Thinking Basketball tracked every Michael Jordan playoff game for a decade...

[jlip]

... and compared his playoff plus-minus to other greats such as LeBron, Shaq, and Curry. Watch, fight, troll, or whatever else you feel like doing.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c

[warriorfan]

Shows how Jordan molded his teammates especially pippen and was able to get the most out of them. Those players would not have improved as much as they did without playing with him.

Also eye test during that video shows how he is the goat

[SATAN]

Shows how Jordan molded his teammates especially pippen and was able to get the most out of them. Those players would not have improved as much as they did without playing with him.

Also eye test during that video shows how he is the goat

:roll:

:facepalm

[bison]

... and compared his playoff plus-minus to other greats such as LeBron, Shaq, and Curry. Watch, fight, troll, or whatever else you feel like doing.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c

Is this 18 minutes of a guy comparing advanced stats?

[theman93]

Is this 18 minutes of a guy comparing advanced stats?

18 minutes of +/- statistics

Shows how impressively MJ developed his teammates from scrubs to winners as well as his individual greatness. :applause:

[bison]

18 minutes of +/- statistics

Shows how impressively MJ developed his teammates from scrubs to winners as well as his individual greatness. :applause:

Interesting. I will check out the video when I’m not so drunk. But you mean to tell me Jordan developed his teammates into clean and efficient championship winning machine so that when he retired, they went on to win 55 games without him? This is very different from when LeTrash exploits and ruins a franchise for temporary glory and leaves the team in ruins once he team hops to his next phony project. Interesting indeed

[jlip]

Is this 18 minutes of a guy comparing advanced stats?
Not quite that simple. It actually includes genuine analysis.


18 minutes of +/- statistics

Shows how impressively MJ developed his teammates from scrubs to winners as well as his individual greatness. :applause:

No. It does not. :facepalm

[SATAN]

theliar93 at it again. :facepalm

[nayte]

It says Jordan was a positive when he was on the court. Ground breaking shiet right there lol

[Micku]

What's most surprising is that MJ plus/minus stat from his metric was that in the playoffs, MJ in 97 had a better +/- than the first three peat and the in the 80s. Like he carried them in 97. I thought he carried them more in 98.

He was better in the 80s and early 90s, but in the 2nd peat, he was smarter and trust in his teammates a little bit more.

However, MJ in the 80s couldn't win until the teammates improved. MJ was just a constant. You can definitely see this in 88 and 89. You also have to give credit to Tex Winter and P.Jax for implementing the triangle and playing that style of basketball. Their system probably contributed improvement more than Doug Collins did. MJ carried that team in 88 and 89.

[light]

Shows how Jordan molded his teammates especially pippen and was able to get the most out of them. Those players would not have improved as much as they did without playing with him.

Also eye test during that video shows how he is the goat

Nope. Jordan didn't mold anybody. He didn't care about molding his teammates. That was Jackson's work. And Pippen's work. Pippen was the encourager and the voice of the Bulls.

The Bulls replaced MJ with Pete Myers and only had -2 wins the next season. 57 wins to 55 wins. Pippen really improved and became the best player in the league after Jordan left.

PS. Jordan's teammates didn't like him and didn't like playing with him.

[nayte]

How do you know all that tho.you seem to make up a whole lot of bullcrap out of thin air

[Xiao Yao You]

Nope. Jordan didn't mold anybody. He didn't care about molding his teammates. That was Jackson's work. And Pippen's work. Pippen was the encourager and the voice of the Bulls.

The Bulls replaced MJ with Pete Myers and only had -2 wins the next season. 57 wins to 55 wins. Pippen really improved and became the best player in the league after Jordan left.

PS. Jordan's teammates didn't like him and didn't like playing with him.

Pippen was never close to the best player in the league! If he had been they wouldn't have been a .500 team once Horace left :facepalm

[theman93]

No. It does not. :facepalm

Yes. It does.

[Johnny32]

Not quite that simple. It actually includes genuine analysis.



No. It does not. :facepalm

don't mind him. i heard he's been desperately spam posting all over the board since i pushed his shit in like a week ago.

[theman93]

don't mind him. i heard he's been desperately spam posting all over the board since i pushed his shit in like a week ago.

You mean like when you thought Jordan only eliminated 14 hall of famers in his playoff career when it turned out he eliminated almost double that amount?

[Johnny32]

wrong poster, fatboy. as we can all see she's been passed around a lot recently.

[theman93]

Nope. Jordan didn't mold anybody. He didn't care about molding his teammates. That was Jackson's work. And Pippen's work. Pippen was the encourager and the voice of the Bulls.

The Bulls replaced MJ with Pete Myers and only had -2 wins the next season. 57 wins to 55 wins. Pippen really improved and became the best player in the league after Jordan left.

PS. Jordan's teammates didn't like him and didn't like playing with him.

Could you remind what the Bulls record in 1995 was before MJ returned? I believe it was an insane 34-31, but just wanted you to confirm.

[Johnny32]

Pippen was never close to the best player in the league! If he had been they wouldn't have been a .500 team once Horace left :facepalm

he was arguably the best two way player in the lg in 94.

22-9-6-3-1 on 49%. 1st team all nba, 1st team all defense, 3rd in mvp voting.

[RogueBorg]

Pippen really improved and became the best player in the league after Jordan left.



Any MVP's for Pipp to back this statement?

[RogueBorg]

3rd in mvp voting.

Only loser Lebronstans think losing is winning.

[Baller789]

Any MVP's for Pipp to back this statement?

Maybe he had a Finals appearance at least?

[RogueBorg]

Maybe he had a Finals appearance at least?


So let me see if I understand this, he didn't win the chip, didn't make the Finals, didn't win MVP, didn't win DPOY, didn't lead the league in scoring, but he's the best player in the league...sounds like normal Lebronstan reasoning.

[1987_Lakers]

So let me see if I understand this, he didn't win the chip, didn't make the Finals, didn't win MVP, didn't win DPOY, didn't lead the league in scoring, but he's the best player in the league...sounds like normal Lebronstan reasoning.

Kareem in '75 didn't win MVP, lead the league in scoring, didn't make the Finals and you could still make an argument he was the league's best player.

[theman93]

he was arguably the best two way player in the lg in 94.

22-9-6-3-1 on 49%. 1st team all nba, 1st team all defense, 3rd in mvp voting.

Arguably?

Hakeem was DPOY and averaged significantly more points a game. LOL

[bison]

Johnny32 is RRR3

[ClipperRevival]

Johnny32 is RRR3

Holy sh*t.

How many alts does this loser have? I mean this guy must constitute like 20% of the posts on this board. Dude needs some help.

[RogueBorg]

don't mind him. i heard he's been desperately spam posting all over the board since i pushed his shit in like a week ago.

Like the time you didn't know the amount of Hall of Famers Jordan eliminated?

[TheMan]

Kareem in '75 didn't win MVP, lead the league in scoring, didn't make the Finals and you could still make an argument he was the league's best player.

Lol, you're comparing Pippen to KAJ...:roll:

[TheMan]

Holy sh*t.

How many alts does this loser have? I mean this guy must constitute like 20% of the posts on this board. Dude needs some help.

Between RRR3 and Simon, they must make up at least half of this joint's posters :lol

[PeroAntic]

MJ's three pointer quote is gold. Love that mentality. Gunners suck, this game is about driving and pushing the opponent inside.

[RRR3]

MJ's three pointer quote is gold. Love that mentality. Gunners suck, this game is about driving and pushing the opponent inside.
Not anymore it isn’t.

[PeroAntic]

Not anymore it isn’t.

It still is. Thats the right way. You want your opponent on the back of his feet. Shooting is great, but the best shooter ever isn't even top 5 best player ever. And hes a rare breed. Shooting should be at a decent level enough just to keep defenders honest.

But what MJ is essentially saying is I could play that way if I wanted to. But I dont because its not fun for me lol

[Full Court]

I tracked every Lebron finals game for his career...


















and came up with -86.

:roll:

[3ba11]

You gonna make me watch this garbage?

I'm sure there's an issue with the data itself or most people's interpretation

I'll provide the salient data

[8Ball]

The Jordan myth is evaporating day by day as people wake up.

Never before do I see people just straight up not believing Jordan is the GOAT.

Poor jordan fans.

[3ba11]

It's a fake... :yaohappy:

A fugaazi

We know this to be fact because the video shows how much Jordan's cast outscored opponents without Jordan, but then gives this number a percentile rank among the other casts in the league (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)) - this information is unattainable because there's no way that he tracked the casts of the other 29 teams in addition to Jordan's cast - the video title says that he tracked Jordan's games, not every game from every team in that time period

So it's a nice guesstimate of the numbers - the video arrives at these estimates by using boxscore data of Jordan and the cast.. The video pretends that it watched every game and tracked the plus/minus, but it's just boxscore data.

However, it's fine because the video says that Jordan's 88-90' casts were at the 0 percentile, or literally the worst in the league (better than 0% of casts).. Then they learned the system, brand of ball and chemistry, which improved them to 37th percentile from 90-92' (better than 37% of casts), and up to the 75th percentile by 93-95' - so even at the Bulls' peak, 1 in 4 casts were still superior.. (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)).

Furthermore, the video shows that the only casts that actually outscored opponents without Jordan was the 91' and 92' casts (by 1-3 points per 48 - barely a .500 ballclub).... (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=10m59s)).

Otherwise, the cast was outscored every other season, so they were below .500 from 88-90', 93', and 96-98' (and barely.500 in 91' and 92).

And the 2nd three-peat casts were horrible - none of them outscored opponents without Jordan and they had 16, 22 and 12 point gaps in the Bulls' performance with and without Jordan from 96-98'.... (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s)).

Finally, teammates play better in superior brands of ball - Jordan was good enough to play a brand of ball that teammates could grow in.. Otoh, zero young teammates grew from low producers to viable producers on Lebron's watch.. His skillset lacks the teammate development and fits to win organically (he imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win, aka talent-based winning, team-hopping)

Btw, the video touts playoff numbers, but Jordan set the record for plus/minus in the 97' and 98' regular seasons, until Curry broke the mark in 16'..

[SouBeachTalents]

It's a fake... :yaohappy:

A fugaazi

We know this to be fact because the video shows how much Jordan's cast outscored opponents without Jordan, but then gives this number a percentile rank among all the other casts in the league (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)) - this information is unattainable because there's no way that he tracked the casts of the other 29 teams in addition to Jordan's cast - the video title says that he tracked Jordan's games, not every game from every team in that time period

So it's a nice guesstimate of the numbers - the video arrives at these estimates by using boxscore data of Jordan and the cast.. The video pretends that it watched every game and tracked the plus/minus, but it's just boxscore data.

However, it's fine because the video says that Jordan's 88-90' casts were at the 0 percentile, or literally the worst in the league (better than 0% of casts).. Then they learned the system, brand of ball and chemistry, which improved them to 37th percentile from 90-92' (better than 37% of casts), and up to the 75th percentile by 93-95' - so even at the Bulls' peak, 1 in 4 casts were still superior.. (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)).

Furthermore, the video shows that the only casts that actually outscored opponents without Jordan was the 91' and 92' casts (by 1-3 points per 48 - barely a .500 ballclub).... (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=10m59s)).

Otherwise, the cast was outscored every other season, so they were below .500 from 88-90', 93', and 96-98' (and barely.500 in 91' and 92).

And the 2nd three-peat casts were horrible - none of them outscored opponents without Jordan and they had 16, 22 and 12 point gaps in the Bulls' performance with and without Jordan from 96-98'.... (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s)).

Finally, teammates play better in superior brands of ball - Jordan was good enough to play a brand of ball that teammates could grow in.. Otoh, zero young teammates grew from low producers to viable producers on Lebron's watch.. His skillset lacks the teammate development and fits to win organically (he imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win, aka talent-based winning, team-hopping)

Btw, the video touts playoff numbers, but Jordan set the record for plus/minus in the 97' and 98' regular seasons, until Curry broke the mark in 16'..
1-9

[Johnny32]

anyone who was actually watching games knows how great the bulls bench was.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByNeavLHSRU&ab_channel=LennardTeo

rem that ^^ finals game 4th qtr with mj on the bench down double digits?

[3ba11]

anyone who was actually watching games knows how great the bulls bench was.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByNeavLHSRU&ab_channel=LennardTeo

rem that finals gm 4th qtr with mj on the bench down double digits.


Jordan hit every big shot down the stretch of that game

Every one

If Lebron ever closed a game like that, you would have a heart attack

[Johnny32]

Jordan hit every big shot down the stretch of that game

Every one

If Lebron ever closed a game like that, you would have a heart attack

and he's icing his legs down 25 if the bench doesn't cut a 15 point lead to 3 with him sitting. that's the point, window licker.

[3ba11]

and he's icing his legs down 25 if the bench doesn't cut a 15 point lead to 3 with him sitting. that's the point, window licker.


Oh so they were going to loae the game

Got it

Jordan dropped 46 in Game 5 to get a 3-2 lead and now 30 with every big shot to close the series

Lebron never did that - Kyrie dropped 40 in Game 5 and then hit the series winner - night and day compared to Jordan's cast..

[sdot_thadon]

Wow, it's always entertaining watching any kind of stan try to dismiss something they didn't think was true.

[3ba11]

Wow, it's always entertaining watching any kind of stan try to dismiss something they didn't think was true.


It's already been proven to be a fake

A fugaazi:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?506106-Thinking-Basketball-tracked-every-Michael-Jordan-playoff-game-for-a-decade&p=14647520&viewfull=1#post14647520


Even though the video confirms that MJ is the goat anyway

[fsvr54]

The Jordan myth is evaporating day by day as people wake up.

Never before do I see people just straight up not believing Jordan is the GOAT.

Poor jordan fans.

People like you are beyond ridiculous

[3ba11]

Wow, it's always entertaining watching any kind of stan try to dismiss something they didn't think was true.


the video shows how much Jordan's cast outscored opponents without Jordan, but then gives this number a percentile rank among the other casts in the league (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)) - this information is unattainable because there's no way that he tracked the casts of the other 29 teams in addition to Jordan's cast - the video title says that he tracked Jordan's games, not every game from every team in that time period

So it's a fake despite showing that Jordan had the worst casts and is obviously goat

[sdot_thadon]

the video shows how much Jordan's cast outscored opponents without Jordan, but then gives this number a percentile rank among the other casts in the league (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)) - this information is unattainable because there's no way that he tracked the casts of the other 29 teams in addition to Jordan's cast - the video title says that he tracked Jordan's games, not every game from every team in that time period

So it's a fake despite showing that Jordan had the worst casts and is obviously goat

I'm pretty sure common sense, if you had a shred, would tell you he ranked them against the actual existing plus minus data that was tracked since then. That dude is a has done full scale projects and crunches more basketball numbers than you in his sleep. Just because you don't like the results don't mean it didn't happen lol.

[jlip]

and he's icing his legs down 25 if the bench doesn't cut a 15 point lead to 3 with him sitting. that's the point, window licker.

Just to troll 3ball, Jordan was not merely on the bench because it was his routine time to rest. Jordan was benched in a closeout game of the NBA Finals because the coach felt he was hurting the team.


But Tex wasn't one to defer to anyone when it came to the game, which transcended everyone. Tex would frequently jab Jackson when he wasn't calling timeouts, "You're being outcoached! Get going." And Tex was the one when the Bulls were falling well behind in Game 6 of the 1992 Finals who told Jackson, "Get Jordan out. He's hurting us." If you wanted honestly you asked Tex. Or listened. Jackson did remove Jordan and the Bulls went on to overcome a 15-point fourth quarter deficit and win their second title.

https://www.nba.com/bulls/history/tex-teacher-and-pioneer-game

Then from a June 16, 1992 article (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19920616&id=ZcQ0AAAAIBAJ&sjid=rAcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4978,4499688&hl=en) look at what was said about that game. Remember this is done in real time, not written by some young new MJ hater/ LeBron "fan boy".

Michael Jordan has been involved in a many Bulls runs in his days with Chicago, but he wasn't a part of this one. With the Portland Trailblazers holding a 15- point lead Sunday after three quarters of Game 6 of the NBA final, Bulls coach Phil Jackson opened the fourth period with Jordan on the bench and Scottie Pippen as the lone starter on the floor...

...Hansen open the quarter with a three pointer from the left corner. Pippen directed the team to perfection, and the seldom used King had all five of his points in the stretch. Jordan meanwhile became a cheerleader. :biggums:

I didn't mind being over there, said Jordan, who scored 12 of his 33 points in the final eight minutes to seal the triumph. (Skip Bayless would call this "front running" if another certain player were in the same situation.) I was anxious to get back in there, but the other guys were doing such a good job that I didn't mind waiting."

[sdot_thadon]

Just to troll 3ball, Jordan was not merely on the bench because it was his routine time to rest. Jordan was benched in a closeout game of the NBA Finals because the coach felt he was hurting the team.


But Tex wasn't one to defer to anyone when it came to the game, which transcended everyone. Tex would frequently jab Jackson when he wasn't calling timeouts, "You're being outcoached! Get going." And Tex was the one when the Bulls were falling well behind in Game 6 of the 1992 Finals who told Jackson, "Get Jordan out. He's hurting us." If you wanted honestly you asked Tex. Or listened. Jackson did remove Jordan and the Bulls went on to overcome a 15-point fourth quarter deficit and win their second title.

https://www.nba.com/bulls/history/tex-teacher-and-pioneer-game

Then from a June 16, 1992 article (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19920616&id=ZcQ0AAAAIBAJ&sjid=rAcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4978,4499688&hl=en) look at what was said about that game. Remember this is done in real time, not written by some young new MJ hater/ LeBron "fan boy".

Michael Jordan has been involved in a many Bulls runs in his days with Chicago, but he wasn't a part of this one. With the Portland Trailblazers holding a 15- point lead Sunday after three quarters of Game 6 of the NBA final, Bulls coach Phil Jackson opened the fourth period with Jordan on the bench and Scottie Pippen as the lone starter on the floor...

...Hansen open the quarter with a three pointer from the left corner. Pippen directed the team to perfection, and the seldom used King had all five of his points in the stretch. Jordan meanwhile became a cheerleader. :biggums:

I didn't mind being over there, said Jordan, who scored 12 of his 33 points in the final eight minutes to seal the triumph. (Skip Bayless would call this "front running" if another certain player were in the same situation.) I was anxious to get back in there, but the other guys were doing such a good job that I didn't mind waiting."

Wow.

[warriorfan]

Just to troll 3ball, Jordan was not merely on the bench because it was his routine time to rest. Jordan was benched in a closeout game of the NBA Finals because the coach felt he was hurting the team.


But Tex wasn't one to defer to anyone when it came to the game, which transcended everyone. Tex would frequently jab Jackson when he wasn't calling timeouts, "You're being outcoached! Get going." And Tex was the one when the Bulls were falling well behind in Game 6 of the 1992 Finals who told Jackson, "Get Jordan out. He's hurting us." If you wanted honestly you asked Tex. Or listened. Jackson did remove Jordan and the Bulls went on to overcome a 15-point fourth quarter deficit and win their second title.

https://www.nba.com/bulls/history/tex-teacher-and-pioneer-game

Then from a June 16, 1992 article (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19920616&id=ZcQ0AAAAIBAJ&sjid=rAcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4978,4499688&hl=en) look at what was said about that game. Remember this is done in real time, not written by some young new MJ hater/ LeBron "fan boy".

Michael Jordan has been involved in a many Bulls runs in his days with Chicago, but he wasn't a part of this one. With the Portland Trailblazers holding a 15- point lead Sunday after three quarters of Game 6 of the NBA final, Bulls coach Phil Jackson opened the fourth period with Jordan on the bench and Scottie Pippen as the lone starter on the floor...

...Hansen open the quarter with a three pointer from the left corner. Pippen directed the team to perfection, and the seldom used King had all five of his points in the stretch. Jordan meanwhile became a cheerleader. :biggums:

I didn't mind being over there, said Jordan, who scored 12 of his 33 points in the final eight minutes to seal the triumph. (Skip Bayless would call this "front running" if another certain player were in the same situation.) I was anxious to get back in there, but the other guys were doing such a good job that I didn't mind waiting."

Damn, so you are saying Jordan sat the 4th and still had a game high 33 points on high efficiency?

https://i.postimg.cc/zXxdKJDW/619-FF382-45-F6-4-FBE-953-E-58-C4-B6-E0157-C.jpg

Alpha.

[3ba11]

I'm pretty sure common sense, if you had a shred, would tell you he ranked them against the actual existing plus minus data that was tracked since then. That dude is a has done full scale projects and crunches more basketball numbers than you in his sleep. Just because you don't like the results don't mean it didn't happen lol.


I just proved that he's a farce.. :confusedshrug:

He specifically said that Jordan's cast ranked in XX percentile of supporting players and graphed the exact years he was talking about (88-93') - he literally connected the dots from year to year on a graph.

But again, we know that he didn't track the games from other casts, so the percentile numbers are fake - he's lying and I caught him.

I'm sorry if you wanted to believe him but he's a fraud, just like Lebron - they both "manufacture" things... you know what I mean?? Lol.. that's the historical record.

But even if we believe the fraud, the video says that Jordan's cast ranked in the 0 percentile from 88-90' - so that's the worst in the league (better than 0% of casts).. From 90-92', his cast was only 37th percentile (better than 37% of casts).. I'm pretty sure that's horrible for a back-to-back champion.

Even the very best rankings of Jordan's casts show 75th percentile - so 1 in 4 casts are still better than the Bulls even after they 3-peated.

Furthermore, only the 91' and 92' casts outscored opponents without Jordan (barely though, so they were barely .500 teams)... Every other cast was outscored and by material margins (88-90', 93', 96-98')..

The 2nd three-peat casts were particularly horrific - none of them outscored opponents without Jordan and they had 16, 22 and 12 point gaps in their performance with Jordan versus without (17 point average) - this compares to Shaq and Lebron's peak periods from the video, except their periods included non-title years.. Ultimately, Jordan's 2nd three-peat and 89/90 seasons show the biggest gaps for title teams and non-title teams, respectively.. Btw, notice how he doesn't provide percentiles for the 2nd three-peat because obviously Jordan's casts those years were utter garbage and it's been misreported by the media.

[RRR3]

Damn this video sent snivelball into a tizzy.

[3ba11]

Damn this video sent snivelball into a tizzy.


I'm a fraud-buster so I had to do what I do

The video and author are a farce.. plain and simple

I proved it above.. Are you going to thank me??

[kawhileonard2]

:roll:

:facepalm

Pippen became great due to playing with Jordan, he even said so himself.

Source: GoogleBooks (http://books.google.com/books?id=aQ84ViBNkYwC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=Game+Michael+Jordan+broke+his+leg&source=web&ots=Y9Xtn3nomR&sig=6shSn2cklYKVP1kBaC6nI0A_oko&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA39,M1)




Pippen, unlike other Bulls who usually kept their distance from Jordan, tried to learn all he could from Jordan in practice. In turn, Jordan worked with Pippen on his moves, jump shot, and defense and taught him mental toughness.



Pippen relates on how his game improved - Link (http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/jordanhof_pippen_090910.html)


http://www.nba.com/media/bulls/jordanpippen_090910.jpg




“He was very competitive, so he went at me and that helped me learn,” said Pippen. “You continue to compete against the very best every day, and you will get better, or you’ll be embarrassed.”




“I went to a small school, so I had to be a jack of all trades and master a few,” said Pippen. “Defense was one thing I was really able to work at and get better.

“A lot of my instincts came from guarding Michael all the time in practice,” he added. “I had four other guys on my team, but I had schemes that I would throw out there depending on what he did. I’d say, ‘If I make Michael do this, then you go trap him.’ There were things I tried to do on defense to trigger him into a
mistake. He was a great player, and if you couldn’t try it on him in practice, there was nowhere else to try it.”



Pippen realized himself that going against MJ is what made him better.


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-krausejordan090909



“Michael was great at identifying things,” Krause said. “Would Pippen have been great someplace else? Michael absolutely killed Scottie in practice every day for his first two years. Mike just tore Pip up. He made Pip learn how to compete and forced him into playing hard. Had there not been someone to challenge Scottie like that, I’m not sure what would’ve happened to him.”

[RRR3]

I'm a fraud-buster so I had to do what I do

The video and author are a farce.. plain and simple

I proved it above.. Are you going to thank me??
Sure I’ll thank you for being entertaining. Reading your meltdowns is funny.

[3ba11]

Just to troll 3ball, Jordan was not merely on the bench because it was his routine time to rest. Jordan was benched in a closeout game of the NBA Finals because the coach felt he was hurting the team.


But Tex wasn't one to defer to anyone when it came to the game, which transcended everyone. Tex would frequently jab Jackson when he wasn't calling timeouts, "You're being outcoached! Get going." And Tex was the one when the Bulls were falling well behind in Game 6 of the 1992 Finals who told Jackson, "Get Jordan out. He's hurting us." If you wanted honestly you asked Tex. Or listened. Jackson did remove Jordan and the Bulls went on to overcome a 15-point fourth quarter deficit and win their second title.

https://www.nba.com/bulls/history/tex-teacher-and-pioneer-game

Then from a June 16, 1992 article (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19920616&id=ZcQ0AAAAIBAJ&sjid=rAcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4978,4499688&hl=en) look at what was said about that game. Remember this is done in real time, not written by some young new MJ hater/ LeBron "fan boy".

Michael Jordan has been involved in a many Bulls runs in his days with Chicago, but he wasn't a part of this one. With the Portland Trailblazers holding a 15- point lead Sunday after three quarters of Game 6 of the NBA final, Bulls coach Phil Jackson opened the fourth period with Jordan on the bench and Scottie Pippen as the lone starter on the floor...

...Hansen open the quarter with a three pointer from the left corner. Pippen directed the team to perfection, and the seldom used King had all five of his points in the stretch. Jordan meanwhile became a cheerleader. :biggums:

I didn't mind being over there, said Jordan, who scored 12 of his 33 points in the final eight minutes to seal the triumph. (Skip Bayless would call this "front running" if another certain player were in the same situation.) I was anxious to get back in there, but the other guys were doing such a good job that I didn't mind waiting."


The article lies by claiming that the Bulls regained the lead without Jordan

A blatant lie - Jordan returned with 8:20 remaining and the Bulls down 3 points - he proceeded to hit every big shot for the last 8 minutes:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mhRMOq5rFtU&t=01h15m03s


So the article is just lying and trying to boost Jordan's cast, while Tex Winters will also say the politically-correct thing that will maintain team morale

You guys are just suckers and prefer to believe the fake news media rather than determine the facts for yourself (like I just did above)

[3ba11]

Sure I’ll thank you for being entertaining. Reading your meltdowns is funny.


So you believe that he tracked the plus-minus for every cast in the NBA from 88-93'??... Not just Jordan's games???... EVERY CAST???

That's the only way he could derive a percentile rank that compares Jordan's cast to others.... :confusedshrug:

sdot's only response to this was to say that the video was comparing Jordan's 88-93' casts to current casts that we have data for - except the video literally graphs the years in question (88-93') - the percentiles are plotted on a graph with the years 88-93'...

So he's a liar and I proved it

Your gratitude is appreciated

Don't be surprised.. I've been exposing the Lebron fraud and false narratives for years - this is just another one - the moment I heard the video call Horace Grant a "star", I knew it was part of the Lebron fraud and probably bankrolled by Klutch Sports..

[sdot_thadon]

I just proved that he's a farce.. :confusedshrug:

He specifically said that Jordan's cast ranked in XX percentile of supporting players and graphed the exact years he was talking about (88-93') - he literally connected the dots from year to year on a graph.

But again, we know that he didn't track the games from other casts, so the percentile numbers are fake - he's lying and I caught him.

I'm sorry if you wanted to believe him but he's a fraud, just like Lebron - they both "manufacture" things... you know what I mean?? Lol.. that's the historical record.

But even if we believe the fraud, the video says that Jordan's cast ranked in the 0 percentile from 88-90' - so that's the worst in the league (better than 0% of casts).. From 90-92', his cast was only 37th percentile (better than 37% of casts).. I'm pretty sure that's horrible for a back-to-back champion.

Even the very best rankings of Jordan's casts show 75th percentile - so 1 in 4 casts are still better than the Bulls even after they 3-peated.

Furthermore, only the 91' and 92' casts outscored opponents without Jordan (barely though, so they were barely .500 teams)... Every other cast was outscored and by material margins (88-90', 93', 96-98')..

The 2nd three-peat casts were particularly horrific - none of them outscored opponents without Jordan and they had 16, 22 and 12 point gaps in their performance with Jordan versus without (17 point average) - this compares to Shaq and Lebron's peak periods from the video, except their periods included non-title years.. Ultimately, Jordan's 2nd three-peat and 89/90 seasons show the biggest gaps for title teams and non-title teams, respectively.. Btw, notice how he doesn't provide percentiles for the 2nd three-peat because obviously Jordan's casts those years were utter garbage and it's been misreported by the media.

Poor you, hurts so much that you can't see the simplicity. He ranked the team he did track(Mjs) vs the teams the NBA has tracked ever since. Duh.

[warriorfan]

MJ should have just forced the team to abandon the triangle system so he could do a simplistic playground ball dominating game which therefor would have his team crater harder than normal when he left due to there being no real system. Jordan probably would have lost more but at least his teammates would look worse then they really are and he could get stats and make excuses when he loses in the finals more times then he wins.


Actually wait no he shouldn’t do that. LeBron stans stay fumin’ :lol

[sdot_thadon]

MJ should have just forced the team to abandon the triangle system so he could do a simplistic playground ball dominating game which therefor would have his team crater harder than normal when he left due to there being no real system. Jordan probably would have lost more but at least his teammates would look worse then they really are and he could get stats and make excuses when he loses in the finals more times then he wins.


Actually wait no he shouldn’t do that. LeBron stans stay fumin’ :lol

Today you learned: he routinely ditched the triangle and did what he wanted(as did scottie at times) He still won despite this fact.

[warriorfan]

Today you learned: he routinely ditched the triangle and did what he wanted(as did scottie at times) He still won despite this fact.

The triangle was run the majority of the time and he didn’t hijack the team by flat out rejecting the triangle like we know LeBron would have done. So therefore MJ’s teammates had a legitimate system to play in when he wasn’t on the floor letting them have elevated performances compared to their skill level, otoh LeBron would refuse to run any offense besides his simplistic ball dominating drive and kick style so the team would not have a system, so obviously when he sat out the team would perform worse then their talent levels because they have no real system to work with. It’s why LeBron has had to collude and team hop while stacking the deck, multiple times, every time coming back with results that did not live up to expectations. LeBron needs more talent to win because his simplistic style is sub optimal….

[3ba11]

Poor you, hurts so much that you can't see the simplicity. He ranked the team he did track(Mjs) vs the teams the NBA has tracked ever since. Duh.


The video graphs the exact years he's talking about (88-93'):


https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-06-2022/Yg_ATJ.gif


So it's a fake graph

And it's funny because he could do a legitimate graph that conpares Jordan's 97' and 98' casts to the NBA....

but there's no percentile graph for the 2nd three-peat casts because he mentions later in the video that they were aids - none of the 2nd three-peat casts outscored opponents without Jordan and they had an average 17-point gap in performance with Jordan and without... this compares to Shaq and Lebron's peak periods, but their periods included non-title years... So Jordan has the biggest gap for title teams (96-98'.... 17 point gap) and non-title teams (89' and 90'... 24 point gap)..

Don't be too embarrassed that you fell for it..

But intuitively, no one would watch every game and track the plus minus unless they were paid a lot.. The NBA currently does it ELECTRONICALLY.. So you should've looked at it with a skeptical eye like I did - then you might've noticed the trick like I did

[theman93]

3ba11 taking these boys to school. My lawd.

[Shooter]

Shows how Jordan molded his teammates especially pippen and was able to get the most out of them. Those players would not have improved as much as they did without playing with him.

Also eye test during that video shows how he is the goat


Holy shit you're a loser :lol
https://i.postimg.cc/G9wFv5b5/Lonely-Fan-lol.jpg

[sdot_thadon]

3ba11 taking these boys to school. My lawd.

Hes an idiot, maybe you 2 were made for each other lol.

[sdot_thadon]

The video graphs the exact years he's talking about (88-93'):


https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-06-2022/Yg_ATJ.gif


So it's a fake graph

And it's funny because he could do a legitimate graph that conpares Jordan's 97' and 98' casts to the NBA....

but there's no percentile graph for the 2nd three-peat casts because he mentions later in the video that they were aids - none of the 2nd three-peat casts outscored opponents without Jordan and they had an average 17-point gap in performance with Jordan and without... this compares to Shaq and Lebron's peak periods, but their periods included non-title years... So Jordan has the biggest gap for title teams (96-98'.... 17 point gap) and non-title teams (89' and 90'... 24 point gap)..

Don't be too embarrassed that you fell for it..

But intuitively, no one would watch every game and track the plus minus unless they were paid a lot.. The NBA currently does it ELECTRONICALLY.. So you should've looked at it with a skeptical eye like I did - then you might've noticed the trick like I did

You took the time to screenshot the graph, yet are clueless about it? He used those particular years because they exhibit the growth his cast had during that time period. He even says so in the damn video. He also did a graph comparing to other players, from different a seasons. Today you learned something new, and maybe it was a painful experience. I get it, hero complex and all. But yeah, just take a breath and use some common sense and you'll get it. Come back here and discuss it with the rest of us once it makes sense for you.

[1987_Lakers]

Good video, nothing ground breaking. He proved what most of us already knew, MJ had crazy impact on the court obviously, but his teammates got better by '91, playing solid for the most part whenever MJ was off the court. What the Bulls did in '94 without MJ basically proved they were very good.

His plus/minus numbers fall short of peak LeBron & Shaq, but still all-time great.

[1987_Lakers]

It's already been proven to be a fake

A fugaazi:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?506106-Thinking-Basketball-tracked-every-Michael-Jordan-playoff-game-for-a-decade&p=14647520&viewfull=1#post14647520


Even though the video confirms that MJ is the goat anyway

lol, this dude is in full meltdown mode.

[3ba11]

You took the time to screenshot the graph, yet are clueless about it? He used those particular years because they exhibit the growth his cast had during that time period. He even says so in the damn video. He also did a graph comparing to other players, from different a seasons. Today you learned something new, and maybe it was a painful experience. I get it, hero complex and all. But yeah, just take a breath and use some common sense and you'll get it. Come back here and discuss it with the rest of us once it makes sense for you.


Do you know what a percentile is? It's a ranking where if you rank in the 37th percentile, this means you did better than 37% of contestants..

So when he says the Bulls cast from 90-92' ranked in the 37th percentile (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=11m59s)), that means they performed better than 37% of casts from 90-92'.. He cannot have this information however, because he only tracked Jordan's games, not every team in the league.. So he's a fraud that simply used 538's boxscore method of determining "best cast" - we all remember the infamous "best cast" list from 538 a few years ago - that was taken entirely from boxscores.

However, his guesstimates claim that Jordan had the worst casts in the league from 88-90' (0 percentile).. This increased to 37th percentile from 90-92 (better than 37% of casts) and 75th percentile by 93' (1 of 4 casts are still better than the 3-peat champs).

Ultimately, he says that Jordan elevated a 0 percentile cast (worst in the league) to the 75th percentile by 93' - how is that not goat elevation of teammates???... No one was added to the team - the same 0 percentile players from 89' learned chemistry and brand of ball to improve to a top 25% cast by 93' (75th percentile).

Only Jordan elevated low-producing young players to viable producers - Grant, BJ and Pippen grew from single-digit rookies into great system players... This wouldn't be possible if Jordan's skillset was a Lebron or Luka-style ball-domination.. It's a good thing that Jordan was good enough to get 30-60 points without dominating the ball - this requires all-time jumpshooting skill. The goat must have all-time jumpshooting skill, aka automatic

Btw, you can say that Shaq and Lebron's on/off was higher but that's false - he cherry-picked the years.. Jordan has the highest on/off for title years (17 average from 96-98' with a high of 22... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s)) and non-title years (24 point average in 89' and 90'... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=02m57s)).. That's higher than the Shaq or Lebron numbers (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=13m25s)).

So carry on

[Johnny32]

lol this one hurt their feelings, big time

[3ba11]

lol this one hurt their feelings, big time


It's was proven to be more fraud, despite showing that Jordan had the worst casts in the league, while also having the best on-off for title runs and non-title runs

[CountDracula]

https://i.ibb.co/TmSzqk8/58-FB1-B9-D-8-A54-46-EE-A994-AA8181-C6-E5-ED.jpg (https://ibb.co/r4Snfm6)

https://i.ibb.co/TYcJBP1/475-C1785-DFBA-487-A-BDCA-9-CB1-D97198-A3.jpg (https://ibb.co/YP2J7fX)

https://i.ibb.co/BjKjx0p/B68-DBB4-E-BA40-4374-A454-99-C937-E47-F9-E.jpg (https://ibb.co/Dkgky0J)

https://i.ibb.co/nL9mQbj/E99-E63-BE-FE6-E-4988-9-AF2-E2-C1-F6-DAE1-AC.gif (https://imgbb.com/)

[3ba11]

.

His plus/minus numbers fall short of peak LeBron & Shaq, but still all-time great


.


Bullshit..

he cherry-picked the years..

Jordan has the highest on/off for title years (17 average from 96-98' with a high of 22... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s)) and non-title years (24 point average in 89' and 90'... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=02m57s)).. That's higher than the Shaq or Lebron numbers (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=13m25s))...

Ultimately, the video says that Jordan elevated a 0 percentile cast (worst in the league from 88-90') to the 75th percentile by 93' (top 25% cast) - how is that not goat elevation of teammates???... No one was added to the team - the same 0 percentile players from 89' learned chemistry and brand of ball to improve to a top 25% cast by 93' (75th percentile).

I guarantee that Lebron never had a 0 percentile cast - he entered the league with the East all-star center on his team and they added a 22/5/5 all-defender to make the 06' Playoffs as a favored, high seed - Lebron never had to carry low seeds and bad records in the playoffs like Jordan because he got 3 years to develop his team into a veteran high seed before entering the 06' Playoffs.

Btw, the only casts that outscored opponents without Jordan was 91' and 92' - I guarantee that there's several seasons where Lebron's cast outscored opponents without him - likely 11-13'.

[Baller789]

Bronies getting bodied. :lol

[Johnny32]

It's was proven to be more fraud, despite showing that Jordan had the worst casts in the league, while also having the best on-off for title runs and non-title runs

your hurt feelings don't matter.

[sdot_thadon]

Bronies getting bodied. :lol

Translation: I have no clue what is being discussed here......but goooo 3ball.

[sdot_thadon]

Do you know what a percentile is? It's a ranking where if you rank in the 37th percentile, this means you did better than 37% of contestants..

So when he says the Bulls cast from 90-92' ranked in the 37th percentile (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=11m59s)), that means they performed better than 37% of casts from 90-92'.. He cannot have this information however, because he only tracked Jordan's games, not every team in the league.. So he's a fraud that simply used 538's boxscore method of determining "best cast" - we all remember the infamous "best cast" list from 538 a few years ago - that was taken entirely from boxscores

You still don't get it. But hey denial is the 1st stage of grief, you've probably moved on to anger by now....
I've already explained to you what you already knew. He's ranking the data he tracked vs already existing data. Why would we care about the data in context of the seasons it happend in, When that's not even close to the point of the video? Of course he didnt track the whole nba in those seasons, he didnt need to. The research was done to get an idea where his plus or minus fits in comparison to other greats that are already on record. Quit playing dumb and trying to discredit someone who's numbers would be trusted a million times before yours are ever trusted once.

[Full Court]

Translation: I have no clue what is being discussed here......but goooo 3ball.

-86 :lol

[8Ball]

Good video, nothing ground breaking. He proved what most of us already knew, MJ had crazy impact on the court obviously, but his teammates got better by '91, playing solid for the most part whenever MJ was off the court. What the Bulls did in '94 without MJ basically proved they were very good.

His plus/minus numbers fall short of peak LeBron & Shaq, but still all-time great.

Jordan played with superteams in the 90s and faced none.


Jordan was not even his best in 1996 and his team won 72 games.


That 72 win year should have given Jordan unanimous MVP if he was truly a 1 man team. But he had a stacked team so a bunch of 1st place votes MVP went to others.

[8Ball]

It's was proven to be more fraud, despite showing that Jordan had the worst casts in the league, while also having the best on-off for title runs and non-title runs

3ball, thinking basketball is able to reach millions and convince them Bron is the GOAT.

You were not able to do so with jordon.

[1987_Lakers]

Translation: I have no clue what is being discussed here......but goooo 3ball.

:roll:

This fits baller perfectly.

[1987_Lakers]

Last time I saw 3ball this upset was when a poster said he was gonna watch every Bulls playoff game from their championship years and give his analysis. 3ball liked the idea at first, but the moment the poster started to praise MJ's teammates he turned on the poster and called BS on the thread. Seems like praising MJ's teammates is what triggers 3ball the most.

[sdot_thadon]

Last time I saw 3ball this upset was when a poster said he was gonna watch every Bulls playoff game from their championship years and give his analysis. 3ball liked the idea at first, but the moment the poster started to praise MJ's teammates he turned on the poster and called BS on the thread. Seems like praising MJ's teammates is what triggers 3ball the most.

And then he said Bj Armstrong sparked the comeback...and I took that personally.

[jlip]

Last time I saw 3ball this upset was when a poster said he was gonna watch every Bulls playoff game from their championship years and give his analysis. 3ball liked the idea at first, but the moment the poster started to praise MJ's teammates he turned on the poster and called BS on the thread. Seems like praising MJ's teammates is what triggers 3ball the most.

It should not be this hilarious either, but it is both comically and sadly entertaining. :roll:

[3ba11]

.
https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-06-2022/Yg_ATJ.gif

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s



You still don't get it. But hey denial is the 1st stage of grief, you've probably moved on to anger by now....
I've already explained to you what you already knew. He's ranking the data he tracked vs already existing data. Why would we care about the data in context of the seasons it happend in, When that's not even close to the point of the video? Of course he didnt track the whole nba in those seasons, he didnt need to. The research was done to get an idea where his plus or minus fits in comparison to other greats that are already on record. Quit playing dumb and trying to discredit someone who's numbers would be trusted a million times before yours are ever trusted once.


You're inventing something that wasn't in the video and wasn't said in the video - you're literally making shit up.. This is the last response on the topic because it's getting ridiculous at this point..

The video charts the 88-93' Bulls vs the 88-93' NBA - that's what is graphed, and that's what the video says (see bolded link above) - at no point does the video say "the 88-93' Bulls are being compared to current players or players since 97'"..

If he was going to do that, he would've charted 97' and 98' Bulls against the 97' and 98 NBA because we have full data for 97' and 98 - he could've made a super-clean chart showing the 97' and 98' Bulls versus other casts at that time..

But he didn't do that - he charted the 88-93' Bulls versus the 88-93' NBA, which is impossible and therefore fake.. He didn't track games for the rest of the NBA from 88-93' - no one did until 97'.

And the NBA tracks plus/minus ELECTRONICALLY - no one would do it manually and it's impossible to do it accurately by hand.. These facts alone dismiss the video as fake - it's preying on betas like you that will lap it up.

And he failed to make Jordan look bad - that's the funny part.. His numbers show that Jordan had the worst casts in the league from 88-90' (0 percentile).. Lebron never had a 0 percentile cast because he entered the league with the East all-star center on his team.. The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas added a 22/5/5 all-defender to make the 06' Playoffs as a high seed.. So Lebron never had to carry low seeds with a bad record like Jordan because he got 3 years to develop his team into a veteran high seed before entering the 06 Playoffs.

The video says that 89 and 90' Jordan elevated 0 percentile teammates to 75th percentile by 93' (top 25% cast) - that's goat elevation of teammates - Jordan responded to his criticism in GOAT fashion by elevating teammates massive amounts (0 to 75th percentile).. Since Jordan has a skillset that allows teammates to grow, he can elevate teammates to win organically and doesn't need to be a talent-based winner like Lebron (team-hopper.. all-star team strategy).. Lebron's skillset imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (team-hopping.. talent-based winning.. all-star team strategy)..

Ultimately,
Jordan has the highest on/off for title years (17 average from 96-98' with a high of 22... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s))..... and non-title years (24 point average in 89' and 90'... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=02m57s)).. That's higher than the Shaq or Lebron numbers (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=13m25s))..

[3ba11]

Last time I saw 3ball this upset was when a poster said he was gonna watch every Bulls playoff game from their championship years and give his analysis. 3ball liked the idea at first, but the moment the poster started to praise MJ's teammates he turned on the poster and called BS on the thread. Seems like praising MJ's teammates is what triggers 3ball the most.


It's because people are lying

Everyone in history enjoyed go-to teammates that dominated and took over series with elite production.

Except Jordan

Only Jordan lacked go-to teammates and was forced to win with a team of hustlers/defenders - so only Jordan had to defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load).

Due to these facts, goat haters cannot find the typical dominant performance from teammates, so they pretend that guys like Kukoc or Kerr getting 9 ppg is amazing, or Pippen getting 22' Westbrook numbers with woat efficiency is infact the best help in the league.. It's pathetic

[jlip]

@3Ball... Can you help me make sense of this? :roll::roll::roll:

https://scontent.fmem1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/297125296_3294166927510398_4523732004879419843_n.j pg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=a26aad&_nc_ohc=e2b9zm4ZSTYAX_KMZ68&tn=lsmkkVH7a6vM-6ZB&_nc_ht=scontent.fmem1-2.fna&oh=00_AT8sqT2bbPlBFzV01zgOE5T-GMrnHBXF24k6h4ATx1Pj5g&oe=62F4BB5C

[sdot_thadon]

.
https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-06-2022/Yg_ATJ.gif

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s





You're inventing something that wasn't in the video and wasn't said in the video - you're literally making shit up.. This is the last response on the topic because it's getting ridiculous at this point..
I'm not inventing anything, I'm just not an idiot. I'd not post any further here either if I were getting my shit pushed in the way you are here.



The video charts the 88-93' Bulls vs the 88-93' NBA - that's what is graphed, and that's what the video says (see bolded link above) - at no point does the video say "the 88-93' Bulls are being compared to current players or players since 97'"..

If he was going to do that, he would've charted 97' and 98' Bulls against the 97' and 98 NBA because we have full data for 97' and 98 - he could've made a super-clean chart showing the 97' and 98' Bulls versus other casts at that time..
Emotion always corrupts comprehension, sorry for your loss. The chart above isn't comparing to anything yet, it's just stating the numbers for that particular stretch of time. And your warped mind won't allow you to understand it's pointless to worry about the rest of the NBA that's not what's being researched ffs. The strength of his casts in a vacuum compared to other greats casts, in a vacuum. Quit obsessing over Irrelevant points. You're basically arguing with yourself.



But he didn't do that - he charted the 88-93' Bulls versus the 88-93' NBA, which is impossible and therefore fake.. He didn't track games for the rest of the NBA from 88-93' - no one did until 97'.

And the NBA tracks plus/minus ELECTRONICALLY - no one would do it manually and it's impossible to do it accurately by hand.. These facts alone dismiss the video as fake - it's preying on betas like you that will lap it up.
Again that chart is the Bulls with Mj off court for that window of time. Nothing to do with the NBA from 88-93 besides that being the era they played in. I'm sure YOU can't track plus or minus by hand, shit you can't even round correctly lol.



And he failed to make Jordan look bad - that's the funny part.. His numbers show that Jordan had the worst casts in the league from 88-90' (0 percentile).. Lebron never had a 0 percentile cast because he entered the league with the East all-star center on his team.. The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas added a 22/5/5 all-defender to make the 06' Playoffs as a high seed.. So Lebron never had to carry low seeds with a bad record like Jordan because he got 3 years to develop his team into a veteran high seed before entering the 06 Playoffs.

The video says that 89 and 90' Jordan elevated 0 percentile teammates to 75th percentile by 93' (top 25% cast) - that's goat elevation of teammates - Jordan responded to his criticism in GOAT fashion by elevating teammates massive amounts (0 to 75th percentile).. Since Jordan has a skillset that allows teammates to grow, he can elevate teammates to win organically and doesn't need to be a talent-based winner like Lebron (team-hopper.. all-star team strategy).. Lebron's skillset imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (team-hopping.. talent-based winning.. all-star team strategy)..

That's where you're so confused, it's with him off the floor. He's not elevating them from the bench. That's the growth they displayed with him watching. From 0- 75 percentile. A pretty great cast.



Ultimately,
Jordan has the highest on/off for title years (17 average from 96-98' with a high of 22... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s))..... and non-title years (24 point average in 89' and 90'... shown here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=02m57s)).. That's higher than the Shaq or Lebron numbers (here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=13m25s))..
Again a complete failure to understand the subject at hand, the point of the exercise wasn't to make Mj look bad. I could see where a Jordan Stan would feel that way because you couldn't believe it. Even your timestamps are dishonest. Shaq and Lebron's numbers were from over the stretches of 2000-2004 and 2016-2021 respectively. Mjs BEST 5 year stretch 1989-1993, wasnt as good in comparison. His point was this:


So, what can we make of all of this? Well despite the noise in plus-minus stats, i find these numbers incredibly important for a few reasons. First they affirm that Jordan's supporting cast radically improved during their title-winning seasons, not necessarily michael himself. As we discussed in his greatest peaks profile Mj looked super human before chicago won a title. He just needed the right teammates to climb the mountain
with. Second, both of the three peats looked great when Jordan was on the floor, with their second three-year run falling just behind Steph Curry's warriors during the Kevin Durant years.
And finally, Jordan does not actually look like an outlier compared to other greats when he was on the court versus off it. His teams were plenty competitive without him and when he was in the game other all-time clubs were comparably dominant. Of course there's enough variability in these numbers that the best player ever isn't guaranteed to have the best on off ever so the debate will certainly rage on.

[light]

One of the most memorable playoff games for MJ was actually one in which he was benched in the 4th quarter. Against the Blazers in the Finals. MJ and the entire starting 5 were benched for being ineffective and the Bulls bench (Bobby Hansen, BJ Armstrong and Stacey King) led a comeback. I watched that live and was as shocked as anyone.

Yep. Prime MJ was benched for sucking in a potential finals clinching game 6. True story.

And it was not the first time he was benched in the playoffs.

It also happened against the Knicks.

https://i.ibb.co/JmGFTx7/Screen-Shot-2022-08-06-at-6-15-11-PM.png

https://i.ibb.co/V9yMJpt/Screen-Shot-2022-08-06-at-6-17-59-PM.png

[3ba11]

One of the most memorable playoff games for MJ was actually one in which he was benched in the 4th quarter. Against the Blazers in the Finals. MJ and the entire starting 5 were benched for being ineffective and the Bulls bench (Bobby Hansen, BJ Armstrong and Stacey King) led a comeback. I watched that live and was as shocked as anyone.

Yep. Prime MJ was benched for sucking in a potential finals clinching game 6. True story.

And it was not the first time he was benched in the playoffs.

It also happened against the Knicks.

https://i.ibb.co/JmGFTx7/Screen-Shot-2022-08-06-at-6-15-11-PM.png

https://i.ibb.co/V9yMJpt/Screen-Shot-2022-08-06-at-6-17-59-PM.png


Those articles are written by humans, who are subject to emotion and trying to persuade rather than report.

The article says the Bulls "erased a 15-point lead"

This is false.

The Blazers had a 3-point lead when MJ returned at the 8:23 mark (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mhRMOq5rFtU&t=01h15m02s) and the lead immediately became 5 due to a couple consecutive Pippen turnovers..

The NBA defines "clutch-time" as last 5 within 5, so Pippen immediately vanished once clutch-time started with only 2 points in the last 5 minutes.

Otoh, MJ scored 10 of the last 12 points and they all were in clutch-time - each shot was a masterclass in mitigating an unspaced floor

Btw, Jordan was always benched at the end of the 3rd and start of the 4th - literally always.. So the articles are basically lying to boost the Bulls' fledgling cast of hustlers/defenders (no go-to players).

So again, the media are just human beings and in this case they're lying for 30 years to pretend the Bulls were cumbaya.... But that's false - MJ ruled with an iron fist specifically because he wasn't gifted HOF's like Kareem or Wade - he had single-digit rookies like Pippen, Grant and BJ that he had to get up to speed QUICK in that murderous East.

[3ba11]

.
https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-06-2022/Yg_ATJ.gif

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s






The chart above isn't comparing to anything yet





The graph plots percentiles.

Percentile is the percentage of casts that the Bulls were better than - a 37th percentile means the Bulls cast was better than 37% of casts (90-92' seasons).

Specifically, the horizontal axis on the graph (X axis) shows the Bulls' percentile rank among NBA casts for each period specified on the vertical axis (Y axis)..

So the graph compares the Bulls' cast to others (percentile) in each period specified on the graph.

The problem is that he didn't track the games for other casts pre-97' - he only tracked Jordan's, so the percentile ranks are fake (which of course means that he didn't track Jordan's either)






it's pointless to worry about the rest of the NBA that's not what's being researched ffs.





That's exactly what the percentile represents - it represents the percentage of casts that the Bulls were better than.

So a zero percentile means the Bulls cast was better than 0% of casts (88-90' seasons)..






The strength of his casts in a vacuum compared to other greats casts, in a vacuum.





Nope

Percentile represents the percentage of casts that the Bulls were better than...... in the time periods specified on the graph.

Again, the problem is that he didn't track the games for other casts from 88-93' - he only tracked Jordan's, so the percentile ranks are fake..






From 0- 75 percentile. A pretty great cast.





No, not great

0 percentile means the Bulls had the worst cast in the league from 88-90' - they were better than 0% of casts (0 percentile).

And 75th percentile in 1993 shows that they improved, but 1 of 4 casts were still better - that's amazing for a 3-peat champion.

Ultimately, only MJ had to elevate 0 percentile cast to top 25% cast - everyone else was gifted ready-made stars..

And Lebron never had a 0 percentile cast because he entered the league with the East all-star center on his team... The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas added a 22/5/5 all-defender to make the 06' Playoffs as a high seed.. So Lebron never had to carry low seeds with a bad record like Jordan because he got 3 years to develop his team into a veteran high seed before entering the 06 Playoffs.






Shaq and Lebron's numbers were from over the stretches of 2000-2004 and 2016-2021 respectively. Mjs BEST 5 year stretch 1989-1993, wasnt as good in comparison






Playoff plus/minus per game (totals)

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.0 (+115)
97' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.2 (+136)
98' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.7 (+162)


^^^ further indication that the video's numbers are fake - Shaq's impact from his most dominant year (and the only low year for Kobe) pales in comparison to old Jordan's impact in the 97' and 98' Playoffs.

So the NBA's data directly contradicts the video's data... But we already knew the percentiles were fake, so this is no surprise.

Btw, the video's "guesstimates" show that Jordan's best 5 year stretch is 89' and 90' (24 point gap in team performance with and without him) plus 96-98' (17 point gap).. This 5-year stretch would put him above Shaq.. But again, the numbers are fake anyway.

[Baller789]

Translation: I have no clue what is being discussed here......but goooo 3ball.

Nah its pretty clear.

Both sides have flawed arguments, but 3ball doesnt normally resort to ad hominems.

That is very evident.

[HoopsNY]

It's because people are lying

Everyone in history enjoyed go-to teammates that dominated and took over series with elite production.

Except Jordan

Only Jordan lacked go-to teammates and was forced to win with a team of hustlers/defenders - so only Jordan had to defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load).

Due to these facts, goat haters cannot find the typical dominant performance from teammates, so they pretend that guys like Kukoc or Kerr getting 9 ppg is amazing, or Pippen getting 22' Westbrook numbers with woat efficiency is infact the best help in the league.. It's pathetic

What you're failing to accept is that while Pippen may have wet the bed a lot of times during the second three peat, he still outplayed the opposing team's #2 option most of the time for the entirety of the 90s.

You keep mentioning his woat efficiency and never accept that Chicago's cast often came up big defensively, which made up for the lack of offense.

Lets look at the finals for example:

'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

Typically, teams play harder defense and numbers fall in the finals, but the disparity between Chicago and their opponents is significantly more than arguably any other time in history. They completely decimated the opposing team's offense, even though they didn't always dominate on the offensive end themselves outside of MJ.

So who gets that credit? Look at some of these years. You have the Bulls holding Utah to a 20 PPG differential with their ORTG plummeting. Was MJ guarding all 5 positions?

[sdot_thadon]

The graph plots percentiles.

Percentile is the percentage of casts that the Bulls were better than - a 37th percentile means the Bulls cast was better than 37% of casts (90-92' seasons).

Specifically, the horizontal axis on the graph (X axis) shows the Bulls' percentile rank among NBA casts for each period specified on the vertical axis (Y axis)..

So the graph compares the Bulls' cast to others (percentile) in each period specified on the graph.

The problem is that he didn't track the games for other casts pre-97' - he only tracked Jordan's, so the percentile ranks are fake (which of course means that he didn't track Jordan's either)
That's exactly what the percentile represents - it represents the percentage of casts that the Bulls were better than.
So a zero percentile means the Bulls cast was better than 0% of casts (88-90' seasons)..

Nope

Percentile represents the percentage of casts that the Bulls were better than...... in the time periods specified on the graph.

Again, the problem is that he didn't track the games for other casts from 88-93' - he only tracked Jordan's, so the percentile ranks are fake..
You're correct, it does plot percentiles, you're completely wrong about the rest.



In the greatest peaks series our patreon community voted him number one but one topic that always comes up with mj is his teammate quality in 1994 jordan retired and without him the bulls won a hefty 55 games and played the eastern champion knicks to a near draw leading some people to think he might have been playing with a stacked deck others think those championships were all about jordan because he finally embraced the team game in 1991 under the zen master phil jackson
to help answer this question we went back and tracked 129 Michael Jordan playoff games ...
to compare MJ and his teammates to what we've learned over the last quarter century.
I'd hate to have been your school teacher lol.



No, not great

0 percentile means the Bulls had the worst cast in the league from 88-90' - they were better than 0% of casts (0 percentile).

And 75th percentile in 1993 shows that they improved, but 1 of 4 casts were still better - that's amazing for a 3-peat champion.

Ultimately, only MJ had to elevate 0 percentile cast to top 25% cast - everyone else was gifted ready-made stars..

And Lebron never had a 0 percentile cast because he entered the league with the East all-star center on his team... The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas added a 22/5/5 all-defender to make the 06' Playoffs as a high seed.. So Lebron never had to carry low seeds with a bad record like Jordan because he got 3 years to develop his team into a veteran high seed before entering the 06 Playoffs.
More facts, yeah so about the allstar cavs team Lebron joined, let's add some facts to that statement. You're absolutely correct, Mj joined a cast that had a -4.6 srs and a -5.1 net rating the year before he arrived, both good for worst in the league. Lebron joined an allstar Cavs squad that posted an outstanding-9.59 srs and a show-stopping -10.2 net rating, oh with 10 less wins than the 1984 bulls....might want to retire that bullet point it's helping your opposition from here on.



^^^ further indication that the video's numbers are fake - Shaq's impact from his most dominant year (and the only low year for Kobe) pales in comparison to old Jordan's impact in the 97' and 98' Playoffs.

So the NBA's data directly contradicts the video's data... But we already knew the percentiles were fake, so this is no surprise.

Btw, the video's "guesstimates" show that Jordan's best 5 year stretch is 89' and 90' (24 point gap in team performance with and without him) plus 96-98' (17 point gap).. This 5-year stretch would put him above Shaq.. But again, the numbers are fake anyway.

The single run is a different story, i havent checked the numbers because he didnt really give them importance in the discussion. Why when considering a "stretch" would you cherry pick non-consecutive years? And i refuse to trust any numbers you post as a repeated liar. He used the 5 years stretches for the reasons he explained in the video.

as long time thinking basketball followers know 10 games is really a small sample especially since jordan only went to the bench for about 50 minutes during those playoffs that means few extra makes or misses would have a huge impact on those minutes that jordan was off the floor so to understand how chicago performed Without mj we really need to look at more games in 1989.....that gives us 27 total games now but it's still a noisy sample so we went ahead and collected the 1990 playoffs and the 91 playoffs and so on after sifting through over 100 bulls playoff games we found some incredible gems....

[sdot_thadon]

Nah its pretty clear.

Both sides have flawed arguments, but 3ball doesnt normally resort to ad hominems.

That is very evident.
The irony.

[3ba11]

You're correct, it does plot percentiles, you're completely wrong about the rest.





If we assume the Bulls' casts are being compared to post-97' casts, then here's the facts based on the video's data:



* Jordan made the 89' ECF with a zero-percentile cast, aka worse than 100% of modern casts (post-97' casts).

* Jordan won 2 titles from 90-92 with casts that were worse than 63% of modern casts (37th percentile).

* Jordan three-peated in 93' with casts that were still nowhere near the best (still worse than 1 in 4 modern casts).


And since we have data for 97' onwards, why doesn't the video show a clean graph of Jordan's 97' and 98' casts versus the NBA for those years?

This wasn't presented because his 2nd three-peat casts would rank horribly... None of the 2nd three-peat casts outscored opponents without Jordan and they had 16, 22, and 12 point gaps (17 average) with and without Jordan.






You're correct, it does plot percentiles, you're completely wrong about the rest.





The presentation of the graph and percentiles indicates that he's comparing the Bulls' cast to other casts of that time period:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s


At no point in the video does he specify anything otherwise, except the vague quote that you referenced of comparing his casts to "what we've learned since".. This doesn't specify what players he's talking about, such as "post-97' teams and supporting players with at least XX minutes, etc"

There's no specification because he doesn't want us checking, like I did with his fake Shaq number...:confusedshrug:






More facts, yeah so about the allstar cavs team Lebron joined, let's add some facts to that statement. You're absolutely correct, Mj joined a cast that had a -4.6 srs and a -5.1 net rating the year before he arrived, both good for worst in the league. Lebron joined an allstar Cavs squad that posted an outstanding -9.59 srs and a show-stopping -10.2 net rating, oh with 10 less wins than the 1984 bulls





The 03' East was historically-weak and extremely weak compared to the 84' East - this gap in strength of schedule explains the gap in SRS between the worst team from 84' and the worst team from 03'.

So the talking point remains on.

Infact, the 04' Cavs saw rookie Boozer blossom into a better-performing PF than MJ ever had (16/11), while still having a better center too (the East all-star center).

It's easy to forget that Lebron had 3 years to develop his team into a veteran, high seed before entering the 06' Playoffs, so he never had to carry bad records and low seeds in the playoffs like MJ did.. Lebron had veteran, high seeds in a conference that 1-star teams were winning, while Jordan had rookie low seeds in a conference that required a super-team to win.






The single run is a different story, i havent checked the numbers because he didnt really give them importance in the discussion. Why when considering a "stretch" would you cherry pick non-consecutive years? And i refuse to trust any numbers you post as a repeated liar. He used the 5 years stretches for the reasons he explained in the video.





All stats are linked to the source and Shaq's entire 5-year stretch is compared to old Jordan:



Playoff plus/minus per game (totals)

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.0 (+115)
01' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2000-01&SeasonType=Playoffs)...... 11.2 (+186)
02' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2001-02&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 6.2 (+118)
03' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2002-03&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 2.2 (+26)
04' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 4.1 (+91)

97' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.2 (+136)
98' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.7 (+162)


So the NBA's data directly contradicts the video's data... But we already knew the percentile methodology was omitted and fake, so the fudged Shaq numbers are no surprise.

Btw, Jordan won 2 three-peats with a break in between, so Jordan's best 5-year stretch isn't really possible.

But the video shows that Jordan's best 5 year stretch is 89' and 90' (24 point gap in team performance with and without him) plus 96-98' (17 point gap).. This 5-year stretch would put him above Shaq.. But again, the numbers are fake anyway.

[sdot_thadon]

If we assume the Bulls' casts are being compared to post-97' casts, then here's the facts based on the video's data:



* Jordan made the 89' ECF with a zero-percentile cast, aka worse than 100% of modern casts (post-97' casts).

* Jordan won 2 titles from 90-92 with casts that were worse than 63% of modern casts (37th percentile).

* Jordan three-peated in 93' with casts that were still nowhere near the best (still worse than 1 in 4 modern casts).


And since we have data for 97' onwards, why doesn't the video show a clean graph of Jordan's 97' and 98' casts versus the NBA for those years?

This wasn't presented because his 2nd three-peat casts would rank horribly... None of the 2nd three-peat casts outscored opponents without Jordan and they had 16, 22, and 12 point gaps (17 average) with and without Jordan.






The presentation of the graph and percentiles indicates that he's comparing the Bulls' cast to other casts of that time period:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s


At no point in the video does he specify anything otherwise, except the vague quote that you referenced of comparing his casts to "what we've learned since".. This doesn't specify what players he's talking about, such as "post-97' teams and supporting players with at least XX minutes, etc"

There's no specification because he doesn't want us checking, like I did with his fake Shaq number...:confusedshrug:






The 03' East was historically-weak and extremely weak compared to the 84' East - this gap in strength of schedule explains the gap in SRS between the worst team from 84' and the worst team from 03'.

So the talking point remains on.

Infact, the 04' Cavs saw rookie Boozer blossom into a better-performing PF than MJ ever had (16/11), while still having a better center too (the East all-star center).

It's easy to forget that Lebron had 3 years to develop his team into a veteran, high seed before entering the 06' Playoffs, so he never had to carry bad records and low seeds in the playoffs like MJ did.. Lebron had veteran, high seeds in a conference that 1-star teams were winning, while Jordan had rookie low seeds in a conference that required a super-team to win.






All stats are linked to the source and Shaq's entire 5-year stretch is compared to old Jordan:



Playoff plus/minus per game (totals)

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.0 (+115)
01' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2000-01&SeasonType=Playoffs)...... 11.2 (+186)
02' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2001-02&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 6.2 (+118)
03' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2002-03&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 2.2 (+26)
04' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 4.1 (+91)

97' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.2 (+136)
98' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.7 (+162)


So the NBA's data directly contradicts the video's data... But we already knew the percentile methodology was omitted and fake, so the fudged Shaq numbers are no surprise.

Btw, Jordan won 2 three-peats with a break in between, so Jordan's best 5-year stretch isn't really possible.

But the video shows that Jordan's best 5 year stretch is 89' and 90' (24 point gap in team performance with and without him) plus 96-98' (17 point gap).. This 5-year stretch would put him above Shaq.. But again, the numbers are fake anyway.

It's as if you can't receive data, only vomit it out. I gave you the actual transcript with his explanation. If you want to avoid it, I understand your fear. But you trying to argue things not even stated are just a waste of everyone's time and stupid to boot. You don't seem to understand that comparing his plus minus to the league he played on doesn't add a single thing to the discussion nor can you understand small points like why he's using 5 year conservative samples vs. 2 or 5 cherry picked ones. Try to actually address what's being said rather than make an argument with the clouds.

[FilmyCogTurner]

Does an instance of the Bulls bench leading a comeback without Jordan somehow imply the team roster is better than advertised and that Jordan is not as great as we think? Do we seriously think this black and white here?

A seven game series is long and drawn out. Teams figure out other teams and sometimes you need to shake the apple tree more than a few times to produce a better harvest. Great the bench squad was able to capitalize in that moment but we are kidding ourselves if anyone here thinks Stacey King and Cliff Livingston were elite role players.

This site has gone mad.

[3ba11]

It's as if you can't receive data, only vomit it out. I gave you the actual transcript with his explanation. If you want to avoid it, I understand your fear. But you trying to argue things not even stated are just a waste of everyone's time and stupid to boot. You don't seem to understand that comparing his plus minus to the league he played on doesn't add a single thing to the discussion nor can you understand small points like why he's using 5 year conservative samples vs. 2 or 5 cherry picked ones. Try to actually address what's being said rather than make an argument with the clouds.


His numbers are false as we proved with the Shaq plus/minus from the 00-04' Playoffs - this 5-year period was sub-par and nowhere near the goat-level that the video claimed.

So case closed.. It's a fake.

The transcript you gave offered no explanation whatsoever... "What we've learned since" doesn't specify anything - he's free to spew out percentiles and fake numbers like he did with Shaq.

You should be the most skeptical of the numbers because they say Jordan was GOAT by far - he made the ECF with a 0 percentile cast in 89', while Lebron was lottery with 0 percentile casts in 04/05.

He won 2 titles from 90-92 with a 37 percentile cast (63% of casts are better).. And his 3-peat in 93' still wasn't anywhere near the best cast - 1 in 4 casts are still superior.. So he 3-peated with the 8th best cast in today's game (75th percentile).

Ultimately, Jordan had better teams than Lebron despite less on-paper talent, so he should get credit for elevating teammates beyond their on-paper worth.. He elevated teammates by being good enough to dominate within a good brand of ball (coachable) and didn't have to dominate the ball to produce.

[3ba11]

Does an instance of the Bulls bench leading a comeback without Jordan somehow imply the team roster is better than advertised and that Jordan is not as great as we think? Do we seriously think this black and white here?

A seven game series is long and drawn out. Teams figure out other teams and sometimes you need to shake the apple tree more than a few times to produce a better harvest. Great the bench squad was able to capitalize in that moment but we are kidding ourselves if anyone here thinks Stacey King and Cliff Livingston were elite role players.

This site has gone mad.


Lebron fans are far more desperate than you realize

The Bulls' bench went on a 14-2 run in the first 3 minutes of the 4th quarter before MJ returned at the 8:20 mark - they were still down 3 points - Jordan scored 10 of 12 points in the last 5 minutes (clutch-time) to close the game, while Pippen had 2 points in the last 5 minutes.. The last 5 minutes is important because the NBA defines this as "clutch-time" (last 5 within 5)

[dankok8]

The better a team is the harder it is to lift them up. A Bulls team without MJ throughout the 90's is like +2 SRS team good for about 50 wins on average. With him they are a +9 SRS team. That may only be a +7 SRS ON/OFF and there are indeed plenty of higher ones in history but lifting an already good team that much is harder than lifting a -5 SRS or let alone a -10 SRS team by +10 SRS or even +12 SRS. Whether MJ is a GOAT-level floor raiser is debatable although evidence says that he's at least among the best. Ceiling raising is where MJ stands out though. He'll take a 50-win supporting cast and make them win 65+ and threepeat twice. And ceiling raising is more valuable in a way because a negative SRS team isn't winning rings regardless of who you add to the team. And teams that are stuck in the middle never improve and never start dynasties even if they somehow manage to win a single ring.

I would love to see ON/OFF comparisons for title teams only. And I mean regular season data in particular. Note that playoff data is super noisy too both because of small sample sizes and sampling bias (a small subsection of opponents...).

[3ba11]

The better a team is the harder it is to lift them up. A Bulls team without MJ throughout the 90's is like +2 SRS team good for about 50 wins on average. With him they are a +9 SRS team. That may only be a +7 SRS ON/OFF and there are indeed plenty of higher ones in history but lifting an already good team that much is harder than lifting a -5 SRS or let alone a -10 SRS team by +10 SRS or even +12 SRS. Whether MJ is a GOAT-level floor raiser is debatable although evidence says that he's at least among the best. Ceiling raising is where MJ stands out though. He'll take a 50-win supporting cast and make them win 65+ and threepeat twice. And ceiling raising is more valuable in a way because a negative SRS team isn't winning rings regardless of who you add to the team.

I would love to see ON/OFF comparisons for title teams only.


On what planet were the Bulls a 2 SRS team without Jordan from 88-90'?

The team needed more time than that to learn a winning brand of ball and how to play good basketball because the on-paper talent wasn't there.

They had to 3-peat first before they could win 55 and that was a one-off - after the no pressure and honeymoon period ended in the 94' Playoffs, the REAL bulls without MJ were borderline lottery in 95' before MJ returned.

Good 1st options are supposed to BUILD a team each year like MJ did, but Pippen destroyed a 3-peat dynasty to borderline lottery in less than 18 months.




The better a team is the harder it is to lift them up. A Bulls team without MJ throughout the 90's is like +2 SRS team good for about 50 wins on average. With him they are a +9 SRS team. That may only be a +7 SRS ON/OFF and there are indeed plenty of higher ones in history but lifting an already good team that much is harder than lifting a -5 SRS or let alone a -10 SRS team by +10 SRS or even +12 SRS. Whether MJ is a GOAT-level floor raiser is debatable although evidence says that he's at least among the best. Ceiling raising is where MJ stands out though. He'll take a 50-win supporting cast and make them win 65+ and threepeat twice. And ceiling raising is more valuable in a way because a negative SRS team isn't winning rings regardless of who you add to the team.

I would love to see ON/OFF comparisons for title teams only.



Percentile definition from Google:

Question: What does "90th percentile" mean?

Answer: "... if a score is said to be in the 90th percentile, this means that 90% of the scores in the distribution are equal to or lower than that

https://dictionary.apa.org/percentile


The video says that the Bulls casts from 88-90' had a 0 percentile, so Jordan made the ECF with a cast that was worse than every other cast.

Even from 90-92', the Bulls won 2 titles with a 37th percentile cast (63% of casts are better).. The 3-peat team in 93' still wasn't anywhere near the best cast - 1 in 4 were still better (75th percentile)







I would love to see ON/OFF comparisons for title teams only.





Jordan's 2nd three-peat averaged a 17-point gap with and without Jordan (16, 22, 12) - that's going to be the best ever or close.

For non-title teams, Jordan's 24-point gap in 89' and 90' is the best.. He made the ECF with 0 percentile casts those years (everyone's cast was better)

[1987_Lakers]

55 wins in '94

[3ba11]

55 wins in '94


How about 95'?

A 3-peat dynasty was destroyed to borderline lottery in 95' before MJ returned

They had to 3-peat first before they could get a one-off decent regular season - but reality set in for the 1995 season - they sucked!!

So Jordan proceeded to carry another borderline lottery cast to a 3-peat in 96-98', which confirmed that he's simply worth a 3-peat.. That's the historical record (91-93', 96-98')

[1987_Lakers]

How about 95'?

No Horace Grant

[RRR3]

No Horace Grant
Grant didn’t score 20 PPG so he’s incapable of realizing he was good.

[FKAri]

This isn't even particularly critical of MJ. Why the butthurt over it? Jesus. Just how many alts does that phaggit 3ball have?

[HoopsNY]

No Horace Grant

This is a good point, but they also were 13-4 (63 win pace) with him and 34-31 (43 win pace) without him. And MJ wasn't even full steam when he returned.

[1987_Lakers]

This isn't even particularly critical of MJ. Why the butthurt over it? Jesus. Just how many alts does that phaggit 3ball have?

Exactly what I was thinking, the vid gave props to MJ while also saying positive things towards MJ's teammates while they were winning championships.

But in 3ball's mind, that isn't good enough. In his mind, MJ led a bunch G League players to championships and he will throw a hissy fit if people say otherwise.

[1987_Lakers]

This is a good point, but they also were 13-4 (63 win pace) with him and 34-31 (43 win pace) without him. And MJ wasn't even full steam when he returned.

And not having Horace Grant resulted in them losing in the 2nd round even with MJ coming back that year.

[HoopsNY]

What you're failing to accept is that while Pippen may have wet the bed a lot of times during the second three peat, he still outplayed the opposing team's #2 option most of the time for the entirety of the 90s.

You keep mentioning his woat efficiency and never accept that Chicago's cast often came up big defensively, which made up for the lack of offense.

Lets look at the finals for example:

'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

Typically, teams play harder defense and numbers fall in the finals, but the disparity between Chicago and their opponents is significantly more than arguably any other time in history. They completely decimated the opposing team's offense, even though they didn't always dominate on the offensive end themselves outside of MJ.

So who gets that credit? Look at some of these years. You have the Bulls holding Utah to a 20 PPG differential with their ORTG plummeting. Was MJ guarding all 5 positions?

3ball ignored this one :lol

[HoopsNY]

And not having Horace Grant resulted in them losing in the 2nd round even with MJ coming back that year.

Right. But you're looking at 55 wins (while ignoring the 2nd round loss in the '94 ECSF), and mentioning the '95 ECSF (while ignoring the regular season).

It's typical with MJ haters to mention the '94 season and Chicago winning 55 games, but no one brings up Chicago's 34-31 record in '95 (43 win pace) as opposed to their 13-4 record with MJ (63 win pace). And then there's 1998 where Pippen missed the first half of the season, but Chicago was on a 56 game win pace without him.

On the flip side, it's erroneous to think that Chicago didn't have a great cast. I do agree that Mj fans downplay Chicago's cast and have done so for years. This is why I mentioned in the other post what Chicago's defense did against their opponents in the finals, who were often elite offensive teams.

'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

None of this happens unless Chicago's cast plays amazing defensively, which is what happened. Be it Grant, Pippen, Armstrong, Rodman, Harper, etc, all of these guys contributed to Chicago shutting down their opponents.

It would be interesting to see how losing teams faired in the finals compared to how good they were in the regular season, to see the difference in production. Intuition tells me that Chicago's defense did much better in that span as opposed to most other teams. That alone should tell people, Mj fans included, that their team was stacked.

[sdot_thadon]

His numbers are false as we proved with the Shaq plus/minus from the 00-04' Playoffs - this 5-year period was sub-par and nowhere near the goat-level that the video claimed.

So case closed.. It's a fake.

The transcript you gave offered no explanation whatsoever... "What we've learned since" doesn't specify anything - he's free to spew out percentiles and fake numbers like he did with Shaq.

You should be the most skeptical of the numbers because they say Jordan was GOAT by far - he made the ECF with a 0 percentile cast in 89', while Lebron was lottery with 0 percentile casts in 04/05.

He won 2 titles from 90-92 with a 37 percentile cast (63% of casts are better).. And his 3-peat in 93' still wasn't anywhere near the best cast - 1 in 4 casts are still superior.. So he 3-peated with the 8th best cast in today's game (75th percentile).

Ultimately, Jordan had better teams than Lebron despite less on-paper talent, so he should get credit for elevating teammates beyond their on-paper worth.. He elevated teammates by being good enough to dominate within a good brand of ball (coachable) and didn't have to dominate the ball to produce.

If you're afraid of the debate you should go start a new thread like you always do. Facts in your face and you over here acting like Rainman. Counting cards Counting cards.

[3ba11]

If you're afraid of the debate you should go start a new thread like you always do. Facts in your face and you over here acting like Rainman. Counting cards Counting cards.


Do I look scared - I completely dissected the dumb video on many levels

Otoh, you've shown to be the master of deflecting itt

[3ba11]

Exactly what I was thinking, the vid gave props to MJ while also saying positive things towards MJ's teammates while they were winning championships.

But in 3ball's mind, that isn't good enough. In his mind, MJ led a bunch G League players to championships and he will throw a hissy fit if people say otherwise.


I don't think the video shows that the Bulls had a good cast... :confusedshrug:

Consider that most champions have the best cast in the league like the KD Warriors or Lebron's preseason favorites from 11-16' (super-teams).

Whereas the Bulls 3-peat cast from 93' wasn't anywhere near the best - 1 in 4 casts are better..
:confusedshrug:

And the video says that Jordan's casts from 90-92' were only 37th percentile (63% of casts are better).. And from 88-90', Jordan made the ECF with 0 percentile casts (every cast is better).

The primary takeaway from the video is how Jordan elevated a 0 percentile cast (worst) to 75th percentile (better than 3 in 4).. No one else had to elevate a 0 percentile cast to champion

[sdot_thadon]

Do I look scared - I completely dissected the dumb video on many levels

Otoh, you've shown to be the master of deflecting itt

No you completely avoided every point it made by crying that it was fake due to comprehension errors or reluctance on your part. Everything you've said about the video has been wrong. That's hardly dissecting anything, I've seen quite a bit of tears tho.

[HoopsNY]

I don't think the video shows that the Bulls had a good cast... :confusedshrug:

Consider that most champions have the best cast in the league like the KD Warriors or Lebron's preseason favorites from 11-16' (super-teams).

Whereas the Bulls 3-peat cast from 93' wasn't anywhere near the best - 1 in 4 casts are better..
:confusedshrug:

And the video says that Jordan's casts from 90-92' were only 37th percentile (63% of casts are better).. And from 88-90', Jordan made the ECF with 0 percentile casts (every cast is better).

The primary takeaway from the video is how Jordan elevated a 0 percentile cast (worst) to 75th percentile (better than 3 in 4).. No one else had to elevate a 0 percentile cast to champion


What you're failing to accept is that while Pippen may have wet the bed a lot of times during the second three peat, he still outplayed the opposing team's #2 option most of the time for the entirety of the 90s.

You keep mentioning his woat efficiency and never accept that Chicago's cast often came up big defensively, which made up for the lack of offense.

Lets look at the finals for example:

'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

Typically, teams play harder defense and numbers fall in the finals, but the disparity between Chicago and their opponents is significantly more than arguably any other time in history. They completely decimated the opposing team's offense, even though they didn't always dominate on the offensive end themselves outside of MJ.

So who gets that credit? Look at some of these years. You have the Bulls holding Utah to a 20 PPG differential with their ORTG plummeting. Was MJ guarding all 5 positions?

Chicago's cast made up for their offense by having the best defense in the league. They routinely shut down their opponents in the finals and it's obvious from the results.

[3ba11]

What you're failing to accept is that while Pippen may have wet the bed a lot of times during the second three peat, he still outplayed the opposing team's #2 option most of the time for the entirety of the 90s.





The problem is that 2nd options on 90's contenders did more than barely outplay opposing sidekicks.

Every 90's sidekick from a contender was infact a 1b that took over series with elite stats and frequently led their team - only Pippen failed to dominate and always achieved secondary stats that could never dominate his match-up.. A low peak of 22 ppg ensured that Pippen at most tied his match-up or barely exceeded it.

Otoh, the 92' WCF shows Terry Porter carrying the Blazers to the Finals by averaging 26/4/8 with 53% on threes (6 attempts) - he was Damian Lillard on the 90' and 92' runs to the Finals and that was the worst sidekick that Jordan faced in the Finals.. Guys like Kemp, Worthy, Stockton and KJ had legendary series of 25-30 ppg that dominated opponents.. Stockton averaged 21/11 with the series walk-off in Barkley's face to carry the Jazz to the 97' Finals..

Ultimately, Pippen was the only 90's sidekick that wasn't a go-to player and couldn't dominate or achieve elite stats (transition/hustle player), so only Jordan faced maximum defensive attention in every series (carried the scoring load) - Pippen wasn't in the scouting report (https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2022/qrDm8n.gif).







You keep mentioning his woat efficiency and never accept that Chicago's cast often came up big defensively, which made up for the lack of offense.

Lets look at the finals for example:

'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

Typically, teams play harder defense and numbers fall in the finals, but the disparity between Chicago and their opponents is significantly more than arguably any other time in history. They completely decimated the opposing team's offense, even though they didn't always dominate on the offensive end themselves outside of MJ.

So who gets that credit? Look at some of these years. You have the Bulls holding Utah to a 20 PPG differential with their ORTG plummeting. Was MJ guarding all 5 positions?


No other dynasty had to rely on defense and their #1 option as much as the Bulls.

Every other dynasty had a bevy of go-to players and scoring options at 3rd and 4th option even..

The Bad Boys had great defense but they also had go-to players at 3rd option like HOF Dantley or 3x all-star Aguirre.. The Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Warriors, and Lebron's super-teams also had go-to players at 3rd option..

So only the Bulls had to rely on defense and Jordan led this charge.. Jordan was top 7 DPOY every year from 88-98' and got more votes than Pippen every year except 96' and 97' - Rodman wasn't even all-defense in 97' or 98', so Jordan was the defensive leader - only Jordan lit that fire.. And he built the team from nothing in 88' - it was Jordan's team

It's like people don't want to concede that the Bulls were a 1-man team so they invent all this new criteria that they don't apply to anyone else

[1987_Lakers]

The primary takeaway from the video is how Jordan elevated a 0 percentile cast (worst) to 75th percentile (better than 3 in 4).. No one else had to elevate a 0 percentile cast to champion

So at first you said the vid is lies and now you agree with it but also add on the "MJ elevated" part. :lol

[3ba11]

So at first you said the vid is lies and now you agree with it but also add on the "MJ elevated" part. :lol

The video is definitely lies because it omits the methodology related to the percentiles, which neans that it can spew out fake numbers like the Shaq plus/minus from 00-04' that sdot and I debunked.

Nonetheless, even lies cannot stop the goat and I think the author of the video doesn't realize that his fabricated numbers show Jordan to be goat

For example, sdot pointed out that Lebron was lottery with a 0 percentile cast in 04', while Jordan made the ECF in 89' and 90' with a 0 percentile cast

[Im Still Ballin]

Right. But you're looking at 55 wins (while ignoring the 2nd round loss in the '94 ECSF), and mentioning the '95 ECSF (while ignoring the regular season).

It's typical with MJ haters to mention the '94 season and Chicago winning 55 games, but no one brings up Chicago's 34-31 record in '95 (43 win pace) as opposed to their 13-4 record with MJ (63 win pace). And then there's 1998 where Pippen missed the first half of the season, but Chicago was on a 56 game win pace without him.

On the flip side, it's erroneous to think that Chicago didn't have a great cast. I do agree that Mj fans downplay Chicago's cast and have done so for years. This is why I mentioned in the other post what Chicago's defense did against their opponents in the finals, who were often elite offensive teams.

'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

None of this happens unless Chicago's cast plays amazing defensively, which is what happened. Be it Grant, Pippen, Armstrong, Rodman, Harper, etc, all of these guys contributed to Chicago shutting down their opponents.

It would be interesting to see how losing teams faired in the finals compared to how good they were in the regular season, to see the difference in production. Intuition tells me that Chicago's defense did much better in that span as opposed to most other teams. That alone should tell people, Mj fans included, that their team was stacked.

You need to adjust for injuries. In '95, they played at a 52-win pace when healthy despite losing Horace Grant.



In ’94, the Bulls played at a 55-win pace when healthy (4.7 SRS). There was undoubtably malaise during the 1993 season after deep postseason runs and the Barcelona Olympics, so a direct comparison between ’93 and ’94 is apples-to-oranges. Still, the ’94 Bulls added Toni Kukoc and Luc Longley, replaced Jordan with a defensive-centric Pete Myers, and posted close-to-contending results.

In 1995, with key cog Horace Grant lost to Orlando (and Ron Harper aboard), a healthy Bulls team still played at a 52-win pace (3.8 SRS) with an rORtg of +1.1 before Michael Jordan returned.

[1987_Lakers]

The video is definitely lies because it omits the methodology related to the percentiles, which neans that it can spew out fake numbers like the Shaq plus/minus from 00-04' that sdot and I debunked.

Nonetheless, even lies cannot stop the goat and I think the author of the video doesn't realize that his fabricated numbers show Jordan to be goat

For example, sdot pointed out that Lebron was lottery with a 0 percentile cast in 04', while Jordan made the ECF in 89' and 90' with a 0 percentile cast

So you agree the Bulls had a 75th percentile cast from '91-'93.

STACKED!

[jlip]

You need to adjust for injuries. In '95, they played at a 52-win pace when healthy despite losing Horace Grant.



In ’94, the Bulls played at a 55-win pace when healthy (4.7 SRS). There was undoubtably malaise during the 1993 season after deep postseason runs and the Barcelona Olympics, so a direct comparison between ’93 and ’94 is apples-to-oranges. Still, the ’94 Bulls added Toni Kukoc and Luc Longley, replaced Jordan with a defensive-centric Pete Myers, and posted close-to-contending results.

In 1995, with key cog Horace Grant lost to Orlando (and Ron Harper aboard), a healthy Bulls team still played at a 52-win pace (3.8 SRS) with an rORtg of +1.1 before Michael Jordan returned.

The Bulls won 55 games in 1994 with Pippen missing 10 games (4-6 record in those games) and Grant missing 12 (7-5 record in those games) which means that they had to have played at a much higher win pace when healthy. Their win percentage with Pippen was 0.708 which translates to a 58 win pace. That would literally have made them the #1 seed with home court throughout the entire eastern conference playoffs and tied them for the 2nd best record in the whole league.

[HoopsNY]

The problem is that 2nd options on 90's contenders did more than barely outplay opposing sidekicks.

Every 90's sidekick from a contender was infact a 1b that took over series with elite stats and frequently led their team - only Pippen failed to dominate and always achieved secondary stats that could never dominate his match-up.. A low peak of 22 ppg ensured that Pippen at most tied his match-up or barely exceeded it.

Otoh, the 92' WCF shows Terry Porter carrying the Blazers to the Finals by averaging 26/4/8 with 53% on threes (6 attempts) - he was Damian Lillard on the 90' and 92' runs to the Finals and that was the worst sidekick that Jordan faced in the Finals.. Guys like Kemp, Worthy, Stockton and KJ had legendary series of 25-30 ppg that dominated opponents.. Stockton averaged 21/11 with the series walk-off in Barkley's face to carry the Jazz to the 97' Finals..

Ultimately, Pippen was the only 90's sidekick that wasn't a go-to player and couldn't dominate or achieve elite stats (transition/hustle player), so only Jordan faced maximum defensive attention in every series (carried the scoring load) - Pippen wasn't in the scouting report (https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2022/qrDm8n.gif).







No other dynasty had to rely on defense and their #1 option as much as the Bulls.

Every other dynasty had a bevy of go-to players and scoring options at 3rd and 4th option even..

The Bad Boys had great defense but they also had go-to players at 3rd option like HOF Dantley or 3x all-star Aguirre.. The Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Warriors, and Lebron's super-teams also had go-to players at 3rd option..

So only the Bulls had to rely on defense and Jordan led this charge.. Jordan was top 7 DPOY every year from 88-98' and got more votes than Pippen every year except 96' and 97' - Rodman wasn't even all-defense in 97' or 98', so Jordan was the defensive leader - only Jordan lit that fire.. And he built the team from nothing in 88' - it was Jordan's team

It's like people don't want to concede that the Bulls were a 1-man team so they invent all this new criteria that they don't apply to anyone else

Chicago's opponents couldn't rely on their cast to produce high level scoring. Why? Because Chicago was often shutting them down. So how do you expect a guy like Porter to repeat his WCF performance when he ran into solid perimeter defense from Chicago?

Chicago wasn't a 1 man team. That's erroneous. Pippen outscored the opponents #2 in every finals except 1996. In 1991, he even outscored Magic and Worthy.

How can you be a 1 man team when your sidekick is outscoring the opponent's sidekicks? That would mean your opponents are inferior by default, which you'd never accept.

And who made up this idea that the game is only offense anyway? The Spurs won 5 titles mainly because of their defense. The Pistons in '04 won a title off of their defense. The Rockets in '94 won because of their defense. And so too did Chicago in the '90s.

Defenses winning championships isn't something new. The Celtics in 2008 beat the Lakers why? Because of their defense. The Lakers averaged 108 PPG on a 113 ORTG, shooting 48% during the regular season. In the finals, they struggled to put up 93 PPG on a 103 ORTG shooting just 44%.

In fact, let's look at the #2 and their output in the finals for some of these years:

'91 Pippen: 20.8 PPG
'92 Pippen: 20.8 PPG
'93 Pippen: 21.2 PPG
'94 Maxwell: 13.8 PPG
'95 Drexler: 21.5 PPG
'96 Pippen: 15.7 PPG
'97 Pippen: 20.0 PPG
'98 Pippen: 15.7 PPG
'99 Robinson: 16.6 PPG
'00 Kobe: 15.6 PPG
'01 Kobe: 24.6 PPG
'02 Kobe: 26.8 PPG
'03 Parker: 14.0 PPG
'04 Billups: 21.0 PPG
'05 Ginobili: 18.7 PPG
'06 Walker: 13.8 PPG
'07 Duncan: 18.3 PPG
'08 Allen: 20.3 PPG
'09 Gasol: 18.6 PPG
'10 Gasol: 18.6 PPG

Would you look at that? Pippen was outscoring almost every single sidekick on championship teams with the exception of Kobe and Drexler. This is more proof than your bs take about the 1980s, an era that was more fast paced with stacked teams than the 90s, which of course you never account for.

[HoopsNY]

You need to adjust for injuries. In '95, they played at a 52-win pace when healthy despite losing Horace Grant.

Fair enough, but the point still stands - that MJ raises the ceiling. dankok made a good point that it's harder to raise a successful team to a higher level than it is an average team to playoff level. MJ had 'em on a 63 win pace in '95.

[3ba11]

The Spurs won 5 titles mainly because of their defense. The Pistons in '04 won a title off of their defense. The Rockets in '94 won because of their defense. And so too did Chicago in the '90s.





You're just lying now and repeating bullshit that you heard on TV, so let's review the FACTS:

The Bulls had the greatest offenses in history, including four #1 offenses with goat margins above league ORTG (91', 92', 96', 97').

They had goat offenses with garbage offensive help because Jordan is the GOAT.. Jordan had goat offenses despite playing 4 on 5 with Rodman and Pippen's aids during the 2nd three-peat.

But even if we go along with your defense premise - it's harder to win with a bunch of defenders/hustlers as opposed to super-teams of juggernaut offensive players.

From the GM standpoint, it's much harder to find the expensive, all-time scorers that Magic and Lebron need rather than surrounding Jordan with cheap defenders.






And who made up this idea that the game is only offense anyway?





you think it's fair that ONLY MJ must defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load) for every playoff run and series?

Everyone else had equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention for numerous playoff runs, so they didn't always face maximum defensive attention...

Any period without facing maximum defensive attention is inflated stats compared to Jordan, who always faced maximum defensive attention - he carried the scoring load in every SERIES, let alone playoff run.






With a sidekick that outscores opposing sidekicks, how can you be a 1 man team??





Because Jordan completely carried the scoring load in every series (faced maximum defensive attention in every series).. This is unique to Jordan.

Most contenders have go-to scoring options at 2nd, 3rd and even 4th option, so the Bulls had the least scoring help of any multiple-time winner - again, this is confirmed by Jordan averaging the most ever and completely carrying the scoring load in every series.






Would you look at that?





https://i.ibb.co/qBBHvB1/chrome-d-EXe-R4x-E8t.jpg


The amazing thing about this graphic is that Pippen is the only 2nd option on it - everyone else is a 3rd option or role player with minimal volume - so only Jordan had to win with large volumes of horrific efficiency from a teammate!!!... :lebronamazed:

Ultimately, Pippen is the only sidekick that played next to someone who was expected to completely carry the scoring load - so only Pippen was left unguarded, yet he still had horrific efficiency!!!..

These facts show Pippen was a straight bum that was lucky to be unguarded alongside the goat scorer - he was just lucky to grow up in dynasty system and chemistry, otherwise he's a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score outside the triangle - even Wiggins was an 18-24 ppg guy outside the Warriors' system.






Pippen even outscored Magic and Worthy.





Worthy led the Lakers with 24 on 57% in the 87' Playoffs including 30 on 62% in the WCF - then he got FMVP in 88' and led the Lakers with 25 on 53% in the 89' Playoffs.

Pippen is nowhere near this version of Worthy - but even a hobbled Worthy in 91' nearly matched Pippen because Pippen's best wasn't that good..

Pippen averaged 20.8 and a hobbled Worthy 19.6.. The tape shows that Worthy still got whatever he wanted on Pippen.. Everyone got their regular numbers against Pippen - he never shut anyone down as the primary defender - look it up.. #entirelyoverrated






In fact, let's look at the #2 and their output for some of these years:

'91 Pippen: 20.8 PPG
'92 Pippen: 20.8 PPG
'93 Pippen: 21.2 PPG
'94 Maxwell: 13.8 PPG
'95 Drexler: 21.5 PPG
'96 Pippen: 15.7 PPG
'97 Pippen: 20.0 PPG
'98 Pippen: 15.7 PPG
'99 Robinson: 16.6 PPG
'00 Kobe: 15.6 PPG
'01 Kobe: 24.6 PPG
'02 Kobe: 26.8 PPG
'03 Parker: 14.0 PPG
'04 Billups: 21.0 PPG
'05 Ginobili: 18.7 PPG
'06 Walker: 13.8 PPG
'07 Duncan: 18.3 PPG
'08 Allen: 20.3 PPG
'09 Gasol: 18.6 PPG
'10 Gasol: 18.6 PPG

Pippen was outscoring almost every single sidekick on championship teams with the exception of Kobe and Drexler. This is more proof than your bs take about the 1980s, an era that was more fast paced with stacked teams than the 90s, which of course you never account for.


Your numbers are wrong.. :confusedshrug:

In 2007, Parker was 2nd or 3rd option but he happened to step up in the Finals and carry the team.

And that's the point - every sidekick did that except Pippen... Every sidekick was expected to be a 1b that averaged close to the #1 option or even more.... Except Pippen..

The Bulls shut teams down in the Finals but every sidekick otherwise carried their team to the Finals and was tasked with scoring nearly as much or more than the #1 option.

Ultimately, Pippen averaged 19 on 42% in 6 Finals, including 0/6 in FMVP, and 0/6 in matching Horry's gamescore from the 95' Finals, and 0/6 in outplaying Wiggins Finals this year - Wiggins averaged 18 on 45% and was a legit go-to option in the clutch.. Otoh, Pippen had series with literally zero clutch points (zero points in the last 5 within 5.. for a whole series)..






Opponents couldn't rely on their cast to produce high level scoring in the Finals.. Why? Because Chicago was often shutting them down.





Correct - that's why the Finals numbers are abnormal and not a normal reflection because the Bulls shut down Finals opponents.

However, if we compare Worthy, Porter, Stockton and KJ to Pippen outside of the Finals, we see that they carry their teams with 1b status and elite stats in many series (25-30 ppg), while Pippen is a secondary producer and completely carried (never a 1b).. He's the only sidekick that never achieved elite ppg, rpg or apg in any series.

[sdot_thadon]

You know a thread is going terribly bad when even your fellow air jordies won't help you out.

Even sheep know what a dead body looks like....

[HoopsNY]

You're just lying now and repeating bullshit that you heard on TV, so let's review the FACTS:

The Bulls had the greatest offenses in history, including four #1 offenses with goat margins above league ORTG (91', 92', 96', 97').

They had goat offenses with garbage offensive help because Jordan is the GOAT.. Jordan had goat offenses despite playing 4 on 5 with Rodman and Pippen's aids during the 2nd three-peat.

But even if we go along with your defense premise - it's harder to win with a bunch of defenders/hustlers as opposed to super-teams of juggernaut offensive players.

From the GM standpoint, it's much harder to find the expensive, all-time scorers that Magic and Lebron need rather than surrounding Jordan with cheap defenders.






you think it's fair that ONLY MJ must defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load) for every playoff run and series?

Everyone else had equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention for numerous playoff runs, so they didn't always face maximum defensive attention...

Any period without facing maximum defensive attention is inflated stats compared to Jordan, who always faced maximum defensive attention - he carried the scoring load in every SERIES, let alone playoff run.






Because Jordan completely carried the scoring load in every series (faced maximum defensive attention in every series).. This is unique to Jordan.

Most contenders have go-to scoring options at 2nd, 3rd and even 4th option, so the Bulls had the least scoring help of any multiple-time winner - again, this is confirmed by Jordan averaging the most ever and completely carrying the scoring load in every series.






https://i.ibb.co/qBBHvB1/chrome-d-EXe-R4x-E8t.jpg


The amazing thing about this graphic is that Pippen is the only 2nd option on it - everyone else is a 3rd option or role player with minimal volume - so only Jordan had to win with large volumes of horrific efficiency from a teammate!!!... :lebronamazed:

Ultimately, Pippen is the only sidekick that played next to someone who was expected to completely carry the scoring load - so only Pippen was left unguarded, yet he still had horrific efficiency!!!..

These facts show Pippen was a straight bum that was lucky to be unguarded alongside the goat scorer - he was just lucky to grow up in dynasty system and chemistry, otherwise he's a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score outside the triangle - even Wiggins was an 18-24 ppg guy outside the Warriors' system.






Worthy led the Lakers with 24 on 57% in the 87' Playoffs including 30 on 62% in the WCF - then he got FMVP in 88' and led the Lakers with 25 on 53% in the 89' Playoffs.

Pippen is nowhere near this version of Worthy - but even a hobbled Worthy in 91' nearly matched Pippen because Pippen's best wasn't that good..

Pippen averaged 20.8 and a hobbled Worthy 19.6.. The tape shows that Worthy still got whatever he wanted on Pippen.. Everyone got their regular numbers against Pippen - he never shut anyone down as the primary defender - look it up.. #entirelyoverrated






Your numbers are wrong.. :confusedshrug:

In 2007, Parker was 2nd or 3rd option but he happened to step up in the Finals and carry the team.

And that's the point - every sidekick did that except Pippen... Every sidekick was expected to be a 1b that averaged close to the #1 option or even more.... Except Pippen..

The Bulls shut teams down in the Finals but every sidekick otherwise carried their team to the Finals and was tasked with scoring nearly as much or more than the #1 option.

Ultimately, Pippen averaged 19 on 42% in 6 Finals, including 0/6 in FMVP, and 0/6 in matching Horry's gamescore from the 95' Finals, and 0/6 in outplaying Wiggins Finals this year - Wiggins averaged 18 on 45% and was a legit go-to option in the clutch.. Otoh, Pippen had series with literally zero clutch points (zero points in the last 5 within 5.. for a whole series)..






Correct - that's why the Finals numbers are abnormal and not a normal reflection because the Bulls shut down Finals opponents.

However, if we compare Worthy, Porter, Stockton and KJ to Pippen outside of the Finals, we see that they carry their teams with 1b status and elite stats in many series (25-30 ppg), while Pippen is a secondary producer and completely carried (never a 1b).. He's the only sidekick that never achieved elite ppg, rpg or apg in any series.

Massive deflections and cherrypicking here. For one, you isolate Parker from the list I gave, completely ignoring everyone else. Meanwhile, Parker led the Spurs in FGA per game in the regular season, playoffs, and finals of 2007. So the point still stands. Duncan put up 18.3 PPG.

You also keep reaching for what some of these guys did outside of the finals, as if that matters. No one cares what they did outside of those finals. What matters is what happens in the finals.

The common theme for the years mentioned is that Pippen was scoring on par or scoring more points than other championship sidekicks/number 2s.

You can debate the semantics of it all, but the facts are facts. And the point still remains, Chicago's defense was stifling in the finals and they decimated their opposing offenses. MJ was not guarding all 5 positions.

And lastly, saying that Pippen wasn't able to be a 1b is silly. You expect him to be a 1b when MJ is the greatest scorer of all-time, putting up 35-40 PPG in many of the series they played in? How does Pippen match that or even close close (25-30 PPG), without taking away from Jordan's game?

And why the hell are you complaining anyway? It resulted in 6 titles and 2 ECF trips when they played together. Everything else was an ECSF trip. How much better can you really get in the modern era?

[8Ball]

You know a thread is going terribly bad when even your fellow air jordies won't help you out.

Even sheep know what a dead body looks like....

:roll:

[RRR3]

You know a thread is going terribly bad when even your fellow air jordies won't help you out.

Even sheep know what a dead body looks like....
A lot of Jordan fans hate 3ball tbh. Phoenix, Kuniva, HoopsNY, King Baron (and I’m sure I’m forgetting some), they all can’t stand him. Only the really psychotic ones like ClipperRevival are fans of him.

[sdot_thadon]

A lot of Jordan fans hate 3ball tbh. Phoenix, Kuniva, HoopsNY, King Baron (and I’m sure I’m forgetting some), they all can’t stand him. Only the really psychotic ones like ClipperRevival are fans of him.

Oh I know, I'm only meaning certain ones when I say that lol. He's the drunk uncle at the family gathering of Mj fans

[dankok8]

During the Bulls' title runs from Ben's video:

https://i.postimg.cc/LXbcNm78/Jordan-Playoff-ON-OFF.jpg

Jordan's ON-OFF are approximately:

1991 +13
1992 +2
1993 +10
1996 +16
1997 +22
1998 +12

[HoopsNY]

You need to adjust for injuries. In '95, they played at a 52-win pace when healthy despite losing Horace Grant.

Just checked this, I think they were 34-29 with Pippen before MJ returned. That's a 44 win pace.

[Wally450]

Massive deflections and cherrypicking here.

3ball in a nutshell

[HoopsNY]

3ball in a nutshell

Pippen literally outscored every sidekick in the finals for a stretch of 20 years with the exception of Kobe and this guy still goes on a rant as if people don't know this. It's unbelievable...actually, it's impressive. Lol. It's like you're so blinded by your love of an athlete that you can't reason that basketball is a 5 on 5 with 7 bench players and a coaching staff. And all of those elements combined with a lot of luck is required to maintain a winning brand.

I believe MJ is the GOAT for sure, but to deny that Chicago was stacked or that Pippen was a great player is revisionist history. Chicago - on a consistent year to year basis - was the most stacked team in the 90s. You can make the argument that other teams' 2-12 were better on an individual year, but they were few and far apart (such as Phoenix in '93).

Otherwise, Pippen and Grant had the Bulls on a 60 win pace in '94. That's not a minor deal. It's major. And Again in '95, without Grant, and without Jordan, Pippen had that team on a 44 win pace with the 2nd best defense in the league. That doesn't happen by accident. That happens with a great player at the helm.

[sdot_thadon]

Pippen literally outscored every sidekick in the finals for a stretch of 20 years with the exception of Kobe and this guy still goes on a rant as if people don't know this. It's unbelievable...actually, it's impressive. Lol. It's like you're so blinded by your love of an athlete that you can't reason that basketball is a 5 on 5 with 7 bench players and a coaching staff. And all of those elements combined with a lot of luck is required to maintain a winning brand.

I believe MJ is the GOAT for sure, but to deny that Chicago was stacked or that Pippen was a great player is revisionist history. Chicago - on a consistent year to year basis - was the most stacked team in the 90s. You can make the argument that other teams' 2-12 were better on an individual year, but they were few and far apart (such as Phoenix in '93).

Otherwise, Pippen and Grant had the Bulls on a 60 win pace in '94. That's not a minor deal. It's major. And Again in '95, without Grant, and without Jordan, Pippen had that team on a 44 win pace with the 2nd best defense in the league. That doesn't happen by accident. That happens with a great player at the helm.

This. This. This. I think basketball culture is screwed over by the idea that 2 things can both be great, either next to each other, or in conjunction with one another. The Bulls being a great team doesn't diminish Mj in any way. If anything that great team was the vehicle to validate his greatness in the eyes of proof seeking critics.

[8Ball]

Pippen literally outscored every sidekick in the finals for a stretch of 20 years with the exception of Kobe and this guy still goes on a rant as if people don't know this. It's unbelievable...actually, it's impressive. Lol. It's like you're so blinded by your love of an athlete that you can't reason that basketball is a 5 on 5 with 7 bench players and a coaching staff. And all of those elements combined with a lot of luck is required to maintain a winning brand.

I believe MJ is the GOAT for sure, but to deny that Chicago was stacked or that Pippen was a great player is revisionist history. Chicago - on a consistent year to year basis - was the most stacked team in the 90s. You can make the argument that other teams' 2-12 were better on an individual year, but they were few and far apart (such as Phoenix in '93).

Otherwise, Pippen and Grant had the Bulls on a 60 win pace in '94. That's not a minor deal. It's major. And Again in '95, without Grant, and without Jordan, Pippen had that team on a 44 win pace with the 2nd best defense in the league. That doesn't happen by accident. That happens with a great player at the helm.

/thread.

3ball has no counter to this.

[3ba11]

Massive deflections and cherrypicking here.





You were wrong about the Bulls' winning primarily from defense - you were confronted with the facts that the Bulls had goat OFFENSES much more than defenses..

But instead of acknowledging the point and/or conceding, your first sentence is to accuse ME of avoiding and deflecting - so the historical record shows that you're projecting.. It's right there in the recent post history.






For one, you isolate Parker from the list I gave





I'm literally doing the opposite - I'm saying that every sidekick dominated like Parker did, except Pippen.

Every sidekick was expected to completely dominate, or carry teams to the Finals, or win FMVP, or lead their team in scoring....Yet you're praising Pippen for barely outscoring opposing sidekicks with worst-ever efficiency, smh.

Pippen couldn't dominate, so he was just an Iggy or Wiggins-caliber player that was lucky to be along for the ride






The common theme for the years mentioned is that Pippen was scoring on par or scoring more points than other championship sidekicks/number 2s.





^^^ All above-average sidekicks do that

The best sidekicks do much more like dominate MVP's, carry their team to the Finals, win FMVP, or lead the team in scoring - Pippen did none of this

Furthermore, other sidekicks don't have worst-ever efficiency or a low peak capability that doesn't require game-planning (can't dominate - system player)






For one, you isolate Parker from the list I gave





Duncan led the 2007 Spurs in scoring for the regular season and Playoffs, so Parker's FMVP is an example of sidekicks dominating (while Pippen never did).

Sidekicks like Dumars, Parker and Iggy won FMVP... Other sidekicks dominated MVP's like when AD dominated Joker... or Kyrie ragdolled Curry and Wade outplayed FMVP Dirk.

Other guys like KJ dominated a couple 7-game wars with Hakeem in 94' and 95' - he averaged 28/5/9 in both series...

MJ would obviously defeat Hakeem with this kind of help... :confusedshrug:

So only MJ lacked a go-to teammate, as Kenny Smith explains here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UF6Xx3F2Lo&t=01m54s)..






You also keep reaching for what some of these guys did outside of the finals, as if that matters. No one cares what they did outside of those finals. What matters is what happens in the finals.





No one cares that AD dominated Joker to carry the Lakers to the 2020 Finals?

You think it's fair that Lebron gets all-time domination from AD in Year 1, while Jordan gets nothing from Pippen in 88', 89', 90' and infact NEVER gets that level of play from Pippen??

And again - surely Jordan would defeat Hakeem in 94' and 95' with KJ's domination, while Barkley lost both series in 7 games.

Jordan could've used this kind of help from 88-90' when he had a 0 percentile cast vs dynasty... However, sidekick domination would've been overkill, since Jordan won when Pippen reached Iggy or Wiggins-caliber.






MJ was not guarding all 5 positions.





No but he was getting the most DPOY votes on his team every year and he was assigned to be primary defender on Magic, Clyde, Isiah and Payton.

So he was the defensive leader while carrying a horrible offensive casts to goat offenses.

So you have no point and are just talking in circles about debunked claims






And lastly, saying that Pippen wasn't able to be a 1b is silly.





You need elite PPG capability to be a 1b and Pippen didn't have it

He never achieved elite ppg, even as the #1 option

And he had woat efficiency

And he couldn't create his own shot or average more than 14 outside the dynasty chemistry that he grew up in (triangle) - he wasn't a go-to player and didn't require doubles (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UF6Xx3F2Lo&t=01m54s) or game-planning (https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2022/qrDm8n.gif).. (<------ those are all-time greats corroborating my points about Pippen)

Ultimately, Pippen played to capacity (near his career highs) alongside Jordan - Jordan squeezed Wiggins-caliber out of a towel boy






And why the hell are you complaining anyway? It resulted in 6 titles and 2 ECF trips when they played together. Everything else was an ECSF trip. How much better can you really get in the modern era?


Anytime a series was close or lost, it was Pippen's poor play that caused it - look it up

So Pippen caused losses in 88', 89', 90', 95', and nearly the 92' Semis or 98' ECF (7 game series)

Pippen wet the bed in all these series and also the 96-98' Finals and many more.

[HoopsNY]

You were wrong about the Bulls' winning primarily from defense - you were confronted with the facts that the Bulls had goat OFFENSES much more than defenses..

Don't misquote me. I mentioned their casts not showing up, but their defense did. See the different in PPG, ORTG, and FG% of their opponents. Again, who was guarding the opposing players? Just MJ? Why were their opponents playing so poorly offensively on a consistent basis?


I'm literally doing the opposite - I'm saying that every sidekick dominated like Parker did, except Pippen.

Every sidekick was expected to completely dominate, or carry teams to the Finals, or win FMVP, or lead their team in scoring....Yet you're praising Pippen for barely outscoring opposing sidekicks with worst-ever efficiency, smh.

Pippen couldn't dominate, so he was just an Iggy or Wiggins-caliber player that was lucky to be along for the ride

No one is saying he could dominate. What I am saying is that Pippen outproduced almost every sidekick in every championship team for a spread of 20 years. You can choose to ignore that all you want, but it's the truth. Sorry, but guys like Billups, Maxwell, Parker, Gasol, and even Duncan weren't regularly putting up 25-30 PPG as sidekicks in the finals.


The best sidekicks do much more like dominate MVP's, carry their team to the Finals, win FMVP, or lead the team in scoring - Pippen did none of this

Irrelevant. Pippen outscored most sidekicks during the 90s and 10s. This is a fact. Pippen was a great player, one of the greatest of all time. Deal with it.


Duncan led the 2007 Spurs in scoring for the regular season and Playoffs, so Parker's FMVP is an example of sidekicks dominating (while Pippen never did).

'07 RS Duncan: 14.1 FGA
'07 RS Parker: 14.2 FGA

'07 PS Duncan: 16.7 FGA
'07 PS Parker: 17.5 FGA

'07 FS Duncan: 16.3 FGA
'07 FS Parker: 18.5 FGA

Parker literally attempted more field goals in every part of the 2007 season (regular season, playoffs, finals).


Sidekicks like Dumars, Parker and Iggy won FMVP... Other sidekicks dominated MVP's like when AD dominated Joker... or Kyrie ragdolled Curry and Wade outplayed FMVP Dirk.

And Pippen outplayed Hornacek, Porter, KJ, and Worthy. So why are you complaining?


Other guys like KJ dominated a couple 7-game wars with Hakeem in 94' and 95' - he averaged 28/5/9 in both series...

Yea, and Pippen out played him in the '93 finals despite his injury (though KJ was injured as well).


You think it's fair that Lebron gets all-time domination from AD in Year 1, while Jordan gets nothing from Pippen in 88', 89', 90' and infact NEVER gets that level of play from Pippen??

Pippen guarded Magic better than Jordan did in the '91 finals. Did you forget the '93 ECF? Chicago was down 0-2 and MJ shot 3-18 in game 3. It was Pippen who put up 29 points on 10-12 shooting (83%). You're really ungrateful. And you call yourself a Bulls fan? If Pippen doesn't play that well, Chicago goes down 0-3.


No but he was getting the most DPOY votes on his team every year and he was assigned to be primary defender on Magic, Clyde, Isiah and Payton.

Another deflection. I raised the point about MJ not guarding all 5 positions IN THE FINALS. Who was shutting down those Lakers, Utah, Sonics, Blazers, and Suns teams? Why did their numbers drop significantly in the finals as opposed to the regular season, more so than other teams that lost in the finals after them?

[HoopsNY]

Pippen Leads Bull Charge -- Forward Saves Jordan, Sends Knicks Home

CHICAGO - While everyone was waiting to hear from Michael Jordan, they were watching Scottie Pippen lead the Chicago Bulls to a chance at a third straight NBA title.

Pippen, picking up the slack from an exhausted Jordan, hit a three-pointer with 1:01 left last night that clinched the two-time defending champions' 96-88 victory over the New York Knicks and a berth in the NBA Finals.

The Bulls had looked like yet another team to fall short of a threepeat when they lost the first two games of the best-of-7 Eastern Conference finals in New York.

A victory on the road in Game 5 set the stage for the deciding Game 6 as the Bulls became the first team to reach the NBA Finals for three straight years since the 1989 Los Angeles Lakers. Only three teams have won three straight titles, the last the Boston Celtics who won the last of eight straight championships in 1966.

Jordan released a statement through his agent just hours before the game calling claims of golf debts of over $1 million "preposterous."

"I think everyone realized he was under tremendous strain tonight and others stepped up and helped out," Bull Coach Phil Jackson said.

No one stepped up more than Pippen, the Bulls' other star who has often been maligned.

"Pippen had a great series, and justly so, because he had been labeled somewhat of a pussyfooter out there," Jackson said.

Pippen finished with 24 points, 16 in the second half, and the biggest his 3-pointer with 61 seconds left on the game clock and one on the shot clock.

"I happened to look up and see the clock at 4 seconds and I got the shot up and it fell for me. It was a big shot," Pippen said of the shot that gave the Bulls a 90-82 lead.

Jordan, held to four free throws in the final quarter, scored 25 points, 17 in the first half.

Jackson said he wasn't concerned about Jordan looking tired.

"It will pass," he said.

Patrick Ewing led the Knicks with 26 points, while John Starks, Anthony Mason and Charles Smith had 14 each.

The Bulls will face the winner of today's Western Conference finals Game 7 between Seattle and Phoenix for the title. The finals start Wednesday night in Phoenix if the Suns win today and in Chicago if the SuperSonics win.

"We'd like Seattle to win so we can maintain homecourt," Pippen said.

It turned out to be a lost season for the Knicks, who had directed all their efforts to dethroning the Bulls only to lose their homecourt advantage when Chicago won 97-94 in New York in Wednesday night's Game 5.

"I think the rivalry was born last year and sustained this year," Jackson said of the team's second straight intense playoff series. "We'll have to see what level it gets to next year." The Bulls have beaten New York three straight years in the playoffs and four of the last five.

The Bulls became the fifth team to ever come back from an 0-2 deficit in the NBA playoffs.

"The players believed in themselves and were capable of pulling it out," Jackson said. "That game Wednesday night was a terrific battle for us and a great one."

It was the first time in Pat Riley's two seasons as coach that the Knicks lost four straight games.

"They kept scratching and scratching and scratching. I'm glad the Knicks are going home - the whole crew," Bull guard B.J. Armstrong said.

The Knicks' last lead was at 10-7 after two early baskets by John Starks. Chicago went on an 11-0 run after that, with Pippen scoring two baskets.

https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19930605&slug=1704979

:lol

[HoopsNY]

But in the New York series, Pippen was the most productive player. For those six games, the Chicago Bulls belonged to Scottie Pippen as much as to Michael Jordan. Pippen averaged 22.5 points, 6.7 rebounds and 4 assists against the Knicks, including two massive performances: 29 points in Game 3 and a 28-point, 11-rebound effort in Game 5, which Pippen ended with two straight game-saving blocks of 6-11 Charles Smith in the waning seconds.

"I hope you all get off his back now," Knicks guard Doc Rivers said. "To beat us, you have to be tough, and he beat us."

In the first three games of the Finals, Pippen has averaged 22.7 points, 10.3 rebounds and 8.7 assists. He suffered from leg cramps in the triple-overtime loss to Phoenix Sunday, but nobody brought up the headache, because he was still out there, trying. In fact, if the Bulls go on to win this third straight championship, could you not make a most valuable player case for a man that's nearly averaging a triple-double?

"This team is capable of winning without me," Pippen said. "I just think I give them more options and more dimensions. {The MVP award is} nothing that I want to focus on. I want to win this series. That's it; that's the bottom line. When it's all said and done, we'll all be happy if that happens."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/sports/1993/06/16/pippen-carries-load-not-baggage/09d6a477-97ee-4745-94ec-20a9e95c5370/

:lol

Both articles posted are from 1993. Both mention Pippen AND Jordan having equal contributions AND Pippen "saving" Jordan. Perish in your rage 3ball. :lol

[3ba11]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/sports/1993/06/16/pippen-carries-load-not-baggage/09d6a477-97ee-4745-94ec-20a9e95c5370/

:lol

Both articles posted are from 1993. Both mention Pippen AND Jordan having equal contributions AND Pippen "saving" Jordan. Perish in your rage 3ball. :lol



93' Finals

Jordan..... 41 on 56 TS.. 2 TO.. 29.6 gamescore
Pippen..... 21 on 46 TS.. 4 TO.. 15.6 gamescore

Majerle.... 17 on 59 TS.. 1 TO.. 17.0 gamescore


I don't read bullshit media ignorance - I look at facts

Pippen was horrible in the 93' Finals and out-produced by Majerle (and also Dumas in the closeout Game 5)..

That's why the Bulls almost lost - both the Suns & Bulls averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ortg for the series, so every ounce of Jordan's 41/9/6 was needed, while Pippen wet the bed with Westbrick efficiency and turnovers.. :confusedshrug:

A healthy KJ is obviously better as well - KJ killed Hakeem in 94/95 and upset Magic in 90'... Pippen is nowhere near this.

Pippen got no DPOY votes in 93', while Jordan was #2, so he was the defensive leader.

So Pippen was aids in the 93' and 96-98' Finals... Infact, he averaged 17.6 on 41% for the entire 3-peat playoffs, so Jordan three-peated with a poor man's Pandemic P

[3ba11]

'07 RS Duncan: 14.1 FGA
'07 RS Parker: 14.2 FGA

'07 PS Duncan: 16.7 FGA
'07 PS Parker: 17.5 FGA

'07 FS Duncan: 16.3 FGA
'07 FS Parker: 18.5 FGA

Parker literally attempted more field goals in every part of the 2007 season (regular season, playoffs, finals).





Not only did Duncan lead the 2007 Spurs in scoring for regular season and playoffs, but if we're comparing Duncan and Jordan as all-time greats, then Parker is Duncan's help - Parker's dominance reduces Duncan's ring quality compared to Jordan..

So your point about Parker being the 1st option makes the point that the teammates of Lebron or Duncan frequently outscored them.

So again, Pippen is the only sidekick that was never a #1 option in any series and never achieved elite stats, while every other sidekick did (1b).






No one is saying Pippen could dominate.





But dominating matters

Sidekick domination is a primary criteria when comparing the ring quality of Duncan, Jordan, Lebron, etc

Only Jordan lacked a sidekick that could achieve elite stats/dominate, or carry a team to the Finals, or win FMVP, or lead the team in scoring..

Everyone else had sidekicks that could play at these objectively superior levels, while Jordan had to win with an Iggy or Wiggins-caliber sidekick (secondary producer).






What I am saying is that Pippen outproduced almost every sidekick in every championship team for a spread of 20 years.





Again, your numbers were false by saying Parker is #1 option when his scoring lead and FMVP simply represents Duncan's superior help (than Jordan had with Pippen)






What I am saying is that Pippen outproduced almost every sidekick in every championship team for a spread of 20 years.





Many sidekicks in 3-pointer history were FMVP or outscored Pippen in the Finals (aka objectively superior):

80' Magic
81' Maxwell
83' Dr. J
85' Worthy
86' McHale
87' Worthy
88' Worthy
89' Dumars
95' Drexler
95' Penny
96' Payton
01' Kobe
02' Kobe
07' Parker
11' Wade
12' Wade
12' Westbrook
15' Iggy
16' Kyrie
17' Kyrie
17' Curry
18' Curry
20' AD
21' Middleton
04' Rip Hamilton (outscored 5 of 6 Pippen Finals)
08' Allen (4 of 6).


Pippen played far below all these guys - Pippen was more like Klay in 16' or Manu in 05' or Wiggins in 22' - that's Pippen's caliber (19 on 42% in 6 Finals)






Pippen outscored most sidekicks during the 90s and 10s. This is a fact.





Nope.. Not even close - see previous response above.

Your calculator must be broken.

In addition to being on the low end of sidekick scorers, Pippen's weak scoring came with Westbrick efficiency, low peak capability (no game-planning required) and absolute WOAT clutch - Pippen would go entire series without scoring in the clutch (last 5 within 5), while Stockton would be Jordan in the clutch

Let me know if you need to see the actual stats for Pippen in the clutch lol






Pippen was a great player, one of the greatest of all time. Deal with it.





The historical record shows that he played at an Iggy or Wiggins caliber but you're inflating him due to ring count (winning spotlight).. But every statistic says that he's about 120-150th (PER, WS/48, etc)..

Using sheer stats to rank sidekicks is fine because they don't affect brand of ball like the 1st option.






Pippen outplayed Hornacek, Porter, KJ, and Worthy.





Pippen was easily outplayed by Stockton, Schrempf, and Majerle, while an injured KJ and Worthy would've smoked him much worse than they smoked 87' Bird or 90' Magic, respectively.

Perhaps you don't realize that Pippen had Westbrick efficiency at high volume in the 96-98' Playoffs, so the Bulls eeked out wins in spite of him.. He was a huge liability in those Finals and outplayed no one .

Btw, Stockton was literally Michael Jordan in the clutch of the 97' and 98' Playoffs and Finals - he was right behind Jordan in clutch-time stats for those years, while Pippen was below Ostertag and Hornacek.






Pippen guarded Magic better than Jordan did in the '91 finals.





Pippen didn't guard Magic in Ganes 1, 4, 5, or the 4th and OT of Game 3.

So no, Jordan shut down Magic in the critical Game 3 OT that swung the series and thereafter - Pippen simply gets inflated by a Game 2 blowout that was spearheaded by MJ going 15-18 against maximum defensive attention.






Did you forget the '93 ECF? Chicago was down 0-2 and MJ shot 3-18 in game 3. It was Pippen who put up 29 points on 10-12 shooting (83%).





did YOU forget?

Game 3 was a giveaway game for New York and a laugher

It was only competitive in the 1st quarter where Jordan had 8 points and 6 assists compared to 6 and 0 for Pippen..

It was a laugher thereafter, which is why it wasn't reported as a Pippen save.. But now 30 years later we see low-character Lebron fans revise history after finding the game on bballref






Who was shutting down those Lakers, Utah, Sonics, Blazers, and Suns teams? Why did their numbers drop significantly in the finals





Jordan is the only guy with a record of shutting guys down - nearly everyone shot 35-44% against him - otoh, everyone gets their regular numbers on Pippen..

Jordan was assigned the primary defender on Magic, Drexler, Isiah, Payton, and Miller, while getting spot-duty on Stockton, KJ and Porter.. He also placed higher in DPOY votes every year and was recognized as the Bulls best defender.

[sdot_thadon]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/sports/1993/06/16/pippen-carries-load-not-baggage/09d6a477-97ee-4745-94ec-20a9e95c5370/

:lol

Both articles posted are from 1993. Both mention Pippen AND Jordan having equal contributions AND Pippen "saving" Jordan. Perish in your rage 3ball. :lol

Damn, well there's some concrete on Scottie that all these guys claim never happened. This, is why some of us say he was one of the best players in the league.

[3ba11]

Damn, well there's some concrete on Scottie that all these guys claim never happened. This, is why some of us say he was one of the best players in the league.


Our modern understanding of basketball reveals that Pippen was horrific in the 93' Finals - no sidekick was ever carried like this:



93' Finals

Jordan..... 41 on 56 TS.. 2 TO.. 29.6 gamescore
Pippen..... 21 on 46 TS.. 4 TO.. 15.6 gamescore

Majerle.... 17 on 59 TS.. 1 TO.. 17.0 gamescore


That's why the Bulls almost lost.

Both the Suns & Bulls averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ortg for the series, so every ounce of Jordan's 41/9/6 was needed, while Pippen wet the bed with Westbrick efficiency and turnovers.. :confusedshrug:

So Pippen was aids in the 93' and 96-98' Finals... Infact, he averaged 17.6 on 41% for the entire 3-peat playoffs (96-98'), so Jordan three-peated with a poor man's Pandemic P

[3ba11]

.
The video says that Shaq had goat plus/minus from 00-04' but this is a lie:



Playoff plus/minus per game (totals)

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.0 (+115)
01' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2000-01&SeasonType=Playoffs)...... 11.2 (+186)
02' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2001-02&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 6.2 (+118)
03' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2002-03&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 2.2 (+26)
04' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/traditional?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 4.1 (+91)

97' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.2 (+136)
98' Jordan (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/traditional?Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs&PerMode=PerGame)..... 7.7 (+162)


So the NBA's data directly contradicts the video's data... But we already knew the percentile methodology was omitted and fake, so the fudged Shaq numbers are no surprise.

[3ba11]

.
Video Cliffs


* Most champions have the best cast in the league, but Jordan's best casts from 91-93' ranked in the 75th percentile (1 in 4 casts were better.. data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)).

* Jordan made the 89' and 90' ECF with the worst casts ever - they were 0 percentile, so 100% of casts were better - data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=12m00s)

* The video doesn't specify the percentile rank for the 2nd three-peat casts because those casts were horrible - none of them outscored opponents without Jordan and they had a 17 point gap in performance with and without him (data here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGDLV-do9c&t=16m20s)).. Only the 91' and 92' casts outscored opponents without Jordan..

* The numbers are fake because the video claims that Shaq had goat plus/minus from 00-04' and he did not - his plus/minus during that period was sub-par compared to 97' and 98' Jordan (data in previous post)

[dankok8]

Here are Shaq's playoff ON-OFF Net Rating.

1997: +17.7
1998: +11.6
1999: +14.7
2000: +22.9
2001: -0.3
2002: +22.9
2003: +11.9
2004: +25.4

The 2001 number looks like a blip probably because the Lakers were so dominant. They were crushing teams even when Shaq sat on the bench.

Anyways this data supports Shaq as a GOAT peak contender but +/- data should never be the only ingredient or even the main one.

[3ba11]

Here are Shaq's playoff ON-OFF Net Rating.

1997: +17.7
1998: +11.6
1999: +14.7
2000: +22.9
2001: -0.3
2002: +22.9
2003: +11.9
2004: +25.4

The 2001 number looks like a blip probably because the Lakers were so dominant. They were crushing teams even when Shaq sat on the bench.

Anyways this data supports Shaq as a GOAT peak contender but +/- data should never be the only ingredient or even the main one.


^^^ Those numbers are false

Here's the NBA's data:



Playoff Net Rating

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.7
01' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2000-01&SeasonType=Playoffs)...... 14.0
02' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2001-02&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 8.0
03' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2002-03&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 1.7
04' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 4.3

97' MJ (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/advanced?SeasonType=Playoffs&Season=1996-97)........... 9.0
98' MJ (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/advanced?SeasonType=Playoffs&Season=1997-98)......... 10.2


If we look at things like net rating, plus/minus, clutch stats (last 5 within 5), and supporting performances, it's clear that peak Shaq is nowhere near 97' or 98' Jordan.

[3ba11]

^^^ Those numbers are false

Here's the NBA's data:



Playoff Net Rating

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.7
01' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2000-01&SeasonType=Playoffs)...... 14.0
02' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2001-02&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 8.0
03' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2002-03&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 1.7
04' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 4.3

97' MJ (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/advanced?SeasonType=Playoffs&Season=1996-97)........... 9.0
98' MJ (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/advanced?SeasonType=Playoffs&Season=1997-98)......... 10.2


If we look at things like net rating, plus/minus, clutch stats (last 5 within 5), and supporting performances, it's clear that peak Shaq is nowhere near 97' or 98' Jordan.


.
3ball owns this thread


https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AcceptableEthicalAnura.webp

https://c.tenor.com/fc1KeUaEBxwAAAAM/my-job-is-done-sneaky.gif



Completely exposed the video as both fraud yet still showing MJ to be goat


https://c.tenor.com/wOJt4Jjv7zMAAAAM/popcorn-yeah.gif

[8Ball]

Pippen literally outscored every sidekick in the finals for a stretch of 20 years with the exception of Kobe and this guy still goes on a rant as if people don't know this. It's unbelievable...actually, it's impressive. Lol. It's like you're so blinded by your love of an athlete that you can't reason that basketball is a 5 on 5 with 7 bench players and a coaching staff. And all of those elements combined with a lot of luck is required to maintain a winning brand.

I believe MJ is the GOAT for sure, but to deny that Chicago was stacked or that Pippen was a great player is revisionist history. Chicago - on a consistent year to year basis - was the most stacked team in the 90s. You can make the argument that other teams' 2-12 were better on an individual year, but they were few and far apart (such as Phoenix in '93).

Otherwise, Pippen and Grant had the Bulls on a 60 win pace in '94. That's not a minor deal. It's major. And Again in '95, without Grant, and without Jordan, Pippen had that team on a 44 win pace with the 2nd best defense in the league. That doesn't happen by accident. That happens with a great player at the helm.

Thread ender.

[3ba11]

.
Many sidekicks in 3-pointer history were FMVP or outscored Pippen in the Finals (aka objectively superior):

80' Magic
81' Maxwell
83' Dr. J
85' Worthy
86' McHale
87' Worthy
88' Worthy
89' Dumars
95' Drexler
95' Penny
96' Payton
01' Kobe
02' Kobe
07' Parker
11' Wade
12' Wade
12' Westbrook
15' Iggy
16' Kyrie
17' Kyrie
17' Curry
18' Curry
20' AD
21' Middleton
04' Rip Hamilton (outscored 5 of 6 Pippen Finals)
08' Allen (4 of 6).


Pippen played far below all these guys - Pippen was more like Klay in 16' or Manu in 05' or Wiggins in 22' - that's Pippen's caliber (19 on 42% in 6 Finals)

[HoopsNY]

Damn, well there's some concrete on Scottie that all these guys claim never happened. This, is why some of us say he was one of the best players in the league.

He was the perfect compliment to MJ in the perfect system. 1993 doesn't happen without Pippen saving Chicago in game 3 against the Knicks.

[FilmyCogTurner]

He was the perfect compliment to MJ in the perfect system. 1993 doesn't happen without Pippen saving Chicago in game 3 against the Knicks.

I would have liked to have seen Jordan paired with a quality big man, it would have completely changed how the defense organized itself against the Bulls if they had an inside threat.

Of course they lose out on plenty of intangibles Pip provided but I still wonder how the court would have opened up for Jordan.

[3ba11]

Parker literally attempted more field goals in every part of the 2007 season (regular season, playoffs, finals).





Not only did Duncan lead the 2007 Spurs in scoring for regular season and playoffs, but if we're comparing Duncan and Jordan as all-time greats, then Parker is Duncan's help - Parker's dominance reduces Duncan's ring quality compared to Jordan..

So your point about Parker being the 1st option makes the point that the teammates of Lebron or Duncan frequently outscored them.

Again, Pippen is the only sidekick that was never a #1 option in any series and never achieved elite stats, while every other sidekick did (1b).

[3ba11]

He was the perfect compliment to MJ in the perfect system. 1993 doesn't happen without Pippen saving Chicago in game 3 against the Knicks.


Nope, you're lying again

Game 3 was over after the first quarter where MJ dominated and Pippen was MIA.

It was a laugher thereafter, which is why it wasn't reported as a Pippen save.. But now 30 years later we see low-character Lebron fans revise history after finding the game on bballref

Btw, it isn't optimal for Jordan to score 33.5 in the playoffs - Jordan had to do that because Pippen is the worst-scoring sidekick among notable sidekicks.

It isn't optimal for Jordan to defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load) - that's entirely SUB-optimal and only Jordan could do it

If Jordan was alongside a go-to player like everyone else had, he would've scored less - he would've averaged 26/8/9 - that's a much easier load.. Actually, he probably still averages 30 because he would still be relied on in the clutch regardless of who his sidekick was.

[3ba11]

Not only did Duncan lead the 2007 Spurs in scoring for regular season and playoffs, but if we're comparing Duncan and Jordan as all-time greats, then Parker is Duncan's help - Parker's dominance reduces Duncan's ring quality compared to Jordan..

So your point about Parker being the 1st option makes the point that the teammates of Lebron or Duncan frequently outscored them.

So again, Pippen is the only sidekick that was never a #1 option in any series and never achieved elite stats, while every other sidekick did (1b).






But dominating matters

Sidekick domination is a primary criteria when comparing the ring quality of Duncan, Jordan, Lebron, etc

Only Jordan lacked a sidekick that could achieve elite stats/dominate, or carry a team to the Finals, or win FMVP, or lead the team in scoring..

Everyone else had sidekicks that could play at these objectively superior levels, while Jordan had to win with an Iggy or Wiggins-caliber sidekick (secondary producer).






Again, your numbers were false by saying Parker is #1 option when his scoring lead and FMVP simply represents Duncan's superior help (than Jordan had with Pippen)






Many sidekicks in 3-pointer history were FMVP or outscored Pippen in the Finals (aka objectively superior):

80' Magic
81' Maxwell
83' Dr. J
85' Worthy
86' McHale
87' Worthy
88' Worthy
89' Dumars
95' Drexler
95' Penny
96' Payton
01' Kobe
02' Kobe
07' Parker
11' Wade
12' Wade
12' Westbrook
15' Iggy
16' Kyrie
17' Kyrie
17' Curry
18' Curry
20' AD
21' Middleton
04' Rip Hamilton (outscored 5 of 6 Pippen Finals)
08' Allen (4 of 6).


Pippen played far below all these guys - Pippen was more like Klay in 16' or Manu in 05' or Wiggins in 22' - that's Pippen's caliber (19 on 42% in 6 Finals)






Nope.. Not even close - see previous response above.

Your calculator must be broken.

In addition to being on the low end of sidekick scorers, Pippen's weak scoring came with Westbrick efficiency, low peak capability (no game-planning required) and absolute WOAT clutch - Pippen would go entire series without scoring in the clutch (last 5 within 5), while Stockton would be Jordan in the clutch

Let me know if you need to see the actual stats for Pippen in the clutch lol






The historical record shows that he played at an Iggy or Wiggins caliber but you're inflating him due to ring count (winning spotlight).. But every statistic says that he's about 120-150th (PER, WS/48, etc)..

Using sheer stats to rank sidekicks is fine because they don't affect brand of ball like the 1st option.






Pippen was easily outplayed by Stockton, Schrempf, and Majerle, while an injured KJ and Worthy would've smoked him much worse than they smoked 87' Bird or 90' Magic, respectively.

Perhaps you don't realize that Pippen had Westbrick efficiency at high volume in the 96-98' Playoffs, so the Bulls eeked out wins in spite of him.. He was a huge liability in those Finals and outplayed no one .

Btw, Stockton was literally Michael Jordan in the clutch of the 97' and 98' Playoffs and Finals - he was right behind Jordan in clutch-time stats for those years, while Pippen was below Ostertag and Hornacek.






Pippen didn't guard Magic in Ganes 1, 4, 5, or the 4th and OT of Game 3.

So no, Jordan shut down Magic in the critical Game 3 OT that swung the series and thereafter - Pippen simply gets inflated by a Game 2 blowout that was spearheaded by MJ going 15-18 against maximum defensive attention.






did YOU forget?

Game 3 was a giveaway game for New York and a laugher

It was only competitive in the 1st quarter where Jordan had 8 points and 6 assists compared to 6 and 0 for Pippen..

It was a laugher thereafter, which is why it wasn't reported as a Pippen save.. But now 30 years later we see low-character Lebron fans revise history after finding the game on bballref






Jordan is the only guy with a record of shutting guys down - nearly everyone shot 35-44% against him - otoh, everyone gets their regular numbers on Pippen..

Jordan was assigned the primary defender on Magic, Drexler, Isiah, Payton, and Miller, while getting spot-duty on Stockton, KJ and Porter.. He also placed higher in DPOY votes every year and was recognized as the Bulls best defender.


HoopsNY ran

[3ba11]

In addition to being on the low end of sidekick scorers, Pippen's weak scoring came with Westbrick efficiency and turnovers, low peak capability (no game-planning required) and absolute WOAT clutch - Pippen would go entire series without scoring in the clutch (last 5 within 5), while Stockton would be Jordan in the clutch

Everyone in history had dominating teammates that allowed the #1 option to average less than 30 in the playoffs... Except the GOAT... Only the goat had so little help that he had to average over 30 and defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load)

[NBAGOAT]

In addition to being on the low end of sidekick scorers, Pippen's weak scoring came with Westbrick efficiency and turnovers, low peak capability (no game-planning required) and absolute WOAT clutch - Pippen would go entire series without scoring in the clutch (last 5 within 5), while Stockton would be Jordan in the clutch

Everyone in history had dominating teammates that allowed the #1 option to average less than 30 in the playoffs... Except the GOAT... Only the goat had so little help that he had to average over 30 and defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load)

you got any statistical evidence pippen wouldnt score in the clutch for an entire series while stockton was putting jordan numbers. I will choose just not to believe you here.

[3ba11]

you got any statistical evidence pippen wouldnt score in the clutch for an entire series while stockton was putting jordan numbers. I will choose just not to believe you here.


* The NBA defines "clutch-time" as last 5 within 5

* Minimum of 5 playoff games to qualify



1997 PLAYOFFS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs)

1. Jordan.......... 5.0 (55)
2. Stockton....... 4.0 (36)

23. Pippen........ 1.6 (18)


1997 FINALS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4)

1. Jordan.......... 5.8 (25)
2. Stockton....... 3.3 (13)

6. Pippen.......... 1.0 (4)


1998 PLAYOFFS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs)

1. Jordan.......... 5.4 (76)

11. Stockton..... 2.3 (28)

22. Pippen........ 1.7 (24)


1998 FINALS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4)

1. Jordan.......... 6.0 (30)

4. Stockton....... 2.0 (10)

8. Pippen........... 1.6 (8)


Furthermore, in the 98' Semis, Pippen had zero points in clutch-time, just like Lebron in 2011 Finals!!... (98' Semis data (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=2).... 11' Finals data (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=2010-11&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4))

Indeed, Jordan won 6 chips with 2011 Finals Lebron (18/7/6 and frightened in the clutch) - that's Pippen.. Prime Wade/Bosh couldn't win with that shit but MJ went 6/6 with it..

[sdot_thadon]

He was the perfect compliment to MJ in the perfect system. 1993 doesn't happen without Pippen saving Chicago in game 3 against the Knicks.

Yeah, I still can't believe the slander he gets from Mj fans sometimes. He was always known as the sidekick. His respect level developed as the runs went on to the point where he was seen as Mjs equal. Not in talent or caliber of player obviously, but in importance to the Bulls success.(2nd 3peat) That season and a half of leadership experience primed the team for that 2nd run with 2 strong leaders with styles of play and leadership that worked well together.

[sdot_thadon]

.
Many sidekicks in 3-pointer history were FMVP or outscored Pippen in the Finals (aka objectively superior):

80' Magic
81' Maxwell
83' Dr. J
85' Worthy
86' McHale
87' Worthy
88' Worthy
89' Dumars
95' Drexler
95' Penny
96' Payton
01' Kobe
02' Kobe
07' Parker
11' Wade
12' Wade
12' Westbrook
15' Iggy
16' Kyrie
17' Kyrie
17' Curry
18' Curry
20' AD
21' Middleton
04' Rip Hamilton (outscored 5 of 6 Pippen Finals)
08' Allen (4 of 6).


Pippen played far below all these guys - Pippen was more like Klay in 16' or Manu in 05' or Wiggins in 22' - that's Pippen's caliber (19 on 42% in 6 Finals)

Small detail you always overlook in these scoring only points of view....none of those guys, except for one had a 1st option taking 26 shots a game and above. So if the number one is taking around 6 fga more a game than any other, I'd imagine his no.2 doesn't get as many opportunities as normal no.2 options. Common sense.

[dankok8]

^^^ Those numbers are false

Here's the NBA's data:



Playoff Net Rating

00' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=1999-00&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 5.7
01' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2000-01&SeasonType=Playoffs)...... 14.0
02' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2001-02&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 8.0
03' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2002-03&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 1.7
04' Shaq (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/406/advanced?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Playoffs)........ 4.3

97' MJ (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/advanced?SeasonType=Playoffs&Season=1996-97)........... 9.0
98' MJ (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/893/advanced?SeasonType=Playoffs&Season=1997-98)......... 10.2


If we look at things like net rating, plus/minus, clutch stats (last 5 within 5), and supporting performances, it's clear that peak Shaq is nowhere near 97' or 98' Jordan.

Can't you read? I wasn't posting Net Ratings. I was posting ON-OFF Net Ratings which is the net rating differential when Shaq is on the court vs. when he isn't. Those Lakers teams fell off the map when Shaq sat on the bench with the exception of 2001.

[HoopsNY]

Can't you read? I wasn't posting Net Ratings. I was posting ON-OFF Net Ratings which is the net rating differential when Shaq is on the court vs. when he isn't. Those Lakers teams fell off the map when Shaq sat on the bench with the exception of 2001.

He doesn't care about reading. He, like LeBron stans, are only interested in winning and argument and giving his point validation.

[NBAGOAT]

* The NBA defines "clutch-time" as last 5 within 5

* Minimum of 5 playoff games to qualify



1997 PLAYOFFS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs)

1. Jordan.......... 5.0 (55)
2. Stockton....... 4.0 (36)

23. Pippen........ 1.6 (18)


1997 FINALS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4)

1. Jordan.......... 5.8 (25)
2. Stockton....... 3.3 (13)

6. Pippen.......... 1.0 (4)


1998 PLAYOFFS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs)

1. Jordan.......... 5.4 (76)

11. Stockton..... 2.3 (28)

22. Pippen........ 1.7 (24)


1998 FINALS Clutch-time PPG (total pts) (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4)

1. Jordan.......... 6.0 (30)

4. Stockton....... 2.0 (10)

8. Pippen........... 1.6 (8)


Furthermore, in the 98' Semis, Pippen had zero points in clutch-time, just like Lebron in 2011 Finals!!... (98' Semis data (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=2).... 11' Finals data (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=2010-11&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4))

Indeed, Jordan won 6 chips with 2011 Finals Lebron (18/7/6 and frightened in the clutch) - that's Pippen.. Prime Wade/Bosh couldn't win with that shit but MJ went 6/6 with it..

Ah so all you have is one playoff run which was by far stocktons best playoff run. 1998 the difference isn’t even significant. You’ll have to offer much more than that with evidence from multiple years

[1987_Lakers]

3ball got destroyed in this thread. Rough to see.

[Axe]

Yikes, even sane posters who get pissed off about lebron at times find 3ball to be stubborn. :oldlol:

[3ba11]

Ah so all you have is one playoff run which was by far stocktons best playoff run. 1998 the difference isn’t even significant. You’ll have to offer much more than that with evidence from multiple years


In addition to becoming MJ in the clutch, Stockton carried the Jazz in the 97' WCF with 21/11 and the legendary walk-off in Barkley's face.. This is far better than Pippen ever played, since Pippen never averaged a double-double in any series and was obviously a complete garbage nobody in the 4th quarter and clutch.. Stockton was a goat playmaker and clutch player - he WAS the system, while Pippen was basically Jeff Green outside the system.

[3ba11]

.
1989-1993 JORDAN ON-OFF NET RATING

https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-12-2022/PmPVj8.gif


1996-1998 JORDAN ON-OFF NET RATING

https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-12-2022/LVXUh-.gif



PER THE VIDEO: (per graphs above)



ON-OFF NET RATING IN PLAYOFFS

97' Shaq........ +17.7
98' Shaq........ +11.6
99' Shaq........ +14.7
00' Shaq........ +22.9
01' Shaq........... -0.3
02' Shaq........ +22.9
03' Shaq........ +11.9
04' Shaq........ +25.4
____________________
15.85 yearly average


89' Jordan..... +24.0
90' Jordan..... +22.0
91' Jordan..... +12.0
92' Jordan....... +2.0
93' Jordan..... +10.0
96' Jordan..... +16.0
97' Jordan..... +22.0
98' Jordan..... +12.0
____________________
15.00 yearly average






Can't you read? I wasn't posting Net Ratings. I was posting ON-OFF Net Ratings





I need to see the source that says a past-prime Shaq had the biggest impact of his career on a super-team with Kobe, Payton and Malone in 2004..

And what good are numbers that say the Lakers beat teams by more WITHOUT shaq then with him in 2001?.. So they were champions without him in 01'?

That's 2 big examples in 5 years and therefore too much noise in the numbers.... or they're fake (my contention all along).. No one could do this shit manually, but you CAN derive plus-minus from boxscores.






Can't you read? I wasn't posting Net Ratings. I was posting ON-OFF Net Ratings


.


The on-off net ratings measure how badly your team beats opponents with and without you, but this doesn't consider things that drive teammate performance and therefore affect the numbers.. Chemistry and brand of ball are drivers of teammate performance, so stars should get credit for being good enough to foster chemistry and teammate performance.. Instead, they're penalized for facilitating higher teammate performance because this lowers their on-off net rating.

That's why the stat is garbage - it doesn't give players credit for being good enough to foster chemistry and teammate performance.. Otoh, ball-centric guys like Luka, Shaq or Lebron often have weak fits that depress teammate performance, thereby boosting on-off net rating.






Can't you read? I wasn't posting Net Ratings. I was posting ON-OFF Net Ratings





In Shaq's title years, when did he have a 75 percentile cast like Jordan's best casts, where 1 in 4 casts were still better?..

7 or 8 teams per year were better than Jordan's best casts, whereas Shaq had the best supporting casts from 2000-2002 and truthfully from 1998-2004 - he had 4 all-star team in 98' and super-team in 04'.

And when did Shaq have a 0 percentile cast that he elevated to solid status like Jordan elevated his 88-90' casts (0 percentile casts)?.. So there's flaws to the on-off net rating, primarily that it penalizes players for being good enough to play a brand of ball that boosts teammate.perfmamce (which lowers on-off net rating).






Can't you read? I wasn't posting Net Ratings. I was posting ON-OFF Net Ratings





For the 89' season, the video shows how the cast performed without him and with him here (&t=03m01s), but it doesn't do this for 1990.. It makes a point to state that the 90' Bulls approached championship-caliber by having a 7-point margin over opponents with Jordan - but it doesn't say how the Bulls did without Jordan because this would show that the improvement to championship-caliber was all Jordan.. The cast was still getting ragdolled without him in 90' just like 89' - we know this by looking at the 14-point margins from 89-93' and deducing the 1 missing year (90').

[sdot_thadon]

In addition to becoming MJ in the clutch, Stockton carried the Jazz in the 97' WCF with 21/11 and the legendary walk-off in Barkley's face.. This is far better than Pippen ever played, since Pippen never averaged a double-double in any series and was obviously a complete garbage nobody in the 4th quarter and clutch.. Stockton was a goat playmaker and clutch player - he WAS the system, while Pippen was basically Jeff Green outside the system.

Get it right, legendary, offensive foul. **** those guys.

[dankok8]

.
1989-1993 JORDAN ON-OFF NET RATING

https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-12-2022/PmPVj8.gif


1996-1998 JORDAN ON-OFF NET RATING

https://i.makeagif.com/media/8-12-2022/LVXUh-.gif



PER THE VIDEO: (per graphs above)



ON-OFF NET RATING IN PLAYOFFS

97' Shaq........ +17.7
98' Shaq........ +11.6
99' Shaq........ +14.7
00' Shaq........ +22.9
01' Shaq........... -0.3
02' Shaq........ +22.9
03' Shaq........ +11.9
04' Shaq........ +25.4
____________________
15.85 yearly average


89' Jordan..... +24.0
90' Jordan..... +22.0
91' Jordan..... +12.0
92' Jordan....... +2.0
93' Jordan..... +10.0
96' Jordan..... +16.0
97' Jordan..... +22.0
98' Jordan..... +12.0
____________________
15.00 yearly average






I need to see the source that says a past-prime Shaq had the biggest impact of his career on a super-team with Kobe, Payton and Malone in 2004..

And what good are numbers that say the Lakers beat teams by more WITHOUT shaq then with him in 2001?.. So they were champions without him in 01'?

That's 2 big examples in 5 years and therefore too much noise in the numbers.... or they're fake (my contention all along).. No one could do this shit manually, but you CAN derive plus-minus from boxscores.






The on-off net ratings measure how badly your team beats opponents with and without you, but this doesn't consider things that drive teammate performance and therefore affect the numbers.. Chemistry and brand of ball are drivers of teammate performance, so stars should get credit for being good enough to foster chemistry and teammate performance.. Instead, they're penalized for facilitating higher teammate performance because this lowers their on-off net rating.

That's why the stat is garbage - it doesn't give players credit for being good enough to foster chemistry and teammate performance.. Otoh, ball-centric guys like Luka, Shaq or Lebron often have weak fits that depress teammate performance, thereby boosting on-off net rating.






In Shaq's title years, when did he have a 75 percentile cast like Jordan's best casts, where 1 in 4 casts were still better?..

7 or 8 teams per year were better than Jordan's best casts, whereas Shaq had the best supporting casts from 2000-2002 and truthfully from 1998-2004 - he had 4 all-star team in 98' and super-team in 04'.

And when did Shaq have a 0 percentile cast that he elevated to solid status like Jordan elevated his 88-90' casts (0 percentile casts)?.. So there's flaws to the on-off net rating, primarily that it penalizes players for being good enough to play a brand of ball that boosts teammate.perfmamce (which lowers on-off net rating).






For the 89' season, the video shows how the cast performed without him and with him here (&t=03m01s), but it doesn't do this for 1990.. It makes a point to state that the 90' Bulls approached championship-caliber by having a 7-point margin over opponents with Jordan - but it doesn't say how the Bulls did without Jordan because this would show that the improvement to championship-caliber was all Jordan.. The cast was still getting ragdolled without him in 90' just like 89' - we know this by looking at the 14-point margins from 89-93' and deducing the 1 missing year (90').

I get the data from Basketball-Reference. Yes Shaq had his best ON-OFF Net Rating in the playoffs in 2004. I think the Lakers' biggest problem on offense is giving too many shots to Kobe and others at the expense of Shaq.

Maybe the Bulls 1990 OFF rating is so bad it doesn't even show on the graph... as in below -20.

Anyways Jordan had incredible plus minus numbers on par with other great players. In fact apart from the 1992 Bulls, the other Bulls teams had a negative Net Rating when MJ sat which may seem a bit surprising considering how dominant those teams were. Then again, this is raw ON-OFF. It doesn't adjust for lineups. Maybe when MJ sat, Pippen and Grant sat as well and that's probably true a lot of the time. Or maybe some of the minutes MJ sat, some of the opponent's best players were on the court and dominated Chicago's bench etc. Adjusted plus minus like RAPM, RPM and all the others try to adjust for these variables but then the samples get really really tiny instead of just tiny.

As Ben Taylor correctly said, it's not the ON rating that is noisy. It's probably quite accurate but the OFF rating is super duper noisy because the samples for superstars playing 40+ mpg are so tiny. I don't think playoff plus minus, adjusted or not, tells us a whole lot other than "MJ is definitely one of the best players of all time." but we know that without the plus-minus too. Trying to read anymore into playoff plus-minus numbers is pointless. Trying to rank the greatest peaks using it is very flawed.

[3ba11]

I get the data from Basketball-Reference. Yes Shaq had his best ON-OFF Net Rating in the playoffs in 2004. I think the Lakers' biggest problem on offense is giving too many shots to Kobe and others at the expense of Shaq.

Maybe the Bulls 1990 OFF rating is so bad it doesn't even show on the graph... as in below -20.

Anyways Jordan had incredible plus minus numbers on par with other great players. In fact apart from the 1992 Bulls, the other Bulls teams had a negative Net Rating when MJ sat which may seem a bit surprising considering how dominant those teams were. Then again, this is raw ON-OFF. It doesn't adjust for lineups. Maybe when MJ sat, Pippen and Grant sat as well and that's probably true a lot of the time. Or maybe some of the minutes MJ sat, some of the opponent's best players were on the court and dominated Chicago's bench etc. Adjusted plus minus like RAPM, RPM and all the others try to adjust for these variables but then the samples get really really tiny instead of just tiny.

As Ben Taylor correctly said, it's not the ON rating that is noisy. It's probably quite accurate but the OFF rating is super duper noisy because the samples for superstars playing 40+ mpg are so tiny. I don't think playoff plus minus, adjusted or not, tells us a whole lot other than "MJ is definitely one of the best players of all time." but we know that without the plus-minus too. Trying to read anymore into playoff plus-minus numbers is pointless. Trying to rank the greatest peaks using it is very flawed.


Teammate performance is half of the stat.

So a player can boost their on-off net rating by having weak fits and brand of ball that depress teammate capacity.

That's why the stat is weak..

I'm sure a prime Westbrook has excellent on-off net rating because his brand depresses teammate capacity.. Luka and Lebron are less severe examples.

Otoh, Jordan's style put the ball in teammates' hands and then bailed them out if needed.. This yielded grown of teammates, chemistry and brand that boosted teammate capacity, thus reducing Jordan's on-off net rating.

So it's an extremely flawed stat just like every other stat.. The reality is that role players are greatly enhanced by a great brand of ball, so this penalizes the on-off net rating of stars that are good enough to dominate within top brands of ball.

[dankok8]

Teammate performance is half of the stat.

So a player can boost their on-off net rating by having weak fits and brand of ball that depress teammate capacity.

That's why the stat is weak..

I'm sure a prime Westbrook has excellent on-off net rating because his brand depresses teammate capacity.. Luka and Lebron are less severe examples.

Otoh, Jordan's style put the ball in teammates' hands and then bailed them out if needed.. This yielded grown of teammates, chemistry and brand that boosted teammate capacity, thus reducing Jordan's on-off net rating.

So it's an extremely flawed stat just like every other stat.. The reality is that role players are greatly enhanced by a great brand of ball, so this penalizes the on-off net rating of stars that are good enough to dominate within top brands of ball.

The weak brand if anything should limit the ON ratings but when the star player who is a ball-dominator is OFF, the team should do well. Of course the other factor is dependence on the star player and there is truth in saying that ball dominant players like Lebron/Magic/Westbrook/Luka etc. have too much of a playmaking role so that when they sit other players either aren't comfortable as playmakers or maybe the team doesn't even have secondary playmakers because it doesn't need them when those guys are on the floor.

But I'm not sure you can call depending on one player a weak brand. Sometimes it's a necessity. Besides Magic won 5 rings (4 as the best/co-best player) and Lebron won 4 rings. But maybe just maybe Jordan who is an unreal on-ball player but also very strong off-ball is the best kind of star to have because they can mesh with other ball dominators. Ben Taylor calls this scalability and argues that this makes Jordan a better ceiling raiser than Lebron because he can raise already good teams to dynasty status. It makes sense.

And besides something also worth considering... the optimal brand of ball depends on the era. That's why when we rank peaks we can only really do it relative to era. Bill Russell, for instance, obviously wouldn't be as good today because teams shoot way more from the outside. But that doesn't mean Russell shouldn't be considered a GOAT candidate because what he did in his era is ridiculous.

[3ba11]

when the star player who is a ball-dominator is OFF, the team should do well.






How is a ball-dominant offense going to work without the ball-dominator?

The team must use a lesser ball-dominator that's nowhere near the star ball-dominator.

That's why ball-dominant offenses fall off a cliff without the star ball-dominator, which boosts their on-off net rating.

That's why I used the term "capacity" - ball-dominant offenses reduce teammate capacity regardless of whether the star ball-dominator is off the floor.. This yields lower team ceilings overall (weak brand).






Of course the other factor is dependence on the star player and there is truth in saying that ball dominant players like Lebron/Magic/Westbrook/Luka etc. have too much of a playmaking role so that when they sit other players either aren't comfortable as playmakers





Uh .. ya..... See previous response above







or maybe the team doesn't even have secondary playmakers because it doesn't need them when those guys are on the floor.





Guys like Wade, Kyrie, Westbrook and Rondo averaged more assists than Pippen, so Lebron needed more playmaking help






But I'm not sure you can call depending on one player a weak brand.

Sometimes it's a necessity.

Besides Magic won 5 rings (4 as the best/co-best player)

and Lebron won 4 rings





^^^ do you see you biased you are against Jordan?

You just said that the Lakers depended on 1 player (Magic).

But Jordan needed a bunch of great teammates? Are you serious?

You might have been talking about playmaking only, but that's false too - Wade, Kyrie, Westbrook and Rondo average more assists than Pippen.. So Lebron needed a ton of playmaking help - you guys just lie about him or aren't aware of how much help his garbage brand of ball and skillset requires.






But I'm not sure you can call depending on one player a weak brand.

Besides Magic won 5 rings





Kareem is goat to many people and ranked higher than Magic all-time.

So those are Kareem's rings.

The Lakers actually weren't a ball-dominant team because the offense ran through Kareem

But regardless, Magic and Lebron are 9-10 in the Finals.. So if the 2 baddest ball-dominators can't be winners on the championship level with super-teams, then it can't be done - it's simply a losing and/or inferior way to play that requires super-teams.






Lebron is better floor raiser





The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas added a 22/5/5 all-defender t to make the 06' Playoffs as a high seed, so when did Lebron carry bad records and low seeds in the playoffs like 85-89' Jordan?..

The historical record shows that Lebron had 3 years to develop his team into a high seed before entering the 06' Playoffs, so he never carried bad teams in the playoffs.. He usually had good casts and high seeds relative to his Eastern competition.




he can raise already good teams[/B] to dynasty status.





The 85' Bulls weren't good and neither were the 95' Bulls, so Jordan wasn't added to good teams.

Furthermore, the video says that the 88-90' Bulls had a 0 percentile cast (worse than all casts), yet Jordan led them to the ECF...

So Jordan is a better floor-raiser because Lebron was lottery with 0 percentile casts and never carried low seeds or 0 percentile casts to the ECF like MJ






And besides something also worth considering... the optimal brand of ball depends on the era.





Ball-dominance has a losing record in any era and ball-dominators win less than off-ball guys in any era.

[Baller789]

Depends if that ball dominator's teams actually play team ball.

In Lebron's case, he is the system. So if there is fault at his end, the whole system falls apart at its seams.

[3ba11]

.
Thread Cliffs


1) The primary stat in the video is on-off net rating, where half the stat measures teammate performance - therefore, the stat rewards players for having bad teammate fits and brand of ball that reduces teammate performance.. Otoh, it penalizes players that are good enough to dominate within a good brand that enhances teammate performance.

2) Jordan had 0 percentile casts in 89' and 90' but still made the ECF, while Lebron was lottery with 0 percentile casts in 04' and otherwise had high seeds in a historically-weak conference.

3) Jordan three-peated with casts from 91-93' that were only the 7th-best in the league (75th percentile), while Lebron needed the preseason favorite to win all his rings and Shaq had the best casts from 98-04'.

4) Only Jordan had to lift 0 percentile casts to viable, while everyone else was gifted super-teams or ready-made stars

[1987_Lakers]

Thread Cliffs

MJ had good teammates while winning

[3ba11]

Thread Cliffs

MJ had good teammates while winning





the 7th best cast in the league (75th percentile).... :confusedshrug:.... he three-peated with it (91-93)

When did Lebron, Shaq or Magic win with the 7th best cast, let alone 3-peat with it?

Lebron needed the preseason favorite and super-team to win... Shaq needed the best casts from 98-04'

Btw, Jordan 3-peated from 96-98' with bottom-tier casts, according to the video.. And only Jordan had to lift 0 percentile casts to viable, while everyone else was gifted super-teams or ready-made stars

[1987_Lakers]

the 7th best cast in the league (75th percentile).... :confusedshrug:.... he three-peated with it (91-93)

When did Lebron, Shaq or Magic win with the 7th best cast, let alone 3-peat with it?

Lebron needed the preseason favorite and super-team to win... Shaq needed the best casts from 98-04'

Btw, Jordan 3-peated from 96-98' with bottom tier casts, according to the video

Both LeBron & Shaq's teams had losing records without them, with the exception of maybe Miami for LeBron.

Lakers were 25-31 from 2000-2004 whenever Shaq missed games.

Bulls went an entire season without MJ and won 55 games.

[3ba11]

Both LeBron & Shaq's teams had losing records without them, with the exception of maybe Miami for LeBron.

Lakers were 25-31 from 2000-2004 whenever Shaq missed games.


Lebron and Shaq routinely underacheive their on-paper talent projection by losing as the preseason favorite and/or falling to underdog..

Favored talent underacheives due to weak brand of ball, so we know that their ball-centric, bully-ball hurts teammate performance compared to superior brands - these bad brands gets worse when they star ball-dominator is replaced in the lineup by a much worse ball-centric player.. Bad brands hurt teammate performance regardless of who the ball-centric player is.

[1987_Lakers]

Lebron and Shaq routinely underacheive their on-paper talent projection by losing as the preseason favorite and/or falling to underdog..

Favored talent underacheives due to weak brand of ball, so we know that their ball-centric, bully-ball hurts teammate performance compared to superior brands - these bad brands gets worse when they star ball-dominator is replaced in the lineup by a much worse ball-centric player.. Bad brands hurt teammate performance regardless of who the ball-centric player is.

You lied, you said Shaq had the best cast in the league despite his team having a losing record without him.

[3ba11]

You lied, you said Shaq had the best cast in the league despite his team having a losing record without him.


Shaq had Kobe

That's the better help than anyone in the league

And Horry, Fisher, Glen Rice, Horace Grant, Fox and many more

[1987_Lakers]

Shaq had Kobe

That's the better help than anyone in the league

And Horry, Fisher, Glen Rice, Horace Grant, Fox and many more

Yet, they were a losing team whenever Shaq missed games.

Lakers only won 34 games in 2005 with Kobe and adding Odom & Butler to replace Shaq, while also being 2nd in preaseason favorites to win a title.

:yaohappy:

[3ba11]

Yet, they were a losing team whenever Shaq missed games.

Lakers only won 34 games in 2005 with Kobe and adding Odom & Butler to replace Shaq, while also being 2nd in preaseason favorites to win a title.

:yaohappy:


Odom and Butler?

Lebron was lottery with all-stars like Zydrunas and Ingram

Or AD and Westbrook

[1987_Lakers]

Odom and Butler?

Lebron was lottery with all-stars like Zydrunas and Ingram

Or AD and Westbrook

Calls Ingram an all-star when he played with LeBron, but ignores Butler was an all-star too. Hell Odom was Toni Kukoc with better defense.

:yaohappy:

[3ba11]

Calls Ingram an all-star when he played with LeBron, but ignores Butler was an all-star too. Hell Odom was Toni Kukoc with better defense.

:yaohappy:


Kukoc sucked

Trash

He never did anything

Odom was far superior

And Lebron was lottery out West until AD saved him

[1987_Lakers]

Kukoc sucked

Trash

He never did anything

Odom was far superior

And Lebron was lottery out West until AD saved him


MJ was 1-9 before Pippen saved him.

:yaohappy:

[3ba11]

MJ was 1-9 before Pippen saved him.

:yaohappy:


Jordan's time without Pippen occurred at a time when EVERYONE loses - Giannis, Curry, Lebron and Durant failed to win any playoff games in their first few seasons as well.

So it's just a timing coincidence and the stats show that Pippen is 120th in PER and a low producer that never reached peak-Horry level in 6 Finals and couldn't outplay Reggie Miller against the same playoff comp (0/5)

Pippen is on the low end of scoring for winning sidekicks with worst-ever efficiency and clutch, so ONLY JORDAN had to defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load)

[1987_Lakers]

Jordan's time without Pippen occurred at a time when EVERYONE loses -

Another lie. Larry Bird is one example.

[3ba11]

Another lie. Larry Bird is one example.


That was obvious sarcasm that you took literally.. more insecurity

So again, it's a timing coincidence and the actual stats show that Pippen was a sub-par-producing system player that never dominated and made MJ carry the load in every series

[1987_Lakers]

Nearly everyone


Jordan's time without Pippen occurred at a time when EVERYONE loses

:lol

[3ba11]

:lol


So again, it's a timing coincidence and the stats show that Pippen was a sub-par-producing system player that never dominated and made MJ carry the load in every series

AD, Wade and Kyrie dominate, while Pippen makes MJ carry the load in every series

[ShawkFactory]

Kukoc sucked

Trash

He never did anything

Odom was far superior

And Lebron was lottery out West until AD saved him

Rock and a hard place here, having to have to fully commit to trashing Jordan's teammates over Kobe :lol

Sorry you had to do that.

[3ba11]

Rock and a hard place here, having to have to fully commit to trashing Jordan's teammates over Kobe :lol

Sorry you had to do that.


Everyone looks bad compared to Jordan, even Kobe

Kobe wouldn't win shit with Jordan's rosters - no one would because it required 33.5 ppg in the playoffs and no one in history even reached 30.. And this 33.5 was against maximum defensive attention (carrying scoring load.. carrying bum talent) -

[ShawkFactory]

Everyone looks bad compared to Jordan, even Kobe

Kobe wouldn't win shit with Jordan's rosters - no one would because it required 33.5 ppg in the playoffs against maximum defensive attention (carrying scoring load) and no one in history even reached 30

I was talking about trashing their teammates. When it's a Kobe teammate vs a Jordan one I didn't expect you so heavily go with Jordan. I guess I should have.

[3ba11]

I was talking about trashing their teammates. When it's a Kobe teammate vs a Jordan one I didn't expect you so heavily go with Jordan. I guess I should have.


The original point was that the video says 91-93' Jordan three-peated with casts that were only the 7th-best in the league (75th percentile), while most winning casts are the best, let alone 3-peat casts... Lebron needed the preseason favorite and super-team to win all his rings and Shaq had the best casts from 98-04'.

And the 2nd three-peat casts were much worse, probably below 50 percentile (the majority of casts were better)

[sdot_thadon]

So again, it's a timing coincidence and the stats show that Pippen was a sub-par-producing system player that never dominated and made MJ carry the load in every series

AD, Wade and Kyrie dominate, while Pippen makes MJ carry the load in every series

Just for the hell of it, a bonus slap to the face of idiocy

Phil Jackson in the summer of 95 before camp to the Chicago Tribune:


Q: Now that the Bulls seem intent on keeping Pippen, will he respond and perform back in Jordan's shadow?

A: "I can only say again this is the most unselfish superstar in the game of basketball. He's a guy we asked five or six years ago not to worry about points, get assists and rebounds and the wins and points will take care of themselves. This year I want him to be a leader and fill in, get assists, find the guys who have to score, play defense, maybe score when a 6-foot guy is playing him. But I still think Scottie will lead this team in rebounding, more or less, and assists."

Another false narrative dead in the water. Bad week for you buddy.

[3ba11]

Just for the hell of it, a bonus slap to the face of idiocy

Phil Jackson in the summer of 95 before camp to the Chicago Tribune:



Another false narrative dead in the water. Bad week for you buddy.


That disproved literally nothing

You were soundly defeated in 2 threads.

You aren't even trying to debate anymore

[sdot_thadon]

That disproved literally nothing

You were soundly defeated in 2 threads.

You aren't even trying to debate anymore

So Phil, the architect of their success giving a direct description of what they asked of Scottie proves nothing? Yeah right buddy. Your word vs Phil. I'm going with Phil.

[ShawkFactory]

The original point was that the video says 91-93' Jordan three-peated with casts that were only the 7th-best in the league (75th percentile), while most winning casts are the best, let alone 3-peat casts... Lebron needed the preseason favorite and super-team to win all his rings and Shaq had the best casts from 98-04'.

And the 2nd three-peat casts were much worse, probably below 50 percentile (the majority of casts were better)

Don't care.

[3ba11]

Don't care.


Lies

[3ba11]

So Phil, the architect of their success giving a direct description of what they asked of Scottie proves nothing? Yeah right buddy. Your word vs Phil. I'm going with Phil.


Scottie couldn't score and Phil didn't want him trying otherwise this happens:


https://i.makeagif.com/media/7-15-2022/7D0vE4.gif


Pippen was a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score outside the triangle

aka a system player that scored on the low end of winning sidekicks with worst-ever efficiency, clutch and low peak capability (no game-planning required)

[sdot_thadon]

Scottie couldn't score and Phil didn't want him trying otherwise this happens:


https://i.makeagif.com/media/7-15-2022/7D0vE4.gif


Pippen was a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score outside the triangle

aka a system player that scored on the low end of winning sidekicks with worst-ever efficiency, clutch and low peak capability (no game-planning required)

More dumb shit. He went to a team with 2! All time low post presences, while playing his entire career as a slasher with bigs who didn't get touches lol. Keep lying to yourself tho.

[3ba11]

More dumb shit. He went to a team with 2! All time low post presences, while playing his entire career as a slasher with bigs who didn't get touches lol. Keep lying to yourself tho.


I'll take Phil's words that he didn't want Pippen trying to score

and then Rudy telling Pippen to try and it failed.. lol

So Pip can't score for shit and shouldn't be trying - he's a system player that needs the system and developed chemistry to score . He's a baby that was carried to 6 chips

So you're defeated again and have been getting beat throughout the thread

[sdot_thadon]

I'll take Phil's words that he didn't want Pippen trying to score

and then Rudy telling Pippen to try and it failed.. lol

So Pip can't score for shit and shouldn't be trying - he's a system player that needs the system and developed chemistry to score . He's a baby that was carried to 6 chips

So you're defeated again and have been getting beat throughout the thread

Yeah you did it buddy, you won all them bruises don't count lol. You should reset with like 10 threads in the morning and quit embarrassing yourself in these I feel bad for you.

[3ba11]

Yeah you did it buddy, you won all them bruises don't count lol. You should reset with like 10 threads in the morning and quit embarrassing yourself in these I feel bad for you.


Haha sweet, another deflection by sdot and victory for 3ball

It becomes hard to defend Pippen after while when the facts of his ineptitude just keep coming.

Did you hear the story of Pippen scoring zero points in clutch time for a series or failing to reach Horry-level in 6 Finals (0/6) or getting drastically outplayed by Reggie Miller against the same playoff opponent 5 times (0/5)

There's a lot of ways to demonstrate Pippen's poor caliber

[sdot_thadon]

Haha sweet, another deflection by sdot and victory for 3ball

It becomes hard to defend Pippen after while when the facts of his ineptitude just keep coming.

It's not you didn't get the memo, the second you start playing dumb I won't waste a concentrated thought in your direction, clowns get pie in the face. Simple as that.

[3ba11]

It's not you didn't get the memo, the second you start playing dumb I won't waste a concentrated thought in your direction, clowns get pie in the face. Simple as that.


Nah, you were soundly beaten about 80 different times itt and now you're in No Mas mode

I win by TKO.. you quit on your stool

[sdot_thadon]

Nah, you were soundly beaten about 80 different times itt and now you're in No Mas mode

I win by TKO.. you quit on your stool

You lose everytime you attempt to prove Pippen, an all time great is terrible. You lose before you even begin, and you fail to realize your little crusades just make more facts surface to make you look like.a fool..

[3ba11]

You lose everytime you attempt to prove Pippen, an all time great is terrible. You lose before you even begin, and you fail to realize your little crusades just make more facts surface to make you look like.a fool..


Nope you guys don't have any facts that say he's good except Rachel Nichols' opinion (media opinion)

But the media opinion amounts to "6 rings doh"

There's no actual performance that says he's good.. 55 wins and 2nd Round isn't top 75... 22/5 peak capability isn't top 75... system player that can't create his shot isn't top 75

The historical record shows that he plays at an Iggy or Wiggins-caliber but the winning spotlight inflates him to all-time status... And honestly, Wiggins is far superior to Pippen because he was 18-24 ppg outside the dynasty system, while Pippen was a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score outside the triangle.

[Im Still Ballin]

Epic thread.

[dankok8]

One thing that stood out to me in this thread is HoopsNY's post about how good the Bulls were defensively in the Finals.


'91 LAL RS: 106.3 PPG | 112.1 ORTG | .484 FG%
'91 LAL FS: 91.6 PPG | 104.5 ORTG | .447 FG%

'92 POR RS: 111.4 PPG | 111.4 ORTG | .473 FG%
'92 POR FS: 97.7 PPG | 103.0 ORTG | .443 FG%

'93 PHO RS: 113.4 PPG | 113.3 ORTG | .493 FG%
'93 PHO FS: 106.7 PPG | 113.0 ORTG | .468 FG%

'96 SEA RS: 104.5 PPG | 110.3 ORTG | .480 FG%
'96 SEA FS: 89.2 PPG| 106.7 ORTG | .445 FG%

'97 UTA RS: 103.1 PPG | 113.6 ORTG | .504 FG%
'97 UTA FS: 87.2 PPG | 103.8 ORTG | .430 FG%

'98 UTA RS: 101.0 PPG | 112.7 ORTG | .490 FG%
'98 UTA FS: 80.2 PPG | 96.1 ORTG | .443 FG%

[3ba11]

One thing that stood out to me in this thread is HoopsNY's post about how good the Bulls were defensively in the Finals.


The Bulls' defense performed better than opponents in the Finals specifically because the opponents' best players were in the backcourt and massively wet the bed against MJ's onslaught.. This is obvious statistical reality.

All of the following guards massively wet the bed versus MJ in the Finals after dominating the playoffs previously (Magic, Drexler, Porter, Majerle, KJ, Stockton, Hornacek, Payton).

So the guards underperformed against MJ, which explains the defensive gap between the Bulls and opponents, while Pippen's defensive assignment always got their regular numbers (Worthy, Kersey, Dumas, Schrempf, Kemp).. That's the reason for the massive defensive gap.. Otherwise, the Bulls had weaker defenses (lower defensive rating in regular season) than most of their ECF and Finals opponents like the 91' Pistons and Lakers, or the 92' Knicks and Blazers, or the 93' Knicks.

Again, everything that was just said is STATISTICAL FACT.. People just don't realize how great MJ was - MJ's presence was like Jon Jones - he was often great enough to win with sheer intimidation, let alone goat athletic talent and skill.






more facts surface





What facts surfaced?

The video clearly states that the Bulls had a zero percentile cast from 88-90' (better than 0% of casts) and the 3-peat casts from 91-93' were still worse than 1 in 4 casts (75th percentile cast), while being in the bottom half of the league from 96-98'.

And Pippen wasn't a superstar (couldn't dominate).. Everyone that won multiple rings needed a dominant 1st option sidekick like Magic needing Kareem, or Shaq needing Kobe, or Hakeem needing Drexler, or Lebron needing Wade... Only Jordan won a bunch of chips with a secondary producer and 100% system player like Pippen (worse than Jeff Green outside the system in 89' and 99').

So the proper way to think about MJ and Pippen is that MJ was good enough to win with Pippen's decade-worst passing and efficiency among 90's sidekicks.. The resulting winning spotlight is why Pippen started making All-NBA in 1992 (5th season).. Compare this trajectory to 4th-year Jamal Murray from the 2020 Playoffs - Jokic wasn't good enough to win with Murray's 27/5/7 on 63% TS, so Murray wasn't elevated to media accolade thereafter like Pippen.. This is just a simple example but it applies to anyone that fails to win with Iggy-caliber help from the sidekick.

[dankok8]

The Bulls' defense performed better than opponents in the Finals specifically because the opponents' best players were in the backcourt and massively wet the bed against MJ's onslaught.. This is obvious statistical reality.

All of the following guards massively wet the bed versus MJ in the Finals after dominating the playoffs previously (Magic, Drexler, Porter, Majerle, KJ, Stockton, Hornacek, Payton).

So the guards underperformed against MJ, which explains the defensive gap between the Bulls and opponents, while Pippen's defensive assignment always got their regular numbers (Worthy, Kersey, Dumas, Schrempf, Kemp).. That's the reason for the massive defensive gap.. Otherwise, the Bulls had weaker defenses (lower defensive rating in regular season) than most of their ECF and Finals opponents like the 91' Pistons and Lakers, or the 92' Knicks and Blazers, or the 93' Knicks.

Again, everything that was just said is STATISTICAL FACT.. People just don't realize how great MJ was - MJ's presence was like Jon Jones - he was often great enough to win with sheer intimidation, let alone goat athletic talent and skill.






What facts surfaced?

The video clearly states that the Bulls had a zero percentile cast from 88-90' (better than 0% of casts) and the 3-peat casts from 91-93' were still worse than 1 in 4 casts (75th percentile cast), while being in the bottom half of the league from 96-98'.

And Pippen wasn't a superstar (couldn't dominate).. Everyone that won multiple rings needed a dominant 1st option sidekick like Magic needing Kareem, or Shaq needing Kobe, or Hakeem needing Drexler, or Lebron needing Wade... Only Jordan won a bunch of chips with a secondary producer and 100% system player like Pippen (worse than Jeff Green outside the system in 89' and 99').

So the proper way to think about MJ and Pippen is that MJ was good enough to win with Pippen's decade-worst passing and efficiency among 90's sidekicks.. The resulting winning spotlight is why Pippen started making All-NBA in 1992 (5th season).. Compare this trajectory to 4th-year Jamal Murray from the 2020 Playoffs - Jokic wasn't good enough to win with Murray's 27/5/7 on 63% TS, so Murray wasn't elevated to media accolade thereafter like Pippen.. This is just a simple example but it applies to anyone that fails to win with Iggy-caliber help from the sidekick.

Be fair. Pippen and Grant were fantastic defenders and the Bulls' defensive system was superb. But besides that I can agree the 1st threepeat Bulls were not a historically great defensive team even though they stepped up in the finals. The 2nd threepeat Bulls definitely were historically great though.

I think Jordan taking out their legs with his offense isn't a good argument. The Bulls kept up their defensive dominance when Jordan sat. Which makes sense as perimeter players rarely move the needle much on defense.

[3ba11]

Be fair. Pippen and Grant were fantastic defenders and the Bulls' defensive system was superb. But besides that I can agree the 1st threepeat Bulls were not a historically great defensive team even though they stepped up in the finals. The 2nd threepeat Bulls definitely were historically great though.

I think Jordan taking out their legs with his offense isn't a good argument. The Bulls kept up their defensive dominance when Jordan sat. Which makes sense as perimeter players rarely move the needle much on defense.


Jordan played 44 MPG in the 91' Finals, so he didn't sit.. The videomaker discounted the numbers that he recorded from the 88' Playoffs for that very reason - 20 minutes for a whole series isn't a sample.

Otoh, the numbers show that massive underperformance from opposing backcourts is why each Finals opponent underperformed offensively - this is clear and irrefutable - everyone else played well except the massively-bed-wetting backcourts..

This kind of underperformance is standard when an athlete undertakes a higher level of competition.. When a high school player goes to college or when a college player goes to the NBA, it's a completely different level and most guys don't perform as well on the higher level.. It's the same thing when Magic or Terry Porter face MJ - it's a completely different level and they play much worse - the frontcourts play great and the backcourts wet the bed vs MJ.. The numbers confirm this over a MASSIVE SAMPLE - over the course of Jordan's 13-year playoff career, nearly every backcourt massively wet the bed against MJ in every series.

Guys like Isiah and Dumars were wetting the bed (Isiah never reached 41% shooting in 4 tries against MJ but shot far better against everyone else) - the Pistons still won because their team was stacked and the Bulls had the worst cast in the league (according to the videomaker).,. Magic and Byron Scott combined for 35 ppg in the WCF but this reduced to 23 ppg in the Finals... Drexler and Porter combined for 50 ppg on the WCF but this reduced to 41 in the Finals... And everyone shot like garbage.

There's no other reason that these teams underperformed offensively - it's just the backcourts underperforming against the GOAT.. It's similar to the recent Jon Jones fight - the GOAT can often with with sheer intimidation, in addition to goat athletic skill and talent.

[dankok8]

Jordan played 44 MPG in the 91' Finals, so he didn't sit.. The videomaker discounted the numbers that he recorded from the 88' Playoffs for that very reason - 20 minutes for a whole series isn't a sample.

Otoh, the numbers show that massive underperformance from opposing backcourts is why each Finals opponent underperformed offensively - this is clear and irrefutable - everyone else played well except the massively-bed-wetting backcourts..

This kind of underperformance is standard when an athlete undertakes a higher level of competition.. When a high school player goes to college or when a college player goes to the NBA, it's a completely different level and most guys don't perform as well on the higher level.. It's the same thing when Magic or Terry Porter face MJ - it's a completely different level and they play much worse - the frontcourts play great and the backcourts wet the bed vs MJ.. The numbers confirm this over a MASSIVE SAMPLE - over the course of Jordan's 13-year playoff career, nearly every backcourt massively wet the bed against MJ in every series.

Guys like Isiah and Dumars were wetting the bed (Isiah never reached 41% shooting in 4 tries against MJ but shot far better against everyone else) - the Pistons still won because their team was stacked and the Bulls had the worst cast in the league (according to the videomaker).,. Magic and Byron Scott combined for 35 ppg in the WCF but this reduced to 23 ppg in the Finals... Drexler and Porter combined for 50 ppg on the WCF but this reduced to 41 in the Finals...

There's no other reason that these teams underperformed offensively - it's just the backcourts underperforming against the GOAT.. It's similar to the recent Jon Jones fight - the GOAT can often with with sheer intimidation, in addition to goat athletic skill and talent.

In Isiah's case, Jordan actually defended him personally and had a lot to do with his decline. MJ with his quickness and long arms was quite devastating defending smaller guards.

Thanks to PHILA who did play-by-play analysis of MJ in the 1992 playoffs, we have MJ's defensive numbers from the 1992 Finals.

Drexler shot 20/45 (44.4%) when defended by Jordan which is actually better than the 28/73 (38.4%) he shot against other defenders.
Porter shot 2/9 (22.2%) when defended by Jordan which is much worse than the 31/61 (50.8%) he shot against other defenders.

So once again Jordan seems to have been effective against the smaller Porter but not against the bigger Drexler. Then again we don't have the breakdown by shot distance or fouls committed or turnovers or anything so it's hard to say exactly how effective he was or wasn't.

MJ was certainly intimidating guys but you overblow the impact of that. If you're going to claim something like that, you better have proof for it.

[3ba11]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/9-24-2015/QvXF8J.gif



In Isiah's case, Jordan actually defended him personally and had a lot to do with his decline. MJ with his quickness and long arms was quite devastating defending smaller guards.

Thanks to PHILA who did play-by-play analysis of MJ in the 1992 p
Playoffs, we have MJ's defensive numbers from the 1992 Finals.

Drexler shot 20/45 (44.4%) when defended by Jordan which is actually better than the 28/73 (38.4%) he shot against other defenders.
Porter shot 2/9 (22.2%) when defended by Jordan which is much worse than the 31/61 (50.8%) he shot against other defenders.

So once again Jordan seems to have been effective against the smaller Porter but not against the bigger Drexler.

MJ was certainly intimidating guys but you overblow the impact of that. If you're going to claim something like that, you better have proof for it.


it's MORE than that - it's more than jordan holding drexler, magic and isiah far below their normal efficiency..

it's also the strategy, pace, energy and intensity level that MJ makes opponents play at.. The gif above shows Terry Porter doing something against MJ that he doesn't have to do against any other opponent.. It's a completely different level and these guys weren't on the level so they underperformed.. History shows 13 years of opposing backcourts wetting the bed against MJ, while the frontcourts did great.

[dankok8]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/9-24-2015/QvXF8J.gif





it's MORE than that - it's more than jordan holding drexler, magic and isiah far below their normal efficiency..

it's also the strategy, pace, energy and intensity level that MJ makes opponents play at.. The gif above shows Terry Porter doing something against MJ that he doesn't have to do against any other opponent.. It's a completely different level and these guys weren't on the level so they underperformed.. History shows 13 years of opposing backcourts wetting the bed against MJ, while the frontcourts did great.

One GIF doesn't prove anything..

MJ has the best case for GOAT peak in NBA history as Thinking Basketball meticulously presented. I don't know why you have to resort to such esoteric claims and denigrating Jordan's teammates to make him the GOAT. You are disrespecting the sport. Pippen was a great player, an all-star on offense and all-time great on defense. The Bulls especially the 2nd threepeat teams were stacked with good defenders including Harper, Pippen, Rodman... MJ carried a huge offensive load no doubt about it but don't pretend he had no help.

"13 years of backcourts wetting the bed against MJ"... Show some proof of this!