Scottie whining cause he can't do it without Michael. Then when Mike comes back, he shuts up.
Printable View
Scottie whining cause he can't do it without Michael. Then when Mike comes back, he shuts up.
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Name them...
[I]This[/I], ladies and gentleman, is why they are called mythologists. So MJ was going to win numerous rings with Trevor Ariza (not a 90's player). GOAT gonna GOAT!!!! :bowdown:
:roll: :roll: :roll:
Where was MJ when Orlando Woolridge was putting up 23 ppg at the SF position?[/QUOTE]
did I say he was gonna win the same? No I said "may have similar results". He had the same tools that Pip did, mentally stronger tho. Would he be a better defender playing with MJ? no doubt.
Wooridlge?
You mean that crack head that played with MJ for only 2 seasons while he was young? :coleman:
I think Pip's greatest attribute was being a bitch.
Honestly.
If he had any balls and stood up for himself he would've left the Bulls early on due to MJ's abuse. But he stayed around and leaned on Grant's shoulder to help him get by.
So he deesrves that much credit.
[QUOTE=FlashDwyaneWade3]Scottie whining cause he can't do it without Michael. Then when Mike comes back, he shuts up.[/QUOTE]
:biggums:
Pippen kept "whining" about his contract for the remainder of his time in Chicago. :lol
[QUOTE]did I say he was gonna win the same? No I said "may have similar results". He had the same tools that Pip did, mentally stronger tho. Would he be a better defender playing with MJ? no doubt.[/QUOTE]
That is still a ridiculous statement. "Similar results" to 6 rings and three all-time great teams with Trevor Ariza.
The fact is there was only one 90's SF who could have filled Pippen's shoes and produced similar results: Grant Hill--and even he was not nearly the defender that Pippen was, which would means 1996-1998 MJ would not be able to conserve his energy on defense like he did. The other problem with Hill is he was not even in the NBA until 1995--and there is no way the Bulls were ever going to get him via the draft or a trade. Even if they magically did that would mean no first three-peat.
The only 90's SF who I can think of who could play the point forward role, defend and have been around for the entire 1991-1998 period is Anthony Mason--and Mason was not anywhere close to Pippen as a scorer. Mason was simply not of Pippen's caliber. Mason was a 1x all-star (in 2001), 1x all-NBA (third) and was a reserve player for his first six seasons (1990-1995). MJ was going to win rings with Charles Smith's backup? :oldlol:
If you remove Pippen from the Bulls you would have had to overhaul the roster. Without Pippen there you would need someone to serve as the primary ballhandler/playmaker. Since there weren't exactly a plethora of SF's who could do that in the 90's that would mean you would need a PG--a real PG--remember the Bulls started two SG's from 1996-1998. Kukoc could have filled some of the void since he was a point forward, but Kukoc did not have the stamina to play extended minutes like Pippen could. So someone would be needed when Kukoc was resting. Moreover, Kukoc was a bad defender. Without Pippen the Bulls would have needed someone else to pick up the defensive slack.
The bottom line is to "replace" Pippen would require several players to fulfill his functions. Pippen was a favorite of GM's and coaches because he was an easy player to build around since he could score, defend, serve as the primary ballhandler/playmaker and had the versatility to defend or play 4 positions. All in one package.
MJ himself knew better than anyone that Pippen was irreplaceable in the real world. :rockon:
[QUOTE=andgar923]There was at least a dozen players that could fill that void. Perhaps they weren't great in their role at that moment. But add them next to MJ and they become better immediately.
Pippen wasn't an anomaly or super special you know.
You could transplant him with Ariza and he may have similar results. That is if Ariza is wiling to become MJ's bitch like Pip did. Naturally, some players won't like to be sent home crying and will probably quit, so I'll give Pippen that much credit. Perhaps a player like Steve Smith won't be willing to deal with MJ and he leaves. But who knows.[/QUOTE]
I read posts like these and it just confirms where the root of trolling came from. Jordan fans. They created the Kobe stans, who created the LeBron stans.
[QUOTE=andgar923]I think Pip's greatest attribute was being a bitch.
Honestly.
If he had any balls and stood up for himself he would've left the Bulls early on due to MJ's abuse. But he stayed around and leaned on Grant's shoulder to help him get by.
So he deesrves that much credit.[/QUOTE]
Wow.
This is why I love Rock. Not long ago, these Jordan stans fought to the botter end trying to say they werent biased and didnt have an agenda. Now theyre starting to come out and show their stupidity. Trevor Ariza? Wow.
Swish used to say that Pippen was his second favorite player. Now hes making posts dedicated exclusively to calling Pippen names and all sorts of ignorance.
Nice job exposing these clowns Rock.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]This is why I love Rock. Not long ago, these Jordan stans fought to the botter end trying to say they werent biased and didnt have an agenda. Now theyre starting to come out and show their stupidity. Trevor Ariza? Wow.
Swish used to say that Pippen was his second favorite player. Now hes making posts dedicated exclusively to calling Pippen names and all sorts of ignorance.
Nice job exposing these clowns Rock.[/QUOTE]
Why do we all get crapped on? There's like 5 Jordan 'fans' on this board, 1 of them makes a statement and you're saying we're responsible for everything LeBron/Kobe stans say?
Drama much?
Here's a mind blowing fact -- if you take the best player in the game and give them a decent enough no.2 option, provided the rest of the roster is at least average, there's a better than 50% chance that team is going to win the championship IMO.
That's just how basketball is.
That's true of 90s Jordan, 94-95 Hakeem, 2000s Shaq, 67 Wilt, etc.
Those guys are just so much better than everyone else, you give them a decent no.2 and there's a fairly good chance they win the title. Not a guarantee, but the odds are better than a coin flip IMO.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Why do we all get crapped on? There's like 5 Jordan 'fans' on this board, 1 of them makes a statement and you're saying we're responsible for everything LeBron/Kobe stans say?
Drama much?[/QUOTE]
Yes. Because you guys created this ridiculous line of reasoning. At least in this forum. You guys started the whole "only win as the man counts" concept back when you refused to give a young Kobe Bryant credit for his role on the Lakers championships in the early 00s. I NEVER hear of that concept until you guys used it againt Bryant. Then Bryant fans took it and it spread like wild fire.
Its so bad that posters dont even talk about the team anymore only the teams best player. Its not gomma be the Bulls vs the Cavs, its gonna be Derrick Rose vs LeBron James. So take a bow. Your contributions have ruined the concept of team in basketball. Congrats
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Yes. Because you guys created this ridiculous line of reasoning. At least in this forum. You guys started the whole "only win as the man counts" concept back when you refused to give a young Kobe Bryant credit for his role on the Lakers championships in the early 00s. I NEVER hear of that concept until you guys used it againt Bryant. Then Bryant fans took it and it spread like wild fire.
Its so bad that posters dont even talk about the team anymore only the teams best player. Its not gomma be the Bulls vs the Cavs, its gonna be Derrick Rose vs LeBron James. So take a bow. Your contributions have ruined the concept of team in basketball. Congrats[/QUOTE]
Find me a post where I said any of those things. Ruined basketball, are you kidding me? :oldlol:
[IMG]http://www.exboyfriendrecovery.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/drama-queen.jpg[/IMG]
Basketball has always been centered about individual match-ups since Wilt vs. Russell, so get over yourself. If you don't like it go watch a different sport.
[QUOTE]Here's a mind blowing fact -- if you take the best player in the game and give them a decent enough no.2 option, provided the rest of the roster is at least average, there's a better than 50% chance that team is going to win the championship IMO.
That's just how basketball is.*
That's true of 90s Jordan, 94-95 Hakeem, 2000s Shaq, 67 Wilt, etc.
Those guys are just so much better than everyone else, you give them a decent no.2 and there's a fairly good chance they win the title. Not a guarantee, but the odds are better than a coin flip IMO.[/QUOTE]
Lol. I never said different. Trevor Ariza is definitely a huge drop from Pippen. Hell Orlando Woolridge was better than Ariza. Expalni why Jordan couldn't lead the Bulls with him as the wing man.
But I also feel that the Bulls could've won a title without Jordan had they replaced him with a decent SG. The Bulls were that good.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol. I never said different. Trevor Ariza is definitely a huge drop from Pippen. Hell Orlando Woolridge was better than Ariza. Expalni why Jordan couldn't lead the Bulls with him as the wing man.
But I also feel that the Bulls could've won a title without Jordan had they replaced him with a decent SG. The Bulls were that good.[/QUOTE]
Well if we look at that Kemp-Pippen trade that nearly happened in the summer of '94 before the Sonics decided against it ... that's a situation where the Bulls probably still would've won multiple titles.
C- Longley
PF - Kemp
SF - Kukoc
SG - Jordan
PG - Harper
[QUOTE=97 bulls]I read posts like these and it just confirms where the root of trolling came from. Jordan fans. They created the Kobe stans, who created the LeBron stans.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]So take a bow. Your contributions have ruined the concept of team in basketball. Congrats[/QUOTE]
Holy shit. Can you be any more dramatic? Ruined basketball? :oldlol:
Look, Pip was a great complimentary player, perhaps the best of all time. But he was clearly a mental midget- from his early career with his 'migraine issues' to sitting out the final seconds of a key playoff game to the implosions in Houston/Portland.
Yeah he was a 'great leader' when he wasn't really leading at all, just playing good cop/grandmama to Jordan's harsh alpha dog. Once he was out from under Jordan's shadow, his real personality was revealed and it wasn't exactly the paradigm of stellar leadership.
You had the aforementioned unforgivable playoff moment in '94, then the next year he was openly campaigning to be traded when the Bulls were struggling to get to a .500 record (then went silent as soon as the bad guy came back and led them to a Historic 2nd 3peat), and then went on to publicly throw his teammate under the bus and run away as soon as things got tough in Houston.
No reason to catch feelings over people pointing these facts out.
[QUOTE]Basketball has always been about individual match-ups since Wilt vs. Russell, so get over yourself. If you don't like it go watch a different sport.[/QUOTE]
Lol. Only casual fans that dont know much about basketball say such. And losers. Do you think its a coincidence that the greatest winners in baseketball, Wooden, Auerbach, Jackson, Russell all preached team first. But I guess you know more than they do. Its true that the media and simpletons may have had the mindset. But not the players.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol. Only casual fans that dont know much about basketball say such. And losers. Do you think its a coincidence that the greatest winners in baseketball, Wooden, Auerbach, Jackson, Russell all preached team first. But I guess you know more than they do. Its true that the media and simpletons may have had the mindset. But not the players.[/QUOTE]
Basketball is the sport most impacted by a singular star player. Get over yourself. Everyone knows this. The fact that you have to use examples from 1960 when the league had 10-12 teams for the majority of time kinda says it all.
If you want to watch a true "team" sport go watch hockey or something. That's a sport where one player really can't tilt the favor of the game on his own and the best player often times does lose.
:oldlol: no way that interview happens today. Pippen comes off like a totally unprofessional piece of shit and Sager would definitely not egg him on like that today.
[QUOTE=guy]:oldlol: no way that interview happens today. Pippen comes off like a totally unprofessional piece of shit and Sager would definitely not egg him on like that today.[/QUOTE]
Pippen did the same thing again in '97, publicly demanding a trade (again). It was a pretty constant thing with Scottie.
He wasn't really great at controlling his emotions.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Holy shit. Can you be any more dramatic? Ruined basketball? :oldlol:
Look, Pip was a great complimentary player, perhaps the best of all time. But he was clearly a mental midget- from his early career with his 'migraine issues' to sitting out the final seconds of a key playoff game to the implosions in Houston/Portland.[/QUOTE]
Can you come up with some new material? Every time Pippen comes up, at least Rock and I always have a fresh clean perspective.
[QUOTE]Yeah he was a 'great leader' when he wasn't really leading at all, just playing good cop/grandmama to Jordan's harsh alpha dog. Once he was out from under Jordan's shadow, his real personality was revealed and it wasn't exactly the paradigm of stellar leadership.[/QUOTE]
Only Pippen haters say that.
[QUOTE]You had the aforementioned unforgivable playoff moment in '94, then the next year he was openly campaigning to be traded when the Bulls were struggling to get to a .500 record (then went silent as soon as the bad guy came back and led them to a Historic 2nd 3peat), and then went on to publicly throw his teammate under the bus and run away as soon as things got tough in Houston.[/QUOTE]
This whole paragraph is full of agenda and incomplete history. As well as lies.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Can you come up with some new material? Every time Pippen comes up, at least Rock and I always have a fresh clean perspective. [/QUOTE]
Is this a comedy club? Why would I need 'new material' :oldlol:
The man's actions speak for themselves. He was a mental midget malcontent who proved he was best suited for a secondary role (being the 3rd option in Houston obviously didn't agree with him either) where he could 'lead' by being the nice guy when the alpha dog's bark was too emotionally scarring for weaker teammates. Once he was asked to be the lead dog himself, well... just watch the video in the OP and others posted throughout the thread.
[QUOTE]Only Pippen haters say that. [/QUOTE]
Or people with their senses intact.
[QUOTE]This whole paragraph is full of agenda and incomplete history. As well as lies.[/QUOTE]
Go ahead and enlighten everyone here by expanding on this. Can't wait.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Pippen did the same thing again in '97, publicly demanding a trade (again). It was a pretty constant thing with Scottie.
He wasn't really great at controlling his emotions.[/QUOTE]
I know. Just don't remember him ever being so giddy about it :oldlol: most stars usually just give a politically correct answer or try to avoid talking about that type of thing completely.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Pippen did the same thing again in '97, publicly demanding a trade (again). It was a pretty constant thing with Scottie.
He wasn't really great at controlling his emotions.[/QUOTE]
Very feminine. That's why him accepting his role as MJ's bitch made so much sense, and why the on floor chemistry worked. Pippen also served as a buffer between the big ole demanding meanie poo team captain in Jordan, as the likable intermediary with the rest of the team.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Basketball is the sport most impacted by a singular star player. Get over yourself. Everyone knows this. The fact that you have to use examples from 1960 when the league had 10-12 teams for the majority of time kinda says it all.
If you want to watch a true "team" sport go watch hockey or something. That's a sport where one player really can't tilt the favor of the game on his own and the best player often times does lose.[/QUOTE]
Lol then why couldn't Jordan win championships before 91?
Wow, so much from the "1 Jordan fan" who hates on Pippen in every thread (maybe Soundwave is right and they are alts :lol ). So much BS/mythology that I'll have to return to this later.
Where are the phonies to denounce the agenda-driven Pippen bashing in every thread btw? :oldlol:
No such thing as myth in regards to MJ. It all happened.
[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]No such thing as myth in regards to MJ. It all happened.[/QUOTE]
Yup. He would win with Trevor Ariza. GOAT gonna GOAT! :bowdown:
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Yup. He would win with Trevor Ariza. GOAT gonna GOAT! :bowdown:[/QUOTE]
Why are you acting like I said that? And what about that plays into your "Jordan Mythology" straw man based agenda? Everything we comment about Jordan was FACTUAL. Or not out of the realm of plausability.
Why was Pippen so fvking high maintenance?
[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]Why are you acting like I said that? And what about that plays into your "Jordan Mythology" straw man based agenda? Everything we comment about Jordan was FACTUAL. Or not out of the realm of plausability.[/QUOTE]
Jordan was so great he would dominate with Trevor Ariza as his second best player. That is not mythology. He was just that good. :bowdown:
[IMG]http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/1372828919_goat.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol then why couldn't Jordan win championships before 91?[/QUOTE]
Well in '90, Pip's 'migraine' in Game 7 of the ECF greatly contributed to that.
[QUOTE=Roundball_Pauk]:blah [/QUOTE]
No one believes your an actual Pippen fan, bruh. Stop it already.
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Krause was good as a GM in the sense of assembling teams but bad in terms of managing players, contracts, egos, etc. Jackson used Krause as a foil to motivate the players.
Every player on those championship teams outside of MJ got there under Krause's watch. Krause was able to constantly re-tool the Bulls to keep them at the top--Pippen and Jordan were the only players to be on all the championship teams. The Cartwright-Oakley trade was because Grant made Oakley expendable and Cartwright gave them a center to defend Ewing and Daughtery. He drafted Kukoc at a time when it was not common to draft foreign players. He acquired Kerr when Kerr was the 12th man on Orlando the previous year. He pulled off the Rodman trade, remedying the Bulls' biggest weakness with the best possible player to fill it--and got Rodman for backup center Will Perdue.
Krause sucked at drafting after the Bulls kept getting high picks, though (he did pretty well with high picks, getting Pippen and Grant in the same year). Kukoc is the only low pick who produced. Krause also likely cost the Bulls a championship in 94' but failing to pull the trigger on the Hornacek trade, preferring to keep the Bulls' first round pick (which turned out to be Dickey Simpkins :facepalm ). Keep in mind the context in which that happened: New York's starting PG, Doc Rivers, had just went down and Chicago was in a close race with New York and Atlanta for the #1 seed. New York got Derek Harper to replace Rivers while the Bulls did nothing to fill their gaping hole at SG.
How good was Krause? 6 rings and perennial contention for a decade speaks for itself but he did benefit from inheriting Jordan and luck. He was badly exposed after Jordan, Jackson, Pippen left Chicago.
In effect they took Pippen with the 8th pick (Seattle picked Pippen at 5th on behalf of Chicago and Seattle got Polynice from the 8th pick). He was a player other teams wanted. If Krause did not engineer the Seattle trade Sacramento would have taken him at #6. Detroit was trying to trade up to get him too--imagine Pippen hitting his prime while Isiah declined (do the Pistons win in 91' and perhaps 92' as well?). Saying Pippen was a gamble is like saying Grant was at 10th or Stacey King was at 6th. A player picked where Pippen was is projected to be an all-star. He turned out to be a superstar (which is what Detroit projected him as). If he didn't pan out it wouldn't have been a big loss like with a #1 pick. There was no major risk they were taking. He had more upside than the players taken after him. In effect, Krause swung for the fences and succeeded.[/QUOTE]
Krause was an average GM not good. He made one great move in like 20 years when he got Pippen. Any competent GM should be able to put the right role players around two superstars, one of which is one of the GOAT. And he was fortunate to get Rodman for a backup center because the Bulls had the only leadership strong enough to take him on, which has little to do with Krause. If Rodman wasn't insane, there's no way they get Rodman without including at least Pippen.
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Jordan was so great he would dominate with Trevor Ariza as his second best player. That is not mythology. He was just that good. [/QUOTE]
If you gave MJ say ...
Armstrong
MJ
Artest or Iggy or Ariza / Odom combo
Grant
Cartwright
Could he still at least win a championship? Yes. I don't think that's mythology. I think that is a very plausible assumption
[QUOTE=SamuraiSWISH]If you gave MJ say ...
Armstrong
MJ
Artest or Iggy or Ariza / Odom combo
Grant
Cartwright
Could he still at least win a championship? Yes. I don't think that's mythology. I think that is a very plausible assumption[/QUOTE]
One championship? Possibly--but what was said is "similar results" with Ariza or a "dozen" other players (Anthony Mason? :roll: ). "Similar results" means comparing to:
*6 rings
*8 ECF's
*11 ECSF's
*55, 61, 67, 57, 55, 47, 72, 69, 62 wins
*Contending even without MJ
Jordan in fact had a player better than Ariza, Iggy, or Odom in Woolridge (a SF of all positions). What happened? Nothing.
What SF's could the Bulls have replaced Pippen with and had "similar" results or even won multiple rings with?
What is mythology is the assumption that MJ could win multiple rings with basically any random starting 5. Guys who were never even all-stars could play SF and the Bulls would keep dominating because "GOAT gonna GOAT" :bowdown: .
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]
Jordan in fact had a player better than Ariza, Iggy, or Odom in Woolridge (a SF of all positions). What happened? Nothing.[/quote]
Cocaine Woolridge? Um, no he wasn't
[quote=Roundball_Rock]What SF's could the Bulls have replaced Pippen with and had "similar" results or even won multiple rings with?[/quote]
Why are we limited to strict SF replacement? All MJ needed was an impactful, consistent ... non migraine receiving sidekick to be successful. And he would've won multiple rings with any kind of adequate talent as his wingman. That's not myth, that's intelligent assumption.
Woolridge was a 23 ppg scorer in 85' and put up 22 ppg in 86'. Ariza, Odom and Iggy could never do that.
[QUOTE]Why are we limited to strict SF replacement?[/QUOTE]
How do you think Ariza, Iggy and Odom came up? So what SF's could the Bulls replace Pippen with and have similar results? And how would the Bulls get such a player (meaning no fantasy "Grant Hill from 1995-1998" scenarios)?
[QUOTE] All MJ needed was an impactful, consistent ... non migraine receiving sidekick to be successful.
And he would've won multiple rings with any kind of adequate talent as his wingman. That's not myth, that's intelligent assumption.[/QUOTE]
That is a reasonable assumption--but the question is--and always has been--what kind of success would they have. MJ's legacy is based heavily on the dominance associated with 6 rings and being on 3 ATG teams (92', 96' and 97'). If he won 2-3 rings over the course of his career he would be looked at a lot differently. MJ stans assert MJ would "GOAT gonna GOAT" his way to dominance with any other player who could contribute anything decent.
The other thing is superstars don't grow on trees and when they exist teams usually don't part with them. Free agency in the 90's was not what it is now. The fact is the best players Chicago has acquired from other teams* since 1985 are Boozer, Ben Wallace and Pau Gasol. Those are the kind of players you are realistically looking at Chicago getting to put alongside MJ. That means players like Mutumbo, Schrempf or Vin Baker in 90's terms. "GOAT gonna GOAT" his way to 6 rings and 72 wins with them?
Chicago was lucky Pippen became a superstar. Very few teams had two players of that elite caliber in the 90's and other than Utah, those other teams who did had that tandem briefly (Orlando for 2 years and Phoenix for 3--and Barkley and KJ battled injuries during that period).
*Pippen was drafted by Seattle on behalf of the Bulls via a deal with Krause.
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]Jordan in fact had a player better than Ariza, Iggy, or Odom in Woolridge (a SF of all positions). What happened? Nothing. [/QUOTE]
Jordan only got to play with Woolridge in his rookie season really. He missed the vast majority of his second season, Orlando was gone by the third. Both playoff appearances they went up against a GOAT team candidate.
Not exactly a good sample size, a rookie year. That's like asking why LeCramp wasn't able to even make the playoffs playing alongside Boozer (Who ended up being the best player on 50+ win teams that made the WCF mind you).
What's Woolridge's claim to fame exactly? :confusedshrug:
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Jordan only got to play with Woolridge in his rookie season really. He missed the vast majority of his second season, Orlando was gone by the third. Both playoff appearances they went up against a GOAT team candidate.
Not exactly a good sample size, a rookie year. That's like asking why LeCramp wasn't able to even make the playoffs playing alongside Boozer (Who ended up being the best player on 50+ win teams that made the WCF mind you).
What's Woolridge's claim to fame exactly? :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
Bingo, before I could.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol then why couldn't Jordan win championships before 91?[/QUOTE]
Great question. Hell, where was MJ before Pippen became a starter? He was around 0.500 every year except 88':
38-44 (with a 23 ppg SF)
9-9 (with a 22 ppg SF)
40-42 (with Charles Oakley)
50-32 (with Charles Oakley who was later the #3 player on 60, 57 and 55 win contenders)
13-12
What happened to "GOAT gonna GOAT"? :confusedshrug:
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]One championship? Possibly--but what was said is "similar results" with Ariza or a "dozen" other players (Anthony Mason? :roll: ). "Similar results" means comparing to:
*6 rings
*8 ECF's
*11 ECSF's
*55, 61, 67, 57, 55, 47, 72, 69, 62 wins
*Contending even without MJ
Jordan in fact had a player better than Ariza, Iggy, or Odom in Woolridge (a SF of all positions). What happened? Nothing.
What SF's could the Bulls have replaced Pippen with and had "similar" results or even won multiple rings with?
What is mythology is the assumption that MJ could win multiple rings with basically any random starting 5. Guys who were never even all-stars could play SF and the Bulls would keep dominating because "GOAT gonna GOAT" :bowdown: .[/QUOTE]
You realize how incredibly stupid using Woolridge, who he only played 1 full season with as a rookie, as an example and an indication of anything is right?
[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]
What happened to "GOAT gonna GOAT"?[/QUOTE]
He was young, and had a shitty team? He still mustered crazy amount of victories as underdog with mere competent up and coming supporting casts in 1988, and 1989. Winning games, and series they had no business winning. So yea, GOAT was goating. Unless you truly believe as a Delaware based "Bulls fan" not from Cold City that MJ wasn't GOAT.
Roundball_Rock agenda gonna agenda. Stay on Pippen's mutated horse sized dong. Guy couldn't even close out a series with a super stacked Blazers squad. Always going to be beta.
"Trade me"
Soft AF as a leader ... locker room guy though.
[QUOTE]He was young, and had a shitty team? He still mustered crazy amount of victories as underdog with mere competent up and coming supporting casts in 1988, and 1989. Winning games, and series they had no business winning. [/QUOTE]
You do realize Chicago [B]immediately[/B] starting winning when Pippen became a starter--and never looked back? It isn't as if it was a gradual process. Overnight the bad ole' days of .500 basketball were washed away. :bowdown:
[QUOTE]GOAT was goating. Unless you truly believe as a Delaware based "Bulls fan" not from Cold City that MJ wasn't GOAT.[/QUOTE]
The Bulls had a global following. Who was I supposed to root for? My home team--the Sixers. In the 90's? :roll: