1992 Pippen = 2001 Kobe

[AussieSteve]

This is not a compliment or an insult to either player. Just a statement of fact in regards to how both players were viewed by the world at the time.

Both players were in nearly the exact same situation career wise.
- Both in their 5th season
- Both playing 2nd fiddle to the consensus best player and biggest star in the world
- Both had just won their first championship the prior year and were favoured to repeat that year

A very level playing field on which to be assessed against each other. How were they assessed by those in the know?

Pippen '92 - 6th All NBA voting, 5th All-D voting, 9th MVP, 3rd DPOY
Kobe '01 - 7th All NBA voting, 6th All-D voting, 9th MVP, 11th DPOY

Obviously Kobe went on to show himself to be the better and greater player as his career progressed, but the comparison at this stage of their careers is uncanny.

Thoughts?...

[dankok8]

In the RS it's not a bad comparison but 01 Kobe was definitely a tier higher in the playoffs.

[SouBeachTalents]

I really disagree with the metric that you used. I'm sure a lot of the time it can turn out to be accurate, but I guarantee that you can find many examples where that simply does not hold up. The perfect example

2014 Noah
3rd All NBA voting, 1st All-D voting, 4th MVP MVP, 1st DPOY

That stacks up with literally any player in history, and I think it's fair to say that Noah would not quite compare to the likes of Jordan or LeBron.

I could maybe get on board with saying they were at least comparable in the regular season, but the playoffs? Kobe was SO much better, like legitimately multiple tiers better, it honestly invalidates the argument they were equals imo. If not for one horrible game he had in their only loss, he would have outscored peak Shaq during their title run.

[Round Mound]

Agree. But how would you compare 1993-94 Pippen to the later years after 2000-2001 Kobe? Pippen still better?

[AussieSteve]

Agree. But how would you compare 1993-94 Pippen to the later years after 2000-2001 Kobe? Pippen still better?

Peak Kobe >> Peak Pippen

[AussieSteve]

I really disagree with the metric that you used. I'm sure a lot of the time it can turn out to be accurate, but I guarantee that you can find many examples where that simply does not hold up. The perfect example

2014 Noah
3rd All NBA voting, 1st All-D voting, 4th MVP MVP, 1st DPOY

That stacks up with literally any player in history, and I think it's fair to say that Noah would not quite compare to the likes of Jordan or LeBron.

I could maybe get on board with saying they were at least comparable in the regular season, but the playoffs? Kobe was SO much better, like legitimately multiple tiers better, it honestly invalidates the argument they were equals imo. If not for one horrible game he had in their only loss, he would have outscored peak Shaq during their title run.

See, I'm ok with this comparison. Noah was DPOY and also led the Bulls in Assists. Sure he was not a great scorer, but '01 Kobe was not a great shot blocker, rebounder or passer.

Noah fell off after that season and Kobe continued to rise. But in that moment, I'm not convinced that Noah could not have been slightly greater in value and impact than '01Kobe.

[Round Mound]

Peak Kobe >> Peak Pippen

Agree with that but when would you say was Kobe's peak? Pippen was a better defender, rebounder and passer as i also mentioned it so many times. Individually Kobe was a better scorer, shooter and more skilled offensively. As a team player Pippen was better and Kobe as an individual player IMO.

[tpols]

This is one of those threads that keeps 3ball coming back. :oldlol:

Just... unbelievably ridiculous.

[tpols]

See, I'm ok with this comparison. Noah was DPOY and also led the Bulls in Assists. Sure he was not a great scorer, but '01 Kobe was not a great shot blocker, rebounder or passer.

Noah fell off after that season and Kobe continued to rise.

But in that moment, I'm not convinced that Noah could not have been slightly greater in value and impact than '01Kobe.

:biggums:

This... is a bannable offense.

I've actually never seen an opinion this bad here. I know I troll yall but this dude is dead serious lmao.

[Axe]

Agree with that but when would you say was Kobe's peak? Pippen was a better defender, rebounder and passer as i also mentioned it so many times. Individually Kobe was a better scorer, shooter and more skilled offensively. As a team player Pippen was better and Kobe as an individual player IMO.
Interesting.

[Phoenix]

You'd have to align 94 Pippen with 01 Kobe to get a better comparison, but the obvious major difference here is Kobe being tiers better as a scorer. You could play the 'all-around' angle but not all skills and attributes should be weighed equally as far as the 'better' player. 01 Kobe was also a great defender so it's not like saying 'but Pippen was a better defender' balances out the chasm in scoring. I'd equate 91 Pippen closer to 00 Kobe before 92 Pippen to 01 Kobe.

[AussieSteve]

:biggums:

This... is a bannable offense.

I've actually never seen an opinion this bad here. I know I troll yall but this dude is dead serious lmao.

That's fine if you disagree.

I'm not in any way saying that Noah was better than Kobe. That's obviously laughable. What I am saying is that its not beyond the realm of possibility that many people may have viewed Noah at in 2014 on a similar level in terms of impact and value as Kobe in 2001. I'm not even saying I agree with it. Just that it's not a stupid comment.

To be clear on why I think its not laughable, the Bulls went 48-32 in Noah's 80 games in 2014. Despite Rose missing the whole season and them being a pretty depleted team. And of course Noah being DPOY was the biggest reason for this. You could argue that the next best player on the team was Mike Dunleavy.

Kobe never led a team to more than 45 wins except when he had Shaq or Pau. And sure Noah lost in the first round, but so did Kobe when he had a crap cast.

Anyway. I'm not going to argue about it. My main point is that media sentiment seems to have been '92 Pippen = '01 Kobe.

[SouBeachTalents]

That's fine if you disagree.

I'm not in any way saying that Noah was better than Kobe. That's obviously laughable. What I am saying is that its not beyond the realm of possibility that many people may have viewed Noah at in 2014 on a similar level in terms of impact and value as Kobe in 2001. I'm not even saying I agree with it. Just that it's not a stupid comment.

To be clear on why I think its not laughable, the Bulls went 48-32 in Noah's 80 games in 2014. Despite Rose missing the whole season and them being a pretty depleted team. And of course Noah being DPOY was the biggest reason for this. You could argue that the next best player on the team was Mike Dunleavy.

Kobe never led a team to more than 45 wins except when he had Shaq or Pau. And sure Noah lost in the first round, but so did Kobe when he had a crap cast.

Anyway. I'm not going to argue about it. My main point is that media sentiment seems to have been '92 Pippen = '01 Kobe.
I'm genuinely curious if you have any proof of this outside of award voting, like media articles etc. Was he really considered a top 5 player like Kobe was by the end of '01, did the media consider him better than Robinson, Malone, Ewing, Barkley, Hakeem etc.? I understand '92 Barkley & Hakeem missed the playoffs, so that could have for sure lowered their stock at the time.

[Carbine]

01 is the arguably the best "sidekick" ever with Anthony Davis/Lebron (whoever you think was #2) and a couple others throughout history.
.
Pippen never achieved that status as a playoff performer.

[Xiao Yao You]

I'm genuinely curious if you have any proof of this outside of award voting, like media articles etc. Was he really considered a top 5 player like Kobe was by the end of '01, did the media consider him better than Robinson, Malone, Ewing, Barkley, Hakeem etc.? I understand '92 Barkley & Hakeem missed the playoffs, so that could have for sure lowered their stock at the time.

I certainly never saw him up with those guys. Ewing either

[Jacks3]

Nah. 01 Kobe was easily better than any version of Pip. He was the Lakers best player in the postseason while Scottie was never anywhere near Mike

[AussieSteve]

I certainly never saw him up with those guys. Ewing either

Are you over 50? Because otherwise how you saw him in 1992 is not really relevant.

[warriorfan]

OP has lost his mind

[Phoenix]

That's fine if you disagree.

I'm not in any way saying that Noah was better than Kobe. That's obviously laughable. What I am saying is that its not beyond the realm of possibility that many people may have viewed Noah at in 2014 on a similar level in terms of impact and value as Kobe in 2001. I'm not even saying I agree with it. Just that it's not a stupid comment.

To be clear on why I think its not laughable, the Bulls went 48-32 in Noah's 80 games in 2014. Despite Rose missing the whole season and them being a pretty depleted team. And of course Noah being DPOY was the biggest reason for this. You could argue that the next best player on the team was Mike Dunleavy.

Kobe never led a team to more than 45 wins except when he had Shaq or Pau. And sure Noah lost in the first round, but so did Kobe when he had a crap cast.

Anyway. I'm not going to argue about it. My main point is that media sentiment seems to have been '92 Pippen = '01 Kobe.

You can't compare win totals in the 2014 east with win totals in the mid 2000s west. The mid 2010s east is the same conference where Jeff Teague, Kyle Korver, Paul Millsap and Al Horford won 60 wins and got to the ECFs. The mid 2000s West had the Spurs, Suns and Mavericks all with their main players at the apex of their primes. The fact that the Bulls in 2014 achieved what they did without Rose says as much about the state of the Eastern conference as it does Noah's impact. Not to discount him, but that's very far from apples to apples. The 2014 Bulls may not have made the playoffs in the 2000s west, and if they did it would have required them to beat the 45 wins Kobe was getting on that Lakers team just to be a 7th seed.

As for your media sentiment regarding 92 Pippen and 01 Kobe, for that to be accurate that means people would have been saying that Pippen was at or near MJ's level in 92 and nobody thought that. As dominant as Shaq was in 01, Kobe was getting 'best player in the league' whispers when he was dropping 45 and 10 or whatever the number was dunking on Duncan and Admirals heads in the WCFs. Not that it was accurate in real time or in retrospect, but 01 Kobe in the playoffs was balling at that level where 'next Jordan' sentiment was really starting to have some substance.

[Phoenix]

I really disagree with the metric that you used. I'm sure a lot of the time it can turn out to be accurate, but I guarantee that you can find many examples where that simply does not hold up. The perfect example

2014 Noah
3rd All NBA voting, 1st All-D voting, 4th MVP MVP, 1st DPOY

That stacks up with literally any player in history, and I think it's fair to say that Noah would not quite compare to the likes of Jordan or LeBron.

I could maybe get on board with saying they were at least comparable in the regular season, but the playoffs? Kobe was SO much better, like legitimately multiple tiers better, it honestly invalidates the argument they were equals imo. If not for one horrible game he had in their only loss, he would have outscored peak Shaq during their title run.

To that point, I was thinking that sounds like a Hakeem year in the early 90's so took a look:

93 Hakeem: DPOY, 1st team all-D, 1st team NBA, 3rd all-NBA voting shares,2nd MVP

That's Dream battling with Jordan and Barkley at the top of the league that year as far as individual players went, and doing that with guys like Robinson and Ewing in their primes, and Shaq coming in. Versus 2014 at the center spot when Dwight's best days were behind him and Yao was still up and coming. Demarcus was ballin' but the Kings sucked so I imagine that took him out of the running.

That's why it's dangerous throwing numbers into a vortex when it inevitably comes to conclusions that 2014 Noah was roughly equal to 93 Hakeem in impact using said numbers.

[3ba11]

People forget that 19-year old Kobe was an all-star starter during his 2nd NBA season and had a much-anticipated matchup with MJ in the all-star game because everyone thought that Kobe was the next MJ.

aka Kobe was good right away, while Pippen needed a ton of development just to be a viable player, so it mattered where he landed.

Pippen was obviously quite lucky to land next to a similar athlete like MJ so that he could grow in MJ's image and style, while also landing on a bum team like the Bulls where he could get some minutes - he could also develop his ball-handling while MJ was off-ball..

Otoh, if he landed next to Magic on the champion Lakers, he would never play and be relegated to a spot-up role, while not developing the same drive and style alongside Magic than he did next to MJ... Magic's passing style needed elite iso-closers like Kareem and Worthy, so Pippen would develop into a Michael Cooper or AC Green-type role like we saw him play in Houston or Portland.

Btw, 2001 Kobe was an elite 1st option and capable of being the best player on a champion - he was MVP of the WCF vs the Spurs - meanwhile, Pippen could never be the best player on a champion.. Any team with Pippen as the best scorer will fall out of contention QUICKLY due to lack of talent, even a 3-peat dynasty as we saw in 1995 before MJ returned.. Pippen destroyed a 3-peat dynasty in less than 18 months before MJ returned to restore 3-peat caliber in his 1st full season back.

[3ba11]

.

2001 WCF vs Spurs


Kobe......... 33/7/7....... 57 TS.... 23 gmsc

Shaq........ 27/13/3...... 54 TS.... 19 gmsc


2001 Kobe carried the Lakers to the Finals, while 1992 Pippen was destroyed by X-Man and nearly caused massive upset loss to the Knicks (16 on 40%).

Pippen was a transition player/dunker, while Kobe could lead teams to titles.. it's a pretty massive gap - bad thread.

Ultimately, the 19-year Kobe was a starter in the all-star game, while Pippen needed a ton of development to be a viable player, so it mattered where Pippen landed - he was lucky to land next to MJ in a system that coddled weak iso players like Pippen.

[AussieSteve]

To that point, I was thinking that sounds like a Hakeem year in the early 90's so took a look:

93 Hakeem: DPOY, 1st team all-D, 1st team NBA, 3rd all-NBA voting shares,2nd MVP

That's Dream battling with Jordan and Barkley at the top of the league that year as far as individual players went, and doing that with guys like Robinson and Ewing in their primes, and Shaq coming in. Versus 2014 at the center spot when Dwight's best days were behind him and Yao was still up and coming. Demarcus was ballin' but the Kings sucked so I imagine that took him out of the running.

That's why it's dangerous throwing numbers into a vortex when it inevitably comes to conclusions that 2014 Noah was roughly equal to 93 Hakeem in impact using said numbers.

Ok, ok. Obviously '93 Hakeem >>> '14 Noah.

A bit of context says that '93 was an elite time for centers. For Hakeem to be the best of them speaks to how great he was. While 2014 was a very average era for centers, so competition wasn't great for Noah. All-NBA 1st for a centre didn't mean the same in '14 as it did in '93.

Clarifying what I think I'm trying to say... it's not that either of Pippen or Kobe were *better* than the other, or that people believed they were better. It's their value and impact relative to the league at the time. Specifically as a sidekick to their respective superstar tram mates.

Based on OP, both Pip and Kobe were considered top 10 players in the league, but probably not much higher. Making them, relatively speaking vs the league, the same calibre of sidekick.

[SouBeachTalents]

Ok, ok. Obviously '93 Hakeem >>> '14 Noah.

A bit of context says that '93 was an elite time for centers. For Hakeem to be the best of them speaks to how great he was. While 2014 was a very average era for centers, so competition wasn't great for Noah. All-NBA 1st for a centre didn't mean the same in '14 as it did in '93.

Clarifying what I think I'm trying to say... it's not that either of Pippen or Kobe were *better* than the other, or that people believed they were better. It's their value and impact relative to the league at the time. Specifically as a sidekick to their respective superstar tram mates.

Based on OP, both Pip and Kobe were considered top 10 players in the league, but probably not much higher. Making them, relatively speaking vs the league, the same calibre of sidekick.
Nah, this is where you're honestly incorrect, which is why I don't think the comparison is applicable. By the end of '01 Kobe was for sure considered a top 5 player, maybe even top 3, while Pippen never was. You're REALLY underselling how dominant Kobe was most of the playoffs, that rose his standing past mere top 10 player.

[Phoenix]

Ok, ok. Obviously '93 Hakeem >>> '14 Noah.

A bit of context says that '93 was an elite time for centers. For Hakeem to be the best of them speaks to how great he was. While 2014 was a very average era for centers, so competition wasn't great for Noah. All-NBA 1st for a centre didn't mean the same in '14 as it did in '93.

Clarifying what I think I'm trying to say... it's not that either of Pippen or Kobe were *better* than the other, or that people believed they were better. It's their value and impact relative to the league at the time. Specifically as a sidekick to their respective superstar tram mates.

Based on OP, both Pip and Kobe were considered top 10 players in the league, but probably not much higher. Making them, relatively speaking vs the league, the same calibre of sidekick.

I understand what you're going for, but my memory of 92 Pippen back when in the time period we're talking isn't tracking to be what Kobe was considered in 2001 in media circles. By the end of the WCFs finals against the Spurs some people were saying Kobe was the best player in the league, including Shaq who has as big an ego as guys at this level tend to have. If 92 Pippen was considered top 10 it would have been at the lower half once you get past MJ, Malone, Barkley, Robinson, Ewing, Drexler. Even Chris Mullin beat him out for first team, and if Nique wasn't out with an achilles tear he may have beat out Scottie as well( Nique bounced back in 93 beating out Scottie for 2nd team). Pip was like a bubble top 10 player in 92 best case, Kobe at worst was top 4 in 2001 with guys like Shaq, Duncan, Garnett

[3ba11]

Comparing Pippen and Kobe at any point in their careers is like comparing Klay to KD - they're 2 completely different players and the only reason this thread exists is the because the winning spotlight distorted media perception and accolade for Pippen, which confuses nascent fans into these misguided attempts to compare players of entirely different tiers.

[ImKobe]

Comparing Pippen and Kobe at any point in their careers is like comparing Klay to KD - they're 2 completely different players and the only reason this thread exists is the because the winning spotlight distorted media perception and accolade for Pippen, which confuses nascent fans into these misguided attempts to compare players of entirely different tiers.

Pretty much. Anyone who puts '92 Pippen on '01 KB's level is smoking crack.

It's just no fair to Pippen. KB had more 40 & 30-pt games in a 9-game stretch in the POs than Pippen did all RS + POs in '92 and KB put up peak Jordan numbers through the first 3 rounds of the POs (32/7/6) to get the Lakers to the Finals with an undefeated record. One bad game aside, KB was damn near perfect in that Playoff run while Pippen didn't carry a load like that for even one series in '92. Pip was a sidekick on offense, KB was a 1a/1b.

And even if you want to make some argument about their raw averages and praising scottie for his ast/reb/stls numbers, the ORTG and Pace were both significantly higher in '92 (5+ in both categories).

[plowking]

Nah, this is where you're honestly incorrect, which is why I don't think the comparison is applicable. By the end of '01 Kobe was for sure considered a top 5 player, maybe even top 3, while Pippen never was. You're REALLY underselling how dominant Kobe was most of the playoffs, that rose his standing past mere top 10 player.

Pippen was considered a top 5 player at one point by plenty in the league.

Not just that his MVP results and All NBA 1st team selections would prove that.

[3ba11]

Pippen was considered a top 5 player at one point by plenty in the league.

Not just that his MVP results and All NBA 1st team selections would prove that.


All-NBA meant nothing back then and it was only something the media themselves ever discussed or cared about.. There weren't fans in 1985 or 1995 that were like "Player X is better because he has 7 all-nba selections" - no one had any idea in the 90's that Pippen was getting All-NBA every year.. If they knew that, many people would've been quite surprised because a ton of fans, media and opposing players in the 90's thought Pippen was complete trash.. That was a running sentiment about him on the street (that he was garbage)

So using media accolades that were awarded 30 years ago in an environment where fans themselves had less say and the media was a smaller, closer-knit bubble means nothing today when evaluating players, especially for a guy like Pippen that benefitted so much from winning spotlight and association with MJ

[tpols]

Pippen was considered a top 5 player at one point by plenty in the league.

Not just that his MVP results and All NBA 1st team selections would prove that.

No that doesn't make any sense since All NBA voting is position based. Will explain further.

[tpols]

Using all NBA voting in this particular case is an extremely skewed argument because the center position only has 1 spot.

Like...

There were many years where Hakeem, David Robinson, and Shaq were 2nd or 3rd team and Scottie was 1st. That doesn't mean Pippen was better than them, it means they had more competition at their position. And then Pippen had to beat out guys like Kemp, Coleman, Detlef, and Mason. And ironically Kemp ended up destroying him in the playoffs H2H.

Chris Mullin, Mark Price, and even... believe it or not Latrell Spreewell were 1st team All NBA in the 90s. Were they top 5 players too? Clearly not.

It's just an extremely disingenuous argument to make here.

[tpols]

To add to that list...

Chris Mullin
Mark Price
Latrell Spreewell
Tim Hardaway
Allen Iverson
Alonzo Mourning
Grant Hill
Gary Payton
John Stockton
Penny Hardaway
Jason Kidd

All made 1st team All NBA in the 90s.

We're any of them considered top 5 players in the game at that point???

Not even close.

[HoopsNY]

This is one of those threads that keeps 3ball coming back. :oldlol:

Just... unbelievably ridiculous.

Agreed. '01 Kobe was literally a 1b to peak Shaq. While the talk is all about Kobe's PS performances, we can't ignore that his regular season was also ridiculous, especially when you consider it was at the height of the defensive era ('98-'04).

[3ba11]

No that doesn't make any sense since All NBA voting is position based. Will explain further.





So let's evaluate Pippen's performance vs other forwards:



92' X-Man'............. 19 on 50% (3rd option)
92' Pippen............. 16 on 40%

93' Dominique........ 30 on 44%
93' Willis'............... 18 on 44%
93' Pippen.............. 15 on 33%

93' Barkley............. 25 on 50%
93' Pippen.............. 20 on 43%

93' Dumas............. 16 on 57% (4th option)
93' Pippen'............. 21 on 44%

95' Johnson............ 21 on 48%
95' Pippen.............. 16 on 42%

96' Penny............... 26 on 47% (H2H matchup)
96' Pippen.............. 19 on 45%

96' Kemp............... 23 on 50%
96' Schrempf.......... 16 on 50% (3rd option)
96' Pippen.............. 16 on 34%

97' Howard............. 19 on 46%
97' Murray.............. 18 on 57% (4th option)
97' Pippen.............. 17 on 39%

98' Rice.................. 23 on 44%
98' Pippen'.............. 18 on 44%

98' Malone'.............. 25 on 50%
98' Pippen............... 16 on 41%

99' Rice.................. 18 on 55% (3rd option)
99' Pippen'.............. 18 on 32%

91' Worthy'.............. 19 on 47% (injured)
91' Pippen............... 20 on 50%


Pippen was outscored by opposing forwards in about half of the playoff series from 92-98', while having the worst efficiency and clutch at the small forward position, and among the lowest peak capabilities (not a threat to "go off".. not on scouting report according to Shaq).. He had the worst shooting splits of ANY position for a playoff run of 15 games and 35 MPG, and he did this twice, and these were title runs for goodness sake (96', 98').. He's simply the most overrated player ever - his Larry Nance or Iguoudala-caliber was inflated by the winning spotlight to top 30 all-time..

If Pippen didn't land on a bum team in 1988 where he could get minutes, or alongside an off-ball player that didn't relegate him to spot-up role, or alongside a supreme athlete that he could emulate and grow in his image and style, or in a system that coddled weak iso players - Pippen would be "just another guy" like Horace's brother (harvey)

[3ba11]

Agreed. '01 Kobe was literally a 1b to peak Shaq. While the talk is all about Kobe's PS performances, we can't ignore that his regular season was also ridiculous, especially when you consider it was at the height of the defensive era ('98-'04).


2015 Klay.......... 3rd team All-NBA..... 12th in All-NBA voting
2019 Lebron...... 3rd team All-NBA..... 13th in All-NBA voting


almost made a thread titled titled 2015 Klay = 2019 Lebron... :oldlol:

[warriorfan]

2015 Klay.......... 3rd team All-NBA..... 12th in All-NBA voting
2019 Lebron...... 3rd team All-NBA..... 13th in All-NBA voting


almost made a thread titled titled 2015 Klay = 2019 Lebron... :oldlol:

:roll:

[Phoenix]

To add to that list...

Chris Mullin
Mark Price
Latrell Spreewell
Tim Hardaway
Allen Iverson
Alonzo Mourning
Grant Hill
Gary Payton
John Stockton
Penny Hardaway
Jason Kidd

All made 1st team All NBA in the 90s.

We're any of them considered top 5 players in the game at that point???

Not even close.

You don't think Penny(95,96) and Grant(97) had top 5 cases during their all-NBA 1st team years? Once you got past MJ, Shaq and Mailman, they had cases. Guys like Ewing and Barkley were declining, Robinson missed 97.

Or Iverson for any of his first team seasons( 99,01, 04)? What about his MVP season in 01? Once you get past Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Garnett, no case for him to be 5th? Who else is in the mix that year? Webber? Tmac? Vince?

Your point is taken for the other players.

[tpols]

You don't think Penny(95,96) and Grant(97) had top 5 cases during their all-NBA 1st team years? Once you got past MJ, Shaq and Mailman, they had cases. Guys like Ewing and Barkley were declining, Robinson missed 97.

Or Iverson for any of his first team seasons( 99,01, 04)? What about his MVP season in 01? Once you get past Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Garnett, no case for him to be 5th? Who else is in the mix that year? Webber? Tmac? Vince?

Your point is taken for the other players.


I don't believe Grant Hill or Penny were top 5 players tbh... they were great but top 5 in the 90s? Nah. Ironically enough I do think both were better than pippen. Penny was basically a smaller tmac and Grant Hill was pippen on steroids. Scottie was definitely better than Iverson though.

Main thing is 1st team All NBA doesn't necessarily mean you're a top 5 player. I just threw down a whole list of 75% of the names aren't even disputable as clearing that threshold.

If we move past media accolades as the only judge and use playoff performances to solve this debate the question in the OP looks totally absurd.

[Phoenix]

I don't believe Grant Hill or Penny were top 5 players tbh... they were great but top 5 in the 90s? Nah. Ironically enough I do think both were better than pippen. Penny was basically a smaller tmac and Grant Hill was pippen on steroids. Scottie was definitely better than Iverson though.

Main thing is 1st team All NBA doesn't necessarily mean you're a top 5 player. I just threw down a whole list of 75% of the names aren't even disputable as clearing that threshold.

If we move past media accolades as the only judge and use playoff performances to solve this debate the question in the OP looks totally absurd.

I thought you meant top 5 in the actual seasons they were all-NBA first team? Like Grant in 97 was first team all-NBA. Who in that season are you taking over him other than Jordan, Shaq and Malone as far as being top 5? Who are you taking over Penny in 96 after MJ, Shaq, and Malone? Scottie was actually balling for the first half of 96 season before affected by mid-season injuries heading into the playoffs. Who are you taking over Iverson in 2001 after Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Garnett?

As for Scottie being better than Iverson.....By the time Iverson peaked Scottie was done as an elite player so you're conflating two different things there.

[tpols]

I thought you meant top 5 in the actual seasons they were all-NBA first team? Like Grant in 97 was first team all-NBA. Who in that season are you taking over him other than Jordan, Shaq and Malone as far as being top 5? Who are you taking over Penny in 96 after MJ, Shaq, and Malone? Scottie was actually balling for the first half of 96 season before affected by mid-season injuries heading into the playoffs. Who are you taking over Iverson in 2001 after Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Garnett?

As for Scottie being better than Iverson.....By the time Iverson peaked Scottie was done as an elite player so you're conflating two different things there.

Yea but that's what I'm sayin...

OP has made the argument multiple times that because Scottie Pippen was 1st All Team NBA he was a top 5 player in the 90s.

And that's faulty reasoning. Shit you even agree with me on 80% of my list point blank. I'm not gonna get into a petty squabble about who you think mightve been on the bubble...

The main point is media accolades in this case are a very dishonest criteria for the case being made.

[Phoenix]

Yea but that's what I'm sayin...

OP has made the argument multiple times that because Scottie Pippen was 1st All Team NBA he was a top 5 player in the 90s.

And that's faulty reasoning. Shit you even agree with me on 80% of my list point blank. I'm not gonna get into a petty squabble about who you think mightve been on the bubble...

The main point is media accolades in this case are a very dishonest criteria for the case being made.

Just that statement on the surface and in this context.... yeah, when you're referring to guys who may have gotten a single all-nba 1st team nod( like a Mark Price). Scottie made 7 All-NBA teams, 3 first, 2 second, 2 third. 10 all-D teams, 8 first team. What's the qualifying criteria for a decade? For me there are two very obvious cases, MJ and Hakeem. Those two dominated the championship scene( obviously MJ moreso) with individual accolades to boot. The other 'obvious' names would be guys like Robinson, Barkley, Malone, Shaq both in peak play and individual accolades. So I'm not really agreeing or disagreeing with what you're saying overall ( other than most of those names you list above who made the all-NBA first team would certainly not be top 5 players over the decade). I'm mostly trying to solidity my understanding of the talking points, in this case.

[3ba11]

J

guys who may have gotten a single all-nba 1st team nod (like a Mark Price).





Price was often-injured but he was the superior producer and this was without a system that coddled weak-iso players and transition dunkers like Pippen (who was nothing outside this system)

Here's their prime vs prime stats:



89-94' Price (https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pricema01.html#1989-1994-sum:advanced)'.......... 21.8 PER... 0.196 WS/48... 5.4 BPM... 18/3/8 on 60.3 TS (49/40/92).. 2.7 TO
91-97' Pippen (https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1997-sum:advanced)........ 21.3 PER... 0.185 WS/48... 6.1 BPM... 20/7/6 on 54.7 TS (49/34/70).. 3.0 TO


Price was the far better scorer, passer, leader, shooter, and clutch player than Pippen, while also being All-NBA without being carried to titles first like Pippen

Pippen's unprecedented winning and winning spotlight yielded unprecedented inflation of media accolade (winning spotlight inflation).

Btw, Price played with 2 all-star teammates plus Ron Harper's 20/5/5, so Price shared the scoring load with a "big 4" but was otherwise a far superior scorer than Pippen both off-the-dribble or off-ball.




J

Scottie made 7 All-NBA teams, 3 first, 2 second, 2 third. 10 all-D teams, 8 first team.





Price was All-NBA without being carried to titles first, while Pippen didn't make All-NBA until the Bulls were closing in on #2 and it was clear they were going to be a historic dynasty..

Pippen was carried to 6 titles as the statis show, so his media accolade inflation is the most of anyone ever, while Price was infact the far better scorer, passer, leader, shooter, and clutch player.

If Pippen's shooting and 5 assists gave MJ great spacing and playmaking help, then what would Price's all-time shooting and 10 assists give MJ?

[ShawkFactory]

2015 Klay.......... 3rd team All-NBA..... 12th in All-NBA voting
2019 Lebron...... 3rd team All-NBA..... 13th in All-NBA voting


almost made a thread titled titled 2015 Klay = 2019 Lebron... :oldlol:

Yea making telling comparisons to combat your stupid arguments is normally something people do to you.

See how easy it is?

Luckily most people don’t care as much as you to then add context to the counter argument.

[Axe]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSox4GT9JBG439wSV-lbkE5MxK4XqxK_FHrgg&usqp=CAU

[3ba11]

Yea making telling comparisons to combat your stupid arguments is normally something people do to you.

See how easy it is?


You guys don't provide the backup like I did with mine by showing that the criteria used by the OP (All-NBA 3rd team and All-NBA voting) was the exact same criteria that I used for 15' Klay vs 19' Lebron, therefore the comparison is a good one.. you guys never provide this backup and the comparison is bad, yet you guys guffaw away and high-five each other as if you've "nailed it".. lol.. it's pretty funny.

[Axe]

@Peja

Come own this lunatic buffoon once again. Andrew badly needs some help.

[ShawkFactory]

You guys don't provide the backup like I did with mine by showing that the criteria used by the OP (All-NBA 3rd team and All-NBA voting) was the exact same criteria that I used for 15' Klay vs 19' Lebron, therefore the comparison is a good one.. you guys never provide this backup and the comparison is bad, yet you guys guffaw away and high-five each other as if you've "nailed it".. lol.. it's pretty funny.

3ball makes contextless comparison: A

Someone else makes similar comparison proving why comparing the parties in A is ridiculous: B

3ball then adds context and claims B is wrong because of this, this, this, and this. Of course A is wrong for the same multitude of reason but now the conversation is on B and most don’t care to go in circles with you and run it back. We’re wise to you games bud.

Anyway…it was just amusing to me to see the shoe on the other foot. That’s all.

[3ba11]

3ball makes contextless claim: A

Someone else makes easy similar case proving why claiming A is ridiculous: B

3ball then adds context and claims B is wrong because of this, this, this, and this. Of course A is wrong for the same multitude of reason but now the conversation is on B and most don’t care to go in circles with you and run it back.

Anyway…it was just amusing to me to see the shoe on the other foot. That’s all.


21 seasons covers all lack of context - it's called sufficient sample size - so when I say that Lebron isn't capable of a #1 offense or has a trend of bad fits and zero young player development, I'm saying these things based on 21 years of evidence with every type of star teammate possible and every lineup possible... That's excellent evidence, while you only have your opinion and the misinformation you hear on LeKlutch Fraud media mainstream TV (Skip, Shannon, Stephen A, Colin, Nick)