Proof that 91' Bulls killing Lakers was SHOCKING compared to 24' Celtics over Mavs

[3ba11]

.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4T25pHu7Nc&t=69s



Marv Albert:

"The Chicago Bulls' domination of this series has to be considered a major surprise.. There's no reason to believe the Lakers would fall apart so dramatically"


Mike Fratello responding:

"I think everyone felt like the balance of power was in the West this year - everyone felt that Portland was the best team and once the Lakers got past them, everyone figured they would just put the Bulls away."


The 91' Lakers getting past Portland was similar to 24' Dallas getting past a red-hot Minnesota team that had just beaten the Nuggets, so the media thought Lakers and Dallas would win the Finals, but they both got surprisingly destroyed.. It proved to be another example of ball-movement > ball-domination.

How many things in history are misreported from what actually happened - future generations change history to suit what they want to believe about current people, circumstances and situations

[gengiskhan]

I still believe 1990-1992 Blazers should've made NBA finals 3 years in a row.

They were the best team to completely neutralize Bulls 2nd-in-command, Scottie Pippen.

Blazers had the speed, muscle, front court and Clyde to do it all against 1991 Bulls.

1991 Blazers vs 1991 Bulls would've been a full-on 7 games Blood bath.

Unlike 1992 Blazers, 1991 Blazers had HCA against 1991 Bulls.

Can you imagine Game 6 and Game 7 in portland against high octane Clyde and co.

[Da_Realist]

The Blazers would have never beaten the 90's Bulls. Their halfcourt game wasn't good enough to beat the Bulls defense.

[SouBeachTalents]

It’s one of the biggest upsets in sports history, on the same tier as Appalachian State beating Michigan.

[gengiskhan]

The Blazers would have never beaten the 90's Bulls. Their halfcourt game wasn't good enough to beat the Bulls defense.

All 1991 Blazers had to do is crack 1991 Pippen under pressure.

And that 1989-1991 Pippen was timid, mentally weak, panicky, choking buffoon.

Leave 1991 MJ alone, there is no antidote to 'god' mode.

1991 Pippen was crackable. 1991 Pippen was good. wasn't even on 1991 AllStar level.

Finals expectation and pressure would've gotten into 1991 Pippens head imo.

If anything to go by 1991 Game 1. 19 pts at pathetic 36%FG. will make BrickBe proud.

[3ba11]

I still believe 1990-1992 Blazers should've made NBA finals 3 years in a row.

They were the best team to completely neutralize Bulls 2nd-in-command, Scottie Pippen.

Blazers had the speed, muscle, front court and Clyde to do it all against 1991 Bulls.

1991 Blazers vs 1991 Bulls would've been a full-on 7 games Blood bath.

Unlike 1992 Blazers, 1991 Blazers had HCA against 1991 Bulls.

Can you imagine Game 6 and Game 7 in portland against high octane Clyde and co.


And the Bulls should've made the Finals in 1990 - they would've had a massive talent deficit to the Blazers, so MJ would've averaged about 45 - it would've been the best he ever played.

[3ba11]

https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-07-2019/4EMYLq.gif

https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-07-2019/508ldf.gif




All 1991 Blazers had to do is crack 1991 Pippen under pressure.

And that 1989-1991 Pippen was timid, mentally weak, panicky, choking buffoon.

Leave 1991 MJ alone, there is no antidote to 'god' mode.

1991 Pippen was crackable. 1991 Pippen was good. wasn't even on 1991 AllStar level.

Finals expectation and pressure would've gotten into 1991 Pippens head imo.

If anything to go by 1991 Game 1. 19 pts at pathetic 36%FG. will make BrickBe proud.


92' Pippen was crackable too - X-Man did it in the 2nd Round, which is the only reason that series unexpectantly went 7 games..

X-Man dominated Pippen in that series and was about to give Pippen another migraine in Game 7 until MJ famously stepped up to X-Man and undertook the "team enforcer" role (shown above)

MJ had learned from 1990 where he didn't stick up for Pippen forcefully like he did to X-Man - that probably helps Pippen get through that game 7 and restore his performance.. MJ said that he learned to be the "enforcer" for Pippen here (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MexSJrF6_EQ)

[jayfan]

.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4T25pHu7Nc&t=69s



Marv Albert:

"The Chicago Bulls' domination of this series has to be considered a major surprise.. There's no reason to believe the Lakers would fall apart so dramatically"


Mike Fratello responding:

"I think everyone felt like the balance of power was in the West this year - everyone felt that Portland was the best team and once the Lakers got past them, everyone figured they would just put the Bulls away."


The 91' Lakers getting past Portland was similar to 24' Dallas getting past a red-hot Minnesota team that had just beaten the Nuggets, so the media thought Lakers and Dallas would win the Finals, but they both got surprisingly destroyed.. It proved to be another example of ball-movement > ball-domination.

How many things in history are misreported from what actually happened - future generations change history to suit what they want to believe about current people, circumstances and situations


Fratello's statement is off. While Portland was favored to come out of the west, they were given no better odds than Chicago to win it all when the playoffs started. Both were +250. He may have figured LA would put the Bulls away, but few others did.

And the Bulls were -200 favorites to win the series prior to Game 1.


https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba-main/?y=1990-1991&sa=nba&a=finals&o=r
.

[Hey Yo]

OP ruined ^^^

eot

[Real Men Wear Green]

JB is MJ with three point range.

[3ba11]

Fratello's statement is off. While Portland was favored to come out of the west, they were given no better odds than Chicago to win it all when the playoffs started. Both were +250. He may have figured LA would put the Bulls away, but few others did.

And the Bulls were -200 favorites to win the series prior to Game 1.


https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba-main/?y=1990-1991&sa=nba&a=finals&o=r
.


Marv isn't talking about the vegas odds - he's talking about how everyone figured the Lakers were the best once they beat Portland, which is exactly what everyone thought about Dallas after they beat the red-hot T'Wolves.

9 of 13 analysts at ESPN picked Dallas over Boston and a similar consensus was reached in the media about the Lakers/Bulls in 91' - the entire media predicted a Lakers' victory

It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the game... Heliocentric teams (ball-dominant teams) will have a lottery record against long-standing, organic ball movement teams like the Celtics beating Luka this year, or previous teams like the Nuggets, Spurs, Warriors, Mavs and Magic beating Lebron's ball-domination and AAU style of play (down-hill brand, aka not 5-man basketball).

[tpols]

The most damning quote of all in support of OPs post came from a guy named Dr. Jerry Finkleberry who was the personal physician for Phil Jackson in 1992.


"I think it is about time... we gave 3ball his flowers."

[SouBeachTalents]

In that playoff run Pippen outscored Ewing, Isiah AND Magic, and was only 2 points off from Barkley.

[Carbine]

If you're going to use quotes from broadcasts, then you must also acknowledge the countless times Pippen is referred to as the best all around player in 96-97 broadcasts by the same Marv Albert and "one of the best players in the NBA" in 92-93 broadcasts.

If you fail to do so, you are being undeniably biased and agenda driven. Keep it consistent.

[Phoenix]

3ball could post a picture of his morning shit and get a few pages of replies lol. Jesus....

[sdot_thadon]

People just enjoy hitting the piñata.

[3ba11]

If you're going to use quotes from broadcasts, then you must also acknowledge the countless times Pippen is referred to as the best all around player in 96-97 broadcasts by the same Marv Albert and "one of the best players in the NBA" in 92-93 broadcasts.

If you fail to do so, you are being undeniably biased and agenda driven. Keep it consistent.


Apples and oranges.

Marv and Fratello were commenting on a past event that was settled - it wasn't subjective, whereas the comments about all-round Pippen are subjective and obvious euphemisms to say that his offense was sub-par.

The entire reason the 91' Finals was misreported at the time is because the media didn't want to report the title run as a complete Jordan carry-job like they had always had in the past, but the previous group-think had never thought much of Pippen's offense so they latched on to his brief defense on Magic.

Pippen has been an all-time defender ever since, regardless of the fact that the majority of opposing SF's went off on him and/or outscored him in playoff series, while his presence yielded inferior team defenses to nearly ever ECF and Finals opponent during the 1st three-peat.. It wasn't until the 2nd three-peat that the Bulls had a truly elite defense.. The 1st three-peat is littered with opponents getting off offensively, even the 91' Lakers had many stretches where the Bulls couldn't stop them..

Btw, 4 guys averaged 17+ for the Lakers in that series and the team had studs like Elden Campbell off the bench and AC Green (all-star in 90' and all-defense in 89') - the Lakers' roster was far more talented, so the level of chemistry that MJ had to develop needed to be outstanding.

[ShawkFactory]

Apples and oranges.

Marv and Fratello were commenting on a past event that was settled - it wasn't subjective, whereas the comments about all-round Pippen are subjective and obvious euphemisms to say that his offense was sub-par.

The entire reason the 91' Finals was misreported at the time is because the media didn't want to report the title run as a complete Jordan carry-job like they had always had in the past, but the previous group-think had never thought much of Pippen's offense so they latched on to his brief defense on Magic.

Pippen has been an all-time defender ever since, regardless of the fact that the majority of opposing SF's went off on him and/or outscored him in playoff series, while his presence yielded inferior team defenses to nearly ever ECF and Finals opponent during the 1st three-peat.. It wasn't until the 2nd three-peat that the Bulls had a truly elite defense.. The 1st three-peat is littered with opponents getting off offensively, even the 91' Lakers had many stretches where the Bulls couldn't stop them..

Btw, 4 guys averaged 17+ for the Lakers in that series and the team had studs like Elden Campbell off the bench and AC Green (all-star in 90' and all-defense in 89') - the Lakers' roster was far more talented, so the level of chemistry that MJ had to develop needed to be outstanding.

:lol

[3ba11]

:lol


it's true - the media had always reported the Bulls as a 1-man team, which is the main reason they thought the Lakers would win the Finals...

But then the Bulls won so they were scrambling to call it a team effort after saying it was a 1-man team for so many years...

They still couldn't give Pippen any props on offense however, so it became a habit to laud his defense and they started with his brief spot-duty on Magic.. The false narrative lasted for 34 years until the youtuber Uncut Hoops did god's work and presented the truth that Jordan guarded Magic for 70% of possessions for Games 2-5 (and all of Game 1)..

He basically showed how MJ had the goat Finals in 1991 by having goat clutch scoring, goat mid-range shooting, goat passing and goat defense.. However, he hasn't done 92' or 93', so those could be better.

[1987_Lakers]

Bulls were Vegas favorites in that series and Worthy was injured.

[Carbine]

Not to mention the Lakers are a public team meaning they usually get a slight bump in odds

[3ba11]

Bulls were Vegas favorites in that series and Worthy was injured.


That's what the website says with no actual sourcing of those numbers - that isn't how I remember it and you saw in the OP what everyone thought heading into the series and how shocking the Bulls' domination was

1st timers never beat veteran teams, especially veterans that just came off a Mavs-like run through the West - the Bulls were viewed as a 1-man team and not ready to beat a 5-time champion like Magic.. Bird and Magic were still the darlings at the time - MJ hadn't done shit yet

[SouBeachTalents]

In that playoff run Pippen outscored Ewing, Isiah AND Magic, and was only 2 points off from Barkley.
Damn yo, that's crazy.

[3ba11]

Damn yo, that's crazy.


one-offs are standard for everyone and usually due to statistical anomaly - the standard was Pippen to produce far less than Barkley, Ewing, and Magic - you yourself said it was "crazy"

so there you go - it's "crazy" for pippen to do that and obviously a massive exception

pippen wasn't capable of getting 30 points in a playoff game, so he was levels below barkley, ewing, magic, etc

he had 6 games of 30 points in his playoff career (208 games total), so it was a massive exception that opposing coaches didn't have to worry about - they didn't have to double him or close out on him and this low peak capability meant that he wasn't on scouting reports, which forced MJ to defeat max defensive attention (carry scoring load).

[1987_Lakers]

That's what the website says with no actual sourcing of those numbers

http://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba-playoffs-series/?y=1991&o=s&fv=&hv=&fd=&rd=

Browsing through the other years, it seems pretty accurate.

The only time Jordan's Bulls pulled an upset was their '89 series vs the Cavs.

On a second look they pulled an upset that same year vs the Knicks.

[3ba11]

http://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba-playoffs-series/?y=1991&o=s&fv=&hv=&fd=&rd=

Browsing through the other years, it seems pretty accurate.


not really. many of those years seem off for sure.

but the odds in any one series mean nothing and don't reflect public sentiment or the general consensus among fans, media, players or people in the industry.. The consensus among the public, fans, coaches and players was that the experienced and far deeper Lakers would beat the newbie Bulls and their "1-man team".

Ultimately, only trends matter, such as a trend of consistent of underdog status on the championship level despite 2 all-star teammates and confirmed favored talent (preseason favorites).. Or when a player loses as the favorite for three straight years, this means more than a one-off and probably means something - it could be interpreted many ways, such as a team's brand of ball failing to match it's on-paper talent.

[1987_Lakers]

not really. many of those years seem off for sure.

Point them out

[sdot_thadon]

Bulls were Vegas favorites in that series and Worthy was injured.

Not only was Worthy, Magic's no.2 option hobbled from the conference finals, but Byron Scott, the starting 2 guard was hurt in game 4 and missed game 5

[3ba11]

Point them out


91' Finals

93' Finals

98' Finals

and maybe even the 93' ECF

95' 2nd Round

I've never seen confirmation of the odds on any of these series

regardless, everyone thought the Lakers' experience and depth would beat the newbie Bulls and their 1-man team, as shown in the OP and many other sources (including myself)

[sdot_thadon]

Apples and oranges.

Marv and Fratello were commenting on a past event that was settled - it wasn't subjective, whereas the comments about all-round Pippen are subjective and obvious euphemisms to say that his offense was sub-par.

The entire reason the 91' Finals was misreported at the time is because the media didn't want to report the title run as a complete Jordan carry-job like they had always had in the past, but the previous group-think had never thought much of Pippen's offense so they latched on to his brief defense on Magic.

Pippen has been an all-time defender ever since, regardless of the fact that the majority of opposing SF's went off on him and/or outscored him in playoff series, while his presence yielded inferior team defenses to nearly ever ECF and Finals opponent during the 1st three-peat.. It wasn't until the 2nd three-peat that the Bulls had a truly elite defense.. The 1st three-peat is littered with opponents getting off offensively, even the 91' Lakers had many stretches where the Bulls couldn't stop them..

Btw, 4 guys averaged 17+ for the Lakers in that series and the team had studs like Elden Campbell off the bench and AC Green (all-star in 90' and all-defense in 89') - the Lakers' roster was far more talented, so the level of chemistry that MJ had to develop needed to be outstanding.

They didn't want to report the series as a carry job so that 30 years later it could be used against Mj in a goat argument vs. A 5 year old kid.....:oldlol: what a clown.

[3ba11]

They didn't want to report the series as a carry job so that 30 years later it could be used agaisnt Mj in a goat argument vs. A 5 year old kid.....:oldlol: what a clown.


that isn't what i said and that makes no sense (what you just said)

the media had always reported that the Bulls were a 1-man team because they were a 1-man team - no one was thinking about 30 years later - they were simply a 1-man team, so they were called a 1-man team..

But once the Bulls shocked everyone and proved everyone wrong by destroying the Lakers, the media wanted to call it a team effort.. this was hard because they had always called the Bulls a 1-man show previously, and they also didn't know how to praise Pippen (so they latched on to his defense)

[1987_Lakers]

91' Finals

93' Finals

98' Finals

and maybe even the 93' ECF

95' 2nd Round

I've never seen confirmation of the odds on any of these series

regardless, everyone thought the Lakers' experience and depth would beat the newbie Bulls and their 1-man team, as shown in the OP and many other sources (including myself)

It's well documented that the '98 Finals was a near toss-up series and the odds in that website indicate that. Looking through the website, the '98 Finals was the closest to a tossup than any other Finals from the data they have. (Going back to 1973)

In '95, I wouldn't have put the Bulls as favorites, but I'm guessing the media and fans got caught up in MJ's comeback.

And I don't see the '93 Bulls who were coming off back to back titles and still having their core being underdogs at any point in '93.

[sdot_thadon]

that isn't what i said and that makes no sense (what you just said)

the media had always reported that the Bulls were a 1-man team because they were a 1-man team - no one was thinking about 30 years later - they were simply a 1-man team, so they were called a 1-man team.. But once the Bulls shocked everyone and proved everyone wrong by destroying the Lakers, the media wanted to call it a team effort.. this was hard because they had always called the Bulls a 1-man show previously, and they also didn't know how to praise Pippen (so they latched on to his defense)

That's the way you work here Bizarro. So Klutch got together at recess to make this future investment?

The media didn't know how to report Scottie? Crack head. Scottie put up 18, 7 and 6 on 52%, made all defensive 2nd team and tied Mj in dpoy votes. In the playoffs he upped it to 21, 9, and 6 on 50% the Bulls weren't a one man team anymore. Thats the reason it was reported that way. Last thought: you believe the media spun a narrative about Pippens 91 season to avoid saying Mj won as a one man show, yet you fail to beleive this same media is capable of creating any narratives to serve Mj as the face of the NBA? Crack. Is. Whack.

[3ba11]

That's the way you work here Bizarro. So Klutch got together at recess to make this future investment?

The media didn't know how to report Scottie? Crack head. Scottie put up 18, 7 and 6 on 52%, made all defensive 2nd team and tied Mj in dpoy votes. In the playoffs he upped it to 21, 9, and 6 on 50% the Bulls weren't a one man team anymore. Thats the reason it was reported that way. Last thought: you believe the media spun a narrative about Pippens 91 season to avoid saying Mj won as a one man show, yet you fail to beleive this same media is capable of creating any narratives to serve Mj as the face of the NBA? Crack. Is. Whack.


Actually, the media and everyone (even you) has always reported the Bulls as a 1-man show OFFENSIVELY, but falsely implies that Pippen's defense somehow makes up it..

So after someone says Pippen was aids offensively and just flow scorer or dunker that didn't require game-planning or scouting report, the response is always "b-b-but defense" as if that makes up for historically-bad offense - if AD averaged 15-20 ppg on weak efficiency like Pippen did in 5 of 6 Finals, no amount of defense would matter - it simply wouldn't be enough help because Lebron cannot carry the scoring load or perform in the clutch like MJ.. We already know that Lebron is too ball-dominant at carry-job volume so he needs teammates to match and offset his scoring.

Regarding the clutch - Lebron's vastly inferior clutch performance is not only seen in scoring, but also inferior clutch efficiency and turnovers - Lebron loses all the close games that MJ wins due to these factors.. In addition to being better at carrying the scoring load, another reason that Jordan wins with just 15-20 with bad efficiency from Pippen is because his skillset develops superior chemistry that makes up for Pippen's deficit..

[sdot_thadon]

Actually, the media and everyone (even you) has always reported the Bulls as a 1-man show OFFENSIVELY, but falsely implies that Pippen's defense somehow makes up it..

So after someone says Pippen was aids offensively and just flow scorer or dunker that didn't require game-planning or scouting report, the response is always "b-b-but defense" as if that makes up for historically-bad offense - if AD averaged 15-20 ppg on weak efficiency like Pippen did in 5 of 6 Finals, no amount of defense would matter - it simply wouldn't be enough help because Lebron cannot carry the scoring load or perform in the clutch like MJ.. We already know that Lebron is too ball-dominant at carry-job volume so he needs teammates to match and offset his scoring.

Regarding the clutch - Lebron's vastly inferior clutch performance is not only seen in scoring, but also inferior clutch efficiency and turnovers - Lebron loses all the close games that MJ wins due to these factors.. In addition to being better at carrying the scoring load, another reason that Jordan wins with just 15-20 with bad efficiency from Pippen is because his skillset develops superior chemistry that makes up for Pippen's deficit..

If I ever thought Mjs Bulls were a one-man team it was when I was a child. Before my understanding of the game expanded past "how many points Jordan got?" This era has undoubtedly the smartest fans we've ever seen because of the amount of info and tape they have access to, we just had highlights on the 9 o'clock news and a newspaper summary the next morning if we were lucky. You can only see the game so far in depth with no data.

Nobody says "Scottie's offense was aids" but an idiot like yourself from a specific old message board. Scottie offense was good enough to hang around 50% from the field for the 1st 3peat. And you're absolutely correct this old man version of Lebron that's played for LA he last couple of years can't carry that sort of load, but prime Lebron? He'd do it blindfolded. Never forget he's got the most playoff gamewinners ever, is the best elimination game player ever, and has some of the best clutch moments in the history of the game. Mj is unquestionably clutch, but so is Bron.

[3ba11]

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

[3ba11]

Nobody says "Scottie's offense was aids"





They don't say "aids" but they say "garbage", or "trash", or "choker", or "overrated", or "migraine", or "can't hit the broadside of a barn", or "can't score", or "potty-pippen", or "ghost-pippen", or "i forgot he was out there pippen"

things like that






Scottie offense was good enough to hang around 50% from the field for the 1st 3peat





Let's see if that's true:



91' Finals......... 45.3 fg.... 52.7 ts... 107 ortg
92' Finals......... 48.4 fg.... 56.1 ts... 102 ortg
93' Finals......... 43.9 fg.... 46.9 ts..... 97 ortg

91' Playoffs...... 50.4 fg.... 56.4 ts... 114 ortg
92' Playoffs...... 46.8 fg.... 54.4 ts... 112 ortg
93' Playoffs...... 46.5 fg.... 50.4 ts... 102 ortg


Looks like it never happened in the Finals and only 1 title run, just like I said - and we know the 2nd three-peat efficiency numbers are literally the worst of all-time (see previous post).

So again, if AD averaged 15-20 ppg on weak efficiency like Pippen did, no amount of defense would matter - it simply wouldn't be enough help because Lebron cannot carry the scoring load or perform in the clutch like MJ..

We already know that Lebron is too ball-dominant at carry-job volume so he needs teammates to match and offset his scoring.






Mj is unquestionably clutch, but so is Bron.





It's a statistical fact that Lebron is a choker compared to MJ because there's a formula for choke factor..

Choke factor = efficiency on regular shots - efficiency on game-winners

MJ had zero choke factor because his efficiency on game-winners was the same as his regular efficiency of 50%... Otoh, Lebron only shoots 37% on game-winners but shoots 55% normally on all his ball-dominant drives, so that's a massive choke factor of around 18 percentage points..

Lebron is also 0-7 on game-winners in the Finals and has never scored on the last possession of a 1-possession game in the Finals - that is a horrific record of clutch compared to goats like MJ, Bird, Duncan, etc.

[3ba11]

Btw, the worst-ever efficiency shown by Pippen in the previous posts is particularly egregious because pippen was primarily a DUNKER

[gbaLL]

mr alex = DRU

[Carbine]

I just need one rebuttle here from 3ball.

Since Pippens offense is often the main critique please explain this to me and give me an example of another clear #2 option doing this in a playoff championship run.

Pippen in 91 playoffs:

First round Pippen outscored Knicks #1 option

Second round Pippen was outscored by only 2ppg by Barkley, the best offensive PF of his era. Pippen destroyed the #2 option on Philly in scoring.

Third round Pippen outscored Pistons #1 option

Finals Pippen outscored #1 option from Lakers

In conclusion, Pippen outscored another teams #1 option in three of the four series and was ONLY 2ppg behind Barkley, the goat offensive PF in the other series.

Find me another example in the history of championship teams where a #2 sidekick performed like that scoring wise in comparison to other teams #1 options. Thanks

[1987_Lakers]

91' Finals

93' Finals

98' Finals

and maybe even the 93' ECF

95' 2nd Round

I've never seen confirmation of the odds on any of these series

regardless, everyone thought the Lakers' experience and depth would beat the newbie Bulls and their 1-man team, as shown in the OP and many other sources (including myself)

Also found this regarding the 1993 Finals

NBA Finals (vs Chicago Bulls) [Lost 2-4]: Bulls -240/+190

Although the Suns came into this series having home-court with the best record in the league, the Bulls still were favorites to win the series with the market giving them a 70% chance at winning the title.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/phoenix-suns-nba-finals-betting-history-charles-barkley-chris-paul

3ball wrong again

[sdot_thadon]

Btw, the worst-ever efficiency shown by Pippen in the previous posts is particularly egregious because pippen was primarily a DUNKER

You've got worse questions to answer a couple of posts above mine for sure. But yeah Scottie wad primarily a dunker taking up to 6 3s a game in the 2nd 3peat. 6 3s a game.....in the 90s.

You've been spanked so many different ways over Lebron on this board I shouldn't even bother. Just always remember Lebron has the most playoff gamewinners ever. Just remember he's also got the greatest comeback ever. He's the greatest elimination game scorer/performer ever. And he's more clutch in the postseason than anyone else from his era bar none. If you think Mj is more clutch? That's OK can't fault you. But choker? Lebrons blew past that narrative so many years ago yoh sound like a window-licking caveman even bringing it up. Also Scottie "shoulda been fmvp" pippen is a nickname you forgot to say.

[3ba11]

Also found this regarding the 1993 Finals

NBA Finals (vs Chicago Bulls) [Lost 2-4]: Bulls -240/+190

Although the Suns came into this series having home-court with the best record in the league, the Bulls still were favorites to win the series with the market giving them a 70% chance at winning the title.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/phoenix-suns-nba-finals-betting-history-charles-barkley-chris-paul

3ball wrong again


Again, the Vegas odds frequently don't reflect the general consensus by fans, players, coaches and media

The general consensus was that the Lakers' experience and depth would beat the newbie Bulls and their 1-man team - the commentary between Marv and Fratello shows this pretty clearly...

And also I remember that series - everyone thought the Lakers would win and it was a surprise when the ship starting sinking and sinking fast - anyone that watched the series would tell you this.

[sdot_thadon]

Again, the Vegas odds frequently don't reflect the general consensus by fans, players, coaches and media

The general consensus was that the Lakers' experience and depth would beat the newbie Bulls and their 1-man team - the commentary between Marv and Fratello as the Bulls are celebrating on the court shows this...

And also I remember that series - everyone thought the Lakers would win and it was a surprise when the ship starting sinking and sinking fast - anyone that watched the series would tell you this.

Helluva backpedal on this punk.

[3ba11]

Helluva backpedal on this punk.


i didn't post the vegas odds in the OP - i posted the more relevant general consensus of media, fans, players and coaches..

you guys brought up vegas odds for some reason.. but vegas odds for a single series mean little - only trends matter.. such as a trend of consistent underdog status on the championship level despite 2 all-star teammates and confirmed favored talent (preseason favorites).. Or when a player loses as the favorite for three straight years, this means more than a one-off and probably means something - it could be interpreted many ways, such as a team's brand of ball failing to match it's on-paper talent.

[1987_Lakers]

Again, the Vegas odds frequently don't reflect the general consensus by fans, players, coaches and media

Yet, you use Preseason Vegas odds to prove your point at times.

[1987_Lakers]

Helluva backpedal on this punk.

https://media.tenor.com/9z7a8JLxxPIAAAAM/all-done-wipe-hands.gif

[3ba11]

Yet, you use Preseason Vegas odds to prove your point at times.


I don't talk about vegas odds for a single series because that means little - I talk about odds in the context of trends - trends are what you can draw conclusions from...

For example, a trend of consistent underdog status on the championship level despite 2 all-star teammates and confirmed favored talent (preseason favorites) would indicate weak chemistry or brand of ball that counters the talent edge.... Or when a player loses as the favorite for three straight years, this means more than a one-off and probably means something - it could be interpreted many ways, such as a team's brand of ball failing to match it's on-paper talent.

[3ba11]

https://media.tenor.com/9z7a8JLxxPIAAAAM/all-done-wipe-hands.gif


:no:... i didn't post the vegas odds in the OP or bring them up - you did - i posted the more relevant general consensus of media, fans, players and coaches..

[1987_Lakers]

I don't talk about vegas odds for a single series because that means little



Bird was a winner on the championship level, and Bird also beat Magic as a big underdog in 1984 and it was historic - a GOAT Finals - Bird turned Magic into "Tragic" Johnson

Bird also defeated max defensive attention in that series (carried scoring load on championship level), which is rare.... In order to carry the scoring load and win, it requires great brand of ball at carry-job volume - jumpshooters maintain sufficient brand at carry-job volume, so they can carry the scoring load and win with less help, while ball-dominators lack sufficient brand at carry-job volume, so they need all-time scoring help.

You sure about that?

I corrected you that Bird was actually a Vegas favorite that year and your excuse for lying was "It was a typo". So you know damn well you were referring to the Vegas odds.

[Carbine]

Here are cold hard facts about Pippens scoring in relation to his peers during playoff series of the entire 6 playoff runs that resulted in titles.

Pippen outscored the other #1 option 8/24 series (33 percent of the time)

Pippen outscored the second leading scorer from the other team 11/24 times

Pippen was outscored by the other teams #2 scorer 5/24 times

This is damning evidence against the entire notion of Pippens scoring was trash. If his scoring was trash, so were the opponents #1 and #2 scorers of the Bulls during those six title runs.

This isn't mentioning Pippens impact on the boards, assists and defensively. The gap between other teams #1 and #2 scorers and Pippen would obviously widen in Pippens favor of those are factored into the equation for each series.

[3ba11]

You sure about that?


Again, odds for a single series are never that important, which is why my mention of the odds was a tertiary point - not even close to the main thing.. so nice try but no

the main point was that Bird defeated max defensive attention in that series (carried scoring load on championship level), which Lebron couldn't do.. And we know why Lebron can't carry the scoring load on the championship level - it's because he's too ball-dominant at carry-job volume and therefore lacks sufficient brand of ball to beat top teams when he has to score too much..

That's why he needs equal scoring partners and cannot carry the scoring load on championship level (defeat max defensive attention) or carry weak help over top teams (beat top 5 SRS or Finals teams with weak scoring & efficiency from a sidekick)

carry on

[1987_Lakers]

Again, odds for a single series are never that important, which is why my mention of the odds was a tertiary point - not even close to the main thing.. so nice try but no

the main point was that Bird defeated max defensive attention in that series (carried scoring load on championship level), which Lebron couldn't do.. And we know why Lebron can't carry the scoring load on the championship level - it's because he's too ball-dominant at carry-job volume and therefore lacks sufficient brand of ball to beat top teams when he has to score too much..

That's why he needs equal scoring partners and cannot carry the scoring load on championship level (defeat max defensive attention) or carry weak help over top teams (beat top 5 SRS or Finals teams with weak scoring & efficiency from a sidekick)

carry on

So back then when I corrected you about '84, it was a "typo" "mistake", but now it's "I was referring to SRS".

:lol

[3ba11]

Here are cold hard facts about Pippens scoring in relation to his peers during playoff series of the entire 6 playoff runs that resulted in titles.

Pippen outscored the other #1 option 8/24 series (33 percent of the time)

Pippen outscored the second leading scorer from the other team 11/24 times

Pippen was outscored by the other teams #2 scorer 5/24 times

This is damning evidence against the entire notion of Pippens scoring was trash. If his scoring was trash, so were the opponents #1 and #2 scorers of the Bulls during those six title runs.

This isn't mentioning Pippens impact on the boards, assists and defensively. The gap between other teams #1 and #2 scorers and Pippen would obviously widen in Pippens favor of those are factored into the equation for each series.



^^^ long debunked.. I'll do it again with the facts and numbers.

In the 92' WCF, Terry Porter averaged 26/4/8 with 53% three-point shooting on 6 attempts to carry the Blazers to the Finals.. He had been playing at this level the entire playoffs but then he collapsed in the face of Jordan's onslaught in the Finals - he expended so much more energy defensively that his offense collapsed to 16 ppg on horrific efficiency.. Night and day from his previous series - a totally different player.

This was the standard for Jordan's entire playoff career against most opposing guards - they played like dogshit against him.

So your point about Pippen outscoring the 2nd-leading scorer on the other team his has been debunked many times by the massive trend of opposing guards massively-underperforming against MJ compared to their normal level - when you look at who Pippen outscored, it's usually guards that were underperforming against MJ like Dumars, Isiah, Price, Harper, Porter, Majerle, Starks, Steve Smith, Stockton, Hornacek or Penny - these were most of the 2nd-leading scorers that he outscored.. Otherwise, he was outscored by the majority of forwards he faced in his career - he was destroyed by his own matchup like Aguirre, Nance, Johnny Newman, X-Man, Dominique, Larry Johnson, Detlef Schrempf, Juwan Howard, Tracy Murray, Glen Rice, and more.

Again, Pippen was nothing outside of the robotic role that he took years to learn in the triangle - he was mostly a dunker and incapable of 30-point playoff games, so he had the lowest peak capability of any notable sidekick.. This low peak capability meant that he wasn't on scouting report, so MJ had to defeat max defensive attention (carry scoring load).. Furthermore, most 1st options enjoyed all-time floor generals like Stockton, Payton, KJ or Hardaway getting 10 APG, while MJ had to tolerate Pippen's 5 APG.. So Pippen had the worst passing, efficiency, clutch and peak capability of any notable 90's sidekick..

MJ won with a historic lane-clogger/bricklayer and mental case at sidekick, who was also a low-producer that couldn't "take over" like other sidekicks.. Most 90's sidekicks were 1b's like Porter, Payton or Worthy that could take over series and play at an elite 1st option level - Pippen is the only guy that was more of a dunker and wasn't a viable option in the clutch or 4th quarters or even 2nd halves.

[Carbine]

Thank you

[SouBeachTalents]

I just need one rebuttle here from 3ball.

Since Pippens offense is often the main critique please explain this to me and give me an example of another clear #2 option doing this in a playoff championship run.

Pippen in 91 playoffs:

First round Pippen outscored Knicks #1 option

Second round Pippen was outscored by only 2ppg by Barkley, the best offensive PF of his era. Pippen destroyed the #2 option on Philly in scoring.

Third round Pippen outscored Pistons #1 option

Finals Pippen outscored #1 option from Lakers

In conclusion, Pippen outscored another teams #1 option in three of the four series and was ONLY 2ppg behind Barkley, the goat offensive PF in the other series.

Find me another example in the history of championship teams where a #2 sidekick performed like that scoring wise in comparison to other teams #1 options. Thanks
3ball didn't even try to address this, skipped right over it and pretended he didn't see it :lol

[3ba11]

Thank you


Pippen put all the attention on MJ because he couldn't "take over" and produce at an elite level like other sidekicks:


* In the 1990 2nd Round, KJ upset the 1-seeded Lakers by averaging 23/12, and then he had two 7-seven-game wars against Hakeem in 94' and 95' with averages of 28/4/9 each time.. (an underperforming barkley is the only thing that stopped the suns from winning those series)

* Worthy averaged 30 on 62% in the 87' WCF and 25 on 57% for that title run to lead the Lakers, while leading the Lakers in scoring each year for the 87-91' Playoffs and winning FMVP in 1988

* Stockton was equal-scoring partner with Malone and averaged 21/11 in the 97' WCF along with the historic series walk-off in Barkley's face

* Payton and Kemp took turns as #1 option and dominated many series to a far greater extent than Pippen - Kemp took FMVP votes from Jordan and Payton could average 24-25 ppg while having more all-defense and all-nba than Pippen

* Porter led the Blazers to the 90' and 92' Finals - he was amazing in both Western Conference Playoffs - far better than Pippen ever played



Remember that Pippen simply learned a role within a system - he was mostly just a dunker and nothing outside the system (easily worse than prime Jeff Green outside the system)

[AirBonner]

24 Celtics > 91 Bulls

[ShawkFactory]

I just need one rebuttle here from 3ball.

Since Pippens offense is often the main critique please explain this to me and give me an example of another clear #2 option doing this in a playoff championship run.

Pippen in 91 playoffs:

First round Pippen outscored Knicks #1 option

Second round Pippen was outscored by only 2ppg by Barkley, the best offensive PF of his era. Pippen destroyed the #2 option on Philly in scoring.

Third round Pippen outscored Pistons #1 option

Finals Pippen outscored #1 option from Lakers

In conclusion, Pippen outscored another teams #1 option in three of the four series and was ONLY 2ppg behind Barkley, the goat offensive PF in the other series.

Find me another example in the history of championship teams where a #2 sidekick performed like that scoring wise in comparison to other teams #1 options. Thanks

Damn :applause:

I’d imagine the only other time this has happened would be Kobe maybe in 02? I haven’t looked it up but I do know Duncan went off in their series that year so maybe not.

[Carbine]

Kobe in 2001 was only outscored by Iverson in the finals. He outscored the other teams #1 scorer in the other three, and in two of them scored more than Shaq.

He also repeated that feat in 2002.

This is why a lot of people have a problem with not giving Kobe that much credit for those titles (2001 and 2002) because he really played top tier basketball. He played like a top 3 player in the world overall and in many series played like the best player in the world.

[sdot_thadon]

They don't say "aids" but they say "garbage", or "trash", or "choker", or "overrated", or "migraine", or "can't hit the broadside of a barn", or "can't score", or "potty-pippen", or "ghost-pippen", or "i forgot he was out there pippen"

things like that






Let's see if that's true:



91' Finals......... 45.3 fg.... 52.7 ts... 107 ortg
92' Finals......... 48.4 fg.... 56.1 ts... 102 ortg
93' Finals......... 43.9 fg.... 46.9 ts..... 97 ortg

91' Playoffs...... 50.4 fg.... 56.4 ts... 114 ortg
92' Playoffs...... 46.8 fg.... 54.4 ts... 112 ortg
93' Playoffs...... 46.5 fg.... 50.4 ts... 102 ortg


Looks like it never happened in the Finals and only 1 title run, just like I said - and we know the 2nd three-peat efficiency numbers are literally the worst of all-time (see previous post).

So again, if AD averaged 15-20 ppg on weak efficiency like Pippen did, no amount of defense would matter - it simply wouldn't be enough help because Lebron cannot carry the scoring load or perform in the clutch like MJ..

We already know that Lebron is too ball-dominant at carry-job volume so he needs teammates to match and offset his scoring.






It's a statistical fact that Lebron is a choker compared to MJ because there's a formula for choke factor..

Choke factor = efficiency on regular shots - efficiency on game-winners

MJ had zero choke factor because his efficiency on game-winners was the same as his regular efficiency of 50%... Otoh, Lebron only shoots 37% on game-winners but shoots 55% normally on all his ball-dominant drives, so that's a massive choke factor of around 18 percentage points..

Lebron is also 0-7 on game-winners in the Finals and has never scored on the last possession of a 1-possession game in the Finals - that is a horrific record of clutch compared to goats like MJ, Bird, Duncan, etc.

Of course you'd cherry pick the stats to your desired narrative and much smaller sample size.

Regular season 3peat sample size

1991: 17.8ppg on 52%
1992: 21ppg on 50.6%
1993: 18.6ppg on 47%

For an average of 49.9% from the field. I know you're not the sharpest but that's "around 50%" like I stated. Even if you're hard up on using the playoff numbers it's an average of 47.9 for the 2nd 3 peat, which is also pretty close to 50% scumbag.

And just for shits and giggles
1994, as the man: 22ppg on 49%

[3ba11]

Of course you'd cherry pick the stats to your desired narrative and much smaller sample size.

Regular season 3peat sample size

1991: 17.8ppg on 52%
1992: 21ppg on 50.6%
1993: 18.6ppg on 47%

For an average of 49.9% from the field. I know you're not the sharpest but that's "around 50%" like I stated. Even if you're hard up on using the playoff numbers it's an average of 47.9 for the 2nd 3 peat, which is also pretty close to 50% scumbag.

And just for shits and giggles
1994, as the man: 22ppg on 49%


So you want to focus on 2 seasons of his regular season career because I was right about him having bad efficiency in the playoffs (worst-ever) - got it

And 22 ppg of system points is a horrible peak capability... Imagine if AD's peak capability as #1 option was 22 ppg - that would be laughable - Larry Hughes did that with 1st team defense in 2005 right before joining Lebron and getting turned into a spot-up shooter..

The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas received a player that was performing at a prime Pippen level on both sides of the ball, yet they couldn't get anywhere near a title, let alone a 3-peat.

[sdot_thadon]

So you want to focus on 2 seasons of his regular season career because I was right about him having bad efficiency in the playoffs (worst-ever) - got it

And 22 ppg of system points is a horrible peak capability... Imagine if AD's peak capability as #1 option was 22 ppg - that would be laughable - Larry Hughes did that with 1st team defense in 2005 right before joining Lebron and getting turned into a spot-up shooter..

The all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas received a player that was performing at a prime Pippen level on both sides of the ball, yet they couldn't get anywhere near a title, let alone a 3-peat.

AD's peak capability as no.1 option in 6 seasons was 48 wins, less wins than Pippen's 55 in 1994. Hughes is the absolute stupidest tag line you've held onto. Hughes put up similar numbers on far worse efficiency 39%, 43% from the field? On similar attempts as a supporting player as what Scottie took as the main man. Oh yeah and tell me how many wins super Hughes helped the wizards to....that will be fun. And Hughes was selected all defense one time. For Pippen this was yearly. All nba and all D. Not even a comparison.

[SouBeachTalents]

3ball didn't even try to address this, skipped right over it and pretended he didn't see it :lol
Yep, had NO answers for this :lol Will continue to pretend he doesn’t see this lol

[sdot_thadon]

Yep, had NO answers for this :lol Will continue to pretend he doesn’t see this lol

He skips any posts that he's dead to rights in.

[SouBeachTalents]

He skips any posts that he's dead to rights in.
https://i.giphy.com/6XA99Q0nPSXyU.webp

[3ba11]

3ball didn't even try to address this, skipped right over it and pretended he didn't see it :lol


look up "one-off" in the dictionary - it's a word - it exists

every other year of Pippen's career was marked with bed-wetting, such as 1988, 1989, 1990 ECF, 1992 ECSF (X-Man debacle), 1993 1st Round (Dominique debacle), 93' Finals (0% from three, 59% FT, 46.9 TS), 94' ECSF (historic chokes and outplayed by Ewing), 1995 (19 on 40% vs Orlando), 96' Finals (15.7 on 34%), 97' 1st Round (outplayed by Howard & Murray), 97' Finals (3 APG and 4 TO's.. 19 on 42%.. zero clutch pts), 98' ECF (16 on 39% - choke at end of Game 4 right before Miller's shot over MJ), 98' Finals (15.7 on 41%), 99' 1st Round (18 on 32%), 00' WCF (goat choke in Game 7), 01-03 (89th option)

[1987_Lakers]

Thread cliffs

3ball dodged 1987_Lakers & Carbine

[3ba11]

Thank you


:confusedshrug:

[3ba11]

Thread cliffs

3ball dodged 1987_Lakers & Carbine


Huh?



Thank you


:confusedshrug:

[eliteballer]

Joke thread

91 Lakers weren't even supposed to make the Finals, and Scott and Worthy were playing injured.

[3ba11]

Joke thread

91 Lakers weren't even supposed to make the Finals,


That's exactly like the 2024 Mavs - no one thought they would win until they started romping through the Western playoffs, which made everyone think they would beat the Celtics just like everyone thought the GOAT Magic would obviously win another title like always against a newbie, 1-star opponent

[Da_Realist]

The Bulls started off slow that season but throughout February and March they separated themselves and made it clear they were the best team in the East at least. They looked unbeatable for a while.
But there was still that lingering question of whether they could actually beat the Pistons. Nothing they did in the regular season mattered. Only the Pistons and only in the playoffs. They went on a serious roll in the playoffs leading to Detroit. Just before the series it was reported that MJ had a groin injury. I remember talking to one of my guys about it, hoping it didn't hinder the Bulls in any way. (I still remember that conversation in front of his house. That guy passed away earlier this year.)
The Bulls won a defensive struggle in Game 1 and won again in Game 2. Game 3 is when they broke the Pistons back. Game 4 was a formality. More of a statement, actually.

In the West, Portland was considered the best team in the league because they had the best record. They had the same questions hovering over their heads about the Lakers that the Bulls had with the Pistons. Except the Lakers size and experience was too much for Portland when they faced off. Portland's lack of a dependable half court game and inability to seize the moment was exposed. Just like in 1990 Finals against Detroit. (And 1992 against Chicago...which should have been a sweep. Chicago coughed up games 2 and 4) In other words, Chicago earned their championship mettle during their battles with Detroit but Portland didn't grow in the same way in their battles against LA & Detroit. Portland got through in 1992 because Magic was gone.

The expectation was that Magic and the Lakers would do the same to Chicago that they did to Portland. I remember USA Today gave the Lakers the edge for those reasons. But Chicago was not like Portland at all. None of the Bulls had championship experience but they played like an experienced team, staying focused on running the offense, playing great defense on every possession, winning in the margins. They were a young team with athleticism playing like an experienced veteran team. They were essentially Portland (youth and athleticism) combined with Detroit (experience, focus, maximizing every opportunity) with of course MJ playing at a level very few have reached.

[SouBeachTalents]

The Bulls started off slow that season but throughout February and March they separated themselves and made it clear they were the best team in the East at least. They looked unbeatable for a while.
But there was still that lingering question of whether they could actually beat the Pistons. Nothing they did in the regular season mattered. Only the Pistons and only in the playoffs. They went on a serious roll in the playoffs leading to Detroit. Just before the series it was reported that MJ had a groin injury. I remember talking to one of my guys about it, hoping it didn't hinder the Bulls in any way. (I still remember that conversation in front of his house. That guy passed away earlier this year.)
The Bulls won a defensive struggle in Game 1 and won again in Game 2. Game 3 is when they broke the Pistons back. Game 4 was a formality. More of a statement, actually.

In the West, Portland was considered the best team in the league because they had the best record. They had the same questions hovering over their heads about the Lakers that the Bulls had with the Pistons. Except the Lakers size and experience was too much for Portland when they faced off. Portland's lack of a dependable half court game and inability to seize the moment was exposed. Just like in 1990 Finals against Detroit. (And 1992 against Chicago...which should have been a sweep. Chicago coughed up games 2 and 4) In other words, Chicago earned their championship mettle during their battles with Detroit but Portland didn't grow in the same way in their battles against LA & Detroit. Portland got through in 1992 because Magic was gone.

The expectation was that Magic and the Lakers would do the same to Chicago that they did to Portland. I remember USA Today gave the Lakers the edge for those reasons. But Chicago was not like Portland at all. None of the Bulls had championship experience but they played like an experienced team, staying focused on running the offense, playing great defense on every possession, winning in the margins. They were a young team with athleticism playing like an experienced veteran team. They were essentially Portland (youth and athleticism) combined with Detroit (experience, focus, maximizing every opportunity) with of course MJ playing at a level very few have reached.
1-9

[3ba11]

But Chicago was not like Portland at all.





Chicago was massively less talented than Portland - many people have said that Luka lost because of massive deficits at the 3 thru 7 spots, but that's exactly how the GOAT won 6 of 6 Finals - the Bulls' had a deficit at those spots in most series, let alone the Finals, and their deficit during the 92' Finals was bigger than the deficit that the 24' Mavs had to the Celtics:




1992 Finals

3. Kersey 14.8
4. Robinson 10.3
5. Ainge 10.0
6. Duckworth 9.3
7. Williams 7.8
________________
52.2 of 96.7 (53.9%)


3. Paxson 10.3
4. Grant 9.2
5. Cartwright 6.3
6. Armstrong 5.8
7. Williams 5.5
________________
37.1 of 104.0 (35.6%)


GAP: 18.3 percentage points



2024 FINALS

3. Holiday 14.4
4. White 13.8
5. Porzingas 12.3
6. Hauser 8.2
7. Horford 7.0
________________
55.7 of 101.6 (54.8%)


3. Washington 10.8
4. Gafford 8.0
5. Jones Jr. 6.6
6. Lively 5.6
7. Green 5.4
________________
36.4 points of 99.2 (36.7%)


GAP: 17.9 percentage points