1994 Pippen should have been mvp

[Shooter]

Wow, a real response for once in this thread? One caveat is Pippen missed 10 games and was hurt for another 2 (Bulls started 5-7 as a result). That hurt his MVP case but also hurt his stats. If we are assessing performance we have to look per game (while docking him in season long consideration).

VORP: Robinson 11.4, Hakeem 7.3, Shaq 7.2, Pippen 6.8 (7.7 over 82), Ewing 5.5
BPM: Robinson 11.9, Pippen 7.7 (8.8. over 82), Hakeem/Shaq 6.8, Ewing 5.2
PER: Robinson 30.7, Shaq 28.5, Hakeem 25.3, Pippen 23.2, Ewing 22.9

WS? Robinson ahead by a mile.

If it is about stats, then it should have been Robinson in a landslide with the order behind him varying based on which stats you value. Of course, these advanced stats didn't exist back then. Pippen would be 2nd in BPM and VORP if he played a full season and was 4th in PER (which penalizes ballhandlers due to turnovers). So probably 2nd.



Center versus SF numbers are apples to oranges. The big difference is rebounding. Prime Kareem matches Jordan in scoring, assists (KAJ ahead in blocks, MJ in steals) but crushes him in rebounding but I never see anyone say prime Kareem>prime Jordan statistically.



The Bulls went 50-20 (59 win pace) with a healthy Pippen, with one loss in a meaningless 82nd game. People keep acting like 55 wins was their performance level. 59 wins would be #1 in the East and second best in the NBA. He deserves to be docked for missing games, but his personal performance and team performance was better than the raw stats suggest.

True, Robinson had less help--but he also had perfect health for his team. Their top 5 guys all played 77+ games. The Bulls had injury issues, which always gets overlooked.

The Bulls weren't great without Pippen. They scored 87 PPG, had a -9 point differential. It isn't like he had the 19' Raptors "cast" or something, even if better than the Spurs'.

[Roundball_Rock]

Stats suddenly stop mattering in this thread when the stats for all players at issue are presented comparatively, not in an agenda-driven vacuum.

[Bronbron23]

Pip was a great player but he absolutely has no argument for mvp that year. Drob, shaq and hakeem all had good records and all had better stats which according to yall is the most important thing. Shit they scored like 800 more points than pip that year and they all had a bigger impact defensively. They also had more rebounds and better shooting percentage. Wtf are yall talking about?

[Roundball_Rock]

Shaq wasn't even a real MVP candidate that year on his 50 win team (with Penny, Anderson, Scott, and Skiles) that got swept by a 47 win team in the first round (in other words, Orlando wasn't a contender) as he struggled to produce against Rik Smits. A lot of revisionism but it was a three horse race then--with Orlando and New York complaining their guys were not in it.

As to stats, that was covered earlier. Robinson was the landslide winner statistically. Pippen was 2nd per game in VORP and BPM, 4th in PER. That ended the statistical discussion. As to raw traditional stats (PPG, RPG, APG, etc.), We also are comparing a wing's stats to 2-4 centers. Using that logic, doesn't something like 30/16/4>33/6/5? ; )

Pippen's impact? A team that went from 4-6 and a -9 point differential while scoring a paltry 87 PPG went 50-20 with a healthy Pippen. Yet we keep hearing (albeit from MJ and a couple Knicks fans) he had no case when he was a legit contender at the time in a three-way race? Yet somehow guys who were not real MVP candidates not only had cases, but should have been over Pippen 26 years later.

[Bronbron23]

Shaq wasn't even a real MVP candidate that year on his 50 win team (with Penny, Anderson, Scott, and Skiles) that got swept by a 47 win team in the first round (in other words, Orlando wasn't a contender) as he struggled to produce against Rik Smits. A lot of revisionism but it was a three horse race then--with Orlando and New York complaining their guys were not in it.

As to stats, that was covered earlier. Robinson was the landslide winner statistically. Pippen was 2nd per game in VORP and BPM, 4th in PER. That ended the statistical discussion. As to raw traditional stats (PPG, RPG, APG, etc.), We also are comparing a wing's stats to 2-4 centers. Using that logic, doesn't something like 30/16/4>33/6/5? ; )

Pippen's impact? A team that went from 4-6 and a -9 point differential while scoring a paltry 87 PPG went 50-20 with a healthy Pippen. Yet we keep hearing (albeit from MJ and a couple Knicks fans) he had no case when he was a legit contender at the time in a three-way race? Yet somehow guys who were not real MVP candidates not only had cases, but should have been over Pippen 26 years later.

Nobody uses vorp bpm and per to be honest but ill concede shaq. He sti has no argument over drob who literally better at everything other than passing.

And the no mj argument means nothing. Mj has nothing to do with it. The Bulls were a goat team with mj just like warriors were a goat team with kd. Curry dosnt get more credit now for whatever he does without kd. They're still a great team with a great coach and system.

[Roundball_Rock]

If it is about stats, then Robinson should have been MVP easily.

It was a three horse race. Pippen's "value" is evident based on their performance with and without him. Yet we are hearing he didn't have a case at all 26 years later and that guys who weren't candidates then should have been ahead of him?

Mj has nothing to do with it. The Bulls were a goat team with mj just like warriors were a goat team with kd

MJ won MVP in 98' for keeping the Bulls at a 56 win pace for not even half a season as the Bulls' eroded much worse without Pippen than they did without Jordan. The Bulls had a 59 win pace with healthy Pippen in 94', which would have meant their record would have improved and they would have had the #1 seed without Jordan. 55 wins understates how good they were with Pippen. As a comparison, the Bulls went from 69 wins to a 56 win pace without Pippen in 98' (67 win pace with Pippen back). That is a double digit win slide...

If it is about PPG/RPG/APG (98' #s):

Jordan: 29/6/4
Malone: 27/10/4
Shaq: 28/11/2

[Bronbron23]

If it is about stats, then Robinson should have been MVP easily.

It was a three horse race. Pippen's "value" is evident based on their performance with and without him. Yet we are hearing he didn't have a case at all 26 years later and that guys who weren't candidates then should have been ahead of him?



MJ won MVP in 98' for keeping the Bulls at a 56 win pace for not even half a season as the Bulls' eroded much worse without Pippen than they did without Jordan. The Bulls had a 59 win pace with healthy Pippen in 94', which would have meant their record would have improved and they would have had the #1 seed without Jordan. 55 wins understates how good they were with Pippen. As a comparison, the Bulls went from 69 wins to a 56 win pace without Pippen in 98' (67 win pace with Pippen back). That is a double digit win slide...

If it is about PPG/RPG/APG (98' #s):

Jordan: 29/6/4
Malone: 27/10/4
Shaq: 28/11/2

well i never argued mj deserved 98 mvp in the first place but he does have some arguments over those guys that pip didnt have against drob. Mj was a much better closer than malone and shaq. He was also a better defender than malone. Pip wasnt a better defender than drob and he wasnt a better closer than drob. Pip is a great 2nd option but hes not a guy you build your team around to win championships. He cant score good enough. Almost every championship team have one of the best scorers or a dominant big. Bron, kd, steph,kobe, shaq, mj, duncan, bird, hakeem, kg and now kawhi. Magic is the exception but even he was still the best at something which was passing. Pip is more of a jack of all trades kind of guy. Offensively Hes good at everything but not great at anything.

[Roundball_Rock]

I brought MJ up because a lot of the people ripping the Bulls' performance will praise the Bulls' 98 performance (for less than half a season) despite a much greater decline in team performance sans Pippen than sans Jordan (in theory the opposite would be true).

A lot of the argument here revolved around win totals. Many people said since the Rockets, Knicks, and Spurs won more games that therefore their best player should be ahead of Pippen in MVP (they also said Shaq should be but you can't expect consistency from those with an agenda). What were those win totals?

Rockets 58
Knicks 57
Spurs 56
Bulls 55
Magic 50

Of course, Pippen missed 10 games and was injured for another 2. In other contexts the same people love to note that but mysteriously want to charge Pippen for losses he was not part of. Here are win totals in games these players actually played (includes 2 injured games for Pippen, Chicago 1-1):

Hakeem 57-23 (58 win pace)
Robinson 54-26 (55 win pace)
Ewing 56-23 (58 win pace)
Pippen 51-21 (58 win pace)
Shaq 49-32 (50 win pace)

If you remove the two injured Pippen games, the Bulls went 50-20, a 59 win pace. So if it is about regular season performance (a professed standard of many Pippen haters here) Pippen comes out looking great.

Pip is a great 2nd option but hes not a guy you build your team around to win championships

Speculation (since he had a grand total of one playoff run as a #1 option) but you can say that about Robinson, Ewing, Malone, Drexler, Payton and even non-superstars like Reggie Miller and Shawn Kemp--all guys praised relative to Pippen throughout this thread. Robinson had nearly a full decade as a #1 option and got past the second round once. Ewing melted down in his finals appearance.

You also can say that about players who actually won MVP. Can you win a chip with Harden, Westbrook, Iverson, etc. as your best player? Your post implies no, that you basically need a top 10 all-time caliber player. Those guys don't win every time but the lion's share of NBA chips have went to teams with one of those players.

KG is an interesting case. KG won only when he played with two other HOF players and people said what you just said about him prior to that: you couldn't win with him as the best player. KG scored 24.2 PPG as his high, 23.0 was his second highest. Is that an Earth shattering difference with 22.0 (in only one full season as a #1 option)? People said it about Dirk too until 2011. Pippen is dismissed because in one year where MJ screwed them they lost. Maybe if MJ left over the summer and they signed Kendall Gill to replace him they win instead of playing 4 on 5 on offense.

Put prime Pippen on the Celtics with Pierce and Allen or prime Pippen on Portland. Those teams don't win chips with him as the best player?

[HoopsNY]

Hakeem deserved the MVP. An argument could be made for Pippen, though I don't think it's strong enough to overcome guys like Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, and maybe even Ewing (though I'd have to look at it more closely).

As for the debate between Miller and Pippen, then Pippen gets that edge. Reggie was a better shooter and more clutch, but Pippen's combination of scoring, defense, and playmaking is more valuable to a team than Miller's ability to score 24 PPG on high efficiency shooting.

[Roundball_Rock]

Hakeem deserved the MVP. An argument could be made for Pippen, though I don't think it's strong enough to overcome guys like Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, and maybe even Ewing (though I'd have to look at it more closely).

Shaq and Ewing weren't even real MVP candidates that year. 26 years later MJ fans now say they should have been ahead of Pippen when their own teams publicly complained they were left out the conversation? You guys do a good job of pushing the "Overton" window. 10 years from now we will hear how Pippen should have been all-NBA 3rd team in 94'.

Miller's ability to score 24 PPG on high efficiency shooting.

Except in series that mattered (I like how 2001 is added in to get him to 24 PPG BTW). Pippen and Miller were in the same series (both scored 17 PPG--Miller did it on 2 less shots--throw him a parade). Miller was outplayed by Kukoc--forget Pippen--in that series and in Game 7.

Miller was 21 PPG in the ECF; guess what Pippen was in the ECF? 20. The hypocrisy of the same people dissing Pippen's scoring (around 19-20) hyping Miller, a 21 PPG guy in his prime. If 20 sucks for a 2nd option, how can 21 be awesome for an alleged 1st option? The 1 extra point?

[insidious301]

Shaq and Ewing weren't even real MVP candidates that year. 26 years later MJ fans now say they should have been ahead of Pippen when their own teams publicly complained they were left out the conversation? You guys do a good job of pushing the "Overton" window. 10 years from now we will hear how Pippen should have been all-NBA 3rd team in 94'.

That isn't true. Shaq had 3 first place points and overall 4th in MVP voting, behind Pippen. How was he not a "real" candidate? Pippen might've had the best year of his career however Hakeem was the rightful MVP. The next best choice would go to Robinson, who had 24 first place points.

Ewing

Ewing never had a case over Pippen.

[HoopsNY]

Shaq and Ewing weren't even real MVP candidates that year. 26 years later MJ fans now say they should have been ahead of Pippen when their own teams publicly complained they were left out the conversation? You guys do a good job of pushing the "Overton" window. 10 years from now we will hear how Pippen should have been all-NBA 3rd team in 94'.

First of all, I didn't anoint Ewing ahead of Pippen. I said, "maybe even Ewing (though I would have to take a look at it)." Ewing averaged more points, rebounds, blocks, higher WS/48, with the #1 seed in the East, but he doesn't deserve a comparison at least?

I don't know what makes someone a "real MVP candidate," but Shaq was definitely one of them.

Who are "you" guys? It's insane that people can't have an opinion with this you, even when comparing players of the same era who were also in the same tier.

Except in series that mattered (I like how 2001 is added in to get him to 24 PPG BTW). Pippen and Miller were in the same series (both scored 17 PPG--Miller did it on 2 less shots--throw him a parade). Miller was outplayed by Kukoc--forget Pippen--in that series and in Game 7.

You're so triggered. I merely mentioned 24 PPG because for Miller's prime years, he did just about that (about 23.5 PPG in the playoffs). But what difference does it make? A point here, a point there; Pippen was still the better overall player.
Miller was 21 PPG in the ECF; guess what Pippen was in the ECF? 20. The hypocrisy of the same people dissing Pippen's scoring (around 19-20) hyping Miller, a 21 PPG guy in his prime. If 20 sucks for a 2nd option, how can 21 be awesome for an alleged 1st option? The 1 extra point?[/QUOTE]

[HoopsNY]

That isn't true. Shaq had 3 first place points and overall 4th in MVP voting, behind Pippen. How was he not a "real" candidate? Pippen might've had the best year of his career however Hakeem was the rightful MVP. The next best choice would go to Robinson, who had 24 first place points.

Ewing never had a case over Pippen.

In that season? Maybe. But that's just the point, they're comparable. It could go either way.

[Roundball_Rock]

I don't know what makes someone a "real MVP candidate," but Shaq was definitely one of them.

News to his GM, who complained publicly about it being a 3 horse race (same as Riley did for Ewing).

Shaq was on a 50 win team (that had Penny, Anderson, D. Scott, Skiles) that got swept by a 47 win team in the first round. How often does a 50 win team produce a MVP candidate? Shaq's stats on basketballreference obscure that his team wasn't good enough.

. But what difference does it make? A point here, a point there

Apparently--all the difference. Miller's entire "case" relies on scoring so we see shady accounting to get him to 24 PPG (tpols uses 01' to get him there, you cut off his prime in 98' to do it).

Either way, the Miller stuff is amusing. It is all about scoring and we are talking 23 PPG in the PO (24 if we cook the books for him) and 21 PPG in the RS for his prime. The problem is those "playoff" numbers come from monster 1st round series. He wasn't that player for the rest of the PO. If he was, I would agree with the Miller crew.

So that leaves us with this: basically arguing Miller scoring 21 PPG in the ECF on around 14 shots a game and Pippen scoring 20 PPG in the ECF on around 16 shots a game (some of these were end of quarter/end of shot clock bailouts--Miller wasn't taking those for Indiana). It almost is a joke: this whole thing is about 1 point and 2 shots.

Here is the problem: those extra 2 Miller shots don't disappear. They go to his (lesser) teammates. Let's say they convert 45% of them. That's 0.9 field goals per game they get that they wouldn't have if Miller missed 2 more shots.

So this whole "efficiency" argument is based on 1 FG a game that Miller generates over Pippen and looks strictly at shooting. How many FG was Pippen generating for Chicago via his playmaking, via being an elite rebounder for a non-big (more possession), via defense (more possessions), etc.?

In that season? Maybe. But that's just the point, they're comparable. It could go either way.

Only to a certain fan base 26 years later.

[insidious301]

In that season? Maybe. But that's just the point, they're comparable. It could go either way.

Meaning he didn't garner enough votes. You're right that Ewing had more points, reb, blocks, better efficiency(and that New York was the #1 seed). Don't know exactly why Pippen got more acclaim. Maybe it had something to do with him winning without Jordan. On the surface that is a strong narrative.