Printable View
[QUOTE=catch24]It's annoying that someone can have 6,000 posts of hot garbage, and not be banned for it. That's all.[/QUOTE]
Lol I should be banned for having a pov? The problem is I got you to admit that if pippen played in the 80s, he'd avg 24/9/8 which are bird type numbers. Andit makes you soooooooo mad.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]What stuff? Its the same thing. I post something and you bring up how I owned you in a scottie pippen debate.[/QUOTE]
The Magic/Pippen "stuff". I'm really not even trying to debate that right now; I was only agreeing with Juju that you're truly uneducated when it pertains to the history of basketball.
Saying you'd take Scottie Pippen over Magic in an NBA draft isn't "owning someone". Hate to burst your bubble, kiddo.
[QUOTE=juju151111]Why are you arguing with this tard? He makes horseshit statements every other day.[/QUOTE]
What's with the insult? If you disagree with me then show your vast basketball knowledge and show me why. If I agree, ill gladly change my stance. I've been wrong before.
In regards to shooting, and only shooting I think Mullin can compete with Bird.
So I'd consider taking him in this debate, but ultimately trust Bird.
[QUOTE=catch24]The Magic/Pippen "stuff". I'm really not even trying to debate that right now; I was only agreeing with Juju that you're truly uneducated when it pertains to the history of basketball.
Saying you'd take Scottie Pippen over Magic in an NBA draft isn't "owning someone". Hate to burst your bubble, kiddo.[/QUOTE]
No, you can't debate me on magic and pippen.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol I should be banned for having a pov? The problem is I got you to admit that if pippen played in the 80s, he'd avg 24/9/8 which are bird type numbers. Andit makes you soooooooo mad.[/QUOTE]
It's not just the point of view you have. It's the troll-like extremes you go to. [I]Pippen would average 30 if he played in the 80's![/I] Those type of statements just aren't stimulating conversation nor fun to debate. [I]The problem[/I] is that your opinions always consist of what-if scenarios. You simply can't backup what you type. I don't know you personally. You don't make me "mad". Of course one is entitled to an opinion, but after a while it gets both redundant and stupid seeing someone post from their ass not having a single iota of perspective. Simply put - stop talking about players you never watched.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]No, you can't debate me on magic and pippen.[/QUOTE]
There's no debate. Magic is a tier or two above Pippen, easily.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Even if you feel bird is better offensively, they're not being in the same universe? That's taking it wayyyyy to far.[/QUOTE]
Nooooo, it isn't. Bird's production was vastly beyond Mullin and the result of that production (Awards, Championships) was way beyond what Mullin did. They are similar only in that they are both white dudes who could shoot. There is a reason why Larry Bird is Larry Bird. His face would be on the Mount Rushmore of the NBA, Mullin's would not. Again, I'm not trying to shit on Mullin. Mullin was awesome, but his impact in a game didn't approach Bird's. And, anyone who would take Pip over Magic needs to have their head examined.
[QUOTE=Kobe 4 The Win]Nooooo, it isn't. Bird's production was vastly beyond Mullin and the result of that production (Awards, Championships) was way beyond what Mullin did. They are similar only in that they are both white dudes who could shoot. There is a reason why Larry Bird is Larry Bird. His face would be on the Mount Rushmore of the NBA, Mullin's would not. Again, I'm not trying to shit on Mullin. Mullin was awesome, but his impact in a game didn't approach Bird's. And, anyone who would take Pip over Magic needs to have their head examined.[/QUOTE]
Isn't this what I said in the first place? Bird is obviously more accomplished cuz he had the better teams. Most of the awards bird won are given to the best player on the best team. But offensively, I really didn't see much of a diffeerence between the two. Definately not to the point that bird is lightyears ahead of mullin as you put it.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Isn't this what I said in the first place? Bird is obviously more accomplished cuz he had the better teams. Most of the awards bird won are given to the best player on the best team. But offensively, I really didn't see much of a diffeerence between the two. Definately not to the point that bird is lightyears ahead of mullin as you put it.[/QUOTE]
^^^^
Did not watch Bird play
[QUOTE=catch24]It's not just the point of view you have. It's the troll-like extremes you go to. [I]Pippen would average 30 if he played in the 80's![/I] Those type of statements just aren't stimulating conversation nor fun to debate. [I]The problem[/I] is that your opinions always consist of what-if scenarios. You simply can't backup what you type. I don't know you personally. You don't make me "mad". Of course one is entitled to an opinion, but after a while it gets both redundant and stupid seeing someone post from their ass not having a single iota of perspective. Simply put - stop talking about players you never watched.[/QUOTE]
Lol I never said pippen would avg 30 ppg in the 80s. I said he'd avg anywhere between 24-26 but he'd be right at around 24/9/8, which you agreed with I might add.
And as I said before, when you try to compare players that never really played together in their prime, it becomes a what if scenario.
I believed I used the example of wilt chamberlain. Statistically, he's the greatest ever. But a lot of people don't consider him the greatest ever cuz [B]IF[/B] he played in the modern era, he wouldn't be anywhere near as statistically dominant as he was in the 60s.
If you don't believe in what if scenarios, then surely the 96 bulls are the greatest team ever cuz they have the greatest record ever. Is this true?
[QUOTE=Miller for 3]^^^^
Did not watch Bird play[/QUOTE]
Lol why? Cuz I don't feel bird was lightyears better offensively than mullin. Maybe my definition of "lightyears" is different from yours.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol I never said pippen would avg 30 ppg in the 80s. I said he'd avg anywhere between 24-26 but he'd be right at around 24/9/8, which you agreed with I might add.[/quote]
All circumstantial. To be honest, I don't even remember agreeing with you. What if he had to carry a team for a long period of time? Could he be as effective of a leader/playmaker as Bird? Magic? Again I'm not going to steer away from the OP but these questions have to be asked and analyzed before you start to extrapolate numbers.
[quote]If you don't believe in what if scenarios, then surely the 96 bulls are the greatest team ever cuz they have the most the greatest record ever. Is this true?[/QUOTE]
This has nothing to do with a 'what-if scenario'. In this case, you would have to use context; i.e., who the Bulls and their contemporaries faced as competition.
Also catch24, you want say this is redundant? You bring this stuff up. Not that I mind cuz I enjoy the conversation.
Didn't Pippen quit on his team one time? Very LeBron esque.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Why does every thread that were in together revolve around my stance on pippen? I think I shed new light on how basketball is played and won and you can't deal with it. This is a bird/mullin thread. You want me to debate you on magic and pippen, I have no problem with it. And just know ill own you like I always do.
If not, let it go. Pippen beat magic on the biggest nba stage. Get over it. It unhealthy[/QUOTE]
Why in every thread you proclaim that you won? You didn't win anything you dumb ass.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]What's with the insult? If you disagree with me then show your vast basketball knowledge and show me why. If I agree, ill gladly change my stance. I've been wrong before.[/QUOTE]
I can't argue anything with you anymore. You just say too much dumbshit.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9csnrFENGc#t=7m53s[/url]
Magic on Mullin's jumper
must be nice to play for 100 bucks a shot
[QUOTE=catch24]All circumstantial. To be honest, I don't even remember agreeing with you. What if he had to carry a team for a long period of time? Could he be as effective of a leader/playmaker as Bird? Magic? Again I'm not going to steer away from the OP but these questions have to be asked and analyzed before you start to extrapolate numbers.
This has nothing to do with a 'what-if scenario'. In this case, you would have to use context; i.e., who the Bulls and their contemporaries faced as competition.[/QUOTE]
I agree its circumstantial cuz none of these players had the same career. But "circumstantial", "if", "context" whats the difference? None is a definite. Its all deductive. Reasoning. But look at what your saying. In some comparisons, like pippen, you want to stay away from context. You don't want to take into consideration, the offense the bulls played, him playing behind jordan, him playing in a league that didnt really stress an uptempo style like the 80s.
But when you want to discuss the bulls and their dominance, then you want "context". You want to factor in contemporaires, competition etc. Which I agree with. I don't think the 96 bulls are the best team cuz they are the only team to win 70+ games, they have the best away record ever, they tied the record for pt differential. Like you said, there's sooo many factors that are involved in a comparison. Pippen is not different
I don't see any real consistancy in this point of view.
[QUOTE=greensborohill]Didn't Pippen quit on his team one time? Very LeBron esque.[/QUOTE]
Lol I guess they're similar in more ways than their vesitility.
[QUOTE=juju151111]Why in every thread you proclaim that you won? You didn't win anything you dumb ass.[/QUOTE]
:oldlol: :oldlol:
97 bulls is such an idiot :roll:
[QUOTE=juju151111]Why in every thread you proclaim that you won? You didn't win anything you dumb ass.[/QUOTE]
Lol so now you've called me a "tard" and a "dumb ass". What is your problem?
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Why does every thread that were in together revolve around my stance on pippen? [/QUOTE]
Because it shows that you've engaged in a pattern of idiocy. You make statements like Pippen >= Bird, Pippen = Magic if he played in the 80's, Pippen was as valuable as Jordan to the Bulls, and now this new joke of a statement that Mullin is as talented as Bird and just as good offensively. All of these statements are a joke, so that's why people keep harping on them.
[QUOTE=OldSchoolBBall]Jesus, you're so obtuse. :oldlol: Mullin isn't even CLOSE to Bird in terms of talent, and I say that as a big Mullin fan (even played against him one time briefly when he visited Xaverian HS in Brooklyn back in the day).[/QUOTE]
I think Bird is a much better player than Mullin, but skillwise they were close, but Bird was bigger and stronger which is one of the reason that their impact on the court was different.
Also, did you go to Xaverian? What year did you graduate?
[QUOTE=Kobe 4 The Win]They are similar only in that they are both white dudes who could shoot. [/QUOTE]
Yes, they could shoot, but they also shared great court vision, great anticipation/feel for the game, great passing skills, and they both had very quick hands that made up for relatively slow feet on defensive.
Other than the jump shot, I think Bird is better in all this, but they were close. Bird was tougher and much better rebounder, but their games are more similiar than say Mullin and Reggie Miller or Mullin and Chuck Person or other long distance shooters.
[QUOTE=OldSchoolBBall]Because it shows that you've engaged in a pattern of idiocy. You make statements like Pippen >= Bird, Pippen = Magic if he played in the 80's, Pippen was as valuable as Jordan to the Bulls, and now this new joke of a statement that Mullin is as talented as Bird and just as good offensively. All of these statements are a joke, so that's why people keep harping on them.[/QUOTE]
It just shows how people can take things out of context. Including you. I said, if pippen played in the 80s, his stats would be higher due to the way the game was played. I threw out some numbers, that noone has really disagreed with. The response I got were that that those are "bird type numbers". And here lies the problem. You guys DON'T WANT THEM to look like birds. All I did was use simple math. I never said he'd lead the league in scoring or avg 30 ppg etc. I've repeatedly stated that bird is ranked higher than pippen and has accomplished more individually. Talent-wise yeas, I don't see a difference. Definaetely not to the point of "clear", "miles", "lightyears", "its not even close" or what ever other word or statement you want to use that would imply that bird is that much better than pippen, or mullin or whoever.
I don't think pippen is better than mullin talent-wise. Their roles and styles were different but that's about it.
When I was asked who I would start a franchise with between magic and pippen, I said pippen cuz I know what he would do with a bad team. Magic has never been on a bad team. And he's always struck me as a crybaby and pouter. And magic was a triflen defender. But as far as rank, magic is higher than pippen.
I feel everything I said is reasonable. Not that you or anyone else has to agree. But lets discuss it. I don't call people asshole, and an idiot etc. I don't need to. This is the internet. Attack my point of view not me. Cuz I'm sure if I was standing in front of you and anyone else on here the conversation would be different.
Another problem is the way people take things out of context. Like when I said I was more impressed with how marion was playing lebron james to a standstill than what dirk was doing during the finals. That got turned around into me saying marion was better than dirk.
The problem as I see it is that I expose you and others as being a hypocrite. And once that happens, your credibilty is shot cuz you talk out of both sides of your mouth. I'm consistant. In all aspect of my pov.
[QUOTE=KevinNYC]Yes, they could shoot, but they also shared great court vision, great anticipation/feel for the game, great passing skills, and they both had very quick hands that made up for relatively slow feet on defensive.
Other than the jump shot, I think Bird is better in all this, but they were close. Bird was tougher and much better rebounder, but their games are more similiar than say Mullin and Reggie Miller or Mullin and Chuck Person or other long distance shooters.[/QUOTE]
This is all I'm sayn. I don't see much of a difference past rebounding. Cuz mullin played with hardaway a good portion of his career. Bird handled the ball more. But rebounding is definately in birds favor.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]I agree its circumstantial cuz none of these players had the same career. But "circumstantial", "if", "context" whats the difference?[/quote]
Are you really asking what the difference between two distinct words are? I'll break it down for you easily. Do I think Pippen (with supporting cast similar to what he had in '94) could lead a team team like he did in '94, putting up better all-around numbers in a faster pace-driven league? Absolutely. Do I think he could do it consistently, say like Magic and Bird? Of course not. And that reason lies within his mentality and role during the Bulls dynasty.
[quote]But when you want to discuss the bulls and their dominance, then you want "context".[/quote]
Why wouldn't I or anyone else? You're indicating that there isn't an anomaly in speculating what someone's numbers would be another ERA versus dissecting a teams competition. A little perverse don't you think?
[QUOTE=catch24]Are you really asking what the difference between two distinct words are? I'll break it down for you easily. Do I think Pippen (with supporting cast similar to what he had in '94) could lead a team team like he did in '94, putting up better all-around numbers in a faster pace-driven league? Absolutely. Do I think he could do it consistently, say like Magic and Bird? Of course not. And that reason lies within his mentality and role during the Bulls dynasty.
Why wouldn't I or anyone else? You're indicating that there isn't an anomaly in speculating what someone's numbers would be another ERA versus dissecting a teams competition. A little perverse don't you think?[/QUOTE]
I sense a double standard comming. But I'm gonna indulge this. Why or what did pippen show in 94 or in any other year he played during his prime, makes you think he couldn't. Play at that high of a level for a few years?
And no there isn't an anomoly. I've seen it done all the time. Wilts stats are routinely translated from the 60s to now. I've seen posters say russell would be the equal of rodman or wallace due to the 60s pace. Kobe fans love to say that he'd avg higher numbers if he didn't have to worry about the zone. Jordan fans say jordan would've avg 40 ppg in this no hand check era. This kind of stuff is done all the time. People say Dwight howard in the 90s would put up mourning type numbers cuz the competiton would be better. Its done all the time. I've seen people compare ming to smits for the same reason. Its done all the time. Its all context.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]I sense a double standard comming. But I'm gonna indulge this. Why or what did pippen show in 94 or in any other year he played during his prime, makes you think he couldn't. Play at that high of a level for a few years?[/quote]
Because he wasn't that type of player. Look how much his production dwindled in the postseason and the following year right before MJ came back out of retirement. He barely shot 43% (on a relatively low volume) cracking under pressure vs NY displaying awful leadership qualities. Leadership qualities NEEDED to excel and beat those super-teams of the 80's.
Despite the influx of teams playing no defense and fast-pace play being prevalent, the ERA was definitely STILL physical. I can't imagine a Pippen led team getting one game on those Pistons, Celtics or Lakers of the 80's. They'd expose him for what he was, mentally soft. You can call Magic a "whiner" and "pouter" all you want, but he was FAR and AWAY a better leader, player and winner.
[quote]And no there isn't an anomoly. I've seen it done all the time. Wilts stats are routinely translated from the 60s to now.[/quote]
I don't care what you've seen done to Wilt here. The fact you don't see a difference in discussing team competition and what a players stats would be a few decades ago is disturbing.
Look, we're going wayyyyy off track here. Just admit you were off-base claiming there was no significant difference between Bird and Mullin offensively.
[QUOTE=KevinNYC]I think Bird is a much better player than Mullin, but skillwise they were close, but Bird was bigger and stronger which is one of the reason that their impact on the court was different.
Also, did you go to Xaverian? What year did you graduate?[/QUOTE]
No, I had a couple of friends who used to be on the team back in the mid-90's, and Mullin would occasionally go down there to show face at his alma mater and play sometimes with current/former players. I was able to get into a couple of these sessions due to my friends. Dude is an INCREDIBLE shooter and a cool guy.
[QUOTE=catch24]Because he wasn't that type of player. Look how much his production dwindled in the postseason and the following year right before MJ came back out of retirement. He barely shot 43% (on a relatively low volume) cracking under pressure vs NY displaying awful leadership qualities. Leadership qualities NEEDED to excel and beat those super-teams of the 80's.
Despite the influx of teams playing no defense and fast-pace play being prevalent, the ERA was definitely STILL physical. I can't imagine a Pippen led team getting one game on those Pistons, Celtics or Lakers of the 80's. They'd expose him for what he was, mentally soft. You can call Magic a "whiner" and "pouter" all you want, but he was FAR and AWAY a better leader, player and winner.
I don't care what you've seen done to Wilt here.
[B]lol sure you don't. You said that trying to generalize stats across eras wasn't the norm. When I show you multiple examples, you don't care. [/B]
The fact you don't see a difference in discussing team competition and what a players stats would be a few decades ago is disturbing.
[B]The similarity is the context. You know what I'm saying is true. Your just acting as if there isn't a parralel.[/B]
Look, we're going wayyyyy off track here. Just admit you were off-base claiming there was no significant difference between Bird and Mullin offensively.[/QUOTE]
Pippen shot bad that bulls/knicks series. But I wouldn't say that was indicative of what he was year by year. That series as a whole was a defensive struggle. Its not like he's the first player to have a bad shooting series against a strong defensive team. He still avg almost. 24 points 9 rebounds and played great defense. And 43% wasn't that bad considering the league avg that year was about 46%. As an example, bird shot 47% in 81 in a league that avg 49%. The difference is bird had a much better team. And the fact that he played against the 40-42 rockets definately helped.
But I stand by assertion that mullin and bird were similar offensively.
[QUOTE=OldSchoolBBall]No, I had a couple of friends who used to be on the team back in the mid-90's, and Mullin would occasionally go down there to show face at his alma mater and play sometimes with current/former players. I was able to get into a couple of these sessions due to my friends. Dude is an INCREDIBLE shooter and a cool guy.[/QUOTE]
OK. So you're younger than me. I watched one of these sessions his senior year in college. I think it was mostly college age guys who were with him then.
The funny part of the story was I saw him in the locker room and figured I would hang around and took a seat in the stands and when he first came out he was awful and I thought: Wow glad no scouts are watching this. Turns out that was his younger brother who looks just like him, but not as tall. When he came out he didn't miss. It was INCREDIBLE. Just like dribbling all around the floor turning and shooting from what seemed like 25-30 feet out and hitting everthing. Not even set shots, just wrong foot turnarounds while warming up. All net each time.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Pippen shot bad that bulls/knicks series. But I wouldn't say that was indicative of what he was year by year. That series as a whole was a defensive struggle. Its not like he's the first player to have a bad shooting series against a strong defensive team. He still avg almost. 24 points 9 rebounds and played great defense. And 43% wasn't that bad considering the league avg that year was about 46%. As an example, bird shot 47% in 81 in a league that avg 49%. The difference is bird had a much better team. And the fact that he played against the 40-42 rockets definately helped.
But I stand by assertion that mullin and bird were similar offensively.[/QUOTE]
[quote]lol sure you don't. You said that trying to generalize stats across eras wasn't the norm. When I show you multiple examples, you don't care.[/quote]
I don't. Although, I may consider the source. A kid who props up his favorite player any chance he gets is irrelevant to me (look how many times you've been called an idiot this thread; use your head) :oldlol: at taking Scottie Pippen over one of the greatest players ever in an NBA draft. There's no way anyone is gonna agree with that, let alone a GM. The only exception is you because you're a zealot.
[quote]The fact you don't see a difference in discussing team competition and what a players stats would be a few decades ago is disturbing.
The similarity is the context. You know what I'm saying is true. Your just acting as if there isn't a parralel.[/quote]
Team competition isn't adjusting an entire ERA's pace for individual players numbers whilst estimating what said players numbers would be. How can you be this clueless? Context is thrown out the window when Pippen had keys to the porsche and refused to comeback in during a pivotal playoff game because a play wasn't drawn up for him. But yeah, Magic is the pouter. Good one :oldlol:
And again, there's a bit of a difference saying Bird/Mullin had similar skillsets and there not being a sigincant difference in their offense.
[QUOTE=catch24]I don't. Although, I may consider the source. A kid who props up his favorite player any chance he gets is irrelevant to me (look how many times you've been called an idiot this thread; use your head) :oldlol: at taking Scottie Pippen over one of the greatest players ever in an NBA draft. There's no way anyone is gonna agree with that, let alone a GM. The only exception is you because you're a zealot.
[B]I don't make decisions because of what someone may think. I was aked a question and I answered it according to what I believe in. That's what men do. Not answer how I think some people on the internet would answer. Maybe your the kid. [/B]
Team competition isn't adjusting an entire ERA's pace for individual players numbers whilst estimating what said players numbers would be.
[B]I didn't do this. I adjusted pippens stats based on if he played in a different era. Not the other way around. What I did is nothing new. Its not an anomoly. And its about as fair as you can get when trying to compare across eras. Cuz we honestly don't know.[/B]
How can you be this clueless? Context is thrown out the window when Pippen had keys to the porsche and refused to comeback in during a pivotal playoff game because a play wasn't drawn up for him. But yeah, Magic is the pouter. Good one :oldlol:
[B]He didn't have the keys to the porche. Thats why he was pissed. He was paying the car note each month. But he couldn't drive it. And for the life of me ill never understand why he gets beat up for that one play. Don't forget, that HE WANTED THE SHOT. HE WANTED THE OPPORTUNITY. And he deserved that chance. Was he wrong? Sure. But I understand where he was comming from.[/B]
And again, there's a bit of a difference saying Bird/Mullin had similar skillsets and there not being a sigincant difference in their offense.[/QUOTE]
There's not a significant difference in their offense. Bird played in an uptempo era and mullin played in an uptempo offense.
[quote]I don't make decisions because of what someone may think. I was aked a question and I answered it according to what I believe in. That's what men do. Not answer how I think some people on the internet would answer. Maybe your the kid.[/quote]
Everyone here knows you rationalize and draw up excuses for your favorite player and team(s). Don't get it twisted, a grown ass man would own up to his mistakes. You've yet to do so. Instead you completely hijack the thread because you're stupid ass finally realizes your first post had zero merit. Bird leads Mullin in every major statistical category offensively. Comfortably I might add.
It doesn't matter what you "believe in". No one sane agrees with you. Pippen was a sidekick. You'd build around a second option instead of one of the top 5-7 players all-time. Think about it for a second. Take a few seconds if you need to.
It's almost as if you're purposely going against the grain because you want attention. Grow up and open up your mind. Learn to put aside your personal bias and feelings in debates. Just because your favorite player doesn't measure up to some of his peers doesn't make his impact any less than what it was. Remember that.
[quote]
I didn't do this. I adjusted pippens stats based on if he played in a different era. Not the other way around. What I did is nothing new. Its not an anomoly. And its about as fair as you can get when trying to compare across eras. Cuz we honestly don't know[/quote]
You can't adjust Pippen's stats, that's the point. You don't know if he could lead a team consistently. He didn't do it in Chicago so what makes you think he could do it by himself against the stacked teams of the 80's without Jordan's guidance or Phil's coaching? Again stop straying away from the original topic and admit you were DEAD wrong saying there wasn't a difference in Mullin and Bird's offense.
[quote]He didn't have the keys to the porche. Thats why he was pissed. He was paying the car note each month.[/quote]
He "led" the team for an entire season. Just because he didn't get the last shot in a playoff game doesn't give him the right to sit on the bench and refuse to come back in. Pippen quit on his team. That's what happened.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]There's not a significant difference in their offense. Bird played in an uptempo era and mullin played in an uptempo offense.[/QUOTE]
Wrong again, moron. Bird was a better passer, ran the Boston offense, was a much better offensive rebounder, and scorer adjusting for volume.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mullich01.html[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html[/url]
In 1985, arguably one of Bird's best seasons, he averaged 29/10/7 and his teams pace per game was 101.6 (13 of 23 in the league); In 1991, arguably one of Mullin's best seasons, he averaged 26/5/4 and his teams pace per game was 103.6 (2nd in the league). So Mullin played in an uptempo offense, second in the league, averaging more possessions than Bird, yet couldn't put up the numbers Bird did. I thought there was no significant difference? Interesting. Its also worth noting there really wasn't much of a difference in defenses during the mid-late 80's and early 90's. Average pace per game was around 100 with teams like the Warriors getting just as many possessions as teams of the 80's.
Shit, their playoff numbers aren't even remotely close making the comparison look even more of a joke than it already is.
[QUOTE=catch24]Everyone here knows you rationalize and draw up excuses for your favorite player and team(s). Don't get it twisted, a grown ass man would own up to his mistakes. You've yet to do so. Instead you completely hijack the thread because you're stupid ass finally realizes your first post had zero merit. Bird leads Mullin in every major statistical category offensively. Comfortably I might add.
It doesn't matter what you "believe in". No one sane agrees with you. Pippen was a sidekick. You'd build around a second option instead of one of the top 5-7 players all-time. Think about it for a second. Take a few seconds if you need to.
It's almost as if you're purposely going against the grain because you want attention. Grow up and open up your mind. Learn to put aside your personal bias and feelings in debates. Just because your favorite player doesn't measure up to some of his peers doesn't make his impact any less than what it was. Remember that.
You can't adjust Pippen's stats, that's the point. You don't know if he could lead a team consistently. He didn't do it in Chicago so what makes you think he could do it by himself against the stacked teams of the 80's without Jordan's guidance or Phil's coaching? Again stop straying away from the original topic and admit you were DEAD wrong saying there wasn't a difference in Mullin and Bird's offense.
He "led" the team for an entire season. Just because he didn't get the last shot in a playoff game doesn't give him the right to sit on the bench and refuse to come back in. Pippen quit on his team. That's what happened.
Wrong again, moron. Bird was a better passer, ran the Boston offense, was a much better offensive rebounder, and scorer adjusting for volume.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mullich01.html[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html[/url]
In 1985, arguably one of Bird's best seasons, he averaged 29/10/7 and his teams pace per game was 101.6 (13 of 23 in the league); In 1991, arguably one of Mullin's best seasons, he averaged 26/5/4 and his teams pace per game was 103.6 (2nd in the league). So Mullin played in an uptempo offense, second in the league, averaging more possessions than Bird, yet couldn't put up the numbers Bird did. I thought there was no significant difference? Interesting. Its also worth noting there really wasn't much of a difference in defenses during the mid-late 80's and early 90's. Average pace per game was around 100 with teams like the Warriors getting just as many possessions as teams of the 80's.
Shit, their playoff numbers aren't even remotely close making the comparison look even more of a joke than it already is.[/QUOTE]
End Of Discussion.
Between 97bulls and Jacks3, it's difficult to tell which of them is a more unreasonable moron. Although, the eye sore factor of 97bulls posts are probably greater.
[QUOTE=TAC602]End Of Discussion.
Between 97bulls and Jacks3, it's difficult to tell which of them is a more unreasonable moron. Although, the eye sore factor of 97bulls posts are probably greater.[/QUOTE]
He thinks he can post garbage and not get called out on it. Come on, honestly, not one [I]single[/I] difference between Bird and Mullin's offensive game?
:wtf:
[QUOTE=catch24]Everyone here knows you rationalize and draw up excuses for your favorite player and team(s). Don't get it twisted, a grown ass man would own up to his mistakes. You've yet to do so. Instead you completely hijack the thread because you're stupid ass finally realizes his first post in this thread had zero merit. Bird leads Mullin in every major statistical category offensively. Comfortably I might add.
[B]Stop trying to validate you opinion by running behind someone else. When they want to chime in they will. That's what females do.[/B]
It doesn't matter what you "believe in". No one sane agrees with you. Pippen was a sidekick. You'd build around a second option instead of one of the top 5-7 players all-time. Think about it for a second. Take a few seconds if you need to.
[B]Sure it does. That's why its called my opinion. [/B]
It's almost as if you're purposely going against the grain because you want attention. Grow up and open up your mind. Learn to put aside your personal bias and feelings in debates. Just because your favorite player doesn't measure up to some of his peers doesn't make him any less of a player. Remember that.
[B[/B]
You can't adjust Pippen's stats, that's the point. You don't know if he could lead a team consistently. He didn't do it in Chicago so what makes you think he could do it by himself against the stacked teams of the 80's without Jordan's guidance or Phil's coaching? Again stop straying away from the original topic and admit you were DEAD wrong saying there wasn't a difference in Mullin and Bird's offense.
[B]if your talking about 94 what was he supposed to do? He had a bad series against the knicks. It happens. Its no more of an indication that he could lead a team to a championship that any other player. It was one year. And the bulls weren't supposed to beat the knicks. They overachieved that season. I remeber the remarks people made when jordan abruptly retired. I remember during the first 3pt people saying the bulls were jordan and a bunch of scrubs. I hoonestly thought they'd finish with about 45 wins at best. Funny thing is. If you compare the 94 bulls to some of laker teams kobe led pre championship, or wades teams, or just about any other, Pippen did more with less. The 95 bulls, who had minimal talent at best were on pace to win about 45 games before jordans return. [/B]
He "led" the team for an entire season. Just because he didn't get the last shot in a playoff game doesn't give him the right to sit on the bench and refuse to come back in. Pippen quit on his team. That's what happened.
[B]you get no argument out of me. It was a bad decision. But I respect the fact that he wanted the shot. That's all I'm saying.[/B]
Wrong again, moron. Bird was a better passer, ran the Boston offense, was a much better offensive rebounder, and scorer adjusting for volume.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mullich01.html[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html[/url]
In 1985, arguably one of Bird's best seasons, he averaged 29/10/7 and his teams pace per game was 101.6 (13 of 23 in the league); In 1991, arguably one of Mullin's best seasons, he averaged 26/5/4 and his teams pace per game was 103.6 (2nd in the league). So Mullin played in an uptempo offense, second in the league, averaging more possessions than Bird, yet couldn't put up the numbers Bird did. I thought there was no significant difference? Interesting. Its also worth noting there really wasn't much of a difference in defenses during the mid-late 80's and early 90's. Average pace per game was around 100 with teams like the Warriors getting just as many possessions as teams of the 80's.
Shit, their playoff numbers aren't even remotely close making the comparison look even more of a joke than it already is.[/QUOTE]
Again, if you feel that bird was better, that's fine. I never said that notion was blasphemy or anything. I said I believed they're on par with each other.