94 Pippen, Ewing or Shaq to contend with?

[insidious301]

If this isn't a discussion for "MVP", I am taking Shaq. He might have been one of the three or four best players in the league. In just his second year too.

[NBAGOAT]

i'm still taing shaq, he wasnt very good in the playoffs but idc. shaq's help gets a bit overrated because it's offensively inclined and top heavy. The defense is mediocre and the depth isnt there. Saw it with his later magic teams too.

MVP voting can be a bit off many years. Chris Paul likely will get some top 5 votes this year and he honestly doesnt not deserve it but it's narrative drivem. he's not a top 5 player and certainly not comparable to luka no matter how badly luka plays in the playoffs this year.

[Marchesk]

If this isn't a discussion for "MVP", I am taking Shaq. He might have been one of the three or four best players in the league. In just his second year too.

Pretty sure Penny would have too, if given the choice. Rodman can choose Pippen. Although it's kind of weird that he said that, given he was playing with Robinson at the time. Guess that goes to show how little respect Dennis had for the Spurs. But David was leading his team in plenty of categories as well, including assists.

[Roundball_Rock]

Chris Webber said the same thing in 94'--had no connection to Pippen or Robinson. Jordan said it as well, albeit in 95' but none of the top tier players (Pippen, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Ewing, Malone) changed materially between 94' and 95'...

Penny and Shaq didn't get along so who knows what he would say.

What's the explanation for Shaq, Penny not winning a playoff game? You have the MVP, you have Penny and they get swept by a 47 win team? Something is off in this equation. We had 20+ pages hyping Shaq as a MVP for 94' but no one provided an answer for their playoff debacle or their lack of RS dominance (50 wins--Pippen and Kukoc without Grant, Rodman, or MJ could get you around 50 ).

If this isn't a discussion for "MVP", I am taking Shaq

It's going to be a near sweep for Shaq in 2020, knowing what we know about Shaq after 1994. What would be interesting is if this question was posed in 1994 (and included Hakeem, Robinson).

[tpols]

Whats the explanation for Reggie hanging 29 ppg on 55% shooting to Shaq's 20 ppg.

"Low volume" am I right Rock, or am I right?

[insidious301]

It's going to be a near sweep for Shaq in 2020, knowing what we know about Shaq after 1994. What would be interesting is if this question was posed in 1994 (and included Hakeem, Robinson).

Who do you think was better than Shaq in 1994? We can go by what people "thought at the time", but what did you think? I watched a little bit of that season and remember Shaq being a phenom. Looking at his numbers now, you could definitely make the case for 3 or 4. Easily.

[NBAGOAT]

Chris Webber said the same thing in 94'--had no connection to Pippen or Robinson. Jordan said it as well, albeit in 95' but none of the top tier players (Pippen, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Ewing, Malone) changed materially between 94' and 95'...

Penny and Shaq didn't get along so who knows what he would say.

What's the explanation for Shaq, Penny not winning a playoff game? You have the MVP, you have Penny and they get swept by a 47 win team? Something is off in this equation. We had 20+ pages hyping Shaq as a MVP for 94' but no one provided an answer for their playoff debacle or their lack of RS dominance (50 wins--Pippen and Kukoc without Grant, Rodman, or MJ could get you around 50 ).



It's going to be a near sweep for Shaq in 2020, knowing what we know about Shaq after 1994. What would be interesting is if this question was posed in 1994 (and included Hakeem, Robinson).

if hakeem and drob come up, i'll certainly take them over shaq. that 47 win team also made the conference finals(one game away from the finals) and penny was a great rookie but not even an all star yet

[3ball]

The Knicks and the Bulls both had 2 all stars that year outside Pippen and Ewing. That's as apples to apples a square off as you'll ever see in the 2nd round. And Ewing's team was 1 rookie toni kukoc shot away from being up 3-0 on Pippen's squad. And of course ultimately won with Ewing outplaying Scottie in every way. So we saw how that plays out in real life... dont even need a hypothetical.

Then Shaq vs Ewing... Shaq got swept out the playoffs that year averaging 10 ppg less than he did in the regular season. Reggie went nuts... 29 ppg on 55% shooting. While Ewing led a team that went 4 rounds deep and was a single shot away from a championship.

So Pat Ewing it is.

This

and the 94' Bulls had a brand advantage on the entire league, along with 3-peat swagger and know-how - aka they had everything going for them

Yet Ewing outplayed Pippen convincingly and won with a worse, uglier brand of ball.. and Pippen had a bad foul in the clutch that infact lost the series - this was worse than his sit-out game because Kukoc couldn't save the day this time. Then he was horrible in Game 7 - so that's 3 chokes in 1 series.. No wonder the Bulls always gave it to MJ in the clutch.. even Phil preferred Kukoc - that's how bad Pippen was in the clutch- there's no better evidence - simply the worst clutch player ever.. jittery and can't shoot

Btw, in the 90"s, this would never even be a question - NO ONE thought Pippen compared to Shaq or Ewing.. no one.. in b4 dumb quotes via Round Rock from people who didn't think Pippen was anywhere bear Ewing or Shaq

[Roundball_Rock]

if hakeem and drob come up, i'll certainly take them over shaq. that 47 win team also made the conference finals(one game away from the finals) and penny was a great rookie but not even an all star yet

I get the explanation for losing the series but 1) not winning a game 2) 50-32 (if they had a high seed they wouldn't draw the Pacers in the first place)? You have the MVP, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Skiles and 50-32 and 0-3 in the playoffs with the MVP on the team? Atlanta won 2 games against the Pacers and their best player by the PO was Danny Manning.

The Pacers getting to the ECF was a bit of a fluke. The two best EC teams were in the other bracket, Orlando wet the bed despite Shaq being the MVP, and Atlanta (the 1 seed) screwed themselves by trading their best player at the all-star break and weren't the same team thereafter. How many 47 win teams get to the ECF/WCF?

[NBAGOAT]

I get the explanation for losing the series but 1) not winning a game 2) 50-32 (if they had a high seed they wouldn't draw the Pacers in the first place)? You have the MVP, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Skiles and 50-32 and 0-3 in the playoffs with the MVP on the team? Atlanta won 2 games against the Pacers and their best player by the PO was Danny Manning.

The Pacers getting to the ECF was a bit of a fluke. The two best EC teams were in the other bracket, Orlando wet the bed despite Shaq being the MVP, and Atlanta (the 1 seed) screwed themselves by trading their best player at the all-star break and weren't the same team thereafter. How many 47 win teams get to the ECF/WCF?

atlanta still went 19-7 with manning, they were a good team still. and in a 3 game series, shit happens though yes Magic still lose in a longer series. i'm not going make big changes to a list over that. No not many 47 win teams make the finals but indiana was not a typical one(their mov more indicative of a 51 win team) and we saw that in the playoffs..

[Marchesk]

We can all admit Pippen was a top 5 player in 94 and deserving of being in the MVP chase, but in the absence of Jordan, there were no great teams. The Sonics were the only 60+ win team, and they get upset in the first round. Kemp was their leading scorer at 18 ppg. The Bulls were one of eight to ten good teams that year all with a shot, if things went right in the playoffs. If the Sonics get past the Nuggets, maybe Houston doesn't make it to the finals.

[tpols]

This

and the 94' Bulls had a brand advantage on the entire league, along with 3-peat swagger and know-how - aka they had everything going for them

Yet Ewing outplayed Pippen convincingly and won with a worse, uglier brand of ball.. and Pippen had a bad foul in the clutch that infact lost the series - this was worse than his sit-out game because Kukoc couldn't save the day this time. Then he was horrible in Game 7 - so that's 3 chokes in 1 series.. No wonder the Bulls always gave it to MJ in the clutch.. even Phil preferred Kukoc - that's how bad Pippen was in the clutch- there's no better evidence - simply the worst clutch player ever.. jittery and can't shoot

Btw, in the 90"s, this would never even be a question - NO ONE thought Pippen compared to Shaq or Ewing.. no one.. in b4 dumb quotes via Round Rock from people who didn't think Pippen was anywhere bear Ewing or Shaq

It is especially damning that Phil let a rookie take the season deciding shot over Pippen... in the end.. it's because he knew Scottie couldn't close, and they would've lost that game and the series in short fashion had he decided to let Pippen take it.

A ****ing rookie.

Damn man... I can see why Pippen was pissed, he was trying to shed that factual label.

[3ball]

Why did Miller always outplay Pippen against common opponents?... aka 94' Knicks, 95' Magic, 00' Lakers, and more

Miller was a 1st option who destroyed the Knicks and outplayed 00' Kobe, while Pippen was a true 2nd option that was destroyed by 99' Kobe.

Pippen doesn't stack up against Miller, which is why NO ONE considered Pippen anywhere near Ewing or Shaq

If the Knicks had offered Krause Ewing for Pippen, Krause would've instantly said yes.. no brainer, especially before Pippen had won many rings.. he's vastly inflated historically because of ring count, which 2nd options shouldn't get as much credit for

[Roundball_Rock]

Atlanta was 34-13 before the trade, 23-12 after the trade. There is a clear drop-off. Danny Manning isn't Dominique Wilkins.

and in a 3 game series, shit happens though yes Magic still lose in a longer series. i'm not going make big changes to a list over that.

The argument we have heard about Shaq connected to 1994 (which led to the OP) is he was arguably the MVP. If you are the MVP, if you are the best or second best player, if you have a great supporting cast and the results are 50-32 and 0-3 in the PO--something doesn't add up...

The answer is obvious: intangibles, leadership matter. Shaq slipped from 29 PPG to 21 PPG in the PO. MVP, doe?

No not many 47 win teams make the finals but indiana was not a typical one(their mov more indicative of a 51 win team) and we saw that in the playoffs..

True but it was 52 the next year, 50 the year after (then 44 before 59 four years later). They weren't a dominant team--they benefited from some bracket luck and Orlando wetting its pants.

[Marchesk]

Atlanta was 34-13 before the trade, 23-12 after the trade. There is a clear drop-off. Danny Manning isn't Dominique Wilkins.

I remember thinking out of KU Danny could be that good. But then the Clippers had to draft him.