The 1992-93 MVP should have went to....

[HoopsNY]

Hakeem Olajuwon. The overall numbers and advanced metrics are close:

RS 1992-93:
Hakeem: 26.1/13.0/3.5 on 53% and 78% fths, 1.8 stls and 4.2 blks
Barkley: 25.6/12.2/5.1 on 52% and 77% fths, 1.6 stls and 1.0 blks

Hakeem Advanced 1992-93:
PER: 27.3
TS%: .577
WS/48: .234
WS: 15.8
OBPM: 3.9
DBPM: 3.6
VORP: 7.8

Barkley Advanced 1992-93
PER: 25.9
TS%: .596
WS/48: .242
WS: 14.4
OBPM: 6.3
DBPM: 1.8
VORP: 7.1

But while these numbers are close, Hakeem has the clear advantage defensively...by a mile. Hakeem was All-Defensive 1st team and DPOY that year, while Barkley wasn't even in the discussion. Anyone who watched the Dream in those days knew how much of a force he was defensively.

The Rockets won 55 games while Phoenix won 62, but Hakeem did not have the offensive support that Barkley had. It is a shame the world doesn't know how great the Dream was.

[Roundball_Rock]

Barkley had them go 25-8 without Kevin Johnson (so a 62 win pace--they finished with 62 wins..). That is a factor that is forgotten in the playoff race. Not many players could lose their #2 option/all-star and experience literally 0 decline without him. Barkley was a beast, though. :bowdown:

[Gotterdammerung]

While Hakeem was clearly the better player, the Suns were the better team. In fact, they seemed destined to win the title in 1993, given Barkley's rehabilitation of his image that began with his domination of the Olympics in 1992, and the Suns had a storybook season.

That alone was the edge for most voters.

Jordan and Pippen seemed exhausted in the beginning of the 1992-93 season, and it took a while for the Bulls to get in gear.

But a lingering, unresolved question hangs from that 1993 playoffs: if the Rockets survived that 7 game deathmatch with the Seattle Sonics (Game 7 turned on a bad call), they were likely going to beat the Suns in the conference finals. Nobody could stop Olajuwon or keep Thorpe off the glass. Mad Max and Smith might have bombed away with the best of the Suns gunners, and the rookie Horry could've offset Ricky Dumas.

We will never know.

[HoopsNY]

Barkley had them go 25-8 without Kevin Johnson (so a 62 win pace--they finished with 62 wins..). That is a factor that is forgotten in the playoff race. Not many players could lose their #2 option/all-star and experience literally 0 decline without him. Barkley was a beast, though. :bowdown:

As opposed to Hakeem who had no KJ equivalent. And Barkley had Dan Majerle who put up 17 a night and brought DPOY level defense to the table. Majerle actually got a DPOY vote and was All-Defense 2nd team.

KJ still managed to play 49 games and averaged 16/8 on 50%.

[HoopsNY]

While Hakeem was clearly the better player, the Suns were the better team. In fact, they seemed destined to win the title in 1993, given Barkley's rehabilitation of his image that began with his domination of the Olympics in 1992, and the Suns a storybook season.

That alone was the edge for most voters.

But a lingering, unresolved question hangs from that 1993 playoffs: if the Rockets survived that 7 game deathmatch with the Seattle Sonics (Game 7 turned on a bad call), they were likely going to beat the Suns in the conference finals. Nobody could stop Olajuwon or keep Thorpe off the glass. Mad Max and Smith might have bombed away with the best of the Suns gunners, and the rookie Horry could've offset Ricky Dumas.

We will never know.

Good points.

[TheCorporation]

Thank you for being a better, less obvious alt.

[HoopsNY]

Thank you for being a better, less obvious alt.

I'm really not sure what your obsession is with me, or why you're now following me around on different threads. I get that school is closed, but seriously, don't you have something better to do?

[Round Mound]

KJ only played 49 games the 92-93 season. So your 2nd option almost did not play for half the season. Hakeem did deserve the MVP that year but the stupidy again of going by the amount of wins by your team influenced alot of the desicions.

Barkley though, should have been the unanimous MVP in 89-90 relative to level of teamates and wins. Especially since every time they placed the Lakers Barkley was the best player in those games and the Sixers clinched the Division Title and where 3-1 against The Pistons (the 89 and eventual 90 chamopions).

[Round Mound]

Here is one of the Barkley game resumes vs the superior Lakers and Barkley just put on a show:

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp03IuJx2Xg
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRmU_jqwTSo
Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rYmmWXlV-A

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Jordan averaged 33 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assist, 3 steals, 1 block and Pippen was tired that season and having a down year. Jordan also doubles Pippen in BPM, win shares, VORP. I would say Jordan was still MVP that season.

1. Jordan
2. Hakeem
3. Barkley

[Round Mound]

Jordan averaged 33 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assist, 3 steals, 1 block and Pippen was tired that season and having a down year. Jordan also doubles Pippen in BPM, win shares, VORP. I would say Jordan was still MVP that season.

1. Jordan
2. Hakeem
3. Barkley

Nope Jordan had Pippen who was a better 2nd option that both Barkley and Hakeem had. Get F-Real!. Hakeem should have won it in 1992-93 and Barkley in 1989-90.

Barkley had the least defensive help compared to the Bulls or Rockets aswell.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Nope Jordan had Pippen who was a better 2nd option that both Barkley and Hakeem had. Get F-Real!. Hakeem should have won it in 1992-93 and Barkley in 1989-90.

Barkley had the least defensive help compared to the Bulls or Rockets aswell.

Gaps between Barkley/majerle

Win shares: 4.6
Vorp: 3.5
BPM: 5.3
Mins: -340

Majerle leads team in MPG and total minutes. Barkley played 340 less mins then Majerle.

Gaps between Jordan/Pippen

Win shares: 8.6
VORP: 5.5
BPM: 7.2
Mins: -56

Jordan definitely beats you that year round and mound and round. Reg season or playoffs. That was Pippen's worst year of the 1st 3peat.

[Round Mound]

Gaps between Barkley/majerle

Win shares: 4.6
Vorp: 3.5
BPM: 5.3
Mins: -340

Majerle leads team in MPG and total minutes. Barkley played 340 less mins then Majerle.

Gaps between Jordan/Pippen

Win shares: 8.6
VORP: 5.5
BPM: 7.2
Mins: -56

Jordan definitely beats you that year round and mound and round. Reg season or playoffs. That was Pippen's worst year of the 1st 3peat.

Watch the games and you´ll see Bulls where much better defensively cause of Pippen and the GRANT: both All Defensive Teamers. That doesn't change the fact that Jordan was the best player in the game. Infact Jordan was the best player from 87-88 to 97-98.

[HoopsNY]

Jordan averaged 33 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assist, 3 steals, 1 block and Pippen was tired that season and having a down year. Jordan also doubles Pippen in BPM, win shares, VORP. I would say Jordan was still MVP that season.

1. Jordan
2. Hakeem
3. Barkley

Pippen still averaged nearly 19/7/6 on 47% with 2 stls and 1 blk. Plus Pippen blew Maxwell out the water in PER, BPM, and VORP, and WS/48. And Pippen was a better defender than Maxwell was. Sorry, but Jordan didn't deserve MVP in 1992-93. His team won just 2 more games to Hakeem's with a better supporting cast.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen getting compared to Dan Majerle now? :confusedshrug:


I would say Jordan was still MVP that season.

Hypothetically speaking, what would happen if you remove Barkley from the Suns and Jordan from the Bulls? If only there was a way to run this experiment.

You also are looking at the stats in a certain way.

VORP per 82: Pippen 4.7, Johnson 2.7; Grant 2.8, Majerle 3.6.
BPM per 82: Pippen 4.0, Johnson 3.3; Grant 1.9, Majerle 2.5.

Bulls still have the edge--and this is with there being no stat for defense and with Johnson going 0/0/0 for 33 games (not to mention choking in the WCF and NBA finals).


Barkley though, should have been the unanimous MVP in 89-90 relative to level of teamates and wins. Especially since every time they placed the Lakers Barkley was the best player in those games and the Sixers clinched the Division Title and where 3-1 against The Pistons (the 89 and eventual 90 chamopions).

With Hersey Hawkins as his second option. :lol Barkley got the most 1st place votes in 90'--so in past eras where there was only one vote he would have won but Magic won because he got more overall votes (each voter has to select 5 players and the votes are weighted by rank).

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Jordan averaged 33 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assist, 3 steals, 1 block and Pippen was tired that season and having a down year. Jordan also doubles Pippen in BPM, win shares, VORP. I would say Jordan was still MVP that season.

1. Jordan
2. Hakeem
3. Barkley

What do you mean "still"? Mike wasn't MVP that yea. It was Barkley and deservedly so. He was second to Jordan in overall BPM and Top 12 in TS%; Hakeem was ~30.

Barkley also led his team to 60 wins, good for the West's #1 seed. Likewise PHX had the #1 ORTG.

Hakeem and Jordan had great cases but MVP doesn't always go to the BEST player. Team record and narrative matter. Barkley was that 'story' on a new team, out west, and were next in-line for Mike and Chicago.

[ClipperRevival]

Do people REALLY need to be reminded that Chuck joined a Suns team that had won 55, 54, 55, and 53 games PRIOR to him joining that team?

As great as Chuck was offensively, he didn't give a sh*t about D and that always matters.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?470602-Good-ole-Chuck-joined-a-Suns-teams-that-had-won-55-54-55-and-53-games

[HBK_Kliq_2]

What do you mean "still"? Mike wasn't MVP that yea. It was Barkley and deservedly so. He was second to Jordan in overall BPM and Top 12 in TS%; Hakeem was ~30.

Barkley also led his team to 60 wins, good for the West's #1 seed. Likewise PHX had the #1 ORTG.

Hakeem and Jordan had great cases but MVP doesn't always go to the BEST player. Team record and narrative matter. Barkley was that 'story' on a new team, out west, and were next in-line for Mike and Chicago.

I meant still as in Jordan was MVP the previous year and still in 93 until he retired.

[Roundball_Rock]

HBK, the other thing about Majerle is his stats were boosted by being the #2 option for 40 percent of the season.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Pippen getting compared to Dan Majerle now? :confusedshrug:



Hypothetically speaking, what would happen if you remove Barkley from the Suns and Jordan from the Bulls? If only there was a way to run this experiment.

You also are looking at the stats in a certain way.

VORP per 82: Pippen 4.7, Johnson 2.7; Grant 2.8, Majerle 3.6.
BPM per 82: Pippen 4.0, Johnson 3.3; Grant 1.9, Majerle 2.5.

Bulls still have the edge--and this is with there being no stat for defense and with Johnson going 0/0/0 for 33 games (not to mention choking in the WCF and NBA finals).



With Hersey Hawkins as his second option. :lol Barkley got the most 1st place votes in 90'--so in past eras where there was only one vote he would have won but Magic won because he got more overall votes (each voter has to select 5 players and the votes are weighted by rank).

What do you mean by per 82? We can't just assume they played 82 games, imagine if we did that for Kawhi?

I was looking at all things in consideration. Majerle carried a heavy load with all the minutes played, Pippen had an off year because it was a 3rd year of a 3peat and he was tired. In a vacuum of course Pippen destroys Majerle as a player. Looking at strictly the 1993 seasons they had, they were comparable in terms of production and Majerle is an all defense defender in his own right.

[Roundball_Rock]

Per 82 to show their level of play. If you don't adjust it, KJ gets blown out since he played 49 games and Pippen 81.

Majerle got raped in the NBA finals. Yeah it's MJ but he didn't score 41 on anyone else. Majerle failed even on a curve. I believe his second highest was 35-36 against LA.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Per 82 to show their level of play. If you don't adjust it, KJ gets blown out since he played 49 games and Pippen 81.

Majerle got raped in the NBA finals. Yeah it's MJ but he didn't score 41 on anyone else. Majerle failed even on a curve. I believe his second highest was 35-36 against LA.

This is a pure regular season vote, it has nothing to do with finals. My point is Jordan/Pippen gap > Barkley/Majerle gap based on advanced stats and minutes played.

Now this is just a regular season award, Pippen still has a 10x better career then Majerle of course. Its just when you're voting for MVP, its usually just narrative. The narrative for me is Pippen was tired in a 3rd of a 3peat and all his stats took a decline because of it.

[iamgine]

Uh no, it should've gone to Jordan.

In fact, every MVP from '88 to '97 except the two seasons he retired should go to Jordan.

[Roundball_Rock]

True--but using that logic MJ, LeBron, Kareem would be MVP every year. They set the bar so high as GOAT-level players there is always going to be a larger gap between a GOAT-level player and top 20-30 type like Pippen or Wade than there will be between a Barkley and Kevin Johnson.


The narrative for me is Pippen was tired in a 3rd of a 3peat and all his stats took a decline because of it.

He had an injured ankle all season, although I'm sure fatigue was part of it too. Players usually fall off in year 3 of a finals run--and Pippen was on the Dream Team too over the summer. He got a cortisone before the playoffs which helped him. He was 20/7/6 on 47% in the playoffs, including 22/8/6/2 on 47% in the ECF and finals (the Bulls went 7-0 in the first two rounds, the real playoffs started in the ECF for them).

Narrative is big in MVP and I think MJ had no real shot as a result. Kareem, LeBron others ran into the same thing: voters are reluctant to give a player MVP three years in a row. Other than the 60's (Wilt, Russell), Bird is the only time it happened.

[HoopsNY]

Do people REALLY need to be reminded that Chuck joined a Suns team that had won 55, 54, 55, and 53 games PRIOR to him joining that team?

As great as Chuck was offensively, he didn't give a sh*t about D and that always matters.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?470602-Good-ole-Chuck-joined-a-Suns-teams-that-had-won-55-54-55-and-53-games

Bingo. The Suns ability and success prior to his arrival is often left out of the conversation. Not to mention, Barkley had a better supporting cast.

[HoopsNY]

Uh no, it should've gone to Jordan.

In fact, every MVP from '88 to '97 except the two seasons he retired should go to Jordan.

Not really. Maybe in 1997 when they gave it to Karl Malone. But 1992-93 should have gone to Hakeem. MJ had Pippen/Grant and won 57 games. Thorpe was good, but I don't think he was anywhere near the level of Pippen. And was Maxwell like Grant?

Not to mention, Pippen started 81 games, Grant 77. Thorpe started 69 games, Maxwell 68. Hakeem was carrying that load more than Barkley and MJ IMO.

[Roundball_Rock]

The Suns ability and success prior to his arrival is often left out of the conversation. Not to mention, Barkley had a better supporting cast.

It wasn't the same team. The Suns gave up 3 starters, including their leading scorer (Hornacek, an all-star), to get Barkley. If it was simply Barkley coming over then 62 wins on a 54 win baseline would look differently. They gave up a combined 40/19/8 for Barkley's 23/11/4 in a 3 for 1 trade. It was Barkley versus an all-star and two other starters being shipped out.

KJ is the only 92' starter who remained a starter on the main 93' team lineup (Johnson/Majerle/West/Dumas/Barkley). The 92' team's main lineup was Johnson/Hornacek/Lang/Ceballos/Perry.

[Roundball_Rock]

Not one mention of Ewing?

*#1 seed in the East
*His team won 60 games--Hakeem's 55, Jordan's 57
*24/12/2 on 50%

These aren't numbers worth even considering for MVP, apparently, for the 1993 season? :confusedshrug:

[Smoke117]

As opposed to Hakeem who had no KJ equivalent. And Barkley had Dan Majerle who put up 17 a night andbrought DPOY level defense to the table. Majerle actually got a DPOY vote and was All-Defense 2nd team.

KJ still managed to play 49 games and averaged 16/8 on 50%.

:roll: After reading that I can't take anything you say seriously again.

[HoopsNY]

Not one mention of Ewing?

*#1 seed in the East
*His team won 60 games--Hakeem's 55, Jordan's 57
*24/12/2 on 50%

These aren't numbers worth even considering for MVP, apparently, for the 1993 season? :confusedshrug:

Why would I mention Ewing when it was an obvious post to bolster Hakeem's recognition? smh.

[HoopsNY]

:roll: After reading that I can't take anything you say seriously again.

Majerle was All-Defense 2nd team and was a DPOY vote getter (Tied 5th with Ewing and Oakley). I'm not sure you're aware of how good Dan Majerle was defensively. Ask any Knicks fan who saw him defend Houston and Spreewell.

[TheCorporation]

:roll: After reading that I can't take anything you say seriously again.

It's 3balls alt :lol That's why

[HoopsNY]

It's 3balls alt :lol That's why

Don't you have a LeBron themed birthday party to go to or something else to occupy your time? Or must you follow me around incessantly?

[Roundball_Rock]

:roll: After reading that I can't take anything you say seriously again.

The same DPOY level Majerle who MJ scored 41 on? :lol Starks "held" the same MJ to 32 on 40 percent in the prior series.

[HoopsNY]

The same DPOY level Majerle who MJ scored 41 on? :lol Starks "held" the same MJ to 32 on 40 percent in the prior series.

Was he a vote getter or not? Was he All-Defensive or not? Was his company along with players like Ewing and Oakley, or not? You're acting like MJ dropping buckets on Majerle somehow disqualifies Majerle from being known as a great defender.

Why pick apart that of all things when determining Hakeem's supporting cast vs Charles'? Or are you saying the combination of guys like Majerle+KJ+Ainge+Dumas etc was somehow inferior to the Rockets' supporting cast?

[tpols]

Was he a vote getter or not? Was he All-Defensive or not? Was his company along with players like Ewing and Oakley, or not? You're acting like MJ dropping buckets on Majerle somehow disqualifies Majerle from being known as a great defender.

Why pick apart that of all things when determining Hakeem's supporting cast vs Charles'? Or are you saying the combination of guys like Majerle+KJ+Ainge+Dumas etc was somehow inferior to the Rockets' supporting cast?

pretty hilarious since he loves to play the accolade tallying game. And yup... thats the standard around here for a lot of 90s players... if you lost to MJ? you sucked...

[AussieSteve]

Suns were 61-15 with Barkley (including 28-6 without KJ) and 1-5 without him.

Barkley deserved the MVP.

[Roundball_Rock]

Suns were 61-15 with Barkley (including 28-6 without KJ) and 1-5 without him.

Barkley deserved the MVP.

Exactly.

As to "supporting casts" and value, it isn't all about stats and team records now? :lol

[HoopsNY]

Exactly.

As to "supporting casts" and value, it isn't all about stats and team records now? :lol

Majerle played in all 82 games, guess he had nothing to do with their success? And the team posted a .755 win % with and without KJ. Does that mean that KJ wasn't important or that other solid players on the team stepped up in his absence?

[HoopsNY]

pretty hilarious since he loves to play the accolade tallying game. And yup... thats the standard around here for a lot of 90s players... if you lost to MJ? you sucked...

lol yea. Not to mention that the only reason he revived this thread was because I didn't prop up Ewing! And he's mad about that because I think there is some similarity between Ewing and Pippen in the 1993-94 season! Imagine that :lol But anyone who watched Dan Majerle knew how good he was defensively.

[Roundball_Rock]

Majerle played in all 82 games, guess he had nothing to do with their success?

It is my understanding "cast" injuries are irrelevant to MVP consideration--you simply tally win totals. Phoenix had 62, Houston 55.


And the team posted a .755 win % with and without KJ. Does that mean that KJ wasn't important

It is not a good look for KJ. All the hype he gets on ISH and the team doesn't skip a beat without him. :oldlol:

As to Majerle, "Jordan" is a pathetic excuse. It is comical how often we see "Jordan" invoked as an excuse for ISH favorites failing to do their job. His check didn't say "Except when Playing 'Jordan'." Starks held "Jordan" to 9 PPG less on 9-10% worse shooting in the previous series. Anyone who watched back then knows "Jordan" wasn't scoring 41 on 49-50% in every series. That probably was his career high...

It also is very anti-Jordan to say these teams were tomato cans who had no shot. Last week it was the Pacers were trash and had no shot to beat the Bulls. This week it is the Suns who had no shot. Who will it be next week? You can't hype every player MJ played against and then say his competition was trash--that has the argument against MJ backwards (the real argument is that MJ played great players but weak teams who had no shot against his "super team"). Ironically a lot of pro-MJ voices agree with his "haters" who say MJ faced no real competition from other teams.

[Whoah10115]

Suns were 61-15 with Barkley (including 28-6 without KJ) and 1-5 without him.

Barkley deserved the MVP.

Si

[HoopsNY]

It is my understanding "cast" injuries are irrelevant to MVP consideration--you simply tally win totals. Phoenix had 62, Houston 55.

That's not why I mentioned Majerle, though. Someone else decided to shit on Majerle's defense. I merely mentioned what he did as a sidekick. Given that Majerle played 82 games that season, how important was he to Phoenix's success?

To LeBron stans and MJ haters, it appears he had little to do with the 62 wins. It was also Barkley, obviously. After all, Majerle sucked offensively and defensively (especially since MJ torched him in the finals).


It is not a good look for KJ. All the hype he gets on ISH and the team doesn't skip a beat without him. :oldlol:

You fail to understand my point. If the topic is about Barkley's supporting cast vs. Hakeem's, then we need to understand that KJ isn't the only player on that supporting cast. You're doing what MJ fans do now and are acting like Barkley won those 62 games on his own. When KJ goes down, no players BUT Barkley stepped up?


As to Majerle, "Jordan" is a pathetic excuse. It is comical how often we see "Jordan" invoked as an excuse for ISH favorites failing to do their job. His check didn't say "Except when Playing 'Jordan'." Starks held "Jordan" to 9 PPG less on 9-10% worse shooting in the previous series. Anyone who watched back then knows "Jordan" wasn't scoring 41 on 49-50% in every series. That probably was his career high...

I missed your point here.


It also is very anti-Jordan to say these teams were tomato cans who had no shot. Last week it was the Pacers were trash and had no shot to beat the Bulls. This week it is the Suns who had no shot. Who will it be next week? You can't hype every player MJ played against and then say his competition was trash--that has the argument against MJ backwards (the real argument is that MJ played great players but weak teams who had no shot against his "super team"). Ironically a lot of pro-MJ voices agree with his "haters" who say MJ faced no real competition from other teams.

What does this have to do with Hakeem vs. Barkley? You've lost me.

[AussieSteve]

Si


Nothing to do with the 93 MVP but another fact that clearly shows Barkley's impact beyond stats, and renders OP's "stats + defense" analysis redundant, is what happened the next season in 93-94

Barkley played the first 29 games with Phoenix going 23-6. He then hurt his back and they went 8-9 without him.

So up until Barkley's back injury, the Suns went 84-21 (.800) with him and 9-14 (.391) without him.

Post back injury he wasn't quite the same and played fewer mins, but they still went 25-11 (.694) to close out that season.

Stats don't tell you about THAT impact!!

[warriorfan]

That's not why I mentioned Majerle, though. Someone else decided to shit on Majerle's defense. I merely mentioned what he did as a sidekick. Given that Majerle played 82 games that season, how important was he to Phoenix's success?

To LeBron stans and MJ haters, it appears he had little to do with the 62 wins. It was also Barkley, obviously. After all, Majerle sucked offensively and defensively (especially since MJ torched him in the finals).



You fail to understand my point. If the topic is about Barkley's supporting cast vs. Hakeem's, then we need to understand that KJ isn't the only player on that supporting cast. You're doing what MJ fans do now and are acting like Barkley won those 62 games on his own. When KJ goes down, no players BUT Barkley stepped up?



I missed your point here.



What does this have to do with Hakeem vs. Barkley? You've lost me.

Making points isn’t Roundballs strong suit. He prefers rambling in circles and copy pasting arbitrary advanced stats from basketball reference.

[Roundball_Rock]

Nothing to do with the 93 MVP but another fact that clearly shows Barkley's impact beyond stats, and renders OP's "stats + defense" analysis redundant, is what happened the next season in 93-94

Barkley played the first 29 games with Phoenix going 23-6. He then hurt his back and they went 8-9 without him.

So up until Barkley's back injury, the Suns went 84-21 (.800) with him and 9-14 (.391) without him.

Post back injury he wasn't quite the same and played fewer mins, but they still went 25-11 (.694) to close out that season.

Stats don't tell you about THAT impact!!

Good points.

If the Suns won 62 games and Rockets 55, why should the team winning substantially less produce the MVP?

The Suns had the best record with only the Knicks close to them. The Bulls were 5 games behind the Suns. The Rockets, Sonic's 7 games behind and the Cavs 8.

Statistically Barkley and Hakeem were similar (and MJ superior in advanced stats).

So if Hakeem is far behind in wins (it's like saying Shaq should have been MVP over Hakeem the next year) and he doesn't have the best stats and value goes to Barkley (as you and others noted here), what is left for Hakeem?

[Shooter]

Making points isn’t Roundballs strong suit. He prefers rambling in circles and copy pasting arbitrary advanced stats from basketball reference.

How's Curry's season going?

[Roundball_Rock]

How's Curry's season going?

He seems to have forgotten about Curry. Whenever I see him quoted it's him whining about competent posters or pushing other players.

I still think it's comical and revealing the army of people pushing Ewing for MVP in the 1994 thread they stormed magically don't think he has a case for MVP in 1993 since the Bulls' candidate in 93' was MJ, not Pippen (apparently 55 wins is enough over 62 or 60 but 55 over 56 or 57 disqualifies you the next year). They don't even try to hide it. :lol

[HoopsNY]

Nothing to do with the 93 MVP but another fact that clearly shows Barkley's impact beyond stats, and renders OP's "stats + defense" analysis redundant, is what happened the next season in 93-94

Barkley played the first 29 games with Phoenix going 23-6. He then hurt his back and they went 8-9 without him.

So up until Barkley's back injury, the Suns went 84-21 (.800) with him and 9-14 (.391) without him.

Post back injury he wasn't quite the same and played fewer mins, but they still went 25-11 (.694) to close out that season.

Stats don't tell you about THAT impact!!

Solid point if we're focusing on the 1994-95 season.

[HoopsNY]

If the Suns won 62 games and Rockets 55, why should the team winning substantially less produce the MVP?

Because the supporting cast is better. Majerle was better than anyone Houston had aside from Hakeem that year. Cedric Ceballos even led the league in FG%. Phoenix had a better bench with Ainge and Chambers. So better sidekicks, better offensive support, and a better bench. Yet somehow Hakeem had the better supporting cast? How does this make sense?


Statistically Barkley and Hakeem were similar (and MJ superior in advanced stats).

Were Barkley and Hakeem similar defensively? When was Barkley ever an elite GOAT level defensive player? The two are night and day in that regard, which is why this debate largely favors Hakeem.

[insidious301]

Because the supporting cast is better. Majerle was better than anyone Houston had aside from Hakeem that year. Cedric Ceballos even led the league in FG%. Phoenix had a better bench with Ainge and Chambers. So better sidekicks, better offensive support, and a better bench. Yet somehow Hakeem had the better supporting cast? How does this make sense?



[quoteWere Barkley and Hakeem similar defensively? When was Barkley ever an elite GOAT level defensive player? The two are night and day in that regard, which is why this debate largely favors Hakeem.

Statistically is all that was implied to be fair. You're right that defense should be accounted for, but omeone like Barkley had great impact even without defense. Or do people really think '93 Hakeem and '93 Barkley were on different levels? At the time and even looking back, you could make the argument for either one.

[HoopsNY]

Statistically is all that was implied to be fair. You're right that defense should be accounted for, but omeone like Barkley for example had great impact even without defense. Or do people really think '93 Barkley and '93 Hakeem were on different tiers? At the time and even looking back, you could make the argument for either player.

I get your point, but I love how the supporting casts are ignored. Majerle was a DPOY vote getter, All-Defensive selection, and an all-star putting up 17 ppg on 57% TS%. Ceballos led the league in FG%, and the Suns had a much better bench than Houston did. Yet that is conveniently overlooked IN ADDITION to Hakeem being the better overall player?

How does any of that make sense? You would think that Hakeem was, in fact, the reason they didn't win more, if we're going to be consistent where it comes to impact, since the silent assumption seems to be that Houston's supporting cast was light years ahead of Phoenix's. After all, KJ was useless. :confusedshrug:

[insidious301]

I get your point, but I love how the supporting casts are ignored. Majerle was a DPOY vote getter, All-Defensive selection, put up 17 ppg on 57 TS%. Ceballos led the league in FG%, and the Suns had a much better bench than Houston did. Yet that is conveniently overlooked IN ADDITION to Hakeem being the better overall player?

How does any of that make sense? You would think that Hakeem was, in fact, the reason they didn't win more, if we're going to be consistent here where it comes to impact, since the silent assumption seems to be that Houston's supporting cast was light years ahead of Phoenix's. After all, KJ was useless. :confusedshrug:

All of this is fair, and I get what you're saying now. If one is going to use Barkley's team success in the debate then Hakeem should be lauded for carrying scrubs. Maybe not "scrubs" but Hakeem clearly had less help.

[HoopsNY]

All of this is fair, and I get what you're saying now. If one is going to use Barkley's team success in the debate then Hakeem should be lauded for carrying scrubs. Maybe not "scrubs" but Hakeem clearly had less help.

Bingo. Roundball doesn't understand this. It's one of the reasons he puts Shaq down for winning 50 games, as if having championship support (in the form of a 3 peat) means nothing when it comes to a supporting cast. Penny, Anderson, and Scott are somehow a better trio than Grant, Armstrong, and Kukoc. And of course, defense doesn't matter. Go figure.

[Smoke117]

The same DPOY level Majerle who MJ scored 41 on? :lol Starks "held" the same MJ to 32 on 40 percent in the prior series.

Eh, taking into individual scoring against you is a poor way to gauge defense imo, but Dan Majerle just wasn't ever even close to a DPOY. (or even first team all defense for his position) It was just such a ridiculously hilarious statement it had to be called out. Was he he a good defensive player? Sure. DPOY level, though? To say this when in 93 when a prime Hakeem and David Robinson were in the league just makes it laughable. Realistically he didn't have 1/10th of their impact defensively, so to say he was a DPOY level player is laugh out loud hilariously. If you go by impact in 93 I doubt Majerle would even make the top 50.

[kawhileonard2]

Jordan had best stats in season and playoffs and set the record in the finals. Don't see how it is not him.

[HoopsNY]

Eh, taking into individual scoring against you is a poor way to gauge defense imo, but Dan Majerle just wasn't ever even close to a DPOY. (or even first team all defense for his position) It was just such a ridiculously hilarious statement it had to be called out. Was he he a good defensive player? Sure. DPOY level, though? To say this when in 93 when a prime Hakeem and David Robinson were in the league just makes it laughable. Realistically he didn't have 1/10th of their impact defensively, so to say he was a DPOY level player is laugh out loud hilariously. If you go by impact in 93 I doubt Majerle would even make the top 50.

When did I ever say that Majerle was deserving of DPOY? My point was to highlight that he was a DPOY vote getter, which must mean something in the grand scheme of things. His company included guys like Ewing and Oakley. Are you telling me that Ewing and Oakley were slouches defensively? Or were they great defensive players themselves?

The problem with people like yourself is that you read what you want to read into people's statements. Take what I said at its face value. I merely pointed out that Majerle was a better sidekick that season between Houston and Phoenix's sidekicks. How am I wrong? Who else provided All-Defense defensive play with solid offensive play (17 PPG on 57.4 TS%) on Houston's roster?

I only mentioned his DPOY status because someone mocked his defensive ability. And since when is finishing All-Defensive 2nd team a bad thing, especially when you have to compete with Michael freaking Jordan on the defensive end, who by 1993 was the best defensive guard in the game? There are some who considered MJ as THE best defensive player that year, (though I would respectfully disagree).

So how is finishing 2nd behind someone like him or Joe Dumars some kind of shame?

[Roundball_Rock]

Eh, taking into individual scoring against you is a poor way to gauge defense imo, but Dan Majerle just wasn't ever even close to a DPOY. (or even first team all defense for his position) It was just such a ridiculously hilarious statement it had to be called out. Was he he a good defensive player? Sure. DPOY level, though?

Agreed. He was a good defender but not DPOY caliber. His defense gets overhyped. He made two all-defensive 2nd teams and the first one was as a bench player.

We keep seeing "Jordan" invoked as excuses for all these 90's players being hyped not measuring up to the hype. "Jordan" is the excuse also for Majerle not making all-D 1st team. Last I checked, there are two all-D spots for guards (Dumars as the other one). Moreover, we don't know if Majerle would beat Starks since they tied in DPOY.

Here are the DPOY results:

Hakeem 73
Robinson/MJ 9
Rodman 3
Ewing/Majerle/Oakley/Starks 1

The impression pushed here is he was a serious DPOY candidate when three Knicks got the same single vote as he did.

Plus, "Jordan" was gone the next two years. Majerle didn't make all-D ever again after 93'.

[AussieSteve]

Why is this guy hyping Dan Majerle so much?

I'll say this. For the 35 games that KJ was out of the starting lineup, Houston's starting lineup around Hakeem was better than what the Sun's had around Barkley.

Thorpe, Horry, Smith, Maxwell > West, Cebalos / Dumas, Majerle, Knight

[Roundball_Rock]

To hype the Sun's "cast" and because Majerle "defended" MJ so he has to be hyped as this monster MJ slayed en route to 41 PPG.

One thing used to diminish Barkley's impact is the Suns won 54 games in 92'--but they shipped out an all-star/their leading scorer and two other starters to acquire Barkley. The actual level of the 93' team without Barkley wasn't anywhere close to 54 wins.

[AussieSteve]

To hype the Sun's "cast" and because Majerle "defended" MJ so he has to be hyped as this monster MJ slayed en route to 41 PPG.

One thing used to diminish Barkley's impact is the Suns won 54 games in 92'--but they shipped out an all-star/their leading scorer and two other starters to acquire Barkley. The actual level of the 93' team without Barkley wasn't anywhere close to 54 wins.

The suns lost a 20ppg AS and also an All NBA PG for half a season.

Barkley was worth both these guys plus an additional 10+ wins (66 win pace in his 76 games)

[Roundball_Rock]

The suns lost a 20ppg AS and also an All NBA PG for half a season.

Barkley was worth both these guys plus an additional 10+ wins (66 win pace in his 76 games)

Yup, plus they lost 2 other starters in the trade in addition to Hornacek. So think about that: the Suns were down 4 starters from their 92' 54 win team, including two AS players, for half the season and Barkley still kept them dominant. That's the definition of "value." :bowdown:

[HoopsNY]

Agreed. He was a good defender but not DPOY caliber. His defense gets overhyped. He made two all-defensive 2nd teams and the first one was as a bench player.

I will repeat again, my point wasn't to say that he was in fact deserving of DPOY, but it was to show that Majerle got DPOY recognition. Furthermore, what he did defensively in terms of accolades outside of this season is irrelevant. We're not examining Majerle's career here, we're looking at him because for some reason, some seem to think that Houston had the better supporting cast.


We keep seeing "Jordan" invoked as excuses for all these 90's players being hyped not measuring up to the hype. "Jordan" is the excuse also for Majerle not making all-D 1st team. Last I checked, there are two all-D spots for guards (Dumars as the other one). Moreover, we don't know if Majerle would beat Starks since they tied in DPOY.

You can be a great defensive player and not make All-Defensive 1st team. Marc Gasol is a classic example of that. Furthermore, Dumars winning it above Majerle doesn't take away from him being a great defensive player that year. You're arguing nickels and dimes here, as usual.


Here are the DPOY results:

Hakeem 73
Robinson/MJ 9
Rodman 3
Ewing/Majerle/Oakley/Starks 1

The impression pushed here is he was a serious DPOY candidate when three Knicks got the same single vote as he did.

Only to someone like you wants to interpret something that isn't there. Was Oakley not a great defensive player? Was Starks not a gritty and an excellent defender? How about Ewing? Ironically, New York had the #1 defense that year....who was largely responsible for that? (I'll give you a hint...Ewing-Starks-Oakley).

Why does getting 1 vote take away from how these players are viewed? You're interpreting it how you want to interpret it, not on how I'm explaining it (and have been explaining it), the entire time. When you see a group of names including guys like Oakley and Majerle, do you race to diminish Oakley's defensive contributions? Of course not.


Plus, "Jordan" was gone the next two years. Majerle didn't make all-D ever again after 93'.

This is a discussion about the 1992-93 season. Again, what happens outside of this season is irrelevant.

I love how the *actual* argument is being lost here. My argument is that Barkley had a better cast than Hakeem. MJ haters want to derail the thread and make it about MJ somehow, showing even more how Hakeem is underrated. Bring up Majerle to show how he was excellent support for Barkley..."No no no! Mj scored 41 on him!!!"

Unbelievable. You would think there is some comparison between Barkley and Jordan going on here the way MJ haters would have it.

[HoopsNY]

Why is this guy hyping Dan Majerle so much?

The question is, why are you and others trying to diminish Majerle's contribution that year? The reason I mentioned him is because Majerle > Thorpe, Majerle > Maxwell, Majerle > Smith. Is this not the case?


I'll say this. For the 35 games that KJ was out of the starting lineup, Houston's starting lineup around Hakeem was better than what the Sun's had around Barkley.

Thorpe, Horry, Smith, Maxwell > West, Cebalos / Dumas, Majerle, Knight

The debate isn't about KJ missing 33 games (not 35), and thus comparing starting lineups. The debate is about the MVP, actual MVP impact, and supporting casts.

Majerle was better than anyone not named Hakeem on Houston. Even if you subtract KJ for 33 games, Cedric Ceballos was better than Phoenix's next player not named Hakeem or Thorpe.

Then we have Phoenix's bench. Who had the deeper bench, or does that not factor into supporting casts?

So we have:

Majerle > Thorpe
Ceballos > Smith
KJ > Every other player not named the aforementioned
Ainge/Chambers > Houston's bench (and I haven't even begun to speak about having a veteran presence like Ainge or Chambers)

Yet Hakeem had the better cast?

Toss in Hakeem's defensive ability (which is being completely ignored here) and it becomes clear Hakeem should have won the MVP.

[Round Mound]

One thing we forget is that Hakeem's teams where better than the Suns DEFENSIVELY.

Suns had GREAT OFFENSE, BUT NO GREAT DEFENSE.

Otis Thorpe was a WAY BETTER DEFENDER than ANY OTHER SUN.

Then you have guys like Robert Horry, Kenny Smith, Sam Cassell and Vernon Maxwell who where GOOD DEFENSIVE PERIMETER PLAYERS and EVEN BETTER 3-POINT SHOOTERS than the Suns with ONLY Thunder Dan being a good 3-Point Shooter and Ainge OFF THE BENCH.

So you have BETTER PERIMETER DEFENDERS and 4 THREE-POINT SHOOTERS...WHICH is MORE than the Suns who had Thunder Dan and OFF THE BENCH Ainge

AINGE WAS NOT A GREAT PERIMETER DEFENDER.

While Thunder Dan was TOUGH MINDED DEFENDER but COULD NOT MOVE SIDEWAYS LATERALY BETTER than the OTHER ROCKET PLAYERS.

[HoopsNY]

One thing we forget is that Hakeem's teams where better than the Suns DEFENSIVELY.

Suns had GREAT OFFENSE, BUT NO GREAT DEFENSE.

Otis Thorpe was a WAY BETTER DEFENDER than ANY OTHER SUN.

Then you have guys like Robert Horry, Kenny Smith, Sam Cassell and Vernon Maxwell who where GOOD DEFENSIVE PERIMETER PLAYERS and EVEN BETTER 3-POINT SHOOTERS than the Suns with ONLY Thunder Dan being a good 3-Point Shooter and Ainge OFF THE BENCH.

So you have BETTER PERIMETER DEFENDERS and 4 THREE-POINT SHOOTERS...WHICH is MORE than the Suns who had Thunder Dan and OFF THE BENCH Ainge

AINGE WAS NOT A GREAT PERIMETER DEFENDER.

While Thunder Dan was TOUGH MINDED DEFENDER but COULD NOT MOVE SIDEWAYS LATERALY BETTER than the OTHER ROCKET PLAYERS.

Way better? The Suns were 9th in defense that season, the Rockets were 3rd. How much of the Suns defensive play was attributed to Barkley as opposed to the Rockets and Hakeem? Anyone who watched Barkley and Hakeem play knew who was impacting their team defense more.

Thorpe was no slouch defensively, but better than Majerle that year? I don't think so. Majerle was a DPOY vote getter and All-Defensive 2nd team. Thorpe received none of that recognition. So how does any of what you're saying add up?

My point about Ainge wasn't to highlight his defense, but to show his offensive production as well as providing a veteran presence. Those things have to count for something.

[Round Mound]

Way better? The Suns were 9th in defense that season, the Rockets were 3rd. How much of the Suns defensive play was attributed to Barkley as opposed to the Rockets and Hakeem? Anyone who watched Barkley and Hakeem play knew who was impacting their team defense more.

Thorpe was no slouch defensively, but better than Majerle that year? I don't think so. Majerle was a DPOY vote getter and All-Defensive 2nd team. Thorpe received none of that recognition. So how does any of what you're saying add up?

My point about Ainge wasn't to highlight his defense, but to show his offensive production as well as providing a veteran presence. Those things have to count for something.

Watch the games...and you can see the Rockets where more athletic, could move sideways better in the perimeter and had 4 bombers as three-point shooters to Suns 2 (Dan and bench player Ainge). Otis Thorpe was a much better defender than thunderdan. impact wise. Suns where better offensively but NOT DEFENSIVELY. Just watch the games.

[kawhileonard2]

I actually thought Barkley and Malone were better than Hakeem until 1994 happened. I'm sure most felt that way to.

[Round Mound]

I actually thought Barkley and Malone were better than Hakeem until 1994 happened. I'm sure most felt that way to.

No atually Hakeem was beter than Barkley and Malone in the mid and late 80s since in his 2nd season (85-86) he went't to the finals with 1 other all star (Sampson),

Barkley was better from 89 to 93 as 2nd best player in the game and then Hakeem just exploded in 94 but especially 95.

[HoopsNY]

Watch the games...and you can see the Rockets where more athletic, could move sideways better in the perimeter and had 4 bombers as three-point shooters to Suns 2 (Dan and bench player Ainge). Otis Thorpe was a much better defender than thunderdan. impact wise. Suns where better offensively but NOT DEFENSIVELY. Just watch the games.

It's been years, but I did watch the games. I'm not getting the same eye test as you are. Majerle was a better lock down defender, despite not having great quickness. Anyway, this will turn into a he said she said, but the fact remains is that Majerle was not only All-Defensive 2nd team that year, but received a DPOY vote alongside Oakley, Ewing, and Starks.

I liked Otis Thorpe, but I think you're overrating him. Furthermore, the game isn't just three point shooting. But if you want to focus so much on how many three point shooters Houston had (as if this somehow puts them over the top where supporting casts were concerned), then consider this:

3pt FG% & Rank
Phoenix - .363% (3rd)
Houston - .361% (4th)

So clearly 3 point shooting as a whole wasn't a problem for Phoenix, even if it was dependent upon 2 players. Those two players still stood out.

[Round Mound]

It's been years, but I did watch the games. I'm not getting the same eye test as you are. Majerle was a better lock down defender, despite not having great quickness. Anyway, this will turn into a he said she said, but the fact remains is that Majerle was not only All-Defensive 2nd team that year, but received a DPOY vote alongside Oakley, Ewing, and Starks.

I liked Otis Thorpe, but I think you're overrating him. Furthermore, the game isn't just three point shooting. But if you want to focus so much on how many three point shooters Houston had (as if this somehow puts them over the top where supporting casts were concerned), then consider this:

3pt FG% & Rank
Phoenix - .363% (3rd)
Houston - .361% (4th)

So clearly 3 point shooting as a whole wasn't a problem for Phoenix, even if it was dependent upon 2 players. Those two players still stood out.

Otis Thrope was much better than people give him credit. He was one of the few PFs that could actually move his feet to guard Charles whle still very long 6'10 with a great wingspam (and could grab the ball like a tennis ball). You still can´t deny that Rockets where a better defensive team on BOTH: BACK COURT AND FRONTCOURT. Their perimeter players where more athletic and they had 4 Three-Point Bombers to the Suns 2. Hakeem is my favoirte center of all time btw. I was laughing at my friends in 95 when Robinson got the MVP i knew Hakeem would murder Robinson and it happened. I also agree that Hakeem deserved the MVP in 92-93 but Charles deserved the 89-90 MVP aswell.

[insidious301]

It's been years, but I did watch the games. I'm not getting the same eye test as you are. Majerle was a better lock down defender, despite not having great quickness. Anyway, this will turn into a he said she said, but the fact remains is that Majerle was not only All-Defensive 2nd team that year, but received a DPOY vote alongside Oakley, Ewing, and Starks.

I liked Otis Thorpe, but I think you're overrating him. Furthermore, the game isn't just three point shooting. But if you want to focus so much on how many three point shooters Houston had (as if this somehow puts them over the top where supporting casts were concerned), then consider this:

3pt FG% & Rank
Phoenix - .363% (3rd)
Houston - .361% (4th)

So clearly 3 point shooting as a whole wasn't a problem for Phoenix, even if it was dependent upon 2 players. Those two players still stood out.

Great information here, HoopsNY. Your post falls in line with what you mentioned before. Hakeem's help wasn't as great, so if that is the argument then it only gives him a boost. I think either player is interchangable in 1993 however the "supporting cast" talking points are straying away from the topic.

[Sarcastic]

It should have gone to Jordan, but this was the first time that voter fatigue for him became a real thing. If you actually look at the numbers objectively, Jordan would win it comfortably. He led the league in just about every advanced stat category, to go along with the scoring title, and steals title.

[Roundball_Rock]

It should have gone to Jordan, but this was the first time that voter fatigue for him became a real thing. If you actually look at the numbers objectively, Jordan would win it comfortably. He led the league in just about every advanced stat category, to go along with the scoring title, and steals title.

Those stats didn't exist then so couldn't factor into voting 27 years ago. They looked at traditional box score stats, team records (Suns won 62, Knicks 60 and Ewing isn't even mentioned in this :oldlol: thread somehow despite being on the 1 seed, Bulls 57, Rockets 55) and tried to guess "value." Voter fatigue hurt MJ but if it weren't for voter bias MJ, LeBron, Kareem would win every year.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

It should have gone to Jordan, but this was the first time that voter fatigue for him became a real thing. If you actually look at the numbers objectively, Jordan would win it comfortably. He led the league in just about every advanced stat category, to go along with the scoring title, and steals title.

Barkley's team had the better record and his advanced stats were in the same ballpark as Jordan. He also averaged more rebounds and shot more efficiently.

Mike was the better player, but Barkley's MVP case was as good as anybodies.

[HoopsNY]

It should have gone to Jordan, but this was the first time that voter fatigue for him became a real thing. If you actually look at the numbers objectively, Jordan would win it comfortably. He led the league in just about every advanced stat category, to go along with the scoring title, and steals title.

Jordan played with Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant, yet achieved just 57 wins. Give Hakeem Pippen and Grant and what do the Rockets do? (They won 55 games as is without players of that caliber).

[HoopsNY]

Those stats didn't exist then so couldn't factor into voting 27 years ago. They looked at traditional box score stats, team records (Suns won 62, Knicks 60 and Ewing isn't even mentioned in this :oldlol: thread somehow despite being on the 1 seed, Bulls 57, Rockets 55) and tried to guess "value." Voter fatigue hurt MJ but if it weren't for voter bias MJ, LeBron, Kareem would win every year.

I never said that Ewing deserved the MVP in 1994. My point was that Pippen-Ewing-Shaq were comparable. But Ewing didn't have a case over Hakeem that year. The same goes for 1993. Ewing had an elite defensive team behind him where guys like Oakley and Starks were more impactful defensively than Thorpe/Maxwell.

Ewing finished 4th in voting that year, which is pretty much on par with his finish in 1994. This thread is to show that Hakeem was the actual MVP.

[Roundball_Rock]

I never said that Ewing deserved the MVP in 1994.

You have actual legitimate feelings and views on the MVP race in both years, as you have shown here. What I had in mind is the 20 other people who pushed Ewing in the other thread but have no opinion at all on the prior year's MVP race (very passionate views on the 94' race, doe! :lol ) or don't mention Ewing at all, touting MJ (records don't matter anymore). It is inconsistent for obvious reasons: his MVP case was stronger than it ever would be in 93'.

[HoopsNY]

You have actual legitimate feelings and views on the MVP race in both years, as you have shown here. What I had in mind is the 20 other people who pushed Ewing in the other thread but have no opinion at all on the prior year's MVP race (very passionate views on the 94' race, doe! :lol ) or don't mention Ewing at all, touting MJ (records don't matter anymore). It is inconsistent for obvious reasons: his MVP case was stronger than it ever would be in 93'.

I see. The reason I said that is because you responded to me in the other thread with a similar response (saying no mention of Ewing in 1992-93). But if it has to do with others, then fair.

[Roundball_Rock]

I see. The reason I said that is because you responded to me in the other thread with a similar response (saying no mention of Ewing in 1992-93). But if it has to do with others, then fair.

I thought that at one point but after seeing you go at it for six pages here obviously you have legit opinions on each. The others? Largely silent or coming here saying MJ should have won.

[HoopsNY]

I thought that at one point but after seeing you go at it for six pages here obviously you have legit opinions on each. The others? Largely silent or coming here saying MJ should have won.

At some point, you have to realize not everyone is a flaming MJ supporter and people do have legitimate opinions and views concerning him which don't make them "stans."

[Roundball_Rock]

Yeah, and that there are differences among MJ fans. Kuniva, Phoenix are not the same as 2ball and the other characters in the PG/Pippen thread.

You have to acknowledge there is an agenda, though. These guys don't care about Ewing as a MVP candidate just as they don't care about PG. There is another thread about PG up and you don't see them flocking to it talking about how awesome he is.

That agenda revolves around MJ. That isn't surprising. If you are a Shaq, Hakeem, Payton, Barkley, Robinson, etc. fan Pippen is no different to you than other random superstars of the era. We don't see daily attacks on Drexler, Ewing, Payton, etc. To random fans Pippen is a random superstar; to other fans diminishing Pippen is irrelevant to their favorite 90's player. Pippen sucking doesn't inflate Ewing or Robinson in any way, for example.

Are they all MJ fans? No, but the lion's share of them obviously are.

On the flip side, you have to acknowledge I am not out there saying MJ was DeRozan and played plumbers. When you get down to it, my views of MJ aren't that far off from Kuniva's, for example (as we found after a several pages long exchange), and probably not yours either. I have MJ #2 all-time and the tiebreaker with KAJ is simply longevity. If I am drafting for one year, one series maybe I take MJ but my criteria is drafting careers with the rest of the team randomly filled in around the legend in question. I can see how I come off that way at times, though, as I play devil's advocate.

Not every view is tied to MJ hate either. I am more favorable than I am unfavorable to 90's superstars but if I say one word about Miller that somehow is part of a nefarious anti-MJ agenda via diminishing his comp (even though in that very thread I'm saying the 98' Pacers had a legit chance and the other side that they were tomato cans). Apparently Zion somehow is linked to the anti-MJ agenda too now? I don't see it at all. I can't sit there and analyze the 10 different ways every player ever relates to possible MJ or LeBron agendas. Especially since that stuff changes. I've been pro-Pippen before LeBron vs. MJ is a thing so it is amusing it is tied to LeBron. I was a Pippen fan long before I even knew who LeBron was or before the internet existed. I wasn't jotting down notes watching games in 1994 for posts on a non-existent internet 15-26 years later.

Sorry if I am harsh towards you at times. It often is dealing with other clowns in the same threads and you get lumped in with them (unfairly) by me at times. I obviously respect you as a poster--or else I wouldn't make long responses to your long posts. :cheers:

[HoopsNY]

Yeah, and that there are differences among MJ fans. Kuniva, Phoenix are not the same as 2ball and the other characters in the PG/Pippen thread.

You have to acknowledge there is an agenda, though. These guys don't care about Ewing as a MVP candidate just as they don't care about PG. There is another thread about PG up and you don't see them flocking to it talking about how awesome he is.

That agenda revolves around MJ. That isn't surprising. If you are a Shaq, Hakeem, Payton, Barkley, Robinson, etc. fan Pippen is no different to you than other random superstars of the era. We don't see daily attacks on Drexler, Ewing, Payton, etc. To random fans Pippen is a random superstar; to other fans diminishing Pippen is irrelevant to their favorite 90's player. Pippen sucking doesn't inflate Ewing or Robinson in any way, for example.

I definitely do see an agenda which I hadn't seen before joining this forum. Or maybe it's that I just don't pay attention enough online. Either way, I think this is in large part due to a sector of fans (mostly LeBron fans), who seek to diminish MJ's accomplishments and use Pippen to do it (For example, the 1-9 crowd...no Pip no chip...etc).

And since MJ is a consistent topic of discussion, naturally, Pippen becomes one too. The way I see it, you have one 3ball, but you have a ton of LeBron stans on here who do not engage with anyone here with any type of intellectual discourse. The Ricos, SATANs, Shooters, Corporations etc of this forum do a good job of utilizing Pippen for their agenda, which of course evokes a response.


On the flip side, you have to acknowledge I am not out there saying MJ was DeRozan and played plumbers. When you get down to it, my views of MJ aren't that far off from Kuniva's, for example (as we found after a several pages long exchange), and probably not yours either. I have MJ #2 all-time and the tiebreaker with KAJ is simply longevity. If I am drafting for one year, one series maybe I take MJ but my criteria is drafting careers with the rest of the team randomly filled in around the legend in question. I can see how I come off that way at times, though, as I play devil's advocate.

That makes sense when you bring up longevity, so I can understand that.

You definitely aren't out there bringing up erroneous claims such as the aforementioned. But at the same time, you're not exactly vocal in refuting the consistent ridiculous claims of LeBron stans who bring up dumb topics such as trying to draw equivalency between DeRozan and MJ or whatever other ridiculous assertions they raise. So why the vigor with 3ball? And you're a Bulls fan, so it does seem rather odd.


Sorry if I am harsh towards you at times. It often is dealing with other clowns in the same threads and you get lumped in with them (unfairly) by me at times. I obviously respect you as a poster--or else I wouldn't make long responses to your long posts. :cheers:

No biggie. I'm lighthearted when it comes to debates. It's just sports at the end of the day.

[Roundball_Rock]

I definitely do see an agenda which I hadn't seen before joining this forum

It is worse on social media. If you join a random sports FB group, 80% of posts are LeBron, Jordan with Pippen ensnared in it. Here at least there are some level of discussions, there it is just spouting the same memes.


Either way, I think this is in large part due to a sector of fans (mostly LeBron fans), who seek to diminish MJ's accomplishments and use Pippen to do it (For example, the 1-9 crowd...no Pip no chip...etc).

Yeah--although one note is it used to be Kobe/MJ. Go look at some old threads from 2009-2011 or so on ISH and you will see it. LeBron fans didn't care about Pippen then and MJ fans were pro-LeBron. Kobe fans advocated for Pippen--way more than LeBron fans do now--but now are silent on him. Us Pippen fans (me, 97, smoke) have been the same as the people around us changed.

A caveat is my understanding is--although I can't confirm since I wasn't on ISH before 2009 and wasn't in stick and ball sports groups online--is this stuff started with MJ fans using Shaq to diminish Kobe, they brought up Pippen in response.

Also note we don't see Wade, Davis, Gasol diminished in the same systematic way. Or anyone else. McHale, Magic, Curry from KD fans, etc.


But at the same time, you're not exactly vocal in refuting the consistent ridiculous claims of LeBron stans who bring up dumb topics such as trying to draw equivalency between DeRozan and MJ or whatever other ridiculous assertions they raise

I do once in a while but mostly avoid it because those claims are so over the top I don't see them being adopted. The Pippen stuff is getting some traction. A lot of the Pippen themes being pushed over the years have stuck to some degree, e.g., Pippen can't score, Pippen was a choker, etc. I don't see people thinking MJ=DeRozan. These weren't nearly as common a decade ago but when you have 2ball/IMKobe/tpols/IG/etc. pushing it day in, day out it gets traction.

What I do see getting some level of traction is the "MJ played plumbers" stuff (more so on social media than here)--which is why I will point out the era stuff is dumb. There are great, good, average, bad players in every era.


So why the vigor with 3ball?

An error of judgment. I need to do a better job of largely ignoring 2ball and his ilk. :lol If you look at that other thread, I'm no longer seriously engaging them. I'm there for comedic purposes, like hearing Pippen=Green.