Teammate career rankings between Jordan and Lebron -- The Reality [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

goozeman

09-09-2020, 03:14 PM

Career Rankings

PER:

Anthony Davis....3
Dwayne Wade......21
Kyrie Irving.....33
Kevin Love.......45
Chris Bosh.......62
Scottie Pippen...132
Horace Grant.....185

OBPM:

Anthony Davis....12
Kyrie Irving.....13
Dwayne Wade......25
Kevin Love.......29
Scottie Pippen...90
Chris Bosh.......102
Horace Grant.....107

WS/48:

Anthony Davis....13
Horace Grant.....55
Kevin Love.......57
Kyrie Irving.....68
Dwayne Wade......70
Chris Bosh.......76
Scottie Pippen...129

Ortg:

Horace Grant.....4 :biggums:
Anthony Davis....28
Kevin Love.......47
Kyrie Irving.....89
Chris Bosh.......107
Dwayne Wade......231
Scottie Pippen...NR top 250

Effective Field Goal Percentage:

Anthony Davis....86
Kyrie Irving.....99
Horace Grant.....206
Kevin Love.......225
Chris Bosh.......227
Scottie Pippen...244
Dwayne Wade......NR top 250

True Shooting:

Anthony Davis.....41
Kyrie Irving......84
Chris Bosh........89
Kevin Love........92
Dwayne Wade.......183
Dennis Rodman.....244 :rockon:
Scoottie Pippen...NR top 250 :facepalm
Horace Grant......NR top 250

BPM:

Anthony Davis.....12
Dwayne Wade.......22
Kyrie Irving......32
Scottie Pippen....35 :applause:
Kevin Love........48
Chris Bosh........134
Horace Grant......176

Notice that all the real stats that are actually measuring something tangible (PER, OBPM, Ortg, WS/48, eFG%, TS%, etc) actually correlate very closely with one another in rankings. They all say that Pippen was maybe a top-100 offensive player all-time. Pippen wasn't even a Chris Bosh level offensive talent. Also, Scottie Pippen's BPM ranking is wildly incongruous because it rewards defensive stars playing on great defensive teams. From BREF about the BPM 2.0 changes:

What players were most impacted by the changes?

Including playoffs, only one player saw his career BPM change by 3.0 or more. That'd be the aforementioned Stockton, who was 3.5 under the old system and is now 6.7. He's aided by the changes in the way the assist and rebound terms interact. Further, the old system said "no rebounds = bad defender." BPM 2.0 says "elite steals, good defensive teams = good defender."

When basketball reference reworked the stat back in 2016, players like John Stockton (another Pippen-like two-way player) saw their career BPM double. And here is the kicker... Even with that bonus bump gifted to him and playing on the best defensive teams of all-time practically his entire career, Pippen wouldn't even be a top-three impact player compared to Lebron's teammates. All-time Pippen is just slightly better than Kevin Love.

In summation, in order for Lebron to be on the level of Jordan, he would need to win six titles and win six Finals MVP's with a Chris Bosh/Kevin Love level player as his second option.

Lebron fans...

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fl4Ki2ob CyAQS5WhFe%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1

ZenMaster7210

09-09-2020, 03:20 PM

https://i.ibb.co/rGNhsyn/73-F59-D20-F8-E4-406-E-B751-7-D088-E67-AAA3.gif

NBAGOAT

09-09-2020, 03:21 PM

goozeman

09-09-2020, 03:28 PM

no shit the 6 stats you used correlate with each other. most of them are only measuring offense. per is definitely a metric focused on offense. ws is based on ortg and drtg, it's a waste of time to list ortg and ws.

Translation: Yea, all those stats are legit but they are mostly offensive stats so they don't count, lol.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 03:32 PM

Is the OP 3ball or Soundwave? :lol

They like to cherry pick advanced stats only when convenient. Just yesterday we saw prime Pippen crushes prime Ewing across the board in advanced stats. That didn't count, doe. Nor does it count that every advanced stat has Pippen near the top for his era.

All this--a daily thread or two to declare "Pippen sucks"--to diminish Pippen and Jordan is still 1-9. He won 6 rangz with a team that was good without him (hell, their offense w/out MJ>their offense w/out Pippen and their alleged fictional offensive ineptness is the thing we hear 24/7 from MJ stains). Sorry, but MJ stains can't erase these facts. Get over it. Maybe someday MJ can get the Hornets out the first round--eventually.

LeBron (long after he played with Wade :oldlol: ) is facing a team with Westbrook, a MVP, as a sidekick. Not exactly John Starks. #Context

The BPM thing is comical. Dishonest MJ fans will deceive--that's all they know to do, but we went over this with OBPM--where again Pippen was elite. MJ stains dismissed that too.

Let's compare OBPM--so no steals in the mix--for Pippen vs. Ewing, a MJ stain favorite and the best player on the only 90's team to consistently give the Bulls comp.

Prime OBPM for Pippen: 3.0
Prime OBPM for Ewing: 2.0

Advanced plus/minus is a great way to suss out a player's impact. Pippen peaked at #2 in that in 95'.

I am sorry MJ quit as MVP instead of trying to win without Pippen or kept opposing trades for Pippen. He clearly didn't feel like he could win without Pippen (not a "challenge" he wanted--a guy who loved challenges). His fans are heartbroken over it to this day.

tpols

09-09-2020, 03:33 PM

Ortg:

Horace Grant.....4
Anthony Davis....28
Kevin Love.......47
Kyrie Irving.....89
Chris Bosh.......107
Dwayne Wade......231
Scottie Pippen...NR top 250

:roll:

Pippy poo

BigtimeNBAFan

09-09-2020, 03:36 PM

Jordan is better than Lebron, but comparing Pippen to Bosh and Love is idiotic. Pippen won more playoff series as a first option without Jordan in the one full year Jordan sat out than Bosh/Love have won without Lebron in their entire career.

Scottie Pippen was a damn good player who was 3rd in MVP voting during the year without Jordan and led them to 55 games. Chris Bosh and Kevin Love aren't even on that same planet. As an overall player, the only years Lebron has played with someone better than Pippen was 2010-2011 Dwade and Anthony Davis this year. Dwade certainly wasn't better than Pippen at the end of his run in Miami and Kyrie was a great scorer, but not the overall player Pippen was. Michael Jordan wouldn't win sh*t if Chris Bosh was his second option.

NBAGOAT

09-09-2020, 03:37 PM

Translation: Yea, all those stats are legit but they are mostly offensive stats so they don't count, lol.

they do count but your conclusion is lebron had better offensive teammates. you really dont need advanced stats to make that conclusion. also no not all of them are legit, it's kind of well known ws per and ortg arent very good anymore, you're stuck in 2015 if you're using them heavily. if you just want to look at just box score stuff, just use per 75 and ts%.

goozeman

09-09-2020, 03:39 PM

Is the OP 3ball or Soundwave? :lol

They like to cherry pick advanced stats only when convenient. Just yesterday we saw prime Pippen crushes prime Ewing. That didn't count, doe.

So "cherry picking stats" means posting almost all relevant statistical data for a player's entire career now? I even threw the fake-Pippen/Lebron fans a bone, and dropped your favorite metric BPM in there just to be fair.

insidious301

09-09-2020, 03:39 PM

LeBron has played with better individual talent. No argument there. Many of these stats however don't take into account defense. And we know that Pippen was the best wing defender of his era. Another poster, it was either Roundball or Kuniva, posted RAPM numbers for Pippen from 1996-1998. He finished around Top 5 during that span. And in the playoffs even better. When LeBron won his championships, his second best player never had that kind of impact.

they do count but your conclusion is lebron had better offensive teammates. you really dont need advanced stats to make that conclusion. also no not all of them are legit, it's kind of well known ws per and ortg arent very good anymore, you're stuck in 2015 if you're using them heavily. if you just want to look at just box score stuff, just use per 75 and ts%.

ORTG & winshares don't adjust for teammates or lineups like the advanced plus minus stats do. Pretty big flaw.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 03:44 PM

they do count but your conclusion is lebron had better offensive teammates.

Was it Miami or Chicago who was top 10 in offense without MJ/LeBron? :confusedshrug: Miami wasn't even top 20 when LeBron left. #TheInconvenientTruth

As to defense, well, Chicago was #2 w/out MJ. Miami? Cleveland?

This is why MJ stains have to repeat the same BS on a loop: to create an alternate reality. Chicago was a competent offense and elite defense w/out MJ. Miami? Cleveland? Not so much...but the guy whose team was #21 on offense and #21 on defense had a better team than the other guy.

#10 on offense. #2 on defense. Cold, hard facts. We can resume the Jordan stain fun house mirror of deception, though, for the rest of the thread--where #10 on O/#2 on D never happened.

Jordan had more help than LeBron relative to the era where guys could be the best player on a contender but would be the #3 option today on a contender (e.g., Klay=Miller) because teams are more stacked (90's and 00's were outliers). Their teams' performance without them speak for themselves. We are always in a twilight zone of speculation when we saw those teams without them. They weren't even close.

insidious301

09-09-2020, 03:47 PM

Let's compare OBPM--so no steals in the mix--for Pippen vs. Ewing, a MJ stain favorite and the best player on the only 90's team to consistently give the Bulls comp.

Prime OBPM for Pippen: 3.0
Prime OBPM for Ewing: 2.0

Why do Jordan fans ignore this? Could it be because Ewing was on the Knicks who were Chicago's best comp? Nah! Probably just a coincidence man!

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 03:53 PM

Why do Jordan fans ignore this? Could it be because Ewing was on the Knicks who were Chicago's best comp? Nah! Probably just a coincidence man!

They know all this. They aren't here to discuss. They do here what they do all over the internet: deceive and destroy MJ's teammates to make it look like MJ won 6 rangz by himself and to mute the argument that MJ was on a milk carton for team success before he had a strong team around him (that LeBron keeps succeeding wherever he goes, whoever the coach, whoever his teammates makes them even more insecure). They have an obvious answer to why MJ did nothing: his team sucked (27 win pace w/out him in 86'; in 94' it was 55 and 63 when Pippen/Grant both played--kind of a big change, no? :lol ) but the logical response is the team became good when they did win. They can't abide that so here we are each day.

The sad thing is they are having some success. They set the terms of the debate because they flood the internet day in, day out with their BS--unrestrained by shame or any connection to reality. The Bulls had a top 10 offense without Jordan. Yet we hear over and over and over the team was inept offensively without the Lord and Savior Michael Jeffrey Jordan. We hear people who were MVP candidates were Iggy and hear people who were never even close to MVP candidates were Curry from the Jordan stan funhouse mirrors.

RRR3

09-09-2020, 03:57 PM

:roll:

Pippy poo
Are you five years old?

insidious301

09-09-2020, 03:58 PM

They know all this. They aren't here to discuss. They do here what they do all over the internet: deceive and destroy MJ's teammates.

The sad thing is they are having some success. They set the terms of the debate because they flood the internet day in, day out with their BS--unrestrained by shame or any connection to reality. The Bulls had a top 10 offense without Jordan. Yet we hear over and over and over the team was inept offensively without the Lord and Savior Michael Jeffrey Jordan. We hear people who were MVP candidates were Iggy and hear people who were never even close to MVP candidates were Curry from the Jordan stan funhouse mirrors.

I couldn't agree more. What is the obsession with w/s per 48 btw? I have seen that 3ball poster use it frequently. And now the OP. Do they not know Prime Pippen>Ewing in winshares and w/s per 48? Pippen also had a better ORTG, another one of their favorite stats. ORTG might be the worst because of the similarities it has to raw plus minus. Maybe they do know all of this like you are saying, and are just here to create their own reality. Whatever the case being it is cult-like.

FKAri

09-09-2020, 04:00 PM

Wow! Even LeBron's teammates are better than Ordan's.
:bowdown: GOAT

3ball

09-09-2020, 04:26 PM

Career Rankings

PER:

Anthony Davis....3
Dwayne Wade......21
Kyrie Irving.....33
Kevin Love.......45
Chris Bosh.......62
Scottie Pippen...132
Horace Grant.....185

OBPM:

Anthony Davis....12
Kyrie Irving.....13
Dwayne Wade......25
Kevin Love.......29
Scottie Pippen...90
Chris Bosh.......102
Horace Grant.....107

WS/48:

Anthony Davis....13
Horace Grant.....55
Kevin Love.......57
Kyrie Irving.....68
Dwayne Wade......70
Chris Bosh.......76
Scottie Pippen...129

Ortg:

Horace Grant.....4 :biggums:
Anthony Davis....28
Kevin Love.......47
Kyrie Irving.....89
Chris Bosh.......107
Dwayne Wade......231
Scottie Pippen...NR top 250

Effective Field Goal Percentage:

Anthony Davis....86
Kyrie Irving.....99
Horace Grant.....206
Kevin Love.......225
Chris Bosh.......227
Scottie Pippen...244
Dwayne Wade......NR top 250

True Shooting:

Anthony Davis.....41
Kyrie Irving......84
Chris Bosh........89
Kevin Love........92
Dwayne Wade.......183
Dennis Rodman.....244 :rockon:
Scoottie Pippen...NR top 250 :facepalm
Horace Grant......NR top 250

BPM:

Anthony Davis.....12
Dwayne Wade.......22
Kyrie Irving......32
Scottie Pippen....35 :applause:
Kevin Love........48
Chris Bosh........134
Horace Grant......176

Notice that all the real stats that are actually measuring something tangible (PER, OBPM, Ortg, WS/48, eFG%, TS%, etc) actually correlate very closely with one another in rankings. They all say that Pippen was maybe a top-100 offensive player all-time. Pippen wasn't even a Chris Bosh level offensive talent. Also, Scottie Pippen's BPM ranking is wildly incongruous because it rewards defensive stars playing on great defensive teams. From BREF about the BPM 2.0 changes:

When basketball reference reworked the stat back in 2016, players like John Stockton (another Pippen-like two-way player) saw their career BPM double. And here is the kicker... Even with that bonus bump gifted to him and playing on the best defensive teams of all-time practically his entire career, Pippen wouldn't even be a top-three impact player compared to Lebron's teammates. All-time Pippen is just slightly better than Kevin Love.

In summation, in order for Lebron to be on the level of Jordan, he would need to win six titles and win six Finals MVP's with a Chris Bosh/Kevin Love level player as his second option.

Lebron fans...

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fl4Ki2ob CyAQS5WhFe%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1

What more needs to be said

I might retire because of this post

Look how much more offensive talent lebron played with, yet he never had #1 offenses.. leDumb ball

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 04:32 PM

Wow! Even LeBron's teammates are better than Ordan's.
:bowdown: GOAT

Think about this:

LeBron stans: "LeBron makes his teammates better. Look at how good Davis is now!"
Jordan stans: "Jordan's teammates sucked. They sucked before him, they sucked with him, they sucked after him."

It is an odd argument for Mike: so he can't make anyone around him better like his chief rival LeBron does (as argued by his fans)? Maybe that explains the lack of success when he didn't have a strong team around him.

I remember Kobe stans, when he was the big threat to MJ, didn't go around dissing Gasol and co. en masse. Some did, but not all. I remember arguing for much of the 2010 season with Kobe stans who swore to me that Bynum>Amare. :lol

Can anyone imagine MJ fans arguing for Grant or Kukoc, who are the rough analogues to what Bynum was on the Lakers, as being better than a guy like Kemp (loose comp for Amare, although Kemp's ceiling was not as high as Amare's)?

I couldn't agree more. What is the obsession with w/s per 48 btw? I have seen that 3ball poster use it frequently. And now the OP.

OP may be 1-9ball. He is echoing him a lot but I have seen that account echo "LostCause" too, who some thought was an alt of Soundwave. For all the flack 1-9ball gets (deservedly so), it is hard to tell who is who because 90% of MJ stans here say the same basic stuff.

WS/48 is a tool used to diminish Pippen because Kukoc was ahead of him in WS/48 a few times and I think Grant once. I think it was Kuniva who ripped 1-9ball badly over that by explaining you can't use WS/48 to compare a bench player to a starter. They keep running into trouble with their TP.

Kukoc WS/48:

1994-95 NBA .185 (12th)
1995-96 NBA .231 (6th)
1996-97 NBA .204 (8th)

Grant WS/48:

1990-91 NBA .188 (13th)
1991-92 NBA .237 (3rd)
1993-94 NBA .188 (11th)
1994-95 NBA .169 (20th)

See the problem? WS/48 tells you Grant was a top 3 player and Kukoc was right outside the top 5 in 6th.

As to Pippen, not exactly a slouch in WS/48 but they cherry pick. Here it is for Pippen:

1990-91 NBA .179 (15th)
1991-92 NBA .192 (12th)
1993-94 NBA .194 (9th)
1994-95 NBA .188 (10th)
1995-96 NBA .209 (9th)
1996-97 NBA .203 (9th)
1997-98 NBA .193 (8th)

So he was top 10 five years in a row--and he was playing heavy minutes, which impacts your "per minute" production.

So their favorite WS/48 stat says: Grant was top 3 at his peak, Kukoc 6th at his peak and top 10 multiple times, Pippen was perennially top 10 for almost all his prime. What will their response be? You know the deal: tap dancing away from WS/48--until the next thread when they pull the same BS until someone calls them out.

oRTG is geared towards low volume dunkers or sharpshooters. Just look at who is at the top of oRTG this year. Hence why a guy like Grant is so high or a guy like Kerr could rank 3rd (w/out MJ in 94').

They don't try to understand stats, how they are calculated. Just cherry pick.

Whenever the plus/minus numbers are posted they fail to generate a response because Pippen crushes their darlings like Ewing, Miller in that.

Maybe they do know all of this like you are saying, and are just here to create their own reality. Whatever the case being it is cult-like.

Yeah, they are here to construct an alternate reality and they have some success with it. It is now accepted the Bulls had weak offensive teammates and Pippen himself was a weak offensive player. That the Bulls were top 10 in offense w/out MJ in 95' (8th in 86'--probably more like 6th in the non-MJ games BTW) or 5th of the 16 teams in playoff offense in 94' is ignored and erased.

It is a shame. Jordan took a top 10 offense and made it GOAT level--but that isn't enough for MJ stans. They have to exaggerate.

The irony? When Pippen was out for half a year, the Bulls were #13 in offense in 98'. :lol The Bulls proved they could have a top 10 offense with Pippen, w/out Jordan--but not the other way around. An absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence but it is an ironic and amusing fact, given their narrative...

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 04:39 PM

Do Pippen, Kukoc, BJ, Grant, et al. get the 5-6 PPG boost in today's NBA that MJ stans were arguing for in the Miller thread? Let me guess: nope. :lol We have seen this raised with Pippen and Kukoc. The MJ stan response is their stats would be equal--or even lower (since Pippen would be Iggy and if Pippen is Iggy, Kukoc is probably a 9th man or something, right?)--in today's NBA.

Suddenly 90's stats can be compared straight up to today's stats.
They have no actual beliefs whatsoever, just careening from topic to topic and winging it based on a momentary agenda...if they had actual beliefs, you would have to say the stats in the OP would be boosted for these players with the extra PPG and associated extra efficiency and extra APG they would have in today's NBA.

3ball

09-09-2020, 04:42 PM

NBAGOAT

09-09-2020, 04:46 PM

WS/48 is a stat that is pegged to the team's number of wins, so it's the perfect stat to compare teammates, and less effective comparing players on different teams that have different wins

And lol at roundball.. this thread destroys him.. Pippen sucked... Not a top 100 offensive player

Alright you just went against goozemans argument. If you can’t compare different players on different teams you cant compare Jordan’s teammates to lebrons teammates using ws/48..,

Again if your point is Jordan mattered more than pippen, that’s basic knowledge but the same for lebron vs wade or Kyrie outside 2011

insidious301

09-09-2020, 04:58 PM

Alright you just went against goozemans argument. If you can’t compare different players on different teams you cant compare Jordan’s teammates to lebrons teammates using ws/48..,

Again if your point is Jordan mattered more than pippen, that’s basic knowledge but the same for lebron vs wade or Kyrie outside 2011

Which either negates the OP or makes 3ball retract his cosign. Haha embarrassing. Logic says that you read up and understand the numbers before applying them. Unfortunately common sense is lost on these people. Roundball had them pegged from the getgo.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 05:00 PM

Alright you just went against goozemans argument. If you can’t compare different players on different teams you cant compare Jordan’s teammates to lebrons teammates using ws/48..,

This is what I mean. These guys are all over the map careening from TP to TP based on the agenda at a given moment--even if they will say the opposite an hour later or the next day with another agenda in another context (e.g., saying 90's players would score 5-6 PPG more easily today--but not applying that to MJ's teammates).

They don't want to use any form of data, other than cherry picked specific data. WS are tied to wins, but that means we can't compare WS for the Bulls to anyone's because they had no comparable team in the 90's. Ironically, because the Bulls were the super team MJ stans like him swear they weren't, their argument is we can't use WS as a comp.

I agree. WS isn't a good stat--but I used it simply because MJ stans like to bring it up.

We can go all day, pick the stat. We know Pippen over and over again ranks at near the top. Here are some more in easy to grasp graphics for 1-9ball and his minions:

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

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

Not stat is the be all end all but when every advanced stat, advanced plus/minus, etc. all tell us the same thing that should mean something to people who throw around stats day in, day out.

goozeman

09-09-2020, 07:12 PM

What more needs to be said

I might retire because of this post

Look how much more offensive talent lebron played with, yet he never had #1 offenses.. leDumb ball

Thanks, man. That's a honor coming from the 3ball, the Jordan-stan legend. Keep posting because it is honestly amusing watching you destroy them constantly. It's funny that they legit think they are winning these arguments no matter how many ways we beat them over the head with the same numbers showing that Pippen was a good player who had a couple of solid seasons as the guy, but he nothing special in the big scheme of things compared to a long list of superior players all-time. Even as a sidekick he was nothing special and many players have won championships with far superior second options. Hell, you could argue some teams won championships with third options better than Pippen (Lakers with Worthy, for example). Fake Pippen-stans always respond the same way, and if you look closely enough off in the distancea you can see the goalposts moving to fit the ever-changing Pippen narrative.

JohnMax

09-09-2020, 07:22 PM

Demar DeJordan got carried by MVPippen, Stern and refs, expansion era, shitty opposition at the SG position and overrated 90s defense

insidious301

09-09-2020, 07:31 PM

OP - Which of LeBron's teammates were better than Prime Ewing?

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 07:39 PM

Do Pippen, Kukoc, BJ, Grant, et al. get the 5-6 PPG boost in today's NBA that MJ stans were arguing for in the Miller thread?

MJ stans still dodging their shameless hypocrisy. :lol

OP - Which of LeBron's teammates were better than Prime Ewing?

Good line of questioning.

Also, use the same logic in the OP to compare the players on MJ's opponents versus those on LeBron's.

Warriors: Durant, Curry, Klay, Green, Iggy
Thunder: Durant, Westbrook, Harden
Celtics: Garnett, Pierce, Allen, Rondo
Bulls II: Rose, Gasol, Butler, Noah
Bulls I: Rose, Noah, Deng, Boozer, Korver
Rockets: Harden, Westbrook
Spurs: Duncan, Parker, Kawhi, Manu

Go on down the line. Of course, we know OP won't do that because teams are more stacked today and if you compared rosters from then to today teams with Starks as their second best player or Miller (90's version of Klay) as their best player wouldn't stack up to teams with Westbrook, Pierce, Parker, Curry, Klay, etc. as second options. Look at those teams listed above. What option would Starks be? He would be 4th or 5th on some of these teams. Different eras.

The legit comparison is teams relative to their eras--but we know LeBron's teams sucked without LeBron (unlike MJ's) so we won't see that either from MJ stains.

The biggest comp we hear about player wise in the 90's usually are Malone, Barkley. These guys were forwards. All-NBA voters thought Pippen was better than them in multiple years with both players in their primes. So if Pippen sucked, what does that mean Malone, Barkley, and others like Ewing (never higher than 4th in MVP) and Miller (never higher than 13th, same as Rik Smits that year in MVP), etc.?

insidious301

09-09-2020, 08:04 PM

MJ stans still dodging their shameless hypocrisy. :lol

Good line of questioning.

Also, use the same logic in the OP to compare the players on MJ's opponents versus those on LeBron's.

Warriors: Durant, Curry, Klay, Green, Iggy
Thunder: Durant, Westbrook, Harden
Celtics: Garnett, Pierce, Allen, Rondo
Bulls II: Rose, Gasol, Butler, Noah
Bulls I: Rose, Noah, Deng, Boozer, Korver
Rockets: Harden, Westbrook
Spurs: Duncan, Parker, Kawhi, Manu

Go on down the line. Of course, we know OP won't do that because teams are more stacked today and if you compared rosters from then to today teams with Starks as their second best player or Miller (90's version of Klay) as their best player wouldn't stack up to teams with Westbrook, Pierce, Parker, Curry, Klay, etc. as second options. Look at those teams listed above. What option would Starks be? He would be 4th or 5th on some of these teams. Different eras.

The legit comparison is teams relative to their eras--but we know LeBron's teams sucked without LeBron (unlike MJ's) so we won't see that either from MJ stains.

The biggest comp we hear about player wise in the 90's usually are Malone, Barkley. These guys were forwards. All-NBA voters thought Pippen was better than them in multiple years with both players in their primes. So if Pippen sucked, what does that mean Malone, Barkley, and others like Ewing (never higher than 4th in MVP) and Miller (never higher than 13th, same as Rik Smits that year in MVP), etc.?

I wonder if the "gooseman" will answer my question directly. Lets see how many players were better than the guy who led Jordan's best comp. I doubt we'll get an answer, because we all know what it entails, and what that'll do to his argument. But I will give him benefit of the doubt.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 08:05 PM

I wonder if the "gooseman" will answer my question directly. Lets see how many players were better than the guy who led Jordan's best comp. I doubt we'll get an answer, because we all know what it entails, and what that'll do to his argument. But I will give him benefit of the doubt.

If that is 1-9ball, he has Ewing 22nd all-time. Not sure where he has Wade. He also has Brandon Ingram as a top 10-12 all-time scorer. As to tpols, he has Ewing>LeBron. :oldlol: tpols isn't "gooseman" but is part of the same ilk. Every MJ stan raves about how great Ewing was.

If these clowns dont think he could tack on another 4-5 ppg vs way inferior teams of today with softened rules and amped up spacing what do you think you could possibly say to convince them otherwise?

Using that logic...

Pippen 27 PPG
Kukoc 24 PPG
BJ 20 PPG
Grant 20 PPG
Woolridge 30 PPG
Oakley 20 PPG
Cartwright 27 PPG

What do the numbers in the OP adjust to if you give every MJ teammate 5 PPG boosts from their scoring peak? These are just the guys who get to 20+ so it doesn't include guys who move into the high teens with an extra 5 PPG.

TheCorporation

09-09-2020, 08:08 PM

Low IQ poster alert :lol

Imagine comparing AD's entire career #s when he hasnt even played 1 full season together lol

Imagine forgetting about the Playoffs

Imagine not comparing LBJ and MJ's playoff career #s. LBJ fam obviously had more HALP despite being less talented than Pippen.

Imagine forgetting all of MJ's rings are 90s trash

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 08:10 PM

The ultimate teammate comparison: 55-27 versus 37-45 or 19-63. :lol

insidious301

09-09-2020, 08:12 PM

If that is 1-9ball, he has Ewing 22nd all-time. Not sure where he has Wade. He also has Brandon Ingram as a top 10-12 all-time scorer. As to tpols, he has Ewing>LeBron. :oldlol: tpols isn't "gooseman" but is part of the same ilk. Every MJ stan raves about how great Ewing was.

So what you're saying is "tpol" has Pippen>Ewing then. That is the conclusion we get from the hard data posted in 1) this thread and 2) the one I enlightened "3ball" in. There is no other logical choice.

Using that logic...

Pippen 27 PPG
Kukoc 24 PPG
BJ 20 PPG
Grant 20 PPG
Woolridge 30 PPG
Oakley 20 PPG
Cartwright 27 PPG

What do the numbers in the OP adjust to if you give every MJ teammate 5 PPG boosts from their scoring peak? These are just the guys who get to 20+ so it doesn't include guys who move into the high teens with an extra 5 PPG.

That is correct, Roundball. If everyone is getting boosts then why aren't Jordan's teammates? The narratives aren't stacking up as they should!

FireDavidKahn

09-09-2020, 08:13 PM

Wait, I thought today's league is soft and so easy to get stats but here you are using the higher stats to say that they are better then older players?????

:roll:

You can't make it up!!!!!!

:roll:

ArbitraryWater

09-09-2020, 08:13 PM

Well its a different era.

Teams are all loaded now.

Bron isn‘t out here facing teams with Starks, Majerle, Smits, etc as sidekick

LAmbruh

09-09-2020, 08:13 PM

Wait, I thought today's league is soft and so easy to get stats but here you are using the higher stats to say that they are better then older players?????

:roll:

You can't make it up!!!!!!

:roll:

exacly :oldlol:

now do Jordans career competition all-time

where does jeff hornacek and craig ehlo rank in the midst

insidious301

09-09-2020, 08:17 PM

Wait, I thought today's league is soft and so easy to get stats but here you are using the higher stats to say that they are better then older players?????

:roll:

You can't make it up!!!!!!

:roll:

Just as you said, Kahn, how do you compare stats that don't adjust for possessions across era? And still want to claim numbers now are easier to get? No consistency from the cult-like posters.

TheCorporation

09-09-2020, 08:18 PM

exacly :oldlol:

now do Jordans career competition all-time

where does jeff hornacek and craig ehlo rank in the midst

:lol :roll: :roll:
G league 6th man

TheCorporation

09-09-2020, 08:20 PM

Wait, I thought today's league is soft and so easy to get stats but here you are using the higher stats to say that they are better then older players?????

:roll:

You can't make it up!!!!!!

:roll:

+1

We need to add 25% to every 90s trash can kid to make up for lack of skillset

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 08:21 PM

So what you're saying is "tpol" has Pippen>Ewing then. That is the conclusion we get from the hard data posted in 1) this thread and 2) the one I enlightened "3ball" in. There is no other logical choice.

Yup, but they want it both ways: Ewing was awesome (because he played against MJ) and Pippen sucks (because he played with MJ). tpols compares Pippen to guys like Iggy and Michael Cooper. No beliefs, just agendas. :oldlol:

That is correct, Roundball. If everyone is getting boosts then why aren't Jordan's teammates?

Good question. They go on and on about how much tougher the 90's were yet MJ's teammates would receive no benefit from being in what they say is a much easier era?

Wait, I thought today's league is soft and so easy to get stats but here you are using the higher stats to say that they are better then older players?????

:roll:

You can't make it up!!!!!!

:roll:

https://media.giphy.com/media/BLjbqh9Yg2LqzBIbf6/giphy.gif

Nope--and they flip flop on this thread to thread--sometimes on an hourly basis. Shameless, isn't it?

knicksman

09-09-2020, 08:22 PM

insidious301

09-09-2020, 08:25 PM

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 08:30 PM

its not about impact or else giannis > jordan or wilt > jordan. Lebron might even be more impactful than jordan but well choose kobe over him when it comes to building a team. Well choose kawhi over him coz they possess the skill that matters the most. And pippen is the same, hes a great 2nd option but we might even have a higher chance of winning with miller than him.

No one would draft Kawhi over LeBron and only Kobe stans would draft Kobe over LeBron. :oldlol:

Let's compare Pippen to MJ stain darling Miller, probably the only player that rivals Ewing as an object of hype for them.

All-NBA: Pippen 7, Miller 3
All-NBA 1st: Pippen 3, Miller 0
All-NBA 1st/2nd: Pippen 5, Miller 0
Top 5 MVP: Pippen 2, Miller 0
Top 10 MVP: Pippen 5, Miller 0
High MVP finish: Pippen 3rd, Miller 13th (tied with J. Rose, M. Finley, D. Armstrong with 1 fifth place vote each)
Prime BPM: Pippen 6.0, Miller 4.2
Prime VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Miller 4.6

This is a joke. I am not going to look up more to compare the two. It is obvious one player was much better--yet MJ stans will rave about Miller and say "Pippen sucked."

The consistent theme is this: if you played with MJ you sucked, if you played against MJ you were a flawless legend. Miller=Curry per some MJ stans. :roll:

Sarcastic

09-09-2020, 09:09 PM

The ultimate teammate comparison: 55-27 versus 37-45 or 19-63. :lol

To be fair, they should have won much more in 93 but Pippen and Grant had really down years compared to 92. Had they not been so bad, 92 Bulls should have been closer to 65ish wins.

Of course Pippen and Grant had career years in 94, so the Bulls overachieved.

SATAN

09-09-2020, 09:14 PM

Roundball_Rock leaves a trail of bodied posters from thread to thread :applause:

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 09:16 PM

...

Thanks. We were waiting for the Knicks/MJ Stockholm Syndrome contingent to make the obligatory appearance echoing the MJ stan TP. We get it: Pippen sucked (sucked in that ECF, right?), Grant sucked, it was all MJ (pathetic Knicks losing to a one man team :lol ), we should cherry pick their highest win total (55, 61, 67, 57, 55--cherry pick 67 as their "true" level!), etc.

Interesting argument: players got better w/out MJ (Pippen, Grant, BJ, Kerr, Myers, arguably S. Williams had career years--i.e., most of the rotation :oldlol: ) while everyone gets worse when LeBron leaves. This is an argument for MJ. :confusedshrug:

Let's use your cherry picking argument. 13' Heat: 66 wins, down to 37 in 15'. That's -29 wins. 92' Bulls 67 wins, 94' Bulls 55 wins. -12. So per your own metric, -29 vs. -12. Both coming from the same baseline: 67 and 66--and one team lands at 55 and the other 37. According to MJ stans and their satellite Knicks fans contingent, 67 to 55=worse team than the team going from 66 to 37.

Again and again we see their own metrics backfire--but they still won't own the logical conclusions of their own metrics.

Roundball_Rock leaves a trail of bodied posters from thread to thread

:cheers:

Jailblazers7

09-09-2020, 09:22 PM

I can't wait to visit this site in 2030 and see MJ vs Lebron debates still going crazy.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 09:36 PM

3ball

09-09-2020, 09:37 PM

Pippen wasn't a star because no one noticed or cared if he played bad.. that's similar to role players and bench players..

the media didn't follow how he played - he had MANY stretches of 12 on 30% similar to Paul George recently - but unlike George, Pippen was never knocked for it.. no one even noticed.. people knew his ceiling was about 20 points, so no one cared when he only got 12.. it was common

people didn't expect much from Pippen.. because he wasn't a true star with actual responsibility that gets knocked for playing poorly... he was treated like a role player (unnoticed overall, virtually unneeded in the clutch, and not held responsible)... He was just a good athlete and slot-filler that took 4 years before barely performing those roles adequately with sufficient toughness..

Look how low his all-time rankings are in every category - the OP showed that pippen is no better than Kevin Love on offense for their careers - probably not top 100 on offense - so TONS AND TONS of guys would've won in Pippen's place

And it's been demonstrated that MJ didn't need Pippen - he obviously didn't "need" a sidekick with spotty offense that forces MJ to have the goat production rate and win every ring as scoring champ (while assisting 30% more often and getting more dpoy votes every year).. certainly MJ doesn't "need" a sidekick that makes him do all that.

Furthermore, 89' MJ nearly beat the Pistons even though Pippen averaged 10 on 40% (14/6/3 in regular season) - he obviously would've won if Pippen was replaced by a better 2nd option, which proves that MJ didn't need Pippen to win in 89', or Phil (Phil wasn't there in 89').. So MJ didn't need Pippen or Phil - case closed - the 89' carry-job proves it.

Ultimately, Pippen played exactly like Larry Hughes except he was barely more effective by being 2 inches taller - but they play exactly the same... FREQUENTLY disappointing offensively, but no one noticed because Pippen was intuitively a role player in everyone's mind, not someone that is held responsible for poor play (aka a star).. MJ was expected to win and lose every game, while Pippen coattailed

TheCorporation

09-09-2020, 09:38 PM

I can't wait to visit this site in 2030 and see MJ vs Lebron debates still going crazy.

I'll see you there :cheers:

knicksman

09-09-2020, 09:42 PM

No one would draft Kawhi over LeBron and only Kobe stans would draft Kobe over LeBron. :oldlol:

Let's compare Pippen to MJ stain darling Miller, probably the only player that rivals Ewing as an object of hype for them.

All-NBA: Pippen 7, Miller 3
All-NBA 1st: Pippen 3, Miller 0
All-NBA 1st/2nd: Pippen 5, Miller 0
Top 5 MVP: Pippen 2, Miller 0
Top 10 MVP: Pippen 5, Miller 0
High MVP finish: Pippen 3rd, Miller 13th (tied with J. Rose, M. Finley, D. Armstrong with 1 fifth place vote each)
Prime BPM: Pippen 6.0, Miller 4.2
Prime VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Miller 4.6

This is a joke. I am not going to look up more to compare the two. It is obvious one player was much better--yet MJ stans will rave about Miller and say "Pippen sucked."

The consistent theme is this: if you played with MJ you sucked, if you played against MJ you were a flawless legend. Miller=Curry per some MJ stans. :roll:
Yeah. Id rather draft a guy who needs 2 superstars over a guy who needs none. And i couldnt think of a team that has won with a pippen type of player

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 09:44 PM

Knicks suck. Knicks fans should create another thread about how their team kept losing to a one man team with really, really bad other players (certainly no one as good as the great Starks, Oakley, or Charles Smith cast on the Bulls' roster) who "played so badly" in the year the Knicks had their one 60 win season in the last half a century but the Knicks still took the L. Damn! :(

3ball

09-09-2020, 09:44 PM

I'll see you there :cheers:

You wish fool

Lebron will be borderline top 5 by most, and eventually borderline top 10

Whereas people only talk about mj being NUMBER ONE.. that's the only rank anyone ever discusses MJ as... So only MJ has and will stand the test of time.

Lebron will be like Kobe if kobe HADN'T died (fade away)

insidious301

09-09-2020, 09:53 PM

Pippen wasn't a star because no one noticed or cared if he played bad.. that's similar to role players and bench players.

the media didn't follow how he played - he had MANY stretches of 12 on 30% similar to Paul George recently - but unlike George, Pippen was never knocked for it.. no one even noticed.. people knew his ceiling was about 20 points, so no one cared when he only got 12.. it was common

Ultimately, Pippen played exactly like Larry Hughes except he was barely more effective by being 2 inches taller - but they play exactly the same... FREQUENTLY disappointing offensively, but no one noticed because Pippen was intuitively a role player in everyone's mind, not someone that is held responsible for poor play (aka a star).. MJ was expected to win and lose every game, while Pippen coattailed

Pippen had better advanced stats than Ewing. And Ewing led NY who was Jordan's best 90s comp. In other words, you can delude yourself all you like, but the hard data disagrees with you. Undeniably so.

WS/48: Pippen .185, Ewing .172
BPM: Pippen 6.0, Ewing 4.0
OBPM: Pippen 3.9, Ewing 2.0
DBPM: Pippen 2.1, Ewing 2.0
PER: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 21.2
VORP: Pippen 45.9 (599 games), Ewing 44.7 (800 games)
VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Ewing 4.6
ORTG: Pippen 112, Ewing 108
TS %: Ewing 56%, Pippen 55%

So if Pippen was a bench player or just "Larry Hughes" then what does that say about Jordan's comp? You aren't getting off, scott free with these claims.

knicksman

09-09-2020, 09:57 PM

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 09:58 PM

So if Pippen was a bench player or just "Larry Hughes" then what does that say about Jordan's comp?

It says we can't take MJ's rangz seriously. Pippen was ahead of Barkley and Malone several times in all-NBA with each of them in their primes. So MJ was playing teams whose best player was worse than Larry Hughes some years of their primes. LeBron was playing KD/Westbrook/Harden, KD/Curry/Klay/Green/Iggy, Duncan/Kawhi/Parker/Ginobili. Every one of these players is worse than Larry Hughes.

Pippen had better advanced stats than Ewing. And Ewing led NY who was Jordan's best 90s comp. In other words, you can delude yourself all you like, but the hard data disagrees with you

Data he himself was citing as evidence of Pippen sucking--just yesterday. These are his own preferred metrics. :roll:

BPM means nothing and doesn't offset Pippen's weak PPG, TS, PER, WS/48, OBPM, ORTG, assist %, and PLAYOFF PERFORMANCE

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?484204-30-guys-had-better-statistica-peak-than-pippen-in-90-s-and-better-playoff-performance/page2

We haven't even gotten around to playoffs. Pippen had several great finals; Ewing melted down in his one finals appearance.

Prime Assist %

Pippen: 24.5%
Ewing: 10.8%

NBASTATMAN

09-09-2020, 10:00 PM

Career Rankings

PER:

Anthony Davis....3
Dwayne Wade......21
Kyrie Irving.....33
Kevin Love.......45
Chris Bosh.......62
Scottie Pippen...132
Horace Grant.....185

OBPM:

Anthony Davis....12
Kyrie Irving.....13
Dwayne Wade......25
Kevin Love.......29
Scottie Pippen...90
Chris Bosh.......102
Horace Grant.....107

WS/48:

Anthony Davis....13
Horace Grant.....55
Kevin Love.......57
Kyrie Irving.....68
Dwayne Wade......70
Chris Bosh.......76
Scottie Pippen...129

Ortg:

Horace Grant.....4 :biggums:
Anthony Davis....28
Kevin Love.......47
Kyrie Irving.....89
Chris Bosh.......107
Dwayne Wade......231
Scottie Pippen...NR top 250

Effective Field Goal Percentage:

Anthony Davis....86
Kyrie Irving.....99
Horace Grant.....206
Kevin Love.......225
Chris Bosh.......227
Scottie Pippen...244
Dwayne Wade......NR top 250

True Shooting:

Anthony Davis.....41
Kyrie Irving......84
Chris Bosh........89
Kevin Love........92
Dwayne Wade.......183
Dennis Rodman.....244 :rockon:
Scoottie Pippen...NR top 250 :facepalm
Horace Grant......NR top 250

BPM:

Anthony Davis.....12
Dwayne Wade.......22
Kyrie Irving......32
Scottie Pippen....35 :applause:
Kevin Love........48
Chris Bosh........134
Horace Grant......176

Notice that all the real stats that are actually measuring something tangible (PER, OBPM, Ortg, WS/48, eFG%, TS%, etc) actually correlate very closely with one another in rankings. They all say that Pippen was maybe a top-100 offensive player all-time. Pippen wasn't even a Chris Bosh level offensive talent. Also, Scottie Pippen's BPM ranking is wildly incongruous because it rewards defensive stars playing on great defensive teams. From BREF about the BPM 2.0 changes:

When basketball reference reworked the stat back in 2016, players like John Stockton (another Pippen-like two-way player) saw their career BPM double. And here is the kicker... Even with that bonus bump gifted to him and playing on the best defensive teams of all-time practically his entire career, Pippen wouldn't even be a top-three impact player compared to Lebron's teammates. All-time Pippen is just slightly better than Kevin Love.

In summation, in order for Lebron to be on the level of Jordan, he would need to win six titles and win six Finals MVP's with a Chris Bosh/Kevin Love level player as his second option.

Lebron fans...

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fl4Ki2ob CyAQS5WhFe%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1

this is such a dumb thread cuz Pippen played well past his prime.. And won BBALL series without MJ.. MJ BLANK WITHOUT PIPPEN.. Pippen has 6 rings must make him better thanMAGIC.. LOL

insidious301

09-09-2020, 10:09 PM

It says we can't take MJ's rangz seriously. Pippen was ahead of Barkley and Malone several times in all-NBA with each of them in their primes. So MJ was playing teams whose best player was worse than Larry Hughes some years of their primes. LeBron was playing KD/Westbrook/Harden, KD/Curry/Klay/Green/Iggy, Duncan/Kawhi/Parker/Ginobili. Every one of these players is worse than Larry Hughes.

Data he himself was citing as evidence of Pippen sucking--just yesterday. These are his own preferred metrics. :roll:

One hundred percent. I am still waiting for gooseman & 3ball to answer these pertinent questions, but only if they can remain consistent. Its all fun and games until you're asked to back it up.

TheCorporation

09-09-2020, 10:12 PM

TheCorporation

09-09-2020, 10:15 PM

You wish fool

Lebron will be borderline top 5 by most, and eventually borderline top 10

Whereas people only talk about mj being NUMBER ONE.. that's the only rank anyone ever discusses MJ as... So only MJ has and will stand the test of time.

Lebron will be like Kobe if kobe HADN'T died (fade away)

This # aint going doint baby girl

https://i.postimg.cc/P5HyRKwN/wow-7132-goat.png

MJ is the one on the decline. He might not be top 5 by 2030 Watch and Learn.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 10:21 PM

One hundred percent. I am still waiting for gooseman & 3ball to answer these pertinent questions, but only if they can remain consistent. Its all fun and games until you're asked to back it up.

Yup but they are cutting and running or dodging. Same with tpols, who was among those going on and on about how 90's players would score a lot more today because this era is so weak, defenses are so bad, etc. Won't apply the same logic to MJ's teammates in the OP, though. These guys have no actual beliefs hence the non-stop agenda driven flip flopping but they should at least admit it. They show in threads and pretend they have a thought out, reasoning, factually based position.

Imagine being a Bulls fan so that means your #2 option was better than your greatest rivalries (Knicks) 1st option (Ewing).

WHAT. A. TIME.

It was glorious! :rockon:

Lebron will be borderline top 5 by most, and eventually borderline top 10

Is this guy on crack? LeBron is consensus top 3 at minimum if he retired tomorrow.

These people hallucinate their own rankings while ignoring consensus rankings. It is fine to disagree with the consensus but those fools deny it even exists. So LeBron is "borderline top 10." Pippen is Larry Hughes. Ewing>LeBron. Miller=Curry. Etc. All in Jordanstan. :lol

3ball

09-09-2020, 10:25 PM

Pippen had better advanced stats than Ewing. And Ewing led NY who was Jordan's best 90s comp. In other words, you can delude yourself all you like, but the hard data disagrees with you. Undeniably so.

So if Pippen was a bench player or just "Larry Hughes" then what does that say about Jordan's comp? You aren't getting off, scott free with these claims.

Stop lying about the advanced stats.

Ewing has higher PER, WS/48, and efficiency.... And better raw stats by a mile, especially scoring because Ewing was an elite alpha dog scorer/shooter, while Pippen was a relative liability with stone hands.. Ewing carried offenses and teams while Pippen could get 10 points and no one noticed or cared.

There's no comparison, which is why Ewing has far better regular season peak (29/11/3 with 4.0 blocks versus 22/9/6 and 2 steals) and better playoff peak (Ewing destroyed Pippen in 94" to make the Finals)

Pippen is nowhere near this.. Pippen only has VORP and the dumb BPM (which says someone can score 10 points less but get a couple steals and have higher BPM)... you guys split BPM into 3 stats, but it's 1 stat and this shady tactic proves that pippen"s stats can't stand on their own

FromDowntown

09-09-2020, 10:26 PM

This is the official, unbiased GOAT list

https://i.postimg.cc/P5HyRKwN/wow-7132-goat.png

I will concede if someone can pass LeFirst then they are the new GOAT

red1

09-09-2020, 10:36 PM

jordan is the greatest winner in pro sports if you're measuring careers. his career and narrative will never be surpassed.

lebron's career has also been spotless. what a GOAT.

insidious301

09-09-2020, 10:39 PM

Stop lying about the advanced stats.

Ewing has higher PER, WS/48, and efficiency.... And better raw stats by a mile, especially scoring because Ewing was an elite alpha dog scorer/shooter, while Pippen was a relative liability with stone hands.. Ewing carried offenses and teams while Pippen could get 10 points and no one noticed or cared.

You're in denial and willfully ignorant. Those stats are from both Ewing and Pippen's prime, and roughly 9 seasons of data. So to recap Prime Pippen(91-98) had better: bpm, ortg, ws, ws48, vorp & ortg. Prime Ewing(88-97) has better: ts, per & ppg. What's more, we know all the stats Pippen beat Ewing in are cumulative & impact ones. Meaning they are unequivocally better measures. What all of this tells us is you need to brush up on what "facts" are. They are clearly not on your side.

In the meantime, we'll wait for you to explain why Pippen outplayed Ewing. The same Ewing who led NY and was also Jordan's best comp.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 10:47 PM

You're in denial and willfully ignorant. Those stats are from both Ewing and Pippen's prime, and roughly 9 seasons of data. So to recap Prime Pippen(91-98) had better: bpm, ortg, ws, ws48, vorp & ortg. Prime Ewing(88-97) has better: ts, per & ppg. What's more, we know all the stats Pippen beat Ewing in are cumulative & impact ones. Meaning they are unequivocally better measures. What all of this tells us is you need to brush up on what "facts" are. They are clearly not on your side.

In the meantime, I will be waiting for you to explain why Pippen was better than Ewing. The same Ewing who led NY and was also Jordan's best comp.

Yup. His. own. metrics. :lol

Even TS % isn't a clear win for Ewing. The gap is 1%--but Ewing was a center taking a lot of bunny shots while Pippen was a perimeter player taking a lot of threes and mid-range shots.

In the playoffs that gap is erased completely.

3ball

09-09-2020, 10:47 PM

You're in denial and willfully ignorant. Those stats are from both Ewing and Pippen's prime, and roughly 9 seasons of data. So to recap Prime Pippen(91-98) had better: bpm, ortg, ws, ws48, vorp & ortg. Prime Ewing(88-97) has better: ts, per & ppg. What's more, we know all the stats Pippen beat Ewing in are cumulative & impact ones. Meaning they are unequivocally better measures. What all of this tells us is you need to brush up on what "facts" are. They are clearly not on your side.

In the meantime, we'll wait for you to explain why Pippen outplayed Ewing. The same Ewing who led NY and was also Jordan's best comp.

Again, your stats are wrong

Ewing has higher PER, WS/48 and efficiency... And better raw stats by a mile... And better regular season and playoff peak

Pippen only has BPM which is a fraud, and meaningless VORP.. he trails in everything else and everything that matters - he literally sucks at scoring compared to Ewing... An entirely lower caliber of player... A "pippen" lol

Ewing was an alpha dog scorer that carried teams, while Pippen was a role player that got carried and was never held accountable (like a role player)

red1

09-09-2020, 10:48 PM

if you really want to nitpick jordan's spotless career though...

3ball

09-09-2020, 10:54 PM

How can Pippen be top 30 all-time when he isn't top 30 all-time in a single stat category?

His best stat is BPM, which is biased towards him, yet he's only 35th!!!!... And every other stat he ranks outside the top 100

Pippen is NOT a top 100 player - if he was, he wouldn't rank OUTSIDE the top 100 in basically everything

insidious301

09-09-2020, 10:55 PM

Yup. His. own. metrics. :lol

Even TS % isn't a clear win for Ewing. The gap is 1%--but Ewing was a center taking a lot of bunny shots while Pippen was a perimeter player taking a lot of threes and mid-range shots.

In the playoffs that gap is erased completely.

Credit to you for posting those numbers btw. I "fact checked" them and they were all correct. The only problem now is that Jordan fans are in denial and refuse to accept the facts. Going as far to say the FACTUAL DATA is wrong. They are beginning to crack, Roundball!

Again, your stats are wrong

Ewing has higher PER, WS/48 and efficiency... And better raw stats by a mile... And better regular season and playoff peak

Pippen only has BPM which is a fraud, and meaningless VORP.. he trails in everything else and everything that matters - he literally sucks at scoring compared to Ewing... An entirely lower caliber of player... A "pippen" lol

Ewing was an alpha dog scorer that carried teams, while Pippen was a role player that got carried and was never held accountable (like a role player)

Incorrect. The stats are all documented and were posted here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?484204-30-guys-had-better-statistica-peak-than-pippen-in-90-s-and-better-playoff-performance/page3). They paint Pippen with better ws/48 & overall winshares. Adding to that, better ortg, vorp & bpm - the latter two being impact stats capturing all around play. When all of the information is laid out properly, as in Pippen>Ewing, how do you come to grips with Ewing leading NY? The Bulls #2 was better than the #1 on the best opponent

Lebron23

09-09-2020, 11:03 PM

So "cherry picking stats" means posting almost all relevant statistical data for a player's entire career now? I even threw the fake-Pippen/Lebron fans a bone, and dropped your favorite metric BPM in there just to be fair.

You are an irrelevant poster. How about defensive stats, and level of competitions? And pippen and grant won more playoffs series than bosh, love, and irving without their best players.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 11:05 PM

Credit to you for posting those numbers btw. I "fact checked" them and they were all correct

Here is some more. Augmented plus/minus data. Unfortunately, we don't have this data from before 1994 but this gives us 1994-1997 with both players still all-NBA players. This is from data I pulled to compare several top stars and tracking them year-over-year.

Augmented Plus-Minus (1994-1997)

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

Pippen is ahead of him every year.

How about RAPM (real adjusted plus-minus)? We have that data starting in 1997 so let's look at 1997 (Ewing was no longer elite by 98', Pippen by 99').

RAPM

Pippen: 9th at 3.9
Ewing: 10th at 3.8

So, close but Pippen ahead again. How about in the playoffs in 97'?

Pippen: 3rd at 2.5
Ewing: 25th at 0.8

Pippen moved up, Ewing moved down significantly in the playoffs.

How about net on/off? Available since 97'.

Net On/Off

Pippen: +8.1
Ewing: +7.4

In the 97' PO:

Pippen: +13.8
Ewing: +9.1

Data point after data point has Pippen>Ewing. :oldlol:

3ball

09-09-2020, 11:10 PM

Credit to you for posting those numbers btw. I "fact checked" them and they were all correct. The only problem now is that Jordan fans are in denial and refuse to accept the facts. Going as far to say the FACTUAL DATA is wrong. They are beginning to crack, Roundball!

Incorrect. The stats are all documented and were posted here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?484204-30-guys-had-better-statistica-peak-than-pippen-in-90-s-and-better-playoff-performance/page3). They paint Pippen with better ws/48 & overall winshares. Adding to that, better ortg, vorp & bpm - the latter two being impact stats capturing all around play. When all of the information is laid out properly, as in Pippen>Ewing, how do you come to grips with Ewing leading NY? The Bulls #2 was better than the #1 on the best opponent

Again, Ewing has better everything - better advanced stats (PER, WS/48, TS)... better raw stats (not even close)... better peak in RS and PO

And Ewing carried teams as an elite alpha-dog scorer - he was never an Iggy or a "pippen".. Pippen was a bad scorer compared to Ewing.. it's like comparing Iggy to Embiid

Ewing was on that top tier, aka MJ, Hakeem, Shaq, Malone, Barkley... Pippen was never on this level and it's a disgusting lie to say he was

insidious301

09-09-2020, 11:11 PM

Here is some more. Augmented plus/minus data. Unfortunately, we don't have this data from before 1994 but this gives us 1994-1997 with both players still all-NBA players. This is from data I pulled to compare several top stars and tracking them year-over-year.

Augmented Plus-Minus (1994-1997)

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

Pippen is ahead of him every year.

How about RAPM (real adjusted plus-minus)? We have that data starting in 1997 so let's look at 1997 (Ewing was no longer elite by 98', Pippen by 99').

Pippen: 9th at 3.9
Ewing: 10th at 3.8

So, close but Pippen ahead again. How about in the playoffs in 97'?

Pippen: 3rd at 2.5
Ewing: 25th at 0.8

Pippen moved up, Ewing moved down significantly in the playoffs.

Data point after data point has Pippen>Ewing. It is something like 12 of 15 in favor of Pippen now. :oldlol:
Ewing:

Real plus minus is the best measure of impact, so this is very keen data. Thank you. Pippen now leads Ewing in basically every major advanced stat & now in impact without the box score. Not a complete sweep but domination that is close enough. Will the Jordan fans address it? Can they come to terms with Pippen > The #1 on their greatest rival? Time will tell!

Again, Ewing has better everything - better advanced stats (PER, WS/48, TS)... better raw stats (not even close)... better peak in RS and PO

And Ewing carried teams as an elite alpha-dog scorer - he was never an Iggy or a "pippen".. Ewing was always much better than Pippen and it's dumb to even consider otherwise, let alone ARGUE it..

Once again, incorrect. Pippen's prime numbers beat Ewing's prime numbers handily. In bpm, vorp, ws, ws48, ortg & now apm/rapm. Damn near a clean sweep! Unfortunately, you will have to come to grips sooner than later.

Shooter

09-09-2020, 11:13 PM

You are an irrelevant poster. How about defensive stats, and level of competitions? And pippen and grant won more playoffs series than bosh, love, and irving without their best players.

Bingo

3ball

09-09-2020, 11:17 PM

insidious301

09-09-2020, 11:20 PM

Ewing led his share of advanced stats just like Pippen and destroys the raw stats

Pippen was a bad scorer compared to Ewing.. it's like comparing Iggy to Embiid.. no one thinks iggy > Embiid and it was the same with Pippen and Ewing

Ewing was on that top tier, aka MJ, Hakeem, Shaq, Malone, Barkley... Pippen was never on this level and it's a disgusting lie to say he was

Not quite. To Ewing's credit, he has a higher ts% & per, but Pippen outclasses him in everything else. I don't know why you're confused, but the numbers are public information for everyone to check. Pippen wins in a complete landslide. Now with that in mind, you can confidently say Pippen was the best SF in the 90s. And also better than the #1 on Chicago's best comp. This makes him top tier & even greater.

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 11:31 PM

Real plus minus is the best measure of impact, so this is very keen data. Thank you. Pippen now leads Ewing in basically every major advanced stat & now in impact without the box score. Not a complete sweep but domination that is close enough. Will the Jordan fans address it? Can they come to terms with Pippen > The #1 on their greatest rival? Time will tell!

They are making Ewing look bad by having all these numbers be dug up and have Pippen ahead of him over and over again. :oldlol:

To Ewing's credit, he has a higher ts% & per

Here is my count.

Ewing is ahead in: PER, TS %, peak WS/48
Pippen is ahead in: prime WS/48, BPM, OBPM, DBPM, VORP, ORTG, prime WOWYR, WOWYR score, peak BPM, Augmented Plus-Minus, Real Adjusted Plus-Minus, Net on/off court

So that is 12-3 for Pippen and where Ewing is ahead it is close--but when Pippen is ahead it rarely is close. For instance, Ewing is 108th all-time in peak WS/48--Pippen is right behind him at 110th. In TS % Ewing is ahead by 1% (that is bad for a C--he should be ahead by more over a SF). PER it is 1.3 for Ewing. Where Pippen is ahead he crushes him. 6-4 in BPM, double the OBPM, 6.3-4.6 in VORP (it may not sound like much but that means Pippen is 37% higher), 112-108 in ORTG, Pippen is 105th in prime WOWYR while Ewing is 214, Pippen is 42nd in prime WOWYR score while Ewing is 85th, Pippen is 23rd all-time in Augmented Plus-Minus while Ewing is 56th, Pippen is 24th in peak BPM while Ewing is 125th.

3ball

09-09-2020, 11:42 PM

Not quite. To Ewing's credit, he has a higher ts% & per, but Pippen outclasses him in everything else. I don't know why you're confused, but the numbers are public information for everyone to check. Pippen wins in a complete landslide. Now with that in mind, you can confidently say Pippen was the best SF in the 90s. And also better than the #1 on Chicago's best comp. This makes him top tier & even greater.

Ewing leads:

PPG
OREB
DREB
RPG
BPG
FT %
FG%
TS
EFG
DREB%
OREB%
REB%
PER
WS/48
Usage
DRTG
2 pt %

Pippen leads:

APG
SPG
OBPM
DBPM
BPM
VORP
ORTG
Assist %
turnovers (lower)
3 pt %

But again, the most important stat is scoring, where Ewing destroyed Pippen and separated himself as a top tier player and rival of Malone, Robinson and MJ... never pippen's rival.. pippen had no rivals because he wasn't on the top level to be rivals with the top dogs

Roundball_Rock

09-09-2020, 11:45 PM

Take the L and move on. Pippen>Ewing using MJ stans' own metrics.

https://media.giphy.com/media/UddZtcUQtMgc8/giphy.gif

:hammertime:

3ball

09-09-2020, 11:58 PM

Take the L and move on. Pippen>Ewing using MJ stans' own metrics.

:hammertime:

Ewing's 5 year peak destroys pippen's, so who cares about your arbitrary 9-year peak that includes fossil Ewing

Ewing leads the vast majority of stat categories for their careers, as shown above

And Ewing was a vastly superior scorer that carried teams, which made him a rival of MJ, Isiah, and Malone, while Pippen was never on that level. This is common knowledge

insidious301

09-09-2020, 11:59 PM

Ewing leads:But again, the most important stat is scoring, where Ewing destroyed Pippen and separated himself as a top tier player and rival of Malone, Robinson and MJ... never pippen's rival.. pippen had no rivals because he wasn't on the top level to be rivals with the top dogs

Your count is wrong. Pippen also leads in WS/48. His column is also more impressive and I will explain why. Impact stats are not raw but they are adjusted for noise, and most of them account for possession. Your total game or the repertoire you have in your skillset. Bpm-rapm-apm are especially great because of the isolated effect. No other stats capture numbers away from team but these do. And with rapm, there are no numbers needed. It is without the box-score. Pure impact.

The only conclusion we arrive at is Pippen > Ewing & therefor the more important player. Another way to look at it is, with the stats you frequently used to prop Jordan, they also matchup perfectly for Pippen. The end result is alike.

Ewing is ahead in: PER, TS %, peak WS/48
Pippen is ahead in: prime WS/48, BPM, OBPM, DBPM, VORP, ORTG, prime WOWYR, WOWYR score, peak BPM, Augmented Plus-Minus, Real Adjusted Plus-Minus, Net on/off court

And here is the correct count.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 12:07 AM

the most important stat is scoring, where Ewing destroyed Pippen

That is a myth.

Prime scoring: Ewing 24.0, Pippen 20.0
Prime PO scoring: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 19.2

When you factor in assists and Pippen's ability to actually make his teammates better, Pippen was the more impactful offensive player (which the offensive RAPM and OBPM numbers back up).

Ewing was not a great player to run an offense through because of his poor passing skills (unlike Shaq or Hakeem). It is a big reason why, along with the lack of a 2nd star, why the Knicks' offenses consistently were below average or flat out bad. Pippen could anchor a good offense and a great defense; Ewing could anchor a below average/bad offense and a great defense.

Ewing was never higher than 4th in MVP and made only 1 all-NBA first team. MJ stans present him as if he was Malone, Robinson, or Barkley--he wasn't. He got a lot of hype but he played in New York, the largest market and home of the national sports media (plus the Knicks' local announcer was the marquee announcer on flagship NBC telecasts), so not surprising. More revisionism from MJ stans.

Ewing and Robinson were both centers so we can compare them prime vs. prime in all-NBA.

1990: Ewing 1st, Robinson 3rd (rookie year)
1991: Robinson 1st, Ewing 2nd
1992: Robinson 1st, Ewing 2nd
1993: Ewing 2nd, Robinson 3rd
1994: Robinson 2nd
1995: Robinson 1st
1996: Robinson 1st

Let's do the same with Pippen and Barkley for the same time frame.

1990: Barkley 1st
1991: Barkley 1st
1992: Both 2nd
1993: Barkley 1st, Pippen 3rd
1994: Pippen 1st, Barkley 2nd
1995: Pippen 1st, Barkley 2nd
1996: Pippen 1st, Barkley 3rd

Pippen surpassed Barkley by 94'--Ewing never surpassed Robinson for a sustained period. He was ahead of rookie Robinson but only once after that.

Impact stats are not raw but they are adjusted for noise, and most of them account for possession. Your total game or the repertoire you have in your skillset. Bpm-rapm-apm are especially great because of the isolated effect. No other stats capture numbers away from team but these do. And with rapm, there are no numbers needed. It is without the box-score. Pure impact.

Great points. The most important stat is the scoreboard: the goal is to score more than the other team. Anything a player can do to further that goal matters. Individual scoring is only a fraction of what a player does on the court.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 12:08 AM

Ewing's 5 year peak destroys pippen's, so who cares about your arbitrary 9-year peak that includes fossil Ewing

Ewing leads the vast majority of stat categories for their careers, as shown above

And Ewing was a vastly superior scorer that carried teams, which made him a rival of MJ, Isiah, and Malone, while Pippen was never on that level. This is common knowledge

What? There is nothing arbitrary about a 9 year prime. Afterall those are the years that actually matter.

Shooter

09-10-2020, 12:10 AM

Take the L and move on. Pippen>Ewing using MJ stans' own metrics.

https://media.giphy.com/media/UddZtcUQtMgc8/giphy.gif

:hammertime:

:hammertime: :djparty

3ball

09-10-2020, 12:13 AM

Your count is wrong. Pippen also leads in WS/48. His column is also more impressive and I will explain why. Impact stats are not raw but they are adjusted for noise, and most of them account for possession. Your total game or the repertoire you have in your skillset. Bpm-rapm-apm are especially great because of the isolated effect. No other stats capture numbers away from team but these do. And with rapm, there are no numbers needed. It is without the box-score. Pure impact.

The only conclusion we arrive at is Pippen > Ewing & therefor the more important player. Another way to look at it is, with the stats you frequently used to prop Jordan, they also matchup perfectly for Pippen. The end result is alike.

And here is the correct count.

No, my comprehensive list was for their careers.

I could care 2 bird shits about your arbitrary 9 year prime that includes fossil Ewing - Ewing's 5 year peak destroys Pippen's, or their 1 year peak..

aka Ewing averaged 29/11/3 with 4.0 blocks in 90'.. or 26/11/3 with 3.0 blocks from 90-94".. and far superior playoff peaks as well.. it's a dumb comparison.

Ultimately, Pippen's scoring deficit put him on a lower level of player entirely - a 2nd option, aka a "pippen", while Ewing was an alpha dog 1st option.. Ewing was on the top tier with MJ, Malone and Robinson - Pippen never was and this is common knowledge

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 12:17 AM

What? There is nothing arbitrary about a 9 year prime. Afterall those are the years that actually matter.

I used the time frame they were all-NBA type players. 1-9ball is trying to use their washed up years.

5 year primes? That is harder to do because it is harder to draw the line. For instance, is it 1992-1996 or 1993-1997 for Pippen? Realistically, we would go 92', 94', 95', 96', 97' but that isn't how BBR software works.

A notable thing about Ewing is his best stats came on bad or average teams. Pippen had his stats on contenders. It is easier to rack up stats on a 39 win team than it is on a 67 win team. Ewing benefited from his situation statistically yet still loses to Pippen over and over.

Let's tally their 5 highest years in certain metrics.

Pippen BPM: 7.7, 7.5, 6.3, 6.1, 5.8
Ewing BPM: 5.5, 5.2, 4.9, 4.5, 4.2

Pippen has 6 seasons better than Ewing's best in BPM.

Pippen VORP: 7.2, 6.8, 6.4, 6.1, 5.9
Ewing VORP: 6.0, 5.5, 5.5, 4.9, 4.8

As you can see, Pippen's four best seasons are higher than Ewing's best and Pippen's 5th best is 0.1 behind Ewing's best. Ewing's second best season would be 7th for Pippen.

5 year augmented plus minus:

Pippen: 5.3 (23rd all-time)
Ewing: 4.3 (56th all-time)

Plus/minus is where Pippen's all-around game and intangibles shows up. People forget stuff like Pippen being an elite rebounder for a perimeter player. He averaged 9 RPG at his peak, which would be 10 RPG in today's pace--as a SF.

Peak BPM:

Pippen: 24th
Ewing: 125th

In CORP (championships added over replacement player), Pippen had 6-7 MVP level seasons while Ewing had 3-4.

Ewing didn't score enough to offset his lack of passing, creation ability. He needed to learn to playmake (MJ himself mocked him by saying he would never win a chip until he learned to pass out a double team) or needed to score more. Doing what he did led to bad offenses coupled with elite defenses and it is hard to win when your team is bad half the time on the court.

Edit: forgot to add if we compare their numbers as number 1 options the gap grows even more in advanced stats and in scoring it closes to 22.2 versus 24.0 in the RS and Pippen pulls ahead 22.8 to 22.5 in the PO. Granted we don't have a big sample for Pippen in the PO but we have 141 RS games of prime Pippen as a number 1 option.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 12:33 AM

I used the time frame they were all-NBA type players. 1-9ball is trying to use their washed up years.

5 year primes? That is harder to do because it is harder to draw the line. For instance, is it 1992-1996 or 1993-1997 for Pippen? Realistically, we would go 92', 94', 95', 96', 97' but that isn't how BBR software works.

A notable thing about Ewing is his best stats came on bad or average teams. Pippen had his stats on contenders. It is easier to rack up stats on a 39 win team than it is on a 67 win team. Ewing benefited from his situation statistically yet still loses to Pippen over and over.

Let's tally their 5 highest years in certain metrics.

Pippen BPM: 7.7, 7.5, 6.3, 6.1, 5.8
Ewing BPM: 5.5, 5.2, 4.9, 4.5, 4.2

Pippen has 6 seasons better than Ewing's best in BPM.

Pippen VORP: 7.2, 6.8, 6.4, 6.1, 5.9
Ewing VORP: 6.0, 5.5, 5.5, 4.9, 4.8

As you can see, Pippen's four best seasons are higher than Ewing's best and Pippen's 5th best is 0.1 behind Ewing's best. Ewing's second best season would be 7th for Pippen.

5 year augmented plus minus:

Pippen: 5.3 (23rd all-time)
Ewing: 4.3 (56th all-time)

Plus/minus is where Pippen's all-around game and intangibles shows up. People forget stuff like Pippen being an elite rebounder for a perimeter player. He averaged 9 RPG at his peak, which would be 10 RPG in today's pace--as a SF.

Peak BPM:

Pippen: 24th
Ewing: 125th

In CORP (championships added over replacement player), Pippen had 6-7 MVP level seasons while Ewing had 3-4.

Ewing didn't score enough to offset his lack of passing, creation ability. He needed to learn to playmake (MJ himself mocked him by saying he would never win a chip until he learned to pass out a double team) or needed to score more. Doing what he did led to bad offenses coupled with elite defenses and it is hard to win when your team is bad half the time on the court.

Good stuff, Roundball. So with all the goalpost shifting, their narrative is still shot. I actually expected better. Well not really. But hey don't get me wrong, Ewing was great. I liked him as a player and saw most of his prime. The thing is though there were better centers and perimeter players then. Pippen was one of them. The only pushback you will hear is from the same fanbase, but they are faint. Not much wiggle room when you're arguing against logic and data.

No, my comprehensive list was for their careers.

That's silly way to debate. Using prime years or when they were at their best draws a cleaner picture. And we aren't talking peanuts here, a 9 year sample is pretty massive. From that timeline, Pippen outdueled Ewing in most advanced stat categories. And even better, the ones that measure individual from team. So the endgame here is Pippen actually being a #1 who was better than his opponents #1. That is quite a luxury Jordan had.

I could care 2 bird shits about your arbitrary 9 year prime that includes fossil Ewing - Ewing's 5 year peak destroys Pippen's, or their 1 year peak..

I didn't ask about your feelings. You're too emotionally invested if anything. Again, more data entry is prone to less noise, so that means 9 years > your smaller sample. This is basic math.

3ball

09-10-2020, 12:41 AM

ClipperRevival

09-10-2020, 12:51 AM

Heat, Bulls had similar results in win totals in the previous four years.

1990-1993 Bulls: 55, 61, 67, 57
2011-2014 Heat: 58, 57*, 66, 54

Yet...

1994 Bulls: 55
2015 Heat: 37

So 55, 61, 67, 57, 55 for the Bulls from 1990-1994 and 58, 57, 66, 54--and 37 for the Heat from 2011-2015.

Can anyone identify the difference here? There is one number here that is not like the other numbers.

*Over 82 games.

I try to stay away from the daily MJ/Bron war going on in here but I couldn't avoid such low hanging fruit.

You want the difference bro?

Well, MJ left his team as 3 peat champs so they had the chemistry and confidence of champs heading into 1993-94. Plus, you had Pip and Grant entering their absolute peaks. Not to mention, they added Kukoc, by far the best Euro player on the leagueat the time, along with Kerr.

Bron, on the flip side, got facialed in historic fashion in the finals and left a sinking ship. And by 2015, Wade was clearly past his prime.

And please, I could care less about some stat you might throw at me without proper context. I am always weary of people who depend so heavily on stats.

PEACE!

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 12:56 AM

Clipper, that makes no sense. The Heat were 2x champs. No confidence :lol ? Yeah, yeah. MJ stans will bring up stats all the time but then don't want to see their own stats applied outside of their deceptive agenda, like the OP.

Basically the one "argument" for Ewing is that he scored 4.0 more in the RS and 3.3 more PPG in the PO (with Pippen scoring 1.8 less as a first option in the RS and 0.3 more in the PO). That's pretty pathetic. That's it?

Another 1-9ball lie was Pippen had no rival. He did. His name was Grant Hill, a Pippen-like player without the elite defense. Before that he didn't have a direct comp at SF but the New York Times in 1991 and Sports Illustrated compared him to another two-way elite player. That player's name? michael Jordan.

The data is for the entire time Ewing was all-NBA level. 97' he was second team all-NBA. That was his highest since 93', since he didn't make All-NBA from 1994-1996. MJ stans raved about 94' Ewing who All-NBA voters thought was fourth best at his position so why exclude 97' when he was behind only Hakeem?

insidious301

09-10-2020, 01:03 AM

Yes roundball, we know that pippen has a non-horrific BPM (the stockton stat, aka steals weighted stat), so you keep harping on it

But what else does he have?.. VORP?.. yes, we already know he has good value above replacement, another meaningless stat.. And what else.. OBPM?.. APG, SPG, ORTG?. thres?. that's it..

otherwise, it's all Ewing - PPG, DREB, OREB, RPG, BPG, TS, FG, EFG, FT%, 2-pt %, PER, WS/48, DRTG, reg season peak, playoff peak, H2H, 1st option (pippen is 2nd option)

You make a habit of being wrong. Steals are also weighted in vorp, winshares & ws48. They're also stats you have used to prop up Jordan/Ewing. And once again, Pippen has Ewing beat in WS/48 not the other way around. So that isn't in his favor just like BPM-RAPM-APM-VORP-ORTG-WS-WS48 aren't either.

3ball

09-10-2020, 01:16 AM

Pippen was never on MJ's level. He was never on the top tier level of MJ, Robinson, Shaq, Malone, Hakeem, Barkley, and yes - Ewing.. Pippen was never on this tier and was always considered a secondary player, aka 2nd option, while they were all alpha dog 1st options..

Pippen's inherent secondary nature was revealed and played out like an experiment in the 94' playoffs - Pippen predictably bricked and imploded.. it's funny because mj elevated pippen TO a second option - he would never be a clear-cut #2 or a champion #2 anywhere else..

people forget that MJ helped Pippen improve on offense more than another player would - Pippen would be a slightly WORSE offensive player if he came up alongside someone other than MJ, and pippen's offense was already shaky alongside MJ many nights

highwhey

09-10-2020, 01:18 AM

everyone knows the drill:

no pip, no chip

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 01:50 AM

You make a habit of being wrong. Steals are also weighted in vorp, winshares & ws48. They're also stats you have used to prop up Jordan/Ewing. And once again, Pippen has Ewing beat in WS/48 not the other way around. So that isn't in his favor just like BPM-RAPM-APM-VORP-ORTG-WS-WS48 aren't either.

These guys are shameless. Several of these stats are stats they will be quick to invoke when convenient.

Pippen crushes Ewing across the board. This is backed up by their AT rankings. You can argue all this is wrong but don't cherry pick stats for the OP or to argue Pippen sucked or that Pippen shouldn't have been MVP etc. and then cut and run when the same stats go the other way.

The steals excuse is laughable. Blocks are weighted as well in these stats and blocks favor Ewing, the center.

This guy is a fool. Pippen was a contributor in every category but not super elite outside of steals. But when you are good or great in every category it adds up in advanced stats. That doesn't even get to defense which is hard to quantify.

Pippen was voted the best all-around player in 1995 by coaches and GM's, etc. There is a reason for that...

insidious301

09-10-2020, 01:50 AM

We actually posted at the same time, Roundball. That's weird although great minds think alike.

Pippen was never on MJ's level. He was never on the top tier level of MJ, Robinson, Malone, and yes - Ewing.. Pippen was never on this tier and was always considered a secondary player, aka 2nd option, while they were all alpha dog 1st options..

Pippen's inherent secondary nature was revealed and played out like an experiment in the 94' playoffs - Pippen predictably bricked and imploded.. it's funny because mj elevated pippen TO a second option - he would never be a clear-cut #2 or a champion #2 anywhere else..

Pippen had better prime stats than Ewing. So not only was Pippen on the level of Ewing, but he had more impact too. What that also tells us is Chicago's #2 was actually a #1, and outplayed the #1 on the Bulls' best rival. Pippen year after year ranked top 10 in most impact stats, so him being a superstar isn't anything new. There would be years like 1994 & even better if he had a team built around his strengths. Not around his defense either, but on the offensive end. For that theory, his OBPM, which was better than Ewing's, is a good rule of thumb.

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 01:56 AM

Pippen had better prime stats than Ewing.

In what world? Ewing peaked at 29/11 w/ 4 blocks a game and averaged 25/11 w/ 2.7 bpg from '90-'97. Ewing outplayed & beat peak Pippen in '94, despite Grant & Armstrong being the 3rd & 4th highest scorers on 60+%TS efficiency.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 02:07 AM

We actually posted at the same time, Roundball. That's weird although great minds think alike.

Pippen had better prime stats than Ewing. So not only was Pippen on the level of Ewing, but he had more impact too. What that also tells us is Chicago's #2 was actually a #1, and outplayed the #1 on the Bulls' best rival. Pippen year after year ranked top 10 in most impact stats, so him being a superstar isn't anything new. There would be years like 1994 & even better if he had a team built around his strengths. Not around his defense either, but on the offensive end. For that theory, his OBPM, which was better than Ewing's, is a good rule of thumb.

Great points (especially the one about great minds :cheers: ).

Pippen never had a team built around his strengths and weaknesses. He inherited MJ's team and then MJ returned the second year. Ewing had teams tailor made for him and they spotlight what he required. The only way the Knicks could contend is with a #1 or #2 defense. They required that because their offenses were consistently bad. So the Knicks had to stack up on hard nosed defenders all over the roster but lacked scoring punch or playmaking as the price. Starks, Oakley, Mason being the headliners. That gave them elite defenses but came at the expense of offense. When the Knicks needed baskets in close playoff games, often they didn't get them. Hence so many losses in so many close series.

Pippen would easier to build around because of his versatility. He could anchor a good offense and an elite defense. He could score more, playmake less or vice versa. Pippen could fit with a wide range if rosters. Ewing couldn't. What Pippen needed was a second option (Grant was a dunker and scored on outbacks). The Bulls
signed Harper to be that but he flopped as a scorer in Chicago. If they had a full prime they could have gotten him someone. Krause should have traded for Hornacek in 94' at the deadline. Bulls go to the finals and probably win a chip then.

goozeman

09-10-2020, 02:07 AM

Moses Malone finished fourth in BPM on the Sixers in 1983, and he led the team in PER, WS/48 and won an MVP. What is the point with this silly comparison? Using BPM to somehow argue Pippen > Ewing is just laughable. Look at the raw numbers, eye test, and literally anything else. Ewing blows Pippen out of the water. BPM obviously has issues rating center production properly. By your logic, Pippen is better than Hakeem when he was dropping 30+ in the finals. Drexler almost doubled Hakeem's OBPM that championship year, but nobody in their right mind believes Drexler > Hakeem that year. Hakeem was the fricking reigning MVP, lol! So naturally you don't see threads like "Drexer > Hakeem in 1995 cuz BPM herp derp...." :oldlol: :hammerhead: :facepalm

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 02:17 AM

Ewing's much more valuable to a team in the 90s, idiot acts as if Scottie could have done more than Ewing with the tools that he had. Wow. So Pippen having two all-star teammates wasn't enough, he needed Jeff Hornacek? Who was Ewing's 2nd best player? Oakley? Or Starks? An undrafted player who made 1 all-star team? Ewing led a team to the Finals with his 2nd option averaging 14.6 ppg on 38.1% for the Playoffs. The fact he did that with below-average help on offense is nothing short of spectacular, & was really close to beating Hakeem as well, but obviously Starks goes 2/18 w/ 0/11 from 3 in a 6-point loss in Game 7.

Moses Malone finished fourth in BPM on the Sixers in 1983, and he led the team in PER, WS/48 and won an MVP. What is the point with this silly comparison? Using BPM to somehow argue Pippen > Ewing is just laughable. Look at the raw numbers, eye test, and literally anything else. Ewing blows Pippen out of the water. BPM obviously has issues rating center production properly. By your logic, Pippen is better than Hakeem when he was dropping 30+ in the finals. Drexler almost doubled Hakeem's OBPM that championship year, but nobody in their right mind believes Drexler > Hakeem that year. Hakeem was the fricking reigning MVP, lol! So naturally you don't see threads like "Drexer > Hakeem in 1995 cuz BPM herp derp...." :oldlol: :hammerhead: :facepalm

Ewing was the anchor on both sides of the court and led his teams to many deep Playoff runs as the #1 guy. He was a better scorer & defensive player & beat/outplayed Pippen when both had their own teams & were in their primes, what else did he need to do in order to be better?

goozeman

09-10-2020, 02:29 AM

Ewing was the anchor on both sides of the court and led his teams to many deep Playoff runs as the #1 guy. He was a better scorer & defensive player & beat/outplayed Pippen when both had their own teams & were in their primes, what else did he need to do in order to be better?

Naw, man, you don't understand. Bobby Jones scoring 9ppg in 1983 was better than back-to-back league MVP and Finals MVP Moses Malone because BPM says so. :oldlol:

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 02:39 AM

Naw, man, you don't understand. Bobby Jones scoring 9ppg in 1983 was better than back-to-back league MVP and Finals MVP Moses Malone because BPM says so. :oldlol:

And they'll completely disregard Stockton having a higher BPM, VORP & PER than Pippen throughout his career. It's hilarious.

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 02:41 AM

Naw, man, you don't understand. Bobby Jones scoring 9ppg in 1983 was better than back-to-back league MVP and Finals MVP Moses Malone because BPM says so. :oldlol:

and per and ws/48 say parish was better than bird in the early 80s. every metric has these bad examples. once in awhile these examples reveal a mistake in popular opinion too. A lot of people in the media for good reason acted like klay was the 2nd or 3rd guy with gs but draymond was just more impactful in 16 and likely most of the kd years too. He was better in every one of those bball reference stats in 16 and the plus minus stuff too.

goozeman

09-10-2020, 02:58 AM

and per and ws/48 say parish was better than bird in the early 80s. every metric has these bad examples. once in awhile these examples reveal a mistake in popular opinion too. A lot of people in the media for good reason acted like klay was the 2nd or 3rd guy with gs but draymond was just more impactful in 16 and likely most of the kd years too. He was better in every one of those bball reference stats in 16 and the plus minus stuff too.

Gimme a break, man. You could make the legit case that Parish was equal or even better than Bird in 1981. His efficiency blew Bird's away on almost equal scoring, and Parish had all-time great defensive seasons during that era. That's nothing weird about that at all and you know it. You can't make any kind of excuse on the other hand for Bobby Jones having more value according to BPM than Moses Malone during an MVP season. It's a joke.

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 03:04 AM

Gimme a break, man. You could make the legit case that Parish was equal or even better than Bird in 1981. His efficiency blew Bird's away on almost equal scoring, and Parish had all-time great defensive seasons during that era. That's nothing weird about that at all and you know it. You can't make any kind of excuse on the other hand for Bobby Jones having more value according to BPM than Moses Malone during an MVP season. It's a joke.

well with bpm you can default to vorp, jones played like 25mpg and that matters. and no arguing parish over bird is pretty bad and you know it.

WhiteKyrie

09-10-2020, 03:06 AM

Career Rankings

PER:

Anthony Davis....3
Dwayne Wade......21
Kyrie Irving.....33
Kevin Love.......45
Chris Bosh.......62
Scottie Pippen...132
Horace Grant.....185

OBPM:

Anthony Davis....12
Kyrie Irving.....13
Dwayne Wade......25
Kevin Love.......29
Scottie Pippen...90
Chris Bosh.......102
Horace Grant.....107

WS/48:

Anthony Davis....13
Horace Grant.....55
Kevin Love.......57
Kyrie Irving.....68
Dwayne Wade......70
Chris Bosh.......76
Scottie Pippen...129

Ortg:

Horace Grant.....4 :biggums:
Anthony Davis....28
Kevin Love.......47
Kyrie Irving.....89
Chris Bosh.......107
Dwayne Wade......231
Scottie Pippen...NR top 250

Effective Field Goal Percentage:

Anthony Davis....86
Kyrie Irving.....99
Horace Grant.....206
Kevin Love.......225
Chris Bosh.......227
Scottie Pippen...244
Dwayne Wade......NR top 250

True Shooting:

Anthony Davis.....41
Kyrie Irving......84
Chris Bosh........89
Kevin Love........92
Dwayne Wade.......183
Dennis Rodman.....244 :rockon:
Scoottie Pippen...NR top 250 :facepalm
Horace Grant......NR top 250

BPM:

Anthony Davis.....12
Dwayne Wade.......22
Kyrie Irving......32
Scottie Pippen....35 :applause:
Kevin Love........48
Chris Bosh........134
Horace Grant......176

Notice that all the real stats that are actually measuring something tangible (PER, OBPM, Ortg, WS/48, eFG%, TS%, etc) actually correlate very closely with one another in rankings. They all say that Pippen was maybe a top-100 offensive player all-time. Pippen wasn't even a Chris Bosh level offensive talent. Also, Scottie Pippen's BPM ranking is wildly incongruous because it rewards defensive stars playing on great defensive teams. From BREF about the BPM 2.0 changes:

When basketball reference reworked the stat back in 2016, players like John Stockton (another Pippen-like two-way player) saw their career BPM double. And here is the kicker... Even with that bonus bump gifted to him and playing on the best defensive teams of all-time practically his entire career, Pippen wouldn't even be a top-three impact player compared to Lebron's teammates. All-time Pippen is just slightly better than Kevin Love.

In summation, in order for Lebron to be on the level of Jordan, he would need to win six titles and win six Finals MVP's with a Chris Bosh/Kevin Love level player as his second option.

Lebron fans...

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fl4Ki2ob CyAQS5WhFe%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1
Damn.

goozeman

09-10-2020, 03:42 AM

well with bpm you can default to vorp, jones played like 25mpg and that matters. and no arguing parish over bird is pretty bad and you know it.

Per 100

Parish........32ppg........16reb.......3ast....... 71ft%.......55fg%.......58ts%.......13Ortg.......9 6Drtg
Bird.......... 26ppg........13reb.......6ast.......86ft%.......48 fg%.......52ts%.......107Org.......99Dtg

Parish also had a higher OBPM, DBPM, and BPM that season, which negates your point totally, but let's just forget about that. The only reason Bird was better an any advanced stat (VORP) is because Parish only played 28mpg. Parish was dominant. He just gets forgotten because he has no personality and Bird's popularity overshadows the rest of the players on those Celtics teams. I don't see the similarity at all really to BPM rating Bobby Jones over Moses Malone during an MVP season.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 10:13 AM

gooseman=1-9ball? 1-9ball was called out the other day for his daily "MJ teammates/Pippen sucked" thread and was asked to post something different. It seems instead of heeding that he simply turned to an alt to post the same.

and per and ws/48 say parish was better than bird in the early 80s. every metric has these bad examples. once in awhile these examples reveal a mistake in popular opinion too. A lot of people in the media for good reason acted like klay was the 2nd or 3rd guy with gs but draymond was just more impactful in 16 and likely most of the kd years too. He was better in every one of those bball reference stats in 16 and the plus minus stuff too.

MJ stans want it both ways. They post stat after stat--look at the OP. Then when we look at 15 stats and Pippen crushes Ewing over and over again--suddenly stats don't matter. It is obvious they have no beliefs, just an agenda but then just admit it that and stop posting stats as if they mean anything to them when they cut and run whenever stats for MJ's teammates show up--even the same stats that they themselves cited. :lol

Re PER, it has a bias against playmakers/passers because of the turnover component so that helps explain Bird. It also explains why Ewing is slightly ahead of Pippen in PER.

You could make the legit case that Parish was equal or even better than Bird in 1981. His efficiency blew Bird's away on almost equal scoring, and Parish had all-time great defensive seasons during that era.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

WS/48 says Grant peaked at #3 and Kukoc #6 in the entire NBA. It also has Pippen as perennial top 10. Do MJ stains want to own WS/48? It makes MJ's teammates look great. Of course, MJ stains will just revert to their a la carte menu of cherry picking.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 10:29 AM

Ewing was the anchor on both sides of the court a

That is the point. :facepalm He sucked at anchoring on the offensive end of the floor. How dumb are you? He is supposed to get an award for anchoring garbage offenses? If he could anchor a top 10 offense he would have multiple rings.

That was too much to ask. His offenses were below average, sometimes not even top 20, every year when the Knicks were contenders (outside of being 12th of 27 in 92'--amazing feat!). #25 in 97' :oldlol: https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/1997.html. Damn, what anchoring!

These morons think 22-24 PPG is enough scoring to offset an inability to playmake or pass out of double teams. With his limitations, he needed to be scoring 30 to make it work (since he forced the team to construct offensively challenged but defensively dominant rosters).

This is another example of the hypocrisy of MJ stains. Ewing's team sucked on offense but they can't even admit it, despite daily telling us how bad MJ's teammates were on offense. The Bulls were top 10 in offense w/out MJ; the Knicks as contenders were never top 10 even with MJ.

Then there is the little fact Ewing spawned a theory that his teams were better without him, you know, like making the NBA finals without him.

I like how MJ stains credit Ewing for "leading a team to the finals." That is because MJ retired at his peak, at the last minute sabotaging the champs from replacing him with a NBA player. That would be like Duncan retiring at his peak right before the season, the Spurs being forced to sign a G-Leaguer to "replace" him, and the Suns making it. That somehow makes Nash better? :oldlol: We also never hear what happened in that finals: one of the WOAT finals performance. An absolute meltdown by Ewing.

Using BPM to somehow argue Pippen > Ewing is just laughable.

Lie after lie after lie from MJ stains. They are so dishonest they would lie to you if it was raining and say it wasn't. We used 16 stats (forgot CORP in my summary)--Pippen won over and over again. :oldlol:

Look at the raw numbers, eye test, and literally anything else.

1-9ball said this almost verbatim. Give it up: you need Ewing for your agenda and need to destroy Pippen for your agenda. The problem is the numbers and all-time consensus says Pippen>Ewing.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 11:02 AM

MJ stains throw a lot of BS and deception out there but to recap.

Ewing is ahead in: PER, TS %, peak WS/48
Pippen is ahead in: prime WS/48, BPM, OBPM, DBPM, VORP, ORTG, prime WOWYR, WOWYR score, peak BPM, Augmented Plus-Minus, Real Adjusted Plus-Minus, Net on/off court, CORP

So that is 13-3 for Pippen and where Ewing is ahead it is close--but when Pippen is ahead it rarely is close. The beat down got so bad several MJ stans suddenly said we shouldn't use stats--despite using stats 24/7.

Also note how MJ stains talk about Ewing or literally any 90's star except Pippen: they don't identify a single flaw. These guys are presented as flawless, perfect, etc. These aren't honest analyses. They can't talk the strengths and weaknesses, which all these players have. If they were flawless they would be GOAT candidates but we know a guy like Pippen is 20-30 AT and Ewing in the 35-40 or so range.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 11:14 AM

In what world? Ewing peaked at 29/11 w/ 4 blocks a game and averaged 25/11 w/ 2.7 bpg from '90-'97. Ewing outplayed & beat peak Pippen in '94, despite Grant & Armstrong being the 3rd & 4th highest scorers on 60+%TS efficiency.

The one where reality operates. Prime Pippen (91-98) vs Ewing (88-97) was broken down for everyone to see.

WS/48: Pippen .185, Ewing .172
BPM: Pippen 6.0, Ewing 4.0
OBPM: Pippen 3.9, Ewing 2.0
DBPM: Pippen 2.1, Ewing 2.0
PER: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 21.2
VORP: Pippen 45.9 (599 games), Ewing 44.7
VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Ewing 4.6
ORTG: Pippen 112, Ewing 108
TS %: Ewing 56%, Pippen 55%

7-2 in Pippen's favor. And if we include APM-RAPM, Pippen leads there too. So tell us what the impact argument is for Ewing, because I'm not seeing one.

Moses Malone finished fourth in BPM on the Sixers in 1983, and he led the team in PER, WS/48 and won an MVP. What is the point with this silly comparison? Using BPM to somehow argue Pippen > Ewing is just laughable. Look at the raw numbers, eye test, and literally anything else. Ewing blows Pippen out of the water. BPM obviously has issues rating center production properly. By your logic, Pippen is better than Hakeem when he was dropping 30+ in the finals. Drexler almost doubled Hakeem's OBPM that championship year, but nobody in their right mind believes Drexler > Hakeem that year. Hakeem was the fricking reigning MVP, lol! So naturally you don't see threads like "Drexer > Hakeem in 1995 cuz BPM herp derp...." :oldlol: :hammerhead: :facepalm

BPM is one of the best measures of impact, and in your OP you also used it. Along with ws/ws48/ortg to argue in favor of LeBron's teammates. So if you are being honest and objective what makes the use of these stats laughable? They're the same numbers lauded in your original argument. This is a huge error your part. You're basically telling ISH not to say what you mean nor mean what you say. How does that make any sense?

Still waiting for you to answer which one of LeBron's teammates were better than Prime Ewing. I know that question isn't comfortable, but you got to leave your safe space at some point.

warriorfan

09-10-2020, 11:22 AM

Tons of incel meltdowns in this thread.

:roll:

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 11:24 AM

BPM is one of the best measures of impact, and in your OP you also used it. Along with ws/ws48/ortg to argue in favor of LeBron's teammates. So if you are being honest and objective what makes the use of these stats laughable? They're the same numbers lauded in your original argument.

:roll: You can't make this stuff up, can you?

Still waiting for you to answer which one of LeBron's teammates were better than Prime Ewing. I know that question isn't comfortable, but you got to leave your safe space at some point.

:lol It is a simple question...

I will throw this out for MJ stans as well: identify a weakness in Ewing's game. Adults can discuss athletes or presidents or movies or whatever and identify pros and cons to each. Can these people? If Ewing was flawless, why was he ringless? According to MJ stans themselves, he lost multiple times to a one man team whose key teammates "played so badly" despite "anchoring" a great team himself. Isn't that on him, at least to some degree?

ArbitraryWater

09-10-2020, 11:28 AM

Well its a different era.

Teams are all loaded now.

Bron isn‘t out here facing teams with Starks, Majerle, Smits, etc as sidekick

like i said

Turbo Slayer

09-10-2020, 11:38 AM

:roll: You can't make this stuff up, can you?

:lol It is a simple question...

I will throw this out for MJ stans as well: identify a weakness in Ewing's game. Adults can discuss athletes or presidents or movies or whatever and identify pros and cons to each. Can these people? If Ewing was flawless, why was he ringless? According to MJ stans themselves, he lost multiple times to a one man team whose key teammates "played so badly" despite "anchoring" a great team himself. Isn't that on him, at least to some degree? As a Knicks fan, I can tell you one. He didn´t have good hands and he was occasionally turnover- prone.

WhiteKyrie

09-10-2020, 11:50 AM

like i said
Not really. Only Miami, Cleveland and Golden State were super teams. 3 legitimate, in prime perennial All Star caliber players, or franchise type guys. In later stages, 4 when KD joined the Warriors.

Two of those teams mind you are LeBron teams. And both teams with stacked all star talent went up against a depleted bum eastern conference.

And all of them, especially Golden State was a reaction and continuation of LeBron needing to form super teams to finally win.

So LeBron can effectively blame himself for all of it, including the team that kept him from winning 3 Finals.

He formed those teams to win as easily as possible. The rest of the contenders or elite teams was two star teams.

Boston and the Spurs were all old, well past their primes and formed organically.

And to be honest, a two star team in Kobe with sidekick Gasol, and some very quality role players eventually beat both those squads.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 11:55 AM

As a Knicks fan, I can tell you one. He didn´t have good hands and he was occasionally turnover- prone.

Yup, and he wasn't a great passer like his contemporaries like Hakeem and Shaq. He could score but his prime average was 24.0 and his prime PO average was 22.5. That is good but not super elite scoring. He did peak at 29 PPG--but that was on a 45 win team--and he had a 27 PPG year but again, on a 39 win team. When the Knicks were good he wasn't putting up those kind of numbers, and he is remembered for those 1992-1997 Knicks teams that were contenders (except in 96' when they had a down year). He was 23.6 PPG in the RS from 1992-1997 and 22.4 PPG in the PO.

But you aren't here with an agenda. The MJ stan agenda calls for them to present every 90's star as flawless--except Pippen, who was the WOAT but fooled the whole world for a decade when he played and in retirement.

Here is what Backpicks had to say about Ewing (so an expert without any agenda--he has Ewing 28th all-time, higher than most experts, so he is pro-Ewing):

The bottom line is this:

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

By "portability" he means how much a player's game translates to various teams and roster contexts. He values players whose games fit in more contexts, which makes sense. If you are drafting from scratch and building a franchise around a player you don't know what the rest of the roster will be. That was my point earlier. Pippen's diverse skill set and all-around game allows him to fit on any team with a range of "casts" around him. Ewing's record shows the teams needed a very specific type of "cast" around him--and the cost of that was having a lack of scoring or playmaking on the roster. If Ewing could score 30 PPG it would have worked but not when he was scoring 22.5 in the playoffs and the team had no other scorer and no strong creator after Jackson left for Indiana.

Ewing was never a good passer, capable of hitting strong-side cutters but otherwise lacking vision; he sometimes forced double-teamed shots in lieu of hitting open teammates. And occasionally, he would just make the wrong pass when doubled:

He also says Ewing was not a good offensive rebounder.

While he scooped some offensive boards in that game, he was never strong in that department (outside of 1988). From ’88-97, Ewing typically fell between the 34th and 42nd percentile in offensive rebounding rate among bigs

Generally, though, he is pro-Ewing as I noted earlier. You can read the full profile at https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/. He lauds Ewing's defense, his defensive rebounding, and his peak scoring.

As a comp, here is his bottom line on Pippen (who he has 25th all-time now, 23rd when he did the write up but KD and Curry moved past since then):

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

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

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

Turbo Slayer

09-10-2020, 12:03 PM

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 12:16 PM

Look at 2020 PER rankings at this website. http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinger/statistics

Is Towns better than LeBron?

Is Hassan Whiteside better than Nikola Jokic?

Is Tony Bradley better than CP3?

PER isn´t perfect.

Yup. No stat is perfect. Every stat has outliers. PER in particular has a bias against ballhandlers because of the turnover component and it has a bias in favor of big men. Look at the PER leaders: 6 of the top 11 are big men. In BPM it is 4 of 11, VORP 3 of 11.

All stats have flaws and outliers but when we look at 16 stats and they are all telling us the same thing that is a different story...

Which list is closest to be an accurate list of the top 10 players?

1. James Harden • HOU 7.3
2. Giannis Antetokounmpo • MIL 6.6
3. LeBron James • LAL 6.1
4. Damian Lillard • POR 5.9
5. Nikola Jokić • DEN 5.5
6. Anthony Davis • LAL 5.4
7. Luka Dončić • DAL 5.4
8. Kawhi Leonard • LAC 5.1
9. Jimmy Butler • MIA 3.7
10. Chris Paul • OKC 3

1. Giannis Antetokounmpo • MIL 11.5
2. James Harden • HOU 9.6
3. Kawhi Leonard • LAC 8.9
4. Luka Dončić • DAL 8.4
5. LeBron James • LAL 8.4
6. Anthony Davis • LAL 8.0
7. Karl-Anthony Towns • MIN 7.8
8. Damian Lillard • POR 7.5
9. Nikola Jokić • DEN 7.4
10. Jimmy Butler • MIA 5.4

1. Giannis Antetokounmpo • MIL 31.9
2. James Harden • HOU 29.1
3. Luka Dončić • DAL 27.6
4. Anthony Davis • LAL 27.4
5. Damian Lillard • POR 26.9
6. Kawhi Leonard • LAC 26.9
7. Karl-Anthony Towns • MIN 26.5
8. Joel Embiid • PHI 25.8
9. LeBron James • LAL 25.5
10. Hassan Whiteside • POR 25.0

To me the middle one is the most accurate (BPM). It has the top 6 players right (not necessarily the order but the right players) and the only outlier in the top 10 is KAT.

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 01:57 PM

That is the point. :facepalm He sucked at anchoring on the offensive end of the floor. How dumb are you? He is supposed to get an award for anchoring garbage offenses? If he could anchor a top 10 offense he would have multiple rings.

That was too much to ask. His offenses were below average, sometimes not even top 20, every year when the Knicks were contenders (outside of being 12th of 27 in 92'--amazing feat!). #25 in 97' :oldlol: https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/1997.html. Damn, what anchoring!

These morons think 22-24 PPG is enough scoring to offset an inability to playmake or pass out of double teams. With his limitations, he needed to be scoring 30 to make it work (since he forced the team to construct offensively challenged but defensively dominant rosters).

This is another example of the hypocrisy of MJ stains. Ewing's team sucked on offense but they can't even admit it, despite daily telling us how bad MJ's teammates were on offense. The Bulls were top 10 in offense w/out MJ; the Knicks as contenders were never top 10 even with MJ.

Then there is the little fact Ewing spawned a theory that his teams were better without him, you know, like making the NBA finals without him.

I like how MJ stains credit Ewing for "leading a team to the finals." That is because MJ retired at his peak, at the last minute sabotaging the champs from replacing him with a NBA player. That would be like Duncan retiring at his peak right before the season, the Spurs being forced to sign a G-Leaguer to "replace" him, and the Suns making it. That somehow makes Nash better? :oldlol: We also never hear what happened in that finals: one of the WOAT finals performance. An absolute meltdown by Ewing.

Lie after lie after lie from MJ stains. They are so dishonest they would lie to you if it was raining and say it wasn't. We used 16 stats (forgot CORP in my summary)--Pippen won over and over again. :oldlol:

1-9ball said this almost verbatim. Give it up: you need Ewing for your agenda and need to destroy Pippen for your agenda. The problem is the numbers and all-time consensus says Pippen>Ewing.

How do you anchor an elite offense with mediocre offensive players around you? Look at the Hakeem teams in the 90s, plenty of them were average/not elite. The '94 team was just 15th in ORTG w/ a 105.9 ORTG, the Knicks were #16 at 105.7, the Bulls had a 106.1 ORTG. So much for Pippen leading an "elite" offense, .4 higher ORTG than the terrible Ewing Knicks with Starks missing 23 games. Knicks also had the 2nd highest SRS in the league compared to the '94 Bulls being 11th. All this talk about Pippen being such an elite offensive player, but then he goes up against the Knicks and loses with Grant & Armstrong combining for 33.4 ppg on over 60%TS. Starks was the 5th highest scorer in the series at 14.7 ppg on 55%TS, somehow the Knicks still win. Guess being the better 2-way player helps Ewing elevate a worse offensive supporting cast to a win when it matters.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 02:19 PM

How do you anchor an elite offense with mediocre offensive players around you? Look at the Hakeem teams in the 90s, plenty of them were average/not elite. The '94 team was just 15th in ORTG w/ a 105.9 ORTG, the Knicks were #16 at 105.7, the Bulls had a 106.1 ORTG. So much for Pippen leading an "elite" offense, .4 higher ORTG than the terrible Ewing Knicks with Starks missing 23 games. Knicks also had the 2nd highest SRS in the league compared to the '94 Bulls being 11th. All this talk about Pippen being such an elite offensive player, but then he goes up against the Knicks and loses with Grant & Armstrong combining for 33.4 ppg on over 60%TS. Starks was the 5th highest scorer in the series at 14.7 ppg on 55%TS, somehow the Knicks still win. Guess being the better 2-way player helps Ewing elevate a worse offensive supporting cast to a win when it matters.

Sounds like a lot of excuses, but not many facts. ORTG isn't the only stat Pippen beats Ewing in either. He rates better in BPM-OBPM-VORP-WS-WS48-APM-RAPM. Adjusted plus minus is especially key because it separates individual from team, therefor making your criticism weak.

WS/48: Pippen .185, Ewing .172
BPM: Pippen 6.0, Ewing 4.0
OBPM: Pippen 3.9, Ewing 2.0
DBPM: Pippen 2.1, Ewing 2.0
PER: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 21.2
VORP: Pippen 45.9, Ewing 44.7
VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Ewing 4.6
ORTG: Pippen 112, Ewing 108
TS %: Ewing 56%, Pippen 55%

And here is Oakley on Ewing's limitations. Going as far to say Ewing actually held NY back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPnEI6HBfwo#t=11m19s

Starting at 11:18

WhiteKyrie

09-10-2020, 02:20 PM

I mean everybody here on both sides of the fan camps need to be honest with themselves.

In fact I think the most impartial people to do this ranking would be hard-core Kobe fans.

But let’s rank the overall quality of superstars and sidekicks and each of these guy’s players supporting cast, if you were to draft them:

1) Anthony Davis (Top 25 All Time)
2) Dwyane Wade (Top 25 All Time)
3) Scottie Pippen (Top 40 All Time)
4) Kyrie Irving
5) Chris Bosh
6) Kevin Love
7) Dennis Rodman
8) Horace Grant

Sound about right?

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 02:23 PM

insidious301

09-10-2020, 02:31 PM

Not many facts? He used ORTG to say that Ewing sucked on offense and hurt his teams on that end, but then you look into it and the Knicks are .4 within Pippen's Bulls and .2 from the Rockets with Starks missing 23 games and had the 2nd highest SRS in the league.

Ok, now give me Stockton vs Pippen in advanced stats? Who's better? Are you going to nit-pick some random advanced metric no one cares about to disregard the PER, WS/48, BPM, OBPM, VORP, WS all being better?

The fact is that Ewing beat Pippen when both were #1 on their respective teams. All this talk about advanced stats & Pippen being Lebron on offense, doesn't change the fact that Ewing beat/outplayed him when it mattered. I could care less about the interview, all I know is that the Knicks win the championship if Starks isn't all-time bad in a 6-point loss.

I will give them to you, but first address Ewing vs Pippen. Those aren't random metrics either, they're commonly accepted and used by ISH and everywhere players are discussed or debated. Prime Pippen > Prime Ewing in nearly all relevant, advanced stat categories. Prime Pippen never had an adquate sidekick to replace Jordan either, so the team h2h record is apples and oranges. You should care about the interview, because it comes from the guy who knows Ewing personally. And played with him throughout the Bulls and Knicks rivalry. Ewing wasn't the guy to get them over the hump and Pippen outplayed him routinely. Just as the impact and advanced numbers intimate.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 02:38 PM

Sounds like a lot of excuses, but not many facts. ORTG isn't the only stat Pippen beats Ewing in either. He rates better in BPM-OBPM-VORP-WS-WS48-APM-RAPM. Adjusted plus minus is especially key because it separates individual from team, therefor making your criticism weak.

That is their MO.

Steps for MJ Stanning: Hyping 90's Star, Except WOAT Pippen

*Rip Pippen, cherry picking to make him look as bad as possible
*Throw in dashes of lying, like saying Pippen had no post game or the consensus was that Coleman was better
*When inevitably Pippen gets compared to another 90's star, defend that other star--be sure to not utter a single critique of the other star while continuing to hammer WOAT Pippen. When their flaws get brought up--make excuses.
*If you have to flip-flop on a dime, don't be ashamed. We are doing this for our Lord and Savior.
*Remember to keep the focus on Pippen. After all, you aren't here to discuss basketball. You are hear to destroy Pippen.

I wouldn't be shocked if these tools have a manual that basically says the above. :lol

Here is Oakley on Ewing's limitations. He goes as far to say Ewing actually held NY back.

Oakley is a bit harsh but there is a kernel of truth to it. The thing is every legend, even HOF players, will have major flaws outside of the GOAT candidates. That is why guys like Pippen and Ewing are where they are. If Ewing could pass and score like Hakeem or Shaq he would be top 10 all-time, not 37th in the most recent ranking. If Pippen could score like Jordan he would be Kobe with better defense and rebounding. He wasn't and he is top 20-30 all-time and not top 10 like Kobe. If Stockton could score he would arguably be better than Magic since he was the better defender. But he couldn't and Magic is borderline top 5 while Stockton is back there a few spots behind Pippen.

But the MJ stan narrative is Ewing, Miller, Malone, Stockton, Payton, Drexler, Kemp, Barkley, Hill, and every 90's star was flawless. So is any player from any other era compared to Pippen. George, Butler are recent examples of this.

That is why you can't have a real discussion with these guys. With honest MJ fans like Kuniva, Phoenix, Bronbron23 you can have a discussion and find that you agree with them on 90% of stuff. But when you have people not even willing to acknowledge basic facts or distorting Miller into=Curry and Ewing>LeBron for agenda purposes, what can you say to them?

Prime Pippen never had an adquate sidekick to replace Jordan either, so the team h2h record is apples and oranges.

Case in point. So the excuse is Ewing didn't have a sidekick but somehow that doesn't apply to Pippen. Starks was a better scorer than anyone the Bulls had in 94'. Grant scored his points on dunks and putbacks, along with a few mid-range jumpers. He wasn't a legit option to turn to. BJ was their de facto #2 option in 94' :oldlol: . What could have changed the game is if Kukoc had some experience but he was a rookie in 94' and not capable of that role, like he was in 95'. Kukoc's growth is a big reason why the Bulls' offense improved in 95' versus 94' but by then Grant was gone. If you had Pippen, Grant, second year level Kukoc on a team they win the East in 94'.

And played with him throughout the Bulls and Knicks rivalry.

He also played on the Bulls for a while and remained friends with some Bulls, including MJ, so he has further insight through those lens as well.

Ewing himself was on a podcast (Woj's I think) in the spring talking about the Bulls-Knicks rivalry. He said "Michael and Scottie were dominating on the wings" and said he was dominating in the post. The implication there is that he views Pippen, Jordan, himself as the superstars with guys like Grant, Oakley, Starks, Kukoc, BJ, Smith, et al. in tiers behind them.

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 02:50 PM

I will give them to you, but first address Ewing vs Pippen. Those aren't random metrics either, they're commonly accepted and used by ISH and everywhere players are discussed or debated. Prime Pippen > Prime Ewing in all relevant, advanced stat categories. Prime Pippen never had an adquate sidekick to replace Jordan either, so the team h2h record is apples and oranges. You should care about the interview, because it comes from the guy who knows Ewing personally. And played with him throughout the Bulls and Knicks rivalry. Ewing wasn't the guy to get them over the hump and Pippen outplayed him routinely. Just as the advanced numbers and impact intimate.

Ewing wasn't the guy to get them over the hump? He got them within a game of winning the title, how much more can you ask from those Knicks rosters? Do you really think anyone else(apart from Jordan) has a dynasty in his place with those exact teammates? Ewing outplayed Pippen when both were #1 options on their teams in the Playoffs. I don't put much stock into Pippen beating Ewing when he has the GOAT on his side and Ewing has mediocre offensive help.

I'm not disputing the advanced metrics, but I still don't see Ewing as a worse player than Pippen in the 90s, big men just were more valuable, unless we're talking about Jordan. Ewing did have higher peaks in PER, WS, OWS, DWS, WS/48, so it's not like Pippen completely dominates him here. I didn't understand you choosing 8 seasons for Pippen vs 10 for Ewing either. If you go from 89-90 to 96-97, Ewing has the higher PER & WS/48 and is a more efficient scorer at a high volume. Pippen has the BPM & VORP numbers in his favor but that's about it.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 02:59 PM

BTW catch how in 94' MJ's teammates suddenly go from scrubs to the best roster in the NBA (and back to pumpkins in 95'), per the MJ stain narrative? :lol Pippen sucked as a sidekick but Grant, a 1x all-star but never all-NBA, was a great sidekick. Pippen couldn't score but Grant was a great sidekick, even though the Bulls couldn't run offense for him because of his limitations. Grant=Starks, who was a 19 PPG scorer. Kukoc was great as a rookie playing 19 MPG in the PO--but sucked in his prime.

93' Bulls' key cast: Pippen, Grant, Armstrong, Cartwright, S. Williams, Paxson
94' Bulls' key cast: Grant, Armstrong, Cartwright, Kukoc, Kerr, S. Williams

94'=best roster in the league
93'=MJ and scrubs

You can't make this stuff up.

Moreover, they harp all the time on Pippen's alleged inability to score--he was the SF version of Rodman in their dishonest narrative. Yet somehow a team without a second scorer on it was a legit cast for a player who allegedly couldn't score? #Hypocrisy

That team was built around MJ. If MJ retired in 1990 the roster would be different by 1994: more scoring in the cast, less defense. They built the roster around the arguable GOAT scorer and focused on defense for obvious reasons.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 03:00 PM

That is their MO.

Steps for MJ Stanning: Hyping 90's Star, Except WOAT Pippen

*Rip Pippen, cherry picking to make him look as bad as possible
*Throw in dashes of lying, like saying Pippen had no post game or the consensus was that Coleman was better
*When inevitably Pippen gets compared to another 90's star, defend that other star--be sure to not utter a single critique of the other star while continuing to hammer WOAT Pippen. When their flaws get brought up--make excuses.
*If you have to flip-flop on a dime, don't be ashamed. We are doing this for our Lord and Savior.
*Remember to keep the focus on Pippen. After all, you aren't here to discuss basketball. You are hear to destroy Pippen.

I wouldn't be shocked if these tools have a manual that basically says the above. :lol

Not sure I've seen anything like it, Roundball. The amount of internal conflict and strive is baffling to me. On one end we are to accept Ewing being better in one or two cateogories. And overall better because his better team beat Pippen's. And on the other end, they want to ignore the handful of impact data and stats they use in other threads. The same ones that paint Pippen better. That and expel the other series' Chicago beat NY.

Can anyone explain that thought process? What is going on in their heads when putting forth this diarrhea in text format?

Oakley is a bit harsh but there is a kernel of truth to it. The thing is every legend, even HOF players, will have major flaws outside of the GOAT candidates. That is why guys like Pippen and Ewing are where they are. If Ewing could pass and score like Hakeem or Shaq he would be top 10 all-time, not 37th in the most recent ranking. If Pippen could score like Jordan he would be Kobe with better defense and rebounding. He wasn't and he is top 20-30 all-time and not top 10 like Kobe. If Stockton could score he would arguably be better than Magic since he was the better defender. But he couldn't and Magic is borderline top 5 while Stockton is back there a few spots behind Pippen.

He was harsh. And you are correct that the what-if example can be used on just about anyone. Good point. There's also a lot of truth in Oakley's statements, but that was also the league then. A bigmans game. Perimeter giants like Jordan, who impacted the game like a big? The exception and not the rule.

That is why you can't have a real discussion with these guys. With honest MJ fans like Kuniva, Phoenix, Bronbron23 you can have a discussion and find that you agree with them on 90% of stuff. But when you have people not even willing to acknowledge basic facts or distorting Miller into=Curry and Ewing>LeBron for agenda purposes, what can you say to them?

I'm beginning to wonder if you and Kuniva were right. Maybe these guys are really just Kobe fans, which would mean they never watched 90s ball. Their flip flopping would then make sense, because it would fall on ignorance.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 03:14 PM

Ewing wasn't the guy to get them over the hump? He got them within a game of winning the title, how much more can you ask from those Knicks rosters? Do you really think anyone else(apart from Jordan) has a dynasty in his place with those exact teammates? Ewing outplayed Pippen when both were #1 options on their teams in the Playoffs. I don't put much stock into Pippen beating Ewing when he has the GOAT on his side and Ewing has mediocre offensive help.

I'm not disputing the advanced metrics, but I still don't see Ewing as a worse player than Pippen in the 90s, big men just were more valuable, unless we're talking about Jordan. Ewing did have higher peaks in PER, WS, OWS, DWS, WS/48, so it's not like Pippen completely dominates him here. I didn't understand you choosing 8 seasons for Pippen vs 10 for Ewing either. If you go from 89-90 to 96-97, Ewing has the higher PER & WS/48 and is a more efficient scorer at a high volume. Pippen has the BPM & VORP numbers in his favor but that's about it.

Those are Oakley's words. I think he was a little too matter of fact, but he is right that Ewing's offense left a lot on the table. Do the Knicks get better with more offensive help? Fair question although I think keeping Mark Jackson and Xavier Mcdaniel in 1992 would've paid dividends. Lets get back to main debate here: Pippen vs Ewing. Forget that you dont "put much stock" into Pippen beating Ewing (and yet do so for Ewing when Pippen didn't have a legit #2). From 1991-98, Pippen beat Ewing in ORTG, BPM, APM, RAPM, WS, WS48, VORP. That is basically a clean sweep.

PPG, TS and PER are really the only things Ewing bests Pippen in. The years chosen are from when they were in their primes. Ewing began his during the late 80s while Pippen primed in the early 90s. Pretty simple. Not seeing how you can draw any other conclusion than Pip>Pat. I have seen you adopt these same metrics to suggest AD>LeBron so what gives? Where is the consistency on your part?

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 03:28 PM

And overall better because his better team beat Pippen's.

Think about their narratives:

*The 90's Bulls were not a super team--it was MJ and scrubs.
*The 90's Knicks were a great team and the Bulls' toughest comp in the 90's, had this great, great flawless legend in Ewing.
*Ewing>Pippen because the Bulls lost to the Knicks narrowly once.

Wait. So the Bulls were not a super team and got weaker by losing their best player without an opportunity to sign a replacement and they faced the "great" team that the Bulls narrowly beat with MJ in 92' and 93'. Yet the Bulls are expected to beat the Knicks? :wtf:

If you think the Bulls should have won, you have to believe the Bulls were such a super team they could lose MJ, not even replace him and still beat their top comp. Or you have to believe the Knicks sucked so much the Bulls' scrubs could beat the NY scrubs. Or a combination of both. What MJ stans say is wildly and laughably inconsistent.

We could cherry pick Ewing. Ewing was outplayed by Rik Smits twice in three years in the playoffs, for example.

That and expel the other series' Chicago beat NY.

Ah, yup: we are to ignore every series in Pippen's prime except one, which came against the #1 D. All the chips he won. All the other big series he was in. They don't count. Yet the same people here will hype one big series Kyrie had as a "sidekick" in 16' in other threads.

Can anyone explain that thought process? What is going on in their heads when putting forth this diarrhea in text format?

All they care about is the agenda at a given moment. Look at the OP. He suddenly flip flops on the stats he himself cited hours later.

I'm beginning to wonder if you and Kuniva were right. Maybe these guys are really just Kobe fans, which would mean they never watched 90s ball. Their flip flopping would then make sense, because it would fall on ignorance.

Some of them definitely are, IMKobe and tpols are good examples. I think some of the others are MJ fans who never watched him but looked up PPG and saw he had the highest and latched onto him, or hate LeBron and use MJ as a tool to diminish LeBron in their mind. It is obvious most of them never watched the 90's Bulls teams.

No one said Pippen was a one-way player when he played but these idiots take it as gospel that Pippen was Rodman or Ben Wallace. Everyone back then thought he was a great all-around player--the best in the league in the eyes of some or second when MJ was playing. I never heard anyone say "Pippen can rebound, pass, defend, lead but too bad he can't score at all!" I challenged MJ stans to produce one quote from a reputable source from Pippen's prime saying he was a one-way player. Weeks ago. Still nothing.

Fair question although I think keeping Mark Jackson and Xavier Mcdaniel in 1992 would've paid dividends

Jackson was key. The only times the Knicks had good or above average offenses were when Jackson was there--but that illustrates the point. They needed an elite playmaker to make their offense work because the rest of the offense was limited offensively in its scoring and playmaking capability. Ewing himself was part of the problem, directly via his poor passing and indirectly via the roster construction the Knicks needed to have a shot with him as their centerpiece. The Knicks forwards were Oakley, Mason, Smith. That's three power forwards. They basically didn't even have a real SF on their roster after 92'. :lol

goozeman

09-10-2020, 04:08 PM

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 04:12 PM

#Hypocrisy #Badfaith

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 04:18 PM

Even if you take Pippen's prime years (90 to 98), he doesn't rank in the top 50 in anything except BPM and OBPM (ranked 49). Like I said, you can use BPM to argue that Pippen is better than a lot of centers from 80's and 90's. Using the same comparison, BPM has Pippen over Hakeem when he was winning back-to-back championships, averaging 30+ in the Finals, and winning the MVP. :facepalm Likewise BPM ridiculously has Moses Malone as the fourth best player on the 1983 Sixers. :oldlol: Moses had a month long split that season where he flirted with 20pts/20reb average. Moses's 1983 campaign was one of the most dominant ever by center. So BPM clearly favors assist/steal metrics (perimeter skills), which is why according to BPM Chris Paul and Stockton are top 3 and and top 8 players all-time. Nobody believes that. Chris Paul can't even get out of the first round of the playoffs and Stockton never won anything despite playing his entire career with the second most accomplished scorer in NBA history. So much for that. Likewise, Pippen never did anything without Jordan. Nothing. His best season he got eliminated by Ewing's Knicks in the second round and the Bulls were 1-3 versus the Kinicks that year RS. Pippen arguably wasn't even the Bulls' best player in the playoffs that year. Horace Grant was practically tied with Pipen in PER, VORP and BPM and had a higher WS/48 and Game score.

bpm is trying to approximate something like rapm using only the box score so yea it favors perimeter guys because those guys impact the game more offensively. playmaking is as valuable as scoring for offense and centers dont usually do that very well (especially moses). according to rapm a lot of centers provide most of their value on defense. embiid is an example this year and and we know moses isnt the defensive center like most of the all time great centers in the top 10. even when shaq had a goat lvl season in 00, the big change from other years during the rs was not his stats but that he had a dpoy lvl year. Yea bpm isnt always too good with its evaluation but so are ws which over rewards efficiency so big man biased especially for guys who are exclusively finishers and per which over rewards volume scoring.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 04:29 PM

bpm is trying to approximate something like rapm using only the box score so yea it favors perimeter guys because those guys impact the game more offensively. playmaking is as valuable as scoring for offense and centers dont usually do that very well (especially moses). according to rapm a lot of centers provide most of their value on defense. embiid is an example this year and and we know moses isnt the defensive center like most of the all time great centers in the top 10. even when shaq had a goat lvl season in 00, the big change from other years during the rs was not his stats but that he had a dpoy lvl year. Yea bpm isnt always too good with its evaluation but so are ws which over rewards efficiency so big man biased especially for guys who are exclusively finishers and per which over rewards volume scoring.

The guy literally used BPM in his OP. :lol

The best stats are advanced plus-minus, and Pippen peaked at #2 behind David Robinson in 95'. (We have data starting in 94' and even more after 97'.)

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 04:31 PM

goozeman

09-10-2020, 04:34 PM

#Hypocrisy #Badfaith

It's not arguing in bad faith to show that you are using a broken comparative metric that positionally favors the modern game over classical big men. You don't seem to understand that BPM is geared to rate accurately today's players, not players from earlier generations. Pippen's game lends itself toward BPM more than somebody like Ewing, Hakeem, Moses Malone, etc. The reason BPM doesn't attempt to accurately rank those players is because those type of players don't exist in today's game. :basketball It has no need to. It only is concerned with accurately ranking perimeter skills. I'll put this in the plainest terms I can, using your metric of choice, BPM has Scottie Pippen from 90 to 98 (up until Pippen turned 32) as only slightly less valuable -- less than point difference -- than prime Shaq's career until the age of 32. Do you think prime Pippen = prime Shaq? That's more or less what you are arguing.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 04:38 PM

yea i like rapm the most but it's not really available anymore. gotta settle for pipm and rpm and for just box score stuff per 100 or per 75

What do you mean not available anymore?

The tough thing about RAPM is that starts in 97'. So that is the tail end of the prime of these 90's players that get discussed (and misses the peak for all of the 90's guys drafted originally in the 80's). AUPM is available since 94' and that gives us more. In that Pippen is ahead of Ewing every year we have data for both as elite players. Same with RAPM in 97'. Same with net on/off in 97'.

There really isn't much for Ewing over Pippen statistically. Hence the hypocrisy and spinning we are seeing.

3ball

09-10-2020, 04:45 PM

The guy literally used BPM in his OP. :lol

The best stats are advanced plus-minus, and Pippen peaked at #2 behind David Robinson in 95'. (We have data starting in 94' and even more after 97'.)

RAPM ranks Draymond highly but he isn't as good as Ewing either... bruh, the stats are just stats - WE still must interpret them and tell the story

MJ, Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Shaq, Drexler <---- they were all 1st option Finals guys and therefore considered the best of the 90"s.. 2nd options like Stockton or Pippen were considered a level below due to inferior scoring

Ultimately, elite 1st options are great shooters and/or iso players capable of nearly 30 ppg

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 04:48 PM

What do you mean not available anymore?

The tough thing about RAPM is that starts in 97'. So that is the tail end of the prime of these 90's players that get discussed (and misses the peak for all of the 90's guys drafted originally in the 80's). AUPM is available since 94' and that gives us more. In that Pippen is ahead of Ewing every year we have data for both as elite players. Same with RAPM in 97'. Same with net on/off in 97'.

There really isn't much for Ewing over Pippen statistically. Hence the hypocrisy and spinning we are seeing.

i mean for recent years and there's multiple sources with different results.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 04:51 PM

i mean for recent years and there's multiple sources with different results.

Hmmm...That is interesting. I use https://basketball-analytics.gitlab.io/rapm-data/. I suppose there will always be tweaks, Backpick's has his own BPM formula. The thing is, all these stats tell us the same thing regardless of minor tweaks. RAPM and AUPM have the same guys at the top, for instance.

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 04:53 PM

RAPM ranks Draymond highly but he isn't as good as Ewing either... bruh, the stats are just stats - WE still must interpret them and tell the story

MJ, Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Shaq, Drexler <---- they were all 1st option Finals guys and therefore considered the best of the 90"s.. 2nd options like Stockton or Pippen were considered a level below due to inferior scoring

Ultimately, elite 1st options are great shooters and/or iso players capable of nearly 30 ppg

you can say this and I dont disagree but I ask how did the warriors win 67 and 73 b2b years if draymond didnt have an enormous possibly superstar level impact. Klay is an elite shooter and valuable 2 way guy but for most not a great championship no2, none of the box score stuff is that high on him either. I know you wont say it's because curry had a goat peak. I also know you wont give credit to the depth because you think 4-8 on depth chart doesnt really matter.

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 04:55 PM

Hmmm...That is interesting. I use https://basketball-analytics.gitlab.io/rapm-data/. I suppose there will always be tweaks, Backpick's has his own BPM formula. The thing is, all these stats tell us the same thing regardless of minor tweaks. RAPM and AUPM have the same guys at the top, for instance.

there's also this which has different results. https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2013-rapm-non-prior-informed-updated-march-30. Could be different methodology or a different dataset

insidious301

09-10-2020, 04:55 PM

RAPM ranks Draymond highly but he isn't as good as Ewing either... bruh, the stats are just stats - WE still must interpret them and tell the story

MJ, Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Shaq, Drexler <---- they were all 1st option Finals guys and therefore considered the best of the 90"s.. 2nd options like Stockton or Pippen were considered a level below due to inferior scoring

Ultimately, elite 1st options are great shooters and/or iso players capable of nearly 30 ppg

That isn't true. We don't have real RAPM before 1997. Not only that, but Prime Ewing bests Draymond in BPM-ORTG-WS-WS48. The same stats used in the OP, which you cosigned btw.

What more needs to be said

I might retire because of this post

Look how much more offensive talent lebron played with, yet he never had #1 offenses.. leDumb ball

The same measures paint Pippen>Ewing, but now all of the sudden they're "just stats" now. Why cant you guys keep a straight criteria?

goozeman

09-10-2020, 04:56 PM

bpm is trying to approximate something like rapm using only the box score so yea it favors perimeter guys because those guys impact the game more offensively. playmaking is as valuable as scoring for offense and centers dont usually do that very well (especially moses). according to rapm a lot of centers provide most of their value on defense. embiid is an example this year and and we know moses isnt the defensive center like most of the all time great centers in the top 10. even when shaq had a goat lvl season in 00, the big change from other years during the rs was not his stats but that he had a dpoy lvl year. Yea bpm isnt always too good with its evaluation but so are ws which over rewards efficiency so big man biased especially for guys who are exclusively finishers and per which over rewards volume scoring.

Well, playmaking is not a valuable as scoring on offense, so there's that.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 04:59 PM

Well, playmaking is not a valuable as scoring on offense, so there's that.

Which of LeBron's teammates were better than prime Ewing?

goozeman

09-10-2020, 05:09 PM

Which of LeBron's teammates were better than prime Ewing?

Jordan never played with an Ewing-level player, bro. Not sure what the point is of the question.

3ball

09-10-2020, 05:09 PM

That isn't true. We don't have real RAPM before 1997. Not only that, but Prime Ewing bests Draymond in BPM-ORTG-WS-WS48. The same stats used in the OP, which you cosigned btw.

The same measures paint Pippen>Ewing, but now all of the sudden they're "just stats" now. Why cant you guys keep a straight criteria?

OP's stats show that Ewing beats Pippen in PER, WS/48, TS, DRTG - that's about half the metrics - so the advanced stats are close, while Ewing destroys Pippen in raw stats and scoring

Ewing was a 1st option Finals guy while Pippen was a 2nd option - 1st option Finals guys are the gold standard of the 90's (MJ, Hakeem, Ewing, Malone, Barkley, Drexler, Shaq, Robinson)

NBAGOAT

09-10-2020, 05:11 PM

Well, playmaking is not a valuable as scoring on offense, so there's that.

it's a lot closer than the general public opinion thinks and i'm not talking for just this era. bird's big advantage on offense over all those other 80's sfs is his playmaking even if some them are more efficient scorers and also why your bird parish being debatable take from earlier is laughable. Let me also throw in this argument. not every team needs more scoring. every team in history could use more passing however. It's a skill that doesnt have diminishing returns.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 05:22 PM

Yeah, because the Bulls' offense was so great without Pippen's playmaking. :lol

The Knicks offense sucked with or without Ewing. The only time they had a good offense was when they had Mark Jackson there to playmake.

What these fools don't grasp is playmakers like Pippen raise teammate efficiency and PPG and therefore overall team PPG. This is why they love Irving. He scores for himself but wrecks his teammates and therefore the team.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 05:22 PM

OP's stats show that Ewing beats Pippen in PER, WS/48, TS, DRTG - that's about half the metrics - so the advanced stats are close, while Ewing destroys Pippen in raw stats and scoring

Ewing was a 1st option Finals guy while Pippen was a 2nd option - 1st option Finals guys are the gold standard of the 90's (MJ, Hakeem, Ewing, Malone, Barkley, Drexler, Shaq, Robinson)

Incorrect. Here is real count, and Pippen wins handily.

WS/48: Pippen .185, Ewing .172
BPM: Pippen 6.0, Ewing 4.0
OBPM: Pippen 3.9, Ewing 2.0
DBPM: Pippen 2.1, Ewing 2.0
PER: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 21.2
VORP: Pippen 45.9 (599 games), Ewing 44.7
VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Ewing 4.6
ORTG: Pippen 112, Ewing 108
TS %: Ewing 56%, Pippen 55%

7-2 in Pippen's favor. And if we include APM-RAPM, Pippen leads there too. Since you already agreed with OP's post, and consider it superior offense, then we must conclude Pippen was a true #1. What that also tells us is Chicago's #2 was actually a #1, and outplayed the #1 on the Bulls' best rival. Pippen year after year ranked top 10 in most impact stats, so him being a superstar isn't anything new.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 05:24 PM

3ball

09-10-2020, 05:30 PM

Incorrect. Here is real count, and Pippen wins handily.

WS/48: Pippen .185, Ewing .172
BPM: Pippen 6.0, Ewing 4.0
OBPM: Pippen 3.9, Ewing 2.0
DBPM: Pippen 2.1, Ewing 2.0
PER: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 21.2
VORP: Pippen 45.9 (599 games), Ewing 44.7
VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Ewing 4.6
ORTG: Pippen 112, Ewing 108
TS %: Ewing 56%, Pippen 55%

7-2 in Pippen's favor. And if we include APM-RAPM, Pippen leads there too. Since you already agreed with OP's post, and consider it superior offense, then we must conclude Pippen was a true #1. What that also tells us is Chicago's #2 was actually a #1, and outplayed the #1 on the Bulls' best rival. Pippen year after year ranked top 10 in most impact stats, so him being a superstar isn't anything new.

OP's stats are career stats, and Ewing has higher career WS/48, PER, TS, and DRTG

But are we just counting up categories to see who leads more of them?... Because Ewing wins easily that way

Otherwise, Ewing leads the ones that matter - PPG, efficiency, and player efficiency rating... His elite scoring ability allowed him to reach the top level, aka 1st option Finals guys... Pippen can't reach this level because he's a weak scorer and 2nd option

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 05:35 PM

You have nothing. Join your son tpols in arguing Manu>Pippen in the other thread.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 05:41 PM

OP's stats are career stats, and Ewing has higher career WS/48, PER, TS, and DR

But are we just counting up categories to see who leads more of them?... Because Ewing wins easily that way

Otherwise, Ewing leads the ones that matter - PPG, efficiency, and player efficiency rating... His elite scoring ability allowed him to reach the top level, aka 1st option Finals guys... Pippen can't reach this level because he's a weak scorer and 2nd option

A players prime is worth more. So the updated stats are from both Ewing and Pippen's prime, and roughly 9 seasons of data. To recap Prime Pippen(91-98) had better: bpm, ortg, ws, ws48, vorp & ortg. Prime Ewing(88-97) has better: ts, per & ppg. What's more, we know all the stats Pippen beat Ewing in are cumulative & impact ones. Meaning they are unequivocally better measures. The facts are clearly not on your side.

Sarcastic

09-10-2020, 05:41 PM

Thanks. We were waiting for the Knicks/MJ Stockholm Syndrome contingent to make the obligatory appearance echoing the MJ stan TP. We get it: Pippen sucked (sucked in that ECF, right?), Grant sucked, it was all MJ (pathetic Knicks losing to a one man team :lol ), we should cherry pick their highest win total (55, 61, 67, 57, 55--cherry pick 67 as their "true" level!), etc.

Interesting argument: players got better w/out MJ (Pippen, Grant, BJ, Kerr, Myers, arguably S. Williams had career years--i.e., most of the rotation :oldlol: ) while everyone gets worse when LeBron leaves. This is an argument for MJ. :confusedshrug:

Let's use your cherry picking argument. 13' Heat: 66 wins, down to 37 in 15'. That's -29 wins. 92' Bulls 67 wins, 94' Bulls 55 wins. -12. So per your own metric, -29 vs. -12. Both coming from the same baseline: 67 and 66--and one team lands at 55 and the other 37. According to MJ stans and their satellite Knicks fans contingent, 67 to 55=worse team than the team going from 66 to 37.

Again and again we see their own metrics backfire--but they still won't own the logical conclusions of their own metrics.

:cheers:

Way to obfuscate with a bunch of nonsense. You refuted absolutely nothing that I said.

Just have a look at the numbers.
92 Pippen - 21/8/7 on .555 TS and 21.5 PER 93 Pippen - 19/8/6 on .510 TS and 19.2 PER
92 Grant - 14/10/3 on .618 TS and 20.6 PER 93 Grant - 13/10/3 on .534 TS and 17.5 PER

You also conveniently left out Toni Kukoc, who was All Rookie 2nd team, and was saving Pippen with game winners during the regular season and the playoffs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUTfJlezXPY&ab_channel=HoopsMadness

3ball

09-10-2020, 05:45 PM

You have nothing. Join your son tpols in arguing Manu>Pippen in the other thread.

You simply can't refute that Ewing leads the majority of stat categories, including the scoring and efficiency categories that are needed to be the top caliber, aka 1st option Finals guy..

In the 90's, the 1st option Finals guys were MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, Drexler, Robinson.. These were the top tier and Pippen wasn't included due to weaker scoring ability..

These are facts that sit comfortably with me... But you go ahead and hang on to a smaller number of stat categories, including stats that double with each additional steal.. :roll:

insidious301

09-10-2020, 05:49 PM

You simply can't refute that Ewing leads the majority of stat categories, including the scoring and efficiency categories that are needed to be the top caliber, aka 1st option Finals guy..

In the 90's, the 1st option Finals guys were MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, Drexler, Robinson.. These were the top tier and Pippen wasn't included due to weaker scoring ability..

These are facts that sit comfortably with me... But you go ahead and hang on to a smaller number of stat categories, including stats that double with each additional steal.. :roll:

Once again, steals are also weighted in vorp, winshares & ws48. They're also stats you agreed with OP on. And that were used to prop up Jordan/Ewing. What's more, Pippen has Ewing beat in WS/48 not the other way around. So that isn't in his favor just like BPM-RAPM-APM-VORP-ORTG-WS aren't either.

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 05:57 PM

Those are Oakley's words. I think he was a little too matter of fact, but he is right that Ewing's offense left a lot on the table. Do the Knicks get better with more offensive help? Fair question although I think keeping Mark Jackson and Xavier Mcdaniel in 1992 would've paid dividends. Lets get back to main debate here: Pippen vs Ewing. Forget that you dont "put much stock" into Pippen beating Ewing (and yet do so for Ewing when Pippen didn't have a legit #2). From 1991-98, Pippen beat Ewing in ORTG, BPM, APM, RAPM, WS, WS48, VORP. That is basically a clean sweep.

PPG, TS and PER are really the only things Ewing bests Pippen in. The years chosen are from when they were in their primes. Ewing began his during the late 80s while Pippen primed in the early 90s. Pretty simple. Not seeing how you can draw any other conclusion than Pip>Pat. I have seen you adopt these same metrics to suggest AD>LeBron so what gives? Where is the consistency on your part?

Why do you disregard Ewing's scoring and track record as the #1 guy exactly? I put my stock into the eye test as much as the stats. Ewing beating & outplaying Pippen when both were in their primes is bigger than just the advanced metrics.

Ewing outplayed Pippen in the Playoffs from '92-'96 & he didn't have the GOAT on his side.

'92
Ewing: 22/11/2 2.3 blk 48.8%FG/52.4%TS 15.9 GmSc
Pippen: 16/8/7/2/1 40.2%FG/49.3%TS 14.9 GmSc

'93

Ewing: 26/12/3/2/2 53%FG/56.9%TS 20.7 GmSc
Pippen: 23/7/4/2 51%FG/57.3%TS 15.7 GmSc

'94

Ewing: 23/12/3/1/2 53%FG/58.1%TS 18.7 GmSc
Pippen: 22/8/5/2/1 40.5%FG/51.3%TS 15.6 GmSc

'96

Ewing: 23/11 2.8 blk 46.7%FG/52.7%TS 15.0 GmSc
Pippen: 16/8/5/3 33%FG/41.6%TS 13.0 GmSc

How did Pippen outplay Ewing in these series exactly?

3ball

09-10-2020, 05:57 PM

Once again, steals are also weighted in vorp, winshares & ws48. They're also stats you agreed with OP on. And that were used to prop up Jordan/Ewing. What's more, Pippen has Ewing beat in WS/48 not the other way around. So that isn't in his favor just like BPM-RAPM-APM-VORP-ORTG-WS aren't either.

leads the majority of stat categories, including the scoring and efficiency categories that are needed to be the top caliber, aka 1st option Finals guy..

In the 90's, the 1st option Finals guys were MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, Drexler, Robinson.. These were the top tier and Pippen wasn't included due to weaker scoring ability..

These are facts that sit comfortably with me... But you go ahead and hang on to a smaller number of stat categories, including stats that double with each additional steal..

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 06:01 PM

leads the majority of stat categories, including the scoring and efficiency categories that are needed to be the top caliber, aka 1st option Finals guy..

In the 90's, the 1st option Finals guys were MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, Drexler, Robinson.. These were the top tier and Pippen wasn't included due to weaker scoring ability..

These are facts that sit comfortably with me... But you go ahead and hang on to a smaller number of stat categories, including stats that double with each additional steal..

Ewing outplayed Pippen in 4 out of 5 series in the 90s, including when both were #1 options, but somehow Pippen was the better player. Put Ewing with Jordan from '88, how many rings do they win?

insidious301

09-10-2020, 06:07 PM

Why do you disregard Ewing's scoring and track record as the #1 guy exactly? I put my stock into the eye test as much as the stats. Ewing beating & outplaying Pippen when both were in their primes is bigger than just the advanced metrics.

Ewing outplayed Pippen in the Playoffs from '92-'96 & he didn't have the GOAT on his side.

'92
Ewing: 22/11/2 2.3 blk 48.8%FG/52.4%TS 15.9 GmSc
Pippen: 16/8/7/2/1 40.2%FG/49.3%TS 14.9 GmSc

'93

Ewing: 26/12/3/2/2 53%FG/56.9%TS 20.7 GmSc
Pippen: 23/7/4/2 51%FG/57.3%TS 15.7 GmSc

'94

Ewing: 23/12/3/1/2 53%FG/58.1%TS 18.7 GmSc
Pippen: 22/8/5/2/1 40.5%FG/51.3%TS 15.6 GmSc

'96

Ewing: 23/11 2.8 blk 46.7%FG/52.7%TS 15.0 GmSc
Pippen: 16/8/5/3 33%FG/41.6%TS 13.0 GmSc

How did Pippen outplay Ewing in these series exactly?

I only "disregard" Ewing when the claims are that Pippen wasn't on his level or a #1 himself. Secondly, Ewing hardly outplayed Pippen in 93. And lastly, this is raw data. Post the impact stats that go along with the raw lines. We know that during their primes Pippen (91-98) beats Ewing (88-98) in WS, WS48, VORP, ORTG, BPM, OBPM and now APM/RAPM. So, all the major impact metrics.

leads the majority of stat categories, including the scoring and efficiency categories that are needed to be the top caliber, aka 1st option Finals guy..

In the 90's, the 1st option Finals guys were MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, Drexler, Robinson.. These were the top tier and Pippen wasn't included due to weaker scoring ability..

These are facts that sit comfortably with me... But you go ahead and hang on to a smaller number of stat categories, including stats that double with each additional steal..

With APM and RAPM, the tally is something like 11-2 in advanced data. All in Pippen's favor. And again for reference

WS/48: Pippen .185, Ewing .172
BPM: Pippen 6.0, Ewing 4.0
OBPM: Pippen 3.9, Ewing 2.0
DBPM: Pippen 2.1, Ewing 2.0
PER: Ewing 22.5, Pippen 21.2
VORP: Pippen 45.9 (599 games), Ewing 44.7
VORP per 82: Pippen 6.3, Ewing 4.6
ORTG: Pippen 112, Ewing 108
TS %: Ewing 56%, Pippen 55%

9 years worth of prime data. So not only was Pippen #1 caliber, like Ewing was, but even better based on the impact.

BigtimeNBAFan

09-10-2020, 06:10 PM

Jordan is better than Lebron, but I'll take Lebron's 2016 Finals against any of Jordan's. Yes Jordan had some incredible Finals, especially 93 where he averaged 41 points, but Lebron absolutely dominated a 73 win team. He led the series (not just his team) in Points, Assists, Rebounds, Steals and Blocks.

Has any other player in NBA history led the series in all 5 statistical categories? Then to have it bein the finals against a 73 win team in a 7 game series is unbelievable. Haters will downplay it, but not many more impressive playoff accomplishments. And spare me "Kyrie hit the big shot." Paxon, Kerr and others hit big shots throughout the Bulls title run.

ImKobe

09-10-2020, 06:10 PM

I only "disregard" Ewing when the claims are that Pippen wasn't on his level or a #1 himself. Secondly, Ewing hardly outplayed Pippen in 93. And lastly, this is raw data. Post the impact stats that go along with the raw lines. We know that during their primes Pippen (91-98) beats Ewing (88-98) in WS, WS48, VORP, ORTG, BPM, OBPM and now APM/RAPM. So, all the major impact metrics.

With APM and RAPM, the tally is something like 11-2 in advanced data. All in Pippen's favor. And again for reference

9 years worth of prime data. So not only was Pippen #1 caliber, like Ewing was, but even better based on the impact.

"Hardly outplayed". He OUTPLAYED him. The stats are right there. He OUTPLAYED him in '93 and outplayed & beat him when both were #1 options and Pippen had better 2nd & 3rd options. What does WS/48 or VORP say about quitting on your team in a tie game?

insidious301

09-10-2020, 06:13 PM

"Hardly outplayed". He OUTPLAYED him. The stats are right there. He OUTPLAYED him in '93 and outplayed & beat him when both were #1 options and Pippen had better 2nd & 3rd options. What does WS/48 or VORP say about quitting on your team in a tie game?

You are stalling. Find the impact data, like you do for AD vs LeBron, and post it here.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 06:47 PM

You are stalling. Find the impact data, like you do for AD vs LeBron, and post it here.

They have nothing. It is a joke, but amusing to observe.

We are hearing--from guys who talk scoring 24/7--Grant was a better scorer than Starks. :roll: This guy (IMKobe, 3ball's own beta poodle) is as ignorant as he is dishonest. Youtube.com, son. Watch some games if you are going to jackoff to MJ every day. You will enjoy. He was really good.

3ball

09-10-2020, 07:06 PM

Ewing outplayed Pippen in 4 out of 5 series in the 90s, including when both were #1 options, but somehow Pippen was the better player. Put Ewing with Jordan from '88, how many rings do they win?

Ewing/MJ would win every year from 88-99'

And MJ could average 24 ppg because Ewing could carry the load.. yet people say MJ needed Pippen, aka MJ "needed" a sidekick that made him carry the goat scoring load and assist 33% more often

tpols

09-10-2020, 07:15 PM

Way to obfuscate with a bunch of nonsense. You refuted absolutely nothing that I said.

Just have a look at the numbers.
92 Pippen - 21/8/7 on .555 TS and 21.5 PER 93 Pippen - 19/8/6 on .510 TS and 19.2 PER
92 Grant - 14/10/3 on .618 TS and 20.6 PER 93 Grant - 13/10/3 on .534 TS and 17.5 PER

You also conveniently left out Toni Kukoc, who was All Rookie 2nd team, and was saving Pippen with game winners during the regular season and the playoffs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUTfJlezXPY&ab_channel=HoopsMadness

Wow Reggie just taking a dump on pippy poo and the bulls.

Bowing after it and everything.

:roll:

Pure gangster.

3ball

09-10-2020, 07:24 PM

I only "disregard" Ewing when the claims are that Pippen wasn't on his level

or a #1 himself.

^^^ that's a low bar..

anyone can be a 1st option - there's 30 in the league every year...but ELITE first options average nearly 30 in various seasons or series of their career - Pippen couldn't because he was an Iggy-level scorer that barely averaged 20 at his peak

He was never considered on the level of MJ, Barkley, Malone, Hakeem, or Ewing, who could average about 30 and were 1st option Finals guys (top tier of the 90's)

Carry on posting about stats that Nate McMillan beats him at

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 07:29 PM

He was never considered on the level of MJ, Barkley, Malone, Hakeem, or Ewing, who could average about 30 and were 1st option Finals guys (top tier of the 90's)

That is news to all-NBA voters. :lol 1994: Pippen 94 votes, Malone 68, and Barkley even further behind on the second team (Malone at least was close to Pippen when he trailed him in 96', the year before the Bulls-Jazz finals). MJ's 2nd option ahead of his finals' opponent from the previous year's 1st option. Damn. What a stacked team. :bowdown:

insidious301

09-10-2020, 07:31 PM

^^^ that's a low bar..

anyone can be a 1st option - there's 30 in the league every year...but ELITE first options average nearly 30 in various seasons or series of their career - Pippen couldn't because he was an Iggy-level scorer that barely averaged 20 at his peak

So based on the data, you agree that Ewing was a weak #1. And the "low bar" Pippen allegedly had was higher than Ewing's? That's a weird way to cope with results, but fair enough. Now you can add him to your list in that thread you made. Ultimately the real and only logical conclusion is Pippen >.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 07:46 PM

So based on the data, you agree that Ewing was a weak #1. And the "low bar" Pippen allegedly had was higher than Ewing's? That's a weird way to cope with results, but fair enough. Now you can add him to your list in that thread you made. Ultimately the real and only logical conclusion is Pippen >.

He still hasn't explained why MJ lost three years in a row to a team whose best player peaked at 23 PPG 6-7 years prior to owning MJ on a 37-45 win team. When Detroit was a contender (1987-1991), Isiah was 18.8 PPG. MJ was scoring up to twice that and taking L's in the first round.

3ball

09-10-2020, 07:46 PM

So based on the data, you agree that Ewing was a weak #1. And the "low bar" Pippen allegedly had was higher than Ewing's? That's a weird way to cope with results, but fair enough. Now you can add him to your list in that thread you made. Ultimately the real and only logical conclusion is Pippen >.
Pippen peaked at 22 ppg... Ewing at 29

with better efficiency across the board

Ewing was an elite scorer, which was required to be a 1st option Finals guy (top caliber)... All the top players of the 90's were 1st option Finals guys, aka MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, Drexler, Robinson..

Pippen was never considered on this level and was considered a 2nd option, which has become synonymous with "Pippen"

goozeman

09-10-2020, 07:51 PM

They have nothing. It is a joke, but amusing to observe.

We are hearing--from guys who talk scoring 24/7--Grant was a better scorer than Starks. :roll: This guy (IMKobe, 3ball's own beta poodle) is as ignorant as he is dishonest. Youtube.com, son. Watch some games if you are going to jackoff to MJ every day. You will enjoy. He was really good.

Like I said, BPM likes Pippen over 90's-era Hakeem. It likes Pippen over almost every big man. For example: 90-98 Pippen 5.7 bpm vs 90's Shaq 6.0 bpm. BPM thinks Pippen was as good as prime Shaq. Garbage argument for garbage stat. Basically, almost all metrics are in agreement that on Pippen was at best a borderline top-50 player for his career. The raw numbers and advanced stats support this as well. Even if you use his so-called "prime" years, his rankings in PER, OBPM, and WS/48 would be 61, 49, and 51 respectively. Only BPM thinks he's a career top-50 player, and I've already explained this is a side-effect how BPM credits defensive stars (high steals) on good defensive teams, i.e. why Stockton is top 10 player according to BPM. Give you an idea how stupid this metric is, Stockton has a 3.7 DBPM one year. To put that in perspective, Mutombo's best defensive year according to BPM was a 3.0. Ben Wallace's best year was a 3.5. That's right... BPM thinks John Stockton was a better peak defender than two guys who won DPOY eight times between them!!! :oldlol: What's crazy about it is that Mutombo's best defensive season would only be Stockton's fourth best. So BPM thinks Stockton was not just a little bit better than Mutumbo, but perennially better.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 07:57 PM

He still hasn't explained why MJ lost three years in a row to a team whose best player peaked at 23 PPG 6-7 years prior to owning MJ on a 37-45 win team. When Detroit was a contender (1987-1991), Isiah was 18.8 PPG. MJ was scoring up to twice that and taking L's in the first round.

Another error on his part. Ouch. Gooseman, what do you think 3ball meant here? I've been asking you pertinent questions for a while now, but you seem a little timid to reply. Get out of your safe space dude.

Pippen peaked at 22 ppg... Ewing at 29

with better efficiency across the board.

Pippen was never considered on this level and was considered a 2nd option, which has become synonymous with "Pippen"

Prime Pippen had more impact and therefor was better. Higher ortg-bpm-obpm-apm-rapm-vorp-ws-ws48-ortg. Many of those stats are in the OP too which you've conceded were great measures. So again, the only conclusion we can draw from that is Pippen being better.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:01 PM

Prime Pippen had more impact and therefor was better. Higher ortg-bpm-obpm-apm-rapm-vorp-ws-ws48-ortg. Many of those stats are in the OP too which you've conceded were great measures. So again, the only conclusion we draw from that then is Pippen being better.

The graphics speak for themselves. The two players usually aren't even close.

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

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

Pippen is far ahead in 4 of 5 of these stats. In the one Ewing is ahead, he is barely ahead--108th all-time versus 110th for Pippen.

goozeman

09-10-2020, 08:02 PM

Another error on his part. Ouch. Gooseman, what do you think 3ball meant here? I've been asking you pertinent questions for a while now, but you seem a little timid to reply. Come out of your safe space dude.

Prime Pippen had more impact and therefor was better. Higher ortg-bpm-pbpm-apm-rapm-vorp-ws-ws48-ortg. Many of those stats are in the OP too which you've conceded were great measures. So again, the only conclusion we draw from that then is Pippen being better.

Who cares about Ewing. Address the issue of how BPM has Pippen over 90's Hakeem and on par with Shaq or how BPM thinks Stockton was a better peak defender than Mutumbo and Ben Ben Wallace. I'm waiting.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:03 PM

Who cares about Ewing. Address the issue of how BPM

You are the guy who made a thread using BPM and some of these other stats. :roll: Shamelessly backpedaled after it got inconvenient. You are a dishonest MJ stain but at least play out your posts next time to avoid such embarrassment.

goozeman

09-10-2020, 08:05 PM

You are the guy who made a thread using BPM and some of these other stats. :roll: Shamelessly backpedaled after it got inconvenient. You are a dishonest MJ stain but at least play out your posts next time to avoid such embarrassment.

I put BPM in there to show you how it does not correlate at all with the other metrics, i.e. that it is a garbage stat. I explained it in the OP. Read it again.

3ball

09-10-2020, 08:11 PM

Prime Pippen had more impact and therefor was better.

.

Not based on the facts - Pippen wasn't good enough to be a 1st option like Ewing, and got destroyed by Ewing in 94'... 94' Ewing ascended to the top tier as a 1st option Finals guy, and Pippen descended to an ordinary, early round loser with bad efficiency

But it was no surprise to anyone - Ewing was expected to wipe the floor with Pippen... And did.. it would've been a sweep if Kukoc hadn't saved them from 0-3 deficit

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:15 PM

They have nothing. They cherry pick data, then when an honest comparison of the same data is done, they flip flop. They say we can't use accolades. We can't use all-time rankings. We can't use what people thought at the time. We just have to take the word of the most dishonest fan base in sports for everything.

One thing this is revealing: MJ stains cannot say a single word of criticism of ANY 90's star, except Pippen. They present every other 90's star as flawless. :lol That is because they have no beliefs whatsoever. Just one agenda and every word they write flows from that. The most disgusting fan base by far.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 08:18 PM

Who cares about Ewing. Address the issue of how BPM has Pippen over 90's Hakeem and on par with Shaq or how BPM thinks Stockton was a better peak defender than Mutumbo and Ben Ben Wallace. I'm waiting.

Ewing is related to your topic and here is why. He had less impact than Pippen who is "weak help" in your opinion. If that's the case then Jordan's competition was in fact mediocre. Your OP doesn't just list BPM either, so don't make things up. We see metrics ORTG-WS48 there which all favor Prime Pippen > Ewing. Back up your claims.

I put BPM in there to show you how it does not correlate at all with the other metrics, i.e. that it is a garbage stat. I explained it in the OP. Read it again.

That isn't true. You used it here to say LeBron's help > Jordan. Now you're running away from your own words.

Not based on the facts - Pippen wasn't good enough to be a 1st option like Ewing, and got destroyed by Ewing in 94'... 94' Ewing ascended to the top tier as a 1st option Finals guy, and Pippen descended to an ordinary, early round loser with bad efficiency

But it was no surprise to anyone - Ewing was expected to wipe the floor with Pippen... And did.. it would've been a sweep if Kukoc hadn't saved them from 0-3 deficit

No, the facts say Pippen bested Prime Ewing from a 9 year span. When they were at their best too. So the facts and evidence are all on my side, not yours. We also know the same numbers you agreed with OP on are the ones that paint Pippen being more impactful as a player. And thus, unequivocally better.

3ball

09-10-2020, 08:23 PM

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:25 PM

1-9ball uses these same stats to argue Kukoc>Pippen, Grant>Kukoc. tpols (1-9ball Junior II) uses oRTG for every player. His "analysis" is basically that. IMKobe (1-9ball Junior I) just does whatever 1-9ball says. Gooseman (Soundwave's trolling account) posted an OP chock full of these stats.

Yet when Pippen trumps the best player on the Bulls' best comp, flip flops and obfuscations. It is possible Pippen sucked but MJ's era was so bad Pippen wound up a top player in it. Okay. So Pippen sucked and MJ's rangz can't be taken seriously per his own stans.

No, all the scoring data

That is one category. :facepalm Dale Ellis scored 29 PPG too in the same era (the year before Ewing did it). Ellis the alpha alpha!

Reggie43

09-10-2020, 08:25 PM

Just took a quick look in this thread and saw the agenda filled Pippen vs Ewing debate but was wondering who was considered the better player at their peaks/prime when both were playing? They are pretty similar and I just want the opinion of those who lived the era.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 08:26 PM

No, all the scoring data says Ewing was elite 1st option for his entire career, while Pippen was a lesser 2nd or 3rd option for his entire career

Nope wrong. The scoring is irrelevant when Pippen had better impact across the board. The same impact measures you already cosigned OP with. So unless you are taking back your own admission, Prime Pippen>Ewing is still a fact.

1-9ball uses these same stats to argue Kukoc>Pippen, Grant>Kukoc. tpols (1-9ball Junior II) uses oRTG for every player. His "analysis" is basically that. IMKobe (1-9ball Junior I) just does whatever 1-9ball says. Gooseman (Soundwave's trolling account) posted an OP chock full of these stats.

Yet when Pippen trumps the best player on the Bulls' best comp, flip flops and obfuscations. It is possible Pippen sucked but MJ's era was so bad Pippen wound up a top player in it. Okay. So Pippen sucked and MJ's rangz can't be taken seriously per his own stans.

That is one category. :facepalm Dale Ellis scored 29 PPG too in the same era (the year before Ewing did it). Ellis the alpha alpha!

Bingo. Every word of this post.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:29 PM

Nope wrong. The scoring is irrelevant when Pippen had better impact across the board. The same impact measures you already cosigned with. So unless you are taking back your own admission, Prime Pippen>Ewing is still a fact.

Bingo. Every word of this post.

Yeah, these are their own self-selected metrics. They are just too lazy to think it through. Apparently, though, saying Pippen wasn't Iggy is "agenda filled" per the "Miller fan". :lol

He made an interesting point. We haven't seen anything from MJ stans about how Ewing was perceived then in any of these threads hyping Ewing (or for Miller in any of the threads hyping Miller or Stockton or X or Y or Z). Pippen fans have posted it. Of course, the "Miller fan" dismissed that evidence as "walls of BS." One the one hand: "What did people think at the time?" On the other: "I don't like what people said at the time. Walls of BS!" More hypocrisy from this ilk.

If they simply admitted they are out to destroy Pippen because MJ didn't win without him (which no one other than LeBron stans holds against him) and LeBron keeps succeeding without Wade that would be one thing but they keep badly trying to disguise the obvious agenda.

Reggie43

09-10-2020, 08:34 PM

Maybe its just me but if I have to select between Peak Ewing and Peak Pippen it wont be an easy choice because both were great outside of injuries.

Leviathon1121

09-10-2020, 08:38 PM

Reggie43

09-10-2020, 08:39 PM

Anybody could say that peak Pippen is better than peak Ewing and it wont be a bad opinion but it also applies for the opposite because both were that good at their peaks.

insidious301

09-10-2020, 08:39 PM

Yeah, these are their own self-selected metrics. They are just too lazy to think it through. Apparently, though, saying Pippen wasn't Iggy is "agenda filled" per the "Miller fan". :lol

He made an interesting point. We haven't seen anything from MJ stans about how Ewing was perceived then in any of these threads hyping Ewing (or for Miller in any of the threads hyping Miller or Stockton or X or Y or Z). Pippen fans have posted it. Of course, the "Miller fan" dismissed that evidence as "walls of BS." One the one hand: "What did people think at the time?" On the other: "I don't like what people said at the time. Walls of BS!" More hypocrisy from this ilk.

If they simply admitted they are out to destroy Pippen because MJ didn't win without him (which no one other than LeBron stans holds against him) and LeBron keeps succeeding without Wade that would be one thing but they keep badly trying to disguise the obvious agenda.

Yeah not sure what "agenda filled" actually means then. Those ridiculous comparisons to Iggy and Cooper have to mean....something....Maybe "idiocy" is a more appropriate word, Roundball.

Maybe its just me but if I have to select between Peak Ewing and Peak Pippen it wont be an easy choice because both were great outside of injuries.

Peak Ewing vs Peak Pippen is close however if its prime vs prime, I am taking Pippen without blinking. The statistical evidence for Pippen is paramount. Better playmaking and while not the conventional bigman on defense, Pippen's impact there was bigman-like. Ewing was a better scorer and rebounder, but the data still favors Pippen.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:42 PM

People didn't compare a SF to a C then. There wouldn't be a "George vs. Davis" thread back then. We can use all-NBA to get a window on what all-NBA voters thought of PF's versus SF's because they were on the same ballot but the debate was Malone vs. Barkley, not Pippen vs. Barkley due to positions.

Neither Pippen or Ewing ever got to the "best player" debate, although Pippen did get the "best all-around player" talk among some (not the same as actual best player but still more than Ewing did), so we can't compare them the same way we can MJ to Barkley or Magic to Bird etc.

What we do know is Pippen was consensus the best perimeter player when MJ was retired and second best behind him for several years when MJ wasn't. That means he was considered better than Drexler, Payton, Miller, Wilkins--guys MJ stans hype to varying degrees--as well as Price, both Hardaways, Hill, Richmond, Johnson, and Rice. It changed year-to-year but from 1994-1995 it was clearly Pippen and then in 96' Pippen behind MJ. Pippen was getting MVP talk and comparisons to MJ in 96' before he got hurt late in the season.

And Ewing? He wasn't even all-NBA from 1993-1996. That means for several prime years he wasn't even considered top 3 at his position by those voters. Was he ever considered the best player at his position let along the "best big" like Pippen was the "best perimeter"?

In MVP, Ewing was never higher than 4th. Pippen had one prime year as a #1 and was 3rd (Ewing was 5th that year). That favors Pippen. Ewing's team had the best record in the East, second best record in the NBA in 93' and he still was "only" 4th in MVP?

Anybody could say that peak Pippen is better than peak Ewing and it wont be a bad opinion but it also applies for the opposite because both were that good at their peaks.

Fair enough. Hard to say since one was a wing and another a C. The thing is, the argument made by the MJ stans is Ewing>>>>>>>>>>Pippen, who=Iggy. Ewing has a case over Pippen--but not statistically, and that is the terrain these guys selected.

3ball

09-10-2020, 08:45 PM

Nope wrong. The scoring is irrelevant

Scoring determines 1st or 2nd option status and is ultimately the difference between Pippen (2nd option) and the top caliber guys (1st option Finals guys)

Pippen was a 2nd option without the 27-30 ppg capability required to be 1st option Finals guy (top caliber player)

insidious301

09-10-2020, 08:48 PM

Scoring determines 1st or 2nd option status and is ultimately the difference between Pippen (2nd option) and the top caliber guys (1st option Finals guys)

And that's why Pippen is below all those guys and overrated by many.... he was a 2nd option without the 27-30 ppg capability required to be 1st option Finals guy (top caliber player)

The scoring isnt important if you're not impacting the games. This is why data is surmises what goes on the court better than any "one" raw stat. Scoring is nice, but if you aren't effecting the bottom line, who cares? This reason alone is why the impact numbers suggest Pippen's playmaking & defense were more valuable. Why the same stats you agreed with OP on also say Pippen>Ewing.

tpols

09-10-2020, 08:50 PM

Anybody could say that peak Pippen is better than peak Ewing and it wont be a bad opinion but it also applies for the opposite because both were that good at their peaks.

We don't need to speculate on that.

"MVP" Pippen saw Ewing in the playoffs in 1994 and was completely outclassed and bounced out the playoffs.

Ewing had better productions and efficiencies. A double whammy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyQXVE5xH6U

Reggie43

09-10-2020, 08:50 PM

People didn't compare a SF to a C then. There wouldn't be a "George vs. Davis" thread back then. We can use all-NBA to get a window on what all-NBA voters thought of PF's versus SF's because they were on the same ballot but the debate was Malone vs. Barkley, not Pippen vs. Barkley due to positions.

Neither Pippen or Ewing ever got to the "best player" debate, although Pippen did get the "best all-around player" talk among some (not the same as actual best player but still more than Ewing did), so we can't compare them the same way we can MJ to Barkley or Magic to Bird etc.

What we do know is Pippen was consensus the best perimeter player when MJ was retired and second best behind him for several years when MJ wasn't. That means he was considered better than Drexler, Payton, Miller, Wilkins--guys MJ stans hype to varying degrees--as well as Price, both Hardaways, Hill, Richmond, Johnson, and Rice. It changed year-to-year but from 1994-1995 it was clearly Pippen and then in 96' Pippen behind MJ. Pippen was getting MVP talk and comparisons to MJ in 96' before he got hurt late in the season.

And Ewing? He wasn't even all-NBA from 1993-1996. That means for several prime years he wasn't even considered top 3 at his position by those voters. Was he ever considered the best player at his position let along the "best big" like Pippen was the "best perimeter"?

In MVP, Ewing was never higher than 4th. Pippen had one prime year as a #1 and was 3rd (Ewing was 5th that year). That favors Pippen. Ewing's team had the best record in the East, second best record in the NBA in 93' and he still was "only" 4th in MVP?

Fair enough. Hard to say since one was a wing and another a C. The thing is, the argument made by the MJ stans is Ewing>>>>>>>>>>Pippen, who=Iggy. Ewing has a case over Pippen--but not statistically, and that is the terrain these guys selected.

To be fair even if the general opinion back then selects one over the other it doesnt mean that it was right. These guys are some of the most underrated players ever.

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:50 PM

Guys have won league MVP's without leading their teams in scoring. Magic, Nash, Russell being the prime examples. Isiah never won MVP but was 18.8 PPG on those Pistons contenders.

No one cares about scoring except MJ fans who use it out of convenience: MJ has the highest career PPG.

The scoring isnt important if you're not impacting the games. This is why data is surmises what goes on the court better than any "one" raw stat. Scoring is nice, but if you aren't effecting the bottom line, who cares?

The second best scorer of that era was Wilkins--and he got traded for Manning when the Hawks were tied with the Bulls for 1st. That is damning. They thought they could give away a guy who averaged 30 the year before and still win a chip...

To be fair even if the general opinion back then selects one over the other it doesnt mean that it was right. These guys are some of the most underrated players ever.

True. My point is it wasn't really debate back then at all because people wouldn't debate a SF with a C like we do now. We can just extrapolate from how they were viewed within positions but even that is limited. In 94' arguably the top 5 players were four centers plus Pippen (Wilbon's list, wrote for the WaPo back then). MVP gives us another data point, but MVP gets mixed in with team results (FWIW, Ewing's team won more yet he was 5th to Pippen's 3rd).

insidious301

09-10-2020, 08:54 PM

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 08:58 PM

So is "tpol" also "ImKobe"? Interesting that he and "ImKobe" used that 94 series to compare the two. We know that Pippen didn't have a servicable backup for Jordan (Pete Myers anyone?!?!?), so why is this a talking point? The better team won, who cares.

No, I doubt it (based on their styles, writing, etc.--although their views are carbon copies of each other) they are both just 1-9ball's betas who I call 1-9ball Junior I and 1-9ball Junior II. They follow him from thread to thread echoing him and the same TP. They also base their "views" on every given topic via their agenda. You won't ever see them deviating from the MJ party line (or gooseman or these other guys). The irony? They love to call players betas but they are the ultimate examples of betas on ISH.

This is what the world has come to. 1-9ball has groupies. :lol

insidious301

09-10-2020, 09:02 PM

No, I doubt it (based on their styles, writing, etc.--although their views are carbon copies of each other) they are both just 1-9ball's betas who I call 1-9ball Junior I and 1-9ball Junior II. They follow him from thread to thread echoing him and the same TP. They also base their "views" on every given topic via their agenda. You won't ever see them deviating from the MJ party line (or gooseman or these other guys). The irony? They love to call players betas but they are the ultimate examples of betas on ISH.

This is what the world has come to. 1-9ball has groupies. :lol

LeBron also beats Kobe H2H in individual numbers. Will they apply the same context? Time will tell! Thanks for clearing that up btw. I don't go around accusing any posters of alts or whatever, but it is weird that these people literally hate/love the same players. Equally. I don't agree with you on Giannis and where Jordan ranks all time (Jordan>Jabbar imo). These guys are like blues brothers though. Almost like they have a group text for their daily political campaign.

3ball

09-10-2020, 09:03 PM

The scoring isnt important if you're not impacting the games. This is why data is surmises what goes on the court better than any "one" raw stat. Scoring is nice, but if you aren't effecting the bottom line, who cares? This reason alone is why the impact numbers suggest Pippen's playmaking & defense were more valuable. Why the same stats you agreed with OP on also say Pippen>Ewing.

Again, all the top guys were 1st option Finals guys - MJ, Malone, Barkley, Shaq, Ewing, Hakeem, Drexler, Robinson - Pippen was a 2nd option and therefore isn't on that level

This is common knowledge.. no one compared Pippen to these guys until the lebron media took over.. heck, Drexler and Penny were compared to Jordan, while Pippen is nowhere near Jordan

insidious301

09-10-2020, 09:07 PM

Again, all the top guys were 1st option Finals guys - MJ, Malone, Barkley, Shaq, Ewing, Hakeem, Drexler, Robinson - Pippen was a 2nd option and therefore isn't on that level

This is common knowledge

Another post where you miss the point. Scoring doesn't matter if it doesn't anchor the endgame. You cosigned Gooseman on all the same numbers that paint Prime Pip > Pat. Don't know why you're still confused, but I cleared this up pages ago.

Reggie43

09-10-2020, 09:09 PM

Its just weird to me that people act like Pippen's defense and playmaking doesnt exist where he probably has the most value and focus only on scoring. But to be fair to them people on the otherside go overboard with the praise as well.

Round Mound

09-10-2020, 09:10 PM

Ewing and Pippen are pretty close...they both are TOP 10 PLAYERS OF THE 90's!

Shooter

09-10-2020, 09:12 PM

MJ falling out ot the top 3 with every 1-9 ball post

LBJ, Bill Russell, Kareem

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 09:22 PM

LeBron also beats Kobe H2H in individual numbers. Will they apply the same context? Time will tell! Thanks for clearing that up btw. I don't go around accusing any posters of alts or whatever, but it is weird that these people literally hate/love the same players. Equally. I don't agree with you on Giannis and where Jordan ranks all time (Jordan>Jabbar imo). These guys are like blues brothers though. Almost like they have a group text for their daily political campaign.

I have wondered about the group text. 1-9ball will post a thread, IMKobe and tpols will be there in minutes. This happens over and over again. These guys all echo the same TP. 1-9ball and his betas are the worst but gooseman, Indian_guy and half a dozen others all share the same basic views they do (look at the 45 page or so George-Pippen thread).

The agenda is this for 90's stars: every 90's star was great, flawless while Pippen sucked. Jordan played against the toughest teams under the toughest rules with the toughest defenses (except Pippen, even though he played the same teams). Jordan would average 45, 50 today; Pippen would barely get in the teens.

Its just weird to me that people act like Pippen's defense and playmaking doesnt exist where he probably has the most value and focus only on scoring

They boil down every player to their PPG and/or their oRTG. To them, offense is just shooting. Playmaking, offensive rebounding, etc. doesn't count.

But to be fair to them people on the otherside go overboard with the praise as well.

I don't think any of the "1-9" people actually believe it. I think they are merely trolling MJ stans. :oldlol:

Ewing and Pippen are pretty close...they both are TOP 10 PLAYERS OF THE 90's!

What is your top 10 for the entire decade? Mine is this:

1) Jordan
2) Hakeem
3) Malone
4) Barkley (Barkley ahead of Malone if we are talking peaks)
5) Robinson
6) Pippen
7) Ewing
8) Drexler
9) Shaq (have to slot him in somewhere, hard because he didn't play 30% the decade but had a high peak)
10) Richmond/T. Hardaway (Hardaway the higher peak, Richmond more consistency)

HM: Payton (wasn't a star for 40% of the decade, clearly top 10 peak wise), Miller, Mourning, Dumars, Price (no particular order here).

insidious301

09-10-2020, 09:44 PM

goozeman

09-10-2020, 09:53 PM

Ewing is related to your topic and here is why. He had less impact than Pippen who is "weak help" in your opinion. If that's the case then Jordan's competition was in fact mediocre. Your OP doesn't just list BPM either, so don't make things up. We see metrics ORTG-WS48 there which all favor Prime Pippen > Ewing. Back up your claims.

The numbers I posted are career numbers. Cherry-picking Pippen's best years as second-option while coattail riding with GOAT player with GOAT team versus first options is not a good argument for you. Pippen's career stats are not better than Ewing's. Ewing bests him in PER, WS/48, eFG%, TS%. Pippen does have a superior career OBPM, but he also has a higher career OBPM than Hakeem, another center that played in the same era and had the same prime as Ewing, so what? Does that therefore mean Pippen > Hakeem on offensive? Please indulge me and attempt to make that argument. All it means is that OBPM favors Pippen's perimeter play over post play. Raw number tell the real story when comparing different positions (something which BPM cannot do), and Ewing/Hakeem blow Pippen away there.

That isn't true. You used it here to say LeBron's help > Jordan. Now you're running away from your own words.

Lebron's teammates overall have clearly been better than Jordan's. Are you arguing differently? Make your case. I must say I don't see how this is even a debate though. The stats depict Lebron's career as serial team-hopper who has played with half the all-stars in the league, Finals MVP's, MVP's, scoring champs, and multiple guys with top 5 PER's. All told this teammates just in the last decade account for over 60 total all-star selections. Sixty. Lol, there are so many you can't keep up with them all. How many all-star teammates did Jordan play with in his career? Even in little Pippy's so-called prime, he failed to make the all-star team in a couple of championship seasons.

No, the facts say Pippen bested Prime Ewing from a 9 year span. When they were at their best too. So the facts and evidence are all on my side, not yours. We also know the same numbers you agreed with OP on are the ones that paint Pippen being more impactful as a player. And thus, unequivocally better.

Pippen literally never bested Ewing at anything in his entire career. Jordan and the Bulls beat the Ewing and the Knicks. That's it. The one time Pippen's Bulls went up against prime Ewing and the Knicks Pippen quit on the bench and watched a rookie save the season. Bulls go down 0-3 and likely get swept without Kukoc's heroics. At the end of the day, they were a second-round level playoff team that got eliminated by the very player that you claim to be inferior to Pippen. Great argument you have there. :facepalm

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 10:09 PM

Speaking of Gooseman, what happened? He was online after I asked him to back up the OP. Did my line of questioning hurt his fragility again? He got a little defensive talking about "BPM", the same stat he originally advocated. That's a good list btw, Roundball. I think Barkley>Malone and Shaq > Ewing. Ewing had more All-NBA teams based on playing earlier, but Shaq also made the finals and from getgo was dominant. I actually thought he was a top 3-5 player from 1995 and on.

Yeah, Shaq is tricky. Top 3-5 player from 1995-1999, probably #2 in 98' and #1 in 99', but he didn't play at all for 30% of the decade so he is tricky to classify on a decade long list. I agree with Barkley over Malone peak wise. I just think Malone over Barkley from 1994-1999>Barkley's edge over Malone from 1990-1993. Of course career wise it is closer because then you are talking late 80's to 1993 for Barkley and his peak was better and when both were at their bests the consensus was Barkley was better.

"Gooseman" probably was logged into his other accounts. :lol

Turbo Slayer

09-10-2020, 10:13 PM

Round Mound

09-10-2020, 10:19 PM

I have wondered about the group text. 1-9ball will post a thread, IMKobe and tpols will be there in minutes. This happens over and over again. These guys all echo the same TP. 1-9ball and his betas are the worst but gooseman, Indian_guy and half a dozen others all share the same basic views they do (look at the 45 page or so George-Pippen thread).

The agenda is this for 90's stars: every 90's star was great, flawless while Pippen sucked. Jordan played against the toughest teams under the toughest rules with the toughest defenses (except Pippen, even though he played the same teams). Jordan would average 45, 50 today; Pippen would barely get in the teens.

They boil down every player to their PPG and/or their oRTG. To them, offense is just shooting. Playmaking, offensive rebounding, etc. doesn't count.

I don't think any of the "1-9" people actually believe it. I think they are merely trolling MJ stans. :oldlol:

What is your top 10 for the entire decade? Mine is this:

1) Jordan
2) Hakeem
3) Malone
4) Barkley (Barkley ahead of Malone if we are talking peaks)
5) Robinson
6) Pippen
7) Ewing
8) Drexler
9) Shaq (have to slot him in somewhere, hard because he didn't play 30% the decade but had a high peak)
10) Richmond/T. Hardaway (Hardaway the higher peak, Richmond more consistency)

HM: Payton (wasn't a star for 40% of the decade, clearly top 10 peak wise), Miller, Mourning, Dumars, Price (no particular order here).

Mine is pretty close to yours:

1-MJ
2-Hakeem
3-Sir Charles
4-Malone
5-Robinson
6-Shaq
7-Ewing
8-Drexler
9-Pippen
10:11-Stockton/Payton

HMs: Hill, Kidd, Richmond, Kemp, Miller, Mourning, Webber, Coleman, Baker etc

goozeman

09-10-2020, 10:20 PM

Yeah, Shaq is tricky. Top 3-5 player from 1995-1999, probably #2 in 98' and #1 in 99', but he didn't play at all for 30% of the decade so he is tricky to classify on a decade long list. I agree with Barkley over Malone peak wise. I just think Malone over Barkley from 1994-1999>Barkley's edge over Malone from 1990-1993. Of course career wise it is closer because then you are talking late 80's to 1993 for Barkley and his peak was better and when both were at their bests the consensus was Barkley was better.

"Gooseman" probably was logged into his other accounts. :lol

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FpHMtogP BHC7Cg%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1

Wait! Ya'll really believe Pippen > Shaq? :oldlol: :roll: Here, let me make this easy for you. As long as oxygen is pumping through Shaq's lungs and he is an NBA uniform, he is better than Pippen any year, any decade, any century. :oldlol:

Roundball_Rock

09-10-2020, 10:27 PM

The Canadian version of NBA.com did a top 15 list for the 90's for the spring. The top 10 were: MJ, Hakeem, Malone, Robinson, Pippen, Shaq, Barkley, Stockton, Ewing, Payton--in that order. https://ca.nba.com/news/power-rankin...81wfdvi7yp5yrj This was based on the votes of 9 writers, not Jordanstan.com.

Mine is pretty close to yours:

1-MJ
2-Hakeem
3-Sir Charles
4-Malone
5-Robinson
6-Shaq
7-Ewing
8-Drexler
9-Pippen
10:11-Stockton/Payton

HMs: Hill, Kidd, Richmond, Kemp, Miller, Mourning, Webber, Coleman, Baker etc

Good list (it seems you weighed peak play more than I did). Hard to quibble more than a couple spots here and there. We are having real world conversations, not comparing Pippen to Iggy. :lol

Wait! Ya'll really believe Pippen > Shaq?

You didn't watch back then but Shaq didn't play for 30% of the decade. Since you may be slow, that means he had 0 value for 30% of the decade and Shaq wasn't Shaq for another 10% of the decade. All-time, I have Shaq 6th--so higher than almost everyone.

Where do you have Pippen in the 90's and who is your top 10? I could use a laugh. The Chiefs game is not competitive.

insidious301

09-11-2020, 12:26 AM

The numbers I posted are career numbers. Cherry-picking Pippen's best years as second-option while coattail riding with GOAT player with GOAT team versus first options is not a good argument for you. Pippen's career stats are not better than Ewing's. Ewing bests him in PER, WS/48, eFG%, TS%. Pippen does have a superior career OBPM, but he also has a higher career OBPM than Hakeem, another center that played in the same era and had the same prime as Ewing, so what? Does that therefore mean Pippen > Hakeem on offensive? Please indulge me and attempt to make that argument. All it means is that OBPM favors Pippen's perimeter play over post play. Raw number tell the real story when comparing different positions (something which BPM cannot do), and Ewing/Hakeem blow Pippen away there.

The numbers I posted were prime years from a 8-9 sample. Basically Ewing and Pippen at their best, so there is no cherry-picking needed. Like 3ball you are being willfully ignorant. Your overall point regarding the 2nd banana is also thick-witted. A #1 has more volume and offensive load to obtain numbers. So the fact Pippen still had more impact, impact like bpm-rapm-apm, which also attempts to adjust separate of team, is damning. Then there is ortg-ws-ws48-vorp which also favor Pippen. All of these numbers span from 91-98 and 88-97 for Ewing. Once again, this tell us Ewing's scoring wasn't poignant like you or his raw numbers claim. We know that impact stats matter because most of them have players like LeBron, Jordan, Kareem as cream of the crop. Look at backpicks all-time rankings for example. Advanced stats are used everywhere there, and the top 10 has the same names you would ordinary see here.

What years are you talking about Pippen>Hakeem btw. Your points are vague and not specific.

Lebron's teammates overall have clearly been better than Jordan's. Are you arguing differently? Make your case. I must say I don't see how this is even a debate though. The stats depict Lebron's career as serial team-hopper who has played with half the all-stars in the league, Finals MVP's, MVP's, scoring champs, and multiple guys with top 5 PER's. All told this teammates just in the last decade account for over 60 total all-star selections. Sixty. Lol, there are so many you can't keep up with them all. How many all-star teammates did Jordan play with in his career? Even in little Pippy's so-called prime, he failed to make the all-star team in a couple of championship seasons.

If you bothered reading posts, you would know that I have already said this. LeBron's teammates were better. The thing is though, according to your OP, these same numbers paint Pippen>Ewing. So if that is the case, where does Pippen really rank? Where does Ewing rank among LeBron's best teammates? We know where you stand on Pippen so these are the questions a rationale mind asks. But if you are consistent there wouldn't be an issue answering this directly. Instead you've been avoiding this, and have gone as far to say the numbers you originally used are flawed, which again, would then make your OP irrelevant.

Pippen literally never bested Ewing at anything in his entire career. Jordan and the Bulls beat the Ewing and the Knicks. That's it. The one time Pippen's Bulls went up against prime Ewing and the Knicks Pippen quit on the bench and watched a rookie save the season. Bulls go down 0-3 and likely get swept without Kukoc's heroics. At the end of the day, they were a second-round level playoff team that got eliminated by the very player that you claim to be inferior to Pippen. Great argument you have there. :facepalm

Prime Pippen literally bests Prime Ewing with the numbers from your OP. From 91-98 Pippen averaged better ortg-ws-ws48-bpm-obpm-apm-rapm-vorp than 88-97 Ewing. Look up "literally" in the dictionary, and use it correctly.

Roundball_Rock

09-11-2020, 12:35 AM

goozeman

09-11-2020, 06:03 PM

Great points, Insidious. The #2 stuff is really bizarre. It's easier to rack up stats as a #1. It's no coincidence Pippen's best statistical years were 94' and 95', and we have a real world experiment built into 95'. Jordan came back and Pippen's numbers fell significantly. Anyone can look it up on BBR.

The other argument he made is further damning of MJ'S comp. The Bulls' top comp was so bad they could not beat a one man team even once? Even worse, when that one man left the one man team, the Knicks beat that team by the thinnest of margins. A shady foul call in Game 5, Cartwright foul trouble in Game 7 (he shut Ewing down but Ewing feasted on Longley).

So Ewing is so awesome, flawless in fact, but he can't lead a team he awesomely is leading to a W against a one man team and then barely beats that team with Pete Myers replacing MJ? This is a case for or is it a case to damn Ewing? :lol

The reason this perspective seems bizaare is because you guys have a zero-sum, video game mentality when it comes to the advanced metrics. You take them as the gospel truth when in fact they are only estimations with various limiatations and weaknesses. The simple belief that shots equals production and that more shots equals more production is just an example of this zero-sum mentality and poor understanding. This a mistake many GM's have made in the past of giving more and more touches to a middling offensive talent who struggles in creating his own shot and team shooting efficiency falls off the cliff. This type of basketball post hoc analysis is a common mistake and why a lot of GM's fail with player development because they draft of the box score and they don't look at how the player is getting their production. In truth, shots are not production at all. It's the exact opposite -- production is getting shots. You guys are putting the cart before the horse. Before a player can be a shooter, they have to be a shot creator.

History has always shown that Pippen-type players forced to be first options are are efficiency black holes in the clutch and in the playoffs. This is why Phil was okay with sitting Pippen's ass on the bench in a playoff game in the fourth quarter. They always get exposed. Pippen was in the process of getting exposed in 1995 before Jordan unretired. Also why without Jordan in 94 and 95 Pippen's shot making as overall trend remained relatively flat to his entire career. His attempts didn't deviate all that much because Pippen continued to play the same role in Phil's triangle. On the one hand, you are giving Pippen too much credit and on the other you are not recognizing Pippen was self-aware and intelligent enough as player to not try to force his game. The result was that the Bulls were still a decent team thanks to experience and coaching, but not a threat to win anything overall. When playoff basketball came around, Pippen's efficiency predictably plummeted. Because in the playoffs against good teams possessions are at a premium, Pippen was forced to create offense and ended up getting shut down by the Knicks. Likewise when Jordan came back those shots that Pippen could never seem to find suddenly came back because Jordan was a far superior at creating offense than Pippen.

In the same way, Ewing as a primary offensive threat was a superior shot creator. That's why you can't compare Pippen's role to Ewing's and why BPM/OBPM having a secondary offensive talent like Pippen ranked higher than scoring centers like Ewing and Hakeem must mean that OBPM and BPM is a flawed stat on some level. The best way to use these stats is to ideally compare players at the same position and the same role and in multiple scenarios. BPM tries normalize for this by creating coefficients for both player position and player role, but it obviously has some issues. If I had an example of the player position/role regression it would be easy to analyze and figure why there is such a huge discrepancy. My theory is that the revamped BPM 2.0 is more geared toward evaluating modern players who mostly play on perimeter anyway. Any stat that has MVP-level Moses Malone as the fourth best player on his roster has issues.. Of course, you guys keep ignoring these very basic critiques of BPM as methodology because you can't explain them away with group think because they are such obvious biases.

goozeman

09-11-2020, 06:48 PM

Prime Pippen literally bests Prime Ewing with the numbers from your OP. From 91-98 Pippen averaged better ortg-ws-ws48-bpm-obpm-apm-rapm-vorp than 88-97 Ewing. Look up "literally" in the dictionary, and use it correctly.

If you bothered to actually do a little research you would know that bpm-obpm-vorp or basically the same thing and that the creator of bpm pegs his formula of his regression to rapm, so whatever rapm says that what bpm tries to emulate using the box score. I've already explained to you that how you using BPM (cherry picking years, comparing different positions, and comparing different roles) is a flawed way of using those stats. This is why when I used these stats I compared Pippen to the entire population of other players all-time and used multiple stats, not one. That gives you a better idea and it shows the entire trajectory of player's career, i.e. development, prime, post-prime, good teams and bad teams, etc.

Your analysis is flawed and so are your conclusions. The fact of the matter is that you can't address the obvious glaring fact that the same stat you quote as the gospel when you cherry pick the data has Pippen > Hakkem , Pippen = Shaq, etc. You can't address who MVP Malone is the fourth best player on his team according to BPM. Nor can you address how BPM thinks John Stockton was a better defender than Ben Wallace and DiKembe Mutumbo. When you actually do a position-by-position comparision, Pippen's case falls apart with these stats. For example, you guys have consistently argued Pippen > Drexler, but the by your own logic Drexler destroys Pippen. But OBPM also says Drexler was a better offensive player than Hakeem the year Olajuwan was utterly dominant, winning NBA championship and Finals MVP on 30-plus against Shaq. So it is crappy little stat that ya'll quote like the gospel and don't understand anyway.

knicksman

09-11-2020, 06:54 PM

goozeman

09-11-2020, 07:13 PM

seriously, raw stats are already misleading. Raw stats have told us that harden, giannis, westbrook are the best players in the league. Yet these guys take it too far with these advanced stats. I dont even trust raw stats how much more for advance stats

Advanced stats love Harden and Westbrook. Harden is top 10 according to BPM. Westbrook is the player that actually exposed BPM as being flawed because he posted a 15.6 which was 20 percent higher score than any season in history. Myers forced to rewrite it to take some of the shine off perimeter players but it still overvalues them completely in certain contexts.

insidious301

09-12-2020, 01:03 PM

If you bothered to actually do a little research you would know that bpm-obpm-vorp or basically the same thing and that the creator of bpm pegs his formula of his regression to rapm, so whatever rapm says that what bpm tries to emulate using the box score. I've already explained to you that how you using BPM (cherry picking years, comparing different positions, and comparing different roles) is a flawed way of using those stats. This is why when I used these stats I compared Pippen to the entire population of other players all-time and used multiple stats, not one. That gives you a better idea and it shows the entire trajectory of player's career, i.e. development, prime, post-prime, good teams and bad teams, etc.

Your analysis is flawed and so are your conclusions. The fact of the matter is that you can't address the obvious glaring fact that the same stat you quote as the gospel when you cherry pick the data has Pippen > Hakkem , Pippen = Shaq, etc. You can't address who MVP Malone is the fourth best player on his team according to BPM. Nor can you address how BPM thinks John Stockton was a better defender than Ben Wallace and DiKembe Mutumbo. When you actually do a position-by-position comparision, Pippen's case falls apart with these stats. For example, you guys have consistently argued Pippen > Drexler, but the by your own logic Drexler destroys Pippen. But OBPM also says Drexler was a better offensive player than Hakeem the year Olajuwan was utterly dominant, winning NBA championship and Finals MVP on 30-plus against Shaq. So it is crappy little stat that ya'll quote like the gospel and don't understand anyway.

Are you high? You literally used those stats in your OP. And under the premise LeBron's help was greater than Jordan's. There is nothing wrong with these metrics, except for the outliers you'd find with any other stat. BPM is one of the best measures out there because it A) adjusts for possession B) separates individual from team C) induces everything you do in a gamelog. By your logic however, PPG is "flawed" because Karl Malone and Bob Pettit score more than Jabbar & Kobe. If I were you I'd brush up on the stats before making another jerky claim. And no, Pippen rates fairly in all advanced metrics, in fact 90s Pippen was top 10 in most of the major advanced stats. That suggests Pippen was a superstar and a true #1. And how couldn't he be? Ewing is often brought up because Pippen out-impacted him with most of the numbers in your OP. So if that's a fact, where does Ewing rate among the players you noted?

You keep talking about flaws, but you haven't done anything to support your argument. Repeating that John Stockton has a good BPM isn't saying anything. Again, if we went by your logic, then PPG is a joke. Pettit>Jabbar. Remember? Unlike you though people are willing to adopt context. When doing so they also understand there are statistical outliers for everything. BPM-OBPM-APM-RAPM all rank the elite players reasonably and the cream of the crop will rise to the top. The bottom line is that unless you're willing to dismiss your own OP then acknowledge where Ewing and Pippen rank. Tell us why Pippen had more impact than the #1 who was on Chicago's best comp.

Roundball_Rock

09-12-2020, 02:51 PM

Are you high? You literally used those stats in your OP.

:lol

He is so ashamed of his stupidity he is hiding behind an alt. He would never post things this explicitly dumb under his "respectable" account (same agenda but dressed up in a suit).

insidious301

09-12-2020, 03:13 PM

:lol

He is so ashamed of his stupidity he is hiding behind an alt. He would never post things this explicitly dumb under his "respectable" account (same agenda but dressed up in a suit).

I'll let him carry on with his jargon, Roundball. If you are going to outright reject stats however, make sure they're ones you don't use. Having a little awareness never hurt anyone.

Roundball_Rock

09-12-2020, 03:19 PM

I'll let him carry on with his jargon, Roundball. If you are going to outright reject stats however, make sure they're ones you don't use. Having a little awareness never hurt anyone.

They (the idiots populating this thread) aren't the sharpest knives. Look at the 20' Raptors thread. Per 3ball Junior, on the one hand they were a one man team (Kawhi), on the other hand the expectation should be 60 wins and the ECF without that one man--not 20 wins and the lottery!

goozeman

09-12-2020, 04:11 PM

Are you high? You literally used those stats in your OP. And under the premise LeBron's help was greater than Jordan's. There is nothing wrong with these metrics, except for the outliers you'd find with any other stat. BPM is one of the best measures out there because it A) adjusts for possession B) separates individual from team C) induces everything you do in a gamelog. By your logic however, PPG is "flawed" because Karl Malone and Bob Pettit score more than Jabbar & Kobe. If I were you I'd brush up on the stats before making another jerky claim. And no, Pippen rates fairly in all advanced metrics, in fact 90s Pippen was top 10 in most of the major advanced stats. That suggests Pippen was a superstar and a true #1. And how couldn't he be? Ewing is often brought up because Pippen out-impacted him with most of the numbers in your OP. So if that's a fact, where does Ewing rate among the players you noted?

You keep talking about flaws, but you haven't done anything to support your argument. Repeating that John Stockton has a good BPM isn't saying anything. Again, if we went by your logic, then PPG is a joke. Pettit>Jabbar. Remember? Unlike you though people are willing to adopt context. When doing so they also understand there are statistical outliers for everything. BPM-OBPM-APM-RAPM all rank the elite players reasonably and the cream of the crop will rise to the top. The bottom line is that unless you're willing to dismiss your own OP then acknowledge where Ewing and Pippen rank. Tell us why Pippen had more impact than the #1 who was on Chicago's best comp.

Pippen was not a "superstar." Being in the top 10 in some categories does not make you a superstar. By your logic Karl Anthony-Towns, Trae Young, and Bradley Beal are superstars. A superstar is a player that gives a franchise instant championship credibility -- a transcendent player. Shaq is a superstar. Barkley is a superstar. Wade is a superstar. Pippen was a career second option, and his best and only full season as primary offensive threat Partick Ewing and the Knicks eliminated Pippen's team in the second round. Those are FACTS.

BTW, I've shown quite a number of examples win which BPM or OBPM utterly defies common sense (eye test and basketball consensus) and you can't address to those issues. Those examples are not "outliers" as you claim, but are common instances of the aggregate box-score estimation undervaluing big-man defensive and offensive contributions. You can find countless examples of OBMP and DBPM inexplicably ranking guard play over post play. For example, do you think Marc Jackson was a better offensive player than Ewing also? OBPM likes Marc Jackson over Ewing 89, 91, and 92. That includes a season in which Jackson only started 21 games and averaged 9ppg. OBPM also likes Starks over Ewing some years. BPM also likes Maurice Cheeks, Greg Anthony, and Doc Rivers over Ewing and Oakley in DBPM some seasons because of his high steal count. Greg Anthony was a reserve playing 20mpg so how can he be a better defender than all-defensive first team Oakley? If you just looked at the stats and took them at face value one could conclude that Greg Anthony was a better defender than one of the greatest defensive enforcers of all-time in Oakley, which is ludicrous.

In 1994 Ewing carried the Knicks to 60 wins and the Finals with Starks being the only other all-star on the roster. Oakley was just an alternate because Barkley declined to play. Meanwhile Pippen had two other all-stars in Grant and B.J. Armstrong (first team), and the Bulls had added the best player in Europe in Kukoc. The Bulls were on paper the more talented team even without Jordan, and Pippen still lost to Ewing. These are facts. Scottie even got outplayed by Grant in the Knicks series. The only other time we hear of Pippen as a possible marquee was when he signed a huge contract with Houston. There were high expectations there based on the success of the Bulls, but he ended up being the Rockets third best player behind an old ass Barkley and Hakeem and flaming out demanding a trade, alienating his teammates, Houston's front office and the fans. Do you think a 32-year-old Ewing is Houston's third best player? Ewing was putting up 24pts-11reb-2blk on 56ts% at that age. Keep dreaming.

tpols

09-12-2020, 04:27 PM

Advanced stats love Harden and Westbrook. Harden is top 10 according to BPM. Westbrook is the player that actually exposed BPM as being flawed because he posted a 15.6 which was 20 percent higher score than any season in history. Myers forced to rewrite it to take some of the shine off perimeter players but it still overvalues them completely in certain contexts.

The thing with one man army types is they make everybody dependent on them like a QB in football. So if the star QB gets knocked out? The team is usually ****ed, but superstar players that can fit in a ball sharing system and play off ball as well as on, allow other teammates to develop "QB" skills while they play the WR role. This elevates the ceiling of the team dramatically.

Roundball_Rock

09-12-2020, 05:00 PM

People should really stop engaging with Ttrolls as if he’s an honest actor. Every post he makes about basketball can be understood by realizing that the fact that LeBron James surpassed Kobe Bryant as a basketball player ruined his life. If you remember that fact, you will understand why he makes the posts he makes. Take his current stance for instance: the Raptors were apparently the 37-45 2008 Hawks without Kawhi. He can’t admit that Kawhi had an amazing supporting cast because he’s obsessed with maintaining his delusion that “any star player can win out East” in order to make LeBron look bad.

#Truth.

As to Gooseman, he is Soundwave/LostCause (the Confederate name has been retired) hiding behind a trolling account. Too ashamed to post this under his main account.

goozeman

09-12-2020, 05:35 PM

#Truth.

As to Gooseman, he is Soundwave/LostCause (the Confederate name has been retired) hiding behind a trolling account. Too ashamed to post this under his main account.

Lol, wtf are you talking about? I have no idea who that person is. If anybody has alts on here it's all the tard Pippen fans spamming this forum. If I hosted a basketball convention for people under 35 you'd be lucky to find a handful of people who had ever even heard of career second-option Scottie Maurice Pippen, but you guys spamming ever thread with retarded crap like Pippen = Shaq on here. :wtf: Projecting much?

tpols

09-12-2020, 05:49 PM

The reason this perspective seems bizaare is because you guys have a zero-sum, video game mentality when it comes to the advanced metrics. You take them as the gospel truth when in fact they are only estimations with various limiatations and weaknesses. The simple belief that shots equals production and that more shots equals more production is just an example of this zero-sum mentality and poor understanding. This a mistake many GM's have made in the past of giving more and more touches to a middling offensive talent who struggles in creating his own shot and team shooting efficiency falls off the cliff. This type of basketball post hoc analysis is a common mistake and why a lot of GM's fail with player development because they draft of the box score and they don't look at how the player is getting their production. In truth, shots are not production at all. It's the exact opposite -- production is getting shots. You guys are putting the cart before the horse. Before a player can be a shooter, they have to be a shot creator.

History has always shown that Pippen-type players forced to be first options are are efficiency black holes in the clutch and in the playoffs. This is why Phil was okay with sitting Pippen's ass on the bench in a playoff game in the fourth quarter. They always get exposed. Pippen was in the process of getting exposed in 1995 before Jordan unretired. Also why without Jordan in 94 and 95 Pippen's shot making as overall trend remained relatively flat to his entire career. His attempts didn't deviate all that much because Pippen continued to play the same role in Phil's triangle. On the one hand, you are giving Pippen too much credit and on the other you are not recognizing Pippen was self-aware and intelligent enough as player to not try to force his game. The result was that the Bulls were still a decent team thanks to experience and coaching, but not a threat to win anything overall. When playoff basketball came around, Pippen's efficiency predictably plummeted. Because in the playoffs against good teams possessions are at a premium, Pippen was forced to create offense and ended up getting shut down by the Knicks. Likewise when Jordan came back those shots that Pippen could never seem to find suddenly came back because Jordan was a far superior at creating offense than Pippen.

In the same way, Ewing as a primary offensive threat was a superior shot creator. That's why you can't compare Pippen's role to Ewing's and why BPM/OBPM having a secondary offensive talent like Pippen ranked higher than scoring centers like Ewing and Hakeem must mean that OBPM and BPM is a flawed stat on some level. The best way to use these stats is to ideally compare players at the same position and the same role and in multiple scenarios. BPM tries normalize for this by creating coefficients for both player position and player role, but it obviously has some issues. If I had an example of the player position/role regression it would be easy to analyze and figure why there is such a huge discrepancy. My theory is that the revamped BPM 2.0 is more geared toward evaluating modern players who mostly play on perimeter anyway. Any stat that has MVP-level Moses Malone as the fourth best player on his roster has issues.. Of course, you guys keep ignoring these very basic critiques of BPM as methodology because you can't explain them away with group think because they are such obvious biases.

Great points. And extremely eloquently written.

Rockhead could learn a thing or two. :lol

To the bolded, Pippen produced at only a 103 ORTG and +2 splits versus the Knicks. They shut him down. That's why Phil wanted Toni to take the most important shot of the series. Pippen as a second banana was a great impact player... big time positive splits. As a 1st option? He was like a weaker Giannis if that makes sense. Still had the defense, but his offense was easily shut down. Even Ewing posted a 113 ORTG in that series. Way better than Pippen.

Yea, Shaq is tricky.

Wait! Ya'll really believe Pippen > Shaq? :oldlol: :roll:

That's rockhead for you lmao. The guy is completely delusional.