1994 Pippen should have been mvp

[QUOTE]No way in hell Simmons ranked Pippen over Hondo all-time. [/QUOTE]

He doesn't but everyone else does. The point wasn't Pippen vs. Hondo. The point was Hondo (aka the Pippen of his era) versus Drexler, Ewing, Payton, etc. I guess it is all rings driving him as well, right? Hondo is a great test case: Pippen by another name. As you noted, the only thing holding him back is era bias. Which means he should be around where Pippen is ranked...

[QUOTE]Do you honestly think Pippen, if not traded on draft day*, ends up in the 20-25 range?[/QUOTE]

You are falling into their trap. Why not ask this question of every player? It could go either way but impossible to know. What if Pippen has 10 years of a prime as the best player, wins a MVP, has a couple other MVP contending seasons, and his team wins a ring? I.e., a Dirk-like career trajectory or Wade. Or Harden's if he winds up with a ring like Dirk. Where does he rank then?

[QUOTE]if Jordan gets drafted by the Blazers and they win a few with Drexler[/QUOTE]

Drexler is a good test case. He actually [I]did[/I] win a ring and no one even remembers it. Go back to the Drexler threads a few weeks ago. His advocates kept pointing to the two finals he [I]lost[/I]. With fans at least, there is an obsession with "options" so losing in the NBA finals or even conference finals as the "#1", even a nominal #1 like Miller>winning rings as a #2.

MJ and Drexler played the same position. How would they mesh? Drexler hit his prime earlier (though he did nothing as a rookie, same as Pippen) than the younger Pippen but the flip side is he started breaking down earlier. So let's suppose Drexler is drafted in 1987 and that they somehow meshed as MJ and Jordan-lite. Both were on the bench as rookies. Pippen became a permanent starter 1/3 through his season year. Drexler started half the games in 88' and 58 in 89'. At any rate, both became all-stars in their third season (which would be 1990). Bulls with Drexler win in 1990, 1991, 1992...and then Drexler starts to decline...

This is where these scenarios get tricky. Drexler in 95' won with a lesser player than MJ--but MJ himself barely won with what by 93' was a better player than Drexler. It shows you it is a team sport. You can't just look at 2 players.

[QUOTE]Also I think Pippen benefited from the Jordan retirement personally. His worth got accepted way more by fans and pundits and being in the MVP mix was justified[/QUOTE]

That's one way to look at it. I agree that he benefited from it because he get proper recognition but the real question isn't the retirement per se but what if he had an entire prime away from MJ versus only 1 4/5 seasons (only 1 playoff run)?

[QUOTE]I doubt he's in the mix for MVP if he plays on the Sonics unless they develop they same way the did without him(balanced team with 60ish win seasons). Then I'd see him win one or two as he would definately be their best player.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, and he would wind up slightly ahead of where he is all-time now in that scenario with a MVP and "rings as the man." The anti-Pippen crowd only looks at downside variance.

There may be value in a ring or two as a "sidekick" but, as Kyrie understood, the value goes away. People don't distinguish between Pippen or Hondo's number and those of Worthy or Gasol or McHale. They all get a modicum of credit but fans give more credit to Ewing, Payton, Miller, Iverson for making *one* finals and losing as the best player.

Pippen without MJ is not top 20. He's literally only there because MJ made him better. Literally.

MJ is still the GOAT, and Pippen isn't top 10 in the 90's. Sorry.

[QUOTE=BigShotBob;14028586]MJ is still the GOAT, and Pippen isn't top 10 in the 90's. Sorry.[/QUOTE]

Where do you rank Pippen for the 90's? I had him 6th. What is your placement?

:lol at the MJ insecurity but that hints at the real agenda re Pippen (of course, none of these people are MJ fans! ).

Here are some others added (starting with Mourning).

Pippen: #21 ESPN, #22 Slam, #25 Backpicks, #24 Simmons
Ewing: #37 ESPN, #30 Slam, #28 Backpicks, #40 Simmons
Drexler: #57 ESPN, #43 Drexler Slam, #39 Backpicks, #44 Simmons
Miller: #49 ESPN, #55 Slam, #30 Backpicks, #63 Simmons
Wilkins: #46 ESPN, #41 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #55 Simmons
Worthy: #51 ESPN, #46 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #50 Simmons
Kemp: N/A ESPN, #100 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #88 Simmons
Robinson: #24 ESPN, #29 Slam, #15 Backpicks, #29 Simmons
Payton: #53 ESPN, #39 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #41 Simmons
Stockton: #28 ESPN, #25 Slam, #27 Stockton, #19 Stockton
Mourning: #63 on ESPN, #78 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
Dumars: N/A on ESPN, #83 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, #74 Simmons
McHale: #36 ESPN, #40 Slam, #38 Backpicks, #35 Simmons
T. Hardaway: N/A ESPN, #96 Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
K. Johnson: N/A ESPN, N/A Slam, N/A Backpicks, #96 Simmons
Mullin: N/A ESPN, #84 Slam, N/A BP, #82 Simmons

Somehow--according to the [I]real[/I] objective posters (no agenda!)--every single one of these players>>>>>Pippen yet somehow Pippen is ahead of all of them all-time. :lol

Here are the careers mapped out for the best of these players, year by year, with markers for different levels of play. It doesn't say anything about rings...note that Pippen's best years "happened" to be 1994 and 1995.

Here are his criteria:

[QUOTE]This list also [B]goes far beyond the box score[/B] — indeed, the box score is merely a reference for quantifying tendencies — so if you’re used to citing points per game and Win Shares, this will be a bit different.

Instead, [B]this is a career-value, or CORP list; it ranks the players who have provided the largest increase in the odds of a team winning championships over the course of their careers[/B]. This means that having great Finals moments or winning the hearts of fans with innovative passes is irrelevant. You can make a great list with those criteria, but that’s not what this exercise is intended to be.

[B]This list is really about evaluating players based on “goodness,” not merely situational value[/B]. (If David Robinson backed up the two best centers ever, he wouldn’t be very valuable, but he’d still be very good.)

All told, in the last seven years I’ve evaluated over 1,500 player-seasons to compile this list.[/QUOTE]

Drexler:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Drexler-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

Miller:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Miller-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

Robinson:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/David-Robinson-seasonal-vauations.png[/IMG]

Ewing:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/P-Ewing-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

Stockton:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Stockton-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

Pippen:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Pippen-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

Rings doe! It is all about those rings! Take away those rings and he would be behind all these players, even though his record (as assessed here) trumps all of them except Robinson's (who is ranked within spots of him, unlike the others here).

Wilkins, Worthy, Payton aren't here because they didn't make the top 40. Here is why Payton didn't:

[QUOTE][B]Payton was in the “barely-missed-the-cut” group. I was actually disappointed with his defense on this latest film study[/B]. He can crank up good positions by being physical and has good hands, but he can be immobile and gamble heavily. As you probably think too, [B]his offense is good but not great[/B].
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Reggie43;14028478]Tell me again how Pippens baggage affect his value as a player? Oh wait you never answered this and avoided it like the plague :roll:

Imagine a top 30 player fresh off 6 rings getting traded for Roy freakin Rogers because of the aforementioned baggage :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

lol Yeah it's not like he was well past his prime at 33 with a ****ed up body or anything. It's easy to last a long time when you don't do anything but shoot like Reggie Miller. He didn't ****ing do anything else that's for damn sure. Defense, rebounding, etc....foreign concepts to your hero.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028578]
You are falling into their trap. Why not ask this question of every player? It could go either way but impossible to know. What if Pippen has 10 years of a prime as the best player, wins a MVP, has a couple other MVP contending seasons, and his team wins a ring? I.e., a Dirk-like career trajectory or Wade. Or Harden's if he winds up with a ring like Dirk. Where does he rank then?[/quote]

I don't think it changes much on those lists although I think he should be higher if that was the case. I also think Dirk and Wade were too low on the latest espn list.

Also think if Pippen never plays Jordan wouldn't be the GOAT; strip any Top 5 player of their respective #2 when he one and none of them id in the mux anymore.

[quote]
Drexler is a good test case. He actually [I]did[/I] win a ring and no one even remembers it. Go back to the Drexler threads a few weeks ago. His advocates kept pointing to the two finals he [I]lost[/I]. With fans at least, there is an obsession with "options" so losing in the NBA finals or even conference finals as the "#1", even a nominal #1 like Miller>winning rings as a #2.[/quote]

Yeah it's BS. There's cut in the AT and best ever ranks where ATG #2s start to get ranked who are definately better than some, even great, #1s. Imo Ewing for example has no case over Pippen. Reggie Miller? Not even close. Drexler gets treated unfairly. He was a great #2 for that one ring and a first option good enough to lead his team to two finals. What's Ewing's argument over him for example.

[quote]
MJ and Drexler played the same position. How would they mesh? Drexler hit his prime earlier (though he did nothing as a rookie, same as Pippen) than the younger Pippen but the flip side is he started breaking down earlier. So let's suppose Drexler is drafted in 1987 and that they somehow meshed as MJ and Jordan-lite. Both were on the bench as rookies. Pippen became a permanent starter 1/3 through his season year. Drexler started half the games in 88' and 58 in 89'. At any rate, both became all-stars in their third season (which would be 1990). Bulls with Drexler win in 1990, 1991, 1992...and then Drexler starts to decline...[/quote]

Drexler would play SF I'm pretty sure, but let's say he is the 2nd option for a threepeat, a great one at that I'm sure he wouldn't be ranked in the 40s and as low as 57.

[quote]
This is where these scenarios get tricky. Drexler in 95' won with a lesser player than MJ--but MJ himself barely won with what by 93' was a better player than Drexler. It shows you it is a team sport. You can't just look at 2 players.
[/quote]

Sure, but alot of those lists look at single player or their first/second option at best.

[quote]
That's one way to look at it. I agree that he benefited from it because he get proper recognition but the real question isn't the retirement per se but what if he had an entire prime away from MJ versus only 1 4/5 seasons (only 1 playoff run)?



Yeah, and he would wind up slightly ahead of where he is all-time now in that scenario with a MVP and "rings as the man." The anti-Pippen crowd only looks at downside variance.

There may be value in a ring or two as a "sidekick" but, as Kyrie understood, the value goes away. People don't distinguish between Pippen or Hondo's number and those of Worthy or Gasol or McHale. They all get a modicum of credit but fans give more credit to Ewing, Payton, Miller, Iverson for making *one* finals and losing as the best player.[/QUOTE]

I think the undervalued great on bad teams, aka McGrady, or the afforementioned Dirk career are the most likely cases for Pippen sans the Bulls. Hence I don't think his contributions to the Bulls' rings are really undervalued.


[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028598]Here are some others added (starting with Mourning).

Pippen: #21 ESPN, #22 Slam, #25 Backpicks, #24 Simmons
Ewing: #37 ESPN, #30 Slam, #28 Backpicks, #40 Simmons
Drexler: #57 ESPN, #43 Drexler Slam, #39 Backpicks, #44 Simmons
Miller: #49 ESPN, #55 Slam, #30 Backpicks, #63 Simmons
Wilkins: #46 ESPN, #41 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #55 Simmons
Worthy: #51 ESPN, #46 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #50 Simmons
Kemp: N/A ESPN, #100 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #88 Simmons
Robinson: #24 ESPN, #29 Slam, #15 Backpicks, #29 Simmons
Payton: #53 ESPN, #39 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #41 Simmons
Stockton: #28 ESPN, #25 Slam, #27 Stockton, #19 Stockton
Mourning: #63 on ESPN, #78 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
Dumars: N/A on ESPN, #83 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, #74 Simmons
McHale: #36 ESPN, #40 Slam, #38 Backpicks, #35 Simmons
T. Hardaway: N/A ESPN, #96 Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
K. Johnson: N/A ESPN, N/A Slam, N/A Backpicks, #96 Simmons
Mullin: N/A ESPN, #84 Slam, N/A BP, #82 Simmons

Somehow--according to the [I]real[/I] objective posters (no agenda!)--every single one of these players>>>>>Pippen yet somehow Pippen is ahead of all of them all-time. :lol[/QUOTE]

As said I only think Robinson was a better player than Pippen on that list. Stockton is way overrated on them.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14028663]I think the undervalued great on bad teams, aka McGrady, or the afforementioned Dirk career are the most likely cases for Pippen sans the Bulls. Hence I don't think his contributions to the Bulls' rings are really undervalued.




As said I only think Robinson was a better player than Pippen on that list. Stockton is way overrated on them.[/QUOTE]

lol Pippen is my favorite player of all time, but him being over Robinson is madness. David Robinson is probably the most underrated player ever. He completely carried the Spurs for a good decade as I've pointed out in from 96 to 97 when they went from one of the best teams in the league to utter garbage with him out. Spurs only even got Tim Duncan because David Robinson was so good the team turned to complete shit without him. lol They went from the 3rd best team in the league IN DEFENSE TO DEAD LAST WITHOUT HIM. Eight in offense to 27/29 without him. lol That's pretty much the definition of impact when your team goes to complete shit without you.

[QUOTE=Smoke117;14028664]lol Pippen is my favorite player of all time, but him being over Robinson is madness. David Robinson is probably the most underrated player ever. He completely carried the Spurs for a good decade as I've pointed out in from 96 to 97 when they went from one of the best teams in the league to utter garbage with him out. Spurs only even got Tim Duncan because David Robinson was so good the team turned to complete shit without him. lol[/QUOTE]

Yeah, David had Lebron level floor raising impact. I liked Sean Elliott, but he definately wouldn't tip the scale enough to win in the 90s.

Btw always thought the Admiral was your #1.

[QUOTE=Smoke117;14028659]lol Yeah it's not like he was well past his prime at 33 with a ****ed up body or anything. It's easy to last a long time when you don't do anything but shoot like Reggie Miller. He didn't ****ing do anything else that's for damn sure. Defense, rebounding, etc.[/QUOTE]

:lol Yet we are the biased, delusional, agenda, etc. people for thinking Pippen>>>Miller like everybody outside of Jordanstan and realizing the context of his 1999 "trade" (because we actually watched back then)?

He essentially signed with the Rockets but the Bulls, as a reward for helping bring them 6 rings (not half a dozen ECF losses, rings) did a "sign and trade" to Houston so he could get another $20 million in his contract. Baggage but his team was doing him a solid to thank him for his service? That is a "golden parachute"--we all would want that kind of "baggage." :lol

Good point on Miller. The reason Pippen's back got shot was taking Malone charges in the finals. Reggie didn't have to worry about doing that since he had one role: shoot on prime Hornacek or prime Hersey Hawkins volume. Klay today at least has to play defense in addition to being a shooter.

The historical comp, the "off brand" version of Pippen is Havlicek; for Miller it is Klay Thompson. Yet Pippen is the one getting the massive boost relative to his actual play? :oldlol:

Robinson would easily be top 10 all time if he was able to maintain his regular season level of play in the playoffs. In his defense, he didn't have a lot of help so I'm guessing he got doubled and tripled a lot.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028670]Robinson would easily be top 10 all time if he was able to maintain his regular season level of play in the playoffs. In his defense, he didn't have a lot of help so I'm guessing he got doubled and tripled a lot.[/QUOTE]

He was ganged up and the moment he couldn't do much under the basket he started to throw face up jumpers. Quite similar to Ewing. Both had solid shots, but they would've needed a cast that could drag the defense away from them so they wouldn't need to settle for jumpers. Give David Robinson a Frobe level player and he'd probably the Bulls' biggest rival in the 90s.

[QUOTE=tpols;14028149]i mean... hakeem was obviously better than ewing. just quicker and more skilled.

but pippen was easy work for him sans jordan.

and that's the point.[/QUOTE]

Uh...in the one game the Bulls played the Rockets that he played in he destroyed the Rockets in 94, dumb shit.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028670]Robinson would easily be top 10 all time if he was able to maintain his regular season level of play in the playoffs. In his defense, he didn't have a lot of help so I'm guessing he got doubled and tripled a lot.[/QUOTE]

Pretty much. He was doubled and triple teamed nonstop in the playoffs as opposing coaches and teams knew nobody else was going to do shit on the Spurs. lol. If you take David Robinson out you take the Spurs out.