1994 Pippen should have been mvp

[Vino24]

People don't really hold Pippen's lack of an MVP against him (or the voters) because he played alongside a guy who pretty much monopolized the voters' attention every year.

That year, Pippen was the second player ever (Dave Cowens) to lead his team in points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks. He led the bulls to 55 wins (two fewer than with MJ)

[Roundball_Rock]

His impact was immense. They were 4-6 (33 win pace) without him--and that was with them facing a soft schedule during that time. They went 51-21 with him (58 win pace). Their net offensive rating was +2.2 with him (8th); -2.6 without him (21st).

Missing those 10 games hurt him, directly and indirectly. Missing games reduces your value and hence directly loses you MVP votes and indirectly because it cost the Bulls the #1 seed. If the Bulls won the #1 seed without MJ it would be hard to deny Pippen the MVP.

[aceman]

People don't really hold Pippen's lack of an MVP against him (or the voters) because he played alongside a guy who pretty much monopolized the voters' attention every year.

That year, Pippen was the second player ever (Dave Cowens) to lead his team in points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks. He led the bulls to 55 wins (two fewer than with MJ)

That was 1995. I think Scottie was one of best players of 1990s but was behind Robinson & Hakeem in 1994

[aceman]

His impact was immense. They were 4-6 (33 win pace) without him--and that was with them facing a soft schedule during that time. They went 51-21 with him (58 win pace). Their net offensive rating was +2.2 with him (8th); -2.6 without him (21st).

Missing those 10 games hurt him, directly and indirectly. Missing games reduces your value and hence directly loses you MVP votes and indirectly because it cost the Bulls the #1 seed. If the Bulls won the #1 seed without MJ it would be hard to deny Pippen the MVP.

8 of 10 games Pippen missed were away.
Trio of Horace, BJ & Kukoc may have been enough to reach playoffs that year.
As you've mention with all players fit team on pace for over 60 wins.

[Roundball_Rock]

8 of 10 games Pippen missed were away.
Trio of Horace, BJ & Kukoc may have been enough to reach playoffs that year.
As you've mention with all players fit team on pace for over 60 wins.

Yeah the annual circus trip, but look at how bad those teams were (win total listed) and how terrible the Bulls were:

Hawks 57 (W)
Bucks 20 (W)
Celtics 32 (L)
Sonics 63 (L)
Blazers 47 (L)
Lakers 33 (W)
Kings 28 (L)
Rockets 58 (L)
Spurs 56 (L)
Mavs 13 (W)

So their wins came against 57, 20, 33, 13 win teams. So three terrible teams. Their losses came against 32, 63, 47, 28, 58 win teams. Their losses were more respectable.

Their point differential? 87 PPG versus 96 PPG. For perspective, the worst team in the league (Dallas) had a -9 differential, same as the Bulls without Pippen.

The problem with Grant, BJ, Kukoc is solid defense but zero scoring. They averaged 87 PPG. For perspective, the lowest scoring team that year averaged 95 PPG (Dallas). Grant was a good player but he was limited offensively, scoring a lot on dunks and putbacks. Kukoc was a rookie who averaged 9/4/3 after the all-star break (12/4/4 before). He wasn't ready. The Bulls got production out of Kukoc in these 10 games, production they wouldn't have over a full season after he hit a rookie wall.

That would mean BJ Armstrong would have to be the #1 option. :lol

[light]

People don't really hold Pippen's lack of an MVP against him (or the voters) because he played alongside a guy who pretty much monopolized the voters' attention every year.

That year, Pippen was the second player ever (Dave Cowens) to lead his team in points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks. He led the bulls to 55 wins (two fewer than with MJ)

Pippen was probably the favorite for MVP at the all-star break in 1994, but the Bulls went on a losing streak right after that where they lost 8 of 11 games and that essentially knocked him out of the top spot.

Those losses cost him - Pippen certainly would have been the MVP if Chicago won 58 games instead of 55.

Hakeem would've been a close second as the Rockets also won 58 games, the difference though would've been Chicago as #1 seed in the East whereas the Rockets were 2nd in the West and 5 games behind Seattle.

So it was just a matter of a few games that kept Pippen from that trophy. Had Pippen played his entire career without Jordan I think he would've won that award eventually because of his spectacular all-around game.

[ELITEpower23]

His impact was immense. They were 4-6 (33 win pace) without him--and that was with them facing a soft schedule during that time. They went 51-21 with him (58 win pace). Their net offensive rating was +2.2 with him (8th); -2.6 without him (21st).

Missing those 10 games hurt him, directly and indirectly. Missing games reduces your value and hence directly loses you MVP votes and indirectly because it cost the Bulls the #1 seed. If the Bulls won the #1 seed without MJ it would be hard to deny Pippen the MVP.

Big facts

[goozeman]

Played 6th easiest schedule, didn't even win division behind Hawks, finished bottom half in the league in team offense, only eighth in league in scoring but not top 50 in true shooting (terrible inefficiency), shot 66 percent from the line and wasn't even top 50 in Ftr (ungodly bad), got locked down and knocked out of the playoffs by Knicks in second round... Player of the decade and MVP ladies and gentleman. Also, he didn't lead team in rebounds so don't know what is up with that.

[BigShotBob]

Played 6th easiest schedule, didn't even win division behind Hawks, finished bottom half in the league in team offense, only eighth in league in scoring but not top 50 in true shooting (terrible inefficiency), shot 66 percent from the line and wasn't even top 50 in Ftr (ungodly bad), got locked down and knocked out of the playoffs by Knicks in second round... Player of the decade and MVP ladies and gentleman. Also, he didn't lead team in rebounds so don't know what is up with that.

Ether.

Not in my top 10 for the 90's.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen was probably the favorite for MVP at the all-star break in 1994, but the Bulls went on a losing streak right after that where they lost 8 of 11 games and that essentially knocked him out of the top spot.

True but they rallied. Horace Grant did his "blue flu" shenanigans in the second half of the season (48 win pace without him), Kukoc hit a rookie wall and those things hurt them but they had the heart of champions and rallied.

The Bulls' low point was 37-21 but they went 19-7 afterwards. Going into the final weekend of the season the standings looked like this:

1) ATL 56-25
2) CHI 55-25
3) NY 54-25
4) ORL 49-31
5) CLE/IND 45-35

So the Bulls were right there but in the 81st game they suffered a double OT loss against the lowly Celtics, probably because they were looking ahead to game 82 against New York. That loss eliminated them from contention for the #1 seed.

The Knicks had the tiebreaker against the Bulls so the 82nd game wound up meaningless for both teams (ATL had locked up the #1 seed with the tiebreaker over NY), but history will record the Knicks won 57 games and the Bulls 55 wins. I guess in retrospect it would have looked better if they both won 56 even with the tiebreaker going to NY.

The other thing to note is Pippen played hurt the first two games and the Bulls went 1-1. He had surgery, missed 10 games to recover. So from Pippen's return through game 81 the Bulls went 50-19 (59 win pace).

If Pippen played 80 games like Hakeem, Robinson none of this stuff would matter. The Bulls would have won the #1 seed with MJ playing baseball.


So it was just a matter of a few games that kept Pippen from that trophy. Had Pippen played his entire career without Jordan I think he would've won that award eventually because of his spectacular all-around game.

Agree that he likely would have. Some people will scoff at that but Harden, Rose, Nash, Iverson, etc. are all lesser players who won MVP at some point.

[BigShotBob]

True but they rallied. Horace Grant did his "blue flu" shenanigans in the second half of the season (48 win pace without him), Kukoc hit a rookie wall and those things hurt them but they had the heart of champions and rallied.

The Bulls' low point was 37-21 but they went 19-7 afterwards. Going into the final weekend of the season the standings looked like this:

1) ATL 56-25
2) CHI 55-25
3) NY 54-25
4) ORL 49-31
5) CLE/IND 45-35

So the Bulls were right there but in the 81st game they suffered a double OT loss against the lowly Celtics, probably because they were looking ahead to game 82 against New York. That loss eliminated them from contention for the #1 seed.

The Knicks had the tiebreaker against the Bulls so the 82nd game wound up meaningless, but history will record the Knicks won 57 games and the Bulls 55 wins. I guess in retrospect it would have looked better if they both won 56 even with the tiebreaker going to NY.

The other thing to note is Pippen played hurt the first two games and the Bulls went 1-1. He had surgery, missed 10 games to recover. So from Pippen's return through game 81 the Bulls went 50-19 (59 win pace).

If Pippen played 80 games like Hakeem, Robinson none of this stuff would matter. The Bulls would have won the #1 seed with MJ playing baseball.



Agree that he likely would have. Some people will scoff at that but Harden, Rose, Nash, Iverson, etc. are all lesser players who won MVP at some point.

Pippen can never win MVP because he's not a dynamic enough of a scorer and he's not efficient enough. Too many players did like what he did and then some.

He didn't even score over 25 points in the second round. Not even once, and he was extremely inefficient. So this proved that he just couldn't handle being the man and leading a team, especially after the meltdown temper tantrum sit down.

[aceman]

Yeah the annual circus trip, but look at how bad those teams were (win total listed) and how terrible the Bulls were:

Hawks 57 (W)
Bucks 20 (W)
Celtics 32 (L)
Sonics 63 (L)
Blazers 47 (L)
Lakers 33 (W)
Kings 28 (L)
Rockets 58 (L)
Spurs 56 (L)
Mavs 13 (W)

So their wins came against 57, 20, 33, 13 win teams. So three terrible teams. Their losses came against 32, 63, 47, 28, 58 win teams. Their losses were more respectable.

Their point differential? 87 PPG versus 96 PPG. For perspective, the worst team in the league (Dallas) had a -9 differential, same as the Bulls without Pippen.

The problem with Grant, BJ, Kukoc is solid defense but zero scoring. They averaged 87 PPG. For perspective, the lowest scoring team that year averaged 95 PPG (Dallas). Grant was a good player but he was limited offensively, scoring a lot on dunks and putbacks. Kukoc was a rookie who averaged 9/4/3 after the all-star break (12/4/4 before). He wasn't ready. The Bulls got production out of Kukoc in these 10 games, production they wouldn't have over a full season after he hit a rookie wall.

That would mean BJ Armstrong would have to be the #1 option. :lol
Good post. Playoff berth just over 0.5 so they were not without hope but rookie kukoc may have dropped off.
Kukoc would be no.1 option rookie or not. Would've played post in triangle & isolated at top for big shot.

[Round Mound]

For me 93-94 Pippen was no surprise. I knew how good Pippen was when Jordan was playing with him. He turned out to be great from 1990 onwards. He deserved the MVP that season in the same why Hakeem deserved in 92-93 and Barkley in 89-90. Relative to teamates Pippen was the most impfactfull player that 93-94 season. He was a top 10 player for all the 90's.

[Roundball_Rock]

Good post. Playoff berth just over 0.5 so they were not without hope but rookie kukoc may have dropped off.
Kukoc would be no.1 option rookie or not. Would've played post in triangle & isolated at top for big shot.

They would need 42 wins without Pippen to get there. I suppose doable--but would be tough. Without Grant they fell off a lot so imagine the drop-off without Pippen. The caveat is the had the SRS of a 52 win team (42-23 pre-MJ but their record was 34-31) so maybe minus Pippen they could scrape together 40-43 wins. The difference between the two years is the Bulls' offense was better in 95' with Kukoc playing as a solid #2 option, Pippen becoming even more efficient, and still having BJ. Their problem was rebounding minus Grant/Rodman. Kukoc was a much better #2 option than Grant. If they signed anyone better than Larry Krystkowiak (yes, I am not kidding) to replace Grant they would have been fine for 95'. Rebounding, plus the scoring/creation combo skills of Pippen, Kukoc along with the shooting of Armstrong, Kerr and the #2 defense would have been a contender.


For me 93-94 Pippen was no surprise. I knew how good Pippen was when Jordan was playing with him. He turned out to be great from 1990 onwards. He deserved the MVP that season in the same why Hakeem deserved in 92-93 and Barkley in 89-90. Relative to teamates Pippen was the most impfactfull player that 93-94 season. He was a top 10 player for all the 90's

:applause:

[Duncan21formvp]

They would need 42 wins without Pippen to get there. I suppose doable--but would be tough. Without Grant they fell off a lot so imagine the drop-off without Pippen. The caveat is the had the SRS of a 52 win team (42-23 pre-MJ but their record was 34-31) so maybe minus Pippen they could scrape together 40-43 wins. The difference between the two years is the Bulls' offense was better in 95' with Kukoc playing as a solid #2 option, Pippen becoming even more efficient, and still having BJ. Their problem was rebounding minus Grant/Rodman. Kukoc was a much better #2 option than Grant. If they signed anyone better than Larry Krystkowiak (yes, I am not kidding) to replace Grant they would have been fine for 95'. Rebounding, plus the scoring/creation combo skills of Pippen, Kukoc along with the shooting of Armstrong, Kerr and the #2 defense would have been a contender.



:applause:

Kobe nor Shaq have more than 1 mvp nor Hakeem. Pippen wasn't as good as either of them.

[houston]

no he didn't Hakeem deserve it. Pip had two other all-stars with him

[Soundwave]

Not even close. It was a feel good story for the regular season and Pip has every right to hold his head up high, but really he has no case to be above Hakeem, DRob, or Shaq and not even Ewing quite honestly.

Ewing led the Knicks to a better record, had better individual stats, and also led the Knicks to the no.1 defence in the NBA, while outplaying Pippen head-to-head in their playoff round where Ewing's team beat Pippen's en route to the NBA Finals.

[Roundball_Rock]

no he didn't Hakeem deserve it. Pip had two other all-stars with him

Was there a bit difference between Grant and Thorpe? Agree with your overall point but the counter is the Rockets had 5 NBA starters and the Bulls only 4. No one else had a G League/CBA player starting except the Bulls because MJ retired right before the season in October so they couldn't sign a Kendall Gill type.

[Whoah10115]

Not even close. It was a feel good story for the regular season and Pip has every right to hold his head up high, but really he has no case to be above Hakeem, DRob, or Shaq and not even Ewing quite honestly.

Ewing led the Knicks to a better record, had better individual stats, and also led the Knicks to the no.1 defence in the NBA, while outplaying Pippen head-to-head in their playoff round where Ewing's team beat Pippen's en route to the NBA Finals.

Pippen for sure has a case over Shaq. Shaq shouldn't be ahead of Ewing, for starters. Pippen was for sure top 3.

[Soundwave]

Pippen for sure has a case over Shaq. Shaq shouldn't be ahead of Ewing, for starters. Pippen was for sure top 3.

Shaq averaged 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 3 blocks per game on 60% shooting from the field ... lets be freaking real here, Shaq was a way, way, way better player.

The only reason Shaq didn't win the scoring title that year was because the Spurs stat padded David Robinson to 71 points in the last game of the year.

Hakeem, Shaq, DRob, and Ewing were all better than Pippen that year, "feel good" narratives put aside.

[Soundwave]

People don't really hold Pippen's lack of an MVP against him (or the voters) because he played alongside a guy who pretty much monopolized the voters' attention every year.

That year, Pippen was the second player ever (Dave Cowens) to lead his team in points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks. He led the bulls to 55 wins (two fewer than with MJ)

You might want to actually do your research, Pippen did not lead the Bulls in rebounds or blocks in 93-94. Horace Grant did. 94-95 was the only year Pippen led the Bulls in rebounds, but Jordan averaged more points and assists.

57 wins for the Bulls in 92-93 was an outlier in part because Pippen and Grant themselves had poor regular seasons compared to the year before. Every other Bulls team with Jordan on it basically played at a 60+ win rate all through the 1990s, even including the 94-95 Bulls went 13-4 with an out of shape Jordan, going from a barely .500 team to a 60+ win rate overnight.

[KD7]

Rodman said it best

https://i.postimg.cc/8cMt4xhH/Screenshot-20200605-001435.jpg

[ImKobe]

In what world is '94 Pippen even close to Hakeem in terms of MVP? He played 8 less games, led a similar supporting cast to a worse record and wasn't better on either end of the court. Hakeem had 0 all-star teammates. Armstrong & Grant both averaged more points than his 2nd option.

[Whoah10115]

Shaq averaged 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 3 blocks per game on 60% shooting from the field ... lets be freaking real here, Shaq was a way, way, way better player.

The only reason Shaq didn't win the scoring title that year was because the Spurs stat padded David Robinson to 71 points in the last game of the year.

Hakeem, Shaq, DRob, and Ewing were all better than Pippen that year, "feel good" narratives put aside.

I know what he averaged, and I don't care. Robinson didn't win just because he padded. He outscored Shaq by .5 a game.

Game is game. Numbers don't mean shit on their own.

Shaq had a better team around him than Ewing and won less. I'm looking at play and the impact is a result of it. Pippen played better.

[Whoah10115]

You might want to actually do your research, Pippen did not lead the Bulls in rebounds or blocks in 93-94. Horace Grant did. 94-95 was the only year Pippen led the Bulls in rebounds, but Jordan averaged more points and assists.

57 wins for the Bulls in 92-93 was an outlier in part because Pippen and Grant themselves had poor regular seasons compared to the year before. Every other Bulls team with Jordan on it basically played at a 60+ win rate all through the 1990s, even including the 94-95 Bulls went 13-4 with an out of shape Jordan, going from a barely .500 team to a 60+ win rate overnight.

All of this is credit btw, and I don't disagree with any of it. But Pippen was exceptional. Not that I think you're dumb in who you're choosing over him, but I don't see it the same way.

[Roundball_Rock]

In what world is '94 Pippen even close to Hakeem in terms of MVP? He played 8 less games, led a similar supporting cast to a worse record and wasn't better on either end of the court. Hakeem had 0 all-star teammates. Armstrong & Grant both averaged more points than his 2nd option.

The real world circa 1994. Pippen "led" the Bulls to 4-6 when he was out? With him they had the same win pace as the Rockets...those missed games may have cost him the MVP.

The "supporting cast" talk ignores Houston had 5 NBA starters, the Bulls 4. The Bulls were playing 4 on 5 on offense for most of the game.

MVP isn't a "best player" award.

[ImKobe]

The real world circa 1994. Pippen "led" the Bulls to 4-6 when he was out? With him they had the same win pace as the Rockets...those missed games may have cost him the MVP.

The "supporting cast" talk ignores Houston had 5 NBA starters, the Bulls 4. The Bulls were playing 4 on 5 on offense for most of the game.

MVP isn't a "best player" award.

Pippen - 51 - 21
Hakeem - 57 - 23

Rockets were 2nd in the WC, Bulls 3rd in the East, Rockets won more games than any EC team. Hakeem played more games than Pippen and led his team to more wins, those things matter in the MVP discussion. Hakeem was the best player on the 2nd best team in the league in the RS.

I'm sorry, but what's your argument again? That Pippen had a worse supporting cast around him? Did he produce better than Hakeem to make up for it? No? Then there's nothing to argue here. There's a reason why Hakeem got 66 first place votes to Pippen's 7. It wasn't close.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen - 51 - 21
Hakeem - 57 - 23

51-20 in games that mattered (59 win pace). The 82nd game was meaningless--the Knicks had the tiebreaker for the 2nd seed and the Hawks had the tiebreaker over the Knicks for the 1st seed. So irrelevant for both teams.

All this cast talk but nothing about injuries? Grant missed 12 games (Bulls 7-5 without him); Thorpe played all 82.

Rockets' Key Cast

Thorpe 82 games
Horry 81 games
Smith 78 games
Maxwell 75 games

Bulls' Key Cast

Grant 70 games
Armstrong 82 games
Cartwright 42 games
Kukoc 75 games

Plus Pippen himself missed 10 games, Hakeem only 2.

The Bulls' had a tougher road to hoe than the Rockets, given injuries and MJ retiring at the last minute and not having 5 NBA starters as a result.

The vote totals were with Pippen missing 10 games and the Bulls' being the 3 seed. What would the vote totals have been if he played 80-82 like he usually did and the Bulls win the #1 seed with Pete Myers "replacing" Jordan?

Shaq had a lot of 3rd place MVP finishes too because he missed 10-12 games.

Then again, you think Carmelo>Pippen, evidently. :lol

[ImKobe]

51-20 in games that mattered (59 win pace). The 82nd game was meaningless--the Knicks had the tiebreaker for the 2nd seed and the Hawks had the tiebreaker over the Knicks for the 1st seed. So irrelevant for both teams.

All this cast talk but nothing about injuries? Grant missed 12 games (Bulls 7-5 without him); Thorpe played all 82.

Rockets' Key Cast

Thorpe 82 games
Horry 81 games
Smith 78 games
Maxwell 75 games

Bulls' Key Cast

Grant 70 games
Armstrong 82 games
Cartwright 42 games
Kukoc 75 games

Plus Pippen himself missed 10 games, Hakeem only 2.

The Bulls' had a tougher road to hoe than the Rockets, given injuries and MJ retiring at the last minute and not having 5 NBA starters as a result.

The vote totals were with Pippen missed 10 games and the Bulls' being the 3 seed. What would the vote totals have been if he played 80-82 like he usually did and the Bulls win the #1 seed with Pete Myers "replacing" Jordan?

Shaq had a lot of 3rd place MVP finishes too because he missed 10-12 games.

These excuses don't matter. Hakeem was the best player on the 2nd best team in the league. Sonics didn't have a superstar so he was a very easy pick, given that he was one of the best scorers/rebounders and the best defensive player in the league. He produced more than Scottie, played more games and led his team to a better record as a result. There's no argument here. It's one thing if Pippen produced better and you could then make the argument that his team was a lot worse, but the reality is that their supporting casts were about even but one produced way more and played more games than the other guy.

[Roundball_Rock]

It wasn't an easy choice nor was Hakeem the consensus best player at the time. That is historical revisionism after the fact. At the time Hakeem vs. Robinson was close for MVP and best player. Pippen--not Ewing (whose team was the #2 seed) or Shaq for the record--was the third horse in the race.

[Soundwave]

I know what he averaged, and I don't care. Robinson didn't win just because he padded. He outscored Shaq by .5 a game.

Game is game. Numbers don't mean shit on their own.

Shaq had a better team around him than Ewing and won less. I'm looking at play and the impact is a result of it. Pippen played better.


60% shooting for Shaq on 19 FGA/game is practically historic efficiency, I don't know if we've seen that in the NBA since. 93-94 arguably might be the 2nd best season Shaq ever had.

And the Magic were still finding themselves that year, they did not have Horace Grant yet and Penny was just a rookie who being mentored by Scott Skiles.

Scottie Pippen was never better than Shaq at any point of either of their 20s-early 30s age for age, year for year. No way.

Ewing was also better than Pippen that year, and so were DRob and Hakeem. Pippen was maybe the 5th best player in the league that year, this is just an instance of a narrative story line over riding actual play on the court.

If the Bulls had the best record in the league or something, OK I get him getting the trophy on the "Steve Nash" argument, but that would be the Sonics, and apparently Kemp or Payton got dick all in credit for that, lol. Which other season is the team with the no.1 record in the league not even given a top 5 candidate for MVP? The Bulls didn't even have the top record in their own division.

To be honest the Atlanta Hawks winning 57 games after only winning 43 the season prior AND trading Dominique Wilkins (so I guess ... Stacey Augmon was "the man"?) mid-season is more shocking all around. 93-94 was a bizarre year all around, right from the Jordan retirement to the OJ Simpson chase interrupting the NBA Finals towards the end. I'll never forget watching that, it was surreal.

[Sarcastic]

Not even close. He shouldn't have even finished 3rd. He got voted that high because it was a feel good story at the time, since the Bulls were without Jordan. You can make an argument for multiple players ahead of Pippen in 94, aside from Hakeem and Robinson, including Shaq, Ewing, Kemp, and Malone.

[Whoah10115]

Not even close. He shouldn't have even finished 3rd. He got voted that high because it was a feel good story at the time, since the Bulls were without Jordan. You can make an argument for multiple players ahead of Pippen in 94, aside from Hakeem and Robinson, including Shaq, Ewing, Kemp, and Malone.

You can't make an argument for any version of Kemp


60% shooting for Shaq on 19 FGA/game is practically historic efficiency, I don't know if we've seen that in the NBA since. 93-94 arguably might be the 2nd best season Shaq ever had.

And the Magic were still finding themselves that year, they did not have Horace Grant yet and Penny was just a rookie who being mentored by Scott Skiles.

Scottie Pippen was never better than Shaq at any point of either of their 20s-early 30s age for age, year for year. No way.

Ewing was also better than Pippen that year, and so were DRob and Hakeem. Pippen was maybe the 5th best player in the league that year, this is just an instance of a narrative story line over riding actual play on the court.

If the Bulls had the best record in the league or something, OK I get him getting the trophy on the "Steve Nash" argument, but that would be the Sonics, and apparently Kemp or Payton got dick all in credit for that, lol. Which other season is the team with the no.1 record in the league not even given a top 5 candidate for MVP? The Bulls didn't even have the top record in their own division.

To be honest the Atlanta Hawks winning 57 games after only winning 43 the season prior AND trading Dominique Wilkins (so I guess ... Stacey Augmon was "the man"?) mid-season is more shocking all around. 93-94 was a bizarre year all around, right from the Jordan retirement to the OJ Simpson chase interrupting the NBA Finals towards the end. I'll never forget watching that, it was surreal.

I get all that, but Pippen was simply a basketball player.

They had a solid team, but Pippen had to be his best version. He was just as good the next year but the teammates were much worse.

It does mean a lot to win 55 post Jordan. Especially since many of the players had been in 3 straight Finals.

[Roundball_Rock]

Not even close. He shouldn't have even finished 3rd. He got voted that high because it was a feel good story at the time, since the Bulls were without Jordan. You can make an argument for multiple players ahead of Pippen in 94, aside from Hakeem and Robinson, including Shaq, Ewing, Kemp, and Malone.

Pippen beat Malone 94-68 in all-NBA voting that year (narrative not an excuse for all-NBA voting). He was the highest overall vote getter but hard to compare across positions. We don't need to do that with forwards, though. Only in retrospect is it argued by MJ stans/Pippen detractors Malone was considered better than Pippen in 94'.

Feel good story. Ewing had a great case. Ewing never finished higher than 4th in MVP in his career. He played for New York...no "feel good" story there? It sounds like the voters just didn't give him the same credit. He actually finished 5th in 94', lower than in 93'. It is obvious MVP voters, rightly or wrongly, never really considered him of MVP timber, relative to his team success and reputation--despite having the ultimate boost of playing for New York.

Ewing was not even all-NBA that year. Tough position--but he beat those guys in other years so what's the excuse for 94'? Ewing benefits from the glow of making the finals but that isn't relevant to MVP voting and was unknown to voters when they voted.

Shaq? On a 50 win team? How often is a player on a 50 win team a MVP

Kemp? As the second best player on his own team? :wtf:

We are seeing random names thrown out there. Might as well throw in Mark Price, Mookie Blaylock, Derrick Coleman. Forget top 3. How did Pippen get any MVP votes at all? :mad:

Fact check time:

1) Hakeem 889
2) Robinson 730
3) Pippen 390
4) Shaq 289
5) Ewing 255
6) Payton 20
7) Malone/Kemp 17
9) Price 7
10) Barkley 5

Kemp deserved it over Pippen, though. Only on ISH. :lol

A top 5 player on a team that, when he played, had the best RS performance in his conference being a MVP candidate. What a travesty.

The 94' excuses (the only year worse than 2020 in the annals of history?) ignores Pippen was getting MVP consideration in 96' before he got hurt. Would he have won? No, but he could have finished 3rd instead of 5th had he not gotten hurt the final quarter of the season and his numbers nose-dived.

[Roundball_Rock]

The argument that Pippen didn't deserve consideration is belied by the implied impact he had. His team was on a 33 win pace without him with a -9 point differential. That would be the worst point differential in the league over a full season. Their offense was 21st without him, 8th with him (so essentially they went from the Kings offense to the Jazz offense with him). As to win pace, with him it was 58 wins and 59 wins if you exclude the meaningless 82nd game. In 95' he missed 3 games total, 2 pre-MJ, so a tiny sample size, but FWIW the Bulls went 0-2 in those games. So that is 4-8 without Pippen, without MJ. You could throw in a game he was ejected in the second quarter as well--a loss to a 17 win team. That would be 4-9.

If certain other players had this type of impact we would never hear the end of it. Smaller impacts get touted routinely on ISH.

MVP isn't a best player award. When were Iverson, Harden, Westbrook, Rose, Nash, Dirk, and so on the best player? Nor does the "Nash changed everything" excuse fly. Robinson won it when Hakeem was the best player, Barkley when MJ was, even back then. Hakeem was 5th in MVP as the best player in 95'. Malone over MJ. Etc. etc.

Many of these names were on the team with the best record but in 94' that wasn't a factor because Seattle had no superstar (Payton arguably became one later--but he wasn't there in 94', which was his first all-star season).

If you remove the names "Pippen" and "Robinson" and "Ewing" you find their scenarios are very similar. All superstars, all on teams that won 55-57 games, etc. The difference was the road taken to get to those win totals was very different...

[Roundball_Rock]

The Ewing talk is fascinating whenever the 94' MVP comes up.

Team A: Goes from 60 wins and 1st place to 57 wins and 2nd place
Team B: Goes from 57 wins and 2nd place to 55 wins and 3rd place

On its face, this appears to be the same thing: both teams lost a couple wins, both slipped a spot in the standings.

Except that "Team B" lost the best player in the NBA at his peak at the last minute (so no real replacement) while "Team A" ran the same team back. Even Pippen's biggest detractors are quick--in any other context--to point to the turnover the roster had for 94' (albeit on the bench, aside from SG).

Yet voters were supposed to favor the best player on Team A over Team B? After they ranked him 4th the prior year when his team and he (2nd team all-NBA in 93'; not all-NBA in 94') had done even better? So his team does worse, he does worse and he is supposed to move up in MVP voting?

Ewing is a convenient tool as is Malone. Utah was the 5 seed (after adding Hornacek), Pippen and Malone weren't even close in all-NBA but Malone should have been higher in MVP?

Here is what was happening (article from March 28, so right at the end of the season) then:


Although O'Neal has proved far better than his critics will admit, the second NBA player not named Michael, Larry or Earvin to win an MVP award since 1983 will be named David or Hakeem. Or possibly Scottie.

With just a month left in the MVP voting among national media, Robinson and Houston's Hakeem Olajuwon have emerged as the favorites, with the Bulls' Scottie Pippen hanging around on the edge.


All three leading contenders have been criticized, doubted and ignored until this season. Robinson wasn't even among the top five in the MVP voting last year, Pippen never has been higher than ninth and Olajuwon wasn't even in the top 20 two years ago.


And all have answered their potential, if not their accusers.
Olajuwon, the angry one, has calmed noticeably, no longer fighting with himself and management.

Pippen has done the impossible, making Jordan's shadow disappear, and Robinson, with the addition of Dennis Rodman to rebound and motivate him, has become an angry man, or at least more determined.


There is some other anger around, notably from those who think they are deserving of the award but being overlooked.

"Shaq is leading the league in scoring, is second in rebounding and shooting on one of the league's most improved teams," noted Orlando General Manager Pat Williams. "He should be right there with Hakeem and Robinson."

Patrick Ewing should, too, says his coach, Pat Riley.

"If there ever was a time he deserved to be MVP, it was last year," said Riley, "when his team won 60 games and 24 of the last 28. And he's had a great season again."

But Ewing's poor performances against Olajuwon and Robinson-he's averaging 13 points a game against them this season to 33 for them-and publicity-shy ways make him a long shot.

So the Knicks' coach, Magic GM are lamenting that Ewing and Shaq aren't even in the hunt but they "clearly" should have finished in the top 3 in the eyes of a collection of "Pippen detractors" 26 years later?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1994-03-28-9403280103-story.html

[ZenMaster7210]

Played 6th easiest schedule, didn't even win division behind Hawks, finished bottom half in the league in team offense, only eighth in league in scoring but not top 50 in true shooting (terrible inefficiency), shot 66 percent from the line and wasn't even top 50 in Ftr (ungodly bad), got locked down and knocked out of the playoffs by Knicks in second round... Player of the decade and MVP ladies and gentleman. Also, he didn't lead team in rebounds so don't know what is up with that.

DAMN! :oldlol::roll:

I love Pip but this post will be ignored by the MJ haters.

[BigShotBob]

Played 6th easiest schedule, didn't even win division behind Hawks, finished bottom half in the league in team offense, only eighth in league in scoring but not top 50 in true shooting (terrible inefficiency), shot 66 percent from the line and wasn't even top 50 in Ftr (ungodly bad), got locked down and knocked out of the playoffs by Knicks in second round... Player of the decade and MVP ladies and gentleman. Also, he didn't lead team in rebounds so don't know what is up with that.

I told ya'll it's a wrap. Roundball_Cuck is just talking to himself.

[Roundball_Rock]

I love Pip but this post will b

Let's put it to the test--and apply the same metrics to other contenders (throwing Ewing, Shaq in there too in addition to the 3 real contenders). See, what Pippen haters can't grasp is all-time rankers, all-NBA voters, MVP voters, etc. have to apply the same criteria to each player. There isn't a special "I hate Pippen" standard. :lol Using his own standards, who is MVP?


Played 6th easiest schedule,

Chicago SOS: 22nd
Houston SOS: 17th
Spurs SOS: 20th
Knicks SOS: 27th (last in the league--27 teams then)
Magic SOS: 21st

As usual, a TP crumbles upon examination. It looks like if they had the Knicks' SOS they would be the team with 57 wins and the Knicks the one with 55.

The other thing is, as shown earlier in the thread "Pippen played" isn't the same as the 82 games because he missed the softest part of the schedule early in the season.


didn't even win division behind Hawks

The Spurs didn't either. That disqualifies Robinson? Orlando was a 50 win team--7 games behind division leader. No Shaq then?

They lost the division because they sucked without Pippen. Ironically, Pippen detractors point to losing the division, losing the #1 seed to argue against Pippen's value. Points for creativity?


Finished bottom half in the league in team offense

8th in the games he played--21st without him. You undercut your own point: the offense sucked without him (87 PPG) yet that means he was less valuable?

Bulls offensive rank: 8th (healthy), 14th (actual)
Rockets offensive rank: 15th
Knicks offensive rank: 16th
Spurs offensive rank: 4th
Magic offensive rank: 3rd

So that disqualifies Hakeem, Ewing whose offenses sucked with them (Pippen's was equal to the Jazz offense with him). Robinson, Shaq had good offenses but were eliminated earlier (along with Pippen) for their teams losing their division.


got locked down and knocked out of the playoffs by Knicks in second round.

Litigated earlier--deceptive and irrelevant to MVP voting. As relevant as Ewing melting down in the finals or Robinson shrinking from 30 PPG to 20 PPG in the same playoffs (a first round loss to a lower seed) or Shaq getting swept in the first round by a 47 win team. This TP would lead to Hakeem being MVP with Pippen 2nd (Ewing, Robinson melted down and Shaq's team didn't win a playoff game)--but Hakeem was disqualifed earlier for Houston having a below average offense (even worse relative to playoff teams--14th of 16, ahead of Ewing's Knicks and the Nuggets).

This stuff is the ultimate tribute to Pippen: Pippen haters (mostly MJ stans but some Knicks fans sprinkled in) can't come up with an honest, consistent criteria to diminish him. Their own logic frequently helps him. The rub is they are homing missiles to hit Pippen but ignore or conceal the context for other players. The tell always is omitting the corresponding data for other players, teams being discussed or that for his peers (his #'s are presented in vacuums by MJ stans).

By his logic, no one qualifies for MVP. :roll:

[Soundwave]

This situation actually if anything just illustrates how stupid and political MVP voting is.

So Ewing leading the Knicks to more wins than the Bulls, the no.1 defence in the league, while having better individual numbers than Pippen isn't "good enough" to be considered in the MVP race (on top of that he knocked Scottie's ass out of the playoffs head-to-head while outplaying him in said series) ... because one of the cited reasons is Ewing is too "media shy".

lol, that's hilarious bull sh*t which just shows how much garbage politics go into the award.

Pippen was outplayed that year by Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, and Ewing flat out.

Shaq averaging 29+ ppg on 60% FG is generational efficiency, not even Wilt and Kareem were able to ever do that, they both had one season of 60+% range shooting but not at 29 ppg and the FGA required to get there. It becomes harder to maintain that FG% the more you shoot, for Shaq to be in that range is remarkable.

[Roundball_Rock]

So Ewing leading the Knicks to more wins than the Bulls, the no.1 defence in the league, while having better individual numbers and better efficiency than Pippen

It illustrates the delta between MJ stans 26 years later and MVP, all-NBA voters then. None of those voters compared efficiency between a SF and C. That is a joke. Serious people wouldn't do that. That is for agenda-driven insecure fans 26 years later. You could compare it among Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem but the "efficiency" police only bring it up in connection to one player (even defending worse playoff efficiency on Ewing or Robinson's part in the same threads :lol ).

Pippen's numbers overall arguably were better than Ewing's (offense is more than scoring)--this was discussed in an earlier thread; MJ stans didn't respond.

The faux concern for Ewing in 94' is funny. His team had a better record in 93', was the 1 seed and not the 2 seed in 93', yet the same "advocates" for Ewing in 94' wouldn't say a word about Ewing in 93'. He slipped from 4th to 5th in voting in those years. So he was this heavy hitting MVP candidate that got jobbed in 94' but deservedly a non-factor in 93'? What about 95'? Is there that big a difference between 57 wins in 94' and 55 in 95'?

If it is about team record, the 93' MVP should have been Barkley, Ewing, Jordan, Hakeem in that order--not Barkley, Hakeem, Jordan, Ewing. Pippen simply took MJ's spot as the Bulls' MVP candidate (both finished 3rd--ahead of Ewing who was 4th, 5th).

Ewing never placed higher than 4th in MVP his entire career. Why is that? He played in New York and was never a serious MVP candidate. That says a lot.


he knocked Scottie's ass out of the playoffs

This is one of the bizarre TP's: bringing up playoff performance for the 94' MVP candidates (the big 3 plus Shaq and Ewing). This is supposed to be an argument for Ewing, Robinson, Shaq. What a world Jordanstan is! :lol

As if Robinson did not have an all-time bad playoff (30 PPG down to 20 PPG, 41% FG as a center, etc.) run en route to losing in the 1st round with a 56 win team in 94', Ewing did not author one of the biggest chokes in finals history, and Shaq get swept by a 47 win team. In Jordanstan, though, these things mean they deserved MVP (everybody did--except Pippen, evidently).

[Soundwave]

It illustrates the delta between MJ stans 26 years later and MVP, all-NBA voters then. None of those voters compared efficiency between a SF and C. That is a joke. Serious people wouldn't do that. That is for agenda-driven insecure fans 26 years later. You could compare it among Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem.

Pippen's numbers overall arguably were better than Ewing's (offense is more than scoring)--this was discussed in an earlier thread; MJ stans didn't respond.

The faux concern for Ewing in 94' is funny. His team had a better record in 93', was the 1 seed and not the 2 seed in 93', yet the same "advocates" for Ewing in 94' wouldn't say a word about Ewing in 93'. He slipped from 4th to 5th in voting in those years. So he was this heavy hitting MVP candidate that got jobbed in 94' but deservedly a non-factor in 93'? What about 95'? Is there that big a difference between 57 wins in 94' and 55 in 95'?

If it is about team record, the 93' MVP should have been Barkley, Ewing, Jordan, Hakeem in that order--not Barkley, Hakeem, Jordan, Ewing.



This is one of the bizarre TP's: bringing up playoff performance for the 94' MVP candidates (the big 3 plus Shaq and Ewing). This is supposed to be an argument for Ewing, Robinson, Shaq. What a world Jordanstan is! :lol

As if Robinson did not have an all-time bad playoff (30 PPG down to 20 PPG, 41% FG as a center, etc.) run in 94', Ewing did not author one of the biggest chokes in finals history, and Shaq get swept by a 47 win team.

No it just illustrates how much bull shit is involved in MVP voting. The article you cited states clearly one of the reasons Ewing was not in the mix is basically because he doesn't suck enough media dick.

It's actually hilarious how good the Knicks were defensively (basically either 1 or 2 for several years in the league during this time) and Ewing got very little recognition for that.

The Knicks had a better record than the Bulls. Ewing had better numbers than Pippen. Ewing's team was no.1 in the league in defence. On top of that Ewing beat Pippen head to head in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series by a good sized margin (shit, Horace Grant may have actually been the best Bulls player in that series).

But some how Ewing was less than Pippen that year? Real truth is Pippen was never better than Ewing for any season in the 90s.

The main reason the Knicks did not win the championship in 1994 is John Starks shot freaking 2 for 18 (11% lol) in game 7 which was a 6 point victory by the Rockets. If Starks shoots even a mediocre 33%, they win the title. But at least the Knicks had a shot at winning the title, which I would take every day of the week over getting bounced in the 2nd round.

[Roundball_Rock]

No it just illustrates how much bull shit is involved in MVP voting. The article you cited states clearly one of the reasons Ewing was not in the mix is basically because he doesn't suck enough media dick.

Yeah, and his level of play.


It's actually hilarious how good the Knicks were defensively (basically either 1 or 2 for several years in the league during this time) and Ewing got very little recognition for that.

What were their offensive ranks? We are talking MVP, not DPOY. It wasn't all Ewing either. Oakley, Starks, Mason. Riley's defensive scheme. The Knicks didn't coincidentally become defensive juggeranuts as soon as Riley got there.


The Knicks had a better record than the Bulls

Did their best player retire weeks before the season? Despite that, the Knicks were only 2 games ahead (a meaningless win in game 82 over CHI)? This is an argument for Ewing being MVP? It implies NY underachieved...you have the MVP, you have a 60 win team coming back intact and they regress more than the Bulls who lost the supposed GOAT at his peak did?


But some how Ewing was less than Pippen that year?

One guy was 1st in all-NBA voting; the other didn't even make the third team. It sucks but maybe we can change the votes after the fact for convenience purposes?


The main reason the Knicks did not win the championship in 1994 is John Starks shot freaking 2 for 18 (11% lol) in game 7

The main reason was Ewing choked. Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency. Suddenly doesn't matter?

Ewing was 19 PPG on 36% from the field, 39% TS. These are horrific numbers for a center. His prime TS % in the regular season was 55%--so a 16% collapse. Meanwhile, his defensive assignment Hakeem roasted him. This da real MVP? Derek Harper, Starks outplayed Ewing in the finals.

Starks choked in Game 7 too--but that doesn't absolve Ewing's choke.

Besides, what happened? Dat great defense couldn't overcome chokes from their two best players? Such a great team. Finally get a chance at a chip, best players decide to choke. :lol

The best part of the defense hype is they will diss Pippen for playing that very "great" defense and having his numbers regress against that defense (not a Ewing or Robinson-like collapse, though). So on the one hand it is an all-time great defense, on the other, why didn't Pippen maintain his RS efficiency against it? #badfaith23 :oldlol:

[Soundwave]

Yeah, and his level of play.



What were their offensive ranks? We are talking MVP, not DPOY. It wasn't all Ewing either. Oakley, Starks, Mason. Riley's defensive scheme. The Knicks didn't coincidentally become defensive juggeranuts as soon as Riley



Did their best player retire weeks before the season? Despite that, the Knicks were only 2 games ahead (a meaningless win in game 82 over CHI)? This is an argument for Ewing being MVP?



One guy was 1st in all-NBA voting; the other didn't even make the third team. It sucks but maybe we can change the votes after the fact for convenience purposes?



The main reason was Ewing choked. Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency. Suddenly doesn't matter?

Ewing was 19 PPG on 36% from the field, 39% TS. These are horrific numbers for a center. His prime TS % in the regular season was 55%--so a 16% collapse.

Starks choked in Game 7 too--but that doesn't absolve Ewing's choke.

Besides, what happened? Dat great defense couldn't overcome chokes from their two best players? Such a great team. Finally get a chance at a chip, best players decide to choke. :lol

The best part of the defense hype is they will diss Pippen for playing that very "great" defense. :oldlol

I'd rather be in the Finals than bounced in the 2nd round, maybe if Scottie was actually in fact a better player than Ewing he would have outplayed Ewing in the Bulls-Knicks series and the Bulls would be in the Finals that year, but they weren't because he wasn't.

Ewing was better than Pippen every season of the 90s. And the Knicks had a better record than the Bulls AND were better defensively AND Ewing had better statistics than Pippen. And we know they beat the Bulls in the playoffs that year while Ewing outplayed Pippen head to head in that playoff series.

But y'know ... these are just minor things, lol.

Apparently being on the team with the better record, having better numbers, being on the no.1 team either a defensive or offensive capacity, while also beating said player head to head in the playoffs shouldn't matter ... we should be looking at who's a better ... interview as part of the metric. Yeah that makes sense.

The Knicks were a great defensive team, probably actually even better than the Bulls. Offensively? Not so much. But that doesn't somehow make Pippen a better player, especially when Ewing was a better offensive player anyway. Patrick would have 7-8 titles if he played with Jordan.

[Roundball_Rock]

I'd rather be in the Finals than bounced in the 2nd round

What did Robinson's and Shaq's teams do in the playoffs? What did those players do in those series respectively? You can't jump up and down about a (razor thin) 2nd round loss and then advocate for 1st round upsets. #badfaith23 How about formulating some real arguments? :lol

Ewing was outplayed by Derek Harper and John Starks in a NBA finals due to his own meltdown (that defense was nowhere to be seen as Hakeem roasted him). This is the real MVP? :confusedshrug:

Ewing, Robinson had all-time bad meltdowns--players they advocate for as MVP candidates--yet they harp on Pippen in the ECSF (against, by their own admission, was a great #1 defense--MVP worthy defense in fact!). You can't make this level of bad faith up. All because of insecurity over LeBron. :roll:

Pippen's 94' playoff numbers make him look like MJ compared to Ewing, Robinson's 94' playoff numbers.

[RRR3]

Pippen was never better than Ewing yet he's usually ranked higher on the GOAT list. Interdasting.

[Soundwave]

What did Robinson's and Shaq's teams do in the playoffs? What did those players do in those series respectively? You can't jump up and down about a (razor thin) 2nd round loss and then advocate for 1st round upsets. #badfaith23 How about formulating some real arguments? :lol

Ewing was outplayed by Derek Harper and John Starks in a NBA finals due to his own meltdown (that defense was nowhere to be seen as Hakeem roasted him). This is the real MVP? :confusedshrug:

What difference does it make? It's not like Pippen did anything special in the playoffs, his playoff highlight that season was getting yelled at on the bench by Cartwright as Kukoc kept the Bulls alive in the 2nd round.

I'm not saying Ewing was the MVP, I'm saying he was better than Pippen that year, which is true. His team had a better record, beat Pippen's team head to head, he had better numbers than Pippen, and had an actual real chance at an NBA title, not an imaginary one.

You're going to say with a straight face Pippen was better than Shaq who average 29.3 + 13+ rpg on 60% FG, something Kareem or Wilt couldn't even do in their careers?

If we're going to do that then lets not even worry about things like regular season records or stats at all and just give away MVP participation trophies based on who has the most "feel good" narrative.

[Roundball_Rock]

What difference does it make?

#Badfaith--now playoff performances suddenly don't matter.


I'm not saying Ewing was the MVP, I'm saying he was better than Pippen that year, which is true

In Jordanstan, sure, but in Jordanstan Kemp, Mourning, Miller, and basically every 90's star is better than Pippen so it's a meaningless statement. :lol

The indicia we have of what people thought about the two players' seasons are the following:

MVP: Pippen 3rd, Ewing 5th
All-NBA: Pippen 1st, Ewing nothing
All-NBA voting: Pippen 1st overall (94-68 over Malone at F); Ewing N/A since his vote total wasn't relevant enough to report.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen was never better than Ewing yet he's usually ranked higher on the GOAT list. Interdasting.

That is the big media conspiracy to push Pippen after the fact. Pippen is the media darling--look at how the media pushes him daily.

What you really need to look at is how they were perceived back then. Look at all the articles Pippen detractors/MJ stans produce to show how poorly Pippen in fact was perceived back then.

Pippen in articles being called the 2nd best player in the NBA dating from 1992 to as late as 1998. Getting compared favorably to MJ . Where are the corresponding articles for Ewing, Kemp, Miller, and the MJ stan 90's player du jour? These guys were on another galaxy than Pippen, right? :confusedshrug:

Re all-time, the argument they make is, as usual, contradictory: they will say Pippen is where he is all-time because he played with MJ but he should not be where he is all-time...wait for it...wait...because he played with MJ (being a 2nd option disqualifies him). :roll:

It is sad to see them like this. They used to be a lot sharper, coherent years ago before the LeBron specter appeared.

[Smoke117]

He probably would have been if he didn't miss those 10 games with a sprained ankle early in the season. The team went 4-6 during that time. If they had just gone 6-4 or better while he was playing the Bulls would have had the same or a better record than they did in 93 and he would have definitely been voted MVP. Horace Grant also missed 12 games himself, though, I dunno what their record was when he was out. I just think it's worth noting considering both played 81 (pippen, despite having an ankle sprain a good 1/3rd of the season...that's why his numbers took a hit compared to the year prior) and Grant 77 games in 93 when they won 57 games.

[Soundwave]

#Badfaith--now playoff performances suddenly don't matter.



In Jordanstan, sure, but in Jordanstan Kemp, Mourning, Miller, and basically every 90's star is better than Pippen so it's a meaningless statement. :lol

The indicia we have of what people thought about the two players' seasons are the following:

MVP: Pippen 3rd, Ewing 5th
All-NBA: Pippen 1st, Ewing nothing
All-NBA voting: Pippen 1st overall (94-68 over Malone at F); Ewing N/A since his vote total wasn't relevant enough to report.

No not in "Jordanstan" In "reality land", if Kevin Durant had better statistics than Giannis, had a team with a better record than Giannis, had a team with either the no.1 in the major category of D or offensive in the NBA whereas Giannis' team was no.1 in neither category, and beat Giannis head to head while outplaying him in said playoff series ... what f**king arguement is there really that Giannis is somehow the better player?

If that were to happen today, everyone and their grandma would say Durant is better (or insert any two players you want into that scenario). You can't have worse stats than another player, a worse team record, lose in the playoffs to said player while being outplayed by that player and somehow luck into being considered better in virtually any other case.

This is a narrative going over actual reality on the court. Pippen was a better media story that year than Ewing, but that's about it.

Patrick Ewing was better than Scottie Pippen that year, beat him in the playoffs while outplaying him soundly and was better than Pippen every year of the 80s or 90s for that matter.

If you put Ewing on the Bulls in place of Pippen they win the title in 1990 and 1995 on top of the six other rings. Maybe even 1989 as well.

[RRR3]

94 BPM

Pippen 7.7
Ewing 5.2


No case doe

[Roundball_Rock]

"Jordanstan" In "reality land", if Kevin Durant had better statistics than Giannis

This guy is really analogizing Ewing to KD...


94 BPM

Pippen 7.7
Ewing 5.2

No case doe

VORP: Pippen 6.8, Ewing 5.5 (Pippen in 72 games, Ewing in 79)
PER: Pippen 23.2, Ewing 22.9

No case. Ewing was better than Pippen every year of his life, including his peak years. Somehow the inferior player is 10-15 spots ahead of the other guy all-time despite never being better (you can't argue longevity either--Ewing had slightly better longevity). Here are more stats (nearly a clean sweep for Pippen, the one category Ewing is ahead in is close--Ewing 108th and Pippen 110th):

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Pippen-GOAT-card.png

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Ewing-player-card.png

Focus on 1994 in these.

Pippen:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Pippen-seasonal-valuations.png

Ewing:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/P-Ewing-seasonal-valuations.png

They aren't even close for the season in question.

[Soundwave]

94 BPM

Pippen 7.7
Ewing 5.2


No case doe

The thing is no one gave Ewing even the time of day for MVP voting that year despite the fact that he had a better team record than Pippen, better individual stats than Pippen, led the Knicks to a better team defence than Pippen, and then beat Pippen in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series to boot.

So how the f**k then is Pippen somehow moving to the head of the line past not only Ewing, but Shaq too who was doing things Wilt and Kareem couldn't even do that year, lol. He wasn't one of the 4 best players in the league that year.

He was the best media story of the 4 ... but actual better player ... nah.

[Roundball_Rock]

He probably would have been if he didn't miss those 10 games with a sprained ankle early in the season. The team went 4-6 during that time. If they had just gone 6-4 or better while he was playing the Bulls would have had the same or a better record than they did in 93 and he would have definitely been voted MVP. Horace Grant also missed 12 games himself, though, I dunno what their record was when he was out. I just think it's worth noting considering both played 81 (pippen, despite having an ankle sprain a good 1/3rd of the season...that's why his numbers took a hit compared to the year prior) and Grant 77 games in 93 when they won 57 games.

Listen to their argument: the Knicks with a full deck won 57 games, the Bulls with MJ bouncing in October and more injuries won 55. Therefore, Ewing was more valuable than Pippen. Any fair reading of these facts would conclude the Bulls winning 55 under those conditions was a lot tougher than the Knicks winning 57. (Plus the "57 versus 55" thing obscures they went 56-25 and 55-26 in the 81 games that actually mattered.)

For you to reach the Jordan stan conclusion, you must believe MJ was not valuable so winning 55 without him was no big deal. It isn't as if he was important. MJ or Myers. Same difference, right? These are the same people who say MJ>>>>KAJ/LeBron/Wilt/XYZ.

Bulls with Pippen: 51-21 (58 win pace)
Knicks with Ewing: 56-23 (58 win pace)

Ewing is light years better but his team with Starks, Oakley, Mason, Smith all there (Doc got hurt but they signed Derek Harper to replace him) did the same as a Bulls team riddled with injuries and Pete Myers starting when he and Pippen actually played?

Yeah, Pippen and Grant were iron men up to that point. Just terrible timing, although part of Grant's thing was the "blue flu" due to his beef with Reinsdorf.

[RRR3]

The thing is no one gave Ewing even the time of day for MVP voting that year despite the fact that he had a better team record than Pippen, better individual stats than Pippen, led the Knicks to a better team defence than Pippen, and then beat Pippen in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series to boot.

So how the f**k then is Pippen somehow moving to the head of the line past not only Ewing, but Shaq too who was doing things Wilt and Kareem couldn't even do, lol. He wasn't one of the 4 best players in the league that year.
What are you going by, PPG and RPG? Pippen was significantly better in BPM, which is a far better measure. I like how you said Ewing was better every year in the 90's when Pippen was CLEARLY better in 1996.

1996 stats

Pippen: 19.4/6.4/5.9/1.7/0.7 with 2.7 TOPG (turnovers per game) on .463/.374/.679 shooting. 21.0 PER, 52.5 EFG%, 55.1 TS%, .209 WS/48, 6.3 BPM, 5.9 VORP. All-Star, All-NBA 1st team, All-Defensive 1st team, 5th in MVP voting.

Ewing: 22.5/10.6/2.1/0.9/2.4 with 2.9 TOPG on .466/.143/.761 shooting. 20.9 PER, 46.7 EFG%, 51.6 TS%, .116 WS/48, 1.6 BPM, 2.5 VORP. All-Star, did not make an All-NBA team or an All-Defensive Team and did not receive a single vote for MVP.



Please tell me how Ewing was better that year :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

The only stat they ever go by:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D15Qw1NWsAU0eaH.jpg

[RRR3]

The only stat they ever go by:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D15Qw1NWsAU0eaH.jpg
Ewing took 3.4 more shots per game to score 3.1 more points per game so he was better :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

Ewing took 3.4 more shots per game to score 3.1 more points per game so he was better :roll:

Yup! :rockon:

It is bizarre. You could argue Ewing was better career wise or peak versus peak but they are contesting literally Pippen's peak years of 1994-1996. Their accolades tell the tale.

1994

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 390 MVP votes, 7 first place votes (3rd in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 255 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (5th in MVP)

1995

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 83 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (7th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 230 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (4th in MVP)

1996

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 226 MVP votes (5th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, no MVP votes (even Rodman and Terrell Brandon got votes)

Pippen was better in 95' and 96' than even these suggest. His MVP voting was dragged down by MJ coming back in 95' (which obscured him leading his team in every category--no stats doe). In 96' his stats were much better 2/3 through the season before he started having injury problems. If he stayed healthy he probably finishes 3rd. At any rate, if a "sidekick" is top 5 in MVP that is rare and speaks volumes.

1994-1996 VORP: Pippen 19.9, Ewing 12.1
1994-1996 BPM: Pippen 7.2, Ewing 3.5
1994-1996 PER: Pippen 22.2, Ewing 21.9
1994-1996 WS: Pippen 35.3, Ewing 29.4
1994-1996 TS %: Pippen 55.1%, Ewing 54.1% (a center lower?!)

How about covering 1992-1997? Both players were at an all-NBA level at the front and back end of this time frame.

1992-1997 VORP: Pippen 37.1, Ewing 25.1
1992-1997 BPM: Pippen 6.2, Ewing 3.6
1992-1997 PER: Ewing 21.8, Pippen 21.4
1992-1997 WS: Pippen 69.6, Ewing 62.8
1992-1997 TS %: Ewing 54.7%, Pippen 54.6%

Pippen has the clear edge again. When Pippen is ahead it is by a lot; when Ewing is ahead he noses ahead.

Keep in mind Pippen's stats were deflated by playing with MJ. It is no coincidence his two best statistical years were 1994 and 1995. Ewing, though, played in a context designed to maximize his stats.

[Round Mound]

Yup! :rockon:

It is bizarre. You could argue Ewing was better career wise or peak versus peak but they are contesting literally Pippen's peak years of 1994-1996. Their accolades tell the tale.

1994

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 390 MVP votes, 7 first place votes (3rd in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 255 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (5th in MVP)

1995

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 83 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (7th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 230 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (4th in MVP)

1996

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 226 MVP votes (5th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, no MVP votes (even Rodman and Terrell Brandon got votes)

Pippen was better in 95' and 96' than even these suggest. His MVP voting was dragged down by MJ coming back in 95' (which obscured him leading his team in every category--no stats doe). In 96' his stats were much better 2/3 through the season before he started having injury problems. If he stayed healthy he probably finishes 3rd. At any rate, if a "sidekick" is top 5 in MVP that is rare and speaks volumes.

1994-1996 VORP: Pippen 19.9, Ewing 12.1
1994-1996 BPM: Pippen 7.2, Ewing 3.5
1994-1996 PER: Pippen 22.2, Ewing 21.9
1994-1996 WS: Pippen 35.3, Ewing 29.4
1994-1996 TS %: Pippen 55.1%, Ewing 54.1% (a center lower?!)

How about covering 1992-1997? Both players were at an all-NBA level at the front and back end of this time frame.

1992-1997 VORP: Pippen 37.1, Ewing 25.1
1992-1997 BPM: Pippen 6.2, Ewing 3.6
1992-1997 PER: Ewing 21.8, Pippen 21.4
1992-1997 WS: Pippen 69.6, Ewing 62.8
1992-1997 TS %: Ewing 54.7%, Pippen 54.6%

Pippen has the clear edge again. When Pippen is ahead it is by a lot; when Ewing is ahead he noses ahead.

Keep in mind Pippen's stats were deflated by playing with MJ. It is no coincidence his two best statistical years were 1994 and 1995. Ewing, though, played in a context designed to maximize his stats.

:applause:

[tpols]

The thing is no one gave Ewing even the time of day for MVP voting that year despite the fact that he had a better team record than Pippen, better individual stats than Pippen, led the Knicks to a better team defence than Pippen, and then beat Pippen in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series to boot.

So how the f**k then is Pippen somehow moving to the head of the line past not only Ewing, but Shaq too who was doing things Wilt and Kareem couldn't even do, lol. He wasn't one of the 4 best players in the league that year.


What are you going by, PPG and RPG? Pippen was significantly better in BPM, which is a far better measure. I like how you said Ewing was better every year in the 90's when Pippen was CLEARLY better in 1996.

1996 stats

:roll:

Were talking about 1994 here dude. Pat hat tricked pippen. Beat him H2H as a first option by every measure.

:facepalm

Pippen just got more exposure because the Bulls drew GOAT ratings and NY was seen as a dirty goon team.

[dylankelly]

Pippen will forever be the greatest number 2 player ever.

[tpols]

But at least the Knicks had a shot at winning the title, which I would take every day of the week over getting bounced in the 2nd round.

Bingo.

Ewing totally outplayed pippen too. Took less shots to score more points and was leading a #1 defense. Better on both ends.

THAT is what you would see if scottie and pat had similar help and went H2H. Ewing was that much better.

If Kukoc misses that shot, Pippen is getting shit on 100 fold more.

[RRR3]

Were talking about 1994 here dude. Pat hat tricked pippen. Beat him H2H as a first option by every measure.

:facepalm

Pippen just got more exposure because the Bulls drew GOAT ratings and NY was seen as a dirty goon team.
He said Ewing was better every year of the 90s. I brought up 96 because there's nothing to support Ewing being better that year. I'm sorry you have trouble following simple conversations.

[RRR3]

Also why are we supposed to take tpols' opinion on Ewing seriously? Dude tried arguing about Ewing versus LeBron ffs. He's clearly a massive Ewing stan. No objectivity.

[tpols]

Tyson Chandler gave Lebron fits... Pat Ewing would make him piss his pants.

And Oak. and Mason. You arent stiff arming your way to the rim through that.

I'm not saying he had a better career, but peaks H2H same help in a series? I'm taking Ewing. It's a rock paper scissors thing.

[RRR3]

Tyson Chandler gave Lebron fits.

Pat Ewing would make him piss his pants. And Oak. and Mason. You arent stiff arming your way to the rim through that.

I'm not saying he had a better career, but peaks H2H same help in a series? I'm taking Ewing. It's a rock paper scissors thing.
:roll: :roll: :roll:










:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

For reference, here is how Backpick's come down on the two (they don't ring count so that excuse doesn't fly, although it is ironic MJ stans suddenly don't care about rings...):

Pippen:


Pippen’s best years hit the beginning of the plus-minus era, and his numbers are impressive. After a marginal year in ’94 (86th percentile), he posted scaled Augmented Plus-Minus values in the 97th percentile in ’95 and ’96, followed by a season in the 98th percentile using adjusted plus-minus (APM) in 1997. His augmented ’95 season was second in the league to plus-minus goliath David Robinson, while his ’96 season trailed only Robinson, Jordan and the venerable Penny Hardaway.

In total, Pippen’s perimeter defense, rebounding and strong passing make him a highly scalable asset, capable of supercharging all kinds of teams. He played second fiddle on excellent offenses alongside Jordan, spent most of his prime leading good or great defenses, and his brush with the MVP in 1994 is inline with my estimation of his peak as a weak MVP candidate.8However, Pippen’s prime was shortened by injuries, and his last high-level year was in 1997. (He was stellar at times in 1998 until his back flared up in the postseason.)

He’s entrenched in the group of players from 22-26, with a peak strong enough to edge out Stockton, but one that lags behind the players ahead of him

Wait, right behind David Robinson? Behind MJ, Robinson, Penny the next year? These are players MJ stans will sing hosannas to.

https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/

Ewing:


Ewing’s plus-minus footprint began in 1994, and AuPM gives him three seasons between the 81st and 89th percentile; good, but not great. He then posted four scaled adjusted plus-minus (APM) years between the 92nd and 97th percentile, primarily from defensive value. This suggests that his mid ’90s were slightly better than what AuPM portrays (from ’94-96), and I see these numbers as an indicator that Ewing’s peak was likely quite strong. He lost much of the 1998 season to injury, but the Knicks played scintillating defense in 30 games with him that year, improving 5.9 efficiency points on D to 7.8 points ahead of the league.

For my money, he strung together 10 consecutive All-Star seasons, with four weak-MVP years and a top-30 peak of all time. I don’t love his portability, nor that he failed to play on a really good offense. To scale well, Ewing would need to curtail his isolation frequency, and I have doubts that he could. I could also see devaluing his mid-’90s defense slightly more, which could push him as low as 30th. Nonetheless, he packaged strong scoring with a top-20 defensive peak, just enough to land him here.

https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/

Only one of the two appears on this chart:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Jordan-v-GOAT-on-off-results-91-93-50g.png

[RRR3]

For reference, here is how Backpick's come down on the two (they don't ring count so that excuse doesn't fly, although it is ironic MJ stans suddenly don't care about rings...):

Pippen:



Wait, right behind David Robinson? Behind MJ, Robinson, Penny the next year? These are players MJ stans will sing hosannas to.

https://backpicks.com/2018/01/29/backpicks-goat-23-scottie-pippen/

Ewing:



https://backpicks.com/2018/01/22/backpicks-goat-27-patrick-ewing/

Only one of the two appears on this chart:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Jordan-v-GOAT-on-off-results-91-93-50g.png
STFU Hater! Ewing was better than peak LeBron!













:roll:











:yaohappy:

[Roundball_Rock]

Also why are we supposed to take tpols' opinion on Ewing seriously? Dude tried arguing about Ewing versus LeBron ffs. He's clearly a massive Ewing stan. No objectivity.

:lol

It is funny these guys act like Ewing playing in New York wasn't a huge advantage. There are 50 governors in the USA. Guess which one got his Coronavirus briefings covered daily? The national media (including the sports media) is based in NYC. NYC is by far the largest market in the United States. The country has three newspapers that are nationally distributed--two of them are based in NYC (the other outside DC and is more geared for travelers than regular news consumption like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal are). There is no better launch pad to become a superstar, to get media hype, get on television, etc. than playing in New York.

Just compare Ewing to small market peers. He and Drexler are ranked about the same all-time. How often do people talk about Drexler? How much did NBC promote Drexler versus Ewing? How often was New York on national TV versus Portland? How many times did New York get the marquee Christmas game? Why is their an entire conspiracy theory about the NBA getting Ewing to New York (why not Cleveland, Milwaukee, or San Antonio?)?

[RRR3]

:lol

It is funny these guys act like Ewing playing in New York wasn't a huge advantage. There are 50 governors in the USA. Guess which one got his Coronavirus briefings covered daily? The national media (including the sports media) is based in NYC. NYC is by far the largest market in the United States. The country has three newspapers that are nationally distributed--two of them are based in NYC (the other outside DC and is more geared for travelers than regular news coverage like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal are). There is no better launch pad to become a superstar, to get media hype, get on television, etc. than playing in New York.

Just compare Ewing to small market peers. He and Drexler are ranked about the same all-time. How often do people talk about Drexler? How much did NBC promote Drexler versus Ewing? How often was New York on versus Portland? How many times did New York get the marquee Christmas game? Why is their an entire conspiracy theory about the NBA getting Ewing to New York (why not Cleveland, Milwaukee, or San Antonio?)?
Look at his post arguing Ewing was better than peak LeBron. Dude has lost it. Ewing GOAT!

[Roundball_Rock]

Look at his post arguing Ewing was better than peak LeBron. Dude has lost it. Ewing GOAT!

This from someone who goes on and on about playoff efficiency when Ewing authored arguably the WOAT NBA finals for a superstar in efficiency. His one shot at a ring and the GOAT doesn't show up?

[RRR3]

This from someone who goes on and on about playoff efficiency when Ewing authored arguably the WOAT NBA finals for a superstar in efficiency. His one shot at a ring and the GOAT doesn't show up?
It was Pippen and LeBron's fault. Even though Pippen was at home watching and LeBron was a little kid. They somehow were responsible for making the GOAT god Ewing miss so many shots.

[Turbo Slayer]

Tyson Chandler gave Lebron fits... Pat Ewing would make him piss his pants.

And Oak. and Mason. You arent stiff arming your way to the rim through that.

I'm not saying he had a better career, but peaks H2H same help in a series? I'm taking Ewing. It's a rock paper scissors thing. https://media.giphy.com/media/glmRyiSI3v5E4/giphy.gif

[tpols]

When i compared efficiency it was for massive sample sizes between players whose games were apple to apple.

not to mention ewing totally schooled scottie efficiency wise head to head in the very year were talking about.... in the playoffs.

you fellas are just too easy. :lol

[RRR3]

https://media.giphy.com/media/glmRyiSI3v5E4/giphy.gif
Ewing was the greatest player of all time according to Tpols.

[RRR3]

When i compared efficiency it was for massive sample sizes between players whose games were apple to apple.

not to mention ewing totally schooled scottie efficiency wise head to head in the very year were talking about.... in the playoffs.

you fellas are just too easy. :lol
I'm actually digging this new Ewing is GOAT shtick. We need stans of different players. LeBron, Kobe, MJ stans are boring. A Patrick Ewing is GOAT agenda, though? Now that's original.

[tpols]

You dont need to be GOAT to beat Lebron.

Dwight did it and is barely top 50.

[Roundball_Rock]

It was Pippen and LeBron's fault. Even though Pippen was at home watching and LeBron was a little kid. They somehow were responsible for making the GOAT god Ewing miss so many shots.

That nefarious LeBron! Rigging MVP and all-NBA voting when he was in elementary and middle school wasn't enough--he had to sabotage Ewing too. :mad:

Pippen deserves legitimate blame. After all, per certain stans on ISH, Ewing's defining series was beating a Bulls team with Pete Myers in place of MJ (barely--thanks to Hue Hollins). After he climbed that mountain top, what else mattered after that? So of course he took the foot off the gas then. He understood his legacy was assured and no one would care if he melted down in the finals.


When i compared efficiency it was for massive sample sizes between players whose games were apple to apple.

not to mention ewing totally schooled scottie efficiency wise

I watched Ewing play. There is nothing "apple to apple" between a perimeter SF and Ewing. :lol Hakeem, Mourning are "apple to apple". Where are the playoff numbers for those series?


A Patrick Ewing is GOAT agenda, though? Now that's original.

Would he take Ewing over MJ, though? When push comes to shove, these "Ewing fans" will always wind up back with their true love MJ.

[RRR3]

You dont need to be GOAT to beat Lebron.

Dwight did it and is barely top 50.
Dwight "held" LeBron to 38.5 PPG on 59.1 TS%, so it's a weird stance to act like his defense was affecting LeBron in that series. Obviously there were other factors at play. Maybe Ewing would be able to hold LeBron to 35 PPG...

[tpols]

i mean... hakeem was obviously better than ewing. just quicker and more skilled.

but pippen was easy work for him sans jordan.

and that's the point.

[RRR3]

i mean... hakeem was obviously better than ewing. just quicker and more skilled.

but pippen was easy work for him sans jordan.

and that's the point.
Are you under the impression the best players on each team just play 1 on 1 to determine which team wins? Because you post like it.

[Roundball_Rock]

Let's throw Smits in there too.

Ewing vs. Hakeem

1994 Finals:

Hakeem 27/9/4 56% TS
Ewing 19/12/2 39% TS

Ewing vs. Mourning

1997 ECSF:

Ewing 24/12/1 52% TS
Mourning 19/9/1 50% TS

1999 1st round:

Ewing 15/11/1 48% TS
Mourning 22/8/1 57% TS

Ewing past his prime by 99' but Knicks blow a 3-1 lead in 97'.

Ewing vs. Smits

1993 1st round:

Ewing 24/11/1 51% TS
Smits 23/8/2 61% TS

1994 ECF:

Ewing 22/11/3 54% TS
Smits 16/6/1 55% TS

1995 ECSF (the "finger roll" series):

Ewing 19/9/3 53% TS
Smits 23/6/1 65% TS

So Hakeem crushed Ewing in their one meeting, the year Ewing was MVP (and Hakeem, and Shaq, and Robinson, and Kemp, and Malone--everybody but Pippen).

Mourning and Ewing split those series, Ewing winning when still elite.

Smits, nominally Indiana's #2 option, actually outplayed the GOAT Ewing in Ewing's prime in 2 of 3 series. Maybe Smits should have won some MVP's?


Are you under the impression the best players on each team just play 1 on 1 to determine which team wins? Because you post like it.

Yup. :lol

[tpols]

not at all. But the teams were of similar strength and Ewing clearly outplayed "MVP" pippen in that series.

in the words of nasir, it aint hard to tell.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI-DRbf_AZk

Listen to that bro and free your mind. All time classic.

Released in 1994 NYC.

:rockon:

[RRR3]

Outplayed by Rik Smits twice in a playoff series but he's better than LeBron James :roll: :roll: :roll:


Inb4 tpols tells us Rik Smits was a superstar :lol

[RRR3]

I've already heard that album.

[RRR3]

I still can't believe Rik friggin' Smits shat on prime Ewing in two different series :roll:

[Smoke117]

Yup! :rockon:

It is bizarre. You could argue Ewing was better career wise or peak versus peak but they are contesting literally Pippen's peak years of 1994-1996. Their accolades tell the tale.

1994

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 390 MVP votes, 7 first place votes (3rd in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 255 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (5th in MVP)

1995

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 83 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (7th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, 230 MVP votes, 1 first place vote (4th in MVP)

1996

Pippen: 1st team all-NBA, 226 MVP votes (5th in MVP)
Ewing: no all-NBA, no MVP votes (even Rodman and Terrell Brandon got votes)

Pippen was better in 95' and 96' than even these suggest. His MVP voting was dragged down by MJ coming back in 95' (which obscured him leading his team in every category--no stats doe). In 96' his stats were much better 2/3 through the season before he started having injury problems. If he stayed healthy he probably finishes 3rd. At any rate, if a "sidekick" is top 5 in MVP that is rare and speaks volumes.

1994-1996 VORP: Pippen 19.9, Ewing 12.1
1994-1996 BPM: Pippen 7.2, Ewing 3.5
1994-1996 PER: Pippen 22.2, Ewing 21.9
1994-1996 WS: Pippen 35.3, Ewing 29.4
1994-1996 TS %: Pippen 55.1%, Ewing 54.1% (a center lower?!)

How about covering 1992-1997? Both players were at an all-NBA level at the front and back end of this time frame.

1992-1997 VORP: Pippen 37.1, Ewing 25.1
1992-1997 BPM: Pippen 6.2, Ewing 3.6
1992-1997 PER: Ewing 21.8, Pippen 21.4
1992-1997 WS: Pippen 69.6, Ewing 62.8
1992-1997 TS %: Ewing 54.7%, Pippen 54.6%

Pippen has the clear edge again. When Pippen is ahead it is by a lot; when Ewing is ahead he noses ahead.

Keep in mind Pippen's stats were deflated by playing with MJ. It is no coincidence his two best statistical years were 1994 and 1995. Ewing, though, played in a context designed to maximize his stats.

94-97 Pippen was the only player unanimiously chosen first team all defense by every single coach. The ONLY player chosen first team all defense BY EVERY OPPOSING COACH. No other player has ever had that accolade. He was even voted first team all defensive team despite only playing half the season in 98, even. lol

[Soundwave]

How often does the supposed "MVP" get outplayed head to head and outsted in the playoffs by the 5th (?) best player then on comparably talented squads?

If Pippen was so much better than Ewing (or at all), explain Ewing beating him in the playoffs and outplaying him head to head in said playoff round.

When does that happen to other MVPs?

You can't have it both ways either and laugh at the Knicks in other threads for being a weak squad and having Starks as the no.2 option, and now try and weasel that back by saying "bu bu bu but Oakley, Harper!" because you're on the losing end of this argument. Especially when Toni Kukoc is the only reason the series was even competitive.

If Ewing isn't that great, what does it say then that he outplayed and beat Pippen head to head in the playoffs.

In 1995, another playoff oppurtunity where Pippen could have showed himself to be a top end player with Jordan clearly being rusty Pippen basically got outplayed by Horace Grant and to evens with Penny Hardaway.

Again how often does this happen to supposed MVP caliber players?

[Roundball_Rock]

Dwight "held" LeBron to 38.5 PPG on 59.1 TS%, so it's a weird stance to act like his defense was affecting LeBron in that series. Obviously there were other factors at play. Maybe Ewing would be able to hold LeBron to 35 PPG...

To be fair, Dwight played lockdown defense on LeBron. LeBron couldn't get past Dwight. Remember Dwight picking LeBron up at half court and shadowing him?


Outplayed by Rik Smits twice in a playoff series but he's better than LeBron James

Including in a series where his team committed the cardinal sin: winning 55 games and losing in 7 in the ECSF. Except he was actually outplayed by his match up (Pippen's match up went 8/3 or something) and missed the series winning finger roll.


94-97 Pippen was the only player unanimiously chosen first team all defense by every single coach. The ONLY player chosen first team all defense BY EVERY OPPOSING COACH. No other player has ever had that accolade. He was even voted first team all defensive team despite only playing half the season in 98, even. lol

:applause:

Let's recap some of the bad faith arguments Pippen haters/MJ stans advanced:

*Playoff efficiency is king, therefore Pippen must suck but less efficient players like Robinson and Ewing (despite being centers) are better than him. Efficiency is irrelevant to them. It only counts for Pippen.
*Pippen can't be MVP because his team lost in the 2nd round--but Robinson and Shaq can be despite losing in the first round to lower seeds (Shaq actually swept). Robinson choking his way from 30 PPG on 58% TS to 20 PPG on 47%? Doesn't matter. Playoff results only count for Pippen. Why did he go from 22 PPG on 54% TS to 23 PPG on 52% TS in the playoffs?
*Pippen can't be MVP because of the Bulls' offense, even though it was better than the Rockets and Knicks' offense. Offense doesn't count for Hakeem and Ewing, only Pippen.
*Ewing>Pippen because the Knicks with a full deck won 57 games and the Bulls losing MJ won 55. The Knicks losing 3 games losing nobody>the Bulls declining 2 games losing the guy all these posters swear is GOAT at his peak.
*Pippen can't be MVP because the Bulls lost their division, but Robinson and Shaq can be despite losing theirs.
*Shawn Kemp, the second option on his team, deserved more MVP votes than Pippen.
*Ewing was MVP because he anchored the #1 defense--but the quality of that defense is irrelevant to Pippen's ECSF. Why didn't Pippen match MJ's great efficiency against the Knicks the previous year (spoiler: he was more efficient)?
*Karl Malone, on the 5th seed, deserved it over Pippen. 53 wins adding Hornacek>55 wins losing MJ.
*55 wins isn't enough to be MVP, but 56 because your team added Rodman or even 50 adding Penny is enough for other players. Or 57 or 58. Just don't give me "55."
*Because the Bulls sucked without Pippen and that reduced their win total, that is strong evidence Pippen was not valuable.
*Because the Bulls' offense sucked without Pippen and that reduced their season long offensive rank (still better than NY and HOU :lol ), that is evidence of Pippen not being valuable.


Did I miss any? These are the flat out bad faith arguments. I'm not even getting to the bad ones, like Pippen was a scrub but somehow was #1 in all-NBA and crushing prime Malone in first team forward voting.

[Whoah10115]

It's just so eh how this conversation goes. Just stats being thrown at each other. No one talks basketball.

[Roundball_Rock]

I still can't believe Rik friggin' Smits shat on prime Ewing in two different series :roll:

I didn't include 1998 because Ewing was past his prime but here is what happened:

Ewing 14/8/1 on 41% TS
Smits 17/6/1 on on 51% TS

Smits had his number.

Ewing played Parish in 88':

Parish 14/12/1 47% TS
Ewing 19/13/3 56% TS

Ewing outplayed him but was outscored by Gerald Wilkins and Johhny Newman on his own team.

Forgot this 1993 series against rookie Mourning:

Ewing 26/11/3 52% TS
Mourning 24/10/2 52% TS

Almost a wash, despite Mourning being a rookie and Ewing in his prime.

Ewing never faced Shaq, Daughtery, or Robinson in the playoffs.

[RRR3]

I didn't include 1998 because Ewing was past his prime but here is what happened:

Ewing 14/8/1 on 41% TS
Smits 17/6/1 on on 51% TS

Smits had his number.

Ewing played Parish in 88':

Parish 14/12/1 47% TS
Ewing 19/13/3 56% TS

Ewing outplayed him but was outscored by Gerald Wilkins and Johhny Newman on his own team.

Forgot this 1993 series against rookie Mourning:

Ewing 26/11/3 52% TS
Mourning 24/10/2 52% TS

Basically a wash, despite Mourning being a rookie and Ewing in his prime.

Ewing never faced Shaq, Daughtery, or Robinson in the playoffs.
Jesus Christ. When the playoffs rolled around, he turned into PatBRICK Ewing.

[Roundball_Rock]

They like to talk efficiency but bizarrely compare his to a SF (for one series against what they hail as a ATG defenses in the next post). Here are apples to apples, prime versus prime comparisons with Smits, Daughtery being added to the party for TS (RS efficiency in parentheses). These are the best offensive centers of the 90's:

By eFG% (adjusts for 3’s being worth more)

Ewing 88’-97’: 48.3% (51.6%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 53.8% (51.5%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 48.1% (52.5%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.2% (58.0%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 49.4% (53.0%)


By TS%

Ewing 88’-97’: 52.8% (56.3%)
Robinson 90’-98’: 54.9% (59.0%)
Shaq 94’-05’: 56.7% (58.4%)
Mourning 94’-00’: 54.8% (58.7%)
Hakeem 86’-97’: 57.8% (55.8%)
Smits 94'-99': 55.5% (55.5%)
Daughtery 88'-94': 58.8% (59.2%)

If I am a Ewing partisan (even if on behalf of MJ), I don't plant my flag on an argument over playoff efficiency...in TS, he is 2% behind his closest comp and 6% behind the top of the class.

I don't feel like looking up Smits' or Daughtery's eFG% but anyone is free to do so. It seems TS % is the coin of realm here.

[Whoah10115]

Yeah that's pretty sad.

98 playoffs? Is that the one after Ewing got shoved to the floor by Ervin Johnson and messed up his wrist, missing the last 56 games, the entire 1st round series, and even Game 1 against Smits and the Pacers?

That's a series where Patrick choked?

RRR3; isn't a great thing to laugh alongside a guy as useless as that. Talk about a lack of context.

[Roundball_Rock]

Talk about a lack of context.

Which your own post excludes. :lol


I didn't include 1998 because Ewing was past his prime but here is what happened

Don't get the faux holier than thou stance. We have for weeks heard Ewing partisans (MJ stans cloaked as Ewing sympathizers but whatever) invoke playoff efficiency over one series against a perimeter player. A key plank of the argument for Ewing>Pippen is precisely that--in this very thread.

What's the matter? People actually fact checking Ewing's now? Where was your pearl clutching for those dozens of posts from a range of posters for weeks? There can't be one set of rules for Pippen, and free passes for every other contemporary of his.

This is the play: when the fact checking shows up, shut down the debate. :rolleyes:

[RRR3]

There's no excuse for a 41% TS.

[Soundwave]

There's no excuse for a 41% TS.

So then what it does it say when Pippen got beat by this player head to head and outplayed in that series head to head?

[Roundball_Rock]

All this from this thread alone, which revolves entirely around efficiency in one series against what--by their own glowing admission--was the #1 defense.


got locked down and knocked out of the playoffs by Knicks in second round

Response to this:


Ether.

Another response:


I love Pip but this post will be ignored by the MJ haters.


Pippen can never win MVP because he's not a dynamic enough of a scorer and he's not efficient enough


He didn't even score over 25 points in the second round. Not even once, and he was extremely inefficient.


while outplaying Pippen head-to-head in their playoff round where Ewing's team beat Pippen's en route to the NBA Finals.


On top of that Ewing beat Pippen head to head in the playoffs while outplaying him in that series


I'd rather be in the Finals than bounced in the 2nd round, maybe if Scottie was actually in fact a better player than Ewing he would have outplayed Ewing


His team had a better record, beat Pippen's team head to head


Patrick Ewing was better than Scottie Pippen that year, beat him in the playoffs while outplaying him soundly

[Roundball_Rock]

I'm happy to adapt to the rules of engagement but we can't have one set of rules for one player and another for every other player in history...


So then what it does it say when Pippen got beat by this player head to head and outplayed in that series head to head?

Pippen didn't play center. Watch some 90's basketball kids. He was a SF. An old Bill Cartwright and Luc Longley were Ewing's match ups (congratulations, he could outplay them. What happened against real competition?). Pippen played Charles Smith (who was 8/3 or something).

By your own logic, Smits>Ewing since he routinely outplayed Ewing head-to-head (for real head-to-head, not Fantasy Island H2H). Rookie Mourning=93' Ewing. Etc.

What is the next #badfaith goal post move?

[Soundwave]

Pippen didn't play center. Watch some 90's basketball kids.

By your own logic, Smits>Ewing. Rookie Mourning=93' Ewing. Etc.

Pippen needed to play center to not get outplayed by Ewing and beaten by him the playoffs?

He also got outplayed by Horace Grant the next year in the 95 playoffs and played pretty close to even by a 2nd year Penny Hardaway.

You want to claim to be MVP, you should not be getting beat by the league's 5th best player one year and then equalled/bettered by two non-top 10 players the next season in your peak prime years.

That's not supposed to happen to MVP players. MVP players should dominate that level of competition.

[Roundball_Rock]

Paging Whoa. See, now this invites scrutiny of Ewing's match ups. Decimated by Hakeem. Outplayed routinely by Rik freaking Smits. Matched by Mourning as a rookie. Contained by Parish.

:lol Grant outplayed Pippen now. Confusing TP? The previous TP was Penny.


That's not supposed to happen to MVP players. MVP players should dominate that level of competition.

This is laughable. Use your own logic on other players.

[Soundwave]

Horace Grant did outplay Pippen in the Bulls-Magic 1995 playoff series. That doesn't happen to MVP caliber players.

If you want to laugh at Ewing for "sucking", sure OK, you realize that makes you look stupid when Ewing was the one who beat Pippen head to head and out played him when they went mano-e-mano in the 1994 playoffs.

That's not supposed to happen if Pippen was in fact a better player.

[Roundball_Rock]

Grant roasted Kukoc. Pippen held him in check. These clowns blaming Pippen. :lol

1994 1st Round

Robinson 20/10/4 47% TS (down from 30/11/5 58% in the RS.)

Spurs lose 3-1 to a lower seed.

1994 Finals

Ewing 19/12/2 39% TS

Ewing outplayed by Derek Harper, John Starks, and crushed by Hakeem.

1991 Vs. Bulls

Ewing 17/10/2 on 47% TS

Ewing has a game score of 8.9. Pippen 17.7, Grant 10.9, Armstrong 10.8, Jordan 26.1. Kiki Vandewedhe outscores Ewing on 59% TS.

I'm not even going to bother continuing. You saw the Smits, Mourning info. Robinson has many skeletons in the closet.

Jordan fans still can't formulate an honest, consistent argument. :lol


Ewing was the one who beat Pippen head to head

On Fantasy Island. In the real world he played Cartwright and Luc Longley. :oldlol:

[Soundwave]

So in Scottie Pippen world, Scottie never loses if the best player on the other team is playing a different position?

That's how it works now?

Pippen was the "man" on the '94 Bulls. Ewing was the "man" on the 94 Knicks.

They had similar levels of supporting cast. Ewing beat Pippen and outplayed him on top of that. Ewing was the better player in that series.

Them's the facts.

Pippen should have stepped up in the 95 playoffs and elevated to an MVP level of play ... he clearly did not in that Magic series. Why? Because he's not capable of doing that. 40% shooting when the team really needed him in that series. Gonna blame Kukoc for that too or is that another excuse?

[Roundball_Rock]

40% shooting when the team really needed him in that series. MVP caliber my ass.

The hypocrisy is stunning. MJ stans are pathetic. :lol This is the same guy who for pages praised a center who went 39% on TS in the NBA finals (all the team needed was 40% for a ring--too much to ask for a MVP center?) and another center who shot 41% in a first round collapse with a 56 win team. It is as stunning as shameless.

Paging, Whoah. Whoah?

MJ stans: everybody outplayed Pippen! Penny! Penny! Penny had a lower GS in both Bulls-Magic series. Everybody is better than Pippen! Kemp! Mourning! Miller! This is why Pippen's stock has risen on ISH. You guys are so ridiculous it boosts him. How long before we here Tyrone Hill>Pippen?

[Soundwave]

The hypocrisy is stunning. MJ stans are pathetic. :lol This is the same guy who for pages praised a center who went 39% on TS in the NBA finals (all the team needed was 40% for a ring--too much to ask for a MVP center?) and another center who shot 41% in a first round collapse with a 56 win team. It is as stunning as shameless.

Paging, Whoah. Whoah?

MJ stans: everybody outplayed Pippen! Penny! Penny! Penny had a lower GS in both Bulls-Magic series. Everybody is better than Pippen! Kemp! Mourning! Miller! This is why Pippen's stock has risen on ISH. You guys are so ridiculous it boosts him. How long before we here Tyrone Hill>Pippen?

Ewing did outplay Pippen in the 94 Bulls Knicks series.

Grant did outplay Pippen in the 95 Bulls Magic series as the best 2nd player on either team and Penny was pretty damn close to even.

You want to dispute that?

[Roundball_Rock]

They had similar levels of supporting cast.

What a gem here. So he says the 94' Bulls without Jordan had=supporting cast to the 94' Knicks. Boys and girls, if this is true, and you add Jordan to the Bulls that means the Knicks, the Bulls' top competition, was...

A) Equal to the Bulls
B) Far inferior--they were equal without MJ so with the "GOAT" they>>>the Knicks.

You tell me? Should we do a poll on this?

Yes, we get it. Every 90's all-star>Pippen. Not a word on Ewing, Robinson, or the others. Ewing outplayed by Derek Harper and John Starks in a NBA finals. Nothing. He isn't useful to MJ stans' agenda for the finals, is he? Robinson melts down. Nothing. Smits owns Ewing. Nothing. Pippen, Pippen, Pippen from the most rattled fan base on the planet.

[Soundwave]

What a gem here. So he says the 94' Bulls without Jordan had=supporting cast to the 94' Knicks. Boys and girls, if this is true, and you add Jordan to the Bulls that means the Knicks, the Bulls' top competition, was...

A) Equal to the Bulls
B) Far inferior--they were equal without MJ so with the "GOAT" they>>>the Knicks.

You tell me? Should we do a poll on this?

Yes, we get it. Every 90's all-star>Pippen. Not a word on Ewing, Robinson, or the others. Pippen, Pippen, Pippen from the most rattled fan base on the planet.

The Knicks weren't the Bulls top competition, they were one of the teams that were up there by virtue of being in the same conference, but they could never beat the Bulls with Jordan. None of that is nothing new or amazing. No one ever claimed the Knicks were a dream team. Defensively they were elite, but not offensively.

If Pippen is a better player than Ewing, the Bulls should win that series. Part of being an MVP is actually playing like one when the chips are on the table.

Please do point out where I said every 90s All-Star was better than Pippen, I never said that. Patrick Ewing though? Yes, he was a better player than Scottie Pippen, sorry if that ruffles your panties.

[Roundball_Rock]

Part of being an MVP is actually playing like one when the chips are on the table.

This is embarrassing. Jordan fans are so dishonest they can't even see their hypocrisy. This is why I am for LeBron. To destroy this trash fan base so hopefully they disappear.

[Marchesk]

Pippen gets overrated in these conversations to replace MJ as Goat, which is the real agenda. Yeah, Pippen was a very good HOFer, but he was not elite and on Hakeem, Shaq, Barkley or David Robinson's level.

[Soundwave]

This is embarrassing. Jordan fans are so dishonest they can't even see their hypocrisy. This is why I am for LeBron. To destroy this trash fan base so hopefully they disappear.

Good luck with that because that's never going to happen, but yeah stan for a b*tch that goes running any time he doesn't have an actual top 10 player on his squad minimum.

If that was the way the NBA was in the 90s, Jordan would have far more titles if players were just bailing on teams the moment any situation got too hard. That's not what I watch pro sports for.

Go ahead and answer the question, did Pippen out play Ewing in '94 playoffs? Did he outplay Grant in '95 Magic series? Should he have?

You seem to not want to touch that one.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen gets overrated in these conversations to replace MJ as Goat, which is the real agenda. Yeah, Pippen was a very good HOFer, but he was not elite and on Hakeem, Shaq, Barkley or David Robinson's level.

Yes, that is the real agenda. Pippen being good exposes MJ as a fraud. Get a grip. What an insecure fan base.

Barkley was 10th in MVP and 2nd team all-NBA in 94'.

David Robinson? Per the standards of MJ stans themselves, he is a fraud. 41% shooting from a C, going from 30 PPG to 20 PPG in the playoffs and losing in the 1st round with a 56 win team?

Of course, if you are a MJ stan, simply move the goal posts. One set of rules for Pippen; another for everybody else. That is the only way the fragile Jordanstan ecosystem survives.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen! Pippen! Pippen! Are MJ stans as jealous of Pippen as MJ was? MJ stans don't want to do any analysis of any other 90's players. Why not? You guys aren't shamed by blatant hypocrisy. Let's go series by series, line by line.

I'll start. What's the explanation for Rik Smits dominating Ewing routinely?

[Reggie43]

How many times is this dude going to be called out for his agenda and then label everyone not agreeing with his ruse a jordan stan?

Is Pippen some irreplaceable legend that is in a class of his own :roll:

[Soundwave]

Pippen is overrated by Roundball Rock. He was not better than Barkley, Robinson, Malone, 90s Shaq, or even Ewing.

Pippen is underrated by 3Ball. He was better than just an average replacement player obviously. He was a good player.

These two need to just rent a room and have some hate sex. Spare the rest of the forum.

[RRR3]

LOL at that meltdown Soundwave had at the mere mention of LeBron. SHOOK.

[Whoah10115]

In all seriousness, Roundball_Rock is the most disingenuous person I've seen here.

He should be banned. Has never watched anything. Just picks stats to try and push an agenda.

"Jordan fans Jordan fans".

Trash.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen! Pippen! Pippen!

Why are MJ stans terrified of examining other players using the standards put forward by MJ stans themselves? MJ stans are always quick to point to how every 90's star was better than Pippen! So what is the fear here? Put others under the same microscope and they, unlike the fraud Pippen, will come out smelling like a rose, right?

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen is overrated by Roundball Rock.


Don't forget MVP voters, GM's, coaches, all-NBA voters, players, and sports writers at the time. The real truth is known by MJ stans and dumb Knicks fans 25 or so years later.

Yes, Pippen was not better than any 90's star....we get it. Kemp>Pippen. Movie at 11. Even though you clowns can't formulate a consistent argument against him.


Has never watched anything

Yes, the guy who knows Pippen was switched onto Grant late in the Orlando series "never watched anything." You are just dumb as a rock and got nervous getting called out for your faux pearl clutching.

No, they are not generally MJ stans. They just hate Pippen (a random 90's star, right?) for...and their favorite player is? :roll:

[Marchesk]

Don't forget MVP voters, GM's, coaches, all-NBA voters, players, and sports writers at the time.

David Robinson had 24 MVP votes to Pippen's 7 in 1994. Doesn't matter if Robinson crapped the bed in the playoffs. MVP is a regular season award.

[Roundball_Rock]

Damn, forgot Chuck Daly and the Dream Team selection committee.

[Roundball_Rock]

David Robinson had 24 MVP votes to Pippen's 7 in 1994. Doesn't matter if Robinson crapped the bed in the playoffs. MVP is a regular season award.

Goal posts shifting--yet again.

How many MVP votes did Ewing, Barkley, Shaq, Kemp!, Miller, Malone, Payton, etc. get?

[Marchesk]

Goal posts shifting--yet again.

You can't dispute the fact that the MVP is a regular season award. It just is.


How many MVP votes did Ewing, Barkley, Shaq, Kemp!, Miller, Malone, Payton, etc. get?

Are you wanting to say Pippen had a better season than some of those players? Sure. Not Shaq, though. But if you want to throw the playoffs into the mix, Hakeem had the best overall season, period. No matter how you spin it, Pippen isn't Jordan.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen is overrated--he somehow managed to sneak into the top 20-30 all-time by consensus. Ahead of Ewing, Drexler, Payton and light years ahead of Kemp!, Miller, etc.

Total fraud, doe? That only the few, the proud, fans of ____ (Oliver Miller?) know?


You can't dispute the fact that the MVP is a regular season award. It just is.

You guys are every way from Sunday. Post to post it shifts. Not necessarily you, but all these "Pippen sucks" peeps. Find a consistent criteria and we can evaluate all these players via it.

[Rico2016]

Pippen is overrated--he somehow managed to sneak into the top 20-30 all-time by consensus. Ahead of Ewing, Drexler, Payton and light years ahead of Kemp!, Miller, etc.

Total fraud, doe? That only the few, the proud know?



You guys are every way from Sunday. Post to post it shifts. Not necessarily you, but all these "Pippen sucks" peeps.

For three straight Finals Runs he averaged 21/9/7/2/1 on 46% in the tough 90s. In 2010's I hear he would be doing 23/10/8/3/2

But somehow that is not good as a #2 option, not even referring to the fact that he was the greatest perimeter in 90s history.

[Marchesk]

Pippen is overrated--he somehow managed to sneak into the top 20-30 all-time by consensus.

He's only overrated if you're saying Pippen was as good as the MVP winners of the 90s, or second best player to Jordan.


Ahead of Ewing, Drexler, Payton and light years ahead of Kemp!, Miller, etc.

It really does help to have Jordan as your teammate and the six rings. Are Ewing and Drexler not winning rings with MJ? But okay, I can see the argument for Pippen over some of those guys.

[Roundball_Rock]

For three straight Finals Runs he averaged 21/9/7/2/1 on 46% in the tough 90s. In 2010's I hear he would be doing 23/10/8/3/2

But somehow that is not good as a #2 option, not even referring to the fact that he was the greatest perimeter in 90s history.

That is why they cannot formulate a single consistent metric to assess him with which they are willing to apply to any other player. Go through this thread. Whenever their own "logic" gets applied to another player, what is their response?

[Reggie43]

Knowing his true value = Hating Pippen?

Was he some irreplaceable legend wherein its blasphemous to compare him to his peers regardless who was better?

[Roundball_Rock]

He's only overrated if you're saying Pippen was as good as the MVP winners of the 90s, or second best player to Jordan.


It really does help to have Jordan as your teammate and the six rings. Are Ewing and Drexler not winning rings with MJ? But okay, I can see the argument for Pippen over some of those guys.

Decade long rankings aren't the same as year-to-year rankings. That is a sleight of hand MJ stans like to pull (not saying you).

Here are my 90's as a whole rankings: 1) Jordan 2) Hakeem 3) Malone 4) Barkley 5) Robinson 6) Pippen 7) Ewing 8 ) Shaq 9) Stockton 10) Drexler. HM: Payton (role player until 94', though.)

All-time is different, year-to-year is different. Barkley>Malone prime versus prime, for example. Shaq>all these guys but MJ all-time. Stockton's peak was really low for a player of his caliber. Give me peak Drexler or peak Payton over him but longevity matters. Etc. What would be your 90's top 10?

As to Jordan, it is unclear what the impact was. The entire argument against Pippen revolves around him playing with Jordan. His accolades skyrocketed without MJ.

Pippen without MJ (2 years): 1st team all-NBA, 1st team all-NBA, 3rd and 7th in MVP.
Pippen with MJ (1988-1993, 1996-1998): one 1st team, 2 second teams, 2 third teams, 5th and 9th in MVP (highs).

Robinson played with Duncan and won 2 rings. Drexler won a ring with Hakeem. Those don't even come up when their legacies are discussed. Drexler losing two finals comes up a lot more. We also see it argued that Miller losing ECF's>Klay Thompson winning rings. There is a tax for being a lower "option" it seems--especially with fans.

It sounds crazy but it may very well have been better for Pippen to have 10 years as a "#1" and hope he got to the finals once or twice like Ewing, Drexler, Miller, Payton, Kidd did at points. Win or lose? It doesn't matter. Losing as a #1>winning 6 as a #2, evidently.

[Roundball_Rock]

As to the MJ stan pearl clutching, correct me if I'm wrong but my observations are:

1) The people most critical of Pippen are universally highly favorable to MJ
2) Pippen critics defend/praise every 90's superstar (or even stars like Kemp or Miller) except Pippen, Jordan's teammate.
3) The arguments against Pippen aren't even real. They won't apply them to any other player and proudly will tell you it doesn't count for others.

So we have this wellspring of hatred towards Pippen. Who was Pippen? He was a random 90's superstar. I grew up in the Philadelphia area. Pippen, Drexler, Ewing, Robinson, etc. All big names but no one in particular generated a special degree of venom in the 90's.

So there is this Pippen specific hate, Pippen is a random 90's superstar except that he played with Jordan, Pippen detractors never say a negative word and in fact praise every 90's superstar who did not play with Jordan, and these people lionize Jordan. Yet with Pippen it is cherry picking, bad faith, etc. Why do they "randomly" select Jordan's teammate out of all the 90's superstars while loving every other 90's superstar who did *not* play with Jordan?

Call me crazy, but it sure sounds like a Jordan connection to the Pippen hate 25 years later...MJ stans want to conceal it but, barring another explanation for the above, the agenda is obvious.

[Reggie43]

You really think the discussions would go this long if you did not treat Pippen as some sort of irreplaceable legend?

Regardless of resume/rings I place Kemp, Drexler, Mourning, Pippen in terms of impact and ability. All of them led their teams to 60+ wins except Pippen. You proceed to get triggered to the heavens as if these players arent even close.

You proceed to place Miller on the same class as peak Hawkins, Blaylock and Jeff Hornaceck as a shot at me but the difference is I know their true value so why should I be offended when they are close in ability in their respective peaks.

[Rico2016]

You really think the discussions would go this long if you did not treat Pippen as some sort of irreplaceable legend?

Regardless of resume/rings I place Kemp, Drexler, Mourning, Pippen in terms of impact and ability. All of them led their teams to 60+ wins except Pippen. You proceed to get triggered to the heavens as if these players arent even close.

You proceed to place Miller on the same class as peak Hawkins, Blaylock and Jeff Hornaceck as a shot at me but the difference is I know their true value so why should I be offended when they are close in ability in their respective peaks.

How are top 30 all time greats not nearly irreplaceable tho?

[Smoke117]

You really think the discussions would go this long if you did not treat Pippen as some sort of irreplaceable legend?

Regardless of resume/rings I place Kemp, Drexler, Mourning, Pippen in terms of impact and ability. All of them led their teams to 60+ wins except Pippen. You proceed to get triggered to the heavens as if these players arent even close.

You proceed to place Miller on the same class as peak Hawkins, Blaylock and Jeff Hornaceck as a shot at me but the difference is I know their true value so why should I be offended when they are close in ability in their respective peaks.

Lol Kemp never at any point led a team to 60+ wins you dipshit, moron ****ing goof. Your stupidity sucking off Reggie has made you half retarded ****stick.

[Reggie43]

How are top 30 all time greats not nearly irreplaceable tho?

Because some of them get placed there due to team accomplishments and not actual abiility.

[Rico2016]

Because some of them get placed there due to team accomplishments and not actual abiility.

Please tell me which ones you are referring to...

[Reggie43]

Lol Kemp never at any point led a team to 60+ wins you dipshit, moron ****ing goof. Your stupidity sucking off Reggie has made you half retarded ****stick.

It was all Payton then? Was he the clear cut leader and best player? Who do you think teams gameplanned for when facing the sonics? Who was the best player for the Sonics on the Finals?

Guess your on the bottle again or forgot your meds so you get triggered easily :roll:

[Bawkish]

Phil's instinct to let Kukoc to take the last shot saved Pip's ass in that series

If he somehow missed that shot, Pip's rep would be in tatters

[Reggie43]

Please tell me which ones you are referring to...

I'll give you a hint, most of them are clear cut second options.

[Smoke117]

I’m pretty sure this goof retard Reggie43 thinks Reggie Miller is greater than Scottie Pippen...the dumb stupid mutt that he is...:lol

[Reggie43]

I’m pretty sure this goof retard Reggie43 thinks Reggie Miller is greater than Scottie a Pippen...the dumb stupid mutt that he is...��

Quote me where I said it? The only thing youll find is where I said the opposite actually.

Dumb stupid mutt got caught lying thus the meltdowns against me :roll:

Word of advice use facts to prove a point and dont invent stuff that never happened, that shit gets easily exposed nowadays with internet and all.

[Reggie43]

On that note, Mutombo didn't even defend Robinson and Hakeem one on one. The PF always did because his feet were too damn slow to play any kind of decent defense on them.



https://youtu.be/ZFEvxc6W9To
https://youtu.be/mUtJmDgIFI8

*Videos show Deke defending both players single coverage with hardly any double teams.

Smoke117 at his best :cheers:

[Roundball_Rock]

I’m pretty sure this goof retard Reggie43 thinks Reggie Miller is greater than Scottie Pippen...the dumb stupid mutt that he is...:lol

:lol He does. One of the many amusing things is they wildly diverge from the consensus (real, not Fantasy Island) on Pippen but then will call us biased,. delusional, etc. for being consistent with the consensus. Pippen is top 20-30 all-time by consensus. That is a fact. Show me an all-time list that has him outside that range. Show me where Ewing, Payton, Drexler, Kemp, Miller, Mourning, Horace Grant, etc. are on the same lists. According to MJ stans, literally every 90's superstar or star was better than Pippen. Even guys like Kemp and Miller. Now we are hearing Horace Grant (who outplayed Penny, who MJ stans adore, in the same series). At least MJ stans finally are giving Grant some credit. A player better than Penny (per their own logic here) as #3? #stacked


Re the MJ stan stuff, it is these people who by their own admission connect Pippen to MJ. They view him solely through the lens of MJ. Yet they swear they aren't MJ stans? :roll:

Of course we aren't allowed to make a case. Woah says if you push back against MJ stans you should be banned. What a useful idiot for MJ stans. Give them free reign to deceive younger posters.

Another myth posed above. If Kukoc misses it goes to OT. The deception never ends.

[Reggie43]

:lol He does. One of the many amusing things is they wildly diverge from the consensus (real, not Fantasy Island) on Pippen but then will call us biased,. delusional, etc. for being consistent with the consensus. Pippen is top 20-30 all-time by consensus. That is a fact. Show me an all-time list that has him outside that range. Show me where Ewing, Payton, Drexler, Kemp, Miller, Mourning, Horace Grant, etc. are on the same lists.


Re the MJ stan stuff, it is these people who by their own admission connect Pippen to MJ. They view him solely through the lens of MJ. Yet they swear they aren't MJ stans? :roll:

Of course we aren't allowed to make a case. Woah says if you push back against MJ stans you should be banned. What a useful idiot for MJ stans. Give them free reign to deceive younger posters.

Another myth posed above. If Kukoc misses it goes to OT. The deception never ends.

Tell me again how Pippens baggage affect his value as a player? Oh wait you never answered this and avoided it like the plague :roll:

Imagine a top 30 player fresh off 6 rings getting traded for Roy freakin Rogers because of the aforementioned baggage :oldlol:

[Marchesk]

Show me where Ewing, Payton, Drexler, Kemp, Miller, Mourning, Horace Grant, etc. are on the same lists.

It's not clear at all to me that Pippen was better than Ewing and Drexler or even Payton. If we removed the six finals, does Pippen still get the consensus top 30? The ones where Jordan won six FMVPS?

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is where all the 90's players MJ stans bring up vis-a-vis Pippen rank all-time in the three most recent major rankings. I'll throw Simmons' 2009 rankings from his book in too, to give us an idea of how they were perceived a decade ago too.

Pippen: #21 ESPN, #22 Slam, #25 Backpicks, #24 Simmons
Ewing: #37 ESPN, #30 Slam, #28 Backpicks, #40 Simmons
Drexler: #57 ESPN, #43 Drexler Slam, #39 Backpicks, #44 Simmons
Miller: #49 ESPN, #55 Slam, #30 Backpicks, #63 Simmons
Wilkins: #46 ESPN, #41 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #55 Simmons
Worthy: #51 ESPN, #46 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #50 Simmons
Kemp: N/A ESPN, #100 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #88 Simmons
Robinson: #24 ESPN, #29 Slam, #15 Backpicks, #29 Simmons
Payton: #53 ESPN, #39 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #41 Simmons
Stockton: #28 ESPN, #25 Slam, #27 Stockton, #19 Stockton

Pippen actually has the most consensus. The others all have one outlier ranking to their name. Pippen is in a tight range. The Pippen debate exists only in a very special place known as Jordanstan where Pippen is #2 all-time--#2 WOAT, ahead of LeBron.

So Pippen was a scrub, equal or lesser than Kemp and Miller--guys who never made first team all-NBA--in Jordanstan but somehow he manages to be ahead of all these guys all-time.


It's not clear at all to me that Pippen was better than Ewing and Drexler or even Payton. If we removed the six finals, does Pippen still get the consensus top 30?

We aren't allowed to discuss this. We can't discuss their resumes. We can't discuss them as players. We can't discuss their stats. We can't discuss how they were perceived at the time. Didn't you get the memo? All is allowed is cherry picking Pippen to say he sucks.

Pippen has been compared to these players at various points on ISH. MJ stans don't engage in the comparison, just respond with more "Pippen sucks" stuff.

You can't apply one set of rules for Pippen and another for every other legend. That isn't how all-time rankings work. If you remove his team success, you have to do the same for each of them. What we often see is "Pippen's rings don't count but Drexler lost two finals as the man, therefore, Drexler>Pippen." That isn't how real history works. That is stanning on ISH.

Plus, if it is all about rings why is Worthy not getting the same boost? Why is Havlicek behind Pippen? How about others with rings? Rodman has 5, no? Where is the "no ring" tax (look at where Stockton is)? Also, take Ewing as an example. We are to ignore he has no ring because he melted down in the finals? So he gets the credit for making a finals but not the demerits for melting down while there?

There is a ranking that by its criteria does not factor in "rings" (which MJ stans suddenly don't think matter for all-time ranking purposes--Pippen, Russell are the few exceptions :oldlol: ) although he does factor in team impact and how well a player could fit on different teams in different roles. Read it yourself (it is called Backpicks--scroll up to their rankings):

https://backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the-backpicks-goat-the-40-best-careers-in-nba-history/

Let me flip your question. Take team success away from all these players. How do you rank them?

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is a comparison of perimeter players in the 90's from another thread. A Pippen vs. Ewing comparison is somewhere around here in another thread--MJ stans did not respond.

Pippen/Drexler/Stockton/Miller in the 90's

All-NBA: Stockton 8, Pippen 7, Drexler 4, Miller 3
All-NBA 1st: Pippen 3, Stockton 2, Drexler 1, Miller 0
Top 5 in MVP: Pippen 2, Drexler 1, Miller/Stockton 0
Top 10 in MVP: Pippen 5, Drexler/Stockton 3, Miller 0
All-star: Stockton 8, Pippen/Drexler 7, Miller 4
All-D: Pippen 9, Stockton 4, Drexler/Miller 0 (Pippen with 8 all-D 1st teams)

Drexler and Stockton both have a trio of top 10 MVP finishes but they are not the same quality. Drexler's were 2nd, 6th, 10th; Stockton's 8th, 9th, 10th. For the record, Pippen's were 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th.

Career All-NBA 1st Teams

Pippen 3
Payton/Stockton 2
Ewing/Wilkins/Drexler 1
Miller/Worthy/Kemp 0

Any Pippen haters have an explanation for this? The M Jay excuse doesn't fly--2 of those 3 came with MJ retired, implying MJ held his accolades back. All these superior players and they make all-NBA 1st team less than Pippen? Pippen did it over prime Malone, Barkley, Hill (you can throw prime Kemp in too since Pippen haters love him) too. That's tough forward competition, no?

Also, if these players are in the same tier--where is the daily onslaught of "Drexler sucks" or "Ewing is a fraud" or "Payton!" scrutiny? It follows only one player (Jordan's teammate), and we are told there is no agenda attached to it. Just a coincidence! In fact, many of the very people who vehemently denounce Pippen will defend or praise other players for equal or worse things in their resume. Thread to thread, post to post, even sentence to sentence. Why don't Drexler or Payton or Worthy or Wilkins or Ewing get even 5% of that level of hate?

The Pippen hate stuff started long after he retired...and really intensified as Jordan fans felt footsteps from LeBron.

[Marchesk]

Why is Havlicek behind Pippen?

No way in hell Simmons ranked Pippen over Hondo all-time. The only reason others might have done so is recency bias.

[Overdrive]

Here is where all the 90's players MJ stans bring up vis-a-vis Pippen rank all-time in the three most recent major rankings. I'll throw Simmons' 2009 rankings from his book in too, to give us an idea of how they were perceived a decade ago too.

Pippen: #21 ESPN, #22 Slam, #25 Backpicks, #24 Simmons
Ewing: #37 ESPN, #30 Slam, #28 Backpicks, #40 Simmons
Drexler: #57 ESPN, #43 Drexler Slam, #39 Backpicks, #44 Simmons
Miller: #49 ESPN, #55 Slam, #30 Backpicks, #63 Simmons
Wilkins: #46 ESPN, #41 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #55 Simmons
Worthy: #51 ESPN, #46 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #50 Simmons
Kemp: N/A ESPN, #100 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #88 Simmons
Robinson: #24 ESPN, #29 Slam, #15 Backpicks, #29 Simmons
Payton: #53 ESPN, #39 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #41 Simmons
Stockton: #28 ESPN, #25 Slam, #27 Stockton, #19 Stockton

Pippen actually has the most consensus. The others all have one outlier ranking to their name. Pippen is in a tight range. The Pippen debate exists only in a very special place known as Jordanstan where Pippen is #2 all-time--#2 WOAT, ahead of LeBron.

Do you honestly think Pippen, if not traded on draft day*, ends up in the 20-25 range? Those lists are so much based on career trajectory. I think Pippen is a better player than all of them except for David Robinson, but if Jordan gets drafted by the Blazers and they win a few with Drexler, a good all round player in his own right gets more rings his status would very much change. #57 is a joke. How is Drexler lower than fn Reggie Miller on some lists.

Also I think Pippen benefited from the Jordan retirement personally. His worth got accepted way more by fans and pundits and being in the MVP mix was justified, but I doubt he's in the mix for MVP if he plays on the Sonics unless they develop they same way the did without him(balanced team with 60ish win seasons). Then I'd see him win one or two as he would definately be their best player.

*In this scenario of course Jordan would also suffer alot - wanna get that out of the way before discussion ensues.

[Roundball_Rock]

No way in hell Simmons ranked Pippen over Hondo all-time.

He doesn't but everyone else does. The point wasn't Pippen vs. Hondo. The point was Hondo (aka the Pippen of his era) versus Drexler, Ewing, Payton, etc. I guess it is all rings driving him as well, right? Hondo is a great test case: Pippen by another name. As you noted, the only thing holding him back is era bias. Which means he should be around where Pippen is ranked...


Do you honestly think Pippen, if not traded on draft day*, ends up in the 20-25 range?

You are falling into their trap. Why not ask this question of every player? It could go either way but impossible to know. What if Pippen has 10 years of a prime as the best player, wins a MVP, has a couple other MVP contending seasons, and his team wins a ring? I.e., a Dirk-like career trajectory or Wade. Or Harden's if he winds up with a ring like Dirk. Where does he rank then?


if Jordan gets drafted by the Blazers and they win a few with Drexler

Drexler is a good test case. He actually did win a ring and no one even remembers it. Go back to the Drexler threads a few weeks ago. His advocates kept pointing to the two finals he lost. With fans at least, there is an obsession with "options" so losing in the NBA finals or even conference finals as the "#1", even a nominal #1 like Miller>winning rings as a #2.

MJ and Drexler played the same position. How would they mesh? Drexler hit his prime earlier (though he did nothing as a rookie, same as Pippen) than the younger Pippen but the flip side is he started breaking down earlier. So let's suppose Drexler is drafted in 1987 and that they somehow meshed as MJ and Jordan-lite. Both were on the bench as rookies. Pippen became a permanent starter 1/3 through his season year. Drexler started half the games in 88' and 58 in 89'. At any rate, both became all-stars in their third season (which would be 1990). Bulls with Drexler win in 1990, 1991, 1992...and then Drexler starts to decline...

This is where these scenarios get tricky. Drexler in 95' won with a lesser player than MJ--but MJ himself barely won with what by 93' was a better player than Drexler. It shows you it is a team sport. You can't just look at 2 players.


Also I think Pippen benefited from the Jordan retirement personally. His worth got accepted way more by fans and pundits and being in the MVP mix was justified

That's one way to look at it. I agree that he benefited from it because he get proper recognition but the real question isn't the retirement per se but what if he had an entire prime away from MJ versus only 1 4/5 seasons (only 1 playoff run)?


I doubt he's in the mix for MVP if he plays on the Sonics unless they develop they same way the did without him(balanced team with 60ish win seasons). Then I'd see him win one or two as he would definately be their best player.

Yeah, and he would wind up slightly ahead of where he is all-time now in that scenario with a MVP and "rings as the man." The anti-Pippen crowd only looks at downside variance.

There may be value in a ring or two as a "sidekick" but, as Kyrie understood, the value goes away. People don't distinguish between Pippen or Hondo's number and those of Worthy or Gasol or McHale. They all get a modicum of credit but fans give more credit to Ewing, Payton, Miller, Iverson for making *one* finals and losing as the best player.

[BigShotBob]

Pippen without MJ is not top 20. He's literally only there because MJ made him better. Literally.

MJ is still the GOAT, and Pippen isn't top 10 in the 90's. Sorry.

[Roundball_Rock]

MJ is still the GOAT, and Pippen isn't top 10 in the 90's. Sorry.

Where do you rank Pippen for the 90's? I had him 6th. What is your placement?

:lol at the MJ insecurity but that hints at the real agenda re Pippen (of course, none of these people are MJ fans! ).

[Roundball_Rock]

Here are some others added (starting with Mourning).

Pippen: #21 ESPN, #22 Slam, #25 Backpicks, #24 Simmons
Ewing: #37 ESPN, #30 Slam, #28 Backpicks, #40 Simmons
Drexler: #57 ESPN, #43 Drexler Slam, #39 Backpicks, #44 Simmons
Miller: #49 ESPN, #55 Slam, #30 Backpicks, #63 Simmons
Wilkins: #46 ESPN, #41 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #55 Simmons
Worthy: #51 ESPN, #46 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #50 Simmons
Kemp: N/A ESPN, #100 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #88 Simmons
Robinson: #24 ESPN, #29 Slam, #15 Backpicks, #29 Simmons
Payton: #53 ESPN, #39 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #41 Simmons
Stockton: #28 ESPN, #25 Slam, #27 Stockton, #19 Stockton
Mourning: #63 on ESPN, #78 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
Dumars: N/A on ESPN, #83 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, #74 Simmons
McHale: #36 ESPN, #40 Slam, #38 Backpicks, #35 Simmons
T. Hardaway: N/A ESPN, #96 Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
K. Johnson: N/A ESPN, N/A Slam, N/A Backpicks, #96 Simmons
Mullin: N/A ESPN, #84 Slam, N/A BP, #82 Simmons

Somehow--according to the real objective posters (no agenda!)--every single one of these players>>>>>Pippen yet somehow Pippen is ahead of all of them all-time. :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Here are the careers mapped out for the best of these players, year by year, with markers for different levels of play. It doesn't say anything about rings...note that Pippen's best years "happened" to be 1994 and 1995.

Here are his criteria:


This list also goes far beyond the box score — indeed, the box score is merely a reference for quantifying tendencies — so if you’re used to citing points per game and Win Shares, this will be a bit different.

Instead, this is a career-value, or CORP list; it ranks the players who have provided the largest increase in the odds of a team winning championships over the course of their careers. This means that having great Finals moments or winning the hearts of fans with innovative passes is irrelevant. You can make a great list with those criteria, but that’s not what this exercise is intended to be.

This list is really about evaluating players based on “goodness,” not merely situational value. (If David Robinson backed up the two best centers ever, he wouldn’t be very valuable, but he’d still be very good.)

All told, in the last seven years I’ve evaluated over 1,500 player-seasons to compile this list.

Drexler:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Drexler-seasonal-valuations.png

Miller:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Miller-seasonal-valuations.png

Robinson:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/David-Robinson-seasonal-vauations.png

Ewing:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/P-Ewing-seasonal-valuations.png

Stockton:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Stockton-seasonal-valuations.png

Pippen:

https://backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Pippen-seasonal-valuations.png

Rings doe! It is all about those rings! Take away those rings and he would be behind all these players, even though his record (as assessed here) trumps all of them except Robinson's (who is ranked within spots of him, unlike the others here).

Wilkins, Worthy, Payton aren't here because they didn't make the top 40. Here is why Payton didn't:


Payton was in the “barely-missed-the-cut” group. I was actually disappointed with his defense on this latest film study. He can crank up good positions by being physical and has good hands, but he can be immobile and gamble heavily. As you probably think too, his offense is good but not great.

[Smoke117]

Tell me again how Pippens baggage affect his value as a player? Oh wait you never answered this and avoided it like the plague :roll:

Imagine a top 30 player fresh off 6 rings getting traded for Roy freakin Rogers because of the aforementioned baggage :oldlol:

lol Yeah it's not like he was well past his prime at 33 with a ****ed up body or anything. It's easy to last a long time when you don't do anything but shoot like Reggie Miller. He didn't ****ing do anything else that's for damn sure. Defense, rebounding, etc....foreign concepts to your hero.

[Overdrive]

You are falling into their trap. Why not ask this question of every player? It could go either way but impossible to know. What if Pippen has 10 years of a prime as the best player, wins a MVP, has a couple other MVP contending seasons, and his team wins a ring? I.e., a Dirk-like career trajectory or Wade. Or Harden's if he winds up with a ring like Dirk. Where does he rank then?

I don't think it changes much on those lists although I think he should be higher if that was the case. I also think Dirk and Wade were too low on the latest espn list.

Also think if Pippen never plays Jordan wouldn't be the GOAT; strip any Top 5 player of their respective #2 when he one and none of them id in the mux anymore.



Drexler is a good test case. He actually did win a ring and no one even remembers it. Go back to the Drexler threads a few weeks ago. His advocates kept pointing to the two finals he lost. With fans at least, there is an obsession with "options" so losing in the NBA finals or even conference finals as the "#1", even a nominal #1 like Miller>winning rings as a #2.

Yeah it's BS. There's cut in the AT and best ever ranks where ATG #2s start to get ranked who are definately better than some, even great, #1s. Imo Ewing for example has no case over Pippen. Reggie Miller? Not even close. Drexler gets treated unfairly. He was a great #2 for that one ring and a first option good enough to lead his team to two finals. What's Ewing's argument over him for example.



MJ and Drexler played the same position. How would they mesh? Drexler hit his prime earlier (though he did nothing as a rookie, same as Pippen) than the younger Pippen but the flip side is he started breaking down earlier. So let's suppose Drexler is drafted in 1987 and that they somehow meshed as MJ and Jordan-lite. Both were on the bench as rookies. Pippen became a permanent starter 1/3 through his season year. Drexler started half the games in 88' and 58 in 89'. At any rate, both became all-stars in their third season (which would be 1990). Bulls with Drexler win in 1990, 1991, 1992...and then Drexler starts to decline...

Drexler would play SF I'm pretty sure, but let's say he is the 2nd option for a threepeat, a great one at that I'm sure he wouldn't be ranked in the 40s and as low as 57.



This is where these scenarios get tricky. Drexler in 95' won with a lesser player than MJ--but MJ himself barely won with what by 93' was a better player than Drexler. It shows you it is a team sport. You can't just look at 2 players.


Sure, but alot of those lists look at single player or their first/second option at best.

[Overdrive]

That's one way to look at it. I agree that he benefited from it because he get proper recognition but the real question isn't the retirement per se but what if he had an entire prime away from MJ versus only 1 4/5 seasons (only 1 playoff run)?



Yeah, and he would wind up slightly ahead of where he is all-time now in that scenario with a MVP and "rings as the man." The anti-Pippen crowd only looks at downside variance.

There may be value in a ring or two as a "sidekick" but, as Kyrie understood, the value goes away. People don't distinguish between Pippen or Hondo's number and those of Worthy or Gasol or McHale. They all get a modicum of credit but fans give more credit to Ewing, Payton, Miller, Iverson for making *one* finals and losing as the best player.

I think the undervalued great on bad teams, aka McGrady, or the afforementioned Dirk career are the most likely cases for Pippen sans the Bulls. Hence I don't think his contributions to the Bulls' rings are really undervalued.



Here are some others added (starting with Mourning).

Pippen: #21 ESPN, #22 Slam, #25 Backpicks, #24 Simmons
Ewing: #37 ESPN, #30 Slam, #28 Backpicks, #40 Simmons
Drexler: #57 ESPN, #43 Drexler Slam, #39 Backpicks, #44 Simmons
Miller: #49 ESPN, #55 Slam, #30 Backpicks, #63 Simmons
Wilkins: #46 ESPN, #41 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #55 Simmons
Worthy: #51 ESPN, #46 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #50 Simmons
Kemp: N/A ESPN, #100 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #88 Simmons
Robinson: #24 ESPN, #29 Slam, #15 Backpicks, #29 Simmons
Payton: #53 ESPN, #39 Slam, N/A Backpicks, #41 Simmons
Stockton: #28 ESPN, #25 Slam, #27 Stockton, #19 Stockton
Mourning: #63 on ESPN, #78 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
Dumars: N/A on ESPN, #83 on Slam, N/A Backpicks, #74 Simmons
McHale: #36 ESPN, #40 Slam, #38 Backpicks, #35 Simmons
T. Hardaway: N/A ESPN, #96 Slam, N/A Backpicks, N/A Simmons
K. Johnson: N/A ESPN, N/A Slam, N/A Backpicks, #96 Simmons
Mullin: N/A ESPN, #84 Slam, N/A BP, #82 Simmons

Somehow--according to the real objective posters (no agenda!)--every single one of these players>>>>>Pippen yet somehow Pippen is ahead of all of them all-time. :lol

As said I only think Robinson was a better player than Pippen on that list. Stockton is way overrated on them.

[Smoke117]

I think the undervalued great on bad teams, aka McGrady, or the afforementioned Dirk career are the most likely cases for Pippen sans the Bulls. Hence I don't think his contributions to the Bulls' rings are really undervalued.




As said I only think Robinson was a better player than Pippen on that list. Stockton is way overrated on them.

lol Pippen is my favorite player of all time, but him being over Robinson is madness. David Robinson is probably the most underrated player ever. He completely carried the Spurs for a good decade as I've pointed out in from 96 to 97 when they went from one of the best teams in the league to utter garbage with him out. Spurs only even got Tim Duncan because David Robinson was so good the team turned to complete shit without him. lol They went from the 3rd best team in the league IN DEFENSE TO DEAD LAST WITHOUT HIM. Eight in offense to 27/29 without him. lol That's pretty much the definition of impact when your team goes to complete shit without you.

[Overdrive]

lol Pippen is my favorite player of all time, but him being over Robinson is madness. David Robinson is probably the most underrated player ever. He completely carried the Spurs for a good decade as I've pointed out in from 96 to 97 when they went from one of the best teams in the league to utter garbage with him out. Spurs only even got Tim Duncan because David Robinson was so good the team turned to complete shit without him. lol

Yeah, David had Lebron level floor raising impact. I liked Sean Elliott, but he definately wouldn't tip the scale enough to win in the 90s.

Btw always thought the Admiral was your #1.

[Roundball_Rock]

lol Yeah it's not like he was well past his prime at 33 with a ****ed up body or anything. It's easy to last a long time when you don't do anything but shoot like Reggie Miller. He didn't ****ing do anything else that's for damn sure. Defense, rebounding, etc.

:lol Yet we are the biased, delusional, agenda, etc. people for thinking Pippen>>>Miller like everybody outside of Jordanstan and realizing the context of his 1999 "trade" (because we actually watched back then)?

He essentially signed with the Rockets but the Bulls, as a reward for helping bring them 6 rings (not half a dozen ECF losses, rings) did a "sign and trade" to Houston so he could get another $20 million in his contract. Baggage but his team was doing him a solid to thank him for his service? That is a "golden parachute"--we all would want that kind of "baggage." :lol

Good point on Miller. The reason Pippen's back got shot was taking Malone charges in the finals. Reggie didn't have to worry about doing that since he had one role: shoot on prime Hornacek or prime Hersey Hawkins volume. Klay today at least has to play defense in addition to being a shooter.

The historical comp, the "off brand" version of Pippen is Havlicek; for Miller it is Klay Thompson. Yet Pippen is the one getting the massive boost relative to his actual play? :oldlol:

[RRR3]

Robinson would easily be top 10 all time if he was able to maintain his regular season level of play in the playoffs. In his defense, he didn't have a lot of help so I'm guessing he got doubled and tripled a lot.

[Overdrive]

Robinson would easily be top 10 all time if he was able to maintain his regular season level of play in the playoffs. In his defense, he didn't have a lot of help so I'm guessing he got doubled and tripled a lot.

He was ganged up and the moment he couldn't do much under the basket he started to throw face up jumpers. Quite similar to Ewing. Both had solid shots, but they would've needed a cast that could drag the defense away from them so they wouldn't need to settle for jumpers. Give David Robinson a Frobe level player and he'd probably the Bulls' biggest rival in the 90s.

[Smoke117]

i mean... hakeem was obviously better than ewing. just quicker and more skilled.

but pippen was easy work for him sans jordan.

and that's the point.

Uh...in the one game the Bulls played the Rockets that he played in he destroyed the Rockets in 94, dumb shit.

[Smoke117]

Robinson would easily be top 10 all time if he was able to maintain his regular season level of play in the playoffs. In his defense, he didn't have a lot of help so I'm guessing he got doubled and tripled a lot.

Pretty much. He was doubled and triple teamed nonstop in the playoffs as opposing coaches and teams knew nobody else was going to do shit on the Spurs. lol. If you take David Robinson out you take the Spurs out.

[tpols]

Uh...in the one game the Bulls played the Rockets that he played in he destroyed the Rockets in 94, dumb shit.

smoke... i was talking about what ewing did to pippen in 1994 playoffs. easy work for pat with no MJ. Pippen wasnt as good of a first option (or player).

jesus, i used to think you were at least a little bit sharp, but turns out you're just another dolt mate. :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

I don't think it changes much on those lists although I think he should be higher if that was the case

That is the best case scenario. Another scenario would be he basically winds up have a slightly better version of the career Drexler, Payton, Ewing had. Outside of you-know-who, everyone agrees Pippen>Wilkins and Wilkins would be a bad case scenario of being on teams with no team success for his entire career. Wilkins is still top 50-60 AT.


Also think if Pippen never plays Jordan wouldn't be the GOAT; strip any Top 5 player of their respective #2 when he one and none of them id in the mux anymore.

I get that argument but I'm not sure. In the current construct? Sure. It is all about rings (except for Russell, Pippen :oldlol: ). That is the card MJ stans go to time and again and the real reason for the anti-Pippen agenda (to make it look like MJ played with little help so 6 rings were inevitable--although in this thread they let it slip they think the Bulls with Pete Myers=the fully intact Knicks. Reach your own conclusion...).

There was and is a media obsession with pushing MJ. He is the ultimate cash cow. I suspect if MJ wound up with, say, 2 rings, a completely different construct would be used to designate him as GOAT. Evidence of this is his retirement. He retired with 3 MVP's and 3 rings and was universally declared the GOAT. LeBron has 4 MVP's and 3 rings and some people say he isn't even better than Kobe.


There's cut in the AT and best ever ranks where ATG #2s start to get ranked who are definately better than some, even great, #1s.

The amusing thing to me is we hear "options" as an argument even when it is clear as day if the two players in question played together the "#2 option" would be the #1 on the same team.


Drexler gets treated unfairly. He was a great #2 for that one ring and a first option good enough to lead his team to two finals. What's Ewing's argument over him for example.

Longevity perhaps? It is interesting Drexler was considered by many to be the 2nd best player in the league at his peak. Ewing was never at that level.


Drexler would play SF I'm pretty sure, but let's say he is the 2nd option for a threepeat, a great one at that I'm sure he wouldn't be ranked in the 40s and as low as 57

57 was an outlier. What would his resume be in that scenario? He made all-NBA 1st team only once. Who is the highest AT who has only one 1st team? Rings can only carry you so far. I can see him moving up a few spots if his resume stays the same but he has more rings but I can't see him cracking the top 30. Plus, keep in mind if he plays with MJ his resume gets deflated. Look at Pippen's outside of the MJ retirement years.

[RRR3]

Uh...in the one game the Bulls played the Rockets that he played in he destroyed the Rockets in 94, dumb shit.
You are responding to someone who implied Patrick Ewing was better than LeBron James.

[Roundball_Rock]

I think the undervalued great on bad teams, aka McGrady, or the afforementioned Dirk career are the most likely cases for Pippen sans the Bulls

What brought T Mac down is injuries and team success. If he had a full prime he would be considered top 50 easily and better than some of the names we have discussed here.


As said I only think Robinson was a better player than Pippen on that list. Stockton is way overrated on them.

Agree on Robinson>Pippen. Stockton is an odd case. He had great longevity but a low peak and a low prime (look at the charts posted earlier). I suspect he gets a large boost for having the assists record. Would anyone draft Stockton over Kidd or Payton, for example?


Yeah, David had Lebron level floor raising impact. I liked Sean Elliott, but he definately wouldn't tip the scale enough to win in the 90s.

That's what these MJ D riders don't get. Robinson was rolling with Elliott, Ewing with Starks, Barkley with Hawkins and later KJ (choked in 93' finals), Drexler with Porter, Hakeem with Thorpe, etc. They act like every team had Pippen.


Uh...in the one game the Bulls played the Rockets that he played in he destroyed the Rockets in 94, dumb shit.

Yup, the Bulls went 2-1 against the Rockets when Pippen played without MJ those years. :lol


i was talking about what ewing did to pippen in 1994 playoffs. easy work for pat with no MJ.

Yeah, because the Knicks dominated the series in Jordanstan, right? :roll:

Pippen haters/MJ stans think Ewing played Pippen when in the real world he played Cartwright/Longley.

We saw earlier what happened when he faced real comp at C...it hurt his MVP chances in 94' in fact. When you average 13 PPG against 33 PPG for the top centers against you it kills your case...hard to be league MVP when you are the 4th best player at your own position.

[RRR3]

T-Mac declined abnormally quickly. When he was at his best he was playing with absolute shit for supporting casts in Orlando.

[Overdrive]

There was and is a media obsession with pushing MJ. He is the ultimate cash cow. I suspect if MJ wound up with, say, 2 rings, a completely different construct would be used to designate him as GOAT. Evidence of this is his retirement. He retired with 3 MVP's and 3 rings and was universally declared the GOAT. LeBron has 4 MVP's and 3 rings and some people say he isn't even better than Kobe.

I read, I think it was in a thread here that Jordan's media coverage started the GOAT talk and there wasn't much before him, but watching old games from the 80s shows that without team success he definately wouldn't remain GOAT. Lebron's biggest problem are his plunders, but that's a topic for another thread.



The amusing thing to me is we hear "options" as an argument even when it is clear as day if the two players in question played together the "#2 option" would be the #1 on the same team.


Let's again take Ewing. I don't think Pippen becomes the first scoring option over him even, but Pippen would be still the better player if he joined the Knicks.



Longevity perhaps? It is interesting Drexler was considered by many to be the 2nd best player in the league at his peak. Ewing was never at that level.

Even his longevity isn't that much better.



57 was an outlier. What would his resume be in that scenario? He made all-NBA 1st team only once. Who is the highest AT who has only one 1st team? Rings can only carry you so far. I can see him moving up a few spots if his resume stays the same but he has more rings but I can't see him cracking the top 30. Plus, keep in mind if he plays with MJ his resume gets deflated. Look at Pippen's outside of the MJ retirement years.

I think the low 30s would be his landing place, but that's close to where I'd rank him rn.

[Roundball_Rock]

Go to the end of the article about H2H hurting Ewing's chances:


There is some other anger around, notably from those who think they are deserving of the award but being overlooked.

"Shaq is leading the league in scoring, is second in rebounding and shooting on one of the league's most improved teams," noted Orlando General Manager Pat Williams. "He should be right there with Hakeem and Robinson."

Patrick Ewing should, too, says his coach, Pat Riley.

"If there ever was a time he deserved to be MVP, it was last year," said Riley, "when his team won 60 games and 24 of the last 28. And he's had a great season again."

But Ewing's poor performances against Olajuwon and Robinson-he's averaging 13 points a game against them this season to 33 for them-and publicity-shy ways make him a long shot.

Here are the game logs. RS only, since we covered the finals vs. Hakeem several times...

Versus Hakeem

Ewing 12/11/3 on 38% TS, Hakeem 29/20/2 on 55% TS
Ewing 12/8/1 on 28% TS, Hakeem 37/13/5 on 62% TS

Versus Robinson

Ewing 15/10/2 42% TS, Robinson 32/10/5 67% TS

Versus Shaq

Ewing 22/18/4 39% TS, Shaq 23/11/3 51% TS
Ewing 31/11/2 63% TS, Shaq 30/16/3 52% TS
Ewing 32/9/3 73% TS, Shaq 22/13/3 53% TS
Ewing 36/9/5 51% TS, Shaq 37/17/5 62% TS
Ewing 26/19/3 58% TS, Shaq 26/5/3 62% TS

Versus Mourning

Ewing 17/6/4 48%, Mourning 28/9/4 60% TS

This is the MVP? Getting annihilated by the two best players at his position, getting outplayed by Mourning in their one meeting? He had success against Shaq, but that undercuts all the Shaq for MVP hype in this thread. Hakeem, Robinson, even Mourning handled Ewing easily but Shaq couldn't?

We also haven't heard a word from Pippen haters/MJ stans about the playoff performances of the other players in 1994:

Shaq 21/13/2 52% TS
Smits 16/5/3 47% TS

So he outplayed Smits but didn't dominate him as his team got swept out the first round by a lower seed.

Robinson 20/10/4 47% TS (lost 3-1 to a lower seed in the 1st round)
Pippen 23/8/5 52% TS (lost in 7 to NY in the ECSF)
Ewing 22/12/3 50% TS (lost in 7 to HOU)

50-52% TS is terrible efficiency for centers.

[Marchesk]

Wait a second, how come Mitch Richmond hasn't been brought up? He played the entire 90s.

Also, Chris Mullin played the entire 90s, and was a 25+ ppg scorer in the early 90s.

[Overdrive]

What brought T Mac down is injuries and team success. If he had a full prime he would be considered top 50 easily and better than some of the names we have discussed here.


Just the first player that came to my mind as a great player without team success, because of shit teams. Hill would be another, even closer to Pippen in style, but he also had that career altering injuries.



Agree on Robinson>Pippen. Stockton is an odd case. He had great longevity but a low peak and a low prime (look at the charts posted earlier). I suspect he gets a large boost for having the assists record. Would anyone draft Stockton over Kidd or Payton, for example?


Agree, but I'm biased. Kidd is my fav PG AT, I liked Payton and hated the Jazz. Maybe there's greatness I don't see as a hater.

[Roundball_Rock]

Let's again take Ewing. I don't think Pippen becomes the first scoring option over him even, but Pippen would be still the better player if he joined the Knicks.

Yeah, that's what I meant generally. In a case like Miller he becomes the first scoring option too.


I think the low 30s would be his landing place, but that's close to where I'd rank him rn.

How much of the difference is playing in Portland versus playing in New York?


Wait a second, how come Mitch Richmond hasn't been brought up? He played the entire 90s.

Also, Chris Mullin played the entire 90s, and was a 25+ ppg scorer in the early 90s.

Mullin was good only briefly (I did include him in AT rankings). Mullin's last all-NBA season was 1992. Richmond>Miller for the 90's and was consistently beating him in accolades but he is the forgotten man of the 90's.

If we want to include Mullin we have to include Price, Daughtery.

The table I pasted was based on candidates proferred as the best non-MJ perimeter player of the 90's in a thread a month ago. Most people said Pippen, but Drexler had a contingent (mostly MJ stans, though, as they drove by to say "Drexler, but here is why Pippen really, really sucks..." :lol ).

[RRR3]

Mullin was an absolute beast from 88-89 to 92-93. Shame he got hurt.

[Roundball_Rock]

Mullin was an absolute beast from 88-89 to 92-93. Shame he got hurt.

True. Look at his line from that time: 26/6/4 on 60% TS (imagine him in today's league).

GS had bad luck. Mullin broke down after 93' (his age 29 season). Hardaway had injury problems as well around the same time, including missing all of the 94' season. They also foolishly (in retrospect) traded Mitch Richmond for Billy Owens.

Compare these two 90's SG's:

All-NBA 2nd team: Player A 3x, Player B 0x
All-NBA 2nd/3rd team: Player A 5x, Player B 3x
All-star: Player A 6x, Player B 5x

Player A: 23/4/4 (prime)
Player B: 21/3/3 (prime)

Player A clearly is better, right? Player A is Mitch Richmond; Player B is Reggie Miller. Yet look at their reputations today. This is a (real) example of reputation inflation decades later.

[BigShotBob]

Mulin > Pippen

Hardaway >Pippen

Penny > Pippen

[RRR3]

BigShotSlob at it again.

[Roundball_Rock]

Mulin > Pippen

Hardaway >Pippen

Penny > Pippen

We get it. Every 90's All-NBA player was better than Pippen according to unbiased fans who randomly hate a random 90's superstar (impossible to determine why Drexler, Robinson, Ewing, etc. don't get the same hate. What, what could it be?) while loving Pippen's teammate. Therefore, Pippen belongs in the class of random all-stars (if he is below every all-NBA player).

The real question for "Pippen haters" (whoever they might be!) is what stars was Pippen actually better than? When I asked your intellectual leader his response was Detlef Schrempf, Sean Elliott, etc. Crazy but at least he stepped up to the plate and said it versus implying it like other "Pippen haters" do.

RRR and Smoke, when have you seen these guys ever say Pippen was better than anyone?

[RRR3]

We get it. Every 90's All-NBA player was better than Pippen according to unbiased fans who randomly hate a random 90's superstar (impossible to determine why Drexler, Robinson, Ewing, etc. don't get the same hate. What, what could it be?) while loving Pippen's teammate. Therefore, Pippen belongs in the class of random all-stars (if he is below every all-NBA player).

The real question for "Pippen haters" (whoever they might be!) is what stars was Pippen actually better than? When I asked your intellectual leader his response was Detlef Schrempf, Sean Elliott, etc. Crazy but at least he stepped up to the plate and said it versus implying it like other "Pippen haters" do.

RRR and Smoke, when have you seen these guys ever say Pippen was better than anyone?
I'm shocked 3ball said Pippen was better than Schrempf tbh. Sean Elliott was hardly a star (unless he was a great defender? Was he?), so that's not too surprising. I've never seen BigShotSlob say Pippen>anyone tbh. But he also said neither LeBron or Shaq are top 10 all time so I wouldn't really pay much attention to him.

[Reggie43]

lol Yeah it's not like he was well past his prime at 33 with a ****ed up body or anything. It's easy to last a long time when you don't do anything but shoot like Reggie Miller. He didn't ****ing do anything else that's for damn sure. Defense, rebounding, etc....foreign concepts to your hero.

With that said was he worth Roy freakin Rogers :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

I'm shocked 3ball said Pippen was better than Schrempf tbh. Sean Elliott was hardly a star (unless he was a great defender? Was he?), so that's not too surprising. I've never seen BigShotSlob say Pippen>anyone tbh. But he also said neither LeBron or Shaq are top 10 all time so I wouldn't really pay much attention to him.

The thing is those guys simply say the quiet part out loud. Look at all these other guys in every Pippen thread. The implication is the same. Pippen is worse than every single all-NBA player whose name comes up. Even random names. It also is never "well, Ewing and Pippen are close but I go with Ewing." It's Pippen is trash. Ewing, Miller, Kemp, XYZ all are vastly better. So if he is light years behind even borderline All-NBA guys like Miller (a couple third teams), what does that imply he was?

[Reggie43]

It's easy to last a long time when you don't do anything but shoot like Reggie Miller. He didn't ****ing do anything else that's for damn sure. Defense, rebounding, etc....foreign concepts to your hero.


https://youtu.be/If8C9FcTyHk

Clutch three.

Steals the ball defensively.

Another clutch trey.

Starks misses the free throw and he gets the clutch rebound.

Gets fouled and proceeds to hit the game winning free throws.

Gets the game winning defensive stop at the end.

"But he didnt play defense doe" :roll:

Pippen meanwhile....


https://youtu.be/mc6nj1p1s-g

[RRR3]

https://youtu.be/If8C9FcTyHk

Clutch three.

Steals the ball defensively.

Another clutch trey.

Starks misses the free throw and he gets the clutch rebound.

Gets fouled and proceeds to hit the game winning free throws.

Gets the game winning defensive stop at the end.

"But he didnt play defense doe" :roll:

Pippen meanwhile....


https://youtu.be/mc6nj1p1s-g
How mad does it make you that everyone ranks Pippen higher than Reggie?

[tpols]

Here's the thing with Reggie vs Pippen...

Pippen is worse than Reggie offensively and in the clutch by a margin that exceeds Pippen's defensive value.

You're comparing a bonafide 1st option playoff performer ~ 24 ppg 120 ORTG w/ ultimate clutch...

...to a guy famous for migraines, sitting out, and getting crossed by young frobe to give up a 15 point 4th quarter game 7 championship on the line lead.

Pippen was a nice top 15 impact player all NBA fella, but he wasnt a superstar stud. He was a strong glue guy who got hyped up beyond his worth playing for the most watched team of all time.

[tpols]

Gets the game winning defensive stop at the end.

that's what people miss.

Reggie was an above average defender in the playoffs especially man defense. He wasnt a guy you could pick on.

So the gap between the two on defense wasnt as big as it was for offense... where scottie was very poor.

Bad efficiency... no volume... so unclutch a ROOKIE is tasked with taking the last second biggest shot of the game over him.

it just is what it is....

[Reggie43]

How mad does it make you that everyone ranks Pippen higher than Reggie?

How am I mad lol, Pippen was one of my fave players before roundball overrated him to death. If you understand basketball you wont deny players impact and ability whether they are a rival or not.

[RRR3]

Here's the thing with Reggie vs Pippen...

Pippen is worse than Reggie offensively and in the clutch by a margin that exceeds Pippen's defensive value.

You're comparing a bonafide 1st option playoff performer ~ 24 ppg 120 ORTG w/ ultimate clutch...

...to a guy famous for migraines, sitting out, and getting crossed by young frobe to give up a 15 point 4th quarter game 7 championship on the line lead.

Pippen was a nice top 15 impact player all NBA fella, but he wasnt a superstar stud. He was a strong glue guy who got hyped up beyond his worth playing for the most watched team of all time.
Patrick Ewing had a playoff ORTG of 104. Yikes. Even Scottie "Andre Roberson" Pippen managed to top that (108).

[RRR3]

that's what people miss.

Reggie was an above average defender in the playoffs especially man defense. He wasnt a guy you could pick on.

So the gap between the two on defense wasnt as big as it was for offense... where scottie was very poor.

Bad efficiency... no volume... so unclutch a ROOKIE is tasked with taking the last second biggest shot of the game over him.

it just is what it is....
There are no stats that support Pippen being "very poor" on offense. This is why no one takes you seriously about this stuff. You make ridiculously hyperbolic claims (i.e., "Giannis is bad at basketball"). If you just said what you actually meant, you could probably have a more honest debate with people. At least I hope you don't actually believe those thing and are being hyperbolic. Giving you the benefit of the doubt here to be nice.

[RRR3]

How am I mad lol, Pippen was one of my fave players before roundball overrated him to death. If you understand basketball you wont deny players impact and ability whether they are a rival or not.
Roundball's ranks Pippen pretty similarly to where he's generally ranked tbh. He definitely is hyperfocused on this subject, because Pippen is his favorite player of all time and he's a stan, but he generally is making good points. I can't really demonize him for being a stan since everyone knows I'm an enormous LeBron stan.

[tpols]

There are no stats that support Pippen being "very poor" on offense. This is why no one takes you seriously about this stuff. You make ridiculously hyperbolic claims (i.e., "Giannis is bad at basketball"). If you just said what you actually meant, you could probably have a more honest debate with people. At least I hope you don't actually believe those thing and are being hyperbolic. Giving you the benefit of the doubt here to be nice.

relative to reggie he was poor.

1994 "peak MVP" pippen had a 104 ORTG in the playoffs. Compared to a 120 ORTG career average for Miller?

That's poor.

The contrast of clutch moments is just icing on the cake.

[Reggie43]

Roundball's ranks Pippen pretty similarly to where he's generally ranked tbh. He definitely is hyperfocused on this subject, because Pippen is his favorite player of all time and he's a stan, but he generally is making good points. I can't really demonize him for being a stan since everyone knows I'm an enormous LeBron stan.

Sure but he overeacts when his idol gets compared to his peers thinking Pippen is some sort of irreplaceable legend that did no wrong. He has some good points but a ton of double standards and cherry picked ones thus being called out by multiple posters. Add the fact that everyone that opposses his views about Pippen is apparently a "Jordan stan" and you have the recipe for one of the worst posters on Ish.

[RRR3]

relative to reggie he was poor.

1994 "peak MVP" pippen had a 104 ORTG in the playoffs. Compared to a 120 ORTG career average for Miller?

That's poor.

The contrast of clutch moments is just icing on the cake.
That's not what you said tho. See my point?

[RRR3]

Sure but he overeacts when his idol gets compared to his peers thinking Pippen is some sort of irreplaceable legend that did no wrong. He has some good points but a ton of double standards and cherry picked ones thus being called out by multiple posters. Add the fact that everyone that opposses his views about Pippen is apparently a "Jordan stan" and you have the recipe for one of the worst posters on Ish.
He's become paranoid about MJ stans yeah. I love how badly he gets 3ball tho

[Roundball_Rock]

Roundball's ranks Pippen pretty similarly to where he's generally ranked tbh. He definitely is hyperfocused on this subject, because Pippen is his favorite player of all time and he's a stan, but he generally is making good points. I can't really demonize him for being a stan since everyone knows I'm an enormous LeBron stan.

Yeah, the people who have Pippen where the consensus has him are the biased, delusional, etc. people. The people who have Miller, who is 25-40 spots behind him on lists, are the true objective people!

It is just me, 97, Smoke these days up against an army of MJ stans. Frankly if they didn't spend every day going into every thread saying Pippen sucks we wouldn't need to discuss him nearly as much. Look at how they attacked this thread. Easily could have just said Hakeem deserved it but that's not why they enter these threads...they don't engage in discussion of the players involved. Just Pippen bashing, even deceitfully and hypocrtically so.

The agenda is as clear as day. 90 percent of Pippen haters have the same thing in common...

[Roundball_Rock]

ESPN had Pippen slightly too high for me. I'd have to put pen to paper but he probably is in the 23-26 range for me. My big thought crime is having MJ #2 instead of #1 (I have LeBron even lower relative to the consensus, 4th versus the consensus of 2nd...). These guys are out there saying Ewing is better than LeBron or Curry is.

Where do all these people have Pippen? Behind Kyrie, Kemp we know. So that pushes him to the tail end of the top 100--at best.

[tpols]

Here's the thing with Reggie vs Pippen...

Pippen is worse than Reggie offensively and in the clutch by a margin that exceeds Pippen's defensive value.

You're comparing a bonafide 1st option playoff performer ~ 24 ppg 120 ORTG w/ ultimate clutch...


relative to reggie he was poor.

1994 "peak MVP" pippen had a 104 ORTG in the playoffs. Compared to a 120 ORTG career average for Miller?

That's poor.

The contrast of clutch moments is just icing on the cake.


That's not what you said tho. See my point?

that's exactly what i said.

it was a direct comparison between the two for the whole post.

[Reggie43]

He's become paranoid about MJ stans yeah. I love how badly he gets 3ball tho

I think that's the good thing about it is that he counters the premier Jordan stan on the board. Most people would have given up seeing how bad and repetitive 3ball's arguments are.

[Roundball_Rock]

0-3 in Game 7 of the ECF is clutch? 1-4 in the ECF, 0-1 in the finals. "Winning Time" ended with the Pacers losing.

Chris Paul is 1st in o rating, Miller 2, D. Jordan 3. The real GOATs! MJ 20th, LeBron is 39th. Shaq 106, Kobe 174. Meanwhile when Reggie actually played coaches were saying he wasn't even the best player on his team.

[RRR3]

that's what people miss.

Reggie was an above average defender in the playoffs especially man defense. He wasnt a guy you could pick on.

So the gap between the two on defense wasnt as big as it was for offense... where scottie was very poor.

Bad efficiency... no volume... so unclutch a ROOKIE is tasked with taking the last second biggest shot of the game over him.

it just is what it is....
:coleman:

Tpols there's now way to read this other than you saying Pip was bad at offense.

[RRR3]

0-3 in Game 7 of the ECF is clutch? 1-4 in the ECF, 0-1 in the finals. "Winning Time" ended with the Pacers losing.

Chris Paul is 1st in o rating, Miller 2, D. Jordan 3. The real GOATs! MJ 20th, LeBron is 39th. Shaq 106, Kobe 174. Meanwhile when Reggie actually played coaches were saying he wasn't even the best player on his team.
Chris Paul actually is one of the best offensive players of all time. ESPN ranking him 40th was blasphemy. I believe backpicks had him 20th or 19th which is probably about right. I could see him a little higher even. He's probably the least flawed player I've ever seen from a skillset standpoint.

[Reggie43]

0-3 in Game 7 of the ECF is clutch? 1-4 in the ECF, 0-1 in the finals. "Winning Time" ended with the Pacers losing..

Winning time: Reggie Miller vs the New York Knicks was about their battles with whom? Did they win against the Knicks in the end? Have you even watched the documentary or are you still waiting for them to make an Espn 30 for 30 about Pippen :roll:

[Whoah10115]

I don't see how he can possibly counter 3ball.

3ball is a legitimate sociopath. You can't get to him, except when you rank LeBron or edit/delete his threads.

Roundball_Rock is a much worse, pretentious version of jlauber.

[Roundball_Rock]

Miller was a shooter. That was it. He was great at it but he offered nothing as a passer or creator (part of offense). Nothing on defense. Nothing on the glass. He was 21/3/3 for his prime. When his shot was off, he was useless (as his team would learn in many key games). He lacked the skill set to handle a #1 option work load. How many screens can you run to get a guy who can't get open open? He took his 14 shots a game but there was always Smits, Person, Schrempf, or Rose there to be #1 in usage--and Miller sometimes was #3 or #4 in usage.

So he is the second GOAT offensive player ever but his coaches couldn't figure it out? Opposing coaches couldn't? Guys on the internet 25 years later know better?

Miller was Klay without the defense, without the scale (Miller's "efficiency" wouldn't hold up at 18 shots a game, for example).


Chris Paul actually is one of the best offensive players of all time. ESPN ranking him 40th was blasphemy. I believe backpicks had him 20th or 19th which is probably about right

True but is he the offensive GOAT, as this stat suggests?

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is some insight on Reggie from KBlaze in a thread weeks ago:


At no point in the 90s would a single person outside his home market call Reggie the best wing after Jordan. You can find articles from Reggies prime with local writers saying Detlef(the 6th man) was the teams best player.

Coaches were picking dudes like Mookie Blaylock.

Stockton was more respected than Reggie.

Pippen, Drexler, Grant Hill, Mitch and others would all have been taken over Reggie by every team in the nba. The Pacers didn’t thrive till Larry Brown got there and told Reggie he wasn’t a superstar type who could win trying to take over games and made them more of an ensemble team. If I posted what Larry Brown said he had to sit Reggie down and tell him ish would be calling me a hater like I said it......


I could also ask Larry Brown, George Karl, and Phil Jackson all of whom said at the time Reggie was his teams second or third best player. You ask nba coaches in like 94 to pick Mckey or Miller Reggie probably won’t win that. The only reason that sounds odd today is you not having been there to see lots of basketball lifers not be that impressed. 28 years old dead prime and the coaches take Mookie and John Starks. He ends up behind 6 guards In the East alone but magically 25 years later he’s I suppose the best guard in the league with Jordan retired.....

Quotes from 1994 and 1995--right in the middle of Reggie's prime:


It’s along the lines of asking peak Draymond or Klay....except 25 years ago they wouldn’t make full use of what guys like Klay could do. And Klay is a great defender. So it’s not exactly that but it’s along those lines. I’d take Reggie for today’s game no doubt. For 1993? I’ll just give you what the coaches said....

Bulls coach Phil Jackson voted for McKey for the All-Star team, saying: "He's their best player. He's the reason they are where they are."

And Indiana's defense starts with Derrick McKey.

"He's as good a defender as there is in the league," coach Larry Brown said. "He's a great all-around player. I don't know where we'd be without him."

"He's the best. He defends every night. He does whatever we need him to do to win," Brown said.

While Brown and teammates call McKey the most important player on the team, McKey was characteristically modest about his play following the win over Charlotte.

Derrick McKey has settled in with the Pacers and become the catalyst through which all offensive plays are run. "People used to tell me Derrick didn't come to play every night," said [Larry Brown]. "He may not have come to play offensively, but he's come to play defensively in every single game I've seen. He's the best all-around player I've ever coached."


Hes one of several pacers that players, coaches, and writers flatly said were the best player on teams Reggie was on in his prime. What you feel about that with nerd stats a quarter century later obviously was not factored in.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?480370-After-Jordan-who-was-the-BEST-perimeter-player-in-the-90s/page4

[Reggie43]

Here is some insight on Reggie from KBlaze in a thread weeks ago:





Quotes from 1994 and 1995--right in the middle of Reggie's prime:





http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?480370-After-Jordan-who-was-the-BEST-perimeter-player-in-the-90s/page4

Dude cant formulate his own arguments :roll:

[Reggie43]

Already had a back and forth with Kblaze about that many years ago and seeing that you love to dig out old threads how about searching for my replies?

[Whoah10115]

Dude cant formulate his own arguments :roll:

3ball is worth reading.

Andre Roberson :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

The irony here? When Miller was asked who would want to be among the Dream Team III players he, like 5 of 11 players, selected Pippen. Why did Miller want to be Pippen? His quote was something like "Because he can score 4 points and dominate a game."

Gee, why would Reggie Miller admire a player who could dominate without scoring? It is obvious why.

More from KBlaze (bold added by me in those quotes):


And yet....it takes people who weren’t there....to run some equations....to see it. Why do you think that is?

Why do you think people who played and coached for decades watched him do it from feet away and didn’t think it was that special....when your blind numbers 25 years later says it was?

When his coach is trying to defend him after one of his many many many many offensive no shows and says:

"I know people are going to say Reggie didn't do this or that, but I've always said it's a team thing for him," said Brown. "He has trouble getting his own shot, beating people off the dribble. He's not what people make him out to be."

What do your numbers understand that he doesn’t?

His coach tells you...lay off....he’s not some super scorer who is gonna bring it every night. Stop expecting so much. That’s said in defense of him.

Why?

Because Reggie would disappear all the time. You would forget he was there for 30 minutes as his team struggled to score. The narrative is that he would just turn it on and win them all these games late....except he won exactly
one big playoff series in 19 years. People remember 6 things from ESPN and read some numbers on an irrelevant 25 points in 47 minutes while being destroyed in a series and make up whole new narratives over the shooting percentages on his largely ineffective totals. The people watching it closest were not nearly as impressed as your calculators are now.

Reggie Millers career was usually 125 screens for 16-25 points and going home when games started to matter and players who could actually bring the ball across half court under a press or just post up and get a shot started to exert more influence.

Reggie was nice. And he would look a lot nicer today. But there’s a reason people weren’t blown away. Those advanced numbers did not translate to a particularly dominant individual. He has moments to point to like every other hall of famer.....but generally speaking he wasn’t gonna matter when it was time to do shit worth remembering.

We remember 8 in 9. But it was of no real consequence. Like everything else you remember him doing.

This happened often. A lot of 10, 15, 20 point games where Reggie scored points but did nothing else that mattered on the court.

He would be a monster in today's game, though.

[Reggie43]

The irony here? When Miller was asked who would want to be among the Dream Team III players he, like 5 of 11 players, selected Pippen. Why did Miller want to be Pippen? His quote was something like "Because he can score 4 points and dominate a game."

Gee, why would Reggie Miller admire a player who could dominate without scoring? It is obvious why.

More from KBlaze (bold added by me in those quotes):



This happened often. A lot of 10, 15, 20 point games where Reggie scored points but did nothing else that mattered on the court.

He would be a monster in today's game, though.

You could say this shit about a ton of players because they had bad games that get overshadowed by their greater ones.

On the topic of disappearing what are you thoughts about the Migraine game or him disappearing on the last 1.8 seconds of a crucial playoff game :roll:

[Smoke117]

You could say this shit about a ton of players because they had bad games that get overshadowed by their greater ones.

On the topic of disappearing what are you thoughts about the Migraine game or him disappearing on the last 1.8 seconds of a crucial playoff game :roll:

Are you still melting down? You ****ing loser. :oldlol:

[tpols]

Dude cant formulate his own arguments :roll:

the guy is so played out he has to run to kblaze to make any sense. :lol

but the problem is blaze is a bulls stan who seees reality through those rose tinted glasses.

anybody saying reggie miller wasnt impacting the game just because he wasnt doing a fancy dribble or dime doesnt deserve a seat at the table of this debate.

The man was dropping elite volume on elite efficiency while pouring in the clutchest of buckets and spacing decoying for everybody else.

It's an open and shut case to anyone with an objective eye.

[Roundball_Rock]

So his one calling card was scoring (21 PPG, evidently that is some GOAT-level # now as goal posts move) and being "clutch." So what happened in the biggest games in series that mattered?

Compare this to what Miller did when he had something to play for (i.e., had real pressure):

Game 6 94' ECF: 27/4/4 on 38% (with a trip to the finals on the line)
Game 7 94' ECF: 25/2/0 on 41%

Game 7 95' ECSF: 29/1/3 on 56%
Game 6 95' ECF: 36/7/2 on 68% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 95' ECF: 12/4/0 on 39%

Game 6 98' ECF: 8/2/0 on 15% (elimination game)
Game 7 98' ECF: 22/0/4 on 54%

Game 6 99' ECF: 8/3/4 on 17% (Pacers eliminated)

Game 5 00' Finals: 25/4/6 on 58%
Game 6 00' Finals: 25/1/3 on 42%

8 points two years in a row in ECF elimination games.

At least Klay can defend the opposing team's best player when his shot is off. Other inferior scorers can provide some creation and passing. Miller? If he is shooting 15% or 38% it is game over.

When Miller was going 25/2/0 Ewing was going 24/22/7 in the same Game 7. Guess which team won and went to the finals?

[Reggie43]

Are you still melting down? You ****ing loser. :oldlol:

Is this dude really gonna talk about meltdowns when basically every reply you have is a meltdown :roll:

[RRR3]

So his one calling card was scoring (21 PPG, evidently that is some GOAT-level # now as goal posts move) and being "clutch." So what happened in the biggest games in series that mattered?

Compare this to what Miller did when he had something to play for (i.e., had real pressure):

Game 6 94' ECF: 27/4/4 on 38% (with a trip to the finals on the line)
Game 7 94' ECF: 25/2/0 on 41%

Game 7 95' ECSF: 29/1/3 on 56%
Game 6 95' ECF: 36/7/2 on 68% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 95' ECF: 12/4/0 on 39%

Game 6 98' ECF: 8/2/0 on 15% (elimination game)
Game 7 98' ECF: 22/0/4 on 54%

Game 6 99' ECF: 8/3/4 on 17% (Pacers eliminated)

Game 5 00' Finals: 25/4/6 on 58%
Game 6 00' Finals: 25/1/3 on 42%

8 points two years in a row in ECF elimination games.

At least Klay can defend the opposing team's best player when his shot is off. Other inferior scorers can provide some creation and passing. Miller? If he is shooting 15% or 38% it is game over.

When Miller was going 25/2/0 Ewing was going 24/22/7 in the same Game 7. Guess which team won?
Well, Ewing is top 5 all time.

[Roundball_Rock]

Well, Ewing is top 5 all time.

True. :oldlol: Ewing>Miller>Kemp>Iggy>Pippen/LeBron.


Are you still melting down? You ****ing loser.

:lol He is acting like limited Reggie didn't routinely disappear in games. He couldn't create shots on his own. He didn't defend. He didn't rebound. He didn't pass. It isn't hard to see how he could be contained. Why does he think Indiana need to rely on Rik Smits, Chuck Person, Schrempf, and Rose so much? Miller was this "alpha alpha" GOAT-level scorer and the guy was operating on Hornacek or Hersey Hawkins usage?

It is obvious why his coaches and opposing coaches viewed him as they did.

[Reggie43]

So his one calling card was scoring (21 PPG, evidently that is some GOAT-level # now as goal posts move) and being "clutch." So what happened in the biggest games in series that mattered?

Compare this to what Miller did when he had something to play for (i.e., had real pressure):

Game 6 94' ECF: 27/4/4 on 38% (with a trip to the finals on the line)
Game 7 94' ECF: 25/2/0 on 41%

Game 7 95' ECSF: 29/1/3 on 56%
Game 6 95' ECF: 36/7/2 on 68% (to stave off elimination)
Game 7 95' ECF: 12/4/0 on 39%

Game 6 98' ECF: 8/2/0 on 15% (elimination game)
Game 7 98' ECF: 22/0/4 on 54%

Game 6 99' ECF: 8/3/4 on 17% (Pacers eliminated)

Game 5 00' Finals: 25/4/6 on 58%
Game 6 00' Finals: 25/1/3 on 42%

8 points two years in a row in ECF elimination games.

At least Klay can defend the opposing team's best player when his shot is off. Other inferior scorers can provide some creation and passing. Miller? If he is shooting 15% or 38% it is game over.

When Miller was going 25/2/0 Ewing was going 24/22/7 in the same Game 7. Guess which team won?

So Miller defending Jordan never happened? He got praise and had the good Jordan defender rep because of his work in that seven game series. Even Jordan himself praised his annoying handchecking physical defense. Every matchup with a star shooting guard he relished going one on one with them. Heck they are youtube videos of him taking the challenge of defending Prime Grant Hill because Mckey's skills has fallen off a cliff at the time and they needed someone to matchup and surely Mullin and Rose are not better options.

[Reggie43]

True. :oldlol: Ewing>Miller>Kemp>Iggy>Pippen/LeBron.



:lol He is acting like limited Reggie didn't routinely disappear in games. He couldn't create shots on his own. He didn't defend. He didn't rebound. He didn't pass. It isn't hard to see how he could be contained. Why does he think Indiana need to rely on Rik Smits, Chuck Person, Schrempf, and Rose so much? Miller was this "alpha alpha" GOAT-level scorer and the guy was operating on Hornacek or Hersey Hawkins usage.

Are you acting that Pippen didnt routinely disappear in games? Remember that 1.8 seconds :roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

The second GOAT offensive player, right?

1994 ECF: Miller 25, Ewing 22, Smits 16, Oakley 14. Only 2.6 APG, though.
1995 ECSF: Miller/Smits 22.6 each, Ewing 19, Starks 17. 3.0 APG.
1995 ECF: Shaq 27, Miller 26, Penny 20, Smits 18. 1.1 APG.
1998 ECF: MJ 32, Miller 17, Pippen 17, Smits 16. 2.0 APG.
1999 ECF: Houston 19, Sprewell 18, Johnson 17, Miller 16. 2.2 APG.
2000 ECF: Miller 22, Sprewell 20, Rose 19, Johnson 13. 1.8 APG.
2000 Finals: Shaq 38, Miller 24, Rose 23, Kobe 16. 3.7 APG.

This is Earth-shattering offensive production? The "average of averages" here are 22 with 2.3 APG. GOAT offensive player? That O rating, huh?

Prime Miller in the playoffs averaged 25 PPG from the WNBA three point line; 22.5 PPG from the NBA line. Keep that in mind when reading those 1995 numbers.

His playoff number jump was driven by playing much higher minutes in the playoffs.

[Reggie43]

Seeing that you love to dig into old threads how about searching for a quote where I overrate Miller? Putting words in peoples mouths wont make you credible unless you prove it.

Worst I probably had was about Paul Pierce but imagine seeing Miller at 39 years old destroy the Celtics in 2 playoff games (28 points plus the dagger and 33 points in a blowout) While trigerring the whole Celtic team with his tactics and you would understand why I would rather have Miller than Pierce.

[Overdrive]

the guy is so played out he has to run to kblaze to make any sense. :lol

but the problem is blaze is a bulls stan who seees reality through those rose tinted glasses.

anybody saying reggie miller wasnt impacting the game just because he wasnt doing a fancy dribble or dime doesnt deserve a seat at the table of this debate.

The man was dropping elite volume on elite efficiency while pouring in the clutchest of buckets and spacing decoying for everybody else.

It's an open and shut case to anyone with an objective eye.

Elite volume? Reggie was never that greatbof a scorer. Elite was close to 30 during his prime not about 20. He was way too dependent on teams play to get his game going, because well he he couldn't dribble fancy. The reality is that Reggie was one of the greatest off ball players ever, but it was the only dimension to his game.
The overrating of his game is beyond retarded.

[999Guy]

Elite volume? Reggie was never that greatbof a scorer. Elite was close to 30 during his prime not about 20. He was way too dependent on teams play to get his game going, because well he he couldn't dribble fancy. The reality is that Reggie was one of the greatest off ball players ever, but it was the only dimension to his game.
The overrating of his game is beyond retarded.
Reggie was a better playoff scorer than everyone in the era except Jordan and Hakeem.

[999Guy]

Reggie Miller playoff scoring(90 - 95): 34.4 per 100 poss / .628 TS%

Barkley playoff scoring (89 - 95): 32 per 100 poss / .578 TS%

It really isn’t even a given Hakeem was a better scorer in the playoffs. He’s actually worse in all honesty. Only Jordan was on Millers level as an offensive player in the postseason. Then baby Shaq when Miller was out of prime.

[Reggie43]

Elite volume? Reggie was never that greatbof a scorer. Elite was close to 30 during his prime not about 20. He was way too dependent on teams play to get his game going, because well he he couldn't dribble fancy. The reality is that Reggie was one of the greatest off ball players ever, but it was the only dimension to his game.
The overrating of his game is beyond retarded.

You call Miller overrated then proceed to underrate his game. He got 24.6ppg .514 fg% .414 3p% at his peak which very few players has done at those percentages without the help of modern no handcheck freedom of movement rules.

Too dependent on team play to get going? Non pacers fans always mistake playing the right way for the benefit of the team as a limitation to his game not knowing he could go one on one and "dribble fancy" if he wanted to which he did when they had average teams in the early 90s and early 2000s when they broke up their core. There are tons of clips of these on youtube its just that he was the Goat offball player so he decided to focus on his strengths.

[Reggie43]

Miller had an elite face up game buoyed by a very quick first step that enabled him to shoot his runner, go all the way to the basket or draw fouls. At his peak he was going close to 8 times a game to the line good for 9th in the league and ahead of guys like Olajuwon, Drexler, Dominique etc.

[Reggie43]

He had these types of moves in his arsenal but I guess posters saw too much of "Uncle Reggie" when he was about to retire so he never got credit for it.


https://youtu.be/JH-atJOyWDY

[tpols]

Miller had an elite face up game buoyed by a very quick first step that enabled him to shoot his runner, go all the way to the basket or draw fouls. At his peak he was going close to 8 times a game to the line good for 9th in the league and ahead of guys like Olajuwon, Drexler, Dominique etc.

true that. you cant really get to the line that often unless youre a serious scorer... it means youre constantly beating and tricking the defense.

or youre just too damn good and they have to foul you just to throw your rhythm off.

[Overdrive]

Reggie Miller playoff scoring(90 - 95): 34.4 per 100 poss / .628 TS%

Barkley playoff scoring (89 - 95): 32 per 100 poss / .578 TS%

It really isn’t even a given Hakeem was a better scorer in the playoffs. He’s actually worse in all honesty. Only Jordan was on Millers level as an offensive player in the postseason. Then baby Shaq when Miller was out of prime.


You call Miller overrated then proceed to underrate his game. He got 24.6ppg .514 fg% .414 3p% at his peak which very few players has done at those percentages without the help of modern no handcheck freedom of movement rules.

Too dependent on team play to get going? Non pacers fans always mistake playing the right way for the benefit of the team as a limitation to his game not knowing he could go one on one and "dribble fancy" if he wanted to which he did when they had average teams in the early 90s and early 2000s when they broke up their core. There are tons of clips of these on youtube its just that he was the Goat offball player so he decided to focus on his strengths.

The right way for the benefit of the team? If Reggie was that great of a scorer, an efficient one at that, why wouldn't the team hand him more shots? Raise the pace for more possessions. Acting like Reggie was an AT elite scorer is revisionist history. Nobody thought like that back then.


true that. you cant really get to the line that often unless youre a serious scorer... it means youre constantly beating and tricking the defense.

or youre just too damn good and they have to foul you just to throw your rhythm off.



7. Reggie Miller
9 of 16

Easily one of the best three-point shooters ever to step onto an NBA court, Reggie Miller also made quite the career out of flailing his wiry frame around at any given moment.

Having that wiry frame gave Miller the advantage when it came to flopping since he could easily sell someone as skinny as himself getting pushed around by just about anyone.

Miller even revolutionized a different style of flopping by perfecting the leg kick. The leg kick basically involves you going up for a normal jump shot, but then sticking your leg to make contact with the defender nearest to you to get the automatic foul.

Worst instance of flopping: Gus Johnson calls Reggie out

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/869637-15-worst-floppers-in-nba-history

[Reggie43]

The right way for the benefit of the team? If Reggie was that great of a scorer, an efficient one at that, why wouldn't the team hand him more shots? Raise the pace for more possessions. Acting like Reggie was an AT elite scorer is revisionist history. Nobody thought like that back then.





https://bleacherreport.com/articles/869637-15-worst-floppers-in-nba-history

Maybe because other players on the team need their touches as well to be effective and provide good chemistry for the team. Would Smits be effective if Miller takes away his shots? Or Mark Jackson if he tries those "fancy dribble moves" and take the ball away from him?

Never said he was elite just better than you think he was.

[999Guy]

Raise the pace for more possessions? There’s no advantage to that. You’re never gonna have more possessions than the other team.

[Turbo Slayer]

The right way for the benefit of the team? If Reggie was that great of a scorer, an efficient one at that, why wouldn't the team hand him more shots? Raise the pace for more possessions. Acting like Reggie was an AT elite scorer is revisionist history. Nobody thought like that back then.





https://bleacherreport.com/articles/869637-15-worst-floppers-in-nba-history Responding to bolded: I think you mean hand over the ball more. Pace does not factor in plays designed for that specific player. Pace just takes in # of team possessions and # of opponent's possessions in a game of 48 minutes. It is just purely a estimate of # of possessions for a team.

I think you meant usage rate.


Raise the pace for more possessions? There’s no advantage to that. You’re never gonna have more possessions than the other team. I agree.

[Reggie43]

https://youtu.be/Cgk24LrIeGk

Is this a player that is too dependent on team play to get going?

Shows his full arsenal with stepbacks, fadeaways, faceup drives runners etc.

[Whoah10115]

Miller wasn't on the very shortlist in the 90s, but that only means the 90s were great.

It's reasonable to take Richmond over him, especially in a vacuum, because Richmond was one of the game's best players.

But Reggie was great. Terrifying to play against, and not just because a little me saw him do something crazy against us.

I saw an older him go off against the Nets, taking it to the rim in OT. Miller can stand against Ray and all the guards of that class.

[Overdrive]

Raise the pace for more possessions? There’s no advantage to that. You’re never gonna have more possessions than the other team.


Responding to bolded: I think you mean hand over the ball more. Pace does not factor in plays designed for that specific player. Pace just takes in # of team possessions and # of opponent's possessions in a game of 48 minutes. It is just purely a estimate of # of possessions for a team.

I think you meant usage rate.

I agree.

No, I did not mean usage rate. I meant possessions. If you have someone so great that he could score alot of points on high efficiency if he had more possessions I'd raise them. Most teams become less effective on more possessions. It's a legitimate strategy and quite some teams thoughout history used it. Raising usage takes away shots from teammates.

[Roundball_Rock]

If Reggie was that great of a scorer, an efficient one at that, why wouldn't the team hand him more shots? Raise the pace for more possessions. Acting like Reggie was an AT elite scorer is revisionist history. Nobody thought like that back then.

Exactly. His team knew he couldn't handle real #1 option usage. He was 21 PPG with 3 APG for his prime. These are not elite numbers. Players with more offensive production get ripped as offensive players (including in this thread) by these Reggie advocates so why are we praising 21/3?

Reggie was a great shooter but that was it. He did not have the skill set to be a real #1 option and he couldn't impact games via passing/creating, defense, rebounding, etc. There is a reason he never finished even top 10 in MVP despite theoretically being the #1 option on a perennial contender.


Raising usage takes away shots from teammates.

Which would mean taking shots away from Rik Smits, Chuck Person, Detlef Schrempf, or Jalen Rose. His team preferred those guys getting higher usage than the supposed all-time great offensive player...but Reggie43 and tpols know better than Larry Brown, Larry Bird, et al.

[999Guy]

No, I did not mean usage rate. I meant possessions. If you have someone so great that he could score alot of points on high efficiency if he had more possessions I'd raise them. Most teams become less effective on more possessions. It's a legitimate strategy and quite some teams thoughout history used it. Raising usage takes away shots from teammates.No.

[Roundball_Rock]

Why do Robinson and Shaq get a pass for going from 30 PPG to 20 PPG and from 29 PPG to 21 PPG, respectively, in the playoffs? Pippen went from 22 PPG to 23 PPG (yes, the guy who scored slightly more is the one getting ripped) and people are jumping up and down about that constituting choking. So playoff production is paramount--but the guys who shrunk to 65% or so of their scoring en route to losing in first round upsets, get a pass? Why is Pippen held to a separate standard by "unbiased" fans who have no agenda regarding him (certainly nothing to do with MJ!)?

Here is the career head-to-head production of players compared here.

Pippen vs. Miller

Pippen 17/6/5 on 49%. 2 steals, 1 block.
Miller 19/3/3 on 45%. 1 steal, 0 blocks.

Bulls 4-1 against the Pacers in 94' so the MJ excuse doesn't work. Pippen's teams 36-12 overall in the RS against Miller's.

Hakeem vs. Ewing

Hakeem 21/11/2 on 50%. 3 blocks, 2 steals.
Ewing 18/9/1 on 46%. 2 blocks, 1 steal.

Hakeem wins across the board. Their teams went 14-14.

Ewing vs. Robinson

Robinson 23/9/3 on 51%. 3 blocks, 2 steals.
Ewing 20/10/2 on 43%. 3 blocks, 1 steal.

Nearly a clean sweep for Robinson but Ewing averaged 1.1 more RPG (Robinson 2.8 BPG versus 2.6 for Ewing).

Ewing vs. Smits

Ewing dominated him in the RS.

Ewing 24/10/2 51%. 3 blocks, 1 steal.
Smits 13/6/1 49%. 1 block, 1 steal.

Playoffs a different story...:

Ewing 19/9/2 46%. 2 blocks, 1 steal.
Smits 17/6/1 54%. 1 block, 1 steal.

Similar story with Ewing vs. Mourning. Ewing wins the RS match ups but Mourning in the playoffs. They are a bit harder to assess, though, as they don't have much overlap in primes.

Ewing vs. Daughtery

Ewing 24/10/2 53%. 1 block, 1 steal.
Daughtery 18/9/3 53%. 2 blocks, 1 steal.

Ewing wins this, although Daughtery basically got his career average numbers against Ewing (19/10/4 on 53% for his career). They never met in the playoffs.

Shaq crushed Ewing but hard to say much since, like Mourning, their primes only briefly overlapped. Suffice it to say, in the 94' season in question, they fought each other to a draw in the RS (although both declined in the playoffs so a playoff meeting would have been interesting).

[Roundball_Rock]

This should extinguish the dumb "offensive rating" TP (from another thread where tpols was being tpols):

Fact check on their playoff oRTG's from 1991-1994 (no need to cherry pick and omit 91', as if it is different than 92'):

1994 playoffs oRTG: Pippen 104 (7th on CHI), Ewing 101 (6th on NY)
1993 playoffs oRTG: Ewing 109 (3rd on NY), Pippen 102 (9th on CHI)
1992 playoffs oRTG: Pippen 112 (4th on CHI), Ewing 110 (3rd on NY)
1991 playoffs oRTG: Pippen 116 (6th on CHI), Ewing 88 (9th on NY)
Playoff career: Pippen 108, Ewing 104

So using this dumb stat and TP, Ewing comes out behind 3 of 4 years during the time the two teams meet four consecutive years and behind career versus career. Jordan stans will careen from TP to TP, with or without the facts.

It is a dumb stat---as you can see they both ranked low on their own teams on this measure. It favors low usage role players.

[Reggie43]

Roundball the usage guy still at it again :facepalm

Tell me how peak numbers of 24.6ppg .514 fg% .414 3p% on 15.7 shots is bad because of usage?

[Reggie43]

Miller wasn't on the very shortlist in the 90s, but that only means the 90s were great.

It's reasonable to take Richmond over him, especially in a vacuum, because Richmond was one of the game's best players.

But Reggie was great. Terrifying to play against, and not just because a little me saw him do something crazy against us.

I saw an older him go off against the Nets, taking it to the rim in OT. Miller can stand against Ray and all the guards of that class.

My thoughts exactly.

Unlike someone on here who gets trigerred when Pippen gets compared to his peers as if he was some sort of irreplaceable legend who did no wrong.

[Roundball_Rock]

Regularized Adjusted Plus Minus (RAPM) gives you a better "apples to apples" comparison of a player's impact since it incorporates everything they do to impact the game and is the same for everyone (e.g., it doesn't reward low usage catch and shoot types). For the players discussed the most here we have data starting in 1994. All these numbers are "plus" numbers, meaning they helped their teams while on the court.

RAPM for Pippen, Ewing, Miller

1994: Pippen 3.7, Miller 3.6, Ewing 3.2
1995: Pippen 5.8, Ewing 3.6, Miller 2.4
1996: Pippen 5.5, Miller 3.6, Ewing 2.9
1997: Pippen 6.4, Ewing 5.7, Miller 1.8
1998: Miller 5.1, Pippen 4.7, Ewing 4.6

They all fall off after that. Miller is the best in 99', 00', Pippen in 01', Miller in 02', Pippen in 03'. Miller is ahead in 04' but both are net negative players by that point. Ewing was a net minus from 01' on.

It is pretty clear who the most impactful player of the group was when all were in their primes...no case, doe!

[Roundball_Rock]

Let's broaden it out.

RAPM Comparison 1994-1998

1994: Robinson 7.5, Malone 5.9, Hakeem 5.2, Pippen 3.7, Shaq/Barkley/Miller 3.6, Ewing 3.2, Penny 2.9, Payton -0.2
1995: Robinson 8.4, Pippen 5.8, Shaq/Penny 5.6, Malone 5.3, Hakeem 5.1, Barkley 3.9, Ewing 3.6, Miller 2.4, Payton 2.3, Hill 2.2
1996: Robinson 6.5, Penny 5.6, Pippen 5.5, Malone 5.1, Shaq/Hill 4.1, Hakeem 3.9, Miller 3.6, Barkley 3.1, Ewing/Payton 2.9
1997: Pippen 6.4, Ewing 5.7, Malone 5.2, Shaq 4.9, Payton 4.5, Penny/Hakeem 4.0, Hill 3.5, Barkley 2.9, Miller 1.8, Robinson 1.6
1998: Shaq 7.8, Malone 5.5, Hill 5.3, Miller 5.1, Pippen/Payton 4.7, Robinson/Ewing 4.6, Barkley 3.6, Hakeem 3.4, Penny 1.9

This is why you never see "Pippen detractors" present any info for Pippen in the context of his peers. They know he will come out looking good so conceal the info.

It is always Pippen presented in a vacuum so scrutiny can be applied selectively to him. If you do it across the board, he comes out looking better--like the deception about his 94' playoff scoring/efficiency without reference to Robinson, Ewing, and Shaq's numbers in the same playoff run because they know Robinson, Shaq shrunk in the playoffs--losing 10 PPG and 8 PPG respectively--and Ewing's overall numbers aren't ground because he melted down in the finals. Yet they harp on Pippen who actually scored more in the playoffs than in the regular season.

[Reggie43]

Can you guys explain to me how a 34 year old Dominique Wilkins having suffered a ruptured achilles a few years back could get traded for a 23.7ppg 7.4rbs 4.2ast 1.3spg 1.4bpg Allstar ('94 Manning) While Pippen at 33 years old coming off six championship rings with the bulls gets traded for Roy freaking Rogers?

[Roundball_Rock]

Here is how the three players fared in CORP (a measure of how much a player increases a random team's odds of winning a championship) over the 90's:

Miller: 8%, 9%, 8%, 9%, 10%, 10%, 8%, 8%, 8%, 8%
Pippen: 9%, 12%, 12%, 11%, 13%, 14%, 13%, 12%, 7%, 7%
Ewing: 16%, 14%, 12%, 11%, 10%, 8%, 7%, 8%, 4%, 4%

So a similar story. Miller lags behind the others when all are in their primes. When they decline due to injuries and aging Miller maintains and surpasses them by 99'. Ewing is ahead of Pippen in 90', 91'; they are equal in 92', 93' and Pippen is ahead of from from 1994-1999.

For reference, those percentages mean:

GOAT Season (30 percent or more chance of a title on a random team, or about +7 points per game on an average team)
All-Time Season (23-30 percent or +6)
MVP Season (17-23 percent or +5)
Weak MVP Season (12-17 percent or +4)
All-NBA Season (8-12 percent or +2.5)
All-Star Season (5-8 percent or +1)
Strong Role Player (3-5 percent or 0)
Role Player (1-3 percent or -2 to -0.5)

[Reggie43]

A player known for the Migraine game, sitting out the last seconds of a playoff game, getting bullied mentally and physically by opponents, incessant trade demands because of a contract he himself signed, sabotaging his teams chances by having his surgery at the start of the season etc.

How does all this factor in improving a random teams chances of winning the championship?

Random advanced stats wont factor in the intangibles that a player brought to the table. That is the reason you see a player coming off six rings get traded for Roy freaking Rogers :roll:

[Bawkish]

Roundball is a statman, but dumb as rocks in true basketball conversations

[Overdrive]

Can you guys explain to me how a 34 year old Dominique Wilkins having suffered a ruptured achilles a few years back could get traded for a 23.7ppg 7.4rbs 4.2ast 1.3spg 1.4bpg Allstar ('94 Manning) While Pippen at 33 years old coming off six championship rings with the bulls gets traded for Roy freaking Rogers?

Why was a reigning league MVP traded for 4 draft picks and a trade exception?

[Reggie43]

Why was a reigning league MVP traded for 4 draft picks and a trade exception?

Still 4 picks better than what the Bulls got

[Roundball_Rock]

Why was a reigning league MVP traded for 4 draft picks and a trade exception?

It is more bad faith. The "trade" (de facto signed with Houston but Chicago did a sign and trade to give him an extra $20 million going away gift. In other words, since the decision was already made there was no "trade" value since Houston had no need to give anything up for a player that was coming anyway. Chicago did him a favor because Pippen brought them multiple rings, unlike others mentioned in this thread) was explained already. It is clear Reggie43 didn't watch back then but this was pointed out earlier, he still continues the TP. :oldlol:

When the real trade proposals Pippen was involved in were raised in another thread we heard silence (especially the one involving Kemp, which showed the GM's of both teams and the coach's of both teams viewed Pippen as clearly superior, as did "league observers").

The Wilkins thing is interesting. He is yet another player these people say was vastly better than Pippen. His team is tied for 1st place at the break (with Chicago), he is averaging 30 PPG--and they ship him away (to purgatory--the Clippers)? That is pretty damning. Yes, he was going to be a free agent at the end of the year but so was Kawhi and so was Manning himself. If you think you can win a chip with a superstar, you keep him. They didn't think Manning was a meaningful drop-off from Nique', an ATG scorer who did little else on the court. Yet Wilkins>>>Pippen, Kemp>>>Pippen when both their teams tell you they value them less than Pippen was valued by teams. Trade value doesn't count except for idiocy over a sign and trade of post-back injury Pippen.

Let's put a bow on the playoff scoring/efficiency TP. Here are the numbers for the top 5 in MVP voting. The change from their regular season production is in parentheses.

1994 Playoff Efficiency/Scoring Comparison of Top 5 MVP candidates

Scoring: Hakeem 29 (+2), Pippen 23 (+1) Ewing 22 (-3), Shaq 21 (-8), Robinson 20 (-10)
TS %: Hakeem 57% (=), Pippen 52% (-2%), Shaq 52% (-9%), Ewing 50% (-5%), Robinson 47% (-11%)

Yet due to the Jordanstan fun-house mirrors, Pippen is the one they are attacking on these grounds while advocating for Shaq, Ewing, Robinson over him in MVP . Not only that, Shawn Kemp. Who had another meltdown (a PF shooting 37% from the field) as his team lost to an 8 seed in an all-time choke. (Also, keep in mind Pippen was a SF and the others are all centers...)

Let's also use their fantasy "apples and oranges" are "apples and apples" and compare Robinson (a C) to Malone (a PF) in their series.

Spurs (56 wins) vs. Jazz (53 wins) 1st Round

Robinson 20/10/4 47% TS
Malone 29/12/2 56% TS

They did not face each other, but under the logic presented here by multiple Pippen haters, Robinson got destroyed by Malone as his team lost 3-1. Ewing, at best, narrowly "outplayed" Pippen. Yet an argument for Robinson over Pippen in MVP is how their play compared to the other #1 option in their final series (no mention of Pippen "vs." Price, who went 15/2/5 on 46% TS).

Then we have Ewing actually getting annihilated by Hakeem in the finals (like he did in the RS against Hakeem and Robinson), Shaq struggling to outscore Rik Smits in a first round sweep to a 47 win team.

Yet Pippen is the one they are railing at for playoff declines, playoff efficiency, and playoff scoring? :roll: The most dishonest fan base in sports.

[Reggie43]

Walls of bullshit and still no answer why he was traded for Roy freaking Rogers. Are various intangibles whether positive or negative a foreign concept to Roundball "the stats guy"