1994 Pippen should have been mvp

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14026802]They would need 42 wins without Pippen to get there. I suppose doable--but would be tough. Without Grant they fell off a lot so imagine the drop-off without Pippen. The caveat is the had the SRS of a 52 win team (42-23 pre-MJ but their record was 34-31) so maybe minus Pippen they could scrape together 40-43 wins. The difference between the two years is the Bulls' offense was better in 95' with Kukoc playing as a solid #2 option, Pippen becoming even more efficient, and still having BJ. Their problem was rebounding minus Grant/Rodman. Kukoc was a much better #2 option than Grant. If they signed anyone better than Larry Krystkowiak (yes, I am not kidding) to replace Grant they would have been fine for 95'. Rebounding, plus the scoring/creation combo skills of Pippen, Kukoc along with the shooting of Armstrong, Kerr and the #2 defense would have been a contender.



:applause:[/QUOTE]

Kobe nor Shaq have more than 1 mvp nor Hakeem. Pippen wasn't as good as either of them.

no he didn't Hakeem deserve it. Pip had two other all-stars with him

Not even close. It was a feel good story for the regular season and Pip has every right to hold his head up high, but really he has no case to be above Hakeem, DRob, or Shaq and not even Ewing quite honestly.

Ewing led the Knicks to a better record, had better individual stats, and also led the Knicks to the no.1 defence in the NBA, while outplaying Pippen head-to-head in their playoff round where Ewing's team beat Pippen's en route to the NBA Finals.

[QUOTE=houston;14026891]no he didn't Hakeem deserve it. Pip had two other all-stars with him[/QUOTE]

Was there a bit difference between Grant and Thorpe? Agree with your overall point but the counter is the Rockets had 5 NBA starters and the Bulls only 4. No one else had a G League/CBA player starting except the Bulls because MJ retired right before the season in October so they couldn't sign a Kendall Gill type.

[QUOTE=Soundwave;14026892]Not even close. It was a feel good story for the regular season and Pip has every right to hold his head up high, but really he has no case to be above Hakeem, DRob, or Shaq and not even Ewing quite honestly.

Ewing led the Knicks to a better record, had better individual stats, and also led the Knicks to the no.1 defence in the NBA, while outplaying Pippen head-to-head in their playoff round where Ewing's team beat Pippen's en route to the NBA Finals.[/QUOTE]

Pippen for sure has a case over Shaq. Shaq shouldn't be ahead of Ewing, for starters. Pippen was for sure top 3.

[QUOTE=Whoah10115;14026898]Pippen for sure has a case over Shaq. Shaq shouldn't be ahead of Ewing, for starters. Pippen was for sure top 3.[/QUOTE]

Shaq averaged 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 3 blocks per game on 60% shooting from the field ... lets be freaking real here, Shaq was a way, way, way better player.

The only reason Shaq didn't win the scoring title that year was because the Spurs stat padded David Robinson to 71 points in the last game of the year.

Hakeem, Shaq, DRob, and Ewing were all better than Pippen that year, "feel good" narratives put aside.

[QUOTE=Vino24;14026741]People don't really hold Pippen's lack of an MVP against him (or the voters) because he played alongside a guy who pretty much monopolized the voters' attention every year.

That year, Pippen was the second player ever (Dave Cowens) to lead his team in points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks. He led the bulls to 55 wins (two fewer than with MJ)[/QUOTE]

You might want to actually do your research, Pippen did not lead the Bulls in rebounds or blocks in 93-94. Horace Grant did. 94-95 was the only year Pippen led the Bulls in rebounds, but Jordan averaged more points and assists.

57 wins for the Bulls in 92-93 was an outlier in part because Pippen and Grant themselves had poor regular seasons compared to the year before. Every other Bulls team with Jordan on it basically played at a 60+ win rate all through the 1990s, even including the 94-95 Bulls went 13-4 with an out of shape Jordan, going from a barely .500 team to a 60+ win rate overnight.

Rodman said it best

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/8cMt4xhH/Screenshot-20200605-001435.jpg[/IMG]

In what world is '94 Pippen even close to Hakeem in terms of MVP? He played 8 less games, led a similar supporting cast to a worse record and wasn't better on either end of the court. Hakeem had 0 all-star teammates. Armstrong & Grant both averaged more points than his 2nd option.

[QUOTE=Soundwave;14026926]Shaq averaged 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 3 blocks per game on 60% shooting from the field ... lets be freaking real here, Shaq was a way, way, way better player.

The only reason Shaq didn't win the scoring title that year was because the Spurs stat padded David Robinson to 71 points in the last game of the year.

Hakeem, Shaq, DRob, and Ewing were all better than Pippen that year, "feel good" narratives put aside.[/QUOTE]

I know what he averaged, and I don't care. Robinson didn't win just because he padded. He outscored Shaq by .5 a game.

Game is game. Numbers don't mean shit on their own.

Shaq had a better team around him than Ewing and won less. I'm looking at play and the impact is a result of it. Pippen played better.

[QUOTE=Soundwave;14026928]You might want to actually do your research, Pippen did not lead the Bulls in rebounds or blocks in 93-94. Horace Grant did. 94-95 was the only year Pippen led the Bulls in rebounds, but Jordan averaged more points and assists.

57 wins for the Bulls in 92-93 was an outlier in part because Pippen and Grant themselves had poor regular seasons compared to the year before. Every other Bulls team with Jordan on it basically played at a 60+ win rate all through the 1990s, even including the 94-95 Bulls went 13-4 with an out of shape Jordan, going from a barely .500 team to a 60+ win rate overnight.[/QUOTE]

All of this is credit btw, and I don't disagree with any of it. But Pippen was exceptional. Not that I think you're dumb in who you're choosing over him, but I don't see it the same way.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14026950]In what world is '94 Pippen even close to Hakeem in terms of MVP? He played 8 less games, led a similar supporting cast to a worse record and wasn't better on either end of the court. Hakeem had 0 all-star teammates. Armstrong & Grant both averaged more points than his 2nd option.[/QUOTE]

The real world circa 1994. Pippen "led" the Bulls to 4-6 when he was out? With him they had the same win pace as the Rockets...those missed games may have cost him the MVP.

The "supporting cast" talk ignores Houston had 5 NBA starters, the Bulls 4. The Bulls were playing 4 on 5 on offense for most of the game.

MVP isn't a "best player" award.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14026970]The real world circa 1994. Pippen "led" the Bulls to 4-6 when he was out? With him they had the same win pace as the Rockets...those missed games may have cost him the MVP.

The "supporting cast" talk ignores Houston had 5 NBA starters, the Bulls 4. The Bulls were playing 4 on 5 on offense for most of the game.

MVP isn't a "best player" award.[/QUOTE]

Pippen - 51 - 21
Hakeem - 57 - 23

Rockets were 2nd in the WC, Bulls 3rd in the East, Rockets won more games than any EC team. Hakeem played more games than Pippen and led his team to more wins, those things matter in the MVP discussion. Hakeem was the best player on the 2nd best team in the league in the RS.

I'm sorry, but what's your argument again? That Pippen had a worse supporting cast around him? Did he produce better than Hakeem to make up for it? No? Then there's nothing to argue here. There's a reason why Hakeem got 66 first place votes to Pippen's 7. It wasn't close.

[QUOTE]Pippen - 51 - 21
Hakeem - 57 - 23[/QUOTE]

51-20 in games that mattered (59 win pace). The 82nd game was meaningless--the Knicks had the tiebreaker for the 2nd seed and the Hawks had the tiebreaker over the Knicks for the 1st seed. So irrelevant for both teams.

All this cast talk but nothing about injuries? Grant missed 12 games (Bulls 7-5 without him); Thorpe played all 82.

[U]Rockets' Key Cast[/U]

Thorpe 82 games
Horry 81 games
Smith 78 games
Maxwell 75 games

[U]Bulls' Key Cast[/U]

Grant 70 games
Armstrong 82 games
Cartwright 42 games
Kukoc 75 games

Plus Pippen himself missed 10 games, Hakeem only 2.

The Bulls' had a tougher road to hoe than the Rockets, given injuries and MJ retiring at the last minute and not having 5 NBA starters as a result.

The vote totals were with Pippen missing 10 games and the Bulls' being the 3 seed. What would the vote totals have been if he played 80-82 like he usually did and the Bulls win the #1 seed with Pete Myers "replacing" Jordan?

Shaq had a lot of 3rd place MVP finishes too because he missed 10-12 games.

Then again, you think Carmelo>Pippen, evidently. :lol

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14026978]51-20 in games that mattered (59 win pace). The 82nd game was meaningless--the Knicks had the tiebreaker for the 2nd seed and the Hawks had the tiebreaker over the Knicks for the 1st seed. So irrelevant for both teams.

All this cast talk but nothing about injuries? Grant missed 12 games (Bulls 7-5 without him); Thorpe played all 82.

[U]Rockets' Key Cast[/U]

Thorpe 82 games
Horry 81 games
Smith 78 games
Maxwell 75 games

[U]Bulls' Key Cast[/U]

Grant 70 games
Armstrong 82 games
Cartwright 42 games
Kukoc 75 games

Plus Pippen himself missed 10 games, Hakeem only 2.

The Bulls' had a tougher road to hoe than the Rockets, given injuries and MJ retiring at the last minute and not having 5 NBA starters as a result.

The vote totals were with Pippen missed 10 games and the Bulls' being the 3 seed. What would the vote totals have been if he played 80-82 like he usually did and the Bulls win the #1 seed with Pete Myers "replacing" Jordan?

Shaq had a lot of 3rd place MVP finishes too because he missed 10-12 games.[/QUOTE]

These excuses don't matter. Hakeem was the best player on the 2nd best team in the league. Sonics didn't have a superstar so he was a very easy pick, given that he was one of the best scorers/rebounders and the best defensive player in the league. He produced more than Scottie, played more games and led his team to a better record as a result. There's no argument here. It's one thing if Pippen produced better and you could then make the argument that his team was a lot worse, but the reality is that their supporting casts were about even but one produced way more and played more games than the other guy.