Printable View
[QUOTE=magnax1]1-Saying defense is more important then offense is stupid
2-There were plenty of better defensive players then Pippen. Just in his era alone, let alone all time.[/QUOTE]
[B]Saying offense is more important then defense is stupid[/B] Believe me.
In fact, trade Pippen WITH ANY player of his era (i want the name) and Bulls wins 0 championships.
[QUOTE=robertshaw_1][B]Saying offense is more important then defense is stupid[/B] Believe me.
In fact, trade Pippen WITH ANY player of his era (i want the name) and Bulls wins 0 championships.[/QUOTE]
Trade Pippen with Glen rice and they win at least 1, probably 2. There are plenty of players who would win a couple rings. Put Prime Dumars in his place, and they're basically no different. (on a somewhat related note, Dumars doesn't get any recognition. Hes a top 5 perimeter defender and was just as good as Isiah on those championship teams)
10 out of the last 25 last champions were the worse defensive teams. barely any difference, especially conisdering 4 were almost completely even.
[QUOTE=magnax1][b]Trade Pippen with Glen rice and they win at least 1, probably 2.[/b] There are plenty of players who would win a couple rings. Put Prime Dumars in his place, and they're basically no different. (on a somewhat related note, Dumars doesn't get any recognition. Hes a top 5 perimeter defender and was just as good as Isiah on those championship teams)
10 out of the last 25 last champions were the worse defensive teams. barely any difference, especially conisdering 4 were almost completely even.[/QUOTE]
[i]Rice[/i]?! At least say Grant Hill, man.
[QUOTE=Alhazred][i]Rice[/i]?! At least say Grant Hill, man.[/QUOTE]
I think its plausible that they win 1 or 2 championships with Glen in the 90's. 96 they're still the best team and everyone is right in their prime. 91 and 92 they could get either year, but it'd be pretty flat even.
[QUOTE=magnax1]I think its plausible that they win 1 or 2 championships with Glen in the 90's. 96 they're still the best team and everyone is right in their prime. 91 and 92 they could get either year, but it'd be pretty flat even.[/QUOTE]
I don't know. Glen Rice wasn't nearly as useful as Scottie. He was a fairly one-dimensional scorer overall.
[QUOTE=magnax1]Trade Pippen with Glen rice and they win at least 1, probably 2. There are plenty of players who would win a couple rings. Put Prime Dumars in his place, and they're basically no different. (on a somewhat related note, Dumars doesn't get any recognition. Hes a top 5 perimeter defender and was just as good as Isiah on those championship teams)
10 out of the last 25 last champions were the worse defensive teams. barely any difference, especially conisdering 4 were almost completely even.[/QUOTE]
glen rice!!!!! :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
[QUOTE]Put Prime Dumars in his place, and they're basically no different.[/QUOTE]
:roll:
[QUOTE]Rice?! At least say Grant Hill, man.[/QUOTE]
I actually agree with him (assuming we transport prime Rice back, not 91' Rice in 91'). I can see Jordan winning in 91' and 96' without a superstar caliber "sidekick" like Pippen in those years so long as he had a legit all-star but there is no way you can plug in a random all-star for 92', 93', 97', or 98' and say the Bulls would win. The Bulls easily could have lost in those seasons had they not had the luxury of having two superstars.
The thing is why is there always so much talk about other players Jordan could win with? The assumption is Pippen could not win with anyone other than Jordan, which is a joke. Prime Pippen on the 00' Blazers, or even a Pippen without the 98' finals injury, on that team wins a ring. You don't exactly have to conjure up a wild scenario like Pippen playing with Shaq and Clyde Drexler with Grant Hill coming off the bench to envision Pippen winning a ring without Jordan.
The bottom line is Jordan himself did not believe the Bulls could plug in any random talented player into Pippen's place. See Jordan's opposition to trading Pippen for young talent. See Jordan retiring after Pippen finally was traded. If Jordan could coast with any talented player why not push for, or at least allow, a trade for a player like Kemp or McDyess*? In the long term that would appear to be better, no? The other "sidekick" would be young and Jordan could have kept winning rings until he was 38 or 39 instead of being paired with an older player like Pippen whose days as a superstar player were numbered by that point. Was Jordan too dumb to realize what some of his fans "know"? I have heard MJ called many things but dumb is not one of them. There is a reason for that!
*Yes, we know what happened to Kemp and McDyess but at the time in theory--if you believe MJ could win with any talented teammate--it would be better in the long-term to trade Pippen for someone like Kemp based on youth.
Rice?? NO WAY...no even mention it..
What? Dumars is as good of a passer, and as good of a defender. He was a worse scorer but not a huge difference. Though Dumars prime was quite a bit shorter then pippen's.
I agree that Pippen would win on the 00 Blazers but I don't think he could win on a team where hes the only first option if you get what I'm saying. It'd have to be a team effort like the 00 Blazers, or 04 Pistons because he just wasn't a good enough scorer to take over games on offense.
[QUOTE=robertshaw_1]1- Defense wins championships, Offense wins games.
[/QUOTE]
but there has never been a defense that was good enough to win over prime Shaqs offense.
[QUOTE=Bigsmoke]but there has never been a defense that was good enough to win over prime Shaqs offense.[/QUOTE]
Shaqs Prime Offense????
His prime was only 3 years??????????????? (00: Miracle against portland, 01, and 02, steal against sacramento)
And in 03 against spurs????? or in 98 and 99...???
oooh....I see.....
[QUOTE]What? Dumars is as good of a passer, and as good of a defender. He was a worse scorer but not a huge difference. Though Dumars prime was quite a bit shorter then pippen's.
I agree that Pippen would win on the 00 Blazers but I don't think he could win on a team where hes the only first option if you get what I'm saying. It'd have to be a team effort like the 00 Blazers, or 04 Pistons because he just wasn't a good enough scorer to take over games on offense.[/QUOTE]
What other first option was there on the 00' Blazers? 25 year old, borderline all-star Rasheed Wallace? 35 year old Sabonis with shot knees? If prime Pippen is on that team he is the clear cut best player. Another realistic scenario (almost happened) is the 94' Bulls with Hornacek replacing Myers as SG. You are acting as if Pippen was Chauncey Billups.
He was a top 10 scorer in the L without Jordan in his prime. I see your point, but his greatness was in other areas. Using your logic Bill Russell would never exist since he couldn't drop 50 on a given night. Or Bill Walton, who led a team to a ring averaging something like 18 ppg. 30/12/8 is as valuable, if not more valuable, than 45/3/2. Then there is Pippen's defensive dominance. Pippen could score 4 points and dominate a game. This is one reason why some great scorers are ringless. When their shot was off they were useless.
Dumars simply was not as good a player. Where was he between Isiah's decline and the drafting of Grant Hill? He wasn't carrying teams to 55 wins. Don't get me wrong. He was a great player but he was never a top 5 player. Yes, I know you think Pippen never was top 5 either but the majority view in his prime had him top 5, especially from 1994-96.
[QUOTE]What other first option was there on the 00' Blazers? 25 year old, borderline all-star Rasheed Wallace? If prime Pippen is on that team he is the clear cut best player. Another realistic scenario is the 94' Bulls with Hornacek replacing Myers as SG. [/QUOTE]
I agree he was the absoulute best player no question, but on offense he wouldn't have to score 20 ppg and do everything for the team in the last couple minutes of a close game. Just like KG was obviously the best player in 08, but had trouble winning as the first offensive option.
[QUOTE]Dumars simply was not as good a player. Where was he between Isiah's decline and the drafting of Grant Hill? He wasn't carrying teams to 55 wins.[/QUOTE]
His second best player in 94 was terry Mills and his third best was 14-7 Isiah who played 60 games. Quite a large difference from Horace grant Toni Kukoc and Phil Jackson. Especially considering 94-96 was Pippen's absoulute peak and dumars was leaving his prime in 94.
[QUOTE=robertshaw_1][B]Saying offense is more important then defense is stupid[/B] Believe me.
In fact, trade Pippen WITH ANY player of his era (i want the name) and Bulls wins 0 championships.[/QUOTE]
LMFAO :lol :roll: :oldlol: Shaq,Grant hill,Clyde,Alanzo,Mt,payton,Stackton,karl malone, etc....
No way would the Bulls be as good with Dumars. They lose the versatility of having either Jordan or Pippen guard positions 1-3, they lose Pippen running the offense like a point guard from the SF position, they lose Pippen's rebounding and they lose Pippen's open court game.