Teammate career rankings between Jordan and Lebron -- The Reality

[QUOTE=3ball;14111947]Yes roundball, we know that pippen has a non-horrific BPM (the stockton stat, aka steals weighted stat), so you keep harping on it

But what else does he have?.. VORP?.. yes, we already know he has good value above replacement, another meaningless stat.. And what else.. OBPM?.. APG, SPG, ORTG?. thres?. that's it..

otherwise, it's all Ewing - PPG, DREB, OREB, RPG, BPG, TS, FG, EFG, FT%, 2-pt %, PER, WS/48, DRTG, reg season peak, playoff peak, H2H, 1st option (pippen is 2nd option)[/QUOTE]

You make a habit of being wrong. Steals are [U]also[/U] weighted in vorp, winshares & ws48. They're also stats you have used to prop up Jordan/Ewing. And once again, Pippen has Ewing beat in WS/48 not the other way around. So that isn't in his favor just like BPM-RAPM-APM-VORP-ORTG-WS-WS48 aren't either.

Pippen was never on MJ's level. He was never on the top tier level of MJ, Robinson, Shaq, Malone, Hakeem, Barkley, and yes - Ewing.. Pippen was [U]never[/U] on this tier and was always considered a secondary player, aka 2nd option, while they were all alpha dog 1st options..

Pippen's inherent secondary nature was revealed and played out like an experiment in the 94' playoffs - Pippen predictably bricked and imploded.. it's funny because mj elevated pippen TO a second option - he would never be a clear-cut #2 or a champion #2 anywhere else..

people forget that MJ helped Pippen improve on offense more than another player would - Pippen would be a slightly WORSE offensive player if he came up alongside someone other than MJ, and pippen's offense was already shaky alongside MJ many nights

everyone knows the drill:

no pip, no chip

[QUOTE=insidious301;14111963]You make a habit of being wrong. Steals are [U]also[/U] weighted in vorp, winshares & ws48. They're also stats you have used to prop up Jordan/Ewing. And once again, Pippen has Ewing beat in WS/48 not the other way around. So that isn't in his favor just like BPM-RAPM-APM-VORP-ORTG-WS-WS48 aren't either.[/QUOTE]

These guys are shameless. Several of these stats are stats they will be quick to invoke when convenient.

Pippen crushes Ewing across the board. This is backed up by their AT rankings. You can argue all this is wrong but don't cherry pick stats for the OP or to argue Pippen sucked or that Pippen shouldn't have been MVP etc. and then cut and run when the same stats go the other way.

The steals excuse is laughable. Blocks are weighted as well in these stats and blocks favor Ewing, the center.

This guy is a fool. Pippen was a contributor in every category but not super elite outside of steals. But when you are good or great in every category it adds up in advanced stats. That doesn't even get to defense which is hard to quantify.

Pippen was voted the best all-around player in 1995 by coaches and GM's, etc. There is a reason for that...

We actually posted at the same time, Roundball. That's weird although great minds think alike.

[QUOTE=3ball;14111975]Pippen was never on MJ's level. He was never on the top tier level of MJ, Robinson, Malone, and yes - Ewing.. Pippen was [U]never[/U] on this tier and was always considered a secondary player, aka 2nd option, while they were all alpha dog 1st options..

Pippen's inherent secondary nature was revealed and played out like an experiment in the 94' playoffs - Pippen predictably bricked and imploded.. it's funny because mj elevated pippen TO a second option - he would never be a clear-cut #2 or a champion #2 anywhere else..[/QUOTE]

Pippen had better prime stats than Ewing. So not only was Pippen on the level of Ewing, but he had more impact too. What that also tells us is Chicago's #2 was actually a #1, and outplayed the #1 on the Bulls' best rival. Pippen year after year ranked top 10 in most impact stats, so him being a superstar isn't anything new. There would be years like 1994 & even better if he had a team built around his strengths. Not around his defense either, but on the offensive end. For that theory, his [B][U]OBPM[/U][/B], which was better than Ewing's, is a good rule of thumb.

[QUOTE=insidious301;14112000]Pippen had better prime stats than Ewing. [/QUOTE]

In what world? Ewing peaked at 29/11 w/ 4 blocks a game and averaged 25/11 w/ 2.7 bpg from '90-'97. Ewing outplayed & beat peak Pippen in '94, despite Grant & Armstrong being the 3rd & 4th highest scorers on 60+%TS efficiency.

[QUOTE=insidious301;14112000]We actually posted at the same time, Roundball. That's weird although great minds think alike.



Pippen had better prime stats than Ewing. So not only was Pippen on the level of Ewing, but he had more impact too. What that also tells us is Chicago's #2 was actually a #1, and outplayed the #1 on the Bulls' best rival. Pippen year after year ranked top 10 in most impact stats, so him being a superstar isn't anything new. There would be years like 1994 & even better if he had a team built around his strengths. Not around his defense either, but on the offensive end. For that theory, his [B][U]OBPM[/U][/B], which was better than Ewing's, is a good rule of thumb.[/QUOTE]

Great points (especially the one about great minds :cheers: ).

Pippen never had a team built around his strengths and weaknesses. He inherited MJ's team and then MJ returned the second year. Ewing had teams tailor made for him and they spotlight what he required. The only way the Knicks could contend is with a #1 or #2 defense. They required that because their offenses were consistently bad. So the Knicks had to stack up on hard nosed defenders all over the roster but lacked scoring punch or playmaking as the price. Starks, Oakley, Mason being the headliners. That gave them elite defenses but came at the expense of offense. When the Knicks needed baskets in close playoff games, often they didn't get them. Hence so many losses in so many close series.

Pippen would easier to build around because of his versatility. He could anchor a good offense and an elite defense. He could score more, playmake less or vice versa. Pippen could fit with a wide range if rosters. Ewing couldn't. What Pippen needed was a second option (Grant was a dunker and scored on outbacks). The Bulls
signed Harper to be that but he flopped as a scorer in Chicago. If they had a full prime they could have gotten him someone. Krause should have traded for Hornacek in 94' at the deadline. Bulls go to the finals and probably win a chip then.

Moses Malone finished fourth in BPM on the Sixers in 1983, and he led the team in PER, WS/48 and won an MVP. What is the point with this silly comparison? Using BPM to somehow argue Pippen > Ewing is just laughable. Look at the raw numbers, eye test, and literally anything else. Ewing blows Pippen out of the water. BPM obviously has issues rating center production properly. By your logic, Pippen is better than Hakeem when he was dropping 30+ in the finals. Drexler almost doubled Hakeem's OBPM that championship year, but nobody in their right mind believes Drexler > Hakeem that year. Hakeem was the fricking reigning MVP, lol! So naturally you don't see threads like "Drexer > Hakeem in 1995 cuz BPM herp derp...." :oldlol: :hammerhead: :facepalm

Ewing's much more valuable to a team in the 90s, idiot acts as if Scottie could have done more than Ewing with the tools that he had. Wow. So Pippen having two all-star teammates wasn't enough, he needed Jeff Hornacek? Who was Ewing's 2nd best player? Oakley? Or Starks? An undrafted player who made 1 all-star team? Ewing led a team to the Finals with his 2nd option averaging 14.6 ppg on 38.1% for the Playoffs. The fact he did that with below-average help on offense is nothing short of spectacular, & was really close to beating Hakeem as well, but obviously Starks goes 2/18 w/ 0/11 from 3 in a 6-point loss in Game 7.

[QUOTE=goozeman;14112012]Moses Malone finished fourth in BPM on the Sixers in 1983, and he led the team in PER, WS/48 and won an MVP. What is the point with this silly comparison? Using BPM to somehow argue Pippen > Ewing is just laughable. Look at the raw numbers, eye test, and literally anything else. Ewing blows Pippen out of the water. BPM obviously has issues rating center production properly. By your logic, Pippen is better than Hakeem when he was dropping 30+ in the finals. Drexler almost doubled Hakeem's OBPM that championship year, but nobody in their right mind believes Drexler > Hakeem that year. Hakeem was the fricking reigning MVP, lol! So naturally you don't see threads like "Drexer > Hakeem in 1995 cuz BPM herp derp...." :oldlol: :hammerhead: :facepalm[/QUOTE]

Ewing was the anchor on both sides of the court and led his teams to many deep Playoff runs as the #1 guy. He was a better scorer & defensive player & beat/outplayed Pippen when both had their own teams & were in their primes, what else did he need to do in order to be better?

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14112014]

Ewing was the anchor on both sides of the court and led his teams to many deep Playoff runs as the #1 guy. He was a better scorer & defensive player & beat/outplayed Pippen when both had their own teams & were in their primes, what else did he need to do in order to be better?[/QUOTE]

Naw, man, you don't understand. Bobby Jones scoring 9ppg in 1983 was better than back-to-back league MVP and Finals MVP Moses Malone because BPM says so. :oldlol:

[QUOTE=goozeman;14112021]Naw, man, you don't understand. Bobby Jones scoring 9ppg in 1983 was better than back-to-back league MVP and Finals MVP Moses Malone because BPM says so. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

And they'll completely disregard Stockton having a higher BPM, VORP & PER than Pippen throughout his career. It's hilarious.

[QUOTE=goozeman;14112021]Naw, man, you don't understand. Bobby Jones scoring 9ppg in 1983 was better than back-to-back league MVP and Finals MVP Moses Malone because BPM says so. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

and per and ws/48 say parish was better than bird in the early 80s. every metric has these bad examples. once in awhile these examples reveal a mistake in popular opinion too. A lot of people in the media for good reason acted like klay was the 2nd or 3rd guy with gs but draymond was just more impactful in 16 and likely most of the kd years too. He was better in every one of those bball reference stats in 16 and the plus minus stuff too.

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT;14112027]and per and ws/48 say parish was better than bird in the early 80s. every metric has these bad examples. once in awhile these examples reveal a mistake in popular opinion too. A lot of people in the media for good reason acted like klay was the 2nd or 3rd guy with gs but draymond was just more impactful in 16 and likely most of the kd years too. He was better in every one of those bball reference stats in 16 and the plus minus stuff too.[/QUOTE]

Gimme a break, man. You could make the legit case that Parish was equal or even better than Bird in 1981. His efficiency blew Bird's away on almost equal scoring, and Parish had all-time great defensive seasons during that era. That's nothing weird about that at all and you know it. You can't make any kind of excuse on the other hand for Bobby Jones having more value according to BPM than Moses Malone during an MVP season. It's a joke.

[QUOTE=goozeman;14112035]Gimme a break, man. You could make the legit case that Parish was equal or even better than Bird in 1981. His efficiency blew Bird's away on almost equal scoring, and Parish had all-time great defensive seasons during that era. That's nothing weird about that at all and you know it. You can't make any kind of excuse on the other hand for Bobby Jones having more value according to BPM than Moses Malone during an MVP season. It's a joke.[/QUOTE]

well with bpm you can default to vorp, jones played like 25mpg and that matters. and no arguing parish over bird is pretty bad and you know it.

[QUOTE=goozeman;14110880][B]Career Rankings[/B]

[B]PER:[/B]

Anthony Davis....3
Dwayne Wade......21
Kyrie Irving.....33
Kevin Love.......45
Chris Bosh.......62
Scottie Pippen...132
Horace Grant.....185

[B]OBPM:[/B]

Anthony Davis....12
Kyrie Irving.....13
Dwayne Wade......25
Kevin Love.......29
Scottie Pippen...90
Chris Bosh.......102
Horace Grant.....107

[B]
WS/48:[/B]

Anthony Davis....13
Horace Grant.....55
Kevin Love.......57
Kyrie Irving.....68
Dwayne Wade......70
Chris Bosh.......76
Scottie Pippen...129
[B]
Ortg:[/B]

Horace Grant.....4 :biggums:
Anthony Davis....28
Kevin Love.......47
Kyrie Irving.....89
Chris Bosh.......107
Dwayne Wade......231
Scottie Pippen...NR top 250
[B]
Effective Field Goal Percentage:[/B]

Anthony Davis....86
Kyrie Irving.....99
Horace Grant.....206
Kevin Love.......225
Chris Bosh.......227
Scottie Pippen...244
Dwayne Wade......NR top 250
[B]
True Shooting:[/B]

Anthony Davis.....41
Kyrie Irving......84
Chris Bosh........89
Kevin Love........92
Dwayne Wade.......183
Dennis Rodman.....244 :rockon:
Scoottie Pippen...NR top 250 :facepalm
Horace Grant......NR top 250

[B]BPM:[/B]

Anthony Davis.....12
Dwayne Wade.......22
Kyrie Irving......32
Scottie Pippen....35 :applause:
Kevin Love........48
Chris Bosh........134
Horace Grant......176


Notice that all the real stats that are actually measuring something tangible (PER, OBPM, Ortg, WS/48, eFG%, TS%, etc) actually correlate very closely with one another in rankings. They all say that Pippen was maybe a top-100 offensive player all-time. Pippen wasn't even a Chris Bosh level offensive talent. Also, Scottie Pippen's BPM ranking is wildly incongruous because it rewards defensive stars playing on great defensive teams. From BREF about the BPM 2.0 changes:




When basketball reference reworked the stat back in 2016, players like John Stockton (another Pippen-like two-way player) saw their career BPM double. And here is the kicker... Even with that bonus bump gifted to him and playing on the best defensive teams of all-time practically his entire career, Pippen wouldn't even be a top-three impact player compared to Lebron's teammates. All-time Pippen is just slightly better than Kevin Love.

In summation, in order for Lebron to be on the level of Jordan, he would need to win six titles and win six Finals MVP's with a Chris Bosh/Kevin Love level player as his second option.

Lebron fans...

[IMG]https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fl4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Damn.