Another commentator saying Pippen was on Jordan's level in 96.

[97 bulls]

I think the way 99% of basketball fans who've both played and watched do. Jordan's impact was superior to Pippen through: the eye test, stats and skills. No fanboy will convince people who live in reality different. I'm not arguing Jordan is GOAT either, so repeating that makes no sense.

The wins don't say that though. And that's all that matters. That's why I say look at the results. Jordan leaves in 94, and Pippens injury in 98 netted literally the same results. Or a 1 percentage point difference. And I'd much rather have the 98 team minutes Pippen and Jordan over the 94 team.

Harper
Burrell
Kukocs
Rodman
Longley

Is better than

Armstrong
Myers
Kukoc (rookie)
Grant
Cartwright (old ass Cartwright)

[MadDog]

The wins don't say that though. And that's all that matters. That's why I say look at the results. Jordan leaves in 94, and Pippens injury in 98 netted literally the same results. Or a 1 percentage point difference. And I'd much rather have the 98 team minutes Pippen and Jordan over the 94 team.

Harper
Burrell
Kukocs
Rodman
Longley

Is better than

Armstrong
Myers
Kukoc (rookie)
Grant
Cartwright (old ass Cartwright)

That's cap. They absolutely do. Jordan's win rate was better in 98 than Pippen's in 94. You also left out Longely in 94 even though he was on the team Luc produced similarly both years. And again, Burrell can't compare to Grant or BJ who were both stars.

I don't care about your revisionist history and narratives. Remember: team stats was YOUR argument lol

[HoopsNY]

The wins don't say that though. And that's all that matters. That's why I say look at the results. Jordan leaves in 94, and Pippens injury in 98 netted literally the same results. Or a 1 percentage point difference. And I'd much rather have the 98 team minutes Pippen and Jordan over the 94 team.

Harper
Burrell
Kukocs
Rodman
Longley

Is better than

Armstrong
Myers
Kukoc (rookie)
Grant
Cartwright (old ass Cartwright)

Grant and BJ were at their peaks in '94. Not to mention, they were both All-Stars. One thing that should be considered, though, is the injuries the league had, which makes Pippen's '94 run comparable to MJ w/o Pippen in '98.

NYK: Ewing missed 56 games
ORL: Penny missed 63 games
MIA: Zo missed 24 games, Mashburn missed 34 games
NJN: Van Horn missed 20 games, Williams missed 17 games
UTA: Stockton missed 19 games
HOU: Hakeem missed 35 games, Barkley missed 14 games
MIN: Gugliotta missed 41 games
WAS: Howard missed 18 games
LAL: Shaq missed 22 games

Now I haven't gone through the league in '94 to see which teams were missing key players, but it would be interesting to see how many 1st, 2nd, or 3rd options missed significant time. It would also be interesting to see how many of the above mentioned opponents had to face off against Chicago without those players and how it compares to Chicago in '94 and who they faced without their key players.

[97 bulls]

When did I ever use points to describe Rodman? Don't strawman. Again, he was coming off the bench and checked out frequently that year. Jordan and Phil had to constantly motivate Rodman just so he could stay on track. His defense and rebounding fell off compared to 96.

Anyone who actually saw that team knows this is ALL fact.

https://youtu.be/eC0B-9Ma-8M

https://youtu.be/NWwI1_8WEco

https://youtu.be/EglLZwE_frI

https://youtu.be/Ftf0VIZ3Ibw


Perhaps you forgot

I didn't just say scoring. You're trying to finesse and ignore what I mentioned earlier. Broken down, Jordan's overall game WHICH INCLUDES SCORING had more impact on the Bulls winning. Reality.

My bad, you did say offense. I'm talking about results bro. Thus the 94 vs 98 comparison

[97 bulls]

Grant and BJ were at their peaks in '94. Not to mention, they were both All-Stars. One thing that should be considered, though, is the injuries the league had, which makes Pippen's '94 run comparable to MJ w/o Pippen in '98.

NYK: Ewing missed 56 games
ORL: Penny missed 63 games
MIA: Zo missed 24 games, Mashburn missed 34 games
NJN: Van Horn missed 20 games, Williams missed 17 games
UTA: Stockton missed 19 games
HOU: Hakeem missed 35 games, Barkley missed 14 games
MIN: Gugliotta missed 41 games
WAS: Howard missed 18 games
LAL: Shaq missed 22 games

Now I haven't gone through the league in '94 to see which teams were missing key players, but it would be interesting to see how many 1st, 2nd, or 3rd options missed significant time. It would also be interesting to see how many of the above mentioned opponents had to face off against Chicago without those players and how it compares to Chicago in '94 and who they faced without their key players.

Lol. We can apply that logic to any year. Pick one.

[Micku]

Pippen had the lowest advanced stats ever for a winning sidekick in the 93' Playoffs (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP, TS), and averaged 17 on 41% for the entire 96-98' Playoffs, so he was horrible for 4 of 6 title runs (45% true shooting in the 93' Finals).

Are you talking about in history or in that specific playoffs?

Because in history? Eeeeeh. Hakeem with the Rockets had to carry hard in the playoffs as well. He has worse teammates when it advance. Lower than Pippen when it comes to PER. Unless you gonn'a say Robert Horry performed better than Pippen lol

And in that specific playoffs, he actually perform than Ewing teammates that year. And I think he was the third best player in the finals in 93, unless you wann'a say Dan Majerle or Kevin Johnson was better?

But I don't not mean to imply that MJ wasn't doing any carrying, because he did.

In less than 18 months, Pippen destroyed a 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round and then borderline lottery in 95' before MJ returned to restore 3-peat caliber.. After the surprise factor was over and the no-pressure or honeymoon period ended in the 94' playoffs, the REAL bulls without MJ were borderline lottery in 95'.

Ultimately, Pippen's playoff run as 1st option was historically disgraceful with so many chokes that it's hard to fathom... Every disaster that one would imagine without MJ actually happened in those playoffs... lol.. Pippen was a legendary embarrassment and confirmed everything that everyone already thought about him (soft, low-producer, not dominant, mentally weak, choker, can't take over games).

By 95, they didn't have the same team. And as ppl said before, they didn't get proper replacement for MJ. You can't replace MJ, but a solid SG at the very least. Other than Penny who did the carrying when Shaq was out, I can't imagine another side kick tho holding down the fort in the 90s. Unless you wann'a talk about Drexler. Maybe Kevin Johnson? Since he was the best player on the team before Barkley got there. But his prime was cut short.

99' Kobe demolished Pippen in the 1st Round and was already far superior to any version of Pippen.

98' Kobe was also superior but he didn't get enough playing time.. Maybe Pippen was better than 97' Kobe for about 2 weeks to start the season.

And Eddie Jones didn't have the winning spotlight to get the accolades that Pippen got, but he was basically the same player as Pippen except superior offensively (he could really shoot the ball).. Again, pippen-caliber is a low bar - most guys were on his level.

Far superior? Hahaha! In 99? In what regard? Scoring? He wasn't better in defense, he wasn't better passing, and he didn't score enough imo to even separate themselves. In how he scored, sure. He was a bit too selfish sometimes. Didn't feed the ball to Shaq. He even commented on one of his interviews how he refused to give the ball to Shaq sometimes even when Shaq is all like, "Hit me young fella. I'm open." Kobe was like, "A'ight" and didn't pass him the ball because he felt they were just gonn'a foul him and send him to the line. And he was all like, "If you want to the ball again, you better rebound."

Eddie Jones is good tho. Almost underrated I felt, but I dunno about better than Pippen prime lol. But he was really solid.

Why wouldn't Jordan win with a guy that could average 26/6/8 on 52% three-point shooting (6 attempts) like Terry Porter in the 92' WCF - that's better than Pippen ever played, so why wouldn't Jordan win with that?

It's consistency and being the best at his position. Even with Terry Porter playing like that, Pippen was better than anybody other than Drexler in the 92 finals. Like Pippen performed better than in the finals against'em. And Terry Porter in 90 finals didn't perform as good either. But not to say MJ couldn't have won with'em. He probably could've. That Portland team in general was really talented.

While Pippen did lack the offensive prowse at times and MJ had to carry that load, he always brought it with solid playmaking and defense.

And if Pippen's mid-tier playmaking helped MJ (5 apg), then what would Stockton goat playmaking do?.. No one in history gets more credit for 5 apg than Pippen but he was just a mid-tier playmaker.. He was actually a garbage playmaker when compared to elite playmakers (which includes Jordan) because Pippen couldn't average more than 7 apg, while MJ could average whatever he wanted and he DID.. Pippen didn't have a handle that could break down defenders or average 30/9/11 at point guard, while Jordan did.



^^^ Again, those guys had sidekicks with higher peaks that actually dominated and led the team in various series (1b), while Pippen was never a 1b or team leader and had lower peak - see previous post for specific proof of these assertions.

Well, first Pippen has never been that dude. He is that elite of player to get those stats. He has never shown it nor capability. If he did, then the Bulls would've been more dominated than they were.

But in terms of playmaking, Pippen at his peak did average 7. I don't know how Pippen would do in another system in his prime. And Stockton probably play the same with the triangle. But under the Jazz system, it would be amazing due to MJ off the ball movement and on the open floor.

I get you if you wann'a say that other players had higher peaks. But a lot of them had shorter primes in the 90s. Kevin Johnson was a stud in the early 90s but he dropped off. Penny could've been better than what he was and had amazing upside but injuries got to them. Larry Johnson seemed like he was gonn'a be a dude to look out for, but injuries got'em.

Pippen stayed healthy...for the most part and was always one of the best at his positions. Him and John Stockton. That's why I feel he was the best sidekick of the 90s. The most consistent, perfect compliment, and he held the fort. If you wann'a say other players had higher peaks, I won't argue too much. But I'll argue Kobe tho. Hahha. At least go to Kobe 2000 was better than any version Pippen than 99. Haha

[Micku]

I think the way 99% of basketball fans who've both played and watched do. Jordan's impact was superior to Pippen through: the eye test, stats and skills. No fanboy will convince people who live in reality different. I'm not arguing Jordan is GOAT either, so repeating that makes no sense.

That's what I'm sayin. But you can use 89 too. You can use 88. You can use 90. You can use 98, which I think is really impressive given of how old, injured, and the drama the team was dealing with. You could use all the Bulls years tho.

It's a very hard argument imo to make that Pippen had a similar impact than MJ when not only the stats say otherwise, but we can see eye test and the skills. We see it when the Bulls are down, we see the offensive become stagnant, and we see MJ carry them. Not to say Pippen wasn't good, but MJ was on another lvl. He always was. Like watching the games in 88-90 was insane seeing MJ being all over the floor in both offense and defense. Granted, MJ didn't trust in his teammates as much as he did in second peat, but it's a bit exaggerated to a point or there have been players like Kobe who out did MJ in that regard.

But a majority says that MJ was superior. Pippen was important, but like I said..it's not like it was Magic/Kareem in the mid 80s, it wasn't KD/Curry. It wasn't 2011 LeBron/Wade. It's not like they were the same impact. It was clearly MJ. Pippen was second. Nothing wrong with that. Like I said, every statistically measure of both raw and advance says it, the clutch stats, and we can see the games. We can see the skills. And this isn't even about MJ being the GOAT or not. It just happens to be MJ is one of the bests to ever do it. But there is a clear difference of not only player skills set, player impact, and player ability.

It's a tougher argument for Curry/KD than MJ/Pip.

[Micku]

The wins don't say that though. And that's all that matters. That's why I say look at the results. Jordan leaves in 94, and Pippens injury in 98 netted literally the same results. Or a 1 percentage point difference. And I'd much rather have the 98 team minutes Pippen and Jordan over the 94 team.

Harper
Burrell
Kukocs
Rodman
Longley

Is better than

Armstrong
Myers
Kukoc (rookie)
Grant
Cartwright (old ass Cartwright)

I wonder what you think of Barkley for instance. He would say that his time in philly was his best years as a player. Like he think he peaked there. And the stats indicate it too. But with the Suns, he felt like he was on the better team, but he wasn't a better player than what he was in philly.

There are other players throughout history that are similar. Sometimes the wins aren't always the indicator that player a or player b figured things out and learned how to win. Like Kareem in the 70s was the better player than in the 80s, but he won more in the 80s. KG was better with the T'Wolves than he was with Boston.

With MJ, I believed there were ppl who thought MJ peaked in 96. Probably cuz of the 72 wins and the fadeaway was used more. But MJ himself felt like he peaked in 91. And that stats indicate it's between 88-91.

But I suppose what I'm asking is this, you don't think it's possible for a player to be better in losing effort than another player who is not impressive statistically, but still win? Because I think it depends.

[HoopsNY]

Lol. We can apply that logic to any year. Pick one.

I don't think you get my point. The '98 season had an innumerable amount of injuries for playoff teams' best players. Chicago, too, saw such injuries, but the point here is, Pippen lost MJ in '94 and won 55 games while MJ lost Pippen and had the team on a 56 win pace.

But unlike '94, MJ faced a lot of depleted teams. This is a credit to Pippen. Now to be fair, I haven't gone and checked how many games the Bulls faced with those teams without their elite stars (Zo, Penny, Shaq, Howard, Ewing, etc). But it would be interesting to see how that plays into it.

Longley and Kerr missed significant time, too, but that when Pippen had already returned.

[97 bulls]

I don't think you get my point. The '98 season had an innumerable amount of injuries for playoff teams' best players. Chicago, too, saw such injuries, but the point here is, Pippen lost MJ in '94 and won 55 games while MJ lost Pippen and had the team on a 56 win pace.

But unlike '94, MJ faced a lot of depleted teams. This is a credit to Pippen. Now to be fair, I haven't gone and checked how many games the Bulls faced with those teams without their elite stars (Zo, Penny, Shaq, Howard, Ewing, etc). But it would be interesting to see how that plays into it.

Longley and Kerr missed significant time, too, but that when Pippen had already returned.

I see what you're saying.

[97 bulls]

I wonder what you think of Barkley for instance. He would say that his time in philly was his best years as a player. Like he think he peaked there. And the stats indicate it too. But with the Suns, he felt like he was on the better team, but he wasn't a better player than what he was in philly.

There are other players throughout history that are similar. Sometimes the wins aren't always the indicator that player a or player b figured things out and learned how to win. Like Kareem in the 70s was the better player than in the 80s, but he won more in the 80s. KG was better with the T'Wolves than he was with Boston.

With MJ, I believed there were ppl who thought MJ peaked in 96. Probably cuz of the 72 wins and the fadeaway was used more. But MJ himself felt like he peaked in 91. And that stats indicate it's between 88-91.

But I suppose what I'm asking is this, you don't think it's possible for a player to be better in losing effort than another player who is not impressive statistically, but still win? Because I think it depends.

Sure that can happen. Look at Matthew Stafford of the Rams. Much like Barkley, his success came when he got more talent around him.

Again, I also believe Jordan is a better player than Pippen. But I also believe that their importance to the team's success is the same. And thats all I'm really concerned with.

Here's another point. Phil Jackson said one of the biggest changes from 90 to 91 was having Pippen run the offense. Essentially having Pippen become the point forward. Guess what? Jordan ran the offense with the same team in 90. The Bulls obviously did better with Pippen as the PG.

Gaudy stats have never told the whole story. Stats need to be taken in context. Pippen wasn't concerned with getting stats. I'm sure had he been concerned, they would've been better (not saying his stats were bad to begin with). But I also feel it would've been at the expense of the team's success.

Even with Barkley. Barkley never won because he was lazy on defense. And very cavalier about it. And I'm sure he has great advanced stats. Why did Bob Knight cut him? He was probably the 2nd best player on that 84 Olympic team. But he couldn't stay in shape. Or wouldn't stay in shape.

[MadDog]

https://youtu.be/eC0B-9Ma-8M

https://youtu.be/NWwI1_8WEco

https://youtu.be/EglLZwE_frI

https://youtu.be/Ftf0VIZ3Ibw

Perhaps you forgot

My bad, you did say offense. I'm talking about results bro. Thus the 94 vs 98 comparison

Yes, Rodman flustered him in a few of those games, but Malone still had 25/11 and shot 50% lol. Rodman was still a very good rebounder and definitely had impact defensively, but unlike 96, he made no all-defensive teams in 98.

What's more, he was also a distraction.

He is ruining the moment for the Bulls. Dennis the Distraction is rearing his chromatic head again. After he arrived late to practice last Friday, Coach Phil Jackson inserted Toni Kukoc into the lineup for Game 1 against the Pacers on Sunday. If Jackson was considering a switch for Game 2, Rodman made the decision easy when he pulled up to the United Center a half-hour later than his teammates on Tuesday.

Unhappy with the decision to bench him, the man who likes to put on his best dress and make like a model put on a pouty display for Game 2. Rodman sulked when he came onto the court, played passively and grabbed only six rebounds. Of course, simply getting him to the court was an incident in itself. During the first quarter, when Jackson turned to the sideline in search of Rodman, he was not there. Rodman was in the locker room. Apparently, he did not think he would be needed until the two-minute mark.

''It was irritating to have to send for him,'' Jackson said after the Bulls won Game 2. ''I'll talk to him and see if we can't set him straight.''

That's like trying to straighten a phone cord. Rodman is going to be Rodman. He has always alternated Good Dennis and Bad Dennis at his own whim. But this sideshow of his is wearing thin on the Bulls. Michael Jordan, especially. Instead of reveling in the Bulls' lead as this four-of-seven-game series heads to Indiana for Game 3 on Saturday, Jordan was unloading on Rodman.

''This is a crucial time of the season, and the last thing we need is this from Dennis,'' Jordan said with an edge to his voice Tuesday night. ''We've been unhappy with some of his antics of late, like being late for practice, not showing up when he should.

''We've always given him enough room to be Dennis. But when we come to work, he has to be here to work.''

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/21/s...s-problem.html

My bad, you did say offense. I'm talking about results bro. Thus the 94 vs 98 comparison

I'm also talking about results, 97. The 98 team had a better win percentage with older players and weaker talent. Jordan's Regularized Adjusted Plus Minus (not a boxscore stat) also bested Pippen. This means that when MJ was on the court, he had more influence on games.

[MadDog]

That's what I'm sayin. But you can use 89 too. You can use 88. You can use 90. You can use 98, which I think is really impressive given of how old, injured, and the drama the team was dealing with. You could use all the Bulls years tho.

It's a very hard argument imo to make that Pippen had a similar impact than MJ when not only the stats say otherwise, but we can see eye test and the skills. We see it when the Bulls are down, we see the offensive become stagnant, and we see MJ carry them. Not to say Pippen wasn't good, but MJ was on another lvl. He always was. Like watching the games in 88-90 was insane seeing MJ being all over the floor in both offense and defense. Granted, MJ didn't trust in his teammates as much as he did in second peat, but it's a bit exaggerated to a point or there have been players like Kobe who out did MJ in that regard.

But a majority says that MJ was superior. Pippen was important, but like I said..it's not like it was Magic/Kareem in the mid 80s, it wasn't KD/Curry. It wasn't 2011 LeBron/Wade. It's not like they were the same impact. It was clearly MJ. Pippen was second. Nothing wrong with that. Like I said, every statistically measure of both raw and advance says it, the clutch stats, and we can see the games. We can see the skills. And this isn't even about MJ being the GOAT or not. It just happens to be MJ is one of the bests to ever do it. But there is a clear difference of not only player skills set, player impact, and player ability.

It's a tougher argument for Curry/KD than MJ/Pip.

With regards to Jordan being a better player, you can use all those years dude. This debate just highlights what Prime Pippen brought versus Jordan. By most objective criteria, MJ had the bigger statistical burden, and his skills netted better results (look at their respective playoff & finals performances).

I agree that it wasn't a KD/Curry situation. Or even a Shaq/Kobe situation in 2001. Pippen was a great number 2 whose impact went well beyond stats. Nothing more, nothing less. The games are available on Youtube, so these weird narratives are funny.

[RogueBorg]

The consensus was that Scottie Pippen was at the least a top 5 player at that time. Again, it doesn't matter whether you agree or disagree, IT WAS THE CONSENSUS!!!!

No, it was not a consensus. I was there, everyone did not agree Pippen was top 5.

1. Jordan
2. Olajuwon
3. Robinson
4. Shaq
5. Barkley
6. Malone

Pippen was not considered better than these guys.

[MadDog]

No, it was not a consensus. I was there, everyone did not agree Pippen was top 5.

1. Jordan
2. Olajuwon
3. Robinson
4. Shaq
5. Barkley
6. Malone

Pippen was not considered better than these guys.

If we're still focusing on 1996, Penny deserves recognition. He finished ahead of Pippen in MVP voting, made 1st team All-NBA, and had a career year statistically. Orlando was swept in the playoffs, but individually he played well throughout.