Scottie Pippen vs. Larry Bird rebounding%

[Overdrive]

Again. Read the entire post. Digest it then respond. My point about the Bulls using a center by commitee was to show the starters be it Cartwright in the beginning or Longley who took his place, only played roughly 23 minutes a game as opposed to Parrish who played roughly 38-39. The per 36 min stat bring their rebounding numbers more in line with each other. Or in line with Mchale.

I get what you're trying to say, but you have to decide on your point. You said Pippen's TRB% are lower, but his team's starting lineup had the better rebounders. Now that it's shown that the Celtics were the better rebounders, you try to use another stat(reb/36), which makes your "TRB% is lower, because of better rebounding starting lineup completly" premise invalid. It's either one or the other, and both don't help as a single point. You can't put a fictional stat(per 36) in relation to a, as you put it, cold number just to win an argument.

Pippen was a good rebounder, but he simply wasn't on Bird's level, that doesn't make him a lesser player than he was.

[Smoke117]

97 Bulls who gives a shit? Scottie Pippen is my favorite player of all time and when I saw this thread pop up I was just like...oh god...why? Why are you making this pointless thread? I can't believe that anyone really gives a **** about any of this.

[97 bulls]

97 Bulls who gives a shit? Scottie Pippen is my favorite player of all time and when I saw this thread pop up I was just like...oh god...why? Why are you making this pointless thread? I can't believe that anyone really gives a **** about any of this.

I made this thread in reply to 1987 Lakers post about hoe Bird was a better rebounder than Pippen based on their respective rebound percentages. I didnt start this. I just finished it. Did you read the thread?

[97 bulls]

I get what you're trying to say, but you have to decide on your point. You said Pippen's TRB% are lower, but his team's starting lineup had the better rebounders. Now that it's shown that the Celtics were the better rebounders, you try to use another stat(reb/36), which makes your "TRB% is lower, because of better rebounding starting lineup completly" premise invalid. It's either one or the other, and both don't help as a single point. You can't put a fictional stat(per 36) in relation to a, as you put it, cold number just to win an argument.

Pippen was a good rebounder, but he simply wasn't on Bird's level, that doesn't make him a lesser player than he was.

Where does it show that theyre better rebounders? The problem is im having a conversation with four different people about 10 different things. Its aggravatig because youll (just an example) will have pluck an excerpt of a post and wonder why Im posting in a certain way. When im just responding to someone else and you came in in the middle of it. If youd read the original post, I tried to brief everyone on why I made this thread. So before anyone posts theyd have an idea as to whats going on. And sure enough people are still comming in here making recklaees assumptions

[Kellogs4toniee]

I made this thread in reply to 1987 Lakers post about hoe Bird was a better rebounder than Pippen based on their respective rebound percentages. I didnt start this. I just finished it. Did you read the thread?

You didn't finish jack you idiot.

I'm not sure whether your a troll or in some kind of twisted mental state where the powers of analysis and comprehension is totally off mark, but the only thing you finished in this thread is make yourself look like an idiot and have pretty much the entire thread continue to disagree with you. Have you ever considered that maybe your wrong? Standardized testing must have been rough on you.

My goodness it's freaking embarrassing to read. Ashamed to see the Bulls word in your name.

[97 bulls]

You didn't finish jack you idiot.

I'm not sure whether your a troll or in some kind of twisted mental state where the powers of analysis and comprehension is totally off mark, but the only thing you finished in this thread is make yourself look like an idiot and have pretty much the entire thread continue to disagree with you. Have you ever considered that maybe your wrong? Standardized testing must have been rough on you.

My goodness it's freaking embarrassing to read. Ashamed to see the Bulls word in your name.

Show me where im wrong. If I post the info backed up wiith facts, how do you arrive at this conclusion? Perhaps if youd stop acting like a sensitive female and read youd understand my point. This was a challenge made to me by another poster based on rebound%. Plain and simple. Youre attacking the wrong person.

[1987_Lakers]

You didn't finish jack you idiot.

I'm not sure whether your a troll or in some kind of twisted mental state where the powers of analysis and comprehension is totally off mark, but the only thing you finished in this thread is make yourself look like an idiot and have pretty much the entire thread continue to disagree with you. Have you ever considered that maybe your wrong? Standardized testing must have been rough on you.

My goodness it's freaking embarrassing to read. Ashamed to see the Bulls word in your name.

[97 bulls]

This is all your fault 87 lol