RealGM's Top 25 Peaks of All Time

[SouBeachTalents]

1. 1991 Jordan
2. 2013 LeBron
3. 2000 Shaq
4. 1977 Kareem
5. 1967 Wilt
6. 2003 Duncan
7. 1994 Hakeem
8. 1964 Russell
9. 1986 Bird
10. 1987 Magic
11. 2017 Curry
12. 2004 KG
13. 2021 Giannis
14. 1964 Oscar
15. 1966 West
16. 2022 Jokic
17. 1977 Walton
18. 2006 Wade
19. 2008 Kobe
20. 1994 Robinson
21. 2017 Kawhi
22. 1976 Dr. J
23. 2011 Dirk
24. 2017 KD
25. 1983 Moses

My initial takeaways

1. I honestly think they generally got the 25 players right. I'd personally probably swap out Moses with Barkley, but Moses is definitely a deserving choice for this list.

2. I think KD is ranked too low, but I understand a lot of this is based not just on play but on achievement, and KD's peak did occur during the snake ring years. I also would've ranked Walton, Wade, Kawhi & Dr. J a few spots higher

3. That boards overrating of KG is their most consistent and puzzling trait. No one disputes KG was a beast and was deserving of inclusion, but I assume the majority of people outside that forum would agree KG's ranked several spots too high. I also think they ranked Jokic a few spots too high as well.

4. While not unreasonable, 2016 will always be Curry's peak to me, even with the terrible Finals. I'd honestly even consider his 2021 season over 2017.

[TheMan]

Shaq's peak was higher than LeBron's, come on :facepalm I have no problem putting LeBron at 3 but I personally would put Bird at 3.

[Wally450]

4. While not unreasonable, 2016 will always be Curry's peak to me, even with the terrible Finals. I'd honestly even consider his 2021 season over 2017.

I was curious why its 2017. 2016 was Curry's best.

[SATAN]

https://playsonideas.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/1280px-the_burning_of_the_library_at_alexandria_in_391_ad .jpg?w=1024&h=754

[8Ball]

Bron 2013 is number 1.

He was 1 vote shy of unanimous mvp.

[Axe]

Lol kobe being #18 is too low for goat standards.

[Gohan]

Curry 2016 was better than anything lebron did. Just because he didnt win the championship doesnt mean anything

[Axe]

Curry 2016 was better than anything lebron did. Just because he didnt win the championship doesnt mean anything
Yep, all those moving screens and banal ongoing quarter buzzer beaters against several lottery teams in the rs back then surely did help his case to be on top rt. :ohwell:

[Manny98]

I think 09 was LeBrons best season and the greatest single season ever by a player

It gets underrated because he lost in the ECF but he had nobody on his team

[TheMan]

Bron 2013 is number 1.

He was 1 vote shy of unanimous mvp.

Dumb argument, Curry should be ahead of LeBron if that's the standard.

[TheMan]

I think 09 was LeBrons best season and the greatest single season ever by a player

It gets underrated because he lost in the ECF but he had nobody on his team

MJ won MVP, scoring champ and DPOY in 87. That season tops LBJ's 09 season, and MJ also didn't have anybody either.

[3ba11]

When a player colludes and puts all the best players on his team, then he can't then have a good "peak" because the team is too stacked - the best peaks have a certain level of carry-job to them and the 13' Heat won the Finals without winning when Lebron was on the floor

[1987_Lakers]

LeBron is the only player I've seen people argue peaked during 3 different times.

09 where he was an athletic freak

13 where he had the best all-around game if you including defense

18 where he was at his peak in terms of offensive skill

[1987_Lakers]

As far as the list, first thing that jumped out was Duncan ahead of Hakeem, I personally think Hakeem had a better peak.

[John8204]

Apparently winning a ring against two other ranked peak guys only gets you to 17.

[3ba11]

LeBron is the only player I've seen people argue peaked during 3 different times.

09 where he was an athletic freak

13 where he had the best all-around game if you including defense

18 where he was at his peak in terms of offensive skill


Every great player has phases to their career:

* lottery phase (04' & 05')

* horrific performance against champions phase (07' & 08')

* Losing as the favorite phase (09-11')

* Stacking the deck and hand-picking preseason favorite (11-16')

* Living of the remnants of a conference decimated by 1 player colluding (17' & 18')

* Lottery Phase 2 (19' and 22')

* Hail Mary bubble phase (20')

[1987_Lakers]

Every great player has phases to their career:

* lottery phase (04' & 05')

* horrific performance against champions phase (07' & 08')

* Losing as the favorite phase (09-11')

* Stacking the deck and hand-picking preseason favorite (11-16')

* Living of the remnants of a conference decimated by 1 player colluding (17' & 18')

* Lottery Phase 2 (19' and 22')

* Hail Mary bubble phase (20')

You already conceded LeBron's peak = MJ's peak way back in 2013.

[3ba11]

You already conceded LeBron's peak = MJ's peak way back in 2013.


No I didn't but I know that's your last defense against the facts... You support the biggest fraud in history.. 0 rings without the decision and people must lie and silence the truth to support the fraud.. you guys are sick

[TheMan]

No I didn't but I know that's your last defense against the facts... You support the biggest fraud in history.. 0 rings without the decision and people must lie and silence the truth to support the fraud.. you guys are sick

:oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

No I didn't but I know that's your last defense against the facts... You support the biggest fraud in history.. 0 rings without the decision and people must lie and silence the truth to support the fraud.. you guys are sick

You support someone who was 1-9. :oldlol:

Deep down you are ashamed of MJ. Which is why you slipped up and revealed the truth in 2013.

[Manny98]

MJ won MVP, scoring champ and DPOY in 87. That season tops LBJ's 09 season, and MJ also didn't have anybody either.
I mean I would argue LeBron was more of a impactful player overall considering his team won 66 games that year

[1987_Lakers]

And yea, Jokic and Garnett are a bit too high.

But a good list overall, realgm seems to know their shit for the most part.

[NBAGOAT]

Realgm just doesn’t value scoring as much as most people, put a pretty high weight on impact stuff. Russell isn’t in most top 10s either. They chose 67 wilt over his 50ppg season

[ShawkFactory]

When a player colludes and puts all the best players on his team, then he can't then have a good "peak" because the team is too stacked - the best peaks have a certain level of carry-job to them and the 13' Heat won the Finals without winning when Lebron was on the floor
Sure he can.

[1987_Lakers]

Realgm just doesn’t value scoring as much as most people, put a pretty high weight on impact stuff. Russell isn’t in most top 10s either. They chose 67 wilt over his 50ppg season

I'd choose '67 Wilt over his 50 ppg season as well.

[Round Mound]

1990 Barkley was PEAK Barkley. He was the 2nd best player in the world 1990-1993. And the one who was the best happened to be THE GOAT.

[Axe]

No I didn't but I know that's your last defense against the facts... You support the biggest fraud in history.. 0 rings without the decision and people must lie and silence the truth to support the fraud.. you guys are sick
'Biggest fraud in history'

Yet you and your ugly disciple talk about him most of the time instead of your respective heroes. :oldlol:

[SouBeachTalents]

Rest of the list

26. 2019-20 Anthony Davis
27. 2006-07 Steve Nash
28. 2014-15 Chris Paul
29. 2018-19 James Harden
30. 1949-50 George Mikan
31. 1989-90 Charles Barkley
32. 1997-98 Karl Malone
33. 1989-90 Patrick Ewing
34. 2002-03 Tracy McGrady
35. 2010-11 Dwight Howard
36. 2021-22 Joel Embiid
37. 1957-58 Bob Pettit
38. 1994-95 Scottie Pippen
39. 1995-96 Penny Hardaway
40. 2015-16 Draymond Green
41. 1974-75 Artis Gilmore
42. 1973-74 Bob Lanier
43. 2016-17 Russell Westbrook
44. 1971-72 Walt Frazier
45. 1999-00 Alonzo Mourning
46. 1969-70 Willis Reed
47. 1960-61 Elgin Baylor
48. 1966-67 Nate Thurmond
49. 2021-22 Luka Doncic
50. 1974-75 Rick Barry

[1987_Lakers]

AD ahead of Nash, Barkley, & CP3? Nah.

[3ba11]

.

Thru 6 games

96' Jordan Finals..... 27 on 42%..... sufficient
13' Lebron Finals..... 23 on 43%..... insufficient (needed Ray to force Game 7)


^^^ Jordan also locked up series with 31 on 46% thru 3 games (3-0 lead), while Lebron averaged 16 on 39% thru 3 games and therefore needed Ray to save him

that's why Jordan's 1996 > Lebron 2013

Jordan had many peaks that were superior to anyone's peak like 92' or 93' Playoffs and Finals... no one has ever played better.

In the 97' Playoffs, Jordan co-led the Bulls in rebounds along with Rodman (8 RPG each), while carrying the scoring and assist load for playoffs and Finals (3 game-winning plays in Finals and critical flu game 5)

In the 98' Playoffs, 35-year Jordan had a 29 PER with goat clutch stats and carrying bums, while also sweeping every award over old-school and new-school all-stars like Duncan, KG, Kobe, Kidd, Hill, Penny, Shaq. Hakeem, Robinson, and many more.

These are all top 10 peaks

[SouBeachTalents]

.

Thru 6 games

96' Jordan Finals..... 27 on 42%..... sufficient
13' Lebron Finals..... 23 on 43%..... insufficient (needed Ray to force Game 7)


^^^ Jordan also locked up series with 31 on 46% thru 3 games (3-0 lead), while Lebron averaged 16 on 39% thru 3 games and therefore needed Ray to save him

that's why Jordan's 1996 > Lebron 2013

Jordan had many peaks that were superior to anyone's peak like 92' or 93' Playoffs and Finals... no one has ever played better.

In the 97' Playoffs, Jordan co-led the Bulls in rebounds along with Rodman (8 RPG each), while carrying the scoring and assist load for playoffs and Finals (3 game-winning plays in Finals and critical flu game 5)

In the 98' Playoffs, 35-year Jordan had a 29 PER with goat clutch stats and carrying bums, while also sweeping every award over old-school and new-school all-stars like Duncan, KG, Kobe, Kidd, Hill, Penny, Shaq. Hakeem, Robinson, and many more.

These are all top 10 peaks
Almost all of these players were either before or past their prime, many of them by several years :lol Posts like these show one of two things, either you legitimately weren't following the league back then, or you intentionally post misleading and untrue things.

[3ba11]

Almost all of these players were either before or past their prime, many of them by several years :lol Posts like these show one of two things, either you legitimately weren't following the league back then, or you intentionally post misleading and untrue things.


You just bolded 1 thing and didn't address anything else

Lebron sucked in the 13' Finals compared to Jordan's worst Finals - all of Jordan's title years are top 10 peaks whether we go by stats, teammate stats, memorable moments or media awards - it isn't even close.

No one averaged 35/6/6 for two straight title runs with top 5 DPOY defense - 36 or 41 in the Finals - that's what Jordan did in 92' and 93'.... And these runs were supposed to be less than 91'..

his 2nd three-peat was just about as impressive due to 3-peating with no offensive help and tougher defensive format (shrunk court from closer 3-point line), and also the clutch moments that won massive games and series.

No one else did things of this caliber - the unprecedented and unmatched stats, media awards, and dominant moments and series are unmatched by anyone in history... Everyone in history needed teammates to lead in scoring for entire playoff runs, while Jordan led every series by 10 ppg and never had an elite-producing teammate/go-to player.. Accordingly, only MJ always faced maximum defensive attention, aka carrying scoring load in Playoffs and Finals of title run

[L.Kizzle]

Why does ISH bring up RealGM so much?
Do they make threads about Insidehoops.com?

[HoopsNY]

So Hakeem is #7 when he was the only MVP, FMVP, and DPOY in a single season? Mj rolled through the Pistons where Isiah was nowhere near the same player he was before his injury. Look at Isiah's first three rounds.

'91 vs. ATL: 15/5/12/1 on 44%
'91 vs. BOS: 9/3/7/1 on 35%
'91 vs. CHI: 17/5/6/1 on 41%

Then he feasted on a Lakers team that was hobbled as well, including Scott who was guarding MJ. I'm not saying that '91 MJ wasn't the best version of MJ or that he would have done a lot worse with those teams being 100%, but that has to be taken into consideration.

LeBron coasted through a weak conference in 2013 in comparison to Hakeem in 1994. Compare LeBron and Hakeem's '94 PS.

PS '94 Hakeem: 29/11/4/2/4 on 52%
PS '13 LeBron: 26/8/7/2/1 on 49%

LeBron shot the 3 better, obviously, but somehow Hakeem shot better from the free-throw line. Go figure. Not to mention, Hakeem went up against one of the best defenses in the 90s Knicks.

If Hakeem is up against Milwaukee, Chicago, and Indiana in the first three rounds, with no real physical presence inside to stop him, or no solid 4s or 5s to defend down-low to drain his energy, how does he fair?

You all know how I feel about Shaq's peak, let alone his 2000 season. The only remaining top quality center in 2000 was Alonzo Mourning. How did Shaq fair against him?

2000 Zo vs. LAL: 27/11/3/1/1 on 44%
2000 Shaq vs MIA: 22/12/5/1/3 on 44%

That was Zo's last healthy year in the league before injuries took over. Shaq feasted when the league saw the demise of the center and benefited from the refs purposefully refereeing him differently to the rest of the league.

The league's ratings had also plummeted so players following the lockout and they needed a big market team like the Lakers in the finals. It's kinda like the MLB owners turning a blind eye to steroids after the '95 lockout.

[ShawkFactory]

Almost all of these players were either before or past their prime, many of them by several years :lol Posts like these show one of two things, either you legitimately weren't following the league back then, or you intentionally post misleading and untrue things.

This. It’s this one.

[3ba11]

.
First 3 Games of Finals

96' Jordan........ 31 on 46%.... 3-0 lead
13' Lebron........ 16 on 39%.... 1-2 deficit (needed Ray)


^^^ how could anyone think that Lebron's 13' Finals was better than any of Jordan's.... :kobe:




This. It’s this one.


All of Jordan's 6 title runs are top 10 in:


* media awards (MVP, FMVP, scoring title, all-defense, etc)

* Stats and clutch stats

* Legendary moments and big-stage clutch shots or winners

* Taking over games


Also,

* Dominance, aka defeating maximum defensive attention (carrying scoring load) and commanding doubles due to insufficient scoring help, i.e. no super-teams or 1b's (winning with secondary producer at sidekick instead of a "1b" elite-producing sidekick and go-to player)

[dankok8]

So Hakeem is #7 when he was the only MVP, FMVP, and DPOY in a single season? Mj rolled through the Pistons where Isiah was nowhere near the same player he was before his injury. Look at Isiah's first three rounds.

'91 vs. ATL: 15/5/12/1 on 44%
'91 vs. BOS: 9/3/7/1 on 35%
'91 vs. CHI: 17/5/6/1 on 41%

Then he feasted on a Lakers team that was hobbled as well, including Scott who was guarding MJ. I'm not saying that '91 MJ wasn't the best version of MJ or that he would have done a lot worse with those teams being 100%, but that has to be taken into consideration.

LeBron coasted through a weak conference in 2013 in comparison to Hakeem in 1994. Compare LeBron and Hakeem's '94 PS.

PS '94 Hakeem: 29/11/4/2/4 on 52%
PS '13 LeBron: 26/8/7/2/1 on 49%

LeBron shot the 3 better, obviously, but somehow Hakeem shot better from the free-throw line. Go figure. Not to mention, Hakeem went up against one of the best defenses in the 90s Knicks.

If Hakeem is up against Milwaukee, Chicago, and Indiana in the first three rounds, with no real physical presence inside to stop him, or no solid 4s or 5s to defend down-low to drain his energy, how does he fair?

You all know how I feel about Shaq's peak, let alone his 2000 season. The only remaining top quality center in 2000 was Alonzo Mourning. How did Shaq fair against him?

2000 Zo vs. LAL: 27/11/3/1/1 on 44%
2000 Shaq vs MIA: 22/12/5/1/3 on 44%

That was Zo's last healthy year in the league before injuries took over. Shaq feasted when the league saw the demise of the center and benefited from the refs purposefully refereeing him differently to the rest of the league.

The league's ratings had also plummeted so players following the lockout and they needed a big market team like the Lakers in the finals. It's kinda like the MLB owners turning a blind eye to steroids after the '95 lockout.

Isiah put up mediocre numbers against the Bulls from 1988-1990 too. And apart from the Boston series his stats are ok. Isiah was rarely a statistical standout during the Pistons run. Obviously he wasn't 100% in 1991 but even fully healthy that series doesn't go beyond 5 games. The Bulls didn't beat them; they annihilated them.

[warriorfan]

realGM is for pencil necked geeks

[Sulico]

Any peak list that doesn't have Curry's 2016 season at No1 is not a real list.

[Soundwave]

Jordan has multiple peaks too

88 Jordan - Peak 1-man tornado on the court, 35 ppg on 53% shooting, scoring champion, dunk champion, defensive player of the
year, NBA MVP, led the league in steals. Most dominant "1 man show" in the NBA since Wilt.

91 Jordan - Not scoring quite as much, but a more refined, all around team player, still hyper athletic, finally NBA champion, tops it off by beating Magic at his own game in the Finals and putting up big time assist numbers along with point totals.

96 Jordan - Return from retirement, written off, reclaims best player in the league, leads the Bulls to 72-10 season + dominant playoff run (arguably the greatest season in the NBA) to reclaim top footing in the world of sports.

97 or 98 Jordan - Complete mental mastery of the game, highlighted by the flu game (1997) and Last Shot in the 98 Finals. Both iconic NBA moments.

[SouBeachTalents]

Any peak list that doesn't have Curry's 2016 season at No1 is not a real list.
Number one, after those Finals? Nah :lol

[HoopsNY]

Isiah put up mediocre numbers against the Bulls from 1988-1990 too. And apart from the Boston series his stats are ok. Isiah was rarely a statistical standout during the Pistons run. Obviously he wasn't 100% in 1991 but even fully healthy that series doesn't go beyond 5 games. The Bulls didn't beat them; they annihilated them.

That's not really the premise of my post, though. The point is that Isiah was a shell of his former self and obviously affected by the injury upon his return. He said it himself, too. Just look at Isiah's numbers pre and post injury

Let's look at Isiah's numbers vs. Chicago the years in question precisely:

'88 vs. CHI: 20/4/10/2 on 40/17/86
'89 vs. CHI: 21/5/8/2 on 39/17/73
'90 vs. CHI: 18/6/9/3 on 40/33/83

'91 vs CHI: 17/5/6/1 on 41/25/72

'91 is the worst the year. But the original point, again, is that injury derailed him and ultimately his career. Let's look at Isiah's PS numbers from '88-'90 and compare them to '91.

PS '88-'90: 20/8/5/2 on 44/37/79 splits
PS '91: 14/9/4/1 on 40/27/73 splits

1991 has the obvious drop off and it's pretty significant.

And you're right that if Isiah is at full strength, the series still favors MJ, but the playoffs might look different from both a legacy and a statistical standpoint if Worthy, Scott, and Isiah were full strength.

[PeroAntic]

Kobe is criminally underrated on that list.

[WhiteKyrie]

MJ won MVP, scoring champ and DPOY in 87. That season tops LBJ's 09 season, and MJ also didn't have anybody either.

*1988*

And 1989. Ending the season averaging a triple double in a more ball dominant capacity akin to modern dudes. 34/11/11 with first team caliber defense.

He’s the goat peak, and it’s not even technically his 1991 season but 1987 - 1993 Michael Jordan is by far the greatest prime / peak stretch and the best player to ever play. Period.

Mike should’ve been MVP in 1989 and 1990.

And was DPOY caliber defender that entire stretch. Defense is a significant factor in winning and always gets ignored.

[Johnny32]

Apparently winning a ring against two other ranked peak guys only gets you to 17.

it only got dirk 23rd.

[ArbitraryWater]

RealGM is being politically correct.


Lol at 2013 LeBron.

[RRR3]

RealGM is being politically correct.


Lol at 2013 LeBron.
Defense.

[SouBeachTalents]

Defense.
While that’s true, his playoffs (for his standards) were pretty pedestrian, and he legitimately struggled with his jumper nearly the entire Finals. That would never in a million years be considered his peak if Ray doesn’t make that 3.

I would agree that was LeBron’s most impressive regular season, but his playoffs and esp Finals do not hold up to muster compared to his other playoff runs, it wouldn’t even crack his top 5 imo.

[RRR3]

While that’s true, his playoffs (for his standards) were pretty pedestrian, and he legitimately struggled with his jumper nearly the entire Finals. That would never in a million years be considered his peak if Ray doesn’t make that 3.

I would agree that was LeBron’s most impressive regular season, but his playoffs and esp Finals do not hold up to muster compared to his other playoff runs, it wouldn’t even crack his top 5 imo.
Yeah but I mean a lot of their struggles in that playoff run was due to Wade playing like shit too. 15.9 PPG on awful efficiency was not what LeBron was expecting from his number two going into that playoffs. 2012 is possibly peak LeBron. Or 2009.

[ArbitraryWater]

Defense.

No defense will make 26 ppg on 49% shooting the height of LeBron's performance, stupid.

[RRR3]

No defense will make 26 ppg on 49% shooting the height of LeBron's performance, stupid.
Why are you always so enraged? Calm down.

[ShawkFactory]

While that’s true, his playoffs (for his standards) were pretty pedestrian, and he legitimately struggled with his jumper nearly the entire Finals. That would never in a million years be considered his peak if Ray doesn’t make that 3.

I would agree that was LeBron’s most impressive regular season, but his playoffs and esp Finals do not hold up to muster compared to his other playoff runs, it wouldn’t even crack his top 5 imo.

He did but that's a small sample size. Throughout the course of that season he played pretty perfect basketball. Jumper was on point, started working more in the post, anchored the team defensively, did everything else he was already good at.

While not his best finals performance, it's not crazy to say that 2013 was his peak as an overall player.

[ArbitraryWater]

Why does ISH bring up RealGM so much?
Do they make threads about Insidehoops.com?

why not?

They have projects that ISH doesnt or has at a much shittier volume.

RGM is simply a prominent place.

[Gohan]

why not?

They have projects that ISH doesnt or has at a much shittier volume.

RGM is simply a prominent place.

If people on realgm was so smart why dont they have 2005 iverson in the top 10? Leaving him out is just a mistake you cant make. They need to do better PERIOD!!!

[dankok8]

That's not really the premise of my post, though. The point is that Isiah was a shell of his former self and obviously affected by the injury upon his return. He said it himself, too. Just look at Isiah's numbers pre and post injury

Let's look at Isiah's numbers vs. Chicago the years in question precisely:

'88 vs. CHI: 20/4/10/2 on 40/17/86
'89 vs. CHI: 21/5/8/2 on 39/17/73
'90 vs. CHI: 18/6/9/3 on 40/33/83

'91 vs CHI: 17/5/6/1 on 41/25/72

'91 is the worst the year. But the original point, again, is that injury derailed him and ultimately his career. Let's look at Isiah's PS numbers from '88-'90 and compare them to '91.

PS '88-'90: 20/8/5/2 on 44/37/79 splits
PS '91: 14/9/4/1 on 40/27/73 splits

1991 has the obvious drop off and it's pretty significant.

And you're right that if Isiah is at full strength, the series still favors MJ, but the playoffs might look different from both a legacy and a statistical standpoint if Worthy, Scott, and Isiah were full strength.

His numbers vs. the Bulls weren't a lot worse. 16.5/4.8/6.0 is not a big drop off from 17.6/6.1/8.6. If Isiah played the way he did in 1990 instead of the way he did in 1991 there is no way that extra production makes any difference in the outcome of the series.

Injuries always happen. Yes people acknowledge that the Bulls wouldn't have vaporized their competition the way they did if everyone was healthy and I agree. But that's the case for just about every team ever. It the end it's just talk by stans or haters. The Bulls beat everyone in front of them. Were the Lakers at their absolute best? Of course not but Lakers also weren't anywhere near their best in the 1983 and 1989 Finals either.

[3ba11]

His numbers vs. the Bulls weren't a lot worse. 16.5/4.8/6.0 is not a big drop off from 17.6/6.1/8.6. If Isiah played the way he did in 1990 instead of the way he did in 1991 there is no way that extra production makes any difference in the outcome of the series.

Injuries always happen. Yes people acknowledge that the Bulls wouldn't have vaporized their competition the way they did if everyone was healthy and I agree. But that's the case for just about every team ever. It the end it's just talk by stans or haters. The Bulls beat everyone in front of them. Were the Lakers at their absolute best? Of course not but Lakers also weren't anywhere near their best in the 1983 and 1989 Finals either.



1987 WCF

Worthy...... 30 on 62%


Worthy carried the Lakers to the 87' Finals and won 88 Finals MVP - he was the 1st option on back-to-back champs and led the Lakers in playoff scoring for the 87-91' Playoffs.

So the Lakers could've won with a healthy Worthy because Pippen was already at his peak in that series and can only go downwards against a dominant Worthy - Worthy was capable of 30 ppg dominance, which would've worn down Pippen more than the hobbled Worthy did.. Hobbled Worthy still nearly matched Pippen in the 91' Finals.

People don't realize that the 90's Bulls weren't super-talented - they were only #4 in preseason odds heading into the 91' season and only had 2 players that could be characterized as "scorers".. This was the exact same roster that was horrible in 89' and collapsed in the 90' ECF.. The Pistons were far more talented with 3x all-stars at every starting spot.

[SouBeachTalents]

1987 WCF

Worthy...... 30 on 62%


Worthy carried the Lakers to the 87' Finals and won 88 Finals MVP - he was the 1st option on back-to-back champs and led the Lakers in playoff scoring for the 87-91' Playoffs.

So the Lakers could've won with a healthy Worthy because Pippen was already at his peak in that series and can only go downwards against a dominant Worthy - Worthy was capable of 30 ppg dominance, which would've worn down Pippen more than the hobbled Worthy did.. Hobbled Worthy still nearly matched Pippen in the 91' Finals.

People don't realize that the 90's Bulls weren't super-talented - they were only #4 in preseason odds heading into the 91' season and only had 2 players that could be characterized as "scorers".. This was the exact same roster that was horrible in 89' and collapsed in the 90' ECF.. The Pistons were far more talented with 3x all-stars at every starting spot.
Damn, huge asterisk on Jordan's first ring.

[3ba11]

Damn, huge asterisk on Jordan's first ring.


I said "could've"

MJ could've easily averaged 5 or 10 more points to win like he did against more talented teams in the 92' or 93' Finals...

Jordan's 31/7/11 on 56% in the 91' Finals was a controlled performance, with the Bulls turning the corner at the end of Game 3 regulation (MJ's back-breaker to send the game into OT with the Lakers' tank on empty)

[Hey Yo]

87 Lakers faced the 39 win Sonics in the WCF.

[3ba11]

87 Lakers faced the 39 win Sonics in the WCF.



87' WCF

X-Man....... 25 on 53%
Worthy...... 30 on 62%


92' ECSF

X-Man......... 19 on 50%
Pippen'........ 16 on 40%


X-Man played better than Pippen ever played - he led a worse cast to the conference finals and didn't need a 3-peat dynasty... He dominated the Lakers and didn't choke like Pippen against the Knicks.

In previous eras, 4-year college guys like X-Man often peak early - X-man was a 22/11 player for his first few years before falling off a little but still having that capability as needed (seen in the 92' Playoffs when he destroyed Pippen).

[Hey Yo]

Avg. 30 against a 39 win team in the WCF isn't impressive.

The 3 teams combined LA faced before the Finals were 118 - 128.

[3ba11]

Avg. 30 against a 39 win team in the WCF isn't impressive.

The 3 teams combined LA faced before the Finals were 118 - 128.


Worthy led the Lakers in scoring for both title runs - 1987 and 1988 - this includes FMVP in 88'

He averaged 24 on 57% in the 87' Playoffs and 25 ppg in other runs from 87-91' - he led the Lakers every year in Playoff scoring from 87-91'.

So look at every 90's sidekick - Worthy, KJ, Payton (or Kemp), Penny, Stockton, Porter - every 90's sidekick was infact a dominant "1b" that could achieve elite stats..... except Pippen... Pippen was the only sidekick that wasn't a go-to player and was more of a transition/hustle player with the lowest peak capability of any sidekick (no gameplanning required (https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2022/qrDm8n.gif)).. Pippen's low peak capability meant he wasn't on the scouting report, so MJ had to defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load).

[HoopsNY]

Isiah put up mediocre numbers against the Bulls from 1988-1990 too. And apart from the Boston series his stats are ok. Isiah was rarely a statistical standout during the Pistons run. Obviously he wasn't 100% in 1991 but even fully healthy that series doesn't go beyond 5 games. The Bulls didn't beat them; they annihilated them.

My point was that MJ's '91 looks amazing statistically, but if these guys are full strength then there might be a drop off of some sort, and the dominance probably doesn't look as good (Chicago went 15-2).

Hakeem's '94 was unbelievable given that he won FMVP, MVP, and DPOY. Offensively, he put up 27/9/4/2/4 on 50% against an elite defense, but how about holding Ewing to 19 PPG on just 36% shooting? That isn't spoken of enough.

[HoopsNY]

1987 WCF

Worthy...... 30 on 62%


Worthy carried the Lakers to the 87' Finals and won 88 Finals MVP - he was the 1st option on back-to-back champs and led the Lakers in playoff scoring for the 87-91' Playoffs.

So the Lakers could've won with a healthy Worthy because Pippen was already at his peak in that series and can only go downwards against a dominant Worthy - Worthy was capable of 30 ppg dominance, which would've worn down Pippen more than the hobbled Worthy did.. Hobbled Worthy still nearly matched Pippen in the 91' Finals.

People don't realize that the 90's Bulls weren't super-talented - they were only #4 in preseason odds heading into the 91' season and only had 2 players that could be characterized as "scorers".. This was the exact same roster that was horrible in 89' and collapsed in the 90' ECF.. The Pistons were far more talented with 3x all-stars at every starting spot.

No. The Lakers wouldn't win with a healthy Worthy. Worthy was already playing well against Pippen. Him putting up a few more PPG doesn't change the outcome of the series, but it does probably impact the dominance factor of Chicago's '91 run. A 4-2 series win looks a lot different than a gentlemen's sweep, irrespective of what some might say.

[HoopsNY]

PS MJ vs. NYK '93: 33 PPG on 40% (52% TS%)
PS Hakeem vs NYK '94: 27 PPG on 50% (56% TS%)

RS MJ vs NYK '93: 27 ppg on 42% TS%
RS Hakeem vs NYK '93: 32 PPG on 60% TS%
RS Hakeem vs NYK '94: 33 PPG on 58% TS%

RS MJ vs HOU '93: 26 PPG on 50% TS%
RS Hakeem vs CHI '93: 23 PPG on 58% TS%

'93 NYK: 95.4 OPP PPG | 99.7 DRTG
'94 NYK: 91.5 OPP PPG | 98.2 DRTG


:lol

[3ba11]

No. The Lakers wouldn't win with a healthy Worthy. Worthy was already playing well against Pippen. Him putting up a few more PPG doesn't change the outcome of the series, but it does probably impact the dominance factor of Chicago's '91 run. A 4-2 series win looks a lot different than a gentlemen's sweep, irrespective of what some might say.


Worthy in the 91' Finals was a shell compared to 87' Worthy

87' Worthy was a dominant force that would easily outplay Pippen given a healthy Worthy's history against Rodman, McHale, and a prime version of X-Man that demolished 92' Pippen.

Pippen only produced at an Iggy or Wiggins level so a healthy Worthy destroys that.

[HoopsNY]

Worthy in the 91' Finals was a shell compared to 87' Worthy

87' Worthy was a dominant force that would easily outplay Pippen given a healthy Worthy's history against Rodman, McHale, and a prime version of X-Man that demolished 92' Pippen.

Pippen only produced at an Iggy or Wiggins level so a healthy Worthy destroys that.

You said if he was healthy they could have won. I disagree, and nothing indicates otherwise.

[3ba11]

My point was that MJ's '91 looks amazing statistically, but if these guys are full strength then there might be a drop off of some sort, and the dominance probably doesn't look as good (Chicago went 15-2).





Only because the stats like PER and others overrate efficiency..

MJ's efficiency was off-the-charts because the Bulls were never tested so it was a controlled dominance where he didn't need to take a lot of shots.. 31/7/11 on 56% in the Finals means that MJ didn't have to unload the clip like he did in 92' and 93' against more talented opposition - the path was far more difficult in 92 and 93', so we see Jordan's scoring increase by 5-10 points on those runs to 35-40 ppg.






Hakeem's '94 was unbelievable given that he won FMVP, MVP, and DPOY. Offensively, he put up 27/9/4/2/4 on 50% against an elite defense, but how about holding Ewing to 19 PPG on just 36% shooting? That isn't spoken of enough.





And yet the Knicks still nearly won - the only reason they lost is because Starks saved the worst game of his life for Game 7.

The Rockets' narrow victory over Ewing's 19 on 36% means they would get destroyed by Jordan's 33 on 40% that you posted previously - Hakeem's defensive impact is less against the Bulls because Hakeem doesn't guard Jordan..

But I think the Rockets could beat the 1st three-peat Bulls because everyone's best would come out in this series and Pippen's best < Horry's best.. Specifically, bricklayer Pippen is 0/6 in matching the sweet-shooting and clutch Horry's gamescore from the 95' Finals, so if Horry/Hakeem offsets Pippen/Jordan, then the Rockets' cast otherwise destroys the Bulls, aka Thorpe and Vernon Maxwell are super-versions of Grant and Paxson.. Thorpe was a boss.. However, the 94' Bulls added Kukoc, Kerr and Longley so that would be more than enough cast for MJ to destroy the Rockets until they get Drexler in 95'... So it's still a 4-peat for Jordan and probably a 5-peat in 95' and ultimately 9-peat to beat Russell's record.. that's how goat MJ was

[3ba11]

You said if he was healthy they could have won. I disagree, and nothing indicates otherwise.


It's pretty obvious - a healthy Worthy dominated the same guys that Pippen wet the bed against (X-Man, Rodman) and took over series on a level that an Iggy or Pippen-level performer can only dream.

You keep implying that Pippen was this top-tier dominator... No.. that was Worthy - he was getting doubled teamed all over the place and carrying the Lakers' offense.... And top-level dominance like 88' Worthy or 19' Kawhi has always destroyed secondary statistical producers like Iggy, Wiggins or Pippen-caliber.

[coastalmarker99]

PS MJ vs. NYK '93: 33 PPG on 40% (52% TS%)
PS Hakeem vs NYK '94: 27 PPG on 50% (56% TS%)

RS MJ vs NYK '93: 27 ppg on 42% TS%
RS Hakeem vs NYK '93: 32 PPG on 60% TS%
RS Hakeem vs NYK '94: 33 PPG on 58% TS%

RS MJ vs HOU '93: 26 PPG on 50% TS%
RS Hakeem vs CHI '93: 23 PPG on 58% TS%

'93 NYK: 95.4 OPP PPG | 99.7 DRTG
'94 NYK: 91.5 OPP PPG | 98.2 DRTG


:lol

Hakeem:bowdown:


The fact that he also locked up Ewing to just 19 PPG on just 36% shooting is unbelievable.

[HoopologyPhD]

I trust OP's opinion, he is an expert on Real GM poles.

[Johnny32]

i agree with 3ball. jordone and duh bulls get exposed as the frauds they really were vs a healthy worthy/lakers team.

[HoopsNY]

It's pretty obvious - a healthy Worthy dominated the same guys that Pippen wet the bed against (X-Man, Rodman) and took over series on a level that an Iggy or Pippen-level performer can only dream.

You keep implying that Pippen was this top-tier dominator... No.. that was Worthy - he was getting doubled teamed all over the place and carrying the Lakers' offense.... And top-level dominance like 88' Worthy or 19' Kawhi has always destroyed secondary statistical producers like Iggy, Wiggins or Pippen-caliber.

What are you talking about? I never aimed anything towards Pippen in this thread. My comments were about how MJ's '91 playoffs looks better than it actually is due to the Pistons playing with an injured Zeke and the Lakers with Scott/Worthy.

[dankok8]

What are you talking about? I never aimed anything towards Pippen in this thread. My comments were about how MJ's '91 playoffs looks better than it actually is due to the Pistons playing with an injured Zeke and the Lakers with Scott/Worthy.

What do you mean MJ's playoffs? I think his personal numbers were lower because of all the blowout wins. If it was closer I think he puts up better stats not worse although the Bulls could have a couple of more losses.

[AussieSteve]

1. I honestly think they generally got the 25 players right. I'd personally probably swap out Moses with Barkley, but Moses is definitely a deserving choice for this list.


Agree. Barkley's peak c.1990-91 deserves to be on the list. Having said that, deep playoff runs eluded him at this stage of his career, so I get that he didn't make the list.

He was the rightful MVP in 90, in a league with peak MJ and Magic. And got beat in the 2nd round in 90 and 91 by Jordan's Bulls with Hersey Hawkins as his wing man.

Hard player to assess because his best personal years came at bad teams.

[3ba11]

What are you talking about? I never aimed anything towards Pippen in this thread. My comments were about how MJ's '91 playoffs looks better than it actually is due to the Pistons playing with an injured Zeke and the Lakers with Scott/Worthy.


You're forgetting how it worked back then.

The Pistons developed a physical brand of ball to blunt the talent advantage and uptempo brand of the Lakers and Celtics... Then the Bulls developed a finesse brand of ball to defeat the Pistons' physical brand.. aka the "organic" eras were an evolution of increasingly-superior brands of ball.. So the Pistons weren't injured or old in 1991 (isiah, dumars and rodman were 27-29 years old) - their brand of ball had simply been made obsolete by a superior brand.. The Pistons were never competitive again even though Dumars and Rodman were peaking.. it's similar to the 14' Finals when the Spurs solved the Heat - the Heat weren't going to be competitive after that without a major change... Btw, the 91' Bulls didn't have a talent advantage because they were #4 in preseason odds (Pistons were #1) and the Bulls had 2 guys with all-star on their resume, whereas the Pistons' entire starting 5 were 3x all-stars or better.. it was well-known at the time that the Bulls overcame a team with superior talent in the Bad Boys.

[TheMan]

i agree with 3ball. jordone and duh bulls get exposed as the frauds they really were vs a healthy worthy/lakers team.

Seething

[HoopsNY]

What do you mean MJ's playoffs? I think his personal numbers were lower because of all the blowout wins. If it was closer I think he puts up better stats not worse although the Bulls could have a couple of more losses.

I mean both statistical dominance and the dominance of team record. A lot of people don't realize that part of MJ's '91 year being his peak year comes as a result of how dominant Chicago was in that playoffs. A full steam Pistons and Lakers team doesn't shift the outcome, but it does change the competitive nature of the series, let alone the record (8-1) to something maybe like 8-3 or 8-4.

[HoopsNY]

You're forgetting how it worked back then.

The Pistons developed a physical brand of ball to blunt the talent advantage and uptempo brand of the Lakers and Celtics... Then the Bulls developed a finesse brand of ball to defeat the Pistons' physical brand.. aka the "organic" eras were an evolution of increasingly-superior brands of ball.. So the Pistons weren't injured or old in 1991 (isiah, dumars and rodman were 27-29 years old) - their brand of ball had simply been made obsolete by a superior brand.. The Pistons were never competitive again even though Dumars and Rodman were peaking.. it's similar to the 14' Finals when the Spurs solved the Heat - the Heat weren't going to be competitive after that without a major change... Btw, the 91' Bulls didn't have a talent advantage because they were #4 in preseason odds (Pistons were #1) and the Bulls had 2 guys with all-star on their resume, whereas the Pistons' entire starting 5 were 3x all-stars or better.. it was well-known at the time that the Bulls overcame a team with superior talent in the Bad Boys.

None of that matters because the Bulls were favored in that series. You're dwelling on the past and not considering that the Pistons weren't the same team by '91.

Detroit had a 53 win pace with Isiah (31-17). That's still well below their 59 wins in 1990 and their 63 wins in 1989.

[3ba11]

None of that matters because the Bulls were favored in that series. You're dwelling on the past and not considering that the Pistons weren't the same team by '91.

Detroit had a 53 win pace with Isiah (31-17). That's still well below their 59 wins in 1990 and their 63 wins in 1989.


The Bulls were off their normal win-rate during their 3-peat attempt in 93' just like the Heat were in 14' or the Lakers in 02' or 11'

So the Pistons' record means little as back-to-back champs and the prevailing dominant dynasty.. They were considered to be among the most talented teams in the league - 3x all-stars like Laimbeer, Aguirre, and Isiah, while Dumars and Rodman were ultimately HOF's - the Bulls couldn't match this at any point in their dynasty.

However, unlike the 92' or 93' Finals, Jordan didn't need to empty the clip and average 35-40 against the 91' Pistons and Lakers because they didn't have as much firepower as the Blazers and Suns.. Barkley was added to a KJ-led team that was routinely winning 55 games and making the WCF, while the Blazers were completely stacked with four all-star players in the starting lineup plus and another 20 point scorer (Kersey) with Ainge and Cliff Robinson coming off-the-bench... Terry Porter shot 53% on threes with 26/4/8 in the 92' WCF, so he was an elite producer alongside Drexler.

[HoopsNY]

The Bulls were off their normal win-rate during their 3-peat attempt in 93' just like the Heat were in 14' or the Lakers in 02' or 11'

So the Pistons' record means little as back-to-back champs and the prevailing dominant dynasty.. They were considered to be among the most talented teams in the league - 3x all-stars like Laimbeer, Aguirre, and Isiah, while Dumars and Rodman were ultimately HOF's - the Bulls couldn't match this at any point in their dynasty.

However, unlike the 92' or 93' Finals, Jordan didn't need to empty the clip and average 35-40 against the 91' Pistons and Lakers because they didn't have as much firepower as the Blazers and Suns.. Barkley was added to a KJ-led team that was routinely winning 55 games and making the WCF, while the Blazers were completely stacked with four all-star players in the starting lineup plus and another 20 point scorer (Kersey) with Ainge and Cliff Robinson coming off-the-bench... Terry Porter shot 53% on threes with 26/4/8 in the 92' WCF, so he was an elite producer alongside Drexler.

Irrelevant

[3ba11]

Irrelevant


You complained about the Pistons record and injuries and the point is that ALL teams that are going for a 3-peat have weak records and injuries

Whenever I point out that 93' Pippen had the lowest true shooting, PER, WS/48, VORP and BPM in the playoffs of any winning sidekick ever, you guys say "he was injured".

The difference is that MJ was able to 3-peat with Pippen's horrific performance and a banged up team, while Isiah, Dumars, and company couldn't...

Ultimately, you guys knock MJ for doing things that other guys FAILED to do.. So other guys failed to win with a secondary producer like Pippen and banged up team, yet you say Jordan "needed" Pippen, aka you guys knock Jordan for needing less than anyone else needed (yeah, makes no sense and inflates pippen ridiculously)... Here's another example - everyone else had a sidekick that averaged 10 assists like Stockton, Tim Hardaway, Payton, KJ or Penny, yet you guys say Jordan "needed" Pippen's 5 assists and westbrick efficiency

[HoopsNY]

You complained about the Pistons record and injuries and the point is that ALL teams that are going for a 3-peat have weak records and injuries

Whenever I point out that 93' Pippen had the lowest true shooting, PER, WS/48, VORP and BPM in the playoffs of any winning sidekick ever, you guys say "he was injured".

The difference is that MJ was able to 3-peat with Pippen's horrific performance and a banged up team, while Isiah, Dumars, and company couldn't...

Ultimately, you guys knock MJ for doing things that other guys FAILED to do.. So other guys failed to win with a secondary producer like Pippen and banged up team, yet you say Jordan "needed" Pippen, aka you guys knock Jordan for needing less than anyone else needed (yeah, makes no sense and inflates pippen ridiculously)... Here's another example - everyone else had a sidekick that averaged 10 assists like Stockton, Tim Hardaway, Payton, KJ or Penny, yet you guys say Jordan "needed" Pippen's 5 assists and westbrick efficiency

You do an amazing job of shifting the goal posts. The conversation was about Hakeem's '94 season and title compared to MJ's in '91.

MJ's looks the most impressive due to the playoff and statistical dominance. But he faced handicapped teams in the series that mattered the most. This doesn't mean that he sees a significant drop off in his efficiency, let alone his statistical production, but it does likely mean that the Bulls finish the playoffs at something like 15-4 or 15-5 rather than 15-2, and his efficiency probably drops.

That matters if we're talking about peak years. In addition, casts matter. Pippen/Grant/Paxson/Cartwright is a better cast than Maxwell/Thorpe/Horry/Smith.

So what Hakeem had to overcome was greater than what MJ overcame. Pippen in the playoffs put up 22/9/6/3/1 on 50% (56% TS%). That's substantially better than anything Hakeem's cast gave him.

In fact, all 5 starters for Chicago shot over 50% in the postseason in '91. For Houston, Thorpe was the only starter outside of Hakeem that shot over 50% in the postseason. And he averaged fewer points and was a worse defender than Grant was.

And this doesn't even consider the fact that Hakeem was the only MVP, FMVP, and DPOY in league history, something that not even MJ did in any of his title runs.

Hakeem's peak year > Mj's, though not by much.

[HoopsNY]

In addition to the above, look at each team's ORTG and DRTG in the playoffs for each year in question:

'91 Bulls: 1st in ORTG | 1st in DRTG
'94 Rockets: 6th in ORTG | 6th in DRTG

The help that MJ got that year in the playoffs was tremendous. Chicago had a 117 ORTG compared to Houston's 107. And they both posted a 104 DRTG.

But tell me again how MJ's '91 peak is somehow greater than Hakeem's '94.

[3ba11]

.
Comparing Pippen's 6 Finals performances to peak-Horry (95' Finals)


95' Horry...... 19.0 gamescore... 18/10/4/3/2 on 57 TS

92' Pippen.... 18.1 gamescore.... 21/8/7/2/1 on 56 TS
91' Pippen.... 17.5 gamescore.... 21/9/7/2/1 on 53 TS
93' Pippen.... 15.6 gamescore.... 20/9/8/2/1 on 46 TS
97' Pippen.... 15.1 gamescore.... 20/8/3/2/2 on 54 TS
96' Pippen.... 13.4 gamescore.... 16/7/5/2/1 on 43 TS
98' Pippen.... 13.0 gamescore.... 16/8/5/2/1 on 50 TS


Pippen was 0/6 in matching Horry-level in the Finals.




You do an amazing job of shifting the goal posts. The conversation was about Hakeem's '94 season and title compared to MJ's in '91.

MJ's looks the most impressive due to the playoff and statistical dominance. But he faced handicapped teams in the series that mattered the most. This doesn't mean that he sees a significant drop off in his efficiency, let alone his statistical production, but it does likely mean that the Bulls finish the playoffs at something like 15-4 or 15-5 rather than 15-2, and his efficiency probably drops.

That matters if we're talking about peak years. In addition, casts matter. Pippen/Grant/Paxson/Cartwright is a better cast than Maxwell/Thorpe/Horry/Smith.

So what Hakeem had to overcome was greater than what MJ overcame. Pippen in the playoffs put up 22/9/6/3/1 on 50% (56% TS%). That's substantially better than anything Hakeem's cast gave him.

In fact, all 5 starters for Chicago shot over 50% in the postseason in '91. For Houston, Thorpe was the only starter outside of Hakeem that shot over 50% in the postseason. And he averaged fewer points and was a worse defender than Grant was.

And this doesn't even consider the fact that Hakeem was the only MVP, FMVP, and DPOY in league history, something that not even MJ did in any of his title runs.

Hakeem's peak year > Mj's, though not by much.


No one would respect the 1980 title-winner if Magic, Kareem and the Lakers died in a plane crash before the playoffs - no one would care who won that title if the overwhelming favorite disappeared and couldn't play.

That's what Hakeem's ring in 94' is worth - nothing.. And it was clear that the Rockets weren't that good because they needed to get lucky by barely beating a choking opponent in the Finals.

But you're wrong about the Rockets' cast - it was far superior to the Bulls, which is why Jordan shows massive statistical dominance over Hakeem... Cartwright and Grant were useless offensively, whereas Horry, Maxwell and Smith provided valuable spacing and were deluxe versions of Paxson.. Thorpe was a manchild inside, while Horry's peak capability exceeded Pippen's (see stats above)..

The eye test (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojEeRFrP4zs) confirms that the Rockets were easily more talented.

[HoopsNY]

.
Comparing Pippen's 6 Finals performances to peak-Horry (95' Finals)


95' Horry...... 19.0 gamescore... 18/10/4/3/2 on 57 TS

92' Pippen.... 18.1 gamescore.... 21/8/7/2/1 on 56 TS
91' Pippen.... 17.5 gamescore.... 21/9/7/2/1 on 53 TS
93' Pippen.... 15.6 gamescore.... 20/9/8/2/1 on 46 TS
97' Pippen.... 15.1 gamescore.... 20/8/3/2/2 on 54 TS
96' Pippen.... 13.4 gamescore.... 16/7/5/2/1 on 43 TS
98' Pippen.... 13.0 gamescore.... 16/8/5/2/1 on 50 TS


Pippen was 0/6 in matching Horry-level in the Finals.






No one would respect the 1980 title-winner if Magic, Kareem and the Lakers died in a plane crash before the playoffs - no one would care who won that title if the overwhelming favorite disappeared and couldn't play.

That's what Hakeem's ring in 94' is worth - nothing.. And it was clear that the Rockets weren't that good because they needed to get lucky by barely beating a choking opponent in the Finals.

But you're wrong about the Rockets' cast - it was far superior to the Bulls, which is why Jordan shows massive statistical dominance over Hakeem... Cartwright and Grant were useless offensively, whereas Horry, Maxwell and Smith provided valuable spacing and were deluxe versions of Paxson.. Thorpe was a manchild inside, while Horry's peak capability exceeded Pippen's (see stats above)..

The eye test (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojEeRFrP4zs) confirms that the Rockets were easily more talented.

LOL, unreal. I mention 1994 and this dope proceeds to post Horry's 1995 numbers. Unbelievable.

Horry '94 FS: 7.9 GmSc
Pippen '91 FS: 17.5 GmSc

You're not talking to some child here. I watched both finals.

[3ba11]

LOL, unreal. I mention 1994 and this dope proceeds to post Horry's 1995 numbers. Unbelievable.

Horry '94 FS: 7.9 GmSc
Pippen '91 FS: 17.5 GmSc

You're not talking to some child here. I watched both finals.


You knock Jordan or Curry for facing banged up teams in 91' and 15', but what if those opponents weren't even there - what if Curry faced the DeRozan Raptors instead of Lebron - that's what Hakeem did in 94' by beating Ewing instead of Jordan.. It's a trash ring.. And I like Ewing (the comparison to DeRozan is a huge slap to Ewing but it's only to make the aforementioned point

And you posted Pippen's gamescore but we know that Horry had higher capability and gamescore than any of Pippen's Finals (95' Finals) but for whatever reason wasn't needed in 94'.. Horry himself says that he would "lock up the bum Pippen"

[HoopsNY]

You knock Jordan or Curry for facing banged up teams in 91' and 15', but what if those opponents weren't even there - what if Curry faced the DeRozan Raptors instead of Lebron - that's what Hakeem did in 94' by beating Ewing instead of Jordan.. It's a trash ring.. And I like Ewing (the comparison to DeRozan is a huge slap to Ewing but it's only to make the aforementioned point

And you posted Pippen's gamescore but we know that Horry had higher capability and gamescore than any of Pippen's Finals (95' Finals) but for whatever reason wasn't needed in 94'.. Horry himself says that he would "lock up the bum Pippen"

Hakeem didn't just beat the Knicks. They beat Phoenix, Utah, and Portland. It's a trash ring, so what does that make Mj's '92 ring against Portland (with no Rod Strickland) and '93 ring against Phoenix? :lol

In '94, Hakeem gave Utah the gentleman's sweep. He put up 28/10/4/3/5 on 50% . He got just 13 PPG on 34% from his #2 (Pippen gave 16 PPG on 41% in the '98 finals).

Hornacek went for 17 on 48%. Stockton went for 14/9. How did Stockton and Hornacek do in '98? :lol

So Hakeem beats the same teams with the same talent, and somehow that's inferior? And I already said in '94, Houston wouldn't have beaten Chicago with MJ.

Look at how inconsistent this moron is. When MJ does it, he's a god. When anyone else does it, they have "trash rings".

[WhiteKyrie]

You're forgetting how it worked back then.

The Pistons developed a physical brand of ball to blunt the talent advantage and uptempo brand of the Lakers and Celtics... Then the Bulls developed a finesse brand of ball to defeat the Pistons' physical brand.. aka the "organic" eras were an evolution of increasingly-superior brands of ball.. So the Pistons weren't injured or old in 1991 (isiah, dumars and rodman were 27-29 years old) - their brand of ball had simply been made obsolete by a superior brand.. The Pistons were never competitive again even though Dumars and Rodman were peaking.. it's similar to the 14' Finals when the Spurs solved the Heat - the Heat weren't going to be competitive after that without a major change... Btw, the 91' Bulls didn't have a talent advantage because they were #4 in preseason odds (Pistons were #1) and the Bulls had 2 guys with all-star on their resume, whereas the Pistons' entire starting 5 were 3x all-stars or better.. it was well-known at the time that the Bulls overcame a team with superior talent in the Bad Boys.

Facts. This myth that the Pistons were old in 1991 and Magic was old in 1991 are hilariously stupid and inaccurate. What does that make the late 90s Bulls and Jazz then? Ancient?

[3ba11]

:facepalm:

[3ba11]

.
Comparing Pippen's 6 Finals performances to peak-Horry (95' Finals)


95' Horry...... 19.0 gamescore... 18/10/4/3/2 on 57 TS

92' Pippen.... 18.1 gamescore.... 21/8/7/2/1 on 56 TS
91' Pippen.... 17.5 gamescore.... 21/9/7/2/1 on 53 TS
93' Pippen.... 15.6 gamescore.... 20/9/8/2/1 on 46 TS
97' Pippen.... 15.1 gamescore.... 20/8/3/2/2 on 54 TS
96' Pippen.... 13.4 gamescore.... 16/7/5/2/1 on 43 TS
98' Pippen.... 13.0 gamescore.... 16/8/5/2/1 on 50 TS




Hakeem didn't just beat the Knicks. They beat Phoenix, Utah, and Portland. It's a trash ring, so what does that make Mj's '92 ring against Portland (with no Rod Strickland) and '93 ring against Phoenix? :lol

In '94, Hakeem gave Utah the gentleman's sweep. He put up 28/10/4/3/5 on 50% . He got just 13 PPG on 34% from his #2 (Pippen gave 16 PPG on 41% in the '98 finals).

Hornacek went for 17 on 48%. Stockton went for 14/9. How did Stockton and Hornacek do in '98? :lol

So Hakeem beats the same teams with the same talent, and somehow that's inferior? And I already said in '94, Houston wouldn't have beaten Chicago with MJ.

Look at how inconsistent this moron is. When MJ does it, he's a god. When anyone else does it, they have "trash rings".


Yes Hakeem faced all those Western teams but his Finals opponent didn't - the Rockets' Finals opponent didn't go through the gauntlet and therefore was basically a 2nd Round winner (derozan) - everyone understood this on some level back then, which is why no one watched, cared or respected those titles.. Again, it would be like Magic, Kareem and the Lakers dying in a plane crash before the 1980 Playoffs - obviously, no one would respect whoever ended up winning that title.. Hakeem also needed 7 games to beat KJ/Barkley, while MJ beat them in 6 with 41/9/6 on 50% the prior year - Barkley was actually injured in 94' so that kills your whole argument as well.

In addition to facing weaker comp, Hakeem's cast included a goat-level clutch killer in Sam Cassell - we forgot about him because he was a rookie but he was a 24-year old rookie and a key "closer" for those Rockets.. This matters because unlike the Bulls' non-offensive bangers and system athletes, guys like Cassell, Maxwell, Smith, Horry and Thorpe were useful offensive players that required game-planning (shooters or creators) - i.e. Shaq was swept by Horry's clutch daggers in the 95' Finals when Horry played better than Pippen ever did (stats above), so Shaq thinks Horry was a key factor in the scouting report but not Pippen (https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2022/qrDm8n.gif)..

Ultimately, Hakeem's superior cast and lesser comp explains why he didn't need as much statistical dominance as MJ.

[HoopsNY]

.
Comparing Pippen's 6 Finals performances to peak-Horry (95' Finals)


95' Horry...... 19.0 gamescore... 18/10/4/3/2 on 57 TS

92' Pippen.... 18.1 gamescore.... 21/8/7/2/1 on 56 TS
91' Pippen.... 17.5 gamescore.... 21/9/7/2/1 on 53 TS
93' Pippen.... 15.6 gamescore.... 20/9/8/2/1 on 46 TS
97' Pippen.... 15.1 gamescore.... 20/8/3/2/2 on 54 TS
96' Pippen.... 13.4 gamescore.... 16/7/5/2/1 on 43 TS
98' Pippen.... 13.0 gamescore.... 16/8/5/2/1 on 50 TS






Yes Hakeem faced all those Western teams but his Finals opponent didn't - the Rockets' Finals opponent didn't go through the gauntlet and therefore was basically a 2nd Round winner (derozan) - everyone understood this on some level back then, which is why no one watched, cared or respected those titles.. Again, it would be like Magic, Kareem and the Lakers dying in a plane crash before the 1980 Playoffs - obviously, no one would respect whoever ended up winning that title.. Hakeem also needed 7 games to beat KJ/Barkley, while MJ beat them in 6 with 41/9/6 on 50% the prior year - Barkley was actually injured in 94' so that kills your whole argument as well.

In addition to facing weaker comp, Hakeem's cast included a goat-level clutch killer in Sam Cassell - we forgot about him because he was a rookie but he was a 24-year old rookie and a key "closer" for those Rockets.. This matters because unlike the Bulls' non-offensive bangers and system athletes, guys like Cassell, Maxwell, Smith, Horry and Thorpe were useful offensive players that required game-planning (shooters or creators) - i.e. Shaq was swept by Horry's clutch daggers in the 95' Finals when Horry played better than Pippen ever did (stats above), so Shaq thinks Horry was a key factor in the scouting report but not Pippen (https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2022/qrDm8n.gif)..

Ultimately, Hakeem's superior cast and lesser comp explains why he didn't need as much statistical dominance as MJ.

Lol; I love the cognitive dissonance. So because Hakeem took 7 games, that's somehow indicative that MJ is somehow superior? Nonsense.

'93 FS Pippen vs. PHO: 21/9/8/2/1 on 44%
'93 FS Grant vs PHO: 11/10/2/2/2 on 58%
'93 FS Armstrong vs PHO: 14/2/5/1 on 51% (53% 3PT%)

Paxson also shot 62% on a ridiculous 83% TS%, including the game winner for the series.

'94 WCSF Maxwell vs. PHO: 13/4/6/0/1/0 on 36%
'94 WCSF Thorpe vs. PHO: 14/8/2/0/1 on 58%
'94 WCSF Smith vs. PHO: 13/4/4/1/1 on 47%

MJ's co-starters outplayed Hakeem's. But of course this liar doesn't mention that. And I love how Barkley's injury gets a mention, but Clyde's gets no mention 1992, and KJ's doesn't get any mention in 1993. How did KJ do vs. Chicago as opposed to Houston?

'93 KJ vs. CHI: 17/3/7/1 on 42% (49% TS%)
'93 KJ vs. HOU: 27/4/10/1 on 44% (53% TS%)

3ball will lie to everyone and claim that MJ's cast sucks. Bullsh!t. MJ had the best and most stacked cast in the '90s on a consistent basis and everyone knows this. There's a reason many consider Hakeem's '94 ring to be the GOAT title run.

[kawhileonard2]

Not sure how you could have that great a peak when down 3-2 with HCA.

[2much_knowledge]

LeBron is the only player I've seen people argue peaked during 3 different times.

09 where he was an athletic freak

13 where he had the best all-around game if you including defense

18 where he was at his peak in terms of offensive skill

Kobe 03 before the rape case, 06 no need to explain and 2008

[kawhileonard2]

Why is allowing a post or thread from another website allowed? If you are interested in realgm then post there and not here.