Scottie Pippen appreciation thread.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24][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]

He was great in 1993-1994 but went a step down in the playoffs. While he averaged 22.8 ppg, he only shot 43% (and 27%) on threes and only averaged 4.6 assists. The Eastern Conference was wide open in 1994 with Atlanta freaking Hawks having the best record and being upset by Indiana - had Pippen truly stepped up in the playoffs the Bulls should have at least won the East.

[QUOTE=kizut1659]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 Houxstan 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.[/QUOTE]
Larry bird was 25 and 26. But even still, im sure most all-time greats have had bad playoff performances. And the fact is that you're taking his fg% out of context by not takinng into consideration his age (although you excuse birds bad fg% by aluding to his age even though he was in his prime and I believ a two time mvp go figure) and his back problems. From 98 on he had back problems. He shot bad in 96 but I think that was the era. It was more defensive minded. Hell jordan shot bad too.

And I don't consider a player that was an integral part of 6 championships a choker. You cant legitimately expect him to win every year.

I also notice that you called the league in general "piss poor" as you termed it. The 90s was a defense oriented era. I could call the 80s piss poor cuz the emphasis was on scoring and had a huge drug problem. You had teams puttting up 115 ppg a night and still loose. Its jsut the way the game was played. I could call the 00s piss poor cuz of the lack of dominant big men. I could knock the 70s cuz of the aba splitting the talent and the rampant drug problem.

You're just a biased hater.

[QUOTE=kizut1659]He was great in 1993-1994 but went a step down in the playoffs. While he averaged 22.8 ppg, he only shot 43% (and 27%) on threes and only averaged 4.6 assists. The Eastern Conference was wide open in 1994 with Atlanta freaking Hawks having the best record and being upset by Indiana - had Pippen truly stepped up in the playoffs the Bulls should have at least won the East.[/QUOTE]
Lol who do you feel is the best player ever?

[QUOTE=kizut1659]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.[/QUOTE]

He would shoot much better today. The league was much more defensive-oriented and [I]physical[/I]. Even this Jazz series that I just posted looked like rugby. And the Jazz were the NICE guys. By the 2nd 3peat, the Bulls were an older, half-court, grind-it-out type of team not too dissimilar to the Pistons in the early 90's. The emphasis was on DEFENSE. That's how the Bulls won, not offensive wizardry. And Pippen was the Bulls best team defender. Check out any Eastern Conference playoff game during this period and tell me if it looks anything like the game being played today. It doesn't.

Nothing but the utmost of respect & admiration for one of the greatest 2nd options to ever grace the court

[QUOTE=Da_Realist]He would shoot much better today. The league was much more defensive-oriented and [I]physical[/I]. Even this Jazz series that I just posted looked like rugby. And the Jazz were the NICE guys. By the 2nd 3peat, the Bulls were an older, half-court, grind-it-out type of team not too dissimilar to the Pistons in the early 90's. The emphasis was on DEFENSE. That's how the Bulls won, not offensive wizardry. And Pippen was the Bulls best team defender. Check out any Eastern Conference playoff game during this period and tell me if it looks anything like the game being played today. It doesn't.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100%, although Jordan was still great at team defense, Pippen was the best individual perimeter defender on that 2nd 3 peat team, Harper and Jordan usually shared difficult matchups by this time

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol who do you feel is the best player ever?[/QUOTE]

Jordan and its not even that close. If you think I am some Kobe lover who is just trying to denigrate the Bulls its not true . . . .I just think Pippen is overrated (i would probably put him around 30 all time) and had a relatively brief prime.

[QUOTE=the GIBBET]This is such a retarded thing to say.

A team does not win 6 championships and set a record for wins in a season with just one "superstar." The year after Michael retired the first time, The Bulls went 55-27 and lost in 7 games to the Knicks in the 2nd round.

I didn't see Kobe doing that when Shaq or Pau weren't there, or Wade doing it without Shaq. I didn't see Pierce doing it before KG and Ray Allen were there.

Sometimes - I know this is hard to believe for people who believe everything Nike and Gatorade and ESPN tell them - there can be two or more players of equal importance to a championship team.

The Bulls are arguably the GREATEST DYNASTY in sports history. WTF does sidekick even mean??? Its just a dumb term that you've heard so you repeat it. Try actually thinking some time.[/QUOTE]

the bulls team was good scottie pippen and dennis rodman, defensive beasts

[QUOTE=kizut1659]Jordan and its not even that close. If you think I am some Kobe lover who is just trying to denigrate the Bulls its not true . . . .I just think Pippen is overrated (i would probably put him around 30 all time) and had a relatively brief prime.[/QUOTE]
No.... kobe fans prop pippen to bring down jordan. Jordan fans knock pippen cuz they feel him being considered an all-time great degrades what jordan accomplished. You fall right in line with the latter.

The reason why I asked you that question is cuz you hold pippen to a standard nobody could achieve. Knocking pippens fg% when he was 34-38 is rediculous. Most people do fall of by that age. He was well out of his prime. From 89 to 98, pippen had a solid fg%. And like most unreasonable people you compare pippen based on other people strengths. Pippen was a good scorer, but his claim to fame was his defense and versitilty.

Then you knock him cuz he couldn't get out of the east after loosing jordan in 94. Even alluding to the hawks as if that helps your argument. Like no other high seeded team has ever been upset before. And im sure you being a jordan fan (as am I) don't hold it against jordan for not winning championships his first few years.

I don't see how he's overrated. I've never heard anybody put him in the top 10 based on his accomplishments. I do feel he's in the top 20 25 at the most. And would've accomplished more personally if he had 7-8 years with his own team.

I guess the most frustrating part is when I see people like you hold a player like pippen to a standard that noone can achieve. Noone can win every year in the league, noone can win mvps And its mainly due to your being unreasonable. When 90% of your prime is spent playing alongside a guy the caliber of jordan. Its just not the way the league is set up.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]No.... kobe fans prop pippen to bring down jordan. Jordan fans knock pippen cuz they feel him being considered an all-time great degrades what jordan accomplished. You fall right in line with the latter.

The reason why I asked you that question is cuz you hold pippen to a standard nobody could achieve. Knocking pippens fg% when he was 34-38 is rediculous. Most people do fall of by that age. He was well out of his prime. From 89 to 98, pippen had a solid fg%. And like most unreasonable people you compare pippen based on other people strengths. Pippen was a good scorer, but his claim to fame was his defense and versitilty.

Then you knock him cuz he couldn't get out of the east after loosing jordan in 94. Even alluding to the hawks as if that helps your argument. Like no other high seeded team has ever been upset before. And im sure you being a jordan fan (as am I) don't hold it against jordan for not winning championships his first few years.

I don't see how he's overrated. I've never heard anybody put him in the top 10 based on his accomplishments. I do feel he's in the top 20 25 at the most. And would've accomplished more personally if he had 7-8 years with his own team.

I guess the most frustrating part is when I see people like you hold a player like pippen to a standard that noone can achieve. Noone can win every year in the league, noone can win mvps And its mainly due to your being unreasonable. When 90% of your prime is spent playing alongside a guy the caliber of jordan. Its just not the way the league is set up.[/QUOTE]

You are only focusing on select facts. Pippen' had a very low playoff field goal percentage not from ages 34 throgh 38 but from 30 through 37. . .and thats if you would not count percentages of 43 and 44 at age of 28 and 29 as low. Considering he came into the league at the age of 21 and it took him couple of years to develop, it means that his prime was pretty brief. I am not holding Pippen to a standard noone else can achieve - most elite players had longer primes - simple as that.

And yes, we will never truly know if Pippen was good enough to win as the "man" but I personally don't think so. In 1994, Pippen's playoff performance was underwhelming - 43% and 4.6 assists per game for the team's best player who is playing a "point forward" are just not good enough for a team to win a championship. In 1995, the Bulls were a .500 team before Jordan came back. I do not see how 1996-1998 version of Pippen was anywhere good enough to win a championhip as the man given the Iversen-like shooting percentage when you are not even the primary focus of the opposing defense. That leaves us with Pippen from 1990 through 1993. During these years, however, the league was still loaded and I would say Pippen was still not as good as Magic in 1991, Drexler in 1992 or Barkley in 1993 so I am not sure the Bulls would have won had Jordan been replaced with an average or even lets say a Pau Gasol level player.

[QUOTE=kizut1659]Jordan and its not even that close. If you think I am some Kobe lover who is just trying to denigrate the Bulls its not true . . . .I just think Pippen is overrated (i would probably put him around 30 all time) and had a relatively brief prime.[/QUOTE]


See, I can sort of see your angle in explaining how Pippen could never win it all as the main guy. My main gripe is when you say he is over-rated. My question then, is where do you rate Pippen? You say you think he's over-rated, but most people (including huge Bulls and Pippen fans like myself) have him around the 30 range.

I think the biggest problem to me over your whole argument is that I don't think he is over-rated. In fact, honestly I think if we took a poll of the entire population ages 20 and over, he would be under-rated.

[QUOTE=Kellogs4toniee]See, I can sort of see your angle in explaining how Pippen could never win it all as the main guy. My main gripe is when you say he is over-rated. My question then, is where do you rate Pippen? You say you think he's over-rated, but most people (including huge Bulls and Pippen fans like myself) have him around the 30 range.

I think the biggest problem to me over your whole argument is that I don't think he is over-rated. In fact, honestly I think if we took a poll of the entire population ages 20 and over, he would be under-rated.[/QUOTE]

I have seen many people rank him in top 20 or low 20s. An examples of people on this board overrating him are comparisons of Pippen to Bryant in 2000-2002, which is accurate with respect to 2000 and but not accurate with respect to 2001 and 2002. Also, i remember a topic how Pippen was better than LeBron James.

[QUOTE=kizut1659]I have seen many people rank him in top 20 or low 20s. An examples of people on this board overrating him are comparisons of Pippen to Bryant in 2000-2002, which is accurate with respect to 2000 and but not accurate with respect to 2001 and 2002. Also, i remember a topic how Pippen was better than LeBron James.[/QUOTE]

If your going into a thread about Pippen being better (not career-wise) then Lebron and taking it seriously, then we're done here...

[QUOTE=Kellogs4toniee]If your going into a thread about Pippen being better (not career-wise) then Lebron and taking it seriously, then we're done here...[/QUOTE]

I obviously did not take it seriously - its just an example of people overrating him and for all i know, the same people might be the ones posting in this thred.

there is so much to say about Scottie Pippen...

i hate people calling the 2nd best forward of all time a "2nd option". that's just show how people don't know basketball...

18pts 7/20 FG 8rbd 4ast 1stl 0blk 1to

these are the stats of Scottie Pippen in game 1 of 1996 ECF against Orlando.
it shows how stats are useless when you take the time to watch this game. MJ just had to follow what Pip was doing, no need to force shots.Penny schooled him in one on one, but the weight he had on the game is just amazing.

in my top 15 all time players.
i would take him in my team over all players of today without a doubt.