"Toni (Kukoc) is One of the More Underrated Players in NBA History"

[Roundball_Rock]

“Kukoč is one of the more underrated players in NBA history because of the team he played with. With his ball-handling abilities and shooting, he could have been an all-time great. But he sacrificed his individual game and even played out of position as a rebounding power forward to accommodate the Bulls. Plus, the NBA still was uncertain about giving European players a prominent role in the 90s.”

Toni, often being unheeded, has proof in the fact he still hasn’t been inducted in the Naismith Hall of Fame. Whether you agree with it or not, when you compare Kukoč to his peers who have already been inducted, it’s safe to say Toni deserves to be a part of that elite group. It’s something Sam Smith agrees with, as he believes Toni is once again a victim of setting aside for the benefit of the Bulls.

“Because he sacrificed individual statistics for the team and thus became the Sixth Man. The Hall of Fame doesn’t enshrine many reserve type players even though Toni often started. Toni was much better and more successful than his fellow players who are in, like Radja, Divac, and Marciulionis. Toni may be the best player ever from overseas to come to the NBA in his prime, unlike Sabonis. I believe he will get into the Hall of Fame within the next two years. He should have been inducted well ahead of players like Radja and Divac based on international accomplishments.”

https://www.basketballnetwork.net/toni-is-one-of-the-more-underrated-players-in-nba-history/

Advanced stats provide some window into how good he was in his prime:

*17th in VORP in 95', 96'.
*10th in BPM in 96', 15th in 96' and 97'.
*16th in WS in 96', 17th in 95'.
*2nd in offensive rating in 96', 9th in 97'.
*19th in PER in 96'.

He is overlooked, though, as he spent most of his prime as the fourth best player on a team with 3 HOF players.

[Carbine]

I don't know, the Bulls boost seems to have given him plenty of recognition he otherwise wouldn't have gotten.

in '99 we saw what he could do with a more prominent role. He really didn't do much. They had one of the worst offenses in the league, if not the worst.

[Indian guy]

Nah. He would've been way less known had he not played for the Bulls. At best he's a 3rd option on a contending team. Anything more than that and you are a lottery team.

[SouBeachTalents]

I completely disagree with that article. Kukoc got a huge boost in publicity by playing on the Bulls. Best case scenario he'd be Detlef Schrempf anywhere else

[Real Men Wear Green]

He could have had more individual accolades but he'd have no championships. History is full of people that could have had more individual success at the cost of less group glory and vice versa. And ts not like he'd have been averaging 30.

[HoopsNY]

Kukoc is slightly underrated by the media but definitely underrated where Bulls fans were concerned. Those who say he didn't show up as well in 1999 also have to understand that a strike shortened season saw dips for the entire league, not just Kukoc, who still managed to go 19-7-5 on 42%.

League Averages 1997-98
FG%: .450
3pt%: .346
TS%: .524
PPG: 95.6

League Averages 1999
FG%: .437
3PT%: .339
TS%: .511
PPG: 91.6

I suspect Kukoc was of no exception and could see him averaging slightly higher shooting numbers and assists in a regularly scheduled season, maybe 44% shooting, 20 ppg, and 6 assists.

[97 bulls]

Kukoc is slightly underrated by the media but definitely underrated where Bulls fans were concerned. Those who say he didn't show up as well in 1999 also have to understand that a strike shortened season saw dips for the entire league, not just Kukoc, who still managed to go 19-7-5 on 42%.

League Averages 1997-98
FG%: .450
3pt%: .346
TS%: .524
PPG: 95.6

League Averages 1999
FG%: .437
3PT%: .339
TS%: .511
PPG: 91.6

I suspect Kukoc was of no exception and could see him averaging slightly higher shooting numbers and assists in a regularly scheduled season, maybe 44% shooting, 20 ppg, and 6 assists.

And let's nor forget that the Bulls were in full tank mode. His best teammate in 99 was probably Brent Barry.

[Carbine]

As we've seen plenty of times though, tanking doesn't make getting numbers any less difficult. Lavine for example.

[97 bulls]

As we've seen plenty of times though, tanking doesn't make getting numbers any less difficult. Lavine for example.

Right, the team sucked. The Bulls intentionally put a terrible roster together. Hence the lack of success. And as HoopsNY stated, his numbers were solid when compared to the rest of the league.

For the life of me, I'll never understand this concept that more talented players get passes for the same result as more talented players.

[Charlie Sheen]

I don't think Kukoc is underrated. What's the big deal about the hall of fame anyway? How important can it be if I didn't know Dino Radja was a hall of famer before reading your post?

[Carbine]

Im not blaming team success on him whatsoever. I'm saying if we were ever going to see big numbers from him and what he's truly capable of as the man, we would have seenit after everyone left.

He didn't put up a lot of scoring volume and the scoring he did do, he did it incredibly inefficiently.

TS of 49 is horrific

He was perfect in the role he was in, even having games where he overshadowed MJ or Pip in the 3 pears..... But he definitely isn't underrated.

[97 bulls]

Im not blaming team success on him whatsoever. I'm saying if we were ever going to see big numbers from him and what he's truly capable of as the man, we would have seenit after everyone left.

He didn't put up a lot of scoring volume and the scoring he did do, he did it incredibly inefficiently.

TS of 49 is horrific

He was perfect in the role he was in, even having games where he overshadowed MJ or Pip in the 3 pears..... But he definitely isn't underrated.

What do you expect? Based on his skillset?

[Phoenix]

I think Kukoc in that 95-98 period on a middling team could have been something like 20/7/6 but any team with him as the best player wasn't going to be a contender. He was in the right spot and ended up with more team accolades than he would have being 'the man' somewhere else.

[1987_Lakers]

He was a worse version of Schrempf, but Kukoc gets more attention because he played for the Bulls. Underrated does not apply here.

When I think underrated, someone like Sidney Moncrief comes to mind, a top 10 player in his day who won multiple DPOY awards and played on contending teams, but you never hear his name get brought up today.

[Roundball_Rock]

He isn't underrated in terms of public profile. He is underrated in terms of his quality as a player and his role on his teams. When those teams are discussed, he rarely if ever gets mentioned (Exhibit A: the Last Dance)--and why Divac, Radja are in the HOF but Kukoc isn't.


in '99 we saw what he could do with a more prominent role. He really didn't do much.

He wasn't suited to be a #1 option but he did fine as a #2 option on a playoff team in 95' before MJ got there. 16/6/5 on 50% FG and 58% TS.


He was in the right spot and ended up with more team accolades than he would have being 'the man' somewhere else.

The problem is that generally unless you were one of the 2-3 best players you get little credit for team results. There are exceptions like Boston with DJ as the fourth HOF guy but generally when people talk rings they mention the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd options. People conflate scoring with best player so while Kukoc was in fact the 3rd option on 3 title teams, he was the fourth best player so people speak of Rodman as the 3rd option.

[Phoenix]

The problem is that generally unless you were one of the 2-3 best players you get little credit for team results. There are exceptions like Boston with DJ as the fourth HOF guy but generally when people talk rings they mention the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd options. People conflate scoring with best player so while Kukoc was in fact the 3rd option on 3 title teams, he was the fourth best player so people speak of Rodman as the 3rd option.

Anyone with a modicum of basketball intelligence should be able to make that distinction. Rodman wasn't an option at all lol, at least as an offensive contributor. I'm not even sure by 98 if he was the third best player. He was becoming more and more erratic. I think Toni fairly could be considered the 3rd best at least in 98 on that team, but Rodman's outlandish antics gave him a larger profile throughout the 3peat. As I said before, Toni as a first option probably gives you 20/7/6 but he can't be your best player if you have championship aspirations. 2nd best player on a 45ish win team? Sure. If MJ hadn't returned in 95 that's likely where the Bulls ended up and he was clearly the 2nd option/2nd best player after Pip. I'm not sure why he hasn't made the HOF though.

[Roundball_Rock]

He was 16/6/5 on good efficiency as a #2 option in 95'. That is one year, his second year so it is possible he could have been 17.5/6/5.5 or something on a good team later in 96' or 97' when he had more experience.


2nd best player on a 45ish win team? Sure. If MJ hadn't returned in 95 that's likely where the Bulls ended up and he was clearly the 2nd option/2nd best player after Pip

They underperformed their SRS due to a poor start to the season and lineup shuffling (several PF's, Harper getting benched, etc.). They had the second best SRS in the East (behind Orlando) before MJ returned. They were 34-31 when MJ returned--the Pacers the prior year were 35-30 at the same point and people talk about how that team walks on water now because they got a favorable bracket and made the ECF as a result. A misconception is that there were all these juggernauts in the East then when you had 47, 52, 50 win teams making the ECF in the 90's. Even 34-31 had them within 6 games of Indiana with the next game against Indiana.

Plus, the Bulls had a gaping hole at PF. If you have a legit PF with Kukoc still the 2nd option the team could be a contender--although actually winning a chip would be tough. Not impossible, though. A team with Thorpe as its second best player won and a team with Starks as its second best player nearly did so.

[97 bulls]

Kukoc never had a team trying to win build around him and cater to his strengths. Hin being the focal point of an offense would mean hed be setting up him teammates not scoring 25-28 ppg. Put better teammates around him and I see 20ppg on 45-47% shooting while getting 6-7 rbds and 9-10 asts.

[1987_Lakers]

Kukoc never had a team trying to win build around him and cater to his strengths. Hin being the focal point of an offense would mean hed be setting up him teammates not scoring 25-28 ppg. Put better teammates around him and I see 20ppg on 45-47% shooting while getting 6-7 TBD and 9-10 asts.

Kukoc never had a season where he averaged over 6 apg, now all of a sudden he's going to average 10 apg? :oldlol:

I think it's hypocritical that you give McHale shit for the Celtics being "mediocre" in '89 (despite ignoring the fact that Parish & DJ were in their mid 30's at that point), but completely give Kukoc a pass for '99. At least McHale led his team to the playoffs.

[Roundball_Rock]

Kukoc was basically Pippen-lite on offense. He wasn't a dominant defender or the great rebounder (for a SF) that Pippen was, but as a scorer, playmaker, and point forward he was Pippen-lite. One reason he provided extra value to the Bulls was they could always have a point forward on the court between Pippen and Kukoc. When both were on the floor together you had a great passing, pass-first duo (often with MJ, who was a good passer in his own right). There is a reason Kukoc was called the Magic Johnson of Europe.

The other thing about the option stuff, Jackson's substitution pattern was to almost always keep one of Pippen or Jordan on the court (for obvious reasons). So there were always stretches of games where Pippen was the first option and Kukoc second (to either Pippen or Jordan) on the court. It wasn't a static thing for 48 minutes on that team.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

I would say he's a very poor man's Lamar Odom I guess?

1) his FG% sucked in 2/3 rings
2) below average defender
3) Never did anything worth remembering without Jordan/Pippen/Phil on his team

[Roundball_Rock]

3) Never did anything worth remembering without Jordan/Pippen/Phil on his team

People forget he was 25 when he came to the NBA. So he was 26-29 from 1995-1998. In other words, he spent basically all his NBA prime with those guys. In 1999 he was still 30 but the Bulls were a dumpster fire. It is hard to read much into that and the following year he was traded. He probably peaked in 95' or 96' and steadily decline thereafter so by 00' and 01' he wasn't the same guy. His TS % went from 58%, 59% in 95' and 96' to 55% and 53% in 97' and 98' and he slide further to 49% as the first option in 99'.


1) his FG% sucked in 2/3 rings

His TS % didn't. Anyway, is 47% and 46% FG % bad for a perimeter player in that era? I don't think so. Defense was allowed back then and by then people started taking threes so that deflated raw FG % relative to a decade or so prior.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

People forget he was 25 when he came to the NBA. So he was 26-29 from 1995-1998. In other words, he spent basically all his NBA prime with those guys. In 1999 he was still 30 but the Bulls were a dumpster fire. It is hard to read much into that and the following year he was traded. He probably peaked in 95' or 96' and steadily decline thereafter so by 00' and 01' he wasn't the same guy. His TS % went from 58%, 59% in 95' and 96' to 55% and 53% in 97' and 98' and he slide further to 49% as the first option in 99'.



His TS % didn't. Anyway, is 47% and 46% FG % bad for a perimeter player in that era? I don't think so. Defense was allowed back then and by then people started taking threes so that deflated raw FG % relative to a decade or so prior.

Kukoc always had 3 legends on his team and the goat coach. Basically the equivalent to Don Nelson on Celtics.

TS average in 1996/1997 was 54%

Kukoc in those years was putting up 49% TS. He is -5 on average.

[Round Mound]

I bet 3-ball thinks he was a scrub!...:rolleyes:

[3ball]

calling rodman "HOF" in 97' and 98' is like calling Shaq HOF in 2010

rodman averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs and wasn't even the starter in 98' (4/8 in 98' Finals)

btw, kukoc averaged 18/5/5 in 1999 while taking over the "glue guy" role in the triangle (pippen's spot) - that's what the spot yielded for pretty much anyone, which is why pippen was nothing without the triangle

carry on

[HBK_Kliq_2]

calling rodman "HOF" in 97' and 98' is like calling Shaq HOF in 2010

rodman averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs and wasn't even the starter in 98' (4/8 in 98' Finals)

btw, kukoc averaged 18/5/5 in 1999 while taking over the "glue guy" role in the triangle (pippen's spot) - that's what the spot yielded for pretty much anyone, which is why pippen was nothing without the triangle

carry on

He still led the league in rebounds in 1997 and 1998. He also averaged 10 rebounds in playoffs and was bulls best rebounder. Jordan didn't have to worry about rebounding, he was 3rd behind Rodman/Pippen.

That's much better then having Marc Gasol averaging 6.4 rebounds and needing to be carried by Kawhi on the rebounds.

[3ball]

He still led the league in rebounds in 1997 and 1998. He also averaged 10 rebounds in playoffs and was bulls best rebounder. Jordan didn't have to worry about rebounding, he was 3rd behind Rodman/Pippen.

That's much better then having Marc Gasol averaging 6.4 rebounds and needing to be carried by Kawhi on the rebounds.

can you read?

rodman averaged 8 rebounds in the 97' playoffs, so mj averaged 8 too during that playoff run (basically tied with rodman)

mj also led the bulls in apg, ppg, and tied for bpg... so he led or tied all categories... and he led ppg by his typical goat margin.... a total carry-job...

he also led those playoffs in clutch points (last 5 within 5) with 58 points in the clutch (23 in Finals, only 4 for pippen who was last per his usual)

[HBK_Kliq_2]

can you read?

rodman averaged 8 rebounds in the 97' playoffs, so mj averaged 8 too during that playoff run (basically tied with rodman)

mj also led the bulls in apg, ppg, and tied for bpg... so he led or tied all categories... and he led ppg by his typical goat margin.... a total carry-job...

he also led those playoffs in clutch points (last 5 within 5) with 58 points in the clutch (23 in Finals, only 4 for pippen who was last per his usual)

I saw you crying about assist % the other day. Saying how Jordan assist % was better then Pippen or whatever. Lets look at the 1997 bulls rebounding percentages

Michael Jordan: 10.9 rebounding %

Dennis Rodman: 17.5 rebounding %

You can't have double standards and use assist % but completely ignore rebounding %

Kawhi Leonard: 12.8 rebounding %

Marc Gasol: 11.5 rebounding %

You lose, now you can go back to your incoherent ramble about "x man" whoever the hell that is Hahahha or give us all a favor and retire again

[97 bulls]

Kukoc never had a season where he averaged over 6 apg, now all of a sudden he's going to average 10 apg? :oldlol:

I think it's hypocritical that you give McHale shit for the Celtics being "mediocre" in '89 (despite ignoring the fact that Parish & DJ were in their mid 30's at that point), but completely give Kukoc a pass for '99. At least McHale led his team to the playoffs.

Again, if he averaged 6 assts with teammates he had in 99, why couldn't he get 3 more with much better scorers around him?

I'm not giving McHale shit, its hypocrisy to give McHale a pass and say what he could've done without Bird, when we saw what he did for a year, but then not give Pip the same break especially when he was much better leading a team.

McHale had Parish, Reggie Lewis, Johnson and barely managed to be .500 in an expansion year. Hell rookie Brian Shaw was far and away better than anything Kukoc had.

[3ball]

:facepalm:

[3ball]

I saw you crying about assist % the other day. Saying how Jordan assist % was better then Pippen or whatever. Lets look at the 1997 bulls rebounding percentages

Michael Jordan: 10.9 rebounding %

Dennis Rodman: 17.5 rebounding %

You can't have double standards and use assist % but completely ignore rebounding %

Kawhi Leonard: 12.8 rebounding %

Marc Gasol: 11.5 rebounding %

You lose, now you can go back to your incoherent ramble about "x man" whoever the hell that is Hahahha or give us all a favor and retire again

yes rodman rebounded more than mj .. I suppose that's the biggest victory you can get on 3ball... lol...

you lost on everything - being rebounding leader doesn't make one HOF.. rodman wasn't even all-defense in 97' or 98' and sucked in the 97/98 playoffs (wasn't the starter in 98')... it's a testament to mj's goat offense that the bulls had goat offenses (team ORtg's) despite playing 4 on 5 with Rodman lol

and sg's aren't supposed to get more than 4-7 rebounds otherwise they're taking away from the bigs.... so it's dumb to compare rebounds of sg's to forwards... nonetheless, mj got rebounds when his team was at a deficit, aka 1989 regular season and 97' playoffs

btw, kukoc averaged 18/7/5 in 1999 while taking over the "glue guy" role in the triangle (pippen's spot) - that's what the spot yielded for pretty much anyone, which is why pippen was nothing without the triangle..

[FireDavidKahn]

People deny this?

Kukoc was and is always highly praised.

[3ball]

People deny this?

Kukoc was and is always highly praised.

his peak < Jr Smith .. :banana:

or Starks (19 and 6 apg with all-defense)

carry on...

[1987_Lakers]

Again, if he averaged 6 assts with teammates he had in 99, why couldn't he get 3 more with much better scorers around him?

I'm not giving McHale shit, its hypocrisy to give McHale a pass and say what he could've done without Bird, when we saw what he did for a year, but then not give Pip the same break especially when he was much better leading a team.

McHale had Parish, Reggie Lewis, Johnson and barely managed to be .500 in an expansion year. Hell rookie Brian Shaw was far and away better than anything Kukoc had.

Because he never even sniffed 5 apg playing with MJ & Pippen. 10 apg sounds ludicrous, you are basically putting him in the same level as Magic, Nash, Kidd, CP3 etc as for as providing assists. Besides LeBron, I can't think of a forward who went an entire season averaging 10 apg and now all of a sudden Kukoc who never even cracked 6 apg in a year is going to average 10 apg? Get real. :oldlol:

[97 bulls]

Because he never even sniffed 5 apg playing with MJ & Pippen. 10 apg sounds ludicrous, you are basically putting him in the same level as Magic, Nash, Kidd, CP3 etc as for as providing assists. Besides LeBron, I can't think of a forward who went an entire season averaging 10 apg and now all of a sudden Kukoc who never even cracked 6 apg in a year is going to average 10 apg? Get real. :oldlol:

He wasnt the focal point of the offense on the Bulls 87Lakers. Read and comprehend the WHOLE argument bro.

I don't feel he would average 10asts per game for his career, but maybe his peak? Damn the man averaged 6 with a bunch of bad scorers. Give him the ball an let him create and I dont see why he couldnt get close.

How many assist do you think he would get at his high if he had 6-7 seasons in which teams were built around him? Especially if he averaged 6 in 99 with a bunch of bad scorers? In the start of the slow down plodding uber defensive era of the early 2000s?

[97 bulls]

Kukoc averaged 5 assist in 99. With a core of Brent Barry, old ass Ron Harper, Mark Bryant, Randy Brown, Dickey Simpkins. Hell Rusty Larue and Kornel David saw almost 20 minutes a night in 99.

Is it fair to say that had he played with better teammates (WITH HIM RUNNING THE OFFENSE AND HAVING THE BALL IN HIS HANDS!!!!!) that hed peak at about 20/7/8-9 assists? Maybe 2-3 Alstar Games? A couple of all NBA second team selections?

[1987_Lakers]

He wasnt the focal point of the offense on the Bulls 87Lakers. Read and comprehend the WHOLE argument bro.

I don't feel he would average 10asts per game for his career, but maybe his peak? Damn the man averaged 6 with a bunch of bad scorers. Give him the ball an let him create and I dont see why he couldnt get close.

How many assist do you think he would get at his high if he had 6-7 seasons in which teams were built around him? Especially if he averaged 6 in 99 with a bunch of bad scorers? In the start of the slow down plodding uber defensive era of the early 2000s?

Would he even be a focal point if he had better scorers on his team though? That's the thing you need to understand. Even in '95 without MJ on the team he only averaged 16 ppg and 4.5 apg, you are severely overrating him. Kukoc was a top tier 6th man, and a solid NBA player, but give him some 20 ppg scorers and he instantly becomes the 2nd/3rd best player on his team. Fact is, we saw him as a focal point of an offense in '99, and he didn't impress.

I would bet my life Kukoc doesn't touch 10 apg during his peak, unless he is playing with a lottery team with D'Antoni making Kukoc play a PG role. :lol

Fact is, if you need Kukoc to play the PG role the majority of the time, your team probably isn't very good.

[97 bulls]

Would he even be a focal point if he had better scorers on his team though? That's the thing you need to understand. Even in '95 without MJ on the team he only averaged 16 ppg and 4.5 apg, you are severely overrating him. Kukoc was a top tier 6th man, and a solid NBA player, but give him some 20 ppg scorers and he instantly becomes the 2nd/3rd best player on his team. Fact is, we saw him as a focal point of an offense in '99, and he didn't impress.

I would bet my life Kukoc doesn't touch 10 apg during his peak, unless he is playing with a lottery team with D'Antoni making Kukoc play a PG role. :lol

Fact is, if you need Kukoc to play the PG role the majority of the time, your team probably isn't very good.

95 was his second year in the league. No, he wasnt the focal point. The triangle offense that the Bulls ran make sure of it. I'm not gonna debate the 10 assist per game thing. I'll concede that. 8-9? I can see it. With some better scorers. Not neccesarily a bunch of 20 ppg scorers. Two guys in the high teens? Two guys in the low teens?

[3ball]

Nash, cp3 and high assist players get 9-10 apg regardless of cast

kukoc isn't good enough to hold the ball more than 4 minutes per game

carry on lol

[Reggie43]

He might be better built for the modern era but he is not underrated in his time with the Bulls. He was an extremely high iq all around offensive player which is only matched by arguably being one of the worst defenders of all time. I remember his defense being hid against non scoring threats and the opposing team would immediately run plays for whoever Kukoc was guarding.

[aceman]

He might be better built for the modern era but he is not underrated in his time with the Bulls. He was an extremely high iq all around offensive player which is only matched by arguably being one of the worst defenders of all time. I remember his defense being hid against non scoring threats and the opposing team would immediately run plays for whoever Kukoc was guarding.
That is simply not true - in his book John Starks stated Kukoc was perceived by fans as a poor defender but he was smart, had long arms & played without contact which was disconcerting for opponents

[Reggie43]

That is simply not true - in his book John Starks stated Kukoc was perceived by fans as a poor defender but he was smart, had long arms & played without contact which was disconcerting for opponents

Quote from an article about the soft euro cliche from many many years back


The notion that European players aren’t tough enough for the NBA was established when Croatian star Toni Kukoc joined Michael Jordan’s Chicago Bulls back in 1993. Kukoc was that rare basketball specimen, a player who combined incredible length, agility, and an oh-so-sweet shooting touch. There was only one problem: Kukoc had an allergy to contact. He hated being anywhere near the paint. Defensively, he was a nightmare—opponents easily bullied him, boxed him out, blew past him, whatever they wanted. All the winning the Bulls did couldn’t stop Jordan from loathing Kukoc for his lack of intensity and guts.

[1987_Lakers]

That is simply not true - in his book John Starks stated Kukoc was perceived by fans as a poor defender but he was smart, had long arms & played without contact which was disconcerting for opponents


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1LaF1hqKSc

This John Starks? It's no secret, Kukoc was a known poor defender.

[3ball]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1LaF1hqKSc

This John Starks? It's no secret, Kukoc was a known poor defender.

again, guys that get high assists - Nash, cp3, etc - they get high assists regardless of cast

kukoc had his chance as the focal point to get high assists and he couldn't - his team was scoring 90+ points just like any team does, yet only 5 apg... anything more than that is impossible

[97 bulls]

again, guys that get high assists - Nash, cp3, etc - they get high assists regardless of cast

kukoc had his chance as the focal point to get high assists and he couldn't - his team was scoring 90+ points just like any team does, yet only 5 apg... anything more than that is impossible

Again, show me what you feel are these players worst "cast". Show me these players worse team they played on. It's still far and away better than what the Bulls put around Kukoc. I mean damn, the wanted to lose.

The Bulls were not scoring 90+ points, they averaged 85 which was dead last. They were also dead last in offensive rating.

[Roundball_Rock]

TS average in 1996/1997 was 54%

Kukoc in those years was putting up 49% TS.

Your numbers are off. His TS % was 59% in 96' and 55% in 97'.


I bet 3-ball thinks he was a scrub!...

Everybody sucked associated with the Bulls, except MJ. :lol The funny thing is the rest of Team MJ is taking the same position here (for all their attempts to disassociate themselves from 3ball's views which they share).


He still led the league in rebounds in 1997 and 1998. He also averaged 10 rebounds in playoffs and was bulls best rebounder. Jordan didn't have to worry about rebounding, he was 3rd behind Rodman/Pippen.

He also guarded Karl Malone, doing a solid job in 98' and a great job 97'. Look at the 97' job:

Malone in the 1997 Finals: 24/10/4 49% TS
Malone in the 1997 season: 27/10/5 60% TS (league MVP in 97')

Look at that whopping 11% falloff from the MVP! :bowdown:

MJ is the best thing that ever happened to Malone, Stockton, Ewing, and Miller. They get issued free passes for not showing up in key series/games/etc. MJ or no MJ: if Malone or Ewing (MJ played great defense on MJ in the 94' finals) or Stockton play close to their normal levels in the finals they win rings.

[HoopsNY]

Kukoc averaged 5 assist in 99. With a core of Brent Barry, old ass Ron Harper, Mark Bryant, Randy Brown, Dickey Simpkins. Hell Rusty Larue and Kornel David saw almost 20 minutes a night in 99.

Is it fair to say that had he played with better teammates (WITH HIM RUNNING THE OFFENSE AND HAVING THE BALL IN HIS HANDS!!!!!) that hed peak at about 20/7/8-9 assists? Maybe 2-3 Alstar Games? A couple of all NBA second team selections?

Really tough to say. If Kukoc is playing 1-2 all-stars on his team, then his usage goes down and he doesn't get 6 assists, let alone 8-9. He was a good passer, but that was pretty much it.

[HoopsNY]

That is simply not true - in his book John Starks stated Kukoc was perceived by fans as a poor defender but he was smart, had long arms & played without contact which was disconcerting for opponents

Yeah......Starks was wrong. Kukoc was a liability defensively as far as I remember it.

[97 bulls]

Really tough to say. If Kukoc is playing 1-2 all-stars on his team, then his usage goes down and he doesn't get 6 assists, let alone 8-9. He was a good passer, but that was pretty much it.

Right. We saw that with Jordan and Pippen. I'm talking about a team built around him.

I dont think hes underrated. I do feel he needs to be in the Hall of Fame. And I'm sure he will. I also feel his personal accomplishments would be better (like a couple allstar appearances and an all nba 2nd team once or twice) had he had a team built around him.

[Roundball_Rock]

Why is Radja in the HOF and not Kukoc? Radja played four years in the NBA. He put up better numbers than Kukoc but he wasn't playing a bench role on a team with 2 superstars (one who played Kukoc's position) and 3 HOF players. Kukoc was the more accomplished NBA and international player.

Kukoc played limited minutes in a bench role (28 MPG from 1996-1998 and 28 MPG from 1994-1998 as well). His per 36 minute production was better: 17/6/5 with a peak 18.2 PPG in 96'. His actual line on those title teams is 13/4/4. You can't simple scale 28 MPG to 36 MPG--the extra fatigue would reduce effectiveness--but his per 36 numbers are similar to what he did as a #2 option in 95'. In particular, during the time he was a starter and the #2 option in 95' (about half the season) where he played 35 MPG, he averaged 17/6/5 so in his case the evidence suggests he could have scaled up to those numbers over a starter's workload

If Kukoc was putting up 17/6/5 he would be looked at a lot differently.

[oldtimer28]

Yeah......Starks was wrong. Kukoc was a liability defensively as far as I remember it.

Correct. Kukoc was long, great offensively, but a bad defender in 90s nba style

[aceman]

Correct. Kukoc was long, great offensively, but a bad defender in 90s nba style

Played 30 minutes a night in championship team & was part of death line up. Below average defender OK - but as far as being a liability which would cost team is simply not true.

[aceman]

Toni is underrated because fans view him as 3rd option. Fact he was no. 3 on bulls was one reasons they were so great (one of many reasons). Which teams in 1996 had a player coming off bench who could create shots in so many ways as Toni?
1999 was built to fail for draft picks. Give a peak Kukoc players like Horace, BJ Armstrong, Kerr & Longley. That team would win 50 games.

[Shooter]

I think Horrace Grant is underrated as well.

[kawhileonard2]

Nah. He would've been way less known had he not played for the Bulls. At best he's a 3rd option on a contending team. Anything more than that and you are a lottery team.

Agreed

[Roundball_Rock]

Toni is underrated because fans view him as 3rd option. Fact he was no. 3 on bulls was one reasons they were so great (one of many reasons). Which teams in 1996 had a player coming off bench who could create shots in so many ways as Toni?

Agreed. The funny thing is a lot of the people who downplay prime Kukoc will sing rookie Kukoc's praises. If he was this awesome contributor as a rookie how can he somehow be a non-factor when he was much better in his prime from 1995-1998? We know the reason for the inconsistency. :lol

[Nashty]

True, the man carried Jordan Clarkson to 3 rings and 3 FMVPs, but does not get any recognition because he was white and European.

[Shooter]

Agreed. The funny thing is a lot of the people who downplay prime Kukoc will sing rookie Kukoc's praises. If he was this awesome contributor as a rookie how can he somehow be a non-factor when he was much better in his prime from 1995-1998? We know the reason for the inconsistency. :lol

Oh we know why :lol

[diamenz]

i remember toni being incredibly streaky. he was either on fire or straight cold on any given night.

[Roundball_Rock]

Oh we know why :lol

:lol Yup.

[Jasper]

Tony played for the Bucks for a while , and he was literally a coach/player on the floor , and it was remarkable how intelligent he was ..
Bucks tried to reup his contract , but he left ... he was a great team player and off the bench player.. (his experience showed) And was a crowd favorite.