1994 Pippen should have been mvp

This situation actually if anything just illustrates how stupid and political MVP voting is.

So Ewing leading the Knicks to more wins than the Bulls, the no.1 defence in the league, while having better individual numbers than Pippen isn't "good enough" to be considered in the MVP race (on top of that he knocked Scottie's ass out of the playoffs head-to-head while outplaying him in said series) ... because one of the cited reasons is Ewing is too "media shy".

lol, that's hilarious bull sh*t which just shows how much garbage politics go into the award.

Pippen was outplayed that year by Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, and Ewing flat out.

Shaq averaging 29+ ppg on 60% FG is generational efficiency, not even Wilt and Kareem were able to ever do that, they both had one season of 60+% range shooting but not at 29 ppg and the FGA required to get there. It becomes harder to maintain that FG% the more you shoot, for Shaq to be in that range is remarkable.

[QUOTE]So Ewing leading the Knicks to more wins than the Bulls, the no.1 defence in the league, while having better individual numbers and better efficiency than Pippen[/QUOTE]

It illustrates the delta between MJ stans 26 years later and MVP, all-NBA voters then. None of those voters compared efficiency between a SF and C. That is a joke. Serious people wouldn't do that. That is for agenda-driven insecure fans 26 years later. You could compare it among Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem but the "efficiency" police only bring it up in connection to one player (even defending worse playoff efficiency on Ewing or Robinson's part in the same threads :lol ).

Pippen's numbers overall arguably were better than Ewing's (offense is more than scoring)--this was discussed in an earlier thread; MJ stans didn't respond.

The faux concern for Ewing in 94' is funny. His team had a better record in 93', was the 1 seed and not the 2 seed in 93', yet the same "advocates" for Ewing in 94' wouldn't say a word about Ewing in 93'. He slipped from 4th to 5th in voting in those years. So he was this heavy hitting MVP candidate that got jobbed in 94' but deservedly a non-factor in 93'? What about 95'? Is there that big a difference between 57 wins in 94' and 55 in 95'?

If it is about team record, the 93' MVP should have been Barkley, Ewing, Jordan, Hakeem in that order--not Barkley, Hakeem, Jordan, Ewing. Pippen simply took MJ's spot as the Bulls' MVP candidate (both finished 3rd--ahead of Ewing who was 4th, 5th).

Ewing never placed higher than 4th in MVP his entire career. Why is that? He played in New York and was never a serious MVP candidate. That says a lot.

[QUOTE] he knocked Scottie's ass out of the playoffs[/QUOTE]

This is one of the bizarre TP's: bringing up playoff performance for the 94' MVP candidates (the big 3 plus Shaq and Ewing). This is supposed to be an argument [I]for[/I] Ewing, Robinson, Shaq. What a world Jordanstan is! :lol

As if Robinson did not have an all-time bad playoff (30 PPG down to 20 PPG, 41% FG as a center, etc.) run en route to losing in the 1st round with a 56 win team in 94', Ewing did not author one of the biggest chokes in finals history, and Shaq get swept by a 47 win team. In Jordanstan, though, these things mean they deserved MVP (everybody did--except Pippen, evidently).

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14027988]It illustrates the delta between MJ stans 26 years later and MVP, all-NBA voters then. None of those voters compared efficiency between a SF and C. That is a joke. Serious people wouldn't do that. That is for agenda-driven insecure fans 26 years later. You could compare it among Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem.

Pippen's numbers overall arguably were better than Ewing's (offense is more than scoring)--this was discussed in an earlier thread; MJ stans didn't respond.

The faux concern for Ewing in 94' is funny. His team had a better record in 93', was the 1 seed and not the 2 seed in 93', yet the same "advocates" for Ewing in 94' wouldn't say a word about Ewing in 93'. He slipped from 4th to 5th in voting in those years. So he was this heavy hitting MVP candidate that got jobbed in 94' but deservedly a non-factor in 93'? What about 95'? Is there that big a difference between 57 wins in 94' and 55 in 95'?

If it is about team record, the 93' MVP should have been Barkley, Ewing, Jordan, Hakeem in that order--not Barkley, Hakeem, Jordan, Ewing.



This is one of the bizarre TP's: bringing up playoff performance for the 94' MVP candidates (the big 3 plus Shaq and Ewing). This is supposed to be an argument [I]for[/I] Ewing, Robinson, Shaq. What a world Jordanstan is! :lol

As if Robinson did not have an all-time bad playoff (30 PPG down to 20 PPG, 41% FG as a center, etc.) run in 94', Ewing did not author one of the biggest chokes in finals history, and Shaq get swept by a 47 win team.[/QUOTE]

No it just illustrates how much bull shit is involved in MVP voting. The article you cited states clearly one of the reasons Ewing was not in the mix is basically because he doesn't suck enough media dick.

It's actually hilarious how good the Knicks were defensively (basically either 1 or 2 for several years in the league during this time) and Ewing got very little recognition for that.

The Knicks had a better record than the Bulls. Ewing had better numbers than Pippen. Ewing's team was no.1 in the league in defence. On top of that Ewing beat Pippen head to head in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series by a good sized margin (shit, Horace Grant may have actually been the best Bulls player in that series).

But some how Ewing was less than Pippen that year? Real truth is Pippen was never better than Ewing for any season in the 90s.

The main reason the Knicks did not win the championship in 1994 is John Starks shot freaking 2 for 18 (11% lol) in game 7 which was a 6 point victory by the Rockets. If Starks shoots even a mediocre 33%, they win the title. But at least the Knicks had a shot at winning the title, which I would take every day of the week over getting bounced in the 2nd round.

[QUOTE]No it just illustrates how much bull shit is involved in MVP voting. The article you cited states clearly one of the reasons Ewing was not in the mix is basically because he doesn't suck enough media dick.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, and his level of play.

[QUOTE]It's actually hilarious how good the Knicks were defensively (basically either 1 or 2 for several years in the league during this time) and Ewing got very little recognition for that.[/QUOTE]

What were their offensive ranks? We are talking MVP, not DPOY. It wasn't all Ewing either. Oakley, Starks, Mason. Riley's defensive scheme. The Knicks didn't coincidentally become defensive juggeranuts as soon as Riley got there.

[QUOTE]The Knicks had a better record than the Bulls[/QUOTE]

Did their best player retire weeks before the season? Despite that, the Knicks were only 2 games ahead (a meaningless win in game 82 over CHI)? This is an argument [I]for[/I] Ewing being MVP? It implies NY underachieved...you have the MVP, you have a 60 win team coming back intact and they regress more than the Bulls who lost the supposed GOAT at his peak did?

[QUOTE]But some how Ewing was less than Pippen that year?[/QUOTE]

One guy was 1st in all-NBA voting; the other didn't even make the third team. It sucks but maybe we can change the votes after the fact for convenience purposes?

[QUOTE]The main reason the Knicks did not win the championship in 1994 is John Starks shot freaking 2 for 18 (11% lol) in game 7 [/QUOTE]

The main reason was Ewing choked. Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency. Suddenly doesn't matter?

Ewing was 19 PPG on 36% from the field, 39% TS. These are horrific numbers for a center. His prime TS % in the regular season was 55%--so a 16% collapse. Meanwhile, his defensive assignment Hakeem roasted him. This da real MVP? Derek Harper, Starks outplayed Ewing in the finals.

Starks choked in Game 7 too--but that doesn't absolve Ewing's choke.

Besides, what happened? Dat great defense couldn't overcome chokes from their two best players? Such a great team. Finally get a chance at a chip, best players decide to choke. :lol

The best part of the defense hype is they will diss Pippen for playing that very "great" defense and having his numbers regress against that defense (not a Ewing or Robinson-like collapse, though). So on the one hand it is an all-time great defense, on the other, why didn't Pippen maintain his RS efficiency against it? #badfaith23 :oldlol:

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028016]Yeah, and his level of play.



What were their offensive ranks? We are talking MVP, not DPOY. It wasn't all Ewing either. Oakley, Starks, Mason. Riley's defensive scheme. The Knicks didn't coincidentally become defensive juggeranuts as soon as Riley



Did their best player retire weeks before the season? Despite that, the Knicks were only 2 games ahead (a meaningless win in game 82 over CHI)? This is an argument for Ewing being MVP?



One guy was 1st in all-NBA voting; the other didn't even make the third team. It sucks but maybe we can change the votes after the fact for convenience purposes?



The main reason was Ewing choked. Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency. Suddenly doesn't matter?

Ewing was 19 PPG on 36% from the field, 39% TS. These are horrific numbers for a center. His prime TS % in the regular season was 55%--so a 16% collapse.

Starks choked in Game 7 too--but that doesn't absolve Ewing's choke.

Besides, what happened? Dat great defense couldn't overcome chokes from their two best players? Such a great team. Finally get a chance at a chip, best players decide to choke. :lol

The best part of the defense hype is they will diss Pippen for playing that very "great" defense. :oldlol[/QUOTE]

I'd rather be in the Finals than bounced in the 2nd round, maybe if Scottie was actually in fact a better player than Ewing he would have outplayed Ewing in the Bulls-Knicks series and the Bulls would be in the Finals that year, but they weren't because he wasn't.

Ewing was better than Pippen every season of the 90s. And the Knicks had a better record than the Bulls AND were better defensively AND Ewing had better statistics than Pippen. And we know they beat the Bulls in the playoffs that year while Ewing outplayed Pippen head to head in that playoff series.

But y'know ... these are just minor things, lol.

Apparently being on the team with the better record, having better numbers, being on the no.1 team either a defensive or offensive capacity, while also beating said player head to head in the playoffs shouldn't matter ... we should be looking at who's a better ... interview as part of the metric. Yeah that makes sense.

The Knicks were a great defensive team, probably actually even better than the Bulls. Offensively? Not so much. But that doesn't somehow make Pippen a better player, especially when Ewing was a better offensive player anyway. Patrick would have 7-8 titles if he played with Jordan.

[QUOTE]I'd rather be in the Finals than bounced in the 2nd round[/QUOTE]

What did Robinson's and Shaq's teams do in the playoffs? What did those players do in those series respectively? You can't jump up and down about a (razor thin) 2nd round loss and then advocate for 1st round upsets. #badfaith23 How about formulating some real arguments? :lol

Ewing was outplayed by Derek Harper and John Starks in a NBA finals due to his own meltdown (that defense was nowhere to be seen as Hakeem roasted him). This is the real MVP? :confusedshrug:

Ewing, Robinson had all-time bad meltdowns--players they advocate [U]for[/U] as MVP candidates--yet they harp on Pippen in the ECSF (against, by their own admission, was a great #1 defense--MVP worthy defense in fact!). You can't make this level of bad faith up. All because of insecurity over LeBron. :roll:

Pippen's 94' playoff numbers make him look like MJ compared to Ewing, Robinson's 94' playoff numbers.

Pippen was never better than Ewing yet he's usually ranked higher on the GOAT list. Interdasting.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028026]What did Robinson's and Shaq's teams do in the playoffs? What did those players do in those series respectively? You can't jump up and down about a (razor thin) 2nd round loss and then advocate for 1st round upsets. #badfaith23 How about formulating some real arguments? :lol

Ewing was outplayed by Derek Harper and John Starks in a NBA finals due to his own meltdown (that defense was nowhere to be seen as Hakeem roasted him). This is the real MVP? :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]

What difference does it make? It's not like Pippen did anything special in the playoffs, his playoff highlight that season was getting yelled at on the bench by Cartwright as Kukoc kept the Bulls alive in the 2nd round.

I'm not saying Ewing was the MVP, I'm saying he was better than Pippen that year, which is true. His team had a better record, beat Pippen's team head to head, he had better numbers than Pippen, and had an actual real chance at an NBA title, not an imaginary one.

You're going to say with a straight face Pippen was better than Shaq who average 29.3 + 13+ rpg on 60% FG, something Kareem or Wilt couldn't even do in their careers?

If we're going to do that then lets not even worry about things like regular season records or stats at all and just give away MVP participation trophies based on who has the most "feel good" narrative.

[QUOTE]What difference does it make?[/QUOTE]

#Badfaith--now playoff performances suddenly [I]don't[/I] matter.

[QUOTE]I'm not saying Ewing was the MVP, I'm saying he was better than Pippen that year, which is true[/QUOTE]

In Jordanstan, sure, but in Jordanstan Kemp, Mourning, Miller, and basically every 90's star is better than Pippen so it's a meaningless statement. :lol

The indicia we have of what people thought about the two players' seasons are the following:

MVP: Pippen 3rd, Ewing 5th
All-NBA: Pippen 1st, Ewing nothing
All-NBA voting: Pippen 1st overall (94-68 over Malone at F); Ewing N/A since his vote total wasn't relevant enough to report.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028031]Pippen was never better than Ewing yet he's usually ranked higher on the GOAT list. Interdasting.[/QUOTE]

That is the big media conspiracy to push Pippen after the fact. Pippen is the media darling--look at how the media pushes him daily.

What you really need to look at is how they were perceived back then. Look at all the articles Pippen detractors/MJ stans produce to show how poorly Pippen in fact was perceived back then.

Pippen in articles being called the 2nd best player in the NBA dating from 1992 to as late as 1998. Getting compared favorably to MJ . Where are the corresponding articles for Ewing, Kemp, Miller, and the MJ stan 90's player du jour? These guys were on another galaxy than Pippen, right? :confusedshrug:

Re all-time, the argument they make is, as usual, contradictory: they will say Pippen is where he is all-time because he played with MJ but he should not be where he is all-time...wait for it...wait...because he played with MJ (being a 2nd option disqualifies him). :roll:

It is sad to see them like this. They used to be a lot sharper, coherent years ago before the LeBron specter appeared.

He probably would have been if he didn't miss those 10 games with a sprained ankle early in the season. The team went 4-6 during that time. If they had just gone 6-4 or better while he was playing the Bulls would have had the same or a better record than they did in 93 and he would have definitely been voted MVP. Horace Grant also missed 12 games himself, though, I dunno what their record was when he was out. I just think it's worth noting considering both played 81 (pippen, despite having an ankle sprain a good 1/3rd of the season...that's why his numbers took a hit compared to the year prior) and Grant 77 games in 93 when they won 57 games.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028036]#Badfaith--now playoff performances suddenly [I]don't[/I] matter.



In Jordanstan, sure, but in Jordanstan Kemp, Mourning, Miller, and basically every 90's star is better than Pippen so it's a meaningless statement. :lol

The indicia we have of what people thought about the two players' seasons are the following:

MVP: Pippen 3rd, Ewing 5th
All-NBA: Pippen 1st, Ewing nothing
All-NBA voting: Pippen 1st overall (94-68 over Malone at F); Ewing N/A since his vote total wasn't relevant enough to report.[/QUOTE]

No not in "Jordanstan" In "reality land", if Kevin Durant had better statistics than Giannis, had a team with a better record than Giannis, had a team with either the no.1 in the major category of D or offensive in the NBA whereas Giannis' team was no.1 in neither category, and beat Giannis head to head while outplaying him in said playoff series ... what f**king arguement is there really that Giannis is somehow the better player?

If that were to happen today, everyone and their grandma would say Durant is better (or insert any two players you want into that scenario). You can't have worse stats than another player, a worse team record, lose in the playoffs to said player while being outplayed by that player and somehow luck into being considered better in virtually any other case.

This is a narrative going over actual reality on the court. Pippen was a better media story that year than Ewing, but that's about it.

Patrick Ewing was better than Scottie Pippen that year, beat him in the playoffs while outplaying him soundly and was better than Pippen every year of the 80s or 90s for that matter.

If you put Ewing on the Bulls in place of Pippen they win the title in 1990 and 1995 on top of the six other rings. Maybe even 1989 as well.

94 BPM

Pippen 7.7
Ewing 5.2


No case doe

[QUOTE]"Jordanstan" In "reality land", if Kevin Durant had better statistics than Giannis[/QUOTE]

This guy is really analogizing Ewing to KD...

[QUOTE]94 BPM

Pippen 7.7
Ewing 5.2

No case doe[/QUOTE]

VORP: Pippen 6.8, Ewing 5.5 (Pippen in 72 games, Ewing in 79)
PER: Pippen 23.2, Ewing 22.9

No case. Ewing was better than Pippen every year of his life, including his peak years. Somehow the inferior player is 10-15 spots ahead of the other guy all-time despite never being better (you can't argue longevity either--Ewing had slightly better longevity). Here are more stats (nearly a clean sweep for Pippen, the one category Ewing is ahead in is close--Ewing 108th and Pippen 110th):

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Pippen-GOAT-card.png[/IMG]

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Ewing-player-card.png[/IMG]

Focus on 1994 in these.

Pippen:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Pippen-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

Ewing:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/P-Ewing-seasonal-valuations.png[/IMG]

They aren't even close for the season in question.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028061]94 BPM

Pippen 7.7
Ewing 5.2


No case doe[/QUOTE]

The thing is no one gave Ewing even the time of day for MVP voting that year despite the fact that he had a better team record than Pippen, better individual stats than Pippen, led the Knicks to a better team defence than Pippen, and then beat Pippen in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series to boot.

So how the f**k then is Pippen somehow moving to the head of the line past not only Ewing, but Shaq too who was doing things Wilt and Kareem couldn't even do that year, lol. He wasn't one of the 4 best players in the league that year.

He was the best media story of the 4 ... but actual better player ... nah.

[QUOTE=Smoke117;14028044]He probably would have been if he didn't miss those 10 games with a sprained ankle early in the season. The team went 4-6 during that time. If they had just gone 6-4 or better while he was playing the Bulls would have had the same or a better record than they did in 93 and he would have definitely been voted MVP. Horace Grant also missed 12 games himself, though, I dunno what their record was when he was out. I just think it's worth noting considering both played 81 (pippen, despite having an ankle sprain a good 1/3rd of the season...that's why his numbers took a hit compared to the year prior) and Grant 77 games in 93 when they won 57 games.[/QUOTE]

Listen to their argument: the Knicks with a full deck won 57 games, the Bulls with MJ bouncing in October and more injuries won 55. Therefore, Ewing was more valuable than Pippen. Any fair reading of these facts would conclude the Bulls winning 55 under those conditions was a lot tougher than the Knicks winning 57. (Plus the "57 versus 55" thing obscures they went 56-25 and 55-26 in the 81 games that actually mattered.)

For you to reach the Jordan stan conclusion, you must believe MJ was not valuable so winning 55 without him was no big deal. It isn't as if he was important. MJ or Myers. Same difference, right? These are the same people who say MJ>>>>KAJ/LeBron/Wilt/XYZ.

Bulls with Pippen: 51-21 (58 win pace)
Knicks with Ewing: 56-23 (58 win pace)

Ewing is light years better but his team with Starks, Oakley, Mason, Smith all there (Doc got hurt but they signed Derek Harper to replace him) did the same as a Bulls team riddled with injuries and Pete Myers starting when he and Pippen actually played?

Yeah, Pippen and Grant were iron men up to that point. Just terrible timing, although part of Grant's thing was the "blue flu" due to his beef with Reinsdorf.

[QUOTE=Soundwave;14028066]The thing is no one gave Ewing even the time of day for MVP voting that year despite the fact that he had a better team record than Pippen, better individual stats than Pippen, led the Knicks to a better team defence than Pippen, and then beat Pippen in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series to boot.

So how the f**k then is Pippen somehow moving to the head of the line past not only Ewing, but Shaq too who was doing things Wilt and Kareem couldn't even do, lol. He wasn't one of the 4 best players in the league that year.[/QUOTE]
What are you going by, PPG and RPG? Pippen was significantly better in BPM, which is a far better measure. I like how you said Ewing was better every year in the 90's when Pippen was CLEARLY better in 1996.

[U]1996 stats[/U]

Pippen: 19.4/6.4/[B]5.9/1.7[/B]/0.7 with[B] 2.7 TOPG [/B](turnovers per game) on .463/[B].374[/B]/.679 shooting. [B]21.0 PER, 52.5 EFG%, 55.1 TS%, .209 WS/48, 6.3 BPM, 5.9 VORP. [/B] All-Star, [B]All-NBA 1st team, All-Defensive 1st team, 5th in MVP voting.[/B]

Ewing: [B]22.5/10.6[/B]/2.1/0.9/[B]2.4[/B] with 2.9 TOPG on [B].466[/B]/.143/[B].761[/B] shooting. 20.9 PER, 46.7 EFG%, 51.6 TS%, .116 WS/48, 1.6 BPM, 2.5 VORP. All-Star, did not make an All-NBA team or an All-Defensive Team and did not receive a single vote for MVP.



Please tell me how Ewing was better that year :roll:

The only stat they ever go by:

[IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D15Qw1NWsAU0eaH.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028082]The only stat they ever go by:

[IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D15Qw1NWsAU0eaH.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Ewing took 3.4 more shots per game to score 3.1 more points per game so he was better :roll:

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028086]Ewing took 3.4 more shots per game to score 3.1 more points per game so he was better :roll:[/QUOTE]

Yup! :rockon:

It is bizarre. You could argue Ewing was better career wise or peak versus peak but they are contesting literally Pippen's peak years of 1994-1996. Their accolades tell the tale.

[U]1994[/U]

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 390 MVP votes, 7 first place votes (3rd in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 255 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (5th in MVP)

[U]1995[/U]

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 83 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (7th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 230 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (4th in MVP)

[U]1996[/U]

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 226 MVP votes (5th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, no MVP votes (even Rodman and Terrell Brandon got votes)

Pippen was better in 95' and 96' than even these suggest. His MVP voting was dragged down by MJ coming back in 95' (which obscured him leading his team in every category--no stats doe). In 96' his stats were much better 2/3 through the season before he started having injury problems. If he stayed healthy he probably finishes 3rd. At any rate, if a "sidekick" is top 5 in MVP that is rare and speaks volumes.

1994-1996 VORP: Pippen 19.9, Ewing 12.1
1994-1996 BPM: Pippen 7.2, Ewing 3.5
1994-1996 PER: Pippen 22.2, Ewing 21.9
1994-1996 WS: Pippen 35.3, Ewing 29.4
1994-1996 TS %: Pippen 55.1%, Ewing 54.1% (a center lower?!)

How about covering 1992-1997? Both players were at an all-NBA level at the front and back end of this time frame.

1992-1997 VORP: Pippen 37.1, Ewing 25.1
1992-1997 BPM: Pippen 6.2, Ewing 3.6
1992-1997 PER: Ewing 21.8, Pippen 21.4
1992-1997 WS: Pippen 69.6, Ewing 62.8
1992-1997 TS %: Ewing 54.7%, Pippen 54.6%

Pippen has the clear edge again. When Pippen is ahead it is by a lot; when Ewing is ahead he noses ahead.

Keep in mind Pippen's stats were deflated by playing with MJ. It is no coincidence his two best statistical years were 1994 and 1995. Ewing, though, played in a context designed to maximize his stats.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028098]Yup! :rockon:

It is bizarre. You could argue Ewing was better career wise or peak versus peak but they are contesting literally Pippen's peak years of 1994-1996. Their accolades tell the tale.

[U]1994[/U]

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 390 MVP votes, 7 first place votes (3rd in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 255 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (5th in MVP)

[U]1995[/U]

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 83 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (7th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 230 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (4th in MVP)

[U]1996[/U]

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 226 MVP votes (5th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, no MVP votes (even Rodman and Terrell Brandon got votes)

Pippen was better in 95' and 96' than even these suggest. His MVP voting was dragged down by MJ coming back in 95' (which obscured him leading his team in every category--no stats doe). In 96' his stats were much better 2/3 through the season before he started having injury problems. If he stayed healthy he probably finishes 3rd. At any rate, if a "sidekick" is top 5 in MVP that is rare and speaks volumes.

1994-1996 VORP: Pippen 19.9, Ewing 12.1
1994-1996 BPM: Pippen 7.2, Ewing 3.5
1994-1996 PER: Pippen 22.2, Ewing 21.9
1994-1996 WS: Pippen 35.3, Ewing 29.4
1994-1996 TS %: Pippen 55.1%, Ewing 54.1% (a center lower?!)

How about covering 1992-1997? Both players were at an all-NBA level at the front and back end of this time frame.

1992-1997 VORP: Pippen 37.1, Ewing 25.1
1992-1997 BPM: Pippen 6.2, Ewing 3.6
1992-1997 PER: Ewing 21.8, Pippen 21.4
1992-1997 WS: Pippen 69.6, Ewing 62.8
1992-1997 TS %: Ewing 54.7%, Pippen 54.6%

Pippen has the clear edge again. When Pippen is ahead it is by a lot; when Ewing is ahead he noses ahead.

[B][U]Keep in mind Pippen's stats were deflated by playing with MJ. It is no coincidence his two best statistical years were 1994 and 1995[/U][/B]. Ewing, though, played in a context designed to maximize his stats.[/QUOTE]

:applause:

[QUOTE]The thing is no one gave Ewing even the time of day for MVP voting that year despite the fact that he had a better team record than Pippen, better individual stats than Pippen, led the Knicks to a better team defence than Pippen, and then beat Pippen in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series to boot.

So how the f**k then is Pippen somehow moving to the head of the line past not only Ewing, but Shaq too who was doing things Wilt and Kareem couldn't even do, lol. He wasn't one of the 4 best players in the league that year.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028080]What are you going by, PPG and RPG? Pippen was significantly better in BPM, which is a far better measure. I like how you said Ewing was better every year in the 90's when Pippen was CLEARLY better in 1996.

[U]1996 stats[/U]

:roll:[/QUOTE]

Were talking about 1994 here dude. Pat hat tricked pippen. Beat him H2H as a first option by every measure.

:facepalm

Pippen just got more exposure because the Bulls drew GOAT ratings and NY was seen as a dirty goon team.

Pippen will forever be the greatest number 2 player ever.

[QUOTE=Soundwave;14027999] But at least the Knicks had a shot at winning the title, which I would take every day of the week over getting bounced in the 2nd round.[/QUOTE]

Bingo.

Ewing totally outplayed pippen too. Took less shots to score more points and was leading a #1 defense. Better on both ends.

THAT is what you would see if scottie and pat had similar help and went H2H. Ewing was that much better.

If Kukoc misses that shot, Pippen is getting shit on 100 fold more.

[QUOTE=tpols;14028103]Were talking about 1994 here dude. Pat hat tricked pippen. Beat him H2H as a first option by every measure.

:facepalm

Pippen just got more exposure because the Bulls drew GOAT ratings and NY was seen as a dirty goon team.[/QUOTE]
He said Ewing was better every year of the 90s. I brought up 96 because there's nothing to support Ewing being better that year. I'm sorry you have trouble following simple conversations.

Also why are we supposed to take tpols' opinion on Ewing seriously? Dude tried arguing about Ewing versus LeBron ffs. He's clearly a massive Ewing stan. No objectivity.

Tyson Chandler gave Lebron fits... Pat Ewing would make him piss his pants.

And Oak. and Mason. You arent stiff arming your way to the rim through that.

I'm not saying he had a better career, but peaks H2H same help in a series? I'm taking Ewing. It's a rock paper scissors thing.

[QUOTE=tpols;14028114]Tyson Chandler gave Lebron fits.

Pat Ewing would make him piss his pants. And Oak. and Mason. You arent stiff arming your way to the rim through that.

I'm not saying he had a better career, but peaks H2H same help in a series? I'm taking Ewing. It's a rock paper scissors thing.[/QUOTE]
:roll: :roll: :roll:










:roll: :roll: :roll:

For reference, here is how Backpick's come down on the two (they don't ring count so that excuse doesn't fly, although it is ironic MJ stans suddenly don't care about rings...):

Pippen:

[QUOTE]Pippen’s best years hit the beginning of the plus-minus era, and [B]his numbers are impressive. After a marginal year in ’94 (86th percentile), he posted scaled Augmented Plus-Minus values in the 97th percentile in ’95 and ’96, followed by a season in the 98th percentile using adjusted plus-minus [/B][B](APM) in 1997[/B]. His augmented[B] ’95 season was second in the league to plus-minus goliath David Robinson[/B], while [B]his ’96 season trailed only Robinson, Jordan and the venerable Penny Hardaway[/B].

In total, [B]Pippen’s perimeter defense, rebounding and strong passing make him a highly scalable asset, capable of supercharging all kinds of teams[/B]. He played [B]second fiddle on excellent offenses[/B] alongside Jordan, spent most of his [B]prime leading good or great defenses[/B], and his brush with the MVP in 1994 is inline with my estimation of his peak as a weak MVP candidate.8However, Pippen’s prime was shortened by injuries, and his last high-level year was in 1997. (He was stellar at times in 1998 until his back flared up in the postseason.)

He’s entrenched in the group of players from 22-26, with a peak strong enough to edge out Stockton, but one that lags behind the players ahead of him[/QUOTE]

Wait, right behind David Robinson? Behind MJ, Robinson, Penny the next year? These are players MJ stans will sing hosannas to.

[URL="https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/"]https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/[/URL]

Ewing:

[QUOTE]Ewing’s plus-minus footprint began in 1994, and [B]AuPM gives him three seasons between the 81st and 89th percentile; good, but not great[/B]. He [B]then posted four scaled adjusted plus-minus (APM) years between the 92nd and 97th percentile[/B], primarily from defensive value. This suggests that his mid ’90s were slightly better than what AuPM portrays (from ’94-96), and I see these numbers as an indicator that [B]Ewing’s peak was likely quite strong[/B]. He lost much of the 1998 season to injury, but the Knicks played scintillating defense in 30 games with him that year, improving 5.9 efficiency points on D to 7.8 points ahead of the league.

For my money, he strung together 10 consecutive All-Star seasons, with four weak-MVP years and a top-30 peak of all time. [B]I don’t love his portability, nor that he failed to play on a really good offense. To scale well, Ewing would need to curtail his isolation frequency, and I have doubts that he could. I could also see devaluing his mid-’90s defense slightly more, which could push him as low as 30th[/B]. Nonetheless, he packaged strong scoring with a top-20 defensive peak, just enough to land him here.[/QUOTE]

[URL="https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/"]https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/[/URL]

Only one of the two appears on this chart:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Jordan-v-GOAT-on-off-results-91-93-50g.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028117]For reference, here is how Backpick's come down on the two (they don't ring count so that excuse doesn't fly, although it is ironic MJ stans suddenly don't care about rings...):

Pippen:



Wait, right behind David Robinson? Behind MJ, Robinson, Penny the next year? These are players MJ stans will sing hosannas to.

[URL="https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/"]https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/[/URL]

Ewing:



[URL="https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/"]https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/[/URL]

Only one of the two appears on this chart:

[IMG]https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Jordan-v-GOAT-on-off-results-91-93-50g.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
STFU Hater! Ewing was better than peak LeBron!













:roll:











:yaohappy:

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028111]Also why are we supposed to take tpols' opinion on Ewing seriously? Dude tried arguing about Ewing versus LeBron ffs. He's clearly a massive Ewing stan. No objectivity.[/QUOTE]

:lol

It is funny these guys act like Ewing playing in New York wasn't a huge advantage. There are 50 governors in the USA. Guess which one got his Coronavirus briefings covered daily? The national media (including the sports media) is based in NYC. NYC is by far the largest market in the United States. The country has three newspapers that are nationally distributed--two of them are based in NYC (the other outside DC and is more geared for travelers than regular news consumption like the [I]New York Times[/I] and [I]Wall Street Journal[/I] are). There is no better launch pad to become a superstar, to get media hype, get on television, etc. than playing in New York.

Just compare Ewing to small market peers. He and Drexler are ranked about the same all-time. How often do people talk about Drexler? How much did NBC promote Drexler versus Ewing? How often was New York on national TV versus Portland? How many times did New York get the marquee Christmas game? Why is their an entire conspiracy theory about the NBA getting Ewing to New York (why not Cleveland, Milwaukee, or San Antonio?)?

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028122]:lol

It is funny these guys act like Ewing playing in New York wasn't a huge advantage. There are 50 governors in the USA. Guess which one got his Coronavirus briefings covered daily? The national media (including the sports media) is based in NYC. NYC is by far the largest market in the United States. The country has three newspapers that are nationally distributed--two of them are based in NYC (the other outside DC and is more geared for travelers than regular news coverage like the [I]New York Times[/I] and [I]Wall Street Journal[/I] are). There is no better launch pad to become a superstar, to get media hype, get on television, etc. than playing in New York.

Just compare Ewing to small market peers. He and Drexler are ranked about the same all-time. How often do people talk about Drexler? How much did NBC promote Drexler versus Ewing? How often was New York on versus Portland? How many times did New York get the marquee Christmas game? Why is their an entire conspiracy theory about the NBA getting Ewing to New York (why not Cleveland, Milwaukee, or San Antonio?)?[/QUOTE]
Look at his post arguing Ewing was better than peak LeBron. Dude has lost it. Ewing GOAT!

[QUOTE=RRR3;14028123]Look at his post arguing Ewing was better than peak LeBron. Dude has lost it. Ewing GOAT![/QUOTE]

This from someone who goes on and on about playoff efficiency when Ewing authored arguably the WOAT NBA finals for a superstar in efficiency. His one shot at a ring and the GOAT doesn't show up?

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14028124]This from someone who goes on and on about playoff efficiency when Ewing authored arguably the WOAT NBA finals for a superstar in efficiency. His one shot at a ring and the GOAT doesn't show up?[/QUOTE]
It was Pippen and LeBron's fault. Even though Pippen was at home watching and LeBron was a little kid. They somehow were responsible for making the GOAT god Ewing miss so many shots.

[QUOTE=tpols;14028114]Tyson Chandler gave Lebron fits... Pat Ewing would make him piss his pants.

And Oak. and Mason. You arent stiff arming your way to the rim through that.

I'm not saying he had a better career, but [B]peaks H2H same help in a series? I'm taking Ewing. It's a rock paper scissors thing.[/B][/QUOTE] [IMG]https://media.giphy.com/media/glmRyiSI3v5E4/giphy.gif[/IMG]

When i compared efficiency it was for massive sample sizes between players whose games were apple to apple.

not to mention ewing totally schooled scottie efficiency wise head to head in the very year were talking about.... in the playoffs.

you fellas are just too easy. :lol

[QUOTE=Turbo Slayer;14028128][IMG]https://media.giphy.com/media/glmRyiSI3v5E4/giphy.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Ewing was the greatest player of all time according to Tpols.

[QUOTE=tpols;14028129]When i compared efficiency it was for massive sample sizes between players whose games were apple to apple.

not to mention ewing totally schooled scottie efficiency wise head to head in the very year were talking about.... in the playoffs.

you fellas are just too easy. :lol[/QUOTE]
I'm actually digging this new Ewing is GOAT shtick. We need stans of different players. LeBron, Kobe, MJ stans are boring. A Patrick Ewing is GOAT agenda, though? Now that's original.

You dont need to be GOAT to beat Lebron.

Dwight did it and is barely top 50.

[QUOTE]It was Pippen and LeBron's fault. Even though Pippen was at home watching and LeBron was a little kid. They somehow were responsible for making the GOAT god Ewing miss so many shots.[/QUOTE]

That nefarious LeBron! Rigging MVP and all-NBA voting when he was in elementary and middle school wasn't enough--he had to sabotage Ewing too. :mad:

Pippen deserves legitimate blame. After all, per certain stans on ISH, Ewing's defining series was beating a Bulls team with Pete Myers in place of MJ (barely--thanks to Hue Hollins). After he climbed that mountain top, what else mattered after that? So of course he took the foot off the gas then. He understood his legacy was assured and no one would care if he melted down in the finals.

[QUOTE]When i compared efficiency it was for massive sample sizes between players whose games were apple to apple.

not to mention ewing totally schooled scottie efficiency wise[/QUOTE]

I watched Ewing play. There is nothing "apple to apple" between a perimeter SF and Ewing. :lol Hakeem, Mourning are "apple to apple". Where are the playoff numbers for those series?

[QUOTE]A Patrick Ewing is GOAT agenda, though? Now that's original.[/QUOTE]

Would he take Ewing over MJ, though? When push comes to shove, these "Ewing fans" will always wind up back with their true love MJ.