Phil Jackson on Scottie Pippen's as a leader

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]:rolleyes:

See, this is what I am talking about. The MJ stan brigade will make comments like that "true sidekick," "greatest beta ever" so Pippen fans naturally will refute it. It is funny, MJ fans like some of the people above will swear they are not anti-Pippen yet they never call out their fellow MJ stans for such statements. Why should we be forced to unilaterally disarm in face of non-stop propaganda from a dozen posters?[/QUOTE]
What did he say that's false? He was a sidekick.

[QUOTE]MJ was captain
Pippen was lieutenant[/QUOTE]

This isn't the police or military. This is a basketball team where no player has authority over other co-workers. He wasn't Mike's deputy or Mike's assistant.

[QUOTE=Phil Jackson]

Everybody says Michael [Jordan] was a great leader. He led by example, by rebuke, by harsh words.[B] Scottie’s leadership was equally dominant[/B], but [his was] a leadership of patting on the back, of support.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]:rolleyes:

See, this is what I am talking about.[/quote]
What did I say that was false though? None of that was a shot at Pippen. He was a sidekick, that's what he'll always be known as ... hell it's referenced all the time in pop culture.

Their basketball relationship was harmonious because of the organic basketball hierarchy on that team. Their dual leadership tactics working in conjunction whipped average role players into championship material.

MJ being alpha, demanding, callous and strict. Pippen being beta, gooey, emotional and nice to help build the fragile teammates back up.

Pip's game meshed with Jordan's. MJ helped mold him anyway, so much so that MJ felt he was "playing with his twin out there" thus the dobermans. Are you seriously insinuating Pippen was an alpha? Or a co leader of the Bulls?

MJ was captain
Pippen was lieutenant

Don't even try arguing otherwise.

What do MJ stans think about Derek Fisher's leadership role on the Lakers? Fisher-Kobe was a similar dynamic to Pippen-Jordan, with the exception of Fisher not serving as the "quarterback of the defense" (Phil Jackson's words...) like Pippen did.

my question is, how can a so-called "leader" go 1-9 in the playoffs without his so-called "beta sidekick", but the so-called "beta sidekick" can 15+ wins without the so-called "leader"?

not like "sidekick" pippen had amazing talent to work either. :confusedshrug:

truth is, jordan is a top 3 perimeter player of all time, but basketball is about winning- and jordan was honestly just another TMac when it pertained to playoff basketball.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]What do MJ stans think about Derek Fisher's leadership role on the Lakers? Fisher-Kobe was a similar dynamic to Pippen-Jordan, with the exception of Fisher not serving as the "quarterback of the defense" (Phil Jackson's words...) like Pippen did.[/QUOTE]
If they both did a good cop / bad cop thing like Pip / MJ did with teammates, yea ... effective forms of leadership. I value the captain / lieutenant dynamic based of leadership as well as on court performance.

[QUOTE=mehyaM24]my question is, how can a so-called "leader" go 1-9 in the playoffs without his so-called "beta sidekick", but the so-called "beta sidekick" can 15+ wins without the so-called "leader"?

not like "sidekick" pippen had amazing talent to work either. :confusedshrug:

truth is, jordan is a top 3 perimeter player of all time, but basketball is about winning- and jordan was honestly just another TMac when it pertained to playoff basketball.[/QUOTE]
This is the type of shit I'm talking about :facepalm

[QUOTE=LBJFTW]Why does everything about lebron have to be so negative? Just because Jordan and Pippen were much better leaders doesn't mean Bron isn't a good player. Not everyone got to see Jordan/Pippen and for some of them, Bron (while not as good of a leader) is all these kids have.[/QUOTE]

off the top of my head, I can only think of Malone and Shaq in recent history outside of Lebron to have the ability to continuously pack on weight/size as muscle instead of fat at this age.

I don't know if the 29 years old prime fits for these type of players.

not when their own playing style is still slowly being adjusted.


compared to other player who reach the prime of their physicality weight wise at an age around 25-26, then they really figure it out by the time they get to 29.


I think this is why I have the general assumptions that big man developes slower compared to their peer.


I don't even know if going small/losing size would be ideal for Lebron, because playing big has been so efficient for him.

[QUOTE=juju151111]This is the type of shit I'm talking about :facepalm[/QUOTE]

:confusedshrug:

was jordan not 1-9 without "beta pippen"?

[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]It's not nearly as impressive in context. The east was horrendous. Boobie shot them into the Finals, then he laid an egg in the Finals performance wise ... got swept being guarded by old AF Bruce Bowen.

MJ's '88 - '90 >>> LeBron's 2007

[/QUOTE]

Jordan's supporting cast in 1988 and 1989 was about equal to Lebron's supporting cast in 2007, at least relative to the rest of the East, which was clearly a tougher conference back then. I definitely don't think regular season record is the end all be all as far as determining how good a team is, but if you want to go strictly by record, the 89 Bulls actually beat a tougher team in the 89 Cavs who won 57 games then the 07 Cavs did who beat the 07 Pistons who won 53 games. That's also not taking into account the fact that the 89 Cavs won more games in a tougher conference then the 07 Pistons did. 89 Bulls also beat the 89 Knicks who 52 games, which may have been more in a weaker conference like the 07 East. Just pointing this out cause its something that doesn't seem to come up when people bring this discussion up.

[QUOTE=guy]Jordan's supporting cast in 1988 and 1989 was about equal to Lebron's supporting cast in 2007, at least relative to the rest of the East, which was clearly a tougher conference back then. I definitely don't think regular season record is the end all be all as far as determining how good a team is, but if you want to go strictly by record, the 89 Bulls actually beat a tougher team in the 89 Cavs who won 57 games then the 07 Cavs did who beat the 07 Pistons who won 53 games. That's also not taking into account the fact that the 89 Cavs won more games in a tougher conference then the 07 Pistons did. 89 Bulls also beat the 89 Knicks who 52 games, which may have been more in a weaker conference like the 07 East. Just pointing this out cause its something that doesn't seem to come up when people bring this discussion up.[/QUOTE]
I assumed RR knew this when trolling. That's why I consider MJ's back to back seasons, plus superior overall performance in both those playoffs to be easily superior than Bron's 2007 run. in '89 MJ gave the undefeated playoff Bay Boys their only losses. The team that swept the Finals. Meanwhile Bron played like ass, and couldn't even weasel out one victory in the Finals.

[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]I assumed RR knew this when trolling. That's why I consider MJ's back to back seasons, plus superior overall performance in both those playoffs to be easily superior than Bron's 2007 run. in '89 MJ gave the undefeated playoff Bay Boys their only losses. The team that swept the Finals. Meanwhile Bron played like ass, and couldn't even weasel out one victory in the Finals.[/QUOTE]

That's another thing. People don't seem to realize that Lebron had arguably one of the worst playoff runs of this career in 07, at least statistically.

[QUOTE=guy]That's another thing. People don't seem to realize that Lebron had arguably one of the worst playoff runs of this career in 07, at least statistically.[/QUOTE]
It's skewed in perception by one historic game.

Jordan like Kobe was sometimes a cancer in practice and on the court. Only morons respond to screamings and putdowns.

Pip :applause: