Best avail #2 options MJ would select over Pip and LBJ would select over his #2?

[FromDowntown]

Pippen
1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998

None for each year, MJ had best available 7 for 7 years.

Wade
2012, 2013, 2014

2013: Russel Westbrook, Kawhi, etc.
2014: Russel Westbrook, Kawhi, etc.

LBJ had best avail 1 for 3 years.

Kyrie
2015, 2016, 2017

2015: Klay
2016: Westbrook
2017: Curry

LBJ had best avail 0 for 3 years

Love
2018

2018: :lol Anyone

All in all 7 years each

MJ had best avail 7 for 7, LBJ has best avail 1 for 7

[3ball]

.
Per 100 Possessions - Playoffs

14' Wade..... 28.6 pts.. 6.2 ast.. 56.0 ts.. 106 ortg.. 18.5 PER.. 0.086 ws/48.. 1.6 obpm
93' Pippen... 26.2 pts.. 7.4 ast.. 50.0 ts.. 102 ortg.. 16.9 PER.. 0.083 ws/48.. 1.1 obpm


^^^ prime Pippen= 14' Wade

Wade was getting prime Pippen stats from the 13' Finals through the 14' ECF

[Roundball_Rock]

Ask MJ himself. He fought against trading Pippen repeatedly. When Pippen left Chicago, MJ, the reigning MVP and NBA champ, retired instead of playing without Pippen and Phil Jackson. That speaks for itself. When has a reigning MVP ever retired in any sport?

He easily could have defended the chip and proven he could win without Pippen (after all, MJ fans are quick to tell us how successful the Bulls were with Kukoc as the #2 option for half of 98') and his fans wouldn't have to spend the rest of eternity insecure. He retired.

[insidious301]

.
Per 100 Possessions - Playoffs

14' Wade..... 28.6 pts.. 6.2 ast.. 56.0 ts.. 106 ortg.. 18.5 PER.. 0.086 ws/48.. 1.6 obpm
93' Pippen... 26.2 pts.. 7.4 ast.. 50.0 ts.. 102 ortg.. 16.9 PER.. 0.083 ws/48.. 1.1 obpm

100 possession numbers for points are utterly useless. The numbers are bloated because no team is giving these players more possessions to jack up shots. And ortg, like its been pointed out to by numerous posters, is a team metric. By the numbers we know that Peak Pippen was on the level of Peak Wade (2009).

[Roundball_Rock]

100 possesion stats for points is utterly useless. And ortg, like its been pointed out to by a numerous posters, is a team metric. By the numbers we know that Peak Pippen was on the level of Peak Wade (2009).

He has been debunked time and again. :oldlol:

MJ per 100 in 1999: 0/0/0 because he would rather retire than play without his security blanket Pippen. The only reigning MVP to ever retire in any sport that I am aware of.

[insidious301]

He has been debunked time and again. :oldlol:

MJ per 100 in 1999: 0/0/0 because he would rather retire than play without his security blanket Pippen. The only reigning MVP to ever retire in any sport that I am aware of.

Good one, Roundball. Haha! Why do crazy Jordan fans like vague stats like ortg & points per 100 possessions? They literally tell us nothing.

[Roundball_Rock]

Good one, Roundball. Haha! Why do crazy Jordan fans like vague stats like ortg & points per 100 possessions? They literally tell us nothing.

The usual: deception. The sad thing is only suckers like 2ball's minions fall for it. The rest of us laugh at the ham handed attempts at deception. :oldlol:

[3ball]

100 possession numbers for points are utterly useless. The numbers are bloated because no team is giving these players more possessions to jack up shots. And ortg, like its been pointed out to by numerous posters, is a team metric. By the numbers we know that Peak Pippen was on the level of Peak Wade (2009).

No, ortg is an individual and team metric

For teams, it's simply points scored per 100 possessions

For individuals, it shows points-produced per 100 possessions, and it includes assists, turnovers etc..

however, individual ortg (points produced per possession) should be viewed along with how many possessions that production occurred on (usage) - you don't want to compare ortg from a high usage creator to a low usage rebounder...

Historically, we see that Jordan uses the most possessions each game (goat usage), with the greatest efficiency on those possessions (ortg) of any perimeter player he's compared to

Otoh, Pippen used a lot of possessions for a 2nd option (high usage), but has horrific production on those possessions (ortg, aka efficiency per possession)..

Hope that helps..

[3ball]

Btw, 14' Wade had higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM in the playoffs than 93' Pippen.. so he was simply out-producing and outplaying Pippen

[SouBeachTalents]

Btw, 14' Wade had higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM in the playoffs than 93' Pippen.. so he was simply out-producing and outplaying Pippen
And '09 LeBron had a higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM than Jordan EVER did in the playoffs

[3ball]

And '09 LeBron had a higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM than Jordan EVER did in the playoffs

Yes lebron showed how to lose with a 39 PER

The goat loser (he's GOOD at it)

Jordan never sacrificed brand of ball/winning for stats

Jordan was a goat assist target so his points came with a teammate assist and helped ball movement.. whereas lebron dominates the ball and scores selfishly without the off-ball skillset, shooting touch or footwork to let teammates assist him

Ultimately, the 13' and 14' Spurs exploited lebron's inability to play the off-ball "shooter" role and destroyed the Heat dynasty

[SouBeachTalents]

Yes lebron showed how to lose with a 39 PER

The goat loser (he's GOOD at it)

Jordan never sacrificed brand of ball/winning for stats

Jordan was a goat assist target so his points came with a teammate assist and helped ball movement.. whereas lebron dominates the ball and scores selfishly without the off-ball skillset, shooting touch or footwork to let teammates assist him
2014 Wade lost too, funny how you don't bring that up :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Playoff BPM

Pippen playoff BPM 91'-98': 6.5, 6.6, 2.0, 5.6, 5.9, 7.8, 5.1, 5.6 (5.6 avg.)
Kobe playoff BPM 00'-02': 4.2, 6.5, 4.3 (4.9 avg.)
Gasol playoff BPM 08'-11': 4.2, 5.3, 5.9, 1.9 (4.8 avg.)
Wade playoff BPM 11'-14': 8.4, 5.3, 3.1, 0.9 (4.6 avg.)
Irving playoff BPM 15'-18': 5.2, 6.0, 2.2, 2.5 (4.2 avg.)
Worthy playoff BPM 87'-91': 5.0, 4.3, 5.1, 2.2, 0.2 (3.4 avg.)
McHale playoff BPM 84'-88': 1.1, 2.9, 5.1, 1.7, 6.1 (3.3 avg.)
Klay playoff BPM 15'-16': 1.9, 4.2 (3.1 avg.)
Pierce playoff BPM 08'-10': 3.6, 1.7, 3.0 (3.0 avg.)
Dumars playoff BPM 89'-91': 2.0, 1.8, 3.7 (2.4 avg.)

That is all the info (no need to cherry pick the worst year like 2ball did where Pippen more than doubled Wade's worst)--people can reach their own conclusion.

Wade wasn't Wade outside of 2011. Stop defining him by his post-prime years because you are insecure about MJ winning nothing without Pippen. LeBron stans don't do that with Wade because they aren't insecure about LeBron like MJ fans evidently are about their hero.

[3ball]

Playoff BPM

Pippen playoff BPM 91'-98': 6.5, 6.6, 2.0, 5.6, 5.9, 7.8, 5.1, 5.6 (5.6 avg.)
Kobe playoff BPM 00'-02': 4.2, 6.5, 4.3 (4.9 avg.)
Gasol playoff BPM 08'-11': 4.2, 5.3, 5.9, 1.9 (4.8 avg.)
Wade playoff BPM 11'-14': 8.4, 5.3, 3.1, 0.9 (4.6 avg.)
Irving playoff BPM 15'-18': 5.2, 6.0, 2.2, 2.5 (4.2 avg.)
Worthy playoff BPM 87'-91': 5.0, 4.3, 5.1, 2.2, 0.2 (3.4 avg.)
McHale playoff BPM 84'-88': 1.1, 2.9, 5.1, 1.7, 6.1 (3.3 avg.)
Klay playoff BPM 15'-16': 1.9, 4.2 (3.1 avg.)
Pierce playoff BPM 08'-10': 3.6, 1.7, 3.0 (3.0 avg.)
Dumars playoff BPM 89'-91': 2.0, 1.8, 3.7 (2.4 avg.)

That is all the info (no need to cherry pick the worst year like 2ball did where Pippen more than doubled Wade's worst)--people can reach their own conclusion.

Wade wasn't Wade outside of 2011. Stop defining him by his old years because you are insecure about MJ winning nothing without Pippen. LeBron stans don't do that with Wade.

Do you know what BPM is?

It's supposed to measure how many points a player adds to the boxscore by their offense (obpm) and theor defense (dbpm)

The creators of the stat point out that boxscore stats include nearly all offensive metrics but don't include many defensive metrics.. so obpm is a valid approximation and dbpm isn't.. it simply counts steals, blocks and defensive rebounds - this is insufficient to measure defense and erroneous because defensive rebounds aren't "defense" per-say.. this favoring of defensive rebounders is why Bird's dbpm = pippen's despite being an inferior defender

More importantly, it's one stat - you can't post Pippen's PER, WS/48, or efficiency because they're all a joke

[Round Mound]

To see how good a 2nd option is. Is to see how he plays without his 1st option.

This is where Pippen ranked among 1st options in 1993-94 WITHOUT MJ:

- 3rd in Plus/Minus
- 4th in PER
- 5th In Defensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Offensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Value Over Replacement Player
- 7th in Defensive Win Shares
- 7th in Win Shares
- 7th In Defensive Rating
- 9th in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes
- 55 Wins (Two Less than the Year Prior)

!

[Roundball_Rock]

LeBron stans=secure
Kobe stans=secure (they don't hit Gasol 24/7)
Wilt stans=secure
KAJ stans=secure
Duncan stans=secure (not dissing Robinson or Parker 24/7)
Curry stans=secure (not dissing Klay or KD all the time)
Magic stans=secure
Bird stans=secure
Russell stans=secure
KD stans=secure
Jordan stans=frothing at the mouth with their insecurity :roll:


This is where Pippen ranked among 1st options in 1993-94 WITHOUT MJ:

- 3rd in Plus/Minus
- 4th in PER
- 5th In Defensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Offensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Value Over Replacement Player
- 7th in Defensive Win Shares
- 7th in Win Shares
- 7th In Defensive Rating
- 9th in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes
- 55 Wins (Two Less than the Year Prior)

:applause:

Name another 90's "sidekick" who could do that. :bowdown: We saw Worthy, Penny, Kemp, McHale all fail to various degrees as #1 options during or near that era. Pippen thrived, obviously suggesting he was playing under capacity as a vastly overqualified sidekick.

[3ball]

To see how good a 2nd option is. Is to see how he plays without his 1st option.

This is where Pippen ranked among 1st options in 1993-94 WITHOUT MJ:

- 3rd in Plus/Minus
- 4th in PER
- 5th In Defensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Offensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Value Over Replacement Player
- 7th in Defensive Win Shares
- 7th in Win Shares
- 7th In Defensive Rating
- 9th in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes
- 55 Wins (Two Less than the Year Prior)

!

^^^ that's regular season after a 3-peat

Post the playoffs - he was 4th in WS/48 on his own team

And how about 99' without the 3-peat system

How was he without the system

Ultimately, Pippen's scoring was either exceeded or matched with better efficiency in 42% of playoff series, including 33% during championship years or Finals

[Axe]

To see how good a 2nd option is. Is to see how he plays without his 1st option.

This is where Pippen ranked among 1st options in 1993-94 WITHOUT MJ:

- 3rd in Plus/Minus
- 4th in PER
- 5th In Defensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Offensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Value Over Replacement Player
- 7th in Defensive Win Shares
- 7th in Win Shares
- 7th In Defensive Rating
- 9th in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes
- 55 Wins (Two Less than the Year Prior)

!
Also went 6-4 in the postseason

[insidious301]

No, ortg is an individual and team metric

It doesn't isolate the player like bpm does. offensive rating tallies what you and your team did but gives you full credit. That is a major flaw and shouldn't be used on here. Or should be used with caution.


For teams, it's simply points scored per 100 possessions

For individuals, it shows points-produced per 100 possessions, and it includes assists, turnovers etc..

And bloats their point total because it ignores everything else going into a log. It does not translate that well by itself. Advanced stats like bpm are better because they take everything into consideration. While also attempting to isolate the player. rpm & rapm are really big on that and to my knowledge the best to date. In fact, high iq posters like NBAGOAT, roundball, fplii and kuniva use them regularly.


To see how good a 2nd option is. Is to see how he plays without his 1st option.

This is where Pippen ranked among 1st options in 1993-94 WITHOUT MJ:

- 3rd in Plus/Minus
- 4th in PER
- 5th In Defensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Offensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Value Over Replacement Player
- 7th in Defensive Win Shares
- 7th in Win Shares
- 7th In Defensive Rating
- 9th in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes
- 55 Wins (Two Less than the Year Prior)

!

Good post. Anyone can have an opinion, but the numbers are hard to ignore.

[Roundball_Rock]

And bloats their point total because it ignores everything else going into a log

No one plays 100 possessions (a proxy for 48 minutes). Per 100 says 98' Kukoc=13' Wade. It also says prime Harrell is Ewing as a scorer. See the problem?

Luc Longley 98' per 100: 21/11/5
Bosh 14' per 100: 27/11/2

Per 100 says Longley is producing equal or slightly greater offense when you factor in the assists gap.

Ewing per 100: 31/15/3
Harrell per 100: 29/11/3
Harrell in LA per 100: 31/12/3

Per 100 is the dumbest, laziest stat out there. It usually is presented as an attempt to balance pace but you do that by simply adjusting for pace (e.g., if the difference in pace is 10%, inflate or deflate stats by 10%. Simple). What it does is bias players who play less minutes as they are fresher than a guy playing 40 MPG or so like Pippen did. It is better for a team if a superstar players 40 MPG than 33 MPG, for obvious reasons. When Wade is on the bench that means a scrub is taking his place. No free lunches in the real world.

[3ball]

It doesn't isolate the player like bpm does. offensive rating tallies what you and your team did but gives you full credit. That is a major flaw and shouldn't be used on here. Or should be used with caution.



And bloats their point total because it ignores everything else going into a log. It does not translate that well by itself. Advanced stats like bpm are better because they take everything into consideration. While also attempting to isolate the player. rpm & rapm are really big on that and to my knowledge the best to date. In fact, high iq posters like NBAGOAT, roundball, fplii and kuniva use them regularly.



Good post. Anyone can have an opinion, but the numbers are hard to ignore.

Lots of guys have career years except it's normally a lot better than 94' Pippen's.. posting a bunch of 6th and 8th places as pippen's peak is weak, especially when he had an advantage on the league.. so he was exposed as trash in the playoffs because his regular season was paper tiger

And i explained what ortg was - if you're too dumb to understand it and want to make up your own shit, be my guest

But understand that pippen's production per possession (efficiency per possession), aka ORTG was horrible and it makes him a role player, not a star.. yes a role player can still rank 8th in stats because it's called SYSTEM ball and Pippen was nothing without it

[Axe]

Just called pip a role player? Yikes.

[insidious301]

And lots of guys have career years except it's normally a lot better than 94' Pippen's.. posting a bunch of 6th and 8th places as your peak when you had an advantage on the league is weak, and he was exposed as trash in the playoffs because his regular season was paper tiger

And i explained what ortg was - if you're too dumb to understand it and want to make up your own shit, be my guest

But pippen's production rate and efficiency per possession were horrible and it makes him a role player, not a star.. yes a role player can still rank 7th etc in stats because it's called SYSTEM ball and Pippen was nothing without it

But the way you paint it, Pippen was a role player and never a superstar. That doesn't match what actually happened. Listen, I know you don't like what the numbers say but tough luck. We have stats, player opinion, coaches opinion and things like All-NBA to support Pippen's greatness. You have a team stat that doesn't adjust for the player. We know what "ortg" is and we didn't need your explanation. It is a dumb stat to favor over all the other evidence.

[insidious301]

No one plays 100 possessions (a proxy for 48 minutes). Per 100 says 98' Kukoc=13' Wade. It also says prime Harrell is Ewing as a scorer. See the problem?

Luc Longley 98' per 100: 21/11/5
Bosh 14' per 100: 27/11/2

Per 100 says Longley is producing equal or slightly greater offense when you factor in the assists gap.

Ewing per 100: 31/15/3
Harrell per 100: 29/11/3
Harrell in LA per 100: 31/12/3

Per 100 is the dumbest, laziest stat out there. It usually is presented as an attempt to balance pace but you do that by simply adjusting for pace (e.g., if the difference in pace is 10%, inflate or deflate stats by 10%. Simple). What it does is bias players who play less minutes as they are fresher than a guy playing 40 MPG or so like Pippen did. It is better for a team if a superstar players 40 MPG than 33 MPG, for obvious reasons. When Wade is on the bench that means a scrub is taking his place. No free lunches in the real world.

School is in session, 3ball.

[3ball]

Just called pip a role player? Yikes.

He was a guy that got points in the flow or transition, and infact sucked in tight halfcourt sets, or as a shooter or iso'er

aka system player... A souped-up Andre Roberson

Again, Jordan didn't need Pippen - he just needed the 90's (where he didn't need an all-time great team with many HOF's to win the conference like the 80's East... 2-star contenders were the norm in the 90's (parity), so obviously the goat + anyone will dominate a 2-star vs 2-star format

[Roundball_Rock]

But the way you paint it, Pippen was a role player and never a superstar. That doesn't match what actually happened. Listen, Ii you don't like what the numbers say tough luck. We have stats, player opinion, coaches opinion and things like All-NBA to support Pippen's greatness. You have a team stat that doesn't adjust for the player. We know what "ortg" is and we didn't need your explanation. It is a dumb stat to favor over all the other evidence.

We basically have every data point available on one side and insecure MJ stan's word on the other side. Which is more credible? :lol

Only their circle jerk believes their lunacy. The most recent all-time ranking had Pippen 21st. Role player doe! :roll:

[Axe]

He was a guy that got points in the flow or transition, and infact sucked in tight halfcourt sets, or as a shooter or iso'er

aka system player... A souped-up Andre Roberson

Again, Jordan didn't need Pippen - he just needed the 90's (where he didn't need an all-time great team with many HOF's to win the conference like the 80's East... 2-star contenders were the norm in the 90's (parity), so obviously the goat + anyone will dominate a 2-star vs 2-star format
But pip didn't need baldan either just to sweep the cavs in the first round of the 1994 postseason. So what's your point? :confusedshrug:

[Roundball_Rock]

It is an amusing argument from the MJ cult that MJ's era was so weak a role player was a MVP candidate and all-NBA first team during MJ's era. As a comp, Miller, who they adore, made only three all-NBA and these were all third teams and he never finished top 10 in MVP. He was 13th and 16th, thing a teammate in each case. If Pippen sucked what does this make the best player on their division rival who MJ stans cream themselves over?

[3ball]

We basically have every data point available on one side and insecure MJ stan's word on the other side. Which is more credible? :lol

Only their circle jerk believes their lunacy. The most recent all-time ranking had Pippen 21st. Role player doe! :roll:

Pippen's playoff stats are trash.. scoring, efficiency, assists... you guys act like 5 apg is good.. :facepalm:.... Maybe its good when you're averaging 25-35, but not when you're getting 15-20 and supposed to be the "facilitator".

16/6/5 is glue guy stuff.. Pippen is a glue guy type player inflated by the winning spotlight into top 60 all-time

His peak is trash, regular season or playoffs.. hornacek won 55 too while leading his team in scoring, yet no one says he's top 30 all-time.. ditto Marc gasol and many more.. btw, peak hornacek was a better shooter, scorer, and passer than Pippen ever was

In 42% of pippen's playoff series (88-98'), his scoring was exceeded or matched with better efficiency by the opposing 2nd leading scorer

[insidious301]

We basically have every data point available on one side and insecure MJ stan's word on the other side. Which is more credible? :lol

Only their circle jerk believes their lunacy. The most recent all-time ranking had Pippen 21st. Role player doe! :roll:

That one has to hurt, Roundball. All the propaganda and lies these trolls utilize, and yet mainstream media takes a dump on them. Reality can be a scary thing!

[insidious301]

Pippen's playoff stats are trash.. scoring, efficiency, assists... you guys act like 5 apg is good.. :facepalm:.... Maybe its good when you're averaging 25-35, but not when you're getting 15-20 and supposed to be the "facilitator".

16/6/5 is glue guy stuff.. Pippen is a glue guy type player inflated by the winning spotlight into top 60 all-time

His peak is trash, regular season or playoffs.. hornacek won 55 too while leading his team in scoring, yet no one says he's top 30 all-time.. ditto Marc gasol and many more.. btw, peak hornacek was a better shooter, scorer, and passer than Pippen ever was

In 42% of pippen's playoff series (88-98'), his scoring was exceeded or matched with better efficiency by the opposing 2nd leading scorer

All the advanced data suggests otherwise. Reality doesn't care about some random Jordan fans' opinion. Better think of something else, 3ball.

[Axe]

Pippen's playoff stats are trash.. scoring, efficiency, assists... you guys act like 5 apg is good.. :facepalm:.... Maybe its good when you're averaging 25-35, but not when you're getting 15-20 and supposed to be the "facilitator".

16/6/5 is glue guy stuff.. Pippen is a glue guy type player inflated by the winning spotlight into top 60 all-time

His peak is trash, regular season or playoffs.. hornacek won 55 too while leading his team in scoring, yet no one says he's top 30 all-time.. ditto Marc gasol and many more.. btw, peak hornacek was a better shooter, scorer, and passer than Pippen ever was

In 42% of pippen's playoff series (88-98'), his scoring was exceeded or matched with better efficiency by the opposing 2nd leading scorer
Lol I'm telling ya, 3ball. You're doing nothing other than to provoke a madman in this board. Better stop it or else.

[Roundball_Rock]

That one has to hurt, Roundball. All the propaganda and lies these trolls utilize, and yet mainstream media takes a dump on them. Reality can be a scary thing!

I'm sure there are some nuts online who think Lincoln sucked as president too. That doesn't change the consensus and you know it must kill 2ball and co. what the consensus on Pippen is.

Not only advanced stats, we know what experts then and now think. No one was saying what these idiots are saying when Pippen actually played. That's why they can't produce any evidence from back then. When the Pippen side does we produce so much they cry it's "walls of BS." It's walls of reality.

One of the biggest memes/arguments against MJ is he played against plumbers, bums and that LeBron is facing much better athletes. MJ stans are so blinded by hate they basically are confirming that by saying stuff like role players (generally) or guys like Draymond and Iggy (specifically) would be superstars if he played in the "weak" 90's. How again does this help MJ? If his era was trash his achievements are negated. That's what the play from some LeBron stans is. Erase everyone before 2000 and make GOAT LeBron by default as a result. Kind of like how MJ stans wrote off Wilt, Russell.

[3ball]

Pippen's advanced stats aren't good - yes, they're okay if you look at his very best season - everyone looks good if you do that...

For example, Hughes' peak season > many Pippen seasons.. so you guys are just lying to prop Pippen up - using 94' to act like that was his whole career, and then ignoring the playoffs... That's a joke.. if you need to do that, then you lose.. 94' was a show-off year.. show off what the 3-peat and goat taught you a d show you could run the triangle without Mike.

And when Pippen played, he wasn't highly regarded.

Yes there's some articles over his 17 year career that say he's a good player but that's the exception.. you guys dug up a few articles over a 17 year career and are claiming it was the prevailing, everyday consensus.. it wasn't, which is why all the articles every day in and day out were about Jordan... But Google is sure good a digging up the half dozen about Pippen

[FromDowntown]

Btw, 14' Wade had higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM in the playoffs than 93' Pippen.. so he was simply out-producing and outplaying Pippen


And '09 LeBron had a higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM than Jordan EVER did in the playoffs

Bodybagged

[FromDowntown]

Btw, 14' Wade had higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM in the playoffs than 93' Pippen.. so he was simply out-producing and outplaying Pippen


And '09 LeBron had a higher PER, WS/48 and OBPM than Jordan EVER did in the playoffs


No one plays 100 possessions (a proxy for 48 minutes). Per 100 says 98' Kukoc=13' Wade. It also says prime Harrell is Ewing as a scorer. See the problem?

Luc Longley 98' per 100: 21/11/5
Bosh 14' per 100: 27/11/2

Per 100 says Longley is producing equal or slightly greater offense when you factor in the assists gap.

Ewing per 100: 31/15/3
Harrell per 100: 29/11/3
Harrell in LA per 100: 31/12/3

Per 100 is the dumbest, laziest stat out there. It usually is presented as an attempt to balance pace but you do that by simply adjusting for pace (e.g., if the difference in pace is 10%, inflate or deflate stats by 10%. Simple). What it does is bias players who play less minutes as they are fresher than a guy playing 40 MPG or so like Pippen did. It is better for a team if a superstar players 40 MPG than 33 MPG, for obvious reasons. When Wade is on the bench that means a scrub is taking his place. No free lunches in the real world.

School is in session 1-9ball

[3ball]

School is in session 1-9ball

No you guys are just dumb and making up your own math

You're simply not smart enough to understand what ortg and usage are

But they're common stats and among the most insightful we have available

Ortg is points produced per possession.. usage is how many possessions that production rate occurs over.. obviously, you want to compare player's ortg that have similar usage.. so a 120 ortg means nothing if the player only used 15% of possessions (15% usage)

[FromDowntown]

No you guys are just dumb and making up your own math

You're simply not smart enough to understand what ortg and usage are

But they're common stats and among the most insightful we have available

Says the dumbest poster that doesn't know basketball at all? So why did LeBron have the best #2 one in 7 years but MJ had it 7 for 7 years

:lol

[3ball]

Says the dumbest poster that doesn't know basketball at all? So why did LeBron have the best #2 one in 7 years but MJ had it 7 for 7 years

:lol

Ortg is points produced per possession.. usage is how many possessions that production rate (ortg) occurs over.. obviously, you want to compare the ortg of players with similar usage.. so a 120 ortg means nothing if the player only used 15% of possessions (15% usage)

And Lebron's 3rd options were the best 2nd options in his conference, and the 2nd or 3rd best 1st options

[insidious301]

Ortg is points produced per possession.. usage is how many possessions that production rate (ortg) occurs over.. obviously, you want to compare the ortg of players with similar usage.. so a 120 ortg means nothing if the player only used 15% of possessions (15% usage)

You were already told that it does not adjust for the player. Ortg is a team stat unlike bpm & rpm which isolate for the player. Apples and oranges, learn the difference.

[knicksman]

LeBron stans=secure
Kobe stans=secure (they don't hit Gasol 24/7)
Wilt stans=secure
KAJ stans=secure
Duncan stans=secure (not dissing Robinson or Parker 24/7)
Curry stans=secure (not dissing Klay or KD all the time)
Magic stans=secure
Bird stans=secure
Russell stans=secure
KD stans=secure
Jordan stans=frothing at the mouth with their insecurity :roll:



:applause:

Name another 90's "sidekick" who could do that. :bowdown: We saw Worthy, Penny, Kemp, McHale all fail to various degrees as #1 options during or near that era. Pippen thrived, obviously suggesting he was playing under capacity as a vastly overqualified sidekick.

dmavs, you cant even use your main account and youre calling everyone insecure. LOL

[3ball]

You were already told that it does not adjust for the player. Ortg is a team stat unlike bpm & rpm which isolate for the player. Apples and oranges, learn the difference.

Are you retarded or something?

Ortg is listed for every player as an individual stat.. on every single bball-ref player page... Then there's an ortg for the team on the team page

"you were told".. wtf.. I was told by uneducated fools who have no idea what they're talking about

Dumbass

[3ball]

Name another 90's "sidekick" who could do that. We saw Worthy, Penny, Kemp, McHale all fail to various degrees as #1 options during or near that era. Pippen thrived, obviously suggesting he was playing under capacity as a vastly overqualified sidekick.




Pippen is the only guy misrepresented and history-revised, so naturally people want to set the record straight

So pippen's misrepresentation differentiates him from other sidekicks.. Pippen won 6 rings because he was lucky enough to play with the goat in a 2-star vs 2-star format (90's) - obviously the goat wins with anyone in a 2-star format.. so MJ didn't need Pippen, he just needed the 90's

[97 bulls]

.
Per 100 Possessions - Playoffs

14' Wade..... 28.6 pts.. 6.2 ast.. 56.0 ts.. 106 ortg.. 18.5 PER.. 0.086 ws/48.. 1.6 obpm
93' Pippen... 26.2 pts.. 7.4 ast.. 50.0 ts.. 102 ortg.. 16.9 PER.. 0.083 ws/48.. 1.1 obpm


^^^ prime Pippen= 14' Wade

Wade was getting prime Pippen stats from the 13' Finals through the 14' ECF

Why do you compare stats like they're playing against the same teams? Conditions, and Rules?

Do you think it was easier to score in 2014 as opposed to 1993? Or was it the same? Or was it easier to score in 93?

[ImKobe]

Why do you compare stats like they're playing against the same teams? Conditions, and Rules?

Do you think it was easier to score in 2014 as opposed to 1993? Or was it the same? Or was it easier to score in 93?

League averages

2013 - 105.8 ORTG
2014 - 106.6 ORTG

1993 - 108.0 ORTG

hmm.

Also, are the '93 Suns now the '08 Celtics defensively because Pippen averaged 21 ppg (20 less than MJ) on 45.9%TS in the series? Which teams are harder to score on - 2013 Spurs or the 1993 Suns?

[Roundball_Rock]

School is in session 1-9ball

:roll: 1-9ball should be his new name!

[3ball]

No one plays 100 possessions (a proxy for 48 minutes). Per 100 says 98' Kukoc=13' Wade. It also says prime Harrell is Ewing as a scorer. See the problem?

Luc Longley 98' per 100: 21/11/5
Bosh 14' per 100: 27/11/2

Per 100 says Longley is producing equal or slightly greater offense when you factor in the assists gap.

Ewing per 100: 31/15/3
Harrell per 100: 29/11/3
Harrell in LA per 100: 31/12/3

Per 100 is the dumbest, laziest stat out there. It usually is presented as an attempt to balance pace but you do that by simply adjusting for pace (e.g., if the difference in pace is 10%, inflate or deflate stats by 10%. Simple). What it does is bias players who play less minutes as they are fresher than a guy playing 40 MPG or so like Pippen did. It is better for a team if a superstar players 40 MPG than 33 MPG, for obvious reasons. When Wade is on the bench that means a scrub is taking his place. No free lunches in the real world.

Ortg is a common and accurate stat for the individual and the team... And so is points per possession.. you sound like a fool for saying otherwise about these 2 common stats.. it's like saying you don't like multiplication as a math concept and we should eliminate it.. you're just a dumbass

And per 100 doesn't say any of the things you said

For example, Longley's higher assist rate DOESN'T offset his big scoring deficit to Bosh - that's something you stated but are wrong about..

Any 6 ppg center can step into the ball movement triangle and assume Longley's assists, but a player of Bosh's caliber is much harder to replace because of the scoring ability and versatility.. your blind assumption that assists offset scoring is wrong and you sound like a fool stating it as fact

That's just 1 example - your entire post was erroneous interpretations of the stats.... or lies, like the Harrell/Ewing comparison (you compared Harrell's career high to Ewing's career average, knowing that Ewing's career peak and average > Harrell's)

So you're just a liar making shit up and not addressing another poster's points

[insidious301]

Are you retarded or something?

Ortg is listed for every player as an individual stat.. on every single bball-ref player page... Then there's an ortg for the team on the team page

"you were told".. wtf.. I was told by uneducated fools who have no idea what they're talking about

Dumbass

Here's the result of an education system failing you. Again ortg includes team numbers to output its data. Brush up on the stats before carelessly adopting them.

Team_Scoring_Poss = Team_FGM + (1 - (1 - (Team_FTM / Team_FTA))^2) * Team_FTA * 0.4

bpm & vorp are far better. Even more so now that they've been updated. Now their focused on explanation, and not prediction. No luck adjustment. A good explanatory stat can be converted to a predictive stat with appropriate regression to the mean. The stat creator of bpm worked with an NBA team to develop an improved rapm basis. This basis provides average RAPM over 5 year eras. This adjusts for aging/role changes. These shorter eras allow a far better coverage of outliers (like LeBron). ortg simply doesn't have that kind of nuance. I know this might make your brain hurt and rage more. Common defensive mechnism for the peabrain clan. But while you do that superior data is still superior.

[Roundball_Rock]

Here's the result of an education system failing you. Again ortg includes team numbers to output its data. Brush up on the stats before carelessly adopting them.


bpm & vorp are far better. even more so now that they've been updated. Now their focus on explanation, not Prediction. No luck adjustment. (A good explanatory stat can be converted to a predictive stat with appropriate regression to the mean. The stat creator of bpm worked with an NBA team to develop an improved rapm basis. This basis provides average RAPM over 5 year eras. This adjusts for aging/role changes. These shorter eras allow a far better coverage of outliers (like LeBron). I know this might make your brain hurt and make you rage. Common defensive mechnism for the peabrain clan. But while you do that superior data is still superior.

:lol

According to 1-9ball, MJ's era was so weak that all-NBA voters (not idiots on the internet 25 years later) couldn't find one forward better than a "role player" in multiple seasons so that had to vote for a role player (which means over Malone, Barkley, Kemp, Hill--forwards MJ stans rave about). This, if we accept that mythology, somehow helps MJ? :confusedshrug:

[warriorfan]

Ortg is a common and accurate stat for the individual and the team... And so is points per possession.. you sound like a fool for saying otherwise about these 2 common stats.. it's like saying you don't like multiplication as a math concept and we should eliminate it.. you're just a dumbass

And per 100 doesn't say any of the things you said

For example, Longley's higher assist rate DOESN'T offset his big scoring deficit to Bosh - that's something you stated but are wrong about..

Any 6 ppg center can step into the ball movement triangle and assume Longley's assists, but a player of Bosh's caliber is much harder to replace because of the scoring ability and versatility.. your blind assumption that assists offset scoring is wrong and you sound like a fool stating it as fact

That's just 1 example - your entire post was erroneous interpretations of the stats.... or lies, like the Harrell/Ewing comparison (you compared Harrell's career high to Ewing's career average, knowing that Ewing's career peak and average > Harrell's)

So you're just a liar making shit up and not addressing another poster's points

Roundball Rock doesn’t like using any accurate and objective statistics like TS% and Per 100 possessions. He’s more interested in obfuscating things with shitty metrics like BPM to further his false agendas.

He’s a troll.

[insidious301]

Roundball Rock doesn’t like using any accurate and objective statistics like TS% and Per 100 possessions. He’s more interested in obfuscating things with shitty metrics like BPM to further his false agendas.

He’s a troll.

None of those stats are as accurate for individuals. Unlike BPM-VORP-RPM-RAPM. Just like 3ball, you are grossly misinformed.

[warriorfan]

None of those stats are as accurate for individuals. Like 3ball, you are highly misinformed.

Care to explain?

[insidious301]

Care to explain?

Individual offensive rating is manipulated by team data. I just posted one part of the formula above. But there are several other calculations taking team play into account. This credits the individual for something they did not do. Bpm & vorp otoh attempt to isolate a players impact by using regression. Away from the team. Most boxscore stats are tough to use however. For the assumption we must make for individuals and their team stats. This also applies for the love affair with winshares. RAPM might be the best to date because it ignores the box score altogether.

[3ball]

Here's the result of an education system failing you. Again ortg includes team numbers to output its data. Brush up on the stats before carelessly adopting them.


bpm & vorp are far better. Even more so now that they've been updated. Now their focused on explanation, and not prediction. No luck adjustment. A good explanatory stat can be converted to a predictive stat with appropriate regression to the mean. The stat creator of bpm worked with an NBA team to develop an improved rapm basis. This basis provides average RAPM over 5 year eras. This adjusts for aging/role changes. These shorter eras allow a far better coverage of outliers (like LeBron). I know this might make your brain hurt and make you rage. Common defensive mechnism for the peabrain clan. But while you do that superior data is still superior.

Regarding the team data in the ortg formula - the number of possessions for the team is necessary information to determine an individual's production per possession (ortg)... :hammerhead:

Team offensive rebounds are also needed because that determines pace, aka the number of team possessions

So the team inputs to the individual ortg formula are the number of scoring possessions for the team and total possessions for the team.. that's necessary to calculate points produced per possession for each individual..

So again, you didn't understand the stat from the start, and are now scrambling around lying about it, and STILL don't understand the stat

Individual ortg is one of the "cleanest" stats there is - it shows points produced per possession for the individual, including assists, turnovers, etc..

Of course you can't compare ortg's for players that have different possession usage (low usage rebounders to high usage creators), but it works well to compare production rates of players with similar possession usage.

Otoh - unlike ortg, BPM is influenced by team performance.. Half of BPM is dbpm, which is based on team defensive drtg... So that's a blatant advantage for teams with better team defensive performance.. BPM is a garbage stat because of the defensive component and the creators state this emphatically - why are you disputing the creators of BPM, and then ridiculously attacking an obviously clean stats like ortg or points per 100 ??

Ultimately, you don't really understand individual ortg or points per 100 - they're 2 different stats... :eek:.. Points per 100 = points scored per possession x 100.. it's simply pace-adjusted scoring rate - that's what we use when ppg is inflated due to high pace... Otoh, individual ortg is points PRODUCED per 100, which includes assists and TO's.. however again, ortg is only useful to compare the production rate (ortg) of players with similar possession usage (so you wouldn't compare ortg of a low usage rebounder to a high-usage creator)

Btw, rapm is unusable because it's impossible to get a big enough sample size.. the numbers are worthless

[Roundball_Rock]

Individual offensive rating is manipulated by team data. I just posted one part of the formula above. But there are several other calculations taking team play into account. This credits the individual for something they did not do. Bpm & vorp otoh attempt to isolate a players impact by using regression. Away from the team. Most boxscore stats are tough to use however. For the assumption we must make for individuals and their team stats. This also applies for the love affair with winshares. RAPM might be the best to date because it ignores the box score altogether.

You are wasting your time with a racist troll. Look at him claiming BPM sucks while "per 100" is accurate. It is the dumbest posters on ISH who keep making these claims--no coincidence. :lol 1-9ball attracts the worst of the worst--birds of a feather flock together.

All the available evidence, stats, accolades, perception, etc. tell us the same thing. These nuts still keep trying to revise history, though.

They are interested in their insecure agenda, not any form of analysis. Notice how they shift thread to thread, player to player, etc.

[LAmbruh]

Roundball putting on a clinic :applause:

[3ball]

You are wasting your time with a racist troll. Look at him claiming BPM sucks while "per 100" is accurate. It is the dumbest posters on ISH who keep making these claims--no coincidence. :lol 1-9ball attracts the worst of the worst--birds of a feather flock together.

All the available evidence, stats, accolades, perception, etc. tell us the same thing. These nuts still keep trying to revise history, though.

They are interested in their insecure agenda, not any form of analysis. Notice how they shift thread to thread, player to player, etc.

Regarding the team data in the ortg formula - the number of team possessions is necessary information to determine an individual's production per possession (ortg)... :hammerhead:

Team offensive rebounds are also needed because that determines pace, aka the number of team possessions

So the team inputs to the individual ortg formula are the number of scoring possessions for the team and total possessions for the team.. that's necessary to calculate points produced per possession for each individual..

So again, you didn't understand the stat from the start, and are now scrambling around lying about it, and STILL don't understand the stat

Individual ortg is one of the "cleanest" stats there is - it shows points produced per possession for the individual, including assists, turnovers, etc..

Of course you can't compare ortg's for players that have different possession usage (low usage rebounders to high usage creators), but it works well to compare production rates of players with similar possession usage.

Otoh - unlike ortg, BPM is influenced by team performance.. Half of BPM is dbpm, which is based on team defensive drtg... So that's a blatant advantage for teams with better team defensive performance.. BPM is a garbage stat because of the defensive component and the creators state this emphatically - why are you disputing the creators of BPM, and then ridiculously attacking an obviously clean stats like ortg or points per 100 ??

Ultimately, you don't really understand individual ortg or points per 100 - they're 2 different stats... :eek:.. Points per 100 = points scored per possession x 100.. it's simply pace-adjusted scoring rate - that's what we use when ppg is inflated due to high pace... Otoh, individual ortg is points PRODUCED per 100, which includes assists and TO's.. however again, ortg is only useful to compare the production rate (ortg) of players with similar possession usage (so you wouldn't compare ortg of a low usage rebounder to a high-usage creator)

[Roundball_Rock]

Roundball putting on a clinic :applause:

:cheers: Having the facts on your side helps. :pimp:

Here is another: Pippen in 95' was selected as 'Best All-Around Player' in the NBA in a poll of players, coaches, trainers and general managers conducted by USA Today.

Players, coaches, trainers, and GM's in a poll done by a major newspaper. Who are you going to believe?

Side A: Players, coaches, trainers, and GM's
Side B: 1-9ball, IMKobe, tpols, Warriorfan

:lol

Here is all-NBA voting for Pippen's peak:

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1994

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

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1995

1) Malone (F) 519
2) Robinson (C) 479
3) Pippen (F) 451
4) Stockton (G) 447
5) P. Hardaway (G) 394

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/12/sp...s-all-nba.html

Top 5 in all-NBA voting in 1996

1) Jordan (G) 113 (unanimous)
2) Pippen (F) 91
3) Hardaway (G) 90
4) Malone (F) 89
5) Robinson (C) 65

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/24/sp...tar-again.html

This is voting for the all-NBA team. Regarding the all-Defensive team, Pippen received the most votes in 1994. And in 1995. And in 1996. Yes, also in 1997. So to recap, these were his finishes during his peak:

All-NBA voting: 1st, 3rd, 2nd
All-Defensive voting: 1st, 1st, 1st

Role player, doe! :roll:

[warriorfan]

You are wasting your time with a racist troll. Look at him claiming BPM sucks while "per 100" is accurate. It is the dumbest posters on ISH who keep making these claims--no coincidence. :lol 1-9ball attracts the worst of the worst--birds of a feather flock together.

All the available evidence, stats, accolades, perception, etc. tell us the same thing. These nuts still keep trying to revise history, though.

They are interested in their insecure agenda, not any form of analysis. Notice how they shift thread to thread, player to player, etc.

Per 100 is the most accurate when comparing across eras, it adjusts both pace and minutes played. You still have to take into account some factors such as if it’s a 15 mpg player and trying to compare him to a 36 mpg player. But in most instances it is very accurate.

[Stanley Kobrick]

Individual offensive rating is manipulated by team data. I just posted one part of the formula above. But there are several other calculations taking team play into account. This credits the individual for something they did not do. Bpm & vorp otoh attempt to isolate a players impact by using regression. Away from the team. Most boxscore stats are tough to use however. For the assumption we must make for individuals and their team stats. This also applies for the love affair with winshares. RAPM might be the best to date because it ignores the box score altogether.
very informative, high iq user :cheers:

[3ball]

All-NBA voting means nothing

The whole argument is that pippen's weak stats, production, and performance was inflated by the winning spotlight..

No one that played as badly as him is anywhere near top 30 all-time.. the stats show this (career, peak, and playoffs), not the accolades

[Roundball_Rock]

With a cult, you are to reject all available evidence except what the cult is telling you. :lol


very informative, high iq user

He is and his patience with these tools is impressive as well. :cheers:

[3ball]

With a cult, you are to reject all available evidence except what the cult leader (in this case 1-9ball) is telling you. :lol

It isn't a cult to use ortg and pace-adjusted points as data and reference points

It's a cult to NOT use it and say these common stats and concepts are somehow bad

[warriorfan]

Regarding the team data in the ortg formula - the number of team possessions is necessary information to determine an individual's production per possession (ortg)... :hammerhead:

Team offensive rebounds are also needed because that determines pace, aka the number of team possessions

So the team inputs to the individual ortg formula are the number of scoring possessions for the team and total possessions for the team.. that's necessary to calculate points produced per possession for each individual..

So again, you didn't understand the stat from the start, and are now scrambling around lying about it, and STILL don't understand the stat

Individual ortg is one of the "cleanest" stats there is - it shows points produced per possession for the individual, including assists, turnovers, etc..

Of course you can't compare ortg's for players that have different possession usage (low usage rebounders to high usage creators), but it works well to compare production rates of players with similar possession usage.

Otoh - unlike ortg, BPM is influenced by team performance.. Half of BPM is dbpm, which is based on team defensive drtg... So that's a blatant advantage for teams with better team defensive performance.. BPM is a garbage stat because of the defensive component and the creators state this emphatically - why are you disputing the creators of BPM, and then ridiculously attacking an obviously clean stats like ortg or points per 100 ??

Ultimately, you don't really understand individual ortg or points per 100 - they're 2 different stats... :eek:.. Points per 100 = points scored per possession x 100.. it's simply pace-adjusted scoring rate - that's what we use when ppg is inflated due to high pace... Otoh, individual ortg is points PRODUCED per 100, which includes assists and TO's.. however again, ortg is only useful to compare the production rate (ortg) of players with similar possession usage (so you wouldn't compare ortg of a low usage rebounder to a high-usage creator)

Top defensive seasons of all time according to DPBM

https://i.postimg.cc/zDdMJTPF/5-AFA62-D5-537-D-460-D-9-CF0-03393-B2-A1020.jpg

Yeah....

Anyways this is what the creator of BPM had to say about it.


It(DPBM)struggles some with defense. As mentioned before, when all you have is a box score, you cannot estimate defense very well. Not including minutes per game in the regression also hampers the accuracy of the defensive estimates. In other words--take DBPM with a spoonful of salt
(https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/bpm2.html)

The creator of the statistic himself is telling us to take 50% of the stat with a “spoonful of salt”. Enough said.

[Roundball_Rock]

Augmented Plus-Minus Data, another form of advanced plus-minus like RPM, for Pippen's prime (data available from 1994 on) compared to other stars.

Augmented PM Comparison 1994-1998

1994: Robinson 7.5, Malone 5.9, Hakeem 5.2, Pippen 3.7, Shaq/Barkley/Miller 3.6, Ewing 3.2, Penny 2.9, Payton -0.2
1995: Robinson 8.4, Pippen 5.8, Shaq/Penny 5.6, Malone 5.3, Hakeem 5.1, Barkley 3.9, Ewing 3.6, Miller 2.4, Payton 2.3, Hill 2.2
1996: Robinson 6.5, Penny 5.6, Pippen 5.5, Malone 5.1, Shaq/Hill 4.1, Hakeem 3.9, Miller 3.6, Barkley 3.1, Ewing/Payton 2.9
1997: Pippen 6.4, Ewing 5.7, Malone 5.2, Shaq 4.9, Payton 4.5, Penny/Hakeem 4.0, Hill 3.5, Barkley 2.9, Miller 1.8, Robinson 1.6
1998: Shaq 7.8, Malone 5.5, Hill 5.3, Miller 5.1, Pippen/Payton 4.7, Robinson/Ewing 4.6, Barkley 3.6, Hakeem 3.4, Penny 1.9

How does Pippen compare to other stars in ORAPM (data from 97' on, focus on ORAPM since MJ stans keep telling you he was Rodman on offense)?

1997 Offensive RAPM

MJ 4.2
Stockton 3.0
Pippen 2.8
Malone 2.6
Dumars 2.3
Hardaway/Richmond/Iverson 2.0
Hakeem/Payton/Penny 1.9
K. Johnson 1.6
Price/Allen 1.4
Hill/Miller 1.3
Ewing 1.2
Kidd 1.1
Kemp 1.0
Barkley 0.9
Mourning/Drexler 0.8

1997 Playoff ORAPM for Stars

Hakeem 1.6
Pippen 1.4
Drexler/Malone 1.2
Kemp/Payton 1.1
Jordan 0.9
Barkley 0.7
Dumars 0.3
Ewing 0
Stockton/Penny -0.1
Johnson -0.4
T. Hardaway -0.8
Mourning -1.2

How about 1998?

Pippen was 2nd in ORAPM among this group for the RS.

1998 ORAPM for Stars

Barkley 4.5
Pippen 3.7
Stockton 3.2
Shaq/Duncan 3.1
Miller 3
Malone 2.9
Jordan 2.8
T. Hardaway 2.7
Hill 2.1
Iverson 1.9
Payton/Drexler 1.8
Mourning 1.7
Johnson/Richmond 1.5
Allen 1.4
Kemp 0.6
Kidd 0.4
Ewing/Hakeem -0.4

In the playoffs Pippen was 5th in the league--Stockton, like he did in 97', crumbled to -0.2 once the playoff lights came on.

If Pippen was a role player, how weak were the 90's then? :confusedshrug: Each available metric has Pippen coming out as elite. These are the very players MJ stans rave about, players who they present as flawless giants, etc.

[3ball]

Augmented Plus-Minus Data, another form of advanced plus-minus like RPM, for Pippen's prime (data available from 1994 on) compared to other stars.

Augmented PM Comparison 1994-1998

1994: Robinson 7.5, Malone 5.9, Hakeem 5.2, Pippen 3.7, Shaq/Barkley/Miller 3.6, Ewing 3.2, Penny 2.9, Payton -0.2
1995: Robinson 8.4, Pippen 5.8, Shaq/Penny 5.6, Malone 5.3, Hakeem 5.1, Barkley 3.9, Ewing 3.6, Miller 2.4, Payton 2.3, Hill 2.2
1996: Robinson 6.5, Penny 5.6, Pippen 5.5, Malone 5.1, Shaq/Hill 4.1, Hakeem 3.9, Miller 3.6, Barkley 3.1, Ewing/Payton 2.9
1997: Pippen 6.4, Ewing 5.7, Malone 5.2, Shaq 4.9, Payton 4.5, Penny/Hakeem 4.0, Hill 3.5, Barkley 2.9, Miller 1.8, Robinson 1.6
1998: Shaq 7.8, Malone 5.5, Hill 5.3, Miller 5.1, Pippen/Payton 4.7, Robinson/Ewing 4.6, Barkley 3.6, Hakeem 3.4, Penny 1.9

How does Pippen compare to other stars in ORAPM (data from 97' on, focus on ORAPM since MJ stans keep telling you he was Rodman on offense)?

1997 Offensive RAPM

MJ 4.2
Stockton 3.0
Pippen 2.8
Malone 2.6
Dumars 2.3
Hardaway/Richmond/Iverson 2.0
Hakeem/Payton/Penny 1.9
K. Johnson 1.6
Price/Allen 1.4
Hill/Miller 1.3
Ewing 1.2
Kidd 1.1
Kemp 1.0
Barkley 0.9
Mourning/Drexler 0.8

1997 Playoff ORAPM for Stars

Hakeem 1.6
Pippen 1.4
Drexler/Malone 1.2
Kemp/Payton 1.1
Jordan 0.9
Barkley 0.7
Dumars 0.3
Ewing 0
Stockton/Penny -0.1
Johnson -0.4
T. Hardaway -0.8
Mourning -1.2

How about 1998?

Pippen was 2nd in ORAPM among this group for the RS.

1998 ORAPM for Stars

Barkley 4.5
Pippen 3.7
Stockton 3.2
Shaq/Duncan 3.1
Miller 3
Malone 2.9
Jordan 2.8
T. Hardaway 2.7
Hill 2.1
Iverson 1.9
Payton/Drexler 1.8
Mourning 1.7
Johnson/Richmond 1.5
Allen 1.4
Kemp 0.6
Kidd 0.4
Ewing/Hakeem -0.4

In the playoffs Pippen was 5th in the league--Stockton, like he did in 97', crumbled to -0.2 once the playoff lights came on.

If Pippen was a role player, how weak were the 90's then? :confusedshrug: Each available metric has Pippen coming out as elite. These are the very players MJ stans rave about, players who they present as flawless giants, etc.

:no:

Where's Kukoc.. where's Harper or Longley

I know at least one of those guys are in there because RAPM is based on lineups.. lineups.. it's a team stat and the best offenses have several guys ranking high

The only metrics that Pippen is passable are BPM and rapm, both of which severely flawed

BPM is flawed because of the defensive component (dbpm) - the boxscore has limited defensive data so bpm can only count steals, blocks and defensive rebounds, and then uses team defensive data for the remaining assumptions... so this favors players on good defensive teams, and defensive rebounds shouldn't even count as pure "defense".. the favoring of defensive rebounders and steals artists is why bird has equal dbpm to Pippen..

And rapm is affected by team performance/effectiveness, aka LINEUPS... it favors winners and good offenses.. when Pippen was on championship teams, but nothing from 99-03'.

[3ball]

To see how good a 2nd option is. Is to see how he plays without his 1st option.

This is where Pippen ranked among 1st options in 1993-94 WITHOUT MJ:

- 3rd in Plus/Minus
- 4th in PER
- 5th In Defensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Offensive Plus/Minus
- 5th In Value Over Replacement Player
- 7th in Defensive Win Shares
- 7th in Win Shares
- 7th In Defensive Rating
- 9th in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes
- 55 Wins (Two Less than the Year Prior)

!

^^^ that's his peak though, which is similar to the peaks of KJ, Kemp, Penny, Stockton and many other 2nd options in the 90's, while being clearly below the peak of most 1st options at that time.

Furthermore, you can't post that data for the playoffs in any season of Pippen's career because his ppg, assists, efficiency, PER, and win shares didn't stand out and was often below 2nd or 3rd option standard, let alone 1st option

[insidious301]

Regarding the team data in the ortg formula - the number of possessions for the team is necessary information to determine an individual's production per possession (ortg)... :hammerhead:

Team offensive rebounds are also needed because that determines pace, aka the number of team possessions

So the team inputs to the individual ortg formula are the number of scoring possessions for the team and total possessions for the team.. that's necessary to calculate points produced per possession for each individual..

So again, you didn't understand the stat from the start, and are now scrambling around lying about it, and STILL don't understand the stat

Individual ortg is one of the "cleanest" stats there is - it shows points produced per possession for the individual, including assists, turnovers, etc..

Ultimately, you don't really understand individual ortg or points per 100 - they're 2 different stats... :eek:.. Points per 100 = points scored per possession x 100.. it's simply pace-adjusted scoring rate - that's what we use when ppg is inflated due to high pace... Otoh, individual ortg is points PRODUCED per 100, which includes assists and TO's.. however again, ortg is only useful to compare the production rate (ortg) of players with similar possession usage (so you wouldn't compare ortg of a low usage rebounder to a high-usage creator)

You're making the same mistake you did earlier. And now are repeating posts. This is a dead giveaway you don't actually want to attain knowledge, and rather wallow in ignorance. Listen, a poster in another asked about ortg & winshares. What you are getting right now is free knowledge so make use of it. The ortg information provided is invaluable and that is because of the team complex. Calculations for individual offensive rating or any stat derived from them are widely known as being essentially useless stats. That is because they depend on myopic assumptions and estimations to convert the box score. Converted into a number that wants to approximate individual contributions to team offensive rating and defensive rating. Once again this is a bad metric to use for the individual. Another flaw is the assumption all players are equal and what differentiates them is assists/points (2 different stats). It assumes everyone gets the same amount of individual credit with the same number of possessions.

Fortunately there's alot of aggregate and reggresion based stats, even synergy is useful on NBA.com. BPM-RAPM-RPM attempt to adjust for the individual player by removing as much team data as possible. This is a good thing. And unlike those stats, with ortg you also have to consider usage % which does not inclide assists! That is not even getting into role definition to make a legitimate comparison. So your Kukoc-Pippen take was beyond awful. All of this is to say you are in over your head. And obviously have no clue what you're even posting. Maybe do more researching on your free time. You know, to save yourself more embarrassment.

[insidious301]

very informative, high iq user :cheers:


He is and his patience with these tools is impressive as well

Thank you both. I just do a lot of reading and wont use stats until I have a command on them. Think it is fair to say every poster should adopt that mindset. Look at "warriorfan". He asked for an explanation on the numbers, and I was generous enough to break it down. Obviously he didn't like what it entailed because he ignored it, and repeated the same flaws I already amended. Same exact thing 3ball did. Low functioning individuals is what I call them.

[Shooter]

:roll: 1-9ball should be his new name!

The perfect name for a weasel like him

[Shooter]

Here's the result of an education system failing you. Again ortg includes team numbers to output its data. Brush up on the stats before carelessly adopting them.


bpm & vorp are far better. Even more so now that they've been updated. Now their focused on explanation, and not prediction. No luck adjustment. A good explanatory stat can be converted to a predictive stat with appropriate regression to the mean. The stat creator of bpm worked with an NBA team to develop an improved rapm basis. This basis provides average RAPM over 5 year eras. This adjusts for aging/role changes. These shorter eras allow a far better coverage of outliers (like LeBron). ortg simply doesn't have that kind of nuance. I know this might make your brain hurt and rage more. Common defensive mechnism for the peabrain clan. But while you do that superior data is still superior.

VORP is King

https://i.postimg.cc/RCJKSDmL/Screenshot-20200816-104633-Samsung-Internet.jpg

I always knew LBJ would be #1 and MJ #2 (obviously)

[insidious301]

Correct, Shooter. LeBron and Jordan are analytics kings. It is why I laugh when certain types clip the conversation to points per game.

[Roundball_Rock]

Thank you both. I just do a lot of reading and wont use stats until I have a command on them. Think it is fair to say every poster should adopt that mindset. Look at "warriorfan". He asked for an explanation on the numbers, and I was generous enough to break it down. Obviously he didn't like what it entailed because he ignored it, and repeated the same flaws I already amended. Same exact thing 3ball did. Low functioning individuals is what I call them.

They are like a cult. They are interested in their narrow agenda, not discussion or analysis of basketball players. That is why you their "views" are so predictable. They are reverse engineered from their agenda. This is why they are so inconsistent thread to thread, player to player, etc. They have no core beliefs or principles on evaluating players.

It is fitting 1-9ball attracts the lowest of the low. The only suckers who fall for his stuff. The rest of ISH considers him a joke. Even a lot of MJ stans stay away from him now.


The perfect name for a weasel like him

Yup! :oldlol:


VORP is King

VORP is basketball's version of WAR in baseball. WAR has emerged as the metric to compare players. It hasn't reached that level of acceptance in the basketball world but it probably is the best along with BPM.

There will never be perfect stats because some things can't be quantified but there are good stats out there that give us insight that people didn't have in past decades. Yet we have people still acting like it is the 1960's with stats. :lol

[sdot_thadon]

Jesus Christ mods, can we get NSFW tags on 3ball threads? Wouldn't want innocent people walking into these gangbangs unknowingly.

[TheCorporation]

VORP is King

https://i.postimg.cc/RCJKSDmL/Screenshot-20200816-104633-Samsung-Internet.jpg

I always knew LBJ would be #1 and MJ #2 (obviously)

https://i.postimg.cc/W3T4P3sx/4bspbj.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/LMnwLzuzBtkysH4hOX/giphy.gif

[3ball]

VORP is King

https://i.postimg.cc/RCJKSDmL/Screenshot-20200816-104633-Samsung-Internet.jpg

I always knew LBJ would be #1 and MJ #2 (obviously)

VORP is an accumulation stat based on games played - so you have to look at individual seasons (same games for everyone), and MJ has 6 of the top 9 VORP seasons ever... He also leads all the non-accumulation stats, aka rate of production stats BPM, PER, WS/48, PPG... So mj has the best stats ever, by far

[TheCorporation]

VORP is an accumulation stat based on games played - so you have to look at individual seasons (where games are equal), and MJ has 6 of the top 9 VORP seasons ever... He also leads all the non-accumulation stats, aka rate of production stats BPM, PER, WS/48, PPG... So mj has the best stats ever, by far

Didn't they both play in 13 playoffs? Hmm. Why didnt MJ accumulate more? :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan retired (as the reigning MVP) because Pippen was gone. That tells you all you need to know...I am not aware of any athlete, let alone a MVP, retiring because one teammate was gone. Talk about dependency. :oldlol:

[3ball]

Didn't they both play in 13 playoffs? Hmm. Why didnt MJ accumulate more? :lol

Lebron has more playoff games

because he always had high seeds in the playoffs (longer runs)...

Otoh, MJ carried a bunch of lottery teams to 8 seeds (which lebron failed to do in 04', 05', and 19'), and therefore had shorter runs overall when you include these low seeded/short runs..

but when both MJ and lebron had high seeds, mj blows lebron away. - only MJ never lost with a 1 or 2 seed, while lebron lost 5 times..

[FromDowntown]

Jordan retired (as the reigning MVP) because Pippen was gone. That tells you all you need to know...I am not aware of any athlete, let alone a MVP, retiring because one teammate was gone. Talk about dependency. :oldlol:

AND that's a wrap :applause:

[Gohan]

Pip don’t need Jordan he’ll take Iverson as his first option

[Round Mound]

Jordan retired (as the reigning MVP) because Pippen was gone. That tells you all you need to know...I am not aware of any athlete, let alone a MVP, retiring because one teammate was gone. Talk about dependency. :oldlol:
:applause:


Jordan let everyone know that he would not comeback and play without Scottie and Phil. I wonder why? No other superstar or all star would have wanted to play with Jordan because he would take alot more FGAs PG than any other player in the league. Pippen was unselfish and was willing to accept and sacrifice his own stats in order for the team to be better. Pippen was one of the most unselfish players ever. He was the best all around SF of the 90's.

[Roundball_Rock]

:applause:


Jordan let everyone know that he would not comeback and play without Scottie and Phil. I wonder why? No other superstar or all star would have wanted to play with Jordan because he would take alot more FGAs PG than any other player in the league. Pippen was unselfish and was willing to accept and sacrifice his own stats in order for the team to be better. Pippen was one of the most unselfish players ever. He was the best all around SF of the 90's.

:applause: :cheers:

[3ball]

:applause:


Jordan let everyone know that he would not comeback and play without Scottie and Phil. I wonder why? No other superstar or all star would have wanted to play with Jordan because he would take alot more FGAs PG than any other player in the league. Pippen was unselfish and was willing to accept and sacrifice his own stats in order for the team to be better. Pippen was one of the most unselfish players ever. He was the best all around SF of the 90's.

MJ didn't want to rebuild.. he was old and their wasn't time to build another dynasty with new players, coach and system.. I'm sure in today's game, he could team up with ready-made stars like Doncic or AD and they'd continue winning until MJ was 38... But that wasn't available back then, so it was going to be a rebuild with young players.. heck, it took 4 years to make Pippen

And Pippen didn't sacrifice stats - his raw production was the same alongside Jordan - more actually - 21.0 and 7.0 apg in 1992 is the highest ppg + apg that pippen ever achieved

[Roundball_Rock]

How long before MJ stans get insecure about Luka? :lol

[3ball]

How long before MJ stans get insecure about Luka? :lol

At least Luka is a skilled jumpshooter and clutch.. he's 21 but I don't see him choking with 22 on 35% like lebron did..

So if people start pushing him for goat, it's more likely to be legit.. there's SUBSTANCE there, aka clutch, jumpshooting skill, goat numbers at 21, not laying eggs or needing excuses, etc

[ELITEpower23]

:applause:


Jordan let everyone know that he would not comeback and play without Scottie and Phil. I wonder why? No other superstar or all star would have wanted to play with Jordan because he would take alot more FGAs PG than any other player in the league. Pippen was unselfish and was willing to accept and sacrifice his own stats in order for the team to be better. Pippen was one of the most unselfish players ever. He was the best all around SF of the 90's.

That was all I needed to see. Thank you for this post, it will shatter the minds of many 1-9ball posters I can imagine.