2011 Dallas: 57 win team, SWEPT def champs w Kobe; 4-1 on Durant, Harden, WB...

[Nb1]

I've been reading alot of posts where it seems that people don't know any basketball history and think the Mavericks back in 2011 were some kind of today's version of Rockets who got lucky or something...

They won 57 games, would have actually been over 60 if they didn't rest in many games!

They literally SWEPT and humiliated the Lakers who were the back to back champs and made Kobe look like some G-league rookie that never saw a basketball before.

Then proceeded to humiliate OKC with KD, Harden, WB (not this shell version of him) and an all around great team.

And then logically ran through the Heat who had never played a season tght before.

That Mavs roster was an amazing fit and was destroying everyone out there, they fully deserve to win it all. All the numbers and games showed they were the best team, dismantling the defending champs alone was already unheard of. So how can anyone talk about them as if they were a bunch of rookies?

[Im Still Ballin]

They didn't play well without Dirk. Just how good was that supporting cast? This is a reasonable question that hopefully invites sensible discussion.

[ImKobe]

They didn't play well without Dirk. Just how good was that supporting cast? This is a reasonable question that hopefully invites sensible discussion.

Tyson Chandler was All-NBA & DPOY the following year.. Mavs went from a 57-win team to just 3 over .500 & out in the 1st rd (sweep) without him.

[tpols]

They won with chemistry and motivation and hunger and grit. No easy road.

It was the ultimate antithesis to what had happened with the summers before unseen collusion...

The Universe enforcing its law of Karma and trying to teach us all a lesson not to take the easy way out.

[Foster5k]

Meanwhile, LeBron beat a 73‑9 Warriors team with a headcase like Kyrie as a sidekick.

Bron >>>>>> Dirk and it aint close.

[AlternativeAcc.]

They didn't play well without Dirk. Just how good was that supporting cast? This is a reasonable question that hopefully invites sensible discussion.

They were built around one scoring star so of course they'll struggle with him off the court.

Tha Mavs mixed in high quality bench guys that often times played with Dirk on the court which skew the numbers. They had the best bench in the NBA. Anyone that knows basketball knows that.

The problem with you numbers geeks is you guys don't actually know the game. You use numbers without context to form opinions. Geek analysis doesn't work.

[AlternativeAcc.]

They won with chemistry and motivation and hunger and grit. No easy road.

It was the ultimate antithesis to what had happened with the summers before unseen collusion...

The Universe enforcing its law of Karma and trying to teach us all a lesson not to take the easy way out.

They won with superior skillset and IQ. Grit and hunger? That's just nonsense. They had several guys who could pass, shoot, and defend at a high level and make high level decisions.

That is what every great team in history has. None of them have super scoring 2nd options like many here believe you need to win. It's the opposite.. you need a versatile 2nd option and amazing role players like the Mavs had.

Having a high scoring 2nd option and bad role players is actually the antithesis to winning. All the great teams have absurdly good role players and 20ppg versatile 2nd options.

[DMAVS41]

They were built around one scoring star so of course they'll struggle with him off the court.

Tha Mavs mixed in high quality bench guys that often times played with Dirk on the court which skew the numbers. They had the best bench in the NBA. Anyone that knows basketball knows that.

The problem with you numbers geeks is you guys don't actually know the game. You use numbers without context to form opinions. Geek analysis doesn't work.

You mean to say that they had players that paired well with Dirk.

When a team puts in the bench players and they get roasted without the star in the game...nobody calls it the best bench in the league.

The current Nuggets are somewhat similar...they had a terrible bench all year with Jokic off the court, but do have a high ceiling with their best players and can increase minutes to mitigate some of the issues.


However, as was shown to you yesterday when you asked for it...the 11 Mavs bench also struggled in the playoffs without Dirk on the floor, but also as pointed out to you yesterday...the sample sizes in the playoffs and minutes yield really weird results so it isn't very valuable information.

A great bench is when the star player can be off the court and the non starters come in and have success. Players that come to mind that have had that are Derrick Rose, Duncan, and Durant.

[AlternativeAcc.]

You mean to say that they had players that paired well with Dirk.

When a team puts in the bench players and they get roasted without the star in the game...nobody calls it the best bench in the league.

The current Nuggets are somewhat similar...they had a terrible bench all year with Jokic off the court, but do have a high ceiling with their best players and can increase minutes to mitigate some of the issues.


However, as was shown to you yesterday when you asked for it...the 11 Mavs bench also struggled in the playoffs without Dirk on the floor, but also as pointed out to you yesterday...the sample sizes in the playoffs and minutes yield really weird results so it isn't very valuable information.

They had starter level players with high IQ coming off the bench.. yes. And they did pair well with Dirk. They didn't have a go-to star or anything, but amazing fill ins for starters where they could sub them in and not miss a beat from what their starting unit produced.

And yes, 150 minutes or so without real context doesn't tell us anything reliable or important. But for some reason you guys keep bringing it up... almost like u desperately want it to matter. It doesn't though.

[DMAVS41]

They had starter level players with high IQ coming off the bench.. yes. And they did pair well with Dirk. They didn't have a go-to star or anything, but amazing fill ins for starters where they could sub them in and not miss a best from what their starting unit produced.

And yes, 150 minutes or so without real context doesn't tell us anything reliable or important. But for some reason you guys keep bringing it up... almost like u desperately want it to matter. It doesn't though.

What?

You just made my point for me. They didn't have a good bench...as the only success they ever had in both the regular season and playoffs was when Dirk was on the court. Again, please educate yourself as you legit have no ****ing clue what you are talking about.

Again, what? You asked for the playoff numbers after you told me the regular season numbers don't matter. I told you the playoff shit is almost always misleading because of limited minutes and blowouts...etc.

However, the regular season numbers matter...whether you like the results or not.

The Mavs bench was not good all year and they also had a 2-7 record without Dirk.

Giannis this year had a good bench...his team had a winning record without him and a positive scoring differential without him.

That doesn't mean the Mavs supporting cast was bad...it was just more reliant on Dirk for success than the Bucks, for example, are reliant on Giannis...in terms of on or off court.

Need anything else explained?

****ing clown.

[red1]

team of destiny that year


they were a team of hungry veterans who executed to perfection.


hardest run ever. every single player was a vet.

[AlternativeAcc.]

What?

You just made my point for me. They didn't have a good bench...as the only success they ever had in both the regular season and playoffs was when Dirk was on the court. Again, please educate yourself as you legit have no ****ing clue what you are talking about.

Again, what? You asked for the playoff numbers after you told me the regular season numbers don't matter.

****ing clown.

Meltdown.

You're just an idiot. Having a good bench means more than being able to produce without your star on the court, especially teams built around 1 stars. The point is that they could replace starters and not miss a beat whereas other teams bench players couldn't.

You actually just don't know anything about basketball. You're a fukking geek. You literally just said the numbers aren't important because of limited minutes and no context. So the info isn't reliable but you keep harping on it. Baffling levels of incompetence.

[DMAVS41]

Meltdown.

You're just an idiot. Having a good bench means more than being able to produce without your star on the court, especially teams built around 1 stars. The point is that they could replace starters and not miss a beat whereas other teams bench players couldn't.

You actually just don't know anything about basketball. You're a fukking geek.

What the **** are you talking about?

I never said that the only measure is producing without your star...I'm simply trying to educate you that people don't say things like..."the Nuggets need to survive the minutes the bench lineup is in"...and imply that they can do it when Jokic is on the court.

Which is why I have tried to tell you that what you are referring to is the supporting cast overall...not just the ****ing bench.

Which, by the way...I want everyone to understand this unreal bench he keeps referencing...It was...

Jason Terry
JJ Barea
Peja
Haywood
Ian

Tell us more how that was so historically good.

And even that is inflated as Terry played starter minutes and it was really Stevenson that was the bench player as he only played like 17 mpg iirc as a "starter". Ian hardly played at all...not sure that matters, but probably isn't worth listing.

The team in the playoffs barely went 9 deep...

[AlternativeAcc.]

What the **** are you talking about?

I never said that the only measure is producing without your star...I'm simply trying to educate you that people don't say things like..."the Nuggets need to survive the minutes the bench lineup is in"...and imply that they can do it when Jokic is on the court.

Which is why I have tried to tell you that what you are referring to is the supporting cast overall...not just the ****ing bench.

Which, by the way...I want everyone to understand this unreal bench he keeps referencing...It was...

Jason Terry
JJ Barea
Peja
Haywood
Ian

Tell us more how that was so historically good.

It was the best bench in the NBA. Jason Terry 20ppg spaces the floor and played extremely clutch basketball. Barea provided incredibly impactful minutes on both ends. Peja and haywood provided huge minutes.

Best bench in the NBA. Their insanely clutch 2nd option came off the bench... You're proving my point. You really don't know the game. You keep citing numbers that you've already admitted are unreliable. It's a bad look.

[DMAVS41]

It was the best bench in the NBA. Jason Terry 20ppg spaces the floor and played extremely clutch basketball. Barea provided incredibly impactful minutes on both ends. Peja and haywood provided huge minutes.

Best bench in the NBA. Their insanely clutch 2nd option came off the bench... You're proving my point. You really don't know the game.

Hahahahahahahah.

So, just to be clear...it is the expectation that a player like Dirk has to win without a 2nd star scoring 20 plus...and he needs to win with a bench worse than Terry/Peja/Barea/Haywood...to prove to you that he's a great player.

And, of course, as you know...Terry really wasn't a bench player in reality...he played starter minutes and it was Stevenson that was really the bench guy in practice.

But, regardless...I know you don't care about reality...Do I have that correct? Dirk needed to win with essentially nothing to matter...right?

[tpols]

They won with superior skillset and IQ. Grit and hunger? That's just nonsense. They had several guys who could pass, shoot, and defend at a high level and make high level decisions.

That is what every great team in history has. None of them have super scoring 2nd options like many here believe you need to win. It's the opposite.. you need a versatile 2nd option and amazing role players like the Mavs had.

Having a high scoring 2nd option and bad role players is actually the antithesis to winning. All the great teams have absurdly good role players and 20ppg versatile 2nd options.

The best case scenario is to have a great 2nd option and a great team behind it.

Dirk beat prime Wade and Lebron. All NBA Bosh as 3rd option and a bunch of role player snipers and hustlers.

The Heat were overwhelming +175 favorites to win the title at the start of the 2011 season and the Mavs were +2000 underdogs.

It was God showing us that hard work does pay off. And being cheap has its consequences.

A beautiful basketball display of Karma.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Hahahahahahahah.

So, just to be clear...it is the expectation that a player like Dirk has to win without a 2nd star scoring 20 plus...and he needs to win with a bench worse than Terry/Peja/Barea/Haywood...to prove to you that he's a great player.

Do I have that correct?

Silly arbitrary "standards" mean nothing to me... 2nd option scoring has never been all too important with the greatest teams ever... as long as you have a guy who can score around 18-20ppg and have high IQ versatile role players... that is what historically wins. Dirk just happened to have better and deeper role players than other teams and a bit less star power at 2nd option... but the team abilities are still extremely high and championship worthy.

The main reason they won the finals was because of team defense and holding LeBron to his worst and most passive series ever. Dirk gets almost no credit for the main reason why they won so arguing his help was historically bad is just low IQ and desperate. You don't the game... you need narratives to tell you what great help looks like in the context of team basketball.

[DMAVS41]

The best case scenario is to have a great 2nd option and a great team behind it.

Dirk beat prime Wade and Lebron. All NBA Bosh as 3rd option and a bunch of role player snipers and hustlers.

The Heat were overwhelming +175 favorites to win the title at the start of the 2011 season and the Mavs were +2000 underdogs.

It was God showing us that hard work does pay off. And being cheap has its consequences.

A beautiful basketball display of Karma.

To make it even worse for him...Durant had both Russ as a great 2nd option and he had Harden coming off the bench...combined with quality vets/defenders....and he claims it was impossible for Durant to win with that.

But Dirk winning with what he did was no big deal...just JJ/Peja/Haywood dominating as usual.

[DMAVS41]

Silly arbitrary "standards" mean nothing to me... 2nd option scoring has never been all too important with the greatest teams ever... as long as you have a guy who can score around 18-20ppg and have high IQ versatile role players... that is what historically wins. Dirk just happened to have better and deeper role players than other teams and a bit less star power at 2nd option... but the team abilities are still extremely high and championship worthy.

The main reason they won the finals was because of team defense and holding LeBron to his worst and most passive series ever. Dirk gets almost no credit for the main reason why they won so arguing his help was historically bad is just low IQ and desperate. You don't the game... you need narratives to tell you what great help looks like in the context of team basketball.

This is simply false. Go look up all the title winning teams ever...and look at how good their 2nd best player was.

My god man...

[AlternativeAcc.]

The best case scenario is to have a great 2nd option and a great team behind it.

Dirk beat prime Wade and Lebron. All NBA Bosh as 3rd option and a bunch of role player snipers and hustlers.

The Heat were overwhelming +175 favorites to win the title at the start of the 2011 season and the Mavs were +2000 underdogs.

It was God showing us that hard work does pay off. And being cheap has its consequences.

A beautiful basketball display of Karma.

Star power doesn't = good chemistry

Complementary skillsets are always more important... bosh hadn't developed a completely skillet and the Heat bench was all-time bad...

Throwing 3 guys used to being 1st option means the other two didn't know how to play complementary ball... they didn't space the floor or pass at a high level in a team context

[AlternativeAcc.]

This is simply false. Go look up all the title winning teams ever...and look at how good their 2nd best player was.

My god man...

I explained that Dirk sacrificed star power at 2nd option but it was made up for with deeper and better role players that contributed equal or more than what a historically great 2nd would.. the game is more than 2 players.

My God man... you have reading comprehension issues.

[DMAVS41]

I explained that Dirk sacrificed star power at 2nd option but it was made up for with deeper and better role players that contributed equal or more than what a historically great 2nd would.. the game is more than 2 players.

My God man... you have reading comprehension issues.

You just got done saying the 2nd guy was never all that important to title winning teams...and that is false.

Dirk didn't sacrifice anything...he didn't build the team. He simply played with a really good, but subpar title winning supporting cast and did something very few players ever did.

You are a moron.

Also, how about people like Durant that had both. Had the star power and a great/deep bench on your standards...you just got done saying it was basically impossible for him to win in 2012. Why?

[AlternativeAcc.]

Dirks 25ppg on 40% in the finals with minimal playmaker and defense is historically BAD for a 1st option.

So obviously, he needed amazing help, particularly on defense for the Mavs to win the series. This is just common sense.

[AlternativeAcc.]

You just got done saying the 2nd guy was never all that important to title winning teams...and that is false.

Dirk didn't sacrifice anything...he didn't build the team. He simply played with a really good, but subpar title winning supporting cast and did something very few players ever did.

You are a moron.

Also, how about people like Durant that had both. Had the star power and a great/deep bench on your standards...you just got done saying it was basically impossible for him to win in 2012. Why?

I said HIGH SCORING 2nd options isn't important.

You have reading problems. I have you melting down like a child. I would snap your neck if you barked at me like this in real life. Puccy.

[DMAVS41]

I said HIGH SCORING 2nd options isn't important.

You have reading problems. I have you melting down like a child. I would snap your neck if you barked at me like this in real life. Puccy.

He didn't have either though. He didn't have a high scoring second option nor a great 2nd best player...nor did he even have a noteworthy bench.

This is why it was rated as one of the worst casts to ever make the finals and the 2nd worst supporting cast to ever win the title.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-this-years-cavs-rank-among-lebrons-nba-finals-supporting-casts/

Again, the players without Dirk on the court did not perform well all year. The players themselves had a lot of flaws...some of them legit no other team even wanted really. Nothing supports your assertions.

Again, I'm sorry if you don't like it...but the very next year the vastly superior player you say Durant was...had even more...had ****ing James Harden coming off the bench...and you say it was impossible to win.

And, even worse for you...your entire argument actually implies that Dirk got the most out of his teammates. Because with Dirk they were great...and without him they struggled tremendously. You are just too stupid to realize it.

[MrFonzworth]

I said HIGH SCORING 2nd options isn't important.

You have reading problems. I have you melting down like a child. I would snap your neck if you barked at me like this in real life. Puccy.

Make another thread about how to deal with bullies at school loser:roll:

[AlternativeAcc.]

He didn't have either though. He didn't have a high scoring second option nor a great 2nd best player...nor did he even have a noteworthy bench.

This is why it was rated as one of the worst casts to ever make the finals and the 2nd worst supporting cast to ever win the title.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-this-years-cavs-rank-among-lebrons-nba-finals-supporting-casts/

Again, the players without Dirk on the court did not perform well all year. The players themselves had a lot of flaws...some of them legit no other team even wanted really. Nothing supports your assertions.

Again, I'm sorry if you don't like it...but the very next year the vastly superior player you say Durant was...had even more...had ****ing James Harden coming off the bench...and you say it was impossible to win.

And, even worse for you...your entire argument actually implies that Dirk got the most out of his teammates. Because with Dirk they were great...and without him they struggled tremendously. You are just too stupid to realize it.

You keep bringing up the numbers you already admitted don't mean anything. :roll:


Also, it's very obvious that guys with certain skills will play better in a system that complements them... so when surrounded by other high IQ versatile players, it forms amazing team cohesion and leads to wins. Singling out guys in a vacuum outside of said team/system is just low IQ analysis.

Also, the Harden guy you referenced had an all-time bad finals on both ends. Terry, otoh, was absurdly clutch and played great. Just another example of name value not adding up to impact or value.


Dirk benefited from his teammates just as much he helped them. They covered his glaring flaws like lack of defense and playmaking, and he provided good scoring for it to work offensively. Giving Dirk all the credit is a massive dick rider move and low IQ.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Make another thread about how to deal with bullies at school loser:roll:

Your life is dedicated to trying to get back at me for mercilessly bullying you on a forum. This is like the 5th time this week you've randomly replied to me seeking my attention.

Cringe.

[ArbitraryWater]

Tyson Chandler was All-NBA & DPOY the following year.. Mavs went from a 57-win team to just 3 over .500 & out in the 1st rd (sweep) without him.

mao, there were many other issues surrounding that team the next few years, especiay in 2013 with Dirks injury.

In 2014 they were beastly again.

[DMAVS41]

You keep bringing up the numbers you already admitted don't mean anything. :roll:


Also, it's very obvious that guys with certain skills will play better in a system that complements them... so when surrounded by other high IQ versatile players, it forms amazing team cohesion and leads to wins. Singling out guys in a vacuum outside of said team/system is just low IQ analysis.

Also, the Harden guy you referenced had an all-time bad finals on both ends. Terry, otoh, was absurdly clutch and played great. Just another example of name value not adding up to impact or value.


Dirk benefited from his teammates just as much he helped them. They covered his glaring flaws like lack of defense and playmaking, and he provided good scoring for it to work offensively. Giving Dirk all the credit is a massive dick rider move and low IQ.

Those aren't from the playoffs. Again, you should educate yourself...that is multiple years of plus/minus data. But I'm not arguing it is everything...I'm just actually providing evidence for my arguments. You honestly probably didn't even know that Terry was basically a starter. I don't think you watched much of that team.

Nobody is giving Dirk all the credit. I'm giving him credit for winning a title as the clear cut best player on the team with a subpar title winning supporting cast. I don't think it was as impressive as Hakeem in 94 or even Duncan in 03...but it was definitely one of the more impressive single star titles ever won.

And then you keep talking about other situations...like Harden having a terrible finals...but you blame Harden and not Durant...but when Dirk's teammates don't play well...you blame Dirk...and when they do play well...you say Dirk deserves zero credit.

You can't be taken seriously...you just got done arguing that Russ was a negative player in his prime and that Jason Terry was a better player.

When you have opinions like that...that are so detached from reality...it should give you pause...it should make you think that maybe you are coming at this wrong and you might be too biased and emotional.

But you won't do that because you are shockingly stupid.

All I hear are excuses for Durant not doing something that Dirk was able to do. I posted the numbers in the other thread...end of the day...they've been very similar in terms of playoff numbers and even if you include Durant's time on the Warriors. The accomplishments are barely different as well.

And, after half of one game of a series, are already coming up with excuses why Durant has no chance to beat the Nuggets. Booker sucks, Ayton sucks, Paul sucks....it's just impossible...every year is impossible for Durant to win unless he's playing on the most loaded team in history and gets injury luck.

Cool...just not sure how that makes him as good as you claim if the only time you expect him to literally do anything...is when it would be shocking if his team didn't win because it was so unfair.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Those aren't from the playoffs. Again, you should educate yourself...that is multiple years of plus/minus data. But I'm not arguing it is everything...I'm just actually providing evidence for my arguments. You honestly probably didn't even know that Terry was basically a starter. I don't think you watched much of that team.

Nobody is giving Dirk all the credit. I'm giving him credit for winning a title as the clear cut best player on the team with a subpar title winning supporting cast. I don't think it was as impressive as Hakeem in 94 or even Duncan in 03...but it was definitely one of the more impressive single star titles ever won.

And then you keep talking about other situations...like Harden having a terrible finals...but you blame Harden and not Durant...but when Dirk's teammates don't play well...you blame Dirk...and when they do play well...you say Dirk deserves zero credit.

You can't be taken seriously...you just got done arguing that Russ was a negative player in his prime and that Jason Terry was a better player.

When you have opinions like that...that are so detached from reality...it should give you pause...it should make you think that maybe you are coming at this wrong and you might be too biased and emotional.

But you won't do that because you are shockingly stupid.

Of course I know Terry was practically a starter you dumb fukk.... thats been my point. They mixed in bench guys with the starters so the numbers you reference are meaningless. Jesus you're fukking stupid.



And no Dirk playing below average D and no playmaking while scoring 25ppg on 40% isn't Duncan or Hakeem level, or LeBron level, or ANY all-time level you dick riding moron. :roll:

[DMAVS41]

Of course I know Terry was practically a starter you dumb fukk.... thats been my point. They mixed in bench guys with the starters so the numbers you reference are meaningless. Jesus you're fukking stupid.



And no Dirk playing below average D and no playmaking while scoring 25ppg on 40% isn't Duncan or Hakeem level, or LeBron level, or ANY all-time level you dick riding moron. :roll:

Every team mixes in bench guys with starters you dumb ****. It just so happened that not only did they struggle without Dirk on the court all year...but their ratings independent from Dirk for multiple years...happened to be the 2nd worst for a team to ever win the title.

Hahahahahaah.

You are making my point for me again...Dirk got the most out of his teammates....so instead of concluding that, man...maybe this Dirk guy that puts up nearly identical numbers to Durant in the playoffs and has made multiple finals as the best player, won a title, upset the Spurs at the height of their powers...won 50 straight over a decade...instead of concluding he might be really good.

You go on and on about Barea / Peja / Haywood / Stevenson...like that is some noteworthy championship bench....

Going on and on about how bad Dirk's defense was...but Terry played way worse defense...not even comparable. Barea and Peja especially were negative defenders as well.

And what makes your arguments even dumber...is that the Mavs won off of offense...but they didn't even have anything noteworthy on offense as you've said. They had by far the best offense in the playoffs...the defense? It was the 8th best...just average.

I know facts don't matter to you but....ouch, Dirk somehow got inept offensive help with no other even 20 ppg scorer to by far the best offense in the most important games of the year....:cheers:

[FKAri]

2011 Lakers were weird. Felt like they got old over night.

[SouBeachTalents]

2011 Lakers were weird. Felt like they got old over night.
That seems to happen to a lot of teams going for a 3peat, the '91 Pistons, '96 Rockets, '14 Heat etc. They like the Lakers all got destroyed in the playoffs.

[Im Still Ballin]

That Mavs-LA 2011 series could've easily gone 6 or 7. Same as LA-OKC in 2012. I think they choked several fourth-quarter leads.

[FKAri]

That seems to happen to a lot of teams going for a 3peat, the '91 Pistons, '96 Rockets, '14 Heat etc. They like the Lakers all got destroyed in the playoffs.

League was moving further and further into small ball and 3 pt shooting. Lakers couldn't shoot and their bigs got worse so kinda a double whammy. Mavs blew them away from 3.

[DMAVS41]

That Mavs-LA 2011 series could've easily gone 6 or 7. Same as LA-OKC in 2012. I think they choked several fourth-quarter leads.

They did. People just remember game 4 where the Lakers completely gave up after a few minutes.

[3ba11]

That seems to happen to a lot of teams going for a 3peat, the '91 Pistons, '96 Rockets, '14 Heat etc. They like the Lakers all got destroyed in the playoffs.


It's statistical fact that Jordan 3-peated with less help than 94' Hakeem or 11' Dirk:



PLAYOFFS

94' Hakeem...... 27.7 PER.... 8.5 BPM... 2.6 VORP... 0.208 WS/48... 28.9 ppg
94' Horry.......... 16.7 PER.... 5.0 BPM... 1.4 VORP... 0.152 WS/48... 11.7 ppg
GAP.................... 11.0............3.5............ 1.2............ 0.056.......... 17.2

93' Jordan........ 30.1 PER... 11.6 BPM... 2.9 VORP... 0.270 WS/48... 35.1 ppg
93' Pippen........ 16.9 PER..... 2.0 BPM... 0.8 VORP... 0.083 WS/48... 20.1 ppg
GAP..................... 13.2........... 9.6............ 2.1........... 0.187.......... 15.0

11' Dirk............ 25.2 PER... 5.5 BPM... 1.6 VORP... 0.210 WS/48... 27.7 ppg
11' Terry........... 20.3 PER... 4.6 BPM... 1.1 VORP... 0.179 WS/48... 17.5 ppg
GAP..................... 4.9............1.1............. 0.5............ 0.031.......... 10.2


Pippen was the greatest bricklayer/lane-clogger in history, as confirmed by his worst-ever efficiency for a playoff run of 15 games and 35 MPG - he did this twice (96', 98') and nearly a third time on the 93' run (50 TS)

[SouBeachTalents]

It's statistical fact that Jordan 3-peated with less help than 94' Hakeem or 11' Dirk:



PLAYOFFS

94' Hakeem...... 27.7 PER.... 8.5 BPM... 2.6 VORP... 0.208 WS/48... 28.9 ppg
94' Horry.......... 16.7 PER.... 5.0 BPM... 1.4 VORP... 0.152 WS/48... 11.7 ppg
GAP.................... 11.0............3.5............. 1.2........... 0.056.......... 17.2

93' Jordan........ 30.1 PER... 11.6 BPM... 2.9 VORP... 0.270 WS/48... 35.1 ppg
93' Pippen........ 16.9 PER..... 2.0 BPM... 0.8 VORP... 0.083 WS/48... 20.1 ppg
GAP..................... 13.2........... 9.6............. 2.1........... 0.187.......... 15.0

11' Dirk............ 25.2 PER... 5.5 BPM... 1.6 VORP... 0.210 WS/48... 27.7 ppg
11' Terry........... 20.3 PER... 4.6 BPM... 1.1 VORP... 0.179 WS/48... 17.5 ppg
GAP..................... 4.9............1.1............. 0.5............ 0.031.......... 10.2
Now do this with 2013 LeBron/Wade.

[3ba11]

Now do this with 2013 LeBron/Wade.



PLAYOFFS

94' Hakeem...... 27.7 PER.... 8.5 BPM... 2.6 VORP... 0.208 WS/48... 28.9 ppg
94' Horry.......... 16.7 PER.... 5.0 BPM... 1.4 VORP... 0.152 WS/48... 11.7 ppg
GAP.................... 11.0............3.5............ 1.2............ 0.056.......... 17.2

11' Dirk............ 25.2 PER... 5.5 BPM... 1.6 VORP... 0.210 WS/48... 27.7 ppg
11' Terry........... 20.3 PER... 4.6 BPM... 1.1 VORP... 0.179 WS/48... 17.5 ppg
GAP..................... 4.9............1.1............. 0.5............ 0.031.......... 10.2

93' Jordan........ 30.1 PER... 11.6 BPM... 2.9 VORP... 0.270 WS/48... 35.1 ppg
93' Pippen........ 16.9 PER..... 2.0 BPM... 0.8 VORP... 0.083 WS/48... 20.1 ppg
GAP..................... 13.2........... 9.6............ 2.1........... 0.187.......... 15.0

13' Lebron........ 28.1 PER... 10.4 BPM... 3.0 VORP... 0.260 WS/48... 25.9 ppg
13' Wade.......... 18.7 PER..... 3.1 BPM... 1.0 VORP... 0.104 WS/48... 15.9 ppg
GAP...................... 9.4........... 7.3............ 2.0........... 0.156........... 10.0


Wade's playoff stats from 2013 and 2014 destroy 93' Pippen because Pippen had the lowest advanced stats ever for a winning sidekick in 93' Playoffs (PER, WS/48, VORP, BPM, TS).

93' Pippen shows the lowest stats compared to 11' Terry, 94' Horry or 14' Wade, while Jordan/Pippen shows the biggest GAP in stats - this was required to 3-peat both times and other title years show similar levels and gaps.

But the 2013 run wouldn't qualify to begin with because we're comparing carry-jobs like 94' Hakeem, 11' Dirk or 93' MJ, so a super-team where no one needed to do much wouldn't fit the criteria of a carry-job...

Btw, Lebron avereaged 16 on 39% for the first 3 games of the 13' Finals while teammates staved off an 0-3 deficit.. His 23 on 43% thru 6 games was insufficient and needed Ray Allen to force Game 7

[Nb1]

PLAYOFFS

94' Hakeem...... 27.7 PER.... 8.5 BPM... 2.6 VORP... 0.208 WS/48... 28.9 ppg
94' Horry.......... 16.7 PER.... 5.0 BPM... 1.4 VORP... 0.152 WS/48... 11.7 ppg
GAP.................... 11.0............3.5............ 1.2............ 0.056.......... 17.2

11' Dirk............ 25.2 PER... 5.5 BPM... 1.6 VORP... 0.210 WS/48... 27.7 ppg
11' Terry........... 20.3 PER... 4.6 BPM... 1.1 VORP... 0.179 WS/48... 17.5 ppg
GAP..................... 4.9............1.1............. 0.5............ 0.031.......... 10.2

93' Jordan........ 30.1 PER... 11.6 BPM... 2.9 VORP... 0.270 WS/48... 35.1 ppg
93' Pippen........ 16.9 PER..... 2.0 BPM... 0.8 VORP... 0.083 WS/48... 20.1 ppg
GAP..................... 13.2........... 9.6............ 2.1........... 0.187.......... 15.0

13' Lebron........ 28.1 PER... 10.4 BPM... 3.0 VORP... 0.260 WS/48... 25.9 ppg
13' Wade.......... 18.7 PER..... 3.1 BPM... 1.0 VORP... 0.104 WS/48... 15.9 ppg
GAP...................... 9.4........... 7.3............ 2.0........... 0.156........... 10.0


Wade's playoff stats from 2013 and 2014 destroy 93' Pippen because Pippen had the lowest advanced stats ever for a winning sidekick in 93' Playoffs (PER, WS/48, VORP, BPM, TS).

93' Pippen shows the lowest stats compared to 11' Terry, 94' Horry or 14' Wade, while Jordan/Pippen shows the biggest GAP in stats - this was required to 3-peat both times and other title years show similar levels and gaps.

But the 2013 run wouldn't qualify to begin with because we're comparing carry-jobs like 94' Hakeem, 11' Dirk or 93' MJ, so a super-team where no one needed to do much wouldn't fit the criteria of a carry-job...

Btw, Lebron avereaged 16 on 39% for the first 3 games of the 13' Finals while teammates staved off an 0-3 deficit.. His 23 on 43% thru 6 games was insufficient and needed Ray Allen to force Game 7

Damn, Pippen had more ppg than all the other sidekicks and lets not even talk about his defense. MJ indeed was a lucky dude to have him by his side, no wonder he couldn't win anything without Pippen! Great work showing those stats proving it!

[3ba11]

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






Damn, Pippen had more ppg than all the other sidekicks and lets not even talk about his defense. MJ indeed was a lucky dude to have him by his side, no wonder he couldn't win anything without Pippen! Great work showing those stats proving it!


Jordan won with Pippen at 16.8 ppg and worst-ever efficiency in 96' and 98' (see graphic above):



PLAYOFFS

94' Hakeem...... 27.7 PER.... 8.5 BPM... 2.6 VORP... 0.208 WS/48... 28.9 ppg
94' Horry.......... 16.7 PER.... 5.0 BPM... 1.4 VORP... 0.152 WS/48... 11.7 ppg
GAP................... 11.0...........3.5............. 1.2........... 0.056............ 17.2

11' Dirk............ 25.2 PER... 5.5 BPM... 1.6 VORP... 0.210 WS/48... 27.7 ppg
11' Terry........... 20.3 PER... 4.6 BPM... 1.1 VORP... 0.179 WS/48... 17.5 ppg
GAP.................... 4.9...........1.1............. 0.5............ 0.031............ 10.2

96' Jordan........ 26.7 PER... 10.7 BPM... 2.4 VORP.. 0.317 WS/48... 30.7 ppg
96' Pippen........ 19.4 PER..... 7.8 BPM... 1.8 VORP.. 0.195 WS/48... 16.9 ppg
GAP................... 7.3............ 2.9............. 0.6............. 0.122.......... 13.8


98' Jordan....... 28.1 PER.... 9.0 BPM... 2.4 VORP... 0.265 WS/48... 32.4 ppg
98' Pippen....... 19.4 PER.... 5.6 BPM... 1.6 VORP... 0.166 WS/48... 16.8 ppg
GAP.................. 8.7........... 3.4.............. 0.8............ 0.095........... 16.4