Scottie Pippen appreciation thread.

So how much is 50 wins in 1988 worth in the uncompetitive 90's? 60? :eek: Jordan with 2 years experience in the league could have led a 90's team to 60 wins! :oldlol:

1988: Pippen and Grant :cheers:


:oldlol: Jordan must have put a bug in your panties. I know you were [I]miserable[/I] in the 90's! Barkley quitting on the Sixers. Spitting on little girls. Throwing dudes out of windows. Couldn't get it done with the Suns.


[B]Barkley did not quit on the Sixers the coach traded him because his team sucked. Period.

^^ :oldlol:

Anyway...back to Pippen.

[QUOTE=Da_Realist][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd3AZdmHSIQ"]Scottie Pippen: A Tribute Part 2[/URL][/QUOTE]

Focused on his defense in this video and tried to show his versatility.

woulda won w/o jordan if they haddent melted down in the 4th in 200

as a fan of the rockets, there's nothing for me to appreciate about quitten. he's my most hated rocket ever besides matt maloney and eddie griffin. i did like him as a bull, though and thought he never got enough credit for the numerous attributes he brought to the table.

his leadership was always ignored. him and jordan were polar opposites on that end. jordan was willing to cut your throat, do anything to fire you up and prove him wrong. pippen was more like "cry on my shoulder" type in the sense where he'd maintain chemistry with his teammates and boost their confidence. only time where this didn't happen was that infamous play with kukoc in '94.

i thought of him as a glue guy who kept things together. he'd have a great impact on the game even if he had a terrible shooting night just because of how dominant he was on defense.

^
As a big Charles Barkley fan, I hated Pippen for his disastrous performance in Houston.

After that I always had this impression of Pippen as a pain in the ass until I read some of Phil's books and started researching for my own.

I always loved his game and used to be one of the guys saying he was more valuable than Jordan when I was younger, but that was because I hated Jordan because he dethroned my Pistons.

A lot of his teammates really seem to adore him. Bill Wennington even called his leadership as or more important than MJ's. (Thanks again Jlip for the heads up) I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt during his Chicago years, but between the Houston debacle, the Portland years and the infamous final play for Kukoc, I think it might be safe to say Pip was a bit of a front runner.

:applause: :applause: :applause: Scottie Pippen top 10 player of all time.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]What about LBJ

He's a better scorer, rebounder and passer than Pippen and he became an elite defender at a younger age?

Kobe has never come close to MJ;s MVP's or scoring titles. He's a poor mans Jordan in that sense.

[B]I'd say Kobe is more comparable to Pippen, have been the sidekick[/B] and top perimeter defender for a three-peat Champion, than Michael who won five MVP's to Kobe's one and Six titles as the #1 option to Kobe's two.[/QUOTE]

Are you an idiot?

Scottie with a courageous effort to help the Bulls win title #6

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzP8yGB8f94"]Scottie Pippen vs Utah 1998 NBA Finals Game 6[/URL]

Great player but overrated. What people overlook is that he actually declined pretty early, already averaging only 39%, 42%, and 41% in the playoffs during the last 3-peat when he was only 30-32.

[B]Pippen was the Best SF along Grant Hill in the 90s[/B]

who bumped?


Negged

[QUOTE=Fatal9]Look all great players have a positive impact on one another but this "MJ made Pippen into an all-star" nonsense really has to stop...

He was a top 5 draft pick, Bulls were aware of the skill set he possessed and traded for him. He played PG most of his life before a growth spurt and developed his court vision and ball handling skills then. He averaged 3 spg in college (more than MJ btw), had great team defense instincts as early as his rookie season. Pippen did what all players do, get better as he gained more experience. Phil is the one who helped his game more than anyone by putting him in an offensive system that would suited his strengths - though a more uptempo style might have been even better. MJ definitely made him a better individual defender, increased his bball IQ but other than that, I'm not seeing it. And like I said, I'm not sure he helped Pip's game more than Phil did.

MJ wasn't taking Scottie's jumpers at the gym for him, MJ didn't make him talented enough to be taken top 5 in a draft, MJ didn't give him his unique all-around skill-set that he developed due to his PG background, MJ didn't give him the work ethic which Scottie used to rise from being a team manager at the start of college to being one of the top prospects in the draft after college. I know it's easy to look back through homer-vision and rewrite history but do you really need to MJ to take credit for everything? He made him a better player. Just like Pippen made MJ a better player by giving the ball to him in the right spots, giving him rest by taking a defensive assignment if he was tired or was in foul trouble, by facilitating the team's offense and getting teammates involved so MJ wouldn't have to worry about it.

It's shameful these dudes on here can't even give him credit for becoming the player he became, because once again "it was all MJ". How many other guys did MJ play with over the course of his career? Why didn't he "make them"?


Dominique won 50 that year with about the same level of help. Almost took down the Celtics too. Where's his medal? :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

great post

[QUOTE=kizut1659]Great player but overrated. What people overlook is that he actually declined pretty early, already averaging only 39%, 42%, and 41% in the playoffs during the last 3-peat when he was only 30-32.[/QUOTE]
All you did is looked at his stats on bball reference. Everybody has had bad shooting playoffs. Larry bird shot 42 and 43% at 24 and 25. Which is atrocious given the era.

You obviously don't know what the hell your talking about

[QUOTE]Originally Posted by Fatal9
Look all great players have a positive impact on one another but this "MJ made Pippen into an all-star" nonsense really has to stop...

He was a top 5 draft pick, Bulls were aware of the skill set he possessed and traded for him. He played PG most of his life before a growth spurt and developed his court vision and ball handling skills then. He averaged 3 spg in college (more than MJ btw), had great team defense instincts as early as his rookie season. Pippen did what all players do, get better as he gained more experience. Phil is the one who helped his game more than anyone by putting him in an offensive system that would suited his strengths - though a more uptempo style might have been even better. MJ definitely made him a better individual defender, increased his bball IQ but other than that, I'm not seeing it. And like I said, I'm not sure he helped Pip's game more than Phil did.

MJ wasn't taking Scottie's jumpers at the gym for him, MJ didn't make him talented enough to be taken top 5 in a draft, MJ didn't give him his unique all-around skill-set that he developed due to his PG background, MJ didn't give him the work ethic which Scottie used to rise from being a team manager at the start of college to being one of the top prospects in the draft after college. I know it's easy to look back through homer-vision and rewrite history but do you really need to MJ to take credit for everything? He made him a better player. Just like Pippen made MJ a better player by giving the ball to him in the right spots, giving him rest by taking a defensive assignment if he was tired or was in foul trouble, by facilitating the team's offense and getting teammates involved so MJ wouldn't have to worry about it.

It's shameful these dudes on here can't even give him credit for becoming the player he became, because once again "it was all MJ". How many other guys did MJ play with over the course of his career? Why didn't he "make them"?


Dominique won 50 that year with about the same level of help. Almost took down the Celtics too. Where's his medal? [/QUOTE]

[B]this[/B]

an absolute beast in 1994...3rd in MVP votes...and led the Bull's to 55 wins with a CBA player replacing Jordan.

Scottie Pippen = top 5 player of the 90's...and one of the greatest of alltime

[QUOTE=97 bulls]All you did is looked at his stats on bball reference. Everybody has had bad shooting playoffs. Larry bird shot 42 and 43% at 24 and 25. Which is atrocious given the era.

You obviously don't know what the hell your talking about[/QUOTE]

I did not just look on bbal reference - i personal remember Pippen often playing subpar during the second 3-peat myself. . .bball reference just proved that my recollections are correct. With respect to Bird, that was slightly before his prime and the Celtics LOST in 1982 and 1983. . .the fact that the Bulls won in 1996 through 1998 despite Pippen's poor shooting percentage in my opinion shows how piss poor the league was during those years so that a second best player on a team can shoot so atrociously and yet the team can win 3 championships in a row. . .which in my opinion lowers the credit Pippen should receive from these last 3 championship.

Also, the shooting percentage shows how brief Pippen's prime really was - he was great in the playoffs from 1991-1993 as a perfect second banana, pretty good in 1994 playoffs as the "man" (but only shot 43%) had a weird 1995 series given Jordan's recent comeback, and then (in my opinion) declined in 1996. This is illustrated by his low shooting percentage in the playoffs not only during the last three peat but every year in Houstan and Portland as well (except the 3-game sweep in 2002.) Except for that sweep, Pippen never shot above 42% from 1996 through 2003. You can tell me I just got those numbers from NBA-Reference but ok, aren't those numbers reflective of something? How can one say the fact that Pippen shot [B]42% or lower in 6 out of 7 his last playoffs and 44% or lower in 8 out of his 9 last [/B] playoffs simply does not matter? Either his prime was brief or his chocked in the playoffs.