Scottie Pippen appreciation thread.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]What examples do we have of Pippen being a good leader?

Late in his career he was a cancer in Houston and the so-called leader of the most undisciplined team in the NBA (Portland)

He was almost never a problem player, but I never thought of him as a leader.

Someone set me straight if I'm wrong.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. He certainly didn't/was not able to serve as a positive influence on Rasheed Wallance and Bonzie Wells. Also, his 1994 refusal to enter the game and 1998 threats to not play that season come to mind.

[QUOTE]In 1994-1995, Pippen was still very good statistically but I had a sense that he lost some of his fire[/QUOTE]

What? That was probably his best season ever defensively despite being asked to carry the biggest load in the league: anchor the defense, lead the team in scoring, rebounding, blocks, minutes and assists while running the offense.

[QUOTE]As the Bulls lacked another great scorer, what the Bulls really needed during these 2 years was for Pippen to be able to score in the high 20s and Pippen didn't have it in him.[/QUOTE]

How many point guards/point forwards score that much? Why would you want your primary playmaker scoring that much, unless it was someone like Lebron? Pippen's teammates loved him and part of the reason was he was primarily interested in winning and he knew to do that he had to make his teammates better. Part of how he did that was being a pass-first player.

[QUOTE]he became a role player by the time he was 33 with only 37K minutes played at that point.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, his 98' back injury had nothing to do with it. :rolleyes: The fact is, in addition to his injury, he had played 11 seasons by then and then the equivalent of 2 1/2 seasons because he was in the playoffs every year, usually going deep. On top of that he played twice in the Olympics. The notion that he had the mileage of a typical 33 year old is demonstrably false.

[QUOTE]What examples do we have of Pippen being a good leader?[/QUOTE]

The best evidence possible: the words of his teammates and coaches throughout his career. What evidence is there to suggest he was [I]not[/I] a good leader? If he was a poor leader why--based on the available evidence--was Scottie the guy teammates turned to when they needed encouragement or inspiration? Is that not precisely the time one looks for leadership?

Regarding Portland, check out Portland's win-loss record with and without him, even in 2002 and 2003. They went from top 5 in the league to barely top 20 both times. Was it his 11/6/5 they were missing?

It is strange to me that time and again leadership on here is viewed simply through the lens of ability on the basketball court, usually scoring prowess. There are nearly 30 teams. The notion that the best player=the leader 90% of the time ignores group dynamics and shows a lack of understanding of what leadership is. Having a superlative ability to put a ball through a hoop hardly correlates with the skills needed to be a great leader.

[QUOTE]Yeah, his 98' back injury had nothing to do with it. [/QUOTE]

Before that back injury I thought he should have (and would have) been Finals MVP if he didn't hurt his back taking a million Karl Malone charges. Also his game 4 is the best defense ever played that I've seen.

jordan and pippen.
i'm tired of people putting down one in favour of the other.
is it that hard to come to grips that two of the greatest players
played on the same team at the same time?

two franchise players started their careers and
spend the best basketball years on the same team.

with skills that complemented each other perfectly.

maybe it sounds too good to be true...
does not happen often....
in fact, only happened once...
6 championships, best record ever...:bowdown:

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T][B]What examples do we have of Pippen being a good leader?[/B]

Late in his career he was a cancer in Houston and the so-called leader of the most undisciplined team in the NBA (Portland)

He was almost never a problem player, but I never thought of him as a leader.

Someone set me straight if I'm wrong.[/QUOTE]



[I]"On the Bulls he [Pippen] was probably the player most liked by the others. He mingled. He could bring out the best in the players and communicate the best. [B]Leadership, real leadership, is one of his strengths[/B]. Everybody would say Michael is a great leader. He leads by example, by rebuke, by harsh words. [B]Scottie's leadership was equally dominant[/B], but it's a leadership of patting the back, support."[/I]

Phil Jackson
[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1017938/5/index.htm[/url]

"[I][B]Scottie was our team leader.[/B] He was the guy that directed our offense and he was the guy that took on a lot of big challenges defensively...[/I]"

Phil Jackson
[url]http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2005/12/scottie-pippens-place-in-basketball.html[/url]

Bill Wennington echoes the same sentiments in his book, entitled [I]Bill Wennington's Tales from the Bulls Hardwood[/I]. He says

[I]"Scottie was my favorite Bull. It's not the most popular thing to say in Chicago, because Michael is supposed to be everybody's favorite. And I loved Michael as a person and as a teammate. I just appreciated Scottie more...

Michael will test you everyday. But Michael will also let you burn in the coach's eyes to see how you handle the situation. [B]Scottie handled his relationships with his teammates differently, and better, in my opinion [/B]...

My first season with the Bulls was the 1993-94 season, the first one Michael did not play because of his initial retirement. In that season I saw Scottie as No. 1...I played with a lot of players--Chris Webber, Mark Aguirre, Sam Perkins--[B]Scottie was head and shoulders above all of those players in terms of leadership [/B]and what he stood for as a team basketball player...

...But what Scottie represented to me is a player whom I would pick 1st for my team every time. Even if Michael was available, I would pick Scottie Pippen...

...[B]Scottie led that team[/B] ['93-'94 Bulls] to 55 wins...Maybe it's apples to oranges, but t[B]hat season was an indication of what Scottie was capable of doing as a team leader.[/B]"[/I]
[url]http://books.google.com/books?id=EipQcbzkyvoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=bill+wennington&hl=en&ei=vTiaTKq6MoG0lQeMvJTuDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false[/url] pp.11-17

[QUOTE=jlip][I]"On the Bulls he [Pippen] was probably the player most liked by the others. He mingled. He could bring out the best in the players and communicate the best. [B]Leadership, real leadership, is one of his strengths[/B]. Everybody would say Michael is a great leader. He leads by example, by rebuke, by harsh words. [B]Scottie's leadership was equally dominant[/B], but it's a leadership of patting the back, support."[/I]

Phil Jackson
[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1017938/5/index.htm[/url]

"[I][B]Scottie was our team leader.[/B] He was the guy that directed our offense and he was the guy that took on a lot of big challenges defensively...[/I]"

Phil Jackson
[url]http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2005/12/scottie-pippens-place-in-basketball.html[/url]

Bill Wennington echoes the same sentiments in his book, entitled [I]Bill Wennington's Tales from the Bulls Hardwood[/I]. He says

[I]"Scottie was my favorite Bull. It's not the most popular thing to say in Chicago, because Michael is supposed to be everybody's favorite. And I loved Michael as a person and as a teammate. I just appreciated Scottie more...

Michael will test you everyday. But Michael will also let you burn in the coach's eyes to see how you handle the situation. [B]Scottie handled his relationships with his teammates differently, and better, in my opinion [/B]...

My first season with the Bulls was the 1993-94 season, the first one Michael did not play because of his initial retirement. In that season I saw Scottie as No. 1...I played with a lot of players--Chris Webber, Mark Aguirre, Sam Perkins--[B]Scottie was head and shoulders above all of those players in terms of leadership [/B]and what he stood for as a team basketball player...

...But what Scottie represented to me is a player whom I would pick 1st for my team every time. Even if Michael was available, I would pick Scottie Pippen...

...[B]Scottie led that team[/B] ['93-'94 Bulls] to 55 wins...Maybe it's apples to oranges, but t[B]hat season was an indication of what Scottie was capable of doing as a team leader.[/B]"[/I]
[url]http://books.google.com/books?id=EipQcbzkyvoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=bill+wennington&hl=en&ei=vTiaTKq6MoG0lQeMvJTuDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false[/url] pp.11-17[/QUOTE]

Very good stuff.

How's Wennington's book overall?

I was under more of the impression that Pippen was more like a Sam Jones who preferred not having the attention on him and kind of a loner.

Scottie Pippen dunking from the FT line.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yB0qWqBsMBc[/url]

Pippen had such underrated hops, you rarely ever hear people talk about how great a dunker he was.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]Very good stuff.

How's Wennington's book overall?

I was under more of the impression that Pippen was more like a Sam Jones who preferred not having the attention on him and kind of a loner.[/QUOTE]

Thanks.
I only read half of it, but from what I did read, it's a solid piece. I wouldn't say that it's a bestseller quality book though. It's somewhat of a brief, informal first person memoir of his days with the Bulls. He pretty much takes you into the practices and addresses other "non game" matters such as the relationships between the players and his perspectives on them. One thing that I did find rather revealing as well as interesting is that Phil Jackson's mind games and unorthodox psychological approaches baffled his players as much as they do everyone else.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]
Really? Read the thread. It is insecure MJ fans who hijacked a "cheers to Scottie" thread.
[/quote]
My response was directly to you. Don't you always do this stuff? You say stuff like "ZOMG, Pippen! Wtf?! He was a better team player than MJ! He wasn't just a sidekick! He was the leader of the team!"

Which is shockingly ok. And I won't truly argue with. It's a great argument to say Magic and Bird were better team players than Jordan, but he actually got the criticism forever. I think people even acknowledge that Magic and Bird did make their much teammates better and landed a better impact than Jordan. At least whoever watched them play. Pippen can do things similar.

However, some people do underrate/overrate things. Like the whole Pippen issue. I like this one guy who said, "Jordan fans underrate Pippen. Jordan haters overrate Pippen."

But then you said:

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]
:oldlol: at this "sidekick" label. "Sidekicks" are not legit MVP candidates. [/quote]
THAT is just not true at all. Mostly all of the greats had sidekicks that were legit MVP candidates. Some were arguably better than they were in that specific time in their careers. And most of them were better than Pippen. There is no attack towards them. wtf?

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]
Kareem -- took a 2nd year expansion team that won 27 games the year before to the ECF as a rookie without Oscar or Magic

Shaq -- always had great teams so there isn't anything to say about him.

Bird -- took a 29 win team to the ECF as a rookie, won a ring with McHale averaging about 10 points on the bench.
[/QUOTE]

Indeed. But so did Hakeem. He took a 29 win team to a 48 win team in his first year. Then he expanded that team to not only beat the Showtime Lakers and went on to the Finals all in his second year. Hakeem actually had a better start and more impact than Jordan too initially. Would you also consider him better than Jordan? Especially as a team player?

You can even argue that LBJ had better impact than Shaq with the impacts on his team.

It's all about having the right chemistry, being at the right time and at the right place. Wilt even acknowledge this when he was asked if he would've been with the Celtics rather than Russel. He felt that team wouldn't do as well. Similar with all the other great players. It all depends.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]The real question is strength relative to the league, something MJ fans conveniently ignore due to expansion. Who wins? An average team from 1965 or 1995? The answer is the former. Jordan had a team that won 55 games while replacing him with a D-League scrub. How many other superstars of that era had a team of that strength? Let's see hard facts, not speculation about teams that wound up winning 56 games despite their top player being out for a while but went 8-9 without the superstar in question, as MJ fans did previously when this question was posed.
[/quote]

Kareem had that team too! Hell, they won the title without him despite him being MVP and all. Bird may had that team when Mchale was healthy and hit his prime, being like the best PF ever in the 80s (also fourth in MVP only behind Bird, Magic, and Jordan). But that is speculating which you don't want to do.

But the Bulls also had prime Grant, which goes unnotice too. Then you have the season after 94, which it things didn't look too promising with the Bulls after Grant got out. With your logic, I can make a argument saying Grant was the most important piece to the puzzle instead of Pippen from 88-94.

Grant got traded to the Magic, who ironically enough beat the Bulls and went to the Finals. Did you also know that this was the first time in Shaq's career that he went pass the first round? That was when Grant came in. Without Grant, they may got another knock out in the first round. Hell, they went to the finals with Grant.

Even after Shaq left, they all was pretty decent. They were still in the playoffs with Penny hurt. Grant was battling injuries. They almost beat the Heat too who later on went to the conference finals against the Bulls. If they were more healthy, then would've been a better team.

Meanwhile, Pippen was on his way just to be a mere .500 team without Grant. Then Jordan came back into the picture and got them a few wins. And this is prime Pippen. Once Jordan got back, they were 13-4. And this is when Jordan was a year and half out of practice. The first 17 games with only Pippen, they were 9-8.

The reason why they sucked is because they had lack of talent. Lack of rebounding and etc. Same thing with Jordan in his rookie career. You need talent to win, good coaching, and good system to win. What the Bulls lacked when Jordan left was another scorer. There was no guards in the quality of Jordan and really no real replacement for him unless they could've got a Chris Mullin or someone like him, which I can't think of atm.


Going back to speculation, you are basically claiming that Pippen is a better team player than Jordan. Do you REALLY think that Pippen would've done any better and have more impact than Jordan as a rookie when competition was tougher and with GOAT teams facing you? Do you really think that Pippen would have carried a Bulls team to success without a Grant/Rodman/Jordan?

But....the Bulls 1985-86 had a lot of potential. They brought in some very nice pieces. They just failed because of injuries and not just Jordan. They had the Ice man, still had Woolridge, had Oakley (the re bounder that they were missing, but a rookie). If they would've been healthy then things would've been interesting. My guess they would be looking at a winning record. Shame.

Just to reply to some of your point micku, I can't really think of a better number 2 guy thn pippen since I've been watching basketball. And this goes back to the 80s.

And I don't agree with the notion that horace grant was as valuable as pippen based on the won loss record. Or even in orlando. Look at who they replaced grant with. They had a trio of pfs larry krystowiak, corie blount and then settled in on kukoc. 2 were 12th men at best a kukoc was not a PF. So you basically are replacing jordan with pete myers, and grant with the guys I mentioned. Im surprised that team was even 500. in fact they were on pace to finish at 43-39 which is damn good when you consider their starting five was

Armstrong
Myers
longley
pippen
kukoc

Then you bring up grant when shaq left. But neglect to mention that they replaced shaq with rony seikly. Who was a damn good center himself

Like I've stated as well as others, pippen was a bonafied superstar that accepted a position that hurt his personal accolades and stats. And for people to knock him for that is disgraceful.

[B]Best All Around SF of the 90s and Best SF of the 90s

He could make others better like Bird, Magic, Barkley and Hakeem

He Was Multi Dimensional Played like a PG and Defended like the Best Forwards[/B]

[QUOTE=97 bulls]
And I don't agree with the notion that horace grant was as valuable as pippen based on the won loss record. Or even in orlando. [/QUOTE]

I was making a point in saying how I can say that Jordan is to Pippen what Pippen is to Grant type of a deal. Grant was Pippen's second option like Jordan was Pippen second option. They both were very important to their success.

Grant was also in the all defensive second team for multiple years. He was very important to their success as the 3rd or 2nd option player.


[QUOTE=97 bulls] Look at who they replaced grant with. They had a trio of pfs larry krystowiak, corie blount and then settled in on kukoc. 2 were 12th men at best a kukoc was not a PF. So you basically are replacing jordan with pete myers, and grant with the guys I mentioned. Im surprised that team was even 500. in fact they were on pace to finish at 43-39 which is damn good when you consider their starting five was

Armstrong
Myers
longley
pippen
kukoc
[/QUOTE]

I agree. But I don't know if they were on pace to win 43-39 or not, because they flirting with the .500 mark.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Then you bring up grant when shaq left. But neglect to mention that they replaced shaq with rony seikly. Who was a damn good center himself[/QUOTE]

I did fail to mention that. It was my mistake to express the significance of Grant of a compare and contrast of Pippen.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Like I've stated as well as others, pippen was a bonafied superstar that accepted a position that hurt his personal accolades and stats. And for people to knock him for that is disgraceful.[/QUOTE]

The thing is that Pippen had a chance to show what he could do for a year and half. I think Pippen did show us what he could do with being the main guy. He isn't the type of guy to explode in stats, not like other second options. Imagine if they didn't have Phil Jackson and the crew either.

Pippen isn't a Mchale, Oscar, Magic, Kobe, Kareem, Shaq, Wade, West, or anything. All of the other greats that played the second fiddle were better than Pippen and they won championships. Some of the second options actually won MVP.

Pippen is overrated in this forum by some people to a degree. Probably because of the popularity of Jordan. For an example, Mchale had more potential than Pippen to be one of the greats if he stayed healthy and wasn't overshadow by Bird. I see no threads on him and his potential.

With that said, I think Pippen was overall the best SF in the 90s. But I think you can label a lot teams are champions that have two guys who are the best or one of the best at their specific position. That's common. I agree with people and say Pippen ain't no joke. He is one of the best defenders out there and a jack of all trades.

But where does Pippen really rank among the all time great second option? He is up against a lot of competition. Some are even in the most ppl top 10. That's the discussion people are not having.

Its just funny how much of a double standard I see here. Pippens suppose to win 2 championships, and 2 mvps with talent that wasn't anywhere as good as other great players. I just don't see why. I mean, jordan had pippen, bird had mchale, magic had worthy, shaq had kobe, kobe has gasol. And pippen had grant. But he's supposed to do all the things these guys did in 2 seasons. Damn its unfair.

[QUOTE=Micku]
But the Bulls also had prime Grant, which goes unnotice too. [B]Then you have the season after 94, which it things didn't look too promising with the Bulls after Grant got out. With your logic, I can make a argument saying Grant was the most important piece to the puzzle instead of Pippen from 88-94.[/B][/quote]

The '95 Bulls problems ran deeper than Horace. The Bulls' entire frontline was pretty much decimated after '94. Horace left via free agency (more on that later). Bill Cartwright retired. Scott Williams also left via free agency. To compound this the Bulls lost Luc Longley to start the season with a stress fracture in his foot and he didn't come back until after January. So they had to play musical chairs at the PF spot with Dickey Simpkins, Greg Foster, Larry Krystowiak, and Corey Blount and feature Will Perdue at center...a rather mediocre interior core to say the least.

[quote]Grant got traded to the Magic, who ironically enough beat the Bulls and went to the Finals. Did you also know that this was the first time in Shaq's career that he went pass the first round? That was when Grant came in. Without Grant, they may got another knock out in the first round. Hell, they went to the finals with Grant. [/quote]

The Bulls didn't trade Horace. He left as a free agent and nothing was gonna make him come back to the Bulls after '94. Jerry Krause in particular pissed off Horace during contract negotiations when he slighted him and named PFs that he thought were better and did this publicly right before the playoffs which was pretty damn stupid on a GMs part. I'm not sure if this affected Horace's play but his numbers dropped drastically during the playoffs...especially his rebounding numbers.

[quote]Meanwhile, Pippen was on his way just to be a mere .500 team without Grant. [/quote]

Which is what happens when a team loses its frontline.

[quote]Then Jordan came back into the picture and got them a few wins. And this is prime Pippen. Once Jordan got back, they were 13-4.[/quote]

Before Jordan came back the team was starting to gel with Longley in the lineup and they had won 8 out of their last 10 games.

[quote]And this is when Jordan was a year and half out of practice. The first 17 games with only Pippen, they were 9-8. [/quote]

Which is what happens when you don't have a frontline or talented scorers around.

[quote]The reason why they sucked is because they had lack of talent. Lack of rebounding and etc. Same thing with Jordan in his rookie career. You need talent to win, good coaching, and good system to win. What the Bulls lacked when Jordan left was another scorer. There was no guards in the quality of Jordan and really no real replacement for him unless they could've got a Chris Mullin or someone like him, which I can't think of atm. [/quote]

Exactly.

Pippen is better than LeBron. More rings, better defense and much ferocious hunger and hatred against his opponents. He would never join forces with his competition.

Pippen hated the Knicks. Pippen hated Miller and the Pacers. Pippen hated the Jazz. He hated the Pistons. He played with heart, he never quit. Pip is a legend. I still don't understand why people look down on him, just because Jordan was the GOAT.

People don't look down on Kobe between 2000-07 did they? And he played with one of the most dominating center ever.

Pippen deserves more respect.