At their peak - Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway, and Scottie Pippen

[QUOTE=plowking]What made Pippen better at running a team?
Court vision? I'm basing that on flashy passes and splitting those impossible gaps. Pippen was much more of a bread and butter passer. He racked up assists in the triangle offense, but never did anything extraordinary. Penny had some passes that reminded you of Magic on the fast break, and Bird in the half court.[/QUOTE]

I'd agree that Penny was overall the better passer, and better at running a team, and probably a better scorer on top of that, but the defensive gap between he Pippen is enough to make up for it in my opinion. I'm going with

Pippen
Penny
Hill

in that order

[QUOTE=plowking]Dominated? He shot 35% outside of one good game. Penny averaged 26ppg that series and had a 38 point game where he shot 75% from the field.

This is why no one takes your opinions seriously on the board. You blatantly make shit up. Of course Pippen won six championships. I guess he's better at running a team than Nash as well since his rings say so. He played with the best player ever in his prime.[/QUOTE]
What did Hardaway shoot outside of his one good game? And dont dont forget those game weren't close. Alot of Hardaways points were scored when the game had already been decided. And that one good game Hardaway had, most of his points came in the first half. The Bulls defense spearheaded by Pippens defense on Hardaway force Orlando to cough up a 20 point lead. Hardaway was shut down in the second half of that game by Pip.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Pippen could make flashy passes.

Pippen was better at running a tram based on the Six championships,[B] the top ratings in offense four times out of the eight he ran the Bulls offense.[/B]

And let's not forget that Pippen dominated Hardaway in 96 ECF.[/QUOTE]

Come on now, you and I both know that the bolded is pretty disingenuous.

[QUOTE=DatAsh]Come on now, you and I both know that the bolded is pretty disingenuous.[/QUOTE]
How? The best way to determine a players efficiency at running a teams offense is how efficient that teams offense is.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]How? The best way to determine a players efficiency at running a teams offense is how efficient that teams offense is.[/QUOTE]

I'm sure having Michael Jordan on his team had nothing to do with that all time great offense.

[QUOTE=DatAsh]I'm sure having Michael Jordan on his team had nothing to do with that all time great offense.[/QUOTE]
Sure it did. So did Rodman, and Kukoc, and Kerr, and armstrong, and Grant etc. But Pippen RAN the team. The question was who did the better Job. Hardaway wasn't exactly working with chopped liver. Shaq, Anderson, Grant, and Scott?

Hill and Penny never reached their peak due to injury, though.

[QUOTE=The Mamba]Hill and Penny never reached their peak due to injury, though.[/QUOTE]

Grant was 28 and 7 years in when the ankle injury came. For all purposes he was maybe a year into his peak. Penny's last really great year was 96, at 25 with 3 seasons under his belt. Which, when you think about it is pretty crazy because Penny after 3 seasons played with the poise of a 7 year veteran.

People talk about how we were robbed of seeing prime Grant and Penny; at least with Hill we got 7 good years out of him. We could see where his career was headed. We were TRULY robbed in Penny's case, we never got to see him at 28, healthy and at his skills/athleticism/mental peak. Even in 3 seasons, at the best we saw of him he was at least on the level of Hill and I believe had injuries not derailed both, Hardaway would have proven himself the more dominant player. Yeah Hill had the triple doubles and all that, but I think Penny could do more with less. As stated before, look at the Magic's record without Shaq and a healthy Penny, they barely skipped a beat.