Scottie Pippen appreciation thread.

[QUOTE=Fatal9]Great post. Repped. I was thinking of working on something like that but there's so much 90s Bulls footage, that there's a lot to go through. "Part 1" means there will be part 2, part 3...? :eek:[/QUOTE]

:cheers:

It's exhausting research. With the other greats, you can cheat. You already have a sense of when they had great moments, big shots, etc... With Pippen, I had to watch, skim and fast forward through tons of games to catch the right plays. Pippen could go 1-9 then dunk on Alonzo Mourning but it not make the highlights because MJ scored 42 that night. Like I said, you can't cheat when doing a Pippen video.

I broke up the video into 2 parts (offense/defense) because I didn't want Pippen to only be known for defense. He was extremely athletic. He made some nice passes (most didn't make the cut), clutch shots and nasty facials. He was more than a defender. But I couldn't leave that out, so that's part 2.

I can look through a lot of Pippen game clips I've saved over the years if you want to add them. I probably won't make any compilations now since you make them exactly how I like (no music, only game footage with commentary) so let me know.

Arguably the best small forward after Bird. The key is whether or not you rank him above Doc or not.

[QUOTE=D.J.]Arguably the best small forward after Bird. The key is whether or not you rank him above Doc or not.[/QUOTE]

I think Pip was Doc 2.0

[QUOTE]Or in 1993 when the Knicks were up 2-0 on the Bulls and won more regular season games than them, I've not seen you post how "if the Knicks get a few calls to go their way in game five they win that series" [/QUOTE]

:oldlol:

That is strange since several times I have said with a break or two here and there the Knicks could have won, with Charles Smith being the prime example.

[QUOTE]You only look at things the way you want to see them. Because of this, most people just ignore you. (Like I should be doing)[/QUOTE]

That is very naive. We all look at things the way we want to see them. Some of us are capable of recognizing that; others are in denial.

[QUOTE]How about if the Knicks had the same two starters at guard for more than eight games in a row once all year? Would that have made any difference?[/QUOTE]

It is funny how all these shades of gray are invoked by you when it comes to the Knicks. Why not play the same game with the Bulls? It isn't just Pippen. Grant, Kukoc missed time as well. The Bulls had a D-Leaguer at SG since MJ retired 2 days before training camp.

[QUOTE]Robinson also took teams to the second round three times and conference finals once while only playing with two all-stars the whole time (Pip had two in '94 alone) in a stronger conference.[/QUOTE]

Over what period of time? Again, you are adopting an objective pose whole engaging in spin.

1) Why didn't you mention the period of time Robinson did that during?
2) What relevance does what Robinson did in 95' (only WCF trip) have to 94'?
3) Why didn't you mention BJ Armstrong was a 14/4 all-star who was voted in by the fans because he was a Bull? You actually are trying to sell him as a legit all-star. :oldlol:

[QUOTE]But let's not let facts get in the way of what we want other people to believe. [/QUOTE]

This coming from someone who actually is trying to claim the Knicks were clearly superior to the Bulls.

[QUOTE]With Starks:

40-19 (.678)

Without Starks:

17-6 (.739)[/QUOTE]


:roll: :cheers:


This is very damning. He had to know that but strangely not only opted not to mention that but insinuated the Knicks struggled without Starks. What a hypocrite (do you have the Kareem-Walton thread? :oldlol: ). He a great poster but the faux pose of scholarly objectivity he adopts is amusing.

It is hilarious to see a big Bill Russell partisan like him diminish the Russell of SF's. You don't see any rhetoric about "leadership" (he actually said Pip was not a good leader earlier in the thread), "intangibles", "defense" and "winning" when it comes to his commentary on Pippen, do you? Instead we see emphasis on things like scoring. 15 ppg>50 ppg based on winning/defense/intangibles/leadership but 22 ppg<28 ppg despite the same metrics falling on the former player's side.

The video is posted by Kelly Dwyer of Yahoo Sports :cheers:

[url]http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Video-Scottie-Pippen-s-brilliance?urn=nba-287399[/url]

Not gonna lie. I never noticed how GREAT a defender he was. Good video.

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd3AZdmHSIQ"]Scottie Pippen: A Tribute Part 2[/URL]

[QUOTE=D.J.]Arguably the best small forward after Bird. The key is whether or not you rank him above Doc or not.[/QUOTE]
Come on. Barry? Baylor? Havlicek?

[QUOTE=magnax1]Come on. Barry? Baylor? Havlicek?[/QUOTE]


Scottie played great at both ends. He had seasons of 21/7+/7, 22/8+/5+/3, and 21/8/5/3. The three you mentioned are a lot like Iverson. Great offensive players, but not so great on the defensive end. Offensively, they weren't much more than volume scorers.

[QUOTE=D.J.]Scottie played great at both ends. He had seasons of 21/7+/7, 22/8+/5+/3, and 21/8/5/3. The three you mentioned are a lot like Iverson. [B]Great offensive players, but not so great on the defensive end.[/B] Offensively, they weren't much more than volume scorers.[/QUOTE]

Where the hell have you been? You didn't hear? Defense doesn't count anymore. Defense doesn't show up all nice and pretty on a stat sheet like big scoring numbers. It's all about volume chucking these days.

[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]Where the hell have you been? You didn't hear? Defense doesn't count anymore. Defense doesn't show up all nice and pretty on a stat sheet like big scoring numbers. It's all about volume chucking these days.[/QUOTE]


Obviously, it doesn't count.

Hondo wasn't so great on the defensive end? :ohwell:

[QUOTE=D.J.]Scottie played great at both ends. He had seasons of 21/7+/7, 22/8+/5+/3, and 21/8/5/3. The three you mentioned are a lot like Iverson. Great offensive players, but not so great on the defensive end. Offensively, they weren't much more than volume scorers.[/QUOTE]

Why do you feel qualified to register an opinion on something you clearly know nothing about?

[B]If Pippen would not have played with one of the greatest ball hoggs in NBA History he would have been a constant 22 (48%), 8, 7, 2, 1.5 Player

His stats are lowered because he had to play in a triangle offense

No player had more responsabilities than Pippen in the Bulls

He had to guard the Best Offensive Player
He had to control the Perimeter Defensively
He had to be the 2nd Best Rebounder
He had to be the Creator (Jordan was a pathetic creator for others, Timing Plays)
He had to be the 2nd Lead Scorer


U have to sacrifice stats if u play with the biggest ball hogg of the 80s and early 90s[/B]