Page 12 of 26 FirstFirst ... 2910111213141522 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 379
  1. #166
    NBA All-star
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Posts
    9,777

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    Hoops stats show that Jordan was the one keeping the Bulls from winning 75 games or more those seasons.


    Jordan's win rate was 80-wins a year (95%) when he took less than 20 shots, except Jordan only got enough help to do this 24% of the time.

    The rest of the time he had carry-jobs, where his record was still spectacular, but obviously not as good as when he had legitimate help.

    Otoh, Lebron and everyone else barely wins 50 or 60 games when they take 20 shots or less, while Jordan's win rate was 80...

    so jordan is clearly FAR superior and HoopsNY proved it.



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    The year I referenced Lebron winning 61 with Mo dropping 16ppg/44% was 2010, and the Celtics won the east that year, not Dwight/Magic. Get your years straight.


    So you omitted the 2nd option Jamison, which means you were lying - Mo was 3rd option behind Jamison

    Ultimately, Dwight won the 09' East and Lebron was the heavily-favored 1 seed in 10' - so 1-star teams were enough to win the conference, which means that Lebron's super-teams were massive overkill.



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    This was the 90s, you didn't need a 2nd option dropping 25ppg to win a title. The two years the Rockets won were with Otis Thorpe dropping 14ppg( 94), Drexler dropping 21(95) and Robinson dropping 16(99).


    Most opponents had scorers at 3rd and 4th option like the 96' Magic, 92' Blazers, 93' Suns, 96' Sonics, 91' Lakers and many more (like the Cavs) - this is why MJ had to average 33.5 in the playoffs, while no one else in history reached 30

    In addition to lacking scorers at 3rd option, Pippen is the only 2nd option on this chart, so only MJ won with large volumes of low efficiency from a teammate:. .

    Pippen had the worst efficiency, clutch and peak capability of any notable 90's sidekick (no game-planning required.. not on scouting report)



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    The 'low end scorer' Pippen outscored the 2nd option in numerous playoff series as has been routinely pointed out.


    Every above-average sidekick outscores opposing sidekicks the majority of series, but only Pippen did it with worst-ever efficiency, worst-ever clutch and low peak capability (no game-planning required.. not on scouting report)



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    The same metrics you used to say 09 Mo was better than 90 Pippen also means that 09 Lebron was better than 89 MJ,because Lebron has better numbers in everything you listed. Be careful.


    2nd options don't dictate brand of ball, so a sheer statistical comparison is valid

    Otoh, the skillset of 1st options dictates brand of ball, chemistry and teammate development, so a straight statistical comparison isn't valid.

    Fortunately, Jordan wins everything - stats, winning, brand of ball, teammate development, teammates playing to capacity, clutch.... did I mention winning?

  2. #167
    2.0 patch Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    8,244

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by 3ba11 View Post
    1)Jordan's win rate was 80-wins a year (95%) when he took less than 20 shots, except Jordan only got enough help to do this 24% of the time.

    2)The rest of the time he had carry-jobs, where his record was still spectacular, but obviously not as good as when he had legitimate help.

    Otoh, Lebron and everyone else barely wins 50 or 60 games when they take 20 shots or less, while Jordan's win rate was 80...

    so jordan is clearly FAR superior and HoopsNY proved it.






    3)So you omitted the 2nd option Jamison, which means you were lying - Mo was 3rd option behind Jamison

    Ultimately, Dwight won the 09' East and Lebron was the heavily-favored 1 seed in 10' - so 1-star teams were enough to win the conference, which means that Lebron's super-teams were massive overkill.






    4)Most opponents had scorers at 3rd and 4th option like the 96' Magic, 92' Blazers, 93' Suns, 96' Sonics, 91' Lakers and many more (like the Cavs) - this is why MJ had to average 33.5 in the playoffs, while no one else in history reached 30

    In addition to lacking scorers at 3rd option, Pippen is the only 2nd option on this chart, so only MJ won with large volumes of low efficiency from a teammate:. .

    Pippen had the worst efficiency, clutch and peak capability of any notable 90's sidekick (no game-planning required.. not on scouting report)






    Every above-average sidekick outscores opposing sidekicks the majority of series, but only Pippen did it with worst-ever efficiency, worst-ever clutch and low peak capability (no game-planning required.. not on scouting report)






    5) 2nd options don't dictate brand of ball, so a sheer statistical comparison is valid

    Otoh, the skillset of 1st options dictates brand of ball, chemistry and teammate development, so a straight statistical comparison isn't valid.

    Fortunately, Jordan wins everything - stats, winning, brand of ball, teammate development, teammates playing to capacity, clutch.... did I mention winning?
    1)Hoops stats show that Jordan was the one keeping the Bulls from winning 75 games or more those seasons. You look at the years where the Bulls flirted with 70( 92, 97) or crossed 70(96), and the stats show a high statistical likelihood that a few more <20 shot night from MJ would have upped the win title north of 75 in a few cases.

    2) So he did end up with legitimate help. Because you have thousands of posts saying MJ has WOAT supporting casts. Legit help, or WOAT support? You can't seem to make up your mind which way you want to go.

    3) I omitted nothing. In 2010 Mo Williams averaged 15.8 in 69 games, Jamison averaged the exact same in 23 games. So how was Jamison the 2nd option averaging the same amount of points while playing 1/3 of the games?

    Yup, another no effort victory for Phoenix, and more lying from 3ball. A walk in the park.

    4) The 'third scorer' on the 96 Magic when they played in the playoffs was Nick Anderson dropping 8ppg on 31% shooting. 4th was Dennis Scott with 7ppg. The third scorer on the Bulls was Rodman at 12, Harper and Kerr at 9. The 7th scorer on the Bulls was Kukoc averaging 7.

    In 1992 finals, Pippen at 2nd option averaged 4 more points than Porter. Yes, the Blazers from scorers 3 to 6 outplayed the Bulls so MJ outdueling Drexler by the margins he did was the main difference. But nobody is disputing MJs performance that series so what's your point? Ditto for 93 vs Phoenix.

    In 96 finals, Jordan was the best player for half the series but his overall scoring output wasn't the biggest difference over 6 games. Hell he wasn't even the highest scorer in the deciding game, Detlef was. Fortunately MJ's 'shitty' cast overcame his 5/19. There's a reason Dennis Rodman gets major props for how dominant on the boards he was and the role he played in the series outcome.

    In 91 Scottie averaged more points at 2nd option than anyone on the Lakers, Worthy, Magic, Perkins, whomever. And the Bulls offense was more than competently cushioned by Horace dropping 15ppg and Paxson 13ppg as scorers # 3 and 4. MJ literally had to be told to pass the fukking ball to Paxson who was open and ended up with 20 points in the clincher. Scottie led the team in scoring the same game (32), rebounding(13), and equaled MJ's steals count(5). Not bad for 'shitty' help when they're given the chance to rise to the occasion.


    5)This is a hilarious bullshit non-reply to what I said. We compare first option against first option data all the time, yourself included except when it leads to inconvenient truths. Lebron as first option in 2009 had higher advanced metrics compared to 89 MJ, and your reply is your usual flailing about like a fish out of water.
    Last edited by Phoenix; 08-16-2022 at 08:02 AM.

  3. #168
    truth serum sdot_thadon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    4,497

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    In 96 finals, Jordan was the best player for half the series but his overall scoring output wasn't the biggest difference over 6 games. Hell he wasn't even the highest scorer in the deciding game, Detlef was. Fortunately MJ's 'shitty' cast overcame his 5/19. There's a reason Dennis Rodman gets major props for how dominant on the boards he was and the role he played in the series outcome.

    5)This is a hilarious bullshit non-reply to what I said. We compare first option against first option data all the time, yourself included except when it leads to inconvenient truths. Lebron as first option in 2009 had higher advanced metrics compared to 89 MJ, and your reply is your usual flailing about like a fish out of water.
    Good stuff. Just wanted to chime in on the 96 finals, a little more Insight that isn't discussed here. I was told recently Ron Harper was a bum for the Bulls, in the finals he was assigned to guard Payton. Out played him in games 1 and 2, again Harper, the Bulls 700th option basically outplayed Seattle's 1st or 2nd option in the 1st 2 games of the finals.....Harper only plays 1 minute in game 3 due to a knee injury, which the Bulls still win, but Payton puts up 19 and 9 after only managing 13 and 3, and 13 ans 6 the previous 2 games with Harper checking him. Hobbled Harper plays only 13 min in game 4 and 1 minute in game 5. Payton puts up 21 and 11, then 23 and 6 against the bulls....other...defender. Harper plays 38 minutes somehow in the closeout game and Payton still puts up 19 and 7 on 70%.

    So in games 1 and 2 Harper held him to 13 and 5 on 38%

    The 4 games following Harper's knee injury: 21 and 8 on 48%

    May have been a sweep had Harper not been injured....but Mj had no help.

    Oh and 5)?

    Here's a bonus read
    Quote Originally Posted by Seattle times
    CHICAGO - For much of the season, he was the Forgotten Bull, for reasons he will admit are plainly obvious.

    "I don't dress up like Dennis (Rodman) or lead the league in scoring like Michael (Jordan)," Chicago's Ron Harper said. "It seems like everybody on this team has a book deal. Everybody. I think Jack Haley is signing one next week.

    "I'm just me, a basketball player. No schtick. No gimmick. I play ball and nowadays you have to do more than that to get noticed or get a shoe commercial."

    Harper is the fifth Beatle who missed his chance at fame early in his NBA career.

    He doesn't fit into the mold of many of his star-studded teammates and was never quite as appreciated as he is now. After a 3-0 lead in the best-of-seven NBA Finals, Chicago lost consecutive games and the cause may be traced to Harper.

    Impending problems

    Ten days ago, a sore knee limited him to one minute of playing time in Game 3. The Bulls won 108-86, but Chicago Coach Phil Jackson sensed impending trouble with Harper out of the lineup.

    "We're just a little bit thinner when Ron Harper is not in there," Jackson said afterward. "We lose one man in our rotation and everybody moves up. . . . Ron does so many things for us, we have to find someone who can match his defensive output."

    Jackson is still searching.

    Without Harper, whose primary responsibility was to defend Sonic guard Gary Payton, the Bulls have struggled in the past two games to slow Seattle's offense.

    The Sonics scored 107 points in Game 4 and 89 in Game 5. Payton finished with 21 and 23 points, respectively, which is a far cry from his 13 points on six-for-17 shooting in the series opener.

    "I think Ron Harper was effective in Games 1 and 2. . . . He's a veteran, he knows how to do things," Payton said. "They might miss him a lot. He's been in the rotation. He's been starting. Now they don't have all that rotation."

    Without Harper, the Bulls are defending Payton with Jordan, which tires him late in the game. For brief stints, reserve Randy Brown is assigned to Payton, but he's unable to guard Payton in the low post.

    Ideal Payton matchup

    At 6 feet 6, Harper is the ideal matchup for Chicago. He is big enough to keep the 6-4 Payton out of the lane and quick enough to keep pace with him on the perimeter.

    However, the injury "cuts down my side-to-side movement," Harper said. "I couldn't keep up with him right now, not for long minutes, anyway."

    Toni Kukoc, the NBA's sixth man of the year, starts in place of Harper, which moves Scottie Pippen from small forward to shooting guard, where he must defend Seattle's Hersey Hawkins.

    "He's running me through a lot of screens and picks and it's difficult to keep up with him when you're not used to something like that," Pippen said of Hawkins. "We're having to play out of position right now. . . . I'm more comfortable at small forward."

    Pippen, Jordan and Rodman were each voted to the first team all-defensive team, yet Harper may be the most important player when defending the Sonics.

    "He gives us a lift defensively as well as offensively," Jordan said. "Without him, that means we have to play a little bit more - Scottie and myself - myself on Gary Payton . . . and we have to utilize a bigger guy on guarding Hawkins.

    Said Jackson: "Ron gives us a big defender and he gives us a player who plays without the ball."
    The bolded sections are interesting comments when you have a 1st team all defensive guy taking Harper's assignment.

  4. #169
    2.0 patch Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    8,244

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by sdot_thadon View Post
    Good stuff. Just wanted to chime in on the 96 finals, a little more Insight that isn't discussed here. I was told recently Ron Harper was a bum for the Bulls, in the finals he was assigned to guard Payton. Out played him in games 1 and 2, again Harper, the Bulls 700th option basically outplayed Seattle's 1st or 2nd option in the 1st 2 games of the finals.....Harper only plays 1 minute in game 3 due to a knee injury, which the Bulls still win, but Payton puts up 19 and 9 after only managing 13 and 3, and 13 ans 6 the previous 2 games with Harper checking him. Hobbled Harper plays only 13 min in game 4 and 1 minute in game 5. Payton puts up 21 and 11, then 23 and 6 against the bulls....other...defender. Harper plays 38 minutes somehow in the closeout game and Payton still puts up 19 and 7 on 70%.

    So in games 1 and 2 Harper held him to 13 and 5 on 38%

    The 4 games following Harper's knee injury: 21 and 8 on 48%

    May have been a sweep had Harper not been injured....but Mj had no help.

    Oh and 5)?

    Here's a bonus read

    The bolded sections are interesting comments when you have a 1st team all defensive guy taking Harper's assignment.
    Interesting, I've been thinking about going back and watching some of these older series. May have to add the 96 finals to the list.

  5. #170
    NBA All-star
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Posts
    9,777

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    1)Hoops stats show that Jordan was the one keeping the Bulls from winning 75 games or more those seasons.


    Legitimately stopped reading and claiming victory

    Maybe I'll respond later for kicks

  6. #171
    NBA Legend AirBonner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    15,471

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by 3ba11 View Post
    Legitimately stopped reading and claiming victory

    Maybe I'll respond later for kicks
    It’s the historical record. Deal with it.

  7. #172
    NBA Legend 97 bulls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15,713

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by 3ba11 View Post
    Legitimately stopped reading and claiming victory

    Maybe I'll respond later for kicks
    Still boils down to this one fact. Instead of you speculating on why Jordan scored 30. Why not take his words as law. That's what I'm gonna do. He took that many shots because he wanted to lead the league in scoring. Point blank, period. That's what he said. Leave it at that.

  8. #173
    NBA All-star
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Posts
    9,777

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    a few more <20 shot night from MJ would have upped the win title north of 75 in a few cases.


    Teammates didn't allow Jordan to shoot less - they didn't play well enough.. Jordan had to carry the load and HoopNY's ' data shows exactly how often based on a 20 FGA threshold

    And if shooting less wins 75 games, why hasn't anyone done it?... Lebron and Magic barely win 50 or 60 games by shooting less than 20 times, while Jordan's win rate is 80 wins (95% win rate) when he has their help (shoots less than 20 times)..

    People always wonder how MJ would do with Kareem or Kobe or Wade and we'll never know.. But we know that whenever MJ got enough help to shoot less than 20 times, he was literally unbeatable.. So our instinct is correct - MJ would be unbeatable with overkill help like Kareem, Wade or the super-team help that Magic and Lebron had..



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    2) So he did end up with legitimate help.


    No because HoopsNY's data showed how often Jordan had to take more than 20 shots - it was about 75-80% of games - that's more than anyone in history and reflects a lack of go-to teammates that only MJ had to overcome, as Kenny Smith explains here:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UF6Xx3F2Lo&t=01m54s



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    Because you have thousands of posts saying MJ has WOAT supporting casts. Legit help, or WOAT support?

    You can't seem to make up your mind


    If I have thousands of posts saying the Bulls casts was trash, then I obviously have my mind made up.. they're trash....



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    3) I omitted nothing. In 2010 Mo Williams averaged 15.8 in 69 games, Jamison averaged the exact same in 23 games.


    It's because we're not 9 years old like you, so we were alive and watched the games - Jamison was a 22/9 stud before joining the Cavs and everyone knew he would be 2nd option..

    Everyone knew that Mo didn't have Jamison's resume or pedigree, so it was disappointing to see Jamison become one of the first casualties of Lebron-ball's skillset (Luka-ball AAU simpleton offense for the low IQ unsophisticated player)



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    4) The 'third scorer' on the 96 Magic when they played in the playoffs was Nick Anderson dropping 8ppg on 31% shooting.


    Jordan locked down Nick Anderson and held nearly every opposing SG to horrible stats.. It's standard for MJ.

    Otoh, Pippen let Penny go off, which is why he wasn't assigned as the primary defender on Drexler, Magic Isiah or Payton...



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    In 1992 finals, Pippen at 2nd option averaged 4 more points than Porter.


    Porter carried the Blazers to the Finals with 26/4/8 on 53% threes (6 attempts).. He was literally Damian Lillard on the 90' and 92' Finals runs.

    KJ played even better in the 90', 94, and 95' playoffs when he upset Magic and dominated Hakeem twice... Meanwhile, Worthy or Stockton have legendary tales of playoff domination..

    So every 90's sidekick was infact a go-to 1b that dominated and achieved elite stats EXCEPT Pippen, who was just a hustler/transition player, system player, and statistically carried in virtually every series..



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    In 1992 finals, Pippen at 2nd option averaged 4 more points than Porter.


    The reality is that MJ helped to lock down Porter, while KJ and Worthy were hurt - otherwise, Pippen would've been destroyed..

    Regardless, Pippen's peak capability was only about 20 ppg, so he never dominate anyone and this low peak meant that he didn't require game-planning (wasn't on scouting report)



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    Yes, the Blazers from scorers 3 to 6 outplayed the Bulls so MJ outdueling Drexler by the margins he did was the main difference. But nobody is disputing MJs performance that series so what's your point? Ditto for 93 vs Phoenix.


    You guys are saying that the Bulls could've won more if Jordan shot less, which is preposterous and demonstrates how thoroughly you've been defeated in the argument about Jordan in general..

    In the 93' Finals, the Suns and Bulls both averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ortg, while Pippen shot 46% true shooting (woat-caliber).. Since Pippen can't handle more shots, are you guys saying that Grant or Paxson should be taking some of Jordan's shots??... See how ridiculous it is?.. The Bulls had no go-to players except Jordan (woat offensive help)



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    In 96 finals, Jordan was the best player for half the series but his overall scoring output wasn't the biggest difference over 6 games. Hell he wasn't even the highest scorer in the deciding game, Detlef was.


    Jordan is always the best when it matters - he got his team a 3-0 lead and then shut it down.

    But Pippen shot 34%, so he can't get more shots

    And Rodman obviously can't get more shots

    So the Bulls are completely f*cked if Jordan doesn't average several more points than anyone in the series and nearly double the average of anyone on his team.



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    MJ literally had to be told to pass the fukking ball to Paxson


    It's so obvious when fans the media never played the game... :

    Every player in the history of basketball has been told "this guy will be open", or "pass the ball here", or "this is the play - find so-and-so"

    It's called X's and O's.. aka coaching

    A few articles point out that it was just regular coaching, but the mainstream media saw the opportunity to play into their erroneous ballhog narrative... One wrong take after another.

    The reality is that Jordan was averaging 11 apg in the series long before the passes to Paxson .. Jordan had already found Paxson a million times in the series already.

    It was just regular coaching.. X's and O's.... Jordan already knew how to pass - he averaged more assists than Lebron for the first 9 years of their playoff careers before Curry's pace and space era made offense easier for everyone.



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    5)This is a hilarious bullshit non-reply to what I said. We compare first option against first option data all the time, yourself included except when it leads to inconvenient truths. Lebron as first option in 2009 had higher advanced metrics compared to 89 MJ, and your reply is your usual flailing about like a fish out of water.

    The difference in brand of ball between 89' Jordan and 09' Lebron showed in the playoffs

    Lebron lost as a historic favorite, while Jordan led one of the biggest upset carry-jobs ever.. Jordan carried much a weaker cast over better teams than Dwight's garbage Magic.

    So not all 40 ppg are the same... Brand of ball matters.



    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post

    Lebron as first option in 2009 had higher advanced metrics compared to 89 MJ, and your reply is your usual flailing about like a fish out of water.


    Phil wouldn't be able to run the triangle with Lebron and would get fired like Blatt, who wanted to run similar concepts.

    So the 1st option dictates brand of ball, teammate fits and chemistry... Luka and Lebron cannot run ball movement brands that yield high team assists - they're too ball-dominant..

    So Jordan's skillset was simply better at brand of ball, chemistry and teammate development - that's why he never lost as the favorite.. He never had better on-paper talent but lost to better brand of ball.
    Last edited by 3ba11; 08-16-2022 at 10:29 PM.

  9. #174
    Goatbrook SouBeachTalents's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,485

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by 3ba11 View Post
    Teammates didn't allow Jordan to shoot less - they didn't play well enough.. Jordan had to carry the load and HoopNY's ' data shows exactly how often based on a 20 FGA threshold

    And if shooting less wins 75 games, why hasn't anyone done it?... Lebron and Magic barely win 50 or 60 games by shooting less than 20 times, while Jordan's win rate is 80-wins when he has their help.

    People always wonder how MJ would do with Kareem or Kobe or Wade and we'll never know.. But we do know that whenever MJ got enough help to shoot less than 20 times, he was literally unbeatable.. So our instinct is correct - MJ would be unbeatable with overkill help and teammates like Kareem, Wade or the super-team help that Magic and Lebron had..






    No because HoopsNY's data showed how often Jordan had to take more than 20 shots - it was about 75-80% of games - that's more than anyone in history and reflects a lack of go-to teammates that only MJ had to overcome, as Kenny Smith explains here:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UF6Xx3F2Lo&t=01m54s






    If I have thousands of posts saying the Bulls casts was trash, then I obviously have my mind made up.. they're trash....






    It's because we're not 9 years old like you, so we were alive and watched the games - Jamison was a 22/9 stud before joining the Cavs and everyone knew he would be 2nd option..

    Everyone knew that Mo didn't have Jamison's resume or pedigree, so it was disappointing to see Jamison become one of the first casualties of Lebron-ball's skillset (Luka-ball AAU simpleton offense for the low IQ unsophisticated player)






    Jordan locked down Nick Anderson and held nearly every opposing SG to horrible stats.. It's standard for MJ.

    Otoh, Pippen let Penny go off, which is why he wasn't assigned as the primary defender on Drexler, Magic Isiah or Payton...






    Porter carried the Blazers to the Finals with 26/4/8 on 53% threes (6 attempts).. He was literally Damian Lillard on the 90' and 92' Finals runs.

    KJ played even better in the 90', 94, and 95' playoffs when he upset Magic and dominated Hakeem twice... Meanwhile, Worthy or Stockton have legendary tales of playoff domination..

    So every 90's sidekick was infact a go-to 1b that dominated and achieved elite stats EXCEPT Pippen, who was just a hustler/transition player, system player, and statistically carried in virtually every series..






    The reality is that MJ helped to lock down Porter, while KJ and Worthy were hurt - otherwise, Pippen would've been destroyed..

    Regardless, Pippen's peak capability was only about 20 ppg, so he never dominate anyone and this low peak meant that he didn't require game-planning (wasn't on scouting report)






    You guys are saying that the Bulls could've won more if Jordan shot less, which is preposterous and demonstrates how thoroughly you've been defeated in the argument about Jordan in general..

    In the 93' Finals, the Suns and Bulls both averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ortg, while Pippen shot 46% true shooting (woat-caliber).. Since Pippen can't handle more shots, are you guys saying that Grant or Paxson should be taking some of Jordan's shots??... See how ridiculous it is?.. The Bulls had no go-to players except Jordan (woat offensive help)






    Jordan is always the best when it matters - he got his team a 3-0 lead and then shut it down.

    But Pippen shot 34%, so he can't get more shots

    And Rodman obviously can't get more shots

    So the Bulls are completely f*cked if Jordan doesn't average several more points than anyone in the series and nearly double the average of anyone on his team.






    It's so obvious when fans the media never played the game... :

    Every player in the history of basketball has been told "this guy will be open", or "pass the ball here", or "this is the play - find so-and-so"

    It's called X's and O's.. aka coaching

    A few articles point out that it was just regular coaching, but the mainstream media saw the opportunity to play into their erroneous ballhog narrative... One wrong take after another.

    The reality is that Jordan was averaging 11 apg in the series long before the passes to Paxson .. Jordan had already found Paxson a million times in the series already.

    It was just regular coaching.. X's and O's.... Jordan already knew how to pass - he averaged more assists than Lebron for the first 9 years of their playoff careers before Curry's pace and space era made offense easier for everyone.






    The difference in brand of ball between 89' Jordan and 09' Lebron showed in the playoffs

    Lebron lost as a historic favorite, while Jordan led one of the biggest upset carry-jobs ever.. Jordan carried much a weaker cast over better teams than Dwight's garbage Magic.

    So not all 40 ppg are the same... Brand of ball matters.






    Phil wouldn't be able to run the triangle with Lebron and would get fired like Blatt, who wanted to run similar concepts.

    So the 1st option dictates brand of ball, teammate fits and chemistry... Luka and Lebron cannot run ball movement brands that yield high team assists - they're too ball-dominant..

    So Jordan's skillset was simply better at brand of ball, chemistry and teammate development - that's why he never lost as the favorite.. He never had better on-paper talent but lost to better brand of ball.
    Holy shit


  10. #175
    Very good NBA starter Round Mound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,310

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Jordan always had the green light to shoot as much as he wanted to. Pippen did the dirty job plus was the best creator of offense and on team d he was the best aswell. That's how i saw it. I was alive and watched the nba from 91 to 98.

  11. #176
    College superstar Baller789's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Posts
    4,530

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by Round Mound View Post
    Jordan always had the green light to shoot as much as he wanted to. Pippen did the dirty job plus was the best creator of offense and on team d he was the best aswell. That's how i saw it. I was alive and watched the nba from 91 to 98.
    I wouldnt say Pip was the best creator. But he certainly was the primary playmaker.

  12. #177
    Kobe Stan
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    11,042

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    How does OP have the energy to do the same song and dance every day for over a decade? Especially about an athlete who doesn't know OP exists. Shit is so bizarre.

  13. #178
    Good college starter
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    3,482

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by 3ba11 View Post
    Hoops ran because his argument was defeated and his numbers confirm MJ's goat load
    Hoops didn't run anywhere. He went away with family to Cape Cod to enjoy the summer. You need help. Your addiction to not only this forum, but also proving that MJ is free of criticism and transcended every other ATG's limitations is disturbing.

  14. #179
    Serious playground baller
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    429

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    I would say Jordan was the primary playmaker while Pip was the primary initiator of the triangle offense. Pip was better suited to setting the table for everyone else while Jordan was better suited attacking the defense and generating offense for either himself or the team.

    These stats are interesting but its extremely disingenuous to think basketball is played this simply. If you watch those classic games, which I do and apologies to 97_Bulls I haven't gotten around to the 93 finals yet I do not see Jordan breaking the offense for his own personal glory. The Bulls needed that offensive output from him and I'm not saying the cast was trash like 3ball. I think the pieces they had were solid but I also think the teams they went up against had their own strengths and advantages over the Bulls as well.

    and let's not forget we are talking about the best scorer the game has ever seen who in the end pulled off what he set out to do... championships an scoring titles and he did it the right way.

  15. #180
    Good college starter
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    3,482

    Default Re: If MJ had a go-to teammate that could dominate, he would've scored less (easier l

    Quote Originally Posted by 3ba11 View Post
    .
    Recent summary of HoopsNY's data that shows Jordan is GOAT


    Jordan won 94.5% of games when he had enough help to take less than 20 shots - this win percentage would give him 78 wins a year if he could average less than 20 shots all year.. Unfortunately, Jordan rarely had enough help to take less than 20 shots, so most games were carry-jobs where his record was still an impressive 74.8% (goat at carry-jobs)
    That's not the point. What people have a problem with is this belief had to take 20+FGA per game. The data doesn't reflect that. What we find is that when he shot less, Chicago did a lot better, to a near flawless level.

    This of course doesn't mean his cast was putting up elite numbers. However, it showed that guys like Pippen, Kukoc, Armstrong, Grant, etc could put up slightly higher averages if given the opportunity. The problem? They weren't given the opportunity.

    To insist that they weren't capable of doing more is disingenuous. It's literally not true.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •