Chicago Bullseye 114 - Talk amongst yourselves

[Fred]

houheffna wrote:

Kobe won nothing without Derrick Fisher....nothing.

Obviously, Pippen was a great player. But are you really going to argue that if Scottie Pippen never existed, Michael Jordan would have zero titles? Somewhere along the line, even a jerk as incompetant as Krause would have been able to surround him with the talent to win at least one.

You bring up 1998? Seriously? That is reaching...Pippen was an MVP caliber player in his prime...I am sorry you missed that part of his career. He was arguably the greatest perimeter defender in league history. I know you don't care much for perimeter defense, which explains your love for Gordon, but it is very important, and THE reason those Bulls teams were so great.

I am arguing that Pippen was an integral part of those championship teams. Your comparing him to Fisher is laughable. Good luck with that.

I am using facts, you are using a Ouija board...lol Jordan won nothing without another great player beside him. Nothing. Where did he go without Pippen? Did he even get out of the first round? No...matter of fact, over the course of their careers, Pippen came closer without Jordan to a title than Jordan ever did without Pippen. Pippen would win 55 games without Jordan, 2 games less than the previous year with Jordan in his prime. Just a fact...you are saying that without Pippen, Jordan would have won 1, with Pippen, Jordan had a dynasty! What is the argument?

NO one player can make a dynasty by himself. It just doesn't happen.

Actually, Pippen didn't play half the season in 98. In the playoffs, he shot 41% from the field, 22% from the 3-point line, and 67% from the free throw line. And in the deciding game that Michael won with the famous shot against Utah, Scottie played less than about 25 minutes and scored all of 8 points. So I think you can make an argument that MJ did win a title without Scottie. Maybe you should re-watch Jordan scoring 63 on the eventual world champion 1986 Celtics...and notice the pile of crap playing around him, but still giving that team all that it could handle.. "I didn't think anyone was capable of doing what Michael has done to us," marveled Celtics ace Larry Bird. "He is the most exciting, awesome player in the game today. I think it's just God disguised as Michael Jordan."

I watched part of that game that he scored 63 points in. I believe they lost that game...and were swept out of the playoffs.

Jordan didn't win until Pippen became a great player, and a team leader. Point blank. We can throw out all kinds of wild scenarios about whether Jordan could have won or not...evidence showed that he needed another great player to win...and having a great coach didn't hurt either. Those components were there thanks to Jerry Krause, nothing anybody says can change that. And based on his contributions to the team, Krause deserves a banner for it.

You need to say this 1000 times until you start believeing it: Interior defense is far more important than perimeter defense. Ask any coach above the high school level and they will tell you they would rather have the best defensive center than the best defensive guard. Great perimter defenders are always suceptable to a well set pick. It's up to the PF or C to stop it, players far harder to pick. It's been proven over and over, most recently by the Celtics. Pierce and Allen were regarded as terrible defenders their entire careers. Garnett shows up, arguably the best interior defender in basketball, and suddenly, the Celtics are good defensively. The 2009 Eastern Conference champion Magic had some of the worst perimeter defenders in the history of the league, starting with Hedo Turgosuck. Lee and Pietrus were their only 2 above average perimeter defenders, and none averaged more than 26 mpg. But they had Howard to clean up the mess, an awesome interior defender.

Every champion in the modern era had a good interior defender, including the Bulls. (Grant/Cartwright - Rodman) The Bulls are unique in that they had the 2 best perimeter defenders of all time in Jordan and Pippen (that will never happen again), which helped tremendously because they didn't have a dominant defensive center. But the vast majority of champions (Shaq, Gasol/Bynum, Hakeem, Jabbar, The Pistons buzzsaw front line of the 80's, Parish)...most of these teams made you fear the paint.

I found it interesting that almost every interview I heard with an opposing head coach about the Lakers this year highlighted how long they were in the front court first in what makes them so difficult to play. The 7 footers on the front line, in Gasol and Bynum (sometimes Odom) really shut down the paint as an option.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

If Boozer had opted out last year, Dumars would have made him an offer but he signed one of the best fas in BG that summer. I still don't think that was a bad signing, he was doing very well before he got injured. There really weren't many other options available and he didn't want to start a full rebuild. I know you don't like BG but he is a good piece to have.

He overpaid for him...that is the point, he could have gotten him for 10-15mil less over the course of the contract. And people on here were saying he was the best fa available. Over Odom, Hedo, Ariza, Artest...people said he was the top dog. He wasn't, and he shouldn't have gotten that much money. Dumars bid against himself...and still lost...

You always overpay to get a guy in FA. Don't you think Ben Wallace was overpaid? Most better fas get overpaid.

 

[houheffna]

You need to say this 1000 times until you start believeing it: Interior defense is far more important than perimeter defense. Ask any coach above the high school level and they will tell you they would rather have the best defensive center than the best defensive guard. Great perimter defenders are always suceptable to a well set pick. It's up to the PF or C to stop it, players far harder to pick. It's been proven over and over, most recently by the Celtics. Pierce and Allen were regarded as terrible defenders their entire careers.

Pippen could guard 4 positions...he was probably the best defender ever covering 94 feet. No wing player I have seen had that much versatility.

That said, you need to say this 1000 times until you start realizing it: Cartwright, Grant, Rodman, Oakley...all were drafted or traded for under Krause! Jordan didn't make Cartwright a good post defender, nor did he make Grant a good post defender...

The Bulls won because of Pippen, Jordan and Harper being beasts defensively. The first time around was Pippen, Jordan and Grant. Cartwright played a major role against opposing centers, giving Ewing and Olajuwon a hard time. Rodman was erratic after his first season here defensively. And lets not act as if Longley was so great at it. Steve Kerr just recently talked about how Pippen and Jordan were so good at help defense that Van Gundy told him that when he was with the Knicks, that was the Knicks top priority, how to score on the Bulls. That defense revolved around their perimeter players.

And your emphasis on post defense is a matter of opinion, I have heard some say the total opposite.

 

[houheffna]

You always overpay to get a guy in FA. Don't you think Ben Wallace was overpaid? Most better fas get overpaid.

And like the Bulls, the Pistons regret overpaying...

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

You always overpay to get a guy in FA. Don't you think Ben Wallace was overpaid? Most better fas get overpaid.

And like the Bulls, the Pistons regret overpaying...

I don't think they do. Before his injury, he was worth his money. I think without Rip, he will put up good numbers for them.

 

[Fred]

houheffna wrote:

You need to say this 1000 times until you start believeing it: Interior defense is far more important than perimeter defense. Ask any coach above the high school level and they will tell you they would rather have the best defensive center than the best defensive guard. Great perimter defenders are always suceptable to a well set pick. It's up to the PF or C to stop it, players far harder to pick. It's been proven over and over, most recently by the Celtics. Pierce and Allen were regarded as terrible defenders their entire careers.

Pippen could guard 4 positions...he was probably the best defender ever covering 94 feet. No wing player I have seen had that much versatility.

That said, you need to say this 1000 times until you start realizing it: Cartwright, Grant, Rodman, Oakley...all were drafted or traded for under Krause! Jordan didn't make Cartwright a good post defender, nor did he make Grant a good post defender...

The Bulls won because of Pippen, Jordan and Harper being beasts defensively. The first time around was Pippen, Jordan and Grant. Cartwright played a major role against opposing centers, giving Ewing and Olajuwon a hard time. Rodman was erratic after his first season here defensively. And lets not act as if Longley was so great at it. Steve Kerr just recently talked about how Pippen and Jordan were so good at help defense that Van Gundy told him that when he was with the Knicks, that was the Knicks top priority, how to score on the Bulls. That defense revolved around their perimeter players.

And your emphasis on post defense is a matter of opinion, I have heard some say the total opposite.

Agree with your comments on Pippen. He was probably the best ever defensively as a perimeter defender.

Krause deserves no credit for Rodman. That only worked because of Jordan. Rodman had just finished destroying the Spurs. Of course you trade Will Perdue for Rodman if you have Jordan there to keep him in line. You can hear Kerr talk about this on Bill Simmons' last podcast. Rodman doesn't work without MJ. Krause made the trade that any moron would.

Horace Grant was a Doug Collins pick. The entire coaching staff wanted Grant. Krause wanted Joe Wolf. This was one year removed from the entire coaching staff wanting Dawkins, and Krause took Brad freaking Sellers. Because of his horrible mistake the year before, Collins went to Reinsdorf, and Reinsdorf went to Krause. Only Reinsdorf could make Krause change his mind. If it wasn't for Collins, we would have Joe Wolf. Oakley was a good pick that he traded away for Cartwright. I believe it's debatable whether or not that was a great move, because Oakley was a better asset against the Pistons, who kept us from several more championships.

Harper was not a beast defensively by the time he played with the Bulls. He was absolutely terrible for us until Michael decided to come back. It's an insult to put Ron Harper in the same sentence with Pippen and MJ.

I'd like to see the person who said perimeter defense is more important than interior defense. Someone that actually played or coached basketball. I want to see that quote. People forget, the 95 Bulls lost to Orlando with Pippen and Michael. True, MJ wasn't in top form, but minus Grant, they had no one to control the paint. You add Rodman, and suddenly we win 72. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Ben Gordon, who you like to call a horrible defensive perimeter player, was our starting 2 on the #1 defense in 06-07. We were number 1 because Wallace cared that year and Made All NBA defensively. There are so many examples that I don't have time to go into it. I want you to point out a champion without a solid defensive 4 or 5?

 

[clonetrooper264]

Just as a quick aside here, I just thought I'd say that perimeter defense and interior defense are both important. Interior defense has an edge imo because you don't want guards like Rondo waltzing into the lane for layups. But perimeter defense is good to have too. This way Ray Allen has to work for all his 3s. A really good team has good defenders on both the inside and outside (Bulls had MJ/Pippen and Rodman or Grant/maybe Cartwright, Lakers have Bynum/Gasol and Kobe/Artest and used to have Shaq and Kobe/Payton (though washed up as he was), Celtics have Garnett and Rondo, Spurs had Duncan/Robinson and Bowen, and the list goes on).

 

[houheffna]

Krause deserves no credit for Rodman. That only worked because of Jordan. Rodman had just finished destroying the Spurs. Of course you trade Will Perdue for Rodman if you have Jordan there to keep him in line. You can hear Kerr talk about this on Bill Simmons' last podcast. Rodman doesn't work without MJ. Krause made the trade that any moron would.

Kerr didn't say that Krause doesn't deserve credit for bringing Rodman to Chicago. Krause brought Kerr to Chicago...

Krause drafting Grant incurred the wrath of Jordan. He was relentless. Krause would eventually trade Oakley for Cartwright and Jordan knew early that Grant was there to replace Oakley eventually. Jordan would later admit that the trade was a good move and important to the Bulls winning titles. By the way, Reinsdorf convinced Krause, he didn't force him. If Krause had drafted Wolf, Reinsdorf would have stood by Krause's decisions. By the way...where did you get that info from? I think I know from who. Selective sourcing to the hilt. You can accept the Collins/Grant explanation, but not accept that Jordan broke up the dynasty...twice??? Though the same man stated both situations to be true? Just sayin...

 

[Kush77]

Fred wrote:
Actually, Pippen didn't play half the season in 98. In the playoffs, he shot 41% from the field, 22% from the 3-point line, and 67% from the free throw line. And in the deciding game that Michael won with the famous shot against Utah, Scottie played less than about 25 minutes and scored all of 8 points. So I think you can make an argument that MJ did win a title without Scottie. [/quote]

Uh oh Fred. When you get a little over the top with your Pip bashing, I gotta step in. lol

You can't make the argument that MJ won without Scottie because he carried the team in 1998 Game 6. Had the Bulls closed out Utah in game 5 Pippen would have been the Finals MVP for his amazing defense in that series, plus solid offensive performances. But he, and Jordan, shot poorly in Game 5. Kukoc almost saved them in that game. Then Pip had the back problem in Game 6 and MJ carried them, so you couldn't deny Jordan the MVP at that point obviously.

Going by that logic Fred, we can say the same thing about 1993. It's amazing how similar the 1993 and 1998 Finals were.

But in Game 6 vs. PHX the Bulls only scored 12 points in the 4th. Up until Pax's 3 Jordan had all of the Bulls' 9 fourth-quarter points. Did MJ win that title on his own?

Lay off my man Pip Fred. And didn't Pip play half the season in 98? He came back on Jan 11th I think. 1 month before the AS break, would that be at least 41 games? I'll have to look it up.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Pippen played 44 games in that 98 season. Just over half. Carry on.

 

[Kush77]

houheffna wrote:
[Jordan won nothing without another great player beside him. Nothing. Where did he go without Pippen? Did he even get out of the first round? No...matter of fact, over the course of their careers, Pippen came closer without Jordan to a title than Jordan ever did without Pippen. Pippen would win 55 games without Jordan, 2 games less than the previous year with Jordan in his prime. Just a fact...you are saying that without Pippen, Jordan would have won 1, with Pippen, Jordan had a dynasty! What is the argument?

NO one player can make a dynasty by himself. It just doesn't happen. [/quote]

Had Scottie never came around Jordan would have won titles still. Of course it would have been with another great player because no one wins without another great player. Unless it was the 2004 Pistons who just had 5 all-star, borderline all-star players.

I love Pip, but saying he got closer to a title without MJ than vice/versa is kinda silly. While the statement at face-value is true, we need to dig deeper.

Jordan never played in his prime without Pippen. Pippen did play in his prime without Jordan. And in his mid-30s with Hou/Portland.
the only example we have of Jordan playing without Pip are 3 years of mid-80s Bulls teams and the Wizards years. the Wiz were not a good team and neither were those Bulls teams.

The year Pip got further, I believe Hou is talking about 2000 with Portland, Pip was 34 y/o. Put a 34 y/o MJ on that Portland team and they win the NBA title no question. Hell, they win the title if MJ came out of retirement and played with Portland at the age of 37.

 

[houheffna]

Had Scottie never came around Jordan would have won titles still. Of course it would have been with another great player because no one wins without another great player. Unless it was the 2004 Pistons who just had 5 all-star, borderline all-star players.

I love Pip, but saying he got closer to a title without MJ than vice/versa is kinda silly. While the statement at face-value is true, we need to dig deeper.

Jordan never played in his prime without Pippen. Pippen did play in his prime without Jordan. And in his mid-30s with Hou/Portland.
the only example we have of Jordan playing without Pip are 3 years of mid-80s Bulls teams and the Wizards years. the Wiz were not a good team and neither were those Bulls teams.

The year Pip got further, I believe Hou is talking about 2000 with Portland, Pip was 34 y/o. Put a 34 y/o MJ on that Portland team and they win the NBA title no question. Hell, they win the title if MJ came out of retirement and played with Portland at the age of 37.

Yeah, Jordan would have won titles, because he would have gone in his backyard and picked a great player off of his great player tree...lol

Doesn't work that way. How could you say that so matter of fact when Lebron just walked away from a team, with no great player, and no titles? I know Krause pissed on your cornflakes Kush but lets give the man some credit here. You, again, are talking supposition, I am talking fact. The fact is, he didn't win nor did he come close to winning a title without Pippen. Jordan was the league MVP in 1988. That year, he didn't get past the second round if I am not mistaken. So its not as if he wasn't a great player already. He couldn't do it alone.

On the other hand, its good to see that you had faith in Krause to find another great player if Pippen had never existed. But the facts are the facts. Pippen, Jackson, Tex Winter and the triangle...all were the ideas of Krause. If those were not contributions to the Bulls six titles, notary contributions, then I don't know what was...

 

[clonetrooper264]

All Pippen arguing aside, I think that since he's being inducted today, we should all take some time to appreciate the greatness that was Scottie Pippen (because he was great and he deserves it).

 

[houheffna]

All Pippen arguing aside, I think that since he's being inducted today, we should all take some time to appreciate the greatness that was Scottie Pippen (because he was great and he deserves it).

I have never denied the man his greatness. There is a good chance the Bulls don't have 6 trophies without him. He deserves respect.

 

[Fred]

houheffna wrote:

Krause deserves no credit for Rodman. That only worked because of Jordan. Rodman had just finished destroying the Spurs. Of course you trade Will Perdue for Rodman if you have Jordan there to keep him in line. You can hear Kerr talk about this on Bill Simmons' last podcast. Rodman doesn't work without MJ. Krause made the trade that any moron would.

Kerr didn't say that Krause doesn't deserve credit for bringing Rodman to Chicago. Krause brought Kerr to Chicago...

Krause drafting Grant incurred the wrath of Jordan. He was relentless. .

Here's an email directly from Sam Smith to me on this subject:

the jordan rules had the true story
jordan wasn't involved
krause wanted wolf
collins bach and jackson wanted grant
they went to reinsdorf and said they wanted grant
reinsdorf told krause to pick who he wanted but know he is the only one who wants wolf
there is no other side

Now, I have no idea what you were doing on NBA draft day 1987. But at the time, Sam Smith was the beat writer for the Bulls, covering and following the team, so I'll go with his account over yours. Krause didn't incur "Jordan's wrath" for not taking Joe Wolf. He did incur Jordan's wrath for trading Oakley, his best friend and the only guy with balls when they played the Pistons. He also incurred it for drafting a piece of crap like Brad Sellers. He also incurred it for his treatment of Phil Jackson in the summer of 97, before their final title, when Krause told Jackson, "I don't care if it's 82-and-0 this year, you're fucking gone." Apparently, Jackson's sin was not being able to fish and kiss Krause's ass. So yes, Krause did incur Jordan's wrath, and it's well deserved.

 

[Fred]

Kush77 wrote:

Fred wrote:
Actually, Pippen didn't play half the season in 98. In the playoffs, he shot 41% from the field, 22% from the 3-point line, and 67% from the free throw line. And in the deciding game that Michael won with the famous shot against Utah, Scottie played less than about 25 minutes and scored all of 8 points. So I think you can make an argument that MJ did win a title without Scottie.

Uh oh Fred. When you get a little over the top with your Pip bashing, I gotta step in. lol

You can't make the argument that MJ won without Scottie because he carried the team in 1998 Game 6. Had the Bulls closed out Utah in game 5 Pippen would have been the Finals MVP for his amazing defense in that series, plus solid offensive performances. But he, and Jordan, shot poorly in Game 5. Kukoc almost saved them in that game. Then Pip had the back problem in Game 6 and MJ carried them, so you couldn't deny Jordan the MVP at that point obviously.

Going by that logic Fred, we can say the same thing about 1993. It's amazing how similar the 1993 and 1998 Finals were.

But in Game 6 vs. PHX the Bulls only scored 12 points in the 4th. Up until Pax's 3 Jordan had all of the Bulls' 9 fourth-quarter points. Did MJ win that title on his own?

Lay off my man Pip Fred. And didn't Pip play half the season in 98? He came back on Jan 11th I think. 1 month before the AS break, would that be at least 41 games? I'll have to look it up.[/quote]


Kush, let me make something clear. I love Scottie Pippen. He's the best defensive Perimeter player I've ever seen and he is well deserving of the HOF. I'm incredibly happy for him.

But even on this day of Scottie, I can't let people rewrite the story of Jordan's greatness. I think I've seen you make this statement at least twice:
"Had the Bulls closed out Utah in game 5 Pippen would have been the Finals MVP for his amazing defense in that series, plus solid offensive performances."

There is absolutely no way in hell if Kukoc wins Game 5 for the Bulls, (which he almost did), that Scottie would have won the MVP. It's still Jordan's. Let's look a little deeper.

a. Jordan played amazing defense in that series too. Although his best play was stripping Malone in Game 6 just before the shot, he was awesome everywhere, as usual.

b.
Game 1:
Jordan line: 33 Pts, 0 Turnovers, 44.8 shooting.
Pippen line: 21 pts, 5 turnovers, 36% shooting, 1-7 from the 3-point line, including a brick that could have tied the game at the buzzer. If he hits that 3, you may have an argument.
Jordan was clearly better in Game 1.

Game 2:
Jordan line: 37 points, 0 turnovers, 3 assists, 5 boards
Pippen line: 21 points, 2 turnovers, 4 assists, 6 boards
Good game for both men, I'd give the edge to MJ.

Game 3:
Jordan: 24 points, TSS%: 63.7
Pippen: 10 points, TSS%: 47.9
Both shoot 50% from the field, but Jordan is 10-11 from the line, Pippen 0-1.
Bulls slaughter Utah. Both good, Jordan clearly better.

Game 4:
Jordan: 34 Points, 8 boards, 2 Assists, 2 steals, 44% shooting.
Pippen: 28 points, 9 boards, 5 assists, 1 steal, 50% shooting.
I'd give the edge to Pippen in this game, but barely. Monster games for both players.

So out of the first 4 games, Jordan was CLEARLY better in 2, Jordan was slightly better in 1, and Pippen was slightly better in 1. Jordan's the MVP.

Now let's go to Game 5, because your argument is that if the Bulls close out Utah in Game 5, the MVP goes to Pippen.

Game 5:
Jordan 28 points, 10-11 from the free throw line, 4 turnovers, 3 steals.
Pippen 6 points on 2-16 shooting, 4 turnovers, 3 steals
They both sucked in this game, with MJ shooting only 35%. Of course, 35% is a ton better than Pippen's 12.5%. Kukoc was awesome on this night, going 11-13 (84%) while Pippen and MJ played keep away for some reason.

But assuming Kukoc was given more opportunities and the Bulls won the game, then Jordan's the MVP. There is absolutely no doubt. Pippen wouldn't even get a vote. God love Pip, and you're right that he played great in several games of that series, but he didn't outplay MJ. No one did, no one has, and no one will.

 

[houheffna]

Here's an email directly from Sam Smith to me on this subject:

the jordan rules had the true story
jordan wasn't involved
krause wanted wolf
collins bach and jackson wanted grant
they went to reinsdorf and said they wanted grant
reinsdorf told krause to pick who he wanted but know he is the only one who wants wolf
there is no other side

Now, I have no idea what you were doing on NBA draft day 1987. But at the time, Sam Smith was the beat writer for the Bulls, covering and following the team, so I'll go with his account over yours. Krause didn't incur "Jordan's wrath" for not taking Joe Wolf. He did incur Jordan's wrath for trading Oakley, his best friend and the only guy with balls when they played the Pistons. He also incurred it for drafting a piece of crap like Brad Sellers. He also incurred it for his treatment of Phil Jackson in the summer of 97, before their final title, when Krause told Jackson, "I don't care if it's 82-and-0 this year, you're fucking gone." Apparently, Jackson's sin was not being able to fish and kiss Krause's ass. So yes, Krause did incur Jordan's wrath, and it's well deserved.

Right, and Sam Smith also wrote an article stating that Jordan broke up the dynasty, not Krause. I have posted that article several times, and you claim it has no validity.

Based on your email..."reinsdorf told krause to pick who he wanted but know he is the only one who wants wolf"

Who picked Grant? Krause did. Paxson didn't pick Aldridge because Skiles didn't like him. Nobody blames Skiles for Paxsnn not picking him. At the end of the day, if Grant falls on his ass, you put him on the list of Krause's busts like everybody else.

Michael Jordan called Horace Grant "Dummy". Why is that? My point was Krause made the right move in drafting Grant and the right subsequent moves in trading Oakley. That is how the championship team was made.

From your email, Krause made a choice...it was the right choice. Jordan wasn't angry with Collins or Jackson for supporting the choice. He was angry at Krause, and Grant.

Jordan acted in a childish fashion as did Krause. A lot of it can't be explained as anything other than ego. I don't think Krause is an all time great GM, he was very successful. And played a key part in those championships.

 

[Kush77]

houheffna wrote:

Had Scottie never came around Jordan would have won titles still. Of course it would have been with another great player because no one wins without another great player. Unless it was the 2004 Pistons who just had 5 all-star, borderline all-star players.

I love Pip, but saying he got closer to a title without MJ than vice/versa is kinda silly. While the statement at face-value is true, we need to dig deeper.

Jordan never played in his prime without Pippen. Pippen did play in his prime without Jordan. And in his mid-30s with Hou/Portland.
the only example we have of Jordan playing without Pip are 3 years of mid-80s Bulls teams and the Wizards years. the Wiz were not a good team and neither were those Bulls teams.

The year Pip got further, I believe Hou is talking about 2000 with Portland, Pip was 34 y/o. Put a 34 y/o MJ on that Portland team and they win the NBA title no question. Hell, they win the title if MJ came out of retirement and played with Portland at the age of 37.

Yeah, Jordan would have won titles, because he would have gone in his backyard and picked a great player off of his great player tree...lol

Doesn't work that way. How could you say that so matter of fact when Lebron just walked away from a team, with no great player, and no titles? I know Krause pissed on your cornflakes Kush but lets give the man some credit here. You, again, are talking supposition, I am talking fact. The fact is, he didn't win nor did he come close to winning a title without Pippen. Jordan was the league MVP in 1988. That year, he didn't get past the second round if I am not mistaken. So its not as if he wasn't a great player already. He couldn't do it alone.

On the other hand, its good to see that you had faith in Krause to find another great player if Pippen had never existed. But the facts are the facts. Pippen, Jackson, Tex Winter and the triangle...all were the ideas of Krause. If those were not contributions to the Bulls six titles, notary contributions, then I don't know what was...

You say Pippen made it further than Jordan because of what he did with Portland in 2000. If Jordan was on that team the Blazers win the title, bottom line.

So to say Pip made it further as some sort of shot at Jordan is silly. Simple as that.

 

[Kush77]

clonetrooper264 wrote:

All Pippen arguing aside, I think that since he's being inducted today, we should all take some time to appreciate the greatness that was Scottie Pippen (because he was great and he deserves it).

Scottie Pippen was great.

But not according to Dip Bayless. Just listened to him and Jemele Hill talk about Pip on ESPN.com in a video. Man, Dip is clueless as ever.

Dip basically said because Scottie only averaged 14 ppg in Houston that he was a creation of Michael Jordan. LOL.

It cracks me up. when good players take less shots, they score less points. Pretty simple concept that people don't seem to understand. Scottie went to Houston, took less shots and played in an offense that was the worst possible one for him to be in. One dominated by two post players.

Can't wait for Scottie to go in the Hall. I wonder if everyone will overreact if Jordan says something that offends them lol.

 

[Kush77]

Fred wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Fred wrote:
Actually, Pippen didn't play half the season in 98. In the playoffs, he shot 41% from the field, 22% from the 3-point line, and 67% from the free throw line. And in the deciding game that Michael won with the famous shot against Utah, Scottie played less than about 25 minutes and scored all of 8 points. So I think you can make an argument that MJ did win a title without Scottie.

Uh oh Fred. When you get a little over the top with your Pip bashing, I gotta step in. lol

You can't make the argument that MJ won without Scottie because he carried the team in 1998 Game 6. Had the Bulls closed out Utah in game 5 Pippen would have been the Finals MVP for his amazing defense in that series, plus solid offensive performances. But he, and Jordan, shot poorly in Game 5. Kukoc almost saved them in that game. Then Pip had the back problem in Game 6 and MJ carried them, so you couldn't deny Jordan the MVP at that point obviously.

Going by that logic Fred, we can say the same thing about 1993. It's amazing how similar the 1993 and 1998 Finals were.

But in Game 6 vs. PHX the Bulls only scored 12 points in the 4th. Up until Pax's 3 Jordan had all of the Bulls' 9 fourth-quarter points. Did MJ win that title on his own?

Lay off my man Pip Fred. And didn't Pip play half the season in 98? He came back on Jan 11th I think. 1 month before the AS break, would that be at least 41 games? I'll have to look it up.

Kush, let me make something clear. I love Scottie Pippen. He's the best defensive Perimeter player I've ever seen and he is well deserving of the HOF. I'm incredibly happy for him.

But even on this day of Scottie, I can't let people rewrite the story of Jordan's greatness. I think I've seen you make this statement at least twice:
"Had the Bulls closed out Utah in game 5 Pippen would have been the Finals MVP for his amazing defense in that series, plus solid offensive performances."

There is absolutely no way in hell if Kukoc wins Game 5 for the Bulls, (which he almost did), that Scottie would have won the MVP. It's still Jordan's. Let's look a little deeper.

a. Jordan played amazing defense in that series too. Although his best play was stripping Malone in Game 6 just before the shot, he was awesome everywhere, as usual.

b.
Game 1:
Jordan line: 33 Pts, 0 Turnovers, 44.8 shooting.
Pippen line: 21 pts, 5 turnovers, 36% shooting, 1-7 from the 3-point line, including a brick that could have tied the game at the buzzer. If he hits that 3, you may have an argument.
Jordan was clearly better in Game 1.

Game 2:
Jordan line: 37 points, 0 turnovers, 3 assists, 5 boards
Pippen line: 21 points, 2 turnovers, 4 assists, 6 boards
Good game for both men, I'd give the edge to MJ.

Game 3:
Jordan: 24 points, TSS%: 63.7
Pippen: 10 points, TSS%: 47.9
Both shoot 50% from the field, but Jordan is 10-11 from the line, Pippen 0-1.
Bulls slaughter Utah. Both good, Jordan clearly better.

Game 4:
Jordan: 34 Points, 8 boards, 2 Assists, 2 steals, 44% shooting.
Pippen: 28 points, 9 boards, 5 assists, 1 steal, 50% shooting.
I'd give the edge to Pippen in this game, but barely. Monster games for both players.

So out of the first 4 games, Jordan was CLEARLY better in 2, Jordan was slightly better in 1, and Pippen was slightly better in 1. Jordan's the MVP.

Now let's go to Game 5, because your argument is that if the Bulls close out Utah in Game 5, the MVP goes to Pippen.

Game 5:
Jordan 28 points, 10-11 from the free throw line, 4 turnovers, 3 steals.
Pippen 6 points on 2-16 shooting, 4 turnovers, 3 steals
They both sucked in this game, with MJ shooting only 35%. Of course, 35% is a ton better than Pippen's 12.5%. Kukoc was awesome on this night, going 11-13 (84%) while Pippen and MJ played keep away for some reason.

But assuming Kukoc was given more opportunities and the Bulls won the game, then Jordan's the MVP. There is absolutely no doubt. Pippen wouldn't even get a vote. God love Pip, and you're right that he played great in several games of that series, but he didn't outplay MJ. No one did, no one has, and no one will.

Your forgetting Fred that this is NBA voters. They treat the awards like it's little league. Everyone gets a trophy!!!!

Scottie played great in that series and was getting the media hype for MVP. Jordan had already won 5 and it would have been Pip's turn to win one. that's how the NBA voters operate. If the Bulls won Game 5, Pippen would have won Finals MVP.

Jordan should have 7 MVP awards, but the NBA voters got sick of giving it to MJ and wanted to give someone else a turn. Barkley and Malone.

The Malone one in 1997 was a lot worse than Barkley imo.