.

The OP mentions several players; Pippen wasn't one of them yet they made it a Pippen thread. They haven't said a single thing of substance regarding them, just cherry picking 3 years for Pippen to get to the career average of Stockton and still keep Pippen 1-2% shy of Malone. They don't have the horses to grasp you can cherry pick any player, including the Utah ones, down to 2, 3, 4 year misleading samples-but some of us have intellectual integrity so we post legit sample sizes. Yet that is who you attack?


Click the link in my first response. That's what I think of 3ball bringing up Pippen in a non related thread. I hate it. It's unjust and annoying.



Someone already gave you the list weeks ago. A good rule of thumb, simply go into any Pippen thread and see who routinely is in it. I posted a thread about Hakeem that is the "other end" of this thread--MJ stans aren't ranting and raving there.


TBH can't remember it. If you still got it drop me the link.

[Overdrive]

A distinction without a difference. The people I classify as that are either admitted MJ stans or suspected ones who all fall in the same bucket. There isn't a dimes worth of difference in their stances on Pippen (comparing him to Kemp, that he is a choker, MJ won by himself, the whole 9 yards). What difference does it make to me if 10% or 20% of them are not actually MJ stans (especially when some are alts)? They--as you would say--functionally are acting like MJ stans in those type of MJ or Pippen threads.


Maybe, but not anyone defending him is a fan even. I really don't like the inferiority complex driven buffoon Jordan and since Lebron was drafted I was hoping that he could eclipse him. I just don't think he did. He fell short so far, but just like the MJ stans you hate those trolls use the same contrived arguments to prop him up. I just think it's weird that you often agree because they use your favourite player as a ploy to prop him up.



That is a reasonable argument. Hard to disentangle since they played together so long--but we do have Malone in LA to look at and he sucked in the finals there (not sure about the whole playoffs).


I hated the Lakers losing in '04, but Malone staying ringless was pretty bittersweet. We'll never know about Stockton, but anything about his game points to him not being someone who overdoes stuff without the need to.



Your accusation was of deceitful data manipulation--which was baseless--and appeared aimed to further the agenda mentioned earlier in the post about suppressing criticisms of any non-Pippen star of the 90's.


The issue is Barkley had begun declining after the 93' season. So where do you draw the line? There isn't a clear demarcation. When in doubt, I use accolades. He snapped a long streak of being 1st or 2nd team all-NBA so that is why I cut it off there. 1988-1995 is a sufficient sample size anyway and there was nothing materially different by including/excluding 1996.

See the other thread. I jumped to a conclusion. Your point about decline in the other thread is pretty decent, but I think that's an important factor. Some players mentally get finished of in certain playoff runs, while they still produce during the prior regular season.





He won his 2nd of 2 MVP's and was 1st, 2nd, 1st in MVP. If that doesn't count for a prime comparison, then nothing does for Malone.


I think Malone is a pretty curious case. He still put up stats, but I really don't think he was historically that great when he got his MVPs. Utah* and Malone just outlived their competition. '99 was the right moment to still put up good enough numbers to become MVP, but I don't think he was good enough to be MVP any of the following years with the same performance. He was a way better player in the early 90s, but outshone by better, greater players.

*Disclaimer, I think that back to back finals Utah team was well run and pretty decent, but there simply was no challenge for them. Some teams were too old by then, some were shaken up, some were not ready yet.

[Roundball_Rock]

Attacking "the original trash brothers" is en vogue on ISH for the sole purpose of propping up Lebron

What is the reference there? I see that posted but am not aware of it--back when I previously posted they were not referred to.

How do Malone/Stockton relate to LeBron?! What connection is there between those two and LeBron? :wtf:


Your most recent data actually shows that most stars, aside from a select few declined in the playoffs.

Yeah and that is what I expected: declines but generally small. If you look at the list, most people were around -2-3%, which makes sense because they faced tougher defenses. Malone stuck out because he was so much worse in the PO and he was so great in the RS. Stockton got lumped in simply because he was his teammate. If the second worst guy on the list was anyone else it wouldn't have been noteworthy but when the two play together for so long it becomes relevant.


TBH can't remember it. If you still got it drop me the link.

I don't remember the thread. It was a random comment in the middle of a thread. There are at least 12-15 of them (some of them are reasonable like Phoenix but most aren't) and then several more who echo their TP but profess to not be MJ stans.


I just think it's weird that you often agree because they use your favourite player as a ploy to prop him up.

I don't care about the outside agendas. I remember when Kobe stans were pro-Pippen and Kobe stans anti-MJ, MJ stans pro-LeBron. That stuff shifts. Eventually Giannis will emerge and shuffle the alliances again. I can't sway with those winds. We are a small fan base but we are a real, longtime fan base that existed long before anyone knew who Kobe, LeBron were. We can't just subsume ourselves to the agendas of the other fan bases--especially since we see what MJ stans are doing all over the internet regularly.

Wade fans aren't saying anything hostile to LeBron or Westbrook fans to Harden or Curry to Durant, etc. because the other fan base isn't going around 24/7 bashing the other star.

[3ball]

The Finals standard in recent years has been 3 perennial all-stars, aka Big 3's - only 2 teams had this (heat/spurs and cavs/warriors), so those were the only teams making the Finals

Otoh, the 90's standard was 2 stars - more teams were closer to this standard, so the competition was higher variance - a different team emerged from the West bloodbath every year as a completely battle-tested, tough opponent

The Jazz were part of this period of OPTIMAL COMPETITION.. the perfect competitive environment - complete parity.. and their "turn" was 97/98... They were dominant and beat Duncan/Pop, Shaq, and Hakeem to make the 98' Finals... They were a more experienced, battle-tested, and cohesive team than lebron ever faced... :confusedshrug:... A rich man's version of the teams that typically beat him

[Overdrive]

What is the reference there? I see that posted but am not aware of it--back when I previously posted they were not referred to.

How do Malone/Stockton relate to LeBron?! What connection is there between those two and LeBron? :wtf:


It's like "Lebron's opponents great, Jordan's bad." Trash Bros refers to Lowry and DeRozan, who the compare to Stockton and Malone.



Yeah and that is what I expected: declines but generally small. If you look at the list, most people were around -2-3%, which makes sense because they faced tougher defenses. Malone stuck out because he was so much worse in the PO and he was so great in the RS. Stockton got lumped in simply because he was his teammate. If the second worst guy on the list was anyone else it wouldn't have been noteworthy but when the two play together for so long it becomes relevant.

Grant Hill surprised me the most. I remember him declining more.



I don't remember the thread. It was a random comment in the middle of a thread. There are at least 12-15 of them (some of them are reasonable like Phoenix but most aren't) and then several more who echo their TP but profess to not be MJ stans.


Don't notice them much just the outstanding stans. Phoenix I'd put in the fan category. Nothing bad about being a fan. Also he props up most 90s players related to Jordan or not. I just think he loves that era.



I don't care about the outside agendas. I remember when Kobe stans were pro-Pippen and Kobe stans anti-MJ, MJ stans pro-LeBron. That stuff shifts. Eventually Giannis will emerge and shuffle the alliances again. I can't sway with those winds. We are a small fan base but we are a real, longtime fan base that existed long before anyone knew who Kobe, LeBron were. We can't just subsume ourselves to the agendas of the other fan bases--especially since we see what MJ stans are doing all over the internet regularly.

Wade fans aren't saying anything hostile to LeBron or Westbrook fans to Harden or Curry to Durant, etc. because the other fan base isn't going around 24/7 bashing the other star.

I wouldn't care for the agendas either, but most interesting still talked about players are somehow linked to either of the afforementioned 3 players. Wade fans rarely attack Lebron, but it's not the same the other way round. You're right with shifting agendas though.

[Roundball_Rock]

Trash Bros refers to Lowry and DeRozan, who the compare to Stockton and Malone.

:wtf: Malone/Stockton=Lowry/DeRozan?


Grant Hill surprised me the most. I remember him declining more.


That is why the exercise was interesting. Hill's teams never won a series so you would expect bigger declines but it didn't happen.

Robinson was a big surprise to me. I thought Robinson, not Malone, would be the biggest decliner. Maybe he was if we isolate peak vs. peak but alas he definitely wasn't for primes (although he probably declined more than the average).


Phoenix I'd put in the fan category. Nothing bad about being a fan. Also he props up most 90s players related to Jordan or not. I just think he loves that era.

True, Phoenix is good. Guy is annoying but he is smart and he operates within the real world. Same with OSB, but he rarely posts these days.


I wouldn't care for the agendas either, but most interesting still talked about players are somehow linked to either of the afforementioned 3 players Wade fans rarely attack Lebron, but it's not the same the other way round. You're right with shifting agendas though.

Yeah, I was called a Kobe stan for being skeptic of some of the MJ mythology; now they call me a LeBron stan. I'm saying exactly the same stuff re MJ. :lol

One thing to consider: what if Kobe got to 6 rings or surpassed MJ in rings? Would the discussion be different? A lot of the focus on Pippen (from MJ and LeBron fans) and Wade/Irving (MJ fans) is based on the team success discussion. I suspect if Kobe got to 6 or 7 rings MJ stans suddenly wouldn't care about rings and would simply be arguing MJ was just a better player, and that construct may have spilled over to LeBron (or they could have had it both ways: player vs. Kobe, rings vs. LeBron).

[Reggie43]

Are you really this delusional that you deny your obvious clear as day agenda? A Lebron "fan" who thinks he is better than Jordan so he attacks him by pretending to "like" Pippen while also attacking Jordans competition leading to this Malone and Stockton thread and many others.

[Roundball_Rock]

You again--the same guy who ripped Pippen's finals performances but defended Ewing's. :lol Yet he accuses others of bias and agenda. Comical.

Yes, you got me! Guilty as charged. See, the whole plan is to diminish Jordan's competition by:

*Criticizing Malone, Stockton, Miller, Robinson. Three of the four are--by MJ stans' own professed metrics--chokers. Don't forget Robinson--remember that series against the Bulls he was in?
*Praising Magic, Drexler, Barkley, Bird, Isiah, Shaq directly.
*Implicitly praising Price, Mourning, T. Hardaway. I don't say much about them but I include them in discussions of elite players--I don't see many MJ stans mention these guys at all. I get it--most MJ stans never saw them play.
*Basically not saying anything at all about Payton. :confusedshrug:
*Mixed commentary on Hakeem, Ewing. Personally, on net I think Ewing got hosed by an incompetent NY front office. How does that fit into the diabolical MJ paranoia rubric? So I am implicitly saying he was a great player but also saying he didn't have proper help? See, with idiots like you, it would be "anti-MJ" either way.

MJ stans are too busy on the floor looking up to MJ to capture any nuances of people's positions. Everything is a cartoon on your knees, evidently.

I'll let you in on a secret: MJ stans themselves diminish MJ more than anybody else. You fools set these criteria, people like me simply copy and paste it to other players and you guys lack the ability and/or knowledge base (depending on the poster) to understand you are setting traps for yourself.

The Ewing discussion was a perfect example. How dumb and/or ignorant do you have to be to set up 94' playoff efficiency as a gold standard? Ewing had all-time terrible level of efficiency that run. Yet that is the hill you clowns select? :roll:

Re LeBron, guilty as charged again. I am promoting LeBron as GOAT by:

*Saying Kareem is GOAT.
*Saying Wilt, Russell are GOAT candidates who deserve legit consideration. As you know, LeBron stans love making GOAT a 5 horse race, versus a 2 horse race.
*Siding with Kareem, Wilt against LeBron stans in various threads.

Bottom line: MJ stans need to get off the floor and start entering threads that cover something other than Jordan, Pippen, or LeBron. Clicking on this thread is a half-hearted start: you guys clicked on it--but only to talk Pippen (comically saying that if you cherry pick three injured playoff runs, a -5% decline* is choking--which means Malone, Stockton are...once again you clowns own yourselves)

*If you also include the two injured 98' Finals game. A lot of injuries needed to get to the sleight of hand.

[Reggie43]

ripped pippens finals? show me a quote

[BigShotBob]

Still better than the 2007 Spurs, 2013 Spurs, 2011 Mavs, and 2012 Thunder.

[Reggie43]

Any poster not puttting Pippen on an irrepplaceable legendary pedestal is a Jordan stan according to your logic :facepalm

[Reggie43]

Retard thinks every argument made against Pippen is done by one poster :facepalm Putting words on peoples mouths. Been called out by fans from both sides for being unlikeable and paranoid but this shit never stops.

[Reggie43]

Again how stupid could you get if you think a Pacers/Reggie Miller fan is a Jordan stan considering the rivalry between their teams, players and fans?

Is it that bad that I put Pippen, Drexler, Kemp, Mourning in the same tier in terms of impact and ability considering all of them except for Pippen led their own teams to 60+ win seasons? Never even said one is better than the other I said they were on the same "tier"

[Roundball_Rock]

Is it that bad that I put Pippen, Drexler, Kemp, Mourning in the same tier

:lol

So you are placing a consensus top 20-30 all-time player in the same tier as Kemp, Mourning and you are accusing others of bias for having MJ #2 instead of #1? Who cares if you are or are not a MJ stan. You echo their TP and paranoia (why do you diss Pippen but defend Malone/Stockton or Ewing? What is the "Pacers fan" angle in defending rival Ewing or two Utah players? #notaMJstan?).

Get off your knees. Do you have any comments on Malone, Stockton? Afraid to expose more hypocrisy?

[Reggie43]

:lol

So you are placing a consensus top 20-30 all-time player in the same tier as Kemp, Mourning and you are accusing others of bias for having MJ #2 instead of #1? Who cares if you are or are not a MJ stan. You echo their TP and paranoia (why do you diss Pippen but defend Malone/Stockton or Ewing? What is the "Pacers fan" angle in defending rival Ewing or two Utah players? #notaMJstan?).

Get off your knees. Do you have any comments on Malone, Stockton? Afraid to expose more hypocrisy?

Using 6 rings accomplishments (top 20-30 ranking) again to compare impact and ability? How stupid could you get?

[Reggie43]

What would be Pippens rankings if he didnt win 6 rings with Jordan? Or are you so delusional that you believed the quotes you presented that Pippen was nearly as good as Jordan :oldlol:

Search my past posts before our interactions and you would see a ton of praise for Pippen because he is actually my fave player in terms of playstyle along with Penny. In fact every single player I liked after Reggie Miller is based on Pippens game. Kirilenko, Artest, Marion, Odom, Granger, Paul George etc

[Roundball_Rock]

You do understand Drexler, Barkley, Shaq, Isiah, Bird, Ewing were MJ's competition as much or more as Malone, Stockton, Miller (one playoff series, Indy's best came in MJ retirement years)? So were Price, Zo, T. Hardaway.

Your hero MJ played 15 years
He played almost every star at some point in the playoffs. Watch some games
It wasn't just 1998 and Malone, Stockton, Miller...

Using your own logic, if it is anti-MJ to criticize a MJ opponent, isn't it then pro-MJ to post favorably about one?

My opinions on 90's players are based on what I saw; yours revolve around a MJ agenda (Pacers fan doe!). You so obsess about MJ you view a Malone/Stockton thread though MJ's lens. :lol

[Reggie43]

My Hero MJ :oldlol: Are you really this stupid? You also called overdrive a Jordan stan despite him saying multiple times he hates Jordan along with other posters.

So basically anybody who opposes your views on Pippen is a Jordan Stan :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

You do understand Drexler, Barkley, Shaq, Isiah, Bird, Ewing were MJ's competition as much or more as Malone, Stockton, Miller (one playoff series, Indy's best came in MJ retirement years)? So were Price, Zo, T. Hardaway.

Your hero MJ played 15 years
He played almost every star at some point in the playoffs. Watch some games
It wasn't just 1998 and Malone, Stockton, Miller...

Using your own logic, if it is anti-MJ to criticize a MJ opponent, isn't it then pro-MJ to post favorably about one?

My opinions on 90's players are based on what I saw; yours revolve around a MJ agenda (Pacers fan doe!). You so obsess about MJ you view a Malone/Stockton thread though MJ's lens. :lol

Are you able to process the first paragraph? It appears you didn't watch MJ so you don't know who his competition actually was. MJ played from 1985-2003 with some years off. It wasn't just 1998.

Let's accept your point that MJ's only comp was Utah and Indiana. So what? Why does a supposed Pacers fan feel the need to defend Utah or to defend Ewing vis-a-vis Robinson? New York was Indiana's top rival
...

[HoopsNY]

Tell me who the stans are? ClippersRevival? Rarely posts any more, but yes he was a stan. SportJames23? He was a stan. Doesn't post anymore after he was gangraped with his '16 bet in any thread he entered. 3ball is a stan, but on a totally different level - reminds me of DeNiro in that one baseball movie. Bullettooth is, but he also posts less. Guy and da-realist aren't stans. Just fans. Never heard much bad about Pippen by them, they just praise Jordan.

Roundball thinks I'm a stan, which I find ironic, since he does everything he can to tear down MJ's status.

[Roundball_Rock]

Drexler, Barkley were actual rivals of MJ for the best player belt
. Your guys never were. Richmond was considered better than Miller then at SG.

Hoops, that was when I just returned. I don't think that anymore after posting with you more. I disagree with you at times but you are a fan of basketball history and post about more than MJ, Pippen, LeBron

Why does a Pacers fan give a damn about Utah and MJ, Pippen again?

[Reggie43]

Are you able to process the first paragraph? It appears you didn't watch MJ so you don't know who his competition actually was. MJ played from 1985-2003 with some years off. It wasn't just 1998.

Let's accept your point that MJ's only comp was Utah and Indiana. So what? Why does a supposed Pacers fan feel the need to defend Utah or to defend Ewing vis-a-vis Robinson? New York was Indiana's top rival
...

Post the quote wherein I said Indiana and Utah are MJ's only comp.

Again putting stuff on others peoples mouths are you really this stupid?

You got called out multiple times on this thread and the only defense you have for yourself is cherry picked stats and walls of bullshit and you have the gall to complain about someone attacking your credibility :D

[HoopsNY]

Drexler, Barkley were actual rivals of MJ for the best player belt
. Your guys never were. Richmond was considered better than Miller then at SG.

Hoops, that was when I just returned. I don't think that anymore after posting with you more. I disagree with you at times but you are a fan of basketball history and post about more than MJ, Pippen, LeBron

Why does a Pacers fan give a damn about Utah and MJ, Pippen again?

Fair enough. I rescind.

[Reggie43]

Roundball thinks I'm a stan, which I find ironic, since he does everything he can to tear down MJ's status.

You, me, overdrive and countless other posters are apparently MJ stans just because we dont agree with his obvious agenda.

[Roundball_Rock]

Overdrive and I had a long exchange. We both admitted to jumping the gun.

Suppose I do have an agenda of diminishing MJ's comp. So why praise most of his comp then? That is your argument: that a guy who praises most of his comp and holds them in higher regard than most is out to diminish MJ's comp. Bizarre, no?

How about you? Why does a Pacers fan obsess over MJ, compare Pippen to Kemp, and care about Utah? Or defend Ewing versus Robinson? These are all bizarre stances for a supposed Pacers fan. They are the stances of...

Yeah, sorry, Hoops. I came back and was mobbed by MJ stans and stuff got lost in the fog of war. I've seen you on random other threads. I'm there too. These idiots think all I do is post about MJ and Pippen because they never click on other threads.

In this thread several posters came in with good points on Malone, Stockton. These other idiots just kept talking Pippen, MJ. 91 percent of the Malone games in the OP were against the WC.

[Reggie43]

Pretty sure this poster is younger than he presents him to be, probably a dude born in the 90s who just watched and read all about the era.

When you get older you will appreciate basketball more regardless of they were rivals or not. Rooted for Utah in those Finals and they were my default team in the west. Never really supported the Knicks but was rooting for Houston/Spree/Camby till they faced the Pacers. I actually think Shaq is the Goat in terms of single season peak despite him destroying the Pacers multiple times.

[HoopsNY]

Overdrive and I had a long exchange. We both admitted to jumping the gun.

Suppose I do have an agenda of diminishing MJ's comp. So why praise most of his comp then? That is your argument: that a guy who praises most of his comp and holds them in higher regard than most is out to diminish MJ's comp. Bizarre, no?

How about you? Why does a Pacers fan obsess over MJ, compare Pippen to Kemp, and care about Utah? Or defend Ewing versus Robinson? These are all bizarre stances for a supposed Pacers fan. They are the stances of...

Yeah, sorry, Hoops. I came back and was mobbed by MJ stans and stuff got lost in the fog of war. I've seen you on random other threads. I'm there too. These idiots think all I do is post about MJ and Pippen because they never click on other threads.

In this thread several posters came in with good points on Malone, Stockton. These other idiots just kept talking Pippen, MJ. 91 percent of the Malone games in the OP were against the WC.

No worries. We're here to talk about basketball. Though I still think you're dead wrong about Kareem :X

[Roundball_Rock]

You dodged the core points.

1) If I am diminishing MJ'S comp why am I praising most of those players?
2) Why are you viewing every player through the lens of MJ? You claim you aren't a MJ DSer but view every player through him? Malone-Stockton choking in the WC has what to do with MJ? MJ is why they lost the WCF 3 times, right? MJ made Malone choke in the 97' finals, Stockton 98'? That MJ post defense, right?
3) What's your obsession with MJ and Pippen as a Pacers fan? Who cares about them?

Yes, the guy who knows Pippen was considered vastly better than Kemp is the one lying about his age. The kid comparing Pippen to second tier stars is the one who was around then.

[Roundball_Rock]

No worries. We're here to talk about basketball. Though I still think you're dead wrong about Kareem :X

Hah! Hey I can get it. Who your GOAT is depends a lot on your critieria. That's the fun of it. We all have different criteria. But to have MJ 1 or 2 or KAJ 1 or 2 or LeBron or Wilt up there is within reasonable, consensus range. This guy is out there comparing Kemp to Pippen.

[Reggie43]

What part of my posts shows you that I was obsessed about MJ? You are the one being called the 3ball of jordan haters so pretty sure you think about a way to bring him down 24/7 :lol

Is Pippen that legendary that you got triggered when Drexler, Mourning, Kemp, Ewing got compared to him? Is Pippen 9 times out of 10 going to beat the aforementioned players on equal teams? Or is he going to sit out a crucial game or the last seconds of the match :oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

You still haven't answered the question. If the goal is to diminish "MJ's competition" why praise more of his opponents than criticize them?

Drexler, Barkley were more relevant rivals than Malone was. You don't have the knowledge base to understand who MJ actually played against and who was and wasn't relevant. Miller wasn't. :lol


Anyway, let's accept your MJ ("non-fan") insecurity. So what? Why does a supposed Pacers fan account obsess about MJ and shielding some of his opponents?

Some of us care about and want to preserve history, others want to troll to defend agendas. I couldn't care less if MJ stans are upset. That is a good thing. Lie after lie is being exposed
They don't even try so it is easy to expose, like saying the 8th best offense was below average of playoff teams. Do the math.

MJ stans need to do better. It's embarrassing to watch them in action. No one diminishes MJ more than MJ stans.

[HoopsNY]

Hah! Hey I can get it. Who your GOAT is depends a lot on your critieria. That's the fun of it. We all have different criteria. But to have MJ 1 or 2 or KAJ 1 or 2 or LeBron or Wilt up there is within reasonable, consensus range. This guy is out there comparing Kemp to Pippen.

I haven't really looked at the posts comparing Kemp to Pippen, but I believe it might be because there were trade talks with the two of them. Aside from maybe the 1995-96 season, Kemp isn't to be considered on Pippen's level.

[Roundball_Rock]

Any comments on Malone and Stockton? You have a litany of posts about Jordan and Pippen in this thread. As a (supposed) Pacers fan, why again are you viewing a Utah thread through Chicago players? No comment at all on these players?

Admit it. You are an alt. It's you and a bunch of MJ stans doing the same thing, insecure over MJ's comp and lacking the intelligence to grasp the overall context of his comp.

[Roundball_Rock]

He thinks Pippen, Drexler, Ewing, Kemp, Mourning are all in the same tier and Kemp is on another tier than Vin Baker. So guys from top 20 to 80-90 all in one tier to him.


He thinks criticizing Malone, Stockton is somehow anti-MJ but doesn't grasp that by that logic praising Drexler, Barkley, Shaq, and others is "pro-MJ." The goal here seems to be to shut down crtiticism of any 90's player but Pippen. The purpose? That way Pippen can be cherry picked without being exposed for hypocrisy. That's their big beef. On and on about Pippen declining 2 percent in efficiency in the playoffs (and 0.3 percent when healthy in Chicago) and then stomping their feet when someone looks it up for other 90's stars and finds Malone declined far more than 0-2 percent and Stockton was right behind him.

[Reggie43]

Praising some of those players is called misdirection because you are afraid to be called out for your agenda, an example is the out of the blue Olajuwon thread.

Funny thing is you have been exposed multiple times by different posters and even your fellow fans.

[Roundball_Rock]

:lol misdirection, eh? To praise more players than to criticize. Kind of a bad way to misdirect over 11 years. What a moron. Again, why is a supposed Pacers fan viewing everything through the lens of MJ?

Hakeem's thread came out of the same research that led to this thread. Malone, Stockton at the bottom; Hakeem at the top.

You are a 🤡 . This thread is about Malone and Stockton. If you have anything of substance to say about the subject do so or log onto your account. If you want to cry to defend your hero MJ, post a thread about it.

I will not indulge your moronic trolling any longer. You add no value to any thread. Embarrassing.

[Reggie43]

You never even answered how Pippen's lowpoints of his career that were due to his lack of mental strength affect his overall value as a player? Add all those numerous trade demands due to a bad contract that he brought upon himself.

[Reggie43]

Moron still thinks Im a Jordan stan :facepalm Find any decent poster who would say the same.

Why am I a Jordan stan again? Just because I said Kemp is in the same tier as Pippen in terms of impact and ability when anyone who saw the 96 Finals saw how bad Pippen could be while Kemp was at times the best player on the court? Or would you rehash the rodman argument wherein he had 4 more rebounds so he outplayed him :roll:

[Turbo Slayer]

Moron still thinks Im a Jordan stan :facepalm Find any decent poster who would say the same.

Why am I a Jordan stan again? Just because I said Kemp is in the same tier as Pippen in terms of impact and ability when anyone who saw the 96 Finals saw how bad Pippen could be while Kemp was at times the best player on the court? Or would you rehash the rodman argument wherein he had 4 more rebounds so he outplayed him :roll:Attacking another poster. Very productive. I bet you wont say "moron" to someone's face irl.

[Roundball_Rock]

Attacking another poster. Very productive. I bet you wont say "moron" to someone's face irl.

He is an idiot. He doesn't know how good Rodman was in the series, just posts stats. He also doesn't grasp the implication of the (3 injuries) Pippen point in the 96' finals. That is where cherry picking comes in. Pippen 96' finals with 3 injuries! Well, let's use that logic to all the other series he was in...wait, wait, MJ hate! MJ hate! So if we apply their own logic to anyone else, it is MJ hate. Define Kemp by the series of his life; Pippen by his worst.

This clown doesn't realize Pippen outplayed Malone and Stockton two years in a row (until he got hurt late in 98', Malone outplayed him then--injured Pippen still matched healthy Stockton :roll: ). I guess Kemp was the real MVP? If he is better than Pippen, and Pippen better than Malone, right?

[Reggie43]

Attacking another poster. Very productive. I bet you wont say "moron" to someone's face irl.

Are you ignoring the fact that he said it to me first in the prior post?

[Reggie43]

He is an idiot. He doesn't know how good Rodman was in the series, just posts stats. He also doesn't grasp the implication of the (3 injuries) Pippen point in the 96' finals. That is where cherry picking comes in. Pippen 96' finals with 3 injuries! Well, let's use that logic to all the other series he was in...wait, wait, MJ hate! MJ hate! So if we apply their own logic to anyone else, it is MJ hate. Define Kemp by the series of his life; Pippen by his worst.

This clown doesn't realize Pippen outplayed Malone and Stockton two years in a row (until he got hurt late in 98', Malone outplayed him then--injured Pippen still matched healthy Stockton :roll: ). I guess Kemp was the real MVP? If he is better than Pippen, and Pippen better than Malone, right?

Rodman was deemed as good in 96 the same way Iguodala was good when he won Finals Mvp or are you gonna act stupid and ignore this?

[Roundball_Rock]

:lol I posted a thread about Malone, Stockton and MJ stans plus a supposed non-MJ Stan 1) made it about Pippen 2) attacked me 3) said nothing about the OP
Now he is innocent?

Re finals, Pippen outplayed everybody in the finals except Magic, Barkley, Kemp. Payton too but it was close. Worthy, Drexler, Porter, Johnson, Malone, Stockton, Hornacek all outplayed.

ECF? Price, Daugherty, Isiah, Dumars, Daugherty, Ewing, Penny, Mourning, Hardaway, Miller, Smits, Starks. I don't think MJ stans want to go down the "outplayed in series" road...

[Reggie43]

Was the migraine game an injury? Quitting the last seconds of a playoff game some sort of mental disease? Most players has some sort of injury going in deep playoff runs but why are Pippen's magnified?

[Roundball_Rock]

Neck, Most players don't have 3 injuries.

The answer is simple for good faith posters: when healthy Pippen's playoff performance mirror his RS performance, which is impressive given playoff defenses are much better. The outliers are 96' and 98' where he was hurt, especially 96' where he had multiple injuries. 97' he was hurt too but overcame it.

What about Malone and Stockton? 10-11 years of underperforming. Why? As a neutral Pacers fan, surely you have a theory...

His dad died days before the migraine. You are young. Sadly you will learn the pain of this issue. My dad is dying too and you clowns think my priority is freaking MJ.

[Reggie43]

:lol I posted a thread about Malone, Stockton and MJ stans plus a supposed non-MJ Stan 1) made it about Pippen 2) attacked me 3) said nothing about the OP
Now he is innocent?

Re finals, Pippen outplayed everybody in the finals except Magic, Barkley, Kemp. Payton too but it was close. Worthy, Drexler, Porter, Johnson, Malone, Stockton, Hornacek all outplayed.

ECF? Price, Daugherty, Isiah, Dumars, Daugherty, Ewing, Penny, Mourning, Hardaway, Miller, Smits, Starks. I don't think MJ stans want to go down the "outplayed in series" road...

Does he do the same as the best player on his team? Not even agreeing with those you mentioned but it was pretty predictable you think that.

Pippen as the best player on his team with defense's keyed on him was a second round exit but "55wins doe" :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Yeah, the Bulls offense did much better against the Knicks defense than the Pacers, Rockets, or Nets did that year. A supposed Pacers fan should know that
:lol The Bulls also had the best point differential of those teams. MJ stans want to shut down debate to conceal and deceive on stuff like this. Which a supposed non-MJ fan is doing time and again.


Your point is a deflection anyway. We are talking relative performance. There isn't any extra keying that caused Malone to decline 6-8 percent or Stockton by 5.

[Roundball_Rock]

What happened to Reggie against the same defense? 39.5 percent shooting, 1.5 RPG, 2 APG with 2 bites at the apple to make the finals. This after "leading" an offense with a 100 rating against the Knicks. Using your own standard, damn.
.

[Reggie43]

How about answering how Pippens "mentality" and past low moments, trade demands etc affect his value as a player? Asked you this a ton of times but you basically turn a blind eye lol. As I said I would be in your side if those things never happened but guess what it is part of who he is.

[Roundball_Rock]

What happened to Reggie against the same defense? 39.5 percent shooting, 1.5 RPG, 2 APG with 2 bites at the apple to make the finals. This after "leading" an offense with a 100 rating against the Knicks. Using your own standard, damn.
.

This is why a real Pacers fan wouldn't go down this road. 1.5 rebounds, 2 assists and below 40 percent shooting with a finals trip on the line. I could get more rebounds by having the ball just bounce to me a few times. What was Reggie doing out there? 2 assists? How about passing the ball now and then? Didn't have the skills to pass, did he? 100 offensive rating? That is pathetic. Maybe that is why the "#2" option led the team in usage in the series? They needed a better option than their "#1".

Of course you won't defend Reggie but will defend Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Kemp. "Pacers fan" wearing a #23 Jersey. :roll:

[Reggie43]

What happened to Reggie against the same defense? 39.5 percent shooting, 1.5 RPG, 2 APG with 2 bites at the apple to make the finals. This after "leading" an offense with a 100 rating against the Knicks. Using your own standard, damn.
.

Cherry picking bullshit. He averaged 24.7ppg 2.1rbs 2.6 apg 1.4spg .435fg% .419 3p% for the whole series but guess what? he never had the luxury of having a much much better player lead their teams to wins to help his resume like Pippen had.

[Reggie43]

You got offended by that other guy who called you out for cherry picking but you just cant help yourself can you? Guess games earlier in the series dont matter right :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

You brought up the Knicks series in a thread about Malone and Stockton (who you still haven't got MJ's stains off to actually comment on the thread subject). Don't like it? MJ stans need to stop owning themselves. It isn't hard to anticipate other arguments from the same logic.

No rebounds. No assists. No defense. Just shots. It's a basketball game, not the 3 point shooting contest. Do something other than jack shots.

What happens when the shots aren't going down and Person, Schrempf, or Smits, or Rose aren't there to bail you out? First option...except the guy never led the team in usage, did he? Coaches knew what he was. Yet you rip a guy who led the entire league in playoff usage. Reggie would shoot 30 percent on real first option work load. He was fine on 15 (screen for me because I can't get open) shots, though.

[Reggie43]

You brought up the Knicks series in a thread about Malone and Stockton (who you still haven't got MJ's stains off to actually comment on the thread subject). Don't like it? MJ stans need to stop owning themselves. It isn't hard to anticipate other arguments from the same logic.

No rebounds. No assists. No defense. Just shots. What happens when the shots aren't going down and Person, Schrempf, or Smits, or Rose aren't there to bail you out? First option...except the guy never led the team in usage, did he? Coaches knew what he was. Yet you rip a guy who led the entire league in playoff usage. Reggie would shoot 30 percent on real first option work load. He was fine on 15 (screen for me because I can't get open) shots, though.

So what? Do I overrate him the way you do Pippen? Trying to take shots at Miller because you cant defend Pippen's mental/confidence issues is such a classic :oldlol:

Using usage to bring down Miller is just so dumb, quite a few people called you out for it but you never learn.

[Roundball_Rock]

He couldn't get open enough for first option volume. His coaches understood that even if internet clowns 25 years don't. That is why he needed other players around him to take the lead, unlike real #1 options like Alonzo Mourning. Plus he couldn't contribute in any other facet of the game so if his low volume shots aren't going in, he is useless in a game.

Would have been a great 3 on Utah, though. Stockton could create for him since he couldn't create for himself and Malone would demand far more defensive attention than Person, Schrempf, Smits or Rose. Reggie could be in the Hornacek role.

[Roundball_Rock]

Reggie was asked if he could be a player for a day who it would be. Guess who he picked (along with 5 of the 11 Dream Team III players)? Hint: not Kemp...:roll:

[Reggie43]

Reggie was asked if he could be a player for a day who it would be. Guess who he picked (along with 5 of the 11 Dream Team III players)? Hint: not Kemp...:roll:

I actually saw that and I was giving it as an example why I liked Pippen. Been searching hard for it again but never found it.

[Reggie43]

Probably on the documentary about them. They all raved about his all around skills if i remember correctly

[Roundball_Rock]

ESPN article. I have the link somewhere.

The best part is his rationale was he wanted to be a player who could score 4 points and dominate a game yet all we hear is scoring, scoring, scoring on ISH about the same player. Here we have Reggie, whose scoring Pippen haters adore (21 PPG is great; 20 trash evidently) saying he wants to be a guy who can dominate without scoring. It isn't hard to see why he would envy that ability.

It wasn't just him. 5 of 11. That's half the DT III. Hakeem was on the team but Pippen is the guy they wanted to be most. Yet he is a fraud and overrated?

[Reggie43]

Pippen led the 96 team in minutes with 176 with Miller virtually tied at 174. Gold Medal game comes and Miller leads the team with 32 mins total enroute to 20pts 1reb 4asts 2 stls with Drob having 26mins for his team leading 28pts. Pippen managed 18mins for his 4pts 4rebs 2ast and a block.

[Reggie43]

I come off as a Pippen hater because of you but I really like Pippen and never lied about him being my fave player in terms of skills so comparing Pippen and Miller does nothing for me.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen got hurt late in the 96' season and that carried over to the playoffs and summer. His main contribution was leadership on the team.

How about the 92' team? Daly said Pippen was the best player on the team. Jordan said Pippen was the best guard (the other guards were peak Drexler, prime Stockton, Magic). Overrated, doe?

Yeah, I'm a fake Pippen fan. I just know all these details about him from 25-30 years ago. All a plot to boost LeBron (or is it Kobe? Can't get the conspiracies straight since they keep shifting) long before anyone knew who LeBron or Kobe were or how bitter and insecure MJ fans would become many years later.

I'm one of the few guys here who knows any of the nuances of the Bulls' 95' season yet MJ stans who couldn't tell you anything about the season before M Jay returned are the real fans :lol . You come off as a MJ stan because you view every little thing through the MJ lens, just like MJ stans. Bizarre for a Miller or Pacers fan to do that.

[Reggie43]

Pippen got hurt late in the 96' season and that carried over to the playoffs and summer. His main contribution was leadership on the team.

How about the 92' team? Daly said Pippen was the best player on the team. Jordan said Pippen was the best guard (the other guards were peak Drexler, prime Stockton, Magic). Overrated, doe?

Yeah, I'm a fake Pippen fan. I just know all these details about him from 25-30 years ago. All a plot to boost LeBron (or is it Kobe? Can't get the conspiracies straight since they keep shifting) long before anyone knew who LeBron or Kobe were or how bitter and insecure MJ fans would become many years later.

I'm basically the only guy here who knows any of the nuances of the 95' season yet MJ stans who couldn't tell you anything about the season before M Jay returned are the real fans :lol .

A real Pippen fan wont take shots at Jordan and their rivals because those are the players that helped develop Pippens game especially MJ.

We all know Barkley was dubbed as the best player in that 92 dream team regardless of random quotes to praise certain players. He was dubbed that because he played hard on most of the games while other players are coasting because of the talent disparity.

How about the 94 team when Miller was praised as its leader despite all the superstars and veterans on that team? Miller had the most mins by far while being just a point off Shaqs scoring lead. 17.1 ppg 87.5 2p% 52.6 3p% 60.3%fg total.

Can you explain a player like Miller as bad as you describe him almost led 2 dream teams in total mins? With all the bickering about playing time he was most trusted by the coaches because he plays the right way and is extremely coachable.

[Roundball_Rock]

A real Pippen fan wont take shots at Jordan and their rivals because those are the players that helped develop Pippens game especially MJ.

You undercut yourself: by your own logic, since I am favorable to more of that competition than critical, by your bizarre standard I am a "real Pippen fan." Malone and Stockton helped develop Pippen? This is news to me BTW since they played only twice a year until 1997. Stockton wasn't even a starter until 1989.

Not a real Pippen fan--who is my favorite team today? You and your ilk wouldn't know because you guys never talk about the Bulls of the 21st century...


We all know Barkley was dubbed as the best player in that 92 dream team regardless of random quotes to praise certain players.

Misdirection and confusion. First, it wasn't a "random quote". It was from the team's freaking coach. :lol Second, it doesn't really matter if Pippen ranked 1st, 2nd, or 3rd on the Dream Team. The point is he was considered an elite player on the most elite team. Yet he was Shawn Kemp? Third, you are conflating Dream Team III (96') with the 92' team. Another sign you didn't watch back then.


Can you explain a player like Miller as bad as you describe him almost led 2 dream teams in total mins?

He is top 50 all-time but he relies on longevity to get there. His peak was low compared to nearly every single player ahead of him. There is a reason he made only three all-NBA teams--all third teams. Yet you say a guy who made three 1st teams alone in the same era sucks?

Let's recap your conspiracy theories:

*I am a closet LeBron fan. 90% of the people saying that for 4-5 years said I was a closet Kobe fan. Now it is LeBron. Oceania was always at war with Eurasia, right? :lol
*I collected information about Pippen from the 90's when no one knew who LeBron or Kobe was. I was watching the game he threw the chair on weeknight against the worst team in the league for LeBron who was 11 at the time.
*I am out to get Jordan's "rivals" (he had no real rival--stop diminishing him by comparing him to inferior players) but I praise most of his rivals.

Anyway, let's stipulate the above nonsense is true. Why does a "Pacers fan" care? Players are attacked all the time. Why the affection for MJ?

Bias?

The real test of bias is not whether you like or dislike a player. It is applying varying sets of standards for players based on what suits an agenda versus having consistent criteria. You have been in many of these threads. Posters switching "views" within posts. Even within the same paragraph at times--all based on who they are talking about at a given moment. This should raise your ire, right? You said nothing. In fact, in many of those cases you aided and abetted those very posters.

Even in this thread. Several posters have attacked Pippen's (injury-driven in two entire runs) efficiency decline in the playoffs. They said not a word about Malone, Stockton or any of these other players who showed larger decreases. Most of them, and you, didn't even bother to post in the Hakeem thread. Why?

Notice they can't even say this: "Yeah, Malone and Stockton choked but Pippen still sucks!" That would be amusing but at least consistent with their own standard: a -2% decrease in efficiency is hardcore choking (and again, you need injuries to get there--from 1990-1995, 1997 he was consistent between the RS and playoffs. This whole TP is based on 96' and 98'.).

[Reggie43]

Leading 2 dream teams in mins is about longevity and making few nba teams? How is that even a logical answer when he played ahead of players with better resumes? You value the opinion of coaches (Daly on Pip) yet fail to explain why they gave him the most mins in a toxic situation were everyone is bickering for playing time (94 and 96)

[Roundball_Rock]

For kicks, here are the career declines in TS% in the playoffs. RS numbers in parentheses.

Pippen: 52.4% (53.6%)
Malone: 52.6% (57.7%)
Stockton: 56.8% (60.8%)
Robinson: 54.7% (58.3%)
Ewing: 51.7% (55.3%)
Barkley: 58.4% (61.2%)
Hakeem: 56.9% (55.3%)
Wilkins: 51.0% (53.6%)
Drexler: 53.2% (54.7%)
Payton: 50.6% (52.8%)
Jordan: 56.8% (56.9%)
T. Hardaway: 50.2% (53.0%)

I could keep going but it is obvious Hakeem is the only one who improved in the postseason, Jordan maintained, and Pippen had the second smallest decline. Yet Pippen is the choker? :lol He, a SF, has better efficiency than Ewing and the same as Malone's. Pippen is the choker? :roll:

This is what undermining MJ's "competition" looks like: you guys jump up and down waving a standard to diminish Pippen, someone turns it around and applies it to others. Voila: time and again Pippen comes out looking better and the "comp" worse per your own arguments: if Pippen is a choker, then, damn--what are these other guys?

[Roundball_Rock]

You still haven't explained how 1) Malone/Stockton relate to MJ as his "competition" in some special way that Barkley, Drexler, Isiah, Payton, Shaq, etc. don't 2) why a supposed Pacers fan would be so protective of two Utah players and MJ while so obsessed with diminishing Pippen (so only protective of one Bull).


You value the opinion of coaches (Daly on Pip) yet fail to explain why they gave him the most mins in a toxic situation were everyone is bickering for playing time (94 and 96)

Coaches were calling McKey Indiana's best player smack in the middle of Miller's prime. One of them was Phil Jackson. I think his own coach was one of them as well. KBlaze posted quotes from 3 coaches from the middle of the 90's to that effect. Coaches were picking Mookie Blaylock and John Starks over Miller as guards. He also noted there were Indiana beat writers who thought Schrempf was Indiana's best player.

This is who you are comparing to Pippen? Sports Illustrated was debating him versus Dominique Wilkins for the EC starting SF while in the same article debating Miller versus Hornacek, Hawkins, Reggie Lewis for the bench EC all-star guard spots.

Dream Team II was young players and players who didn't make the original DT cut (the DT picked Mullin over Miller for the "zone breaker/shooter" role).


Those players were Derrick Coleman, Joe Dumars, Kevin Johnson, Larry Johnson, Shawn Kemp, Dan Majerle, Reggie Miller, Alonzo Mourning, Shaquille O'Neal, Mark Price, Steve Smith and Dominique Wilkins

The B and C list there, outside of Shaq and Wilkins. Steve Smith, Dan Majerle? :lol Miller and Price were the best shooters on the team. Of course he would get a bunch of minutes. Mullin was second on the Dream Team in minutes for the same reason (behind MJ). Guess who was 3rd?

Miller was second in minutes and second in shots on the 96' team. Guess who 1st was in both (they flip order in scoring)? The 96' performance is more impressive--but would any coach or GM take Miller over Richmond, Penny, Hakeem, Payton, Shaq, Hill, Pippen, Malone, Barkley, Robinson, and Stockton for NBA purposes? Stockton is the only one Miller may get picked over. If all those players are in a draft in 1996, Miller goes 11th or 12th.

[warriorfan]

Pippen led the 96 team in minutes with 176 with Miller virtually tied at 174. Gold Medal game comes and Miller leads the team with 32 mins total enroute to 20pts 1reb 4asts 2 stls with Drob having 26mins for his team leading 28pts. Pippen managed 18mins for his 4pts 4rebs 2ast and a block.

:roll:

Elite production

[Reggie43]

Dude cant really explain Miller on those Dream teams and thinks he is a better talent evaluator than Hof coaches :oldlol: In basketball being coachable and playing the right way are insane traits to have and would easily negate any talent or skill level advantage.

If the original Dream Team was selected in 1994 or 1995 Do you doubt that Miller gets in considering the playoff resume that he had?

You trying to use Kblaze's arguments now? The self proclaimed "intelligent" poster running out of ideas? Players being picked over the other in allstar games because of narrative or a career year are not that uncommon. Random quotes to praise glue guys on teams are everywhere, role players producing better than they normally would and they think they deserve Finals Mvp (96 Rodman) over the Goat. Heck we have had coaches think Pippen was more valuable than Jordan on those teams but do you all take them as gospel?

A gm would definitely take Miller over half the players you listed if they knew what they would be getting for 18 years. Donnie Walsh said it best:

"But his career is about a lot more than the numbers. His competitive spirit, professionalism, class and leadership by example helped elevate this franchise to a whole new level in the NBA. Before he got here, the Pacers had been to the NBA playoffs twice in 12 seasons, eliminated in the first round both times. He leaves here not only with 15 playoff trips in his 18 seasons, but six trips to the Eastern Conference Finals and our only NBA Finals berth ever.

He also made himself a big part of this community, putting down roots here and choosing to remain in Indiana when he could've taken opportunities to play on bigger stages. Very few players in the history of any sport have shown that kind of loyalty to a team, a city and its fans."

Would you take 18 years of the aforementioned or somebody who is willing to quit on the last 1.8 seconds of a playoff game or use a migraine as an injury excuse? Do you prefer a franchise player who would get bullied mentally and physically on high pressure games/series or a player who is the epitome of leadership and clutchness on and off the court. Add all those trade requests and clashes with management for a contract he himself signed? How about burning bridges with teammates when he felt his talents was not maximized (Houston) and I thought he was this great versatile player who could play with anyone yet complained and struggled playing alongside two hall of famers (chuck and hakeem) There is a reason he got traded for garbage well below his value because gms dont want to deal with the extra baggage that he has.

[Hey Yo]

Rodman was deemed as good in 96 the same way Iguodala was good when he won Finals Mvp or are you gonna act stupid and ignore this?
Iggy led the league in rebounding and was 1st team All-Defense in 2015?

[Reggie43]

Iggy led the league in rebounding and was 1st team All-Defense in 2015?

Was pertaining to their finals performance in 96 and 2015 respectively where both played beyond their ability

[Hey Yo]

Was pertaining to their finals performance in 96 and 2015 respectively where both played beyond their ability

How was Iggy playing beyond his ability when he could have been a starter for 13 other teams in the league?

How was Rodman beyond his abilities when he was still like the 3x reigning rebound champion who still provided All-defensive NBA 1st team agility?

[Reggie43]

How was Iggy playing beyond his ability when he could have been a starter for 13 other teams in the league?

How was Rodman beyond his abilities when he was still like the 3x reigning rebound champion who still provided All-defensive NBA 1st team agility?

You have to read the prior posts to understand it. Basically Rodman apparently outplaying Kemp is the same way Iguodala outplayed Lebron. The thing you quoted is not to be taken at face value because I agree with what you are getting at.

[Roundball_Rock]

Still no answer on why a "Pacers fan" is so protective of Jazz players, MJ (every thread is viewed through the lens of MJ, even players he played only once or twice in his career), hostile to Pippen.:lol He can't answer, for obvious reasons. So whose alt is this?


thinks he is a better talent evaluator than Hof coaches

Can you share the evaluations (assuming they actually exist)? KBlaze posted evaluations from coaches, including one HOF coach, from that same time frame. You seem to not grasp that Miller's style was more suited for the Olympics than 90's NBA basketball. A coach could praise him for the DT and also think McKey was better in the NBA context in 1994.

In another thread you saw evaluations from two GM's, two coaches (Phil Jackson being one), all-NBA voters every year, Sports Illustrated, "league observers". Yet you still maintained Kemp=Pippen because you, 3ball, and BSBob disagreed (without providing any evidence outside of the MJ stan echo chamber). So expert opinion suddenly matters?


You trying to use Kblaze's arguments now? The self proclaimed "intelligent" poster running out of ideas? Players being picked over the other in allstar games because of narrative or a career year are not that uncommon

The point keeps sailing over your head: all those quotes, like the Pippen quotes, go to how they were perceived at the time. Prime Pippen would never get compared to Jeff Hornacek or Hersey Hawkins because they were in different tiers. He was compared to Wilkins, Hill.

KBlaze is an excellent poster who consistently brings the receipts to back his points up. He isn't making random declarations like "Kemp was equal to Pippen" or "The consensus was Kemp was better" without a shred of evidence--and then dismissing the mountain of evidence produced as "out of context."


A gm would definitely take Miller over half the players you listed if they knew what they would be getting for 18 years

Different question. I said for a specific year. Miller is top 50 thanks to his longevity but where does his peak and prime rank? You need superstar peak and prime play to win rings, as Indiana learned.


Was pertaining to their finals performance in 96 and 2015 respectively where both played beyond their ability

So did Kemp--yet we heard that as the benchmark for Kemp. You guys can't keep contorting to suit agendas post to post. Kemp was being praised for the 96' finals, it was argued by Kemp fans (MJ fans) that was the real Kemp, and the little detail about Kemp getting beat by his own match up (according to some, including his coach) was omitted from the narrative. That was the relevance of Rodman.

Log onto your real MJ account or there isn't a point in continuing this charade. You are merely trolling--not a word about Malone and Stockton--and are incapable of producing any evidence to back your "opinion."

[Reggie43]

Is it still a mystery to you that I could like great players of an era? Must be a pretty hard concept for the "3ball of Jordan haters" to understand.

A ton of times I asked how Pippen's "baggage" affect his value as a player? Why are you avoiding this like the plague? Facts are he got traded for garbage because of this.

A coach said Derrick Mckey was better than Miller and you take it as gospel without context. How about the time when the same coach hinted that Pippen is more valuable than Jordan? Do we take that at face value?

[Reggie43]

Lebrontard thinks im an alt because im calling him out for his obvious agenda :facepalm

[Roundball_Rock]

So now coaches don't matter--just minutes later. :roll:


A coach said Derrick Mckey was better than Miller and you take it as gospel without context. How about the time when the same coach hinted that Pippen is more valuable than Jordan? Do we take that at face value?

No, we listen to what Reggie43/BSBob/3ball have to say about it. :lol

It wasn't "out of context"--the context was voting for all-stars and part of his argument for McKey was he was "their best player."


Lebrontard thinks im an alt because im calling him out for his obvious agenda

The agenda of "diminishing Jordan" by praising most of his "rivals" who you view completely through the lens of MJ (not a MJ fan doe!). :roll:

Yes, you love great players of the era (only if it suits insecurity about MJ)--but obsess over Pippen, even fabricating his trade value after you are called out for the deception earlier. You don't even know who the GM of Portland was at the time.

[Reggie43]

Show my post where I said Kemp is equal to Pippen or the consensus that Kemp was better than Pippen. The only thing I said was they were on the same tier in terms of impact and ability which is not even outrageous.

You are an exposed cherry picking liar who cries about his "credibility" when everyone knows what you are about.

[Reggie43]

Yep cant answer about Pippens baggage still :roll:

[Reggie43]

Fabricating trade value when he got traded for Roy Rogers of all people because of the aforementioned baggage

[Reggie43]

Dude is caught in the corner because he cant defend the Migraine game, quitting on the last seconds of a crucial playoff game getting bullied mentally and physically by opponents, clashing with the front office for something he himself signed, various trade demands etc.

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is an actual defense of Malone's PO efficiency decline (Screaming Pippen! Pippen! Pippen! Or trolling isn't a defense), albeit in an article that overall criticizes him for that (while ranking him #13 all-time, higher than most, so on net a pro-Malone take):


While we have almost no WOWY information on Malone, we have plus-minus data for the entire backside of his career. From 1994-98, his scaled numbers fall in the 96th-97th percentile historically (around +5), followed by two seasons in the 94th and 95th percentile. Given Malone’s efficiency decline in the playoffs, some might want to curve these numbers down a bit, but there’s an argument that Utah relied on him even more in the postseason, and that his statistical drop-off was caused by an overloaded burden; he couldn’t sustain lone-star scoring heights with the best of them, but there’s only so much value in a role like that anyway.

So they had to rely on him more because Stockton, Hornacek, J. Malone weren't proper second scoring options.

Not favorable towards Stockton, though:


We typically think of a marginally efficient, high-volume scorer as incapable of leading great offenses, but in Malone’s case the Jazz attacks bordered on elite. Unlike the great offenses that outperformed Utah in the team chart above, the Jazz lacked a strong secondary scorer to alleviate pressure. Additionally, Karl’s turnovers declined in the playoffs despite shouldering a slightly larger load. All of these areas offset some of his scoring troubles.

Stockton himself was incapable of ramping up his offensive attack and his scoring and efficiency both plummeted in the playoffs. Per the scouting report (and contrary to popular opinion), Malone’s play was only marginally synergistic with Stockton.


https://backpicks.com/2018/02/08/backpicks-goat-13-karl-malone/

[Gotterdammerung]

Watching a lot of 90s NBA playoff games, I was always underwhelmed with the Jazz.

They were a mighty regular season machine, but easily stymied in the playoffs for a few reasons:

Against weak teams, Stockton could control the pace and run fast break, and Malone ran the floor better than any other bigman I have ever seen. That means Malone got easy buckets in transition. This happened more often against weak teams, likely to cough the ball more and fall prey to veteran tricks of the famed pick and roll. Weak teams are usually young, or not sufficiently laden with veterans.

This didn't work in the playoffs because there are fewer possessions, fewer turnovers and fastbreaks. And this is where Stockton and Malone fell short because they often did not step up their game. Stockton kept running the offense the same way, instead of taking a few tough shots to bail out his teammates. And Malone, no longer running like a deer, had to resort to a weak post up game where he settled for lazy fallback jumpers. His game was referee-protected, but that does not really carry over in the playoffs.

And I noticed that the only time the Jazz actually broke through in the Western Conference was when all the other powers declined (Portland, Phoenix, Houston, Seattle, even Golden State for friggin sakes).

[Roundball_Rock]

Against weak teams, Stockton could control the pace and run fast break, and Malone ran the floor better than any other bigman I have ever seen. That means Malone got easy buckets in transition. This happened more often against weak teams, likely to cough the ball more and fall prey to veteran tricks of the famed pick and roll. Weak teams are usually young, or not sufficiently laden with veterans.

This didn't work in the playoffs because there are fewer possessions, fewer turnovers and fastbreaks. And this is where Stockton and Malone fell short because they often did not step up their game. Stockton kept running the offense the same way, instead of taking a few tough shots to bail out his teammates. And Malone, no longer running like a deer, had to resort to a weak post up game where he settled for lazy fallback jumpers. His game was referee-protected, but that does not really carry over in the playoffs.


Somewhat similar to D'Antoni's system where it produces video game RS numbers but ultimately comes up short against top teams in the playoffs?


I noticed that the only time the Jazz actually broke through in the Western Conference was when all the other powers declined (Portland, Phoenix, Houston, Seattle, even Golden State for friggin sakes).

Yup. Hakeem, Drexler, Barkley were all past their primes leaving only Shaq as a rival WC superstar at that point (and he was with a young team). Payton, Kemp were in their primes but Kemp torpedoed the team in the playoffs with off the court shenanigans.