Scottie Pippen

[X]

There are no what-ifs about my opinion.

Hill was truly greater than Pippen and the fact that you deny it tells me that you are probably 'all of the above' in regard to that list

I <3 Hill...one of the great Dukies of all time. But injuries derailed his career. They didn't derail Pip's career, and he had great success. I could argue all day about how Hill had the potential to be a top 10-20 player all-time in this league, but he was injured too much. It's part of the game, and it bit him harder than most. Sucks...he could've been truly special.

 

[FirstTimer]

dude, you obviously don't follow sports. Your confusing style with results. Stop it. Your making yourdelf look stupid. Who's better? The guy that scores 20 ppg on jumpshots, or the guy that scores 20 ppg attacking the basket? Both have their strengths and weaknesses. Im not in no way shape or form saying that glen rice was better than grant hill. Just that their offensive production was similar. Not their rebounding, defense, passing etc

Yeah I don't follow sports.....It's not like I coach basketball, do radio play by play and color commentary of the game, was a scholarship athlete in college etc etc etc Moving on....

I'm not confusing style with results at all. I'm directly ointing out that it's idiotic when evaluating the player, especially a player with room to grow as Hill had, to ignore the way they produced and the actual type of player they were. To ignore efficiency of the player when putting up the statistics is sprots Special person. Not al 26PPG is created equal. I'd rather have an effiecient 26PPG than an ineffecient 26PPG. How are you not able to grasp this? And you accuse me of not following sports?

I asked you to name the top players. Not good players. Im drawing a parallel between the players from their respective primes. If that's the best you can list. I can see why you feel hill was on his way to being the best player in the league

Those were the top players. I took those directly from All-NBA team results and statistical leaders during that time.

Get a clue.

Hell half those guys were playing in the NBA when Pippen was putting up prime numbers. On top of that I will state again: Grant Hill won ROY and was immedietly one of the best players in the NBA during Pippen's second season of no Jordan against the same league. Hill excelled from the moment he came into the league against the same players Pippen was excelling against. You have no argument whatsoever.

come on bro. Only rookie can win rookie of the year. Even then he had to share it. And im not saying the league was softer. Just not as good

No shit only a rookie can win ROY. Amazing observation. The overall point was that Hill excelled in the league immedetly and against the same competition that Pippen was excelling against. It's not liek Hill had to wait for the league to soften up to become a stand out player. He became a standout player immedietly.

Once again, get a clue.

follow me. Im only referring to their offensive production. Not anything else. And definately not styles

Offensive production is directly tied to the style they play. For christ sakes. How are you NOT getting this? I wouldn't expect a banging PF or low post player to "produce" like a point forward. I wouldn't expect a three point shooting SG to product the same as a point forward. I also like how you completely ignore the fact that I pointed out you leave out a stat like assists from your "offensive production" argument even though assists is an offensive production statistic. Simply looking at PPG for the measure of a players offensive production is myopic and asinine..even if one is only viewing scoring. The way the player comes about those points and how efficient they are at it MATTERS.

we agree on this. Hill was definatley on his way to greatness. But he's not better than pippen

I never said he was better than Pippen. Ever. Pippen to me is a borderline Top 50 player ever. Hill isn't. The entire point of everything I said is that IMO Hill, had he stayed healthy, would have easily surpassed Pippen as a player. As I've stated about 20 times in this thread: That's not a slight at Pippen, not a cut down, not discrediting Pippen, etc etc etc. It's simply an amazingly large compliment to Grant Hill and how damn good a player he was before he was hurt.

he never showed that.

Because he got hurt. Holy shit?! Have you been following along at all?

The year he managed 26, he got 7 rbds and 5 assts.

And he had other seasons where he averaged nearly 10RPG and over 7APG during his early seasons. Stats will flucuate. That's why I directly said those numbers would have been an average.

and greatest defender ever

Pippen wasn't the greatest defender ever. Rodman was easily a betetr defensive player than Pippen. You'd have a tough times proving Pippen was a better defender than Sidney Moncrief(a two time DPOY). Pippen was a great defender, an all-timer, but not the best ever.

I think pippen was a better jumer and above the rim player

LOL at this. No. Pippen was a more powerful at the rim player but Hill was the superior leaper and "above the rim" player.

And they're equal passers.

Hill>Pippen as a passer and ball handler.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

97Bulls wants to believe in something irrationally and I doubt anybody changes his mind.

 

[97Bulls]

Yeah I don't follow sports.....It's not like I coach basketball, do radio play by play and color commentary of the game, was a scholarship athlete in college etc etc etc Moving on....
then you must be a horrible coach. And you forgot the part where you say your 6'4 230 lbs of solid muscle. Gotta love the internet
I'm not confusing style with results at all. I'm directly ointing out that it's idiotic when evaluating the player, especially a player with room to grow as Hill had, to ignore the way they produced and the actual type of player they were. To ignore efficiency of the player when putting up the statistics is sprots Special person. Not al 26PPG is created equal. I'd rather have an effiecient 26PPG than an ineffecient 26PPG. How are you not able to grasp this? And you accuse me of not following sports?

but you can't show your proof that hill didn't peak. that's the problem with shoulda, coulda, woulda you just don't know. And when he did play in a decent amount of games, he didn't hit 26 10 7. He went right back to his 20 ppg scoring self. This is a fact. And im not comparing who was better between the players I listed. All I did was compare their scoring path to hills. Not efficiency or rebounds or assists or whose better etc. You have no proof to show you claim. Your just spewing stuff out.
Those were the top players. I took those directly from All-NBA team results and statistical leaders during that time.

Get a clue.
lol, give me a clue. Show me a plaeyer that's scored at a similar rate of hill. I dont care about their efficiency, or if theyre as good as hill, their rebounds, their defense. Just the yearly rate of their production of putting the ball in thee basket. That will start to solidify your claim that he wouldve maintained that rate. Then Id be more willing to accept your theory. Your a terrible debater bro.
Hell half those guys were playing in the NBA when Pippen was putting up prime numbers. On top of that I will state again: Grant Hill won ROY and was immedietly one of the best players in the NBA during Pippen's second season of no Jordan against the same league. Hill excelled from the moment he came into the league against the same players Pippen was excelling against. You have no argument whatsoever.
and again why does him winning co rookie of the year matter. Its an award that limited to rookies. And he couldn't even win that outright. But I agree hill did hit the ground running. Which is why I don't give very much weight to your claim that he wasn't at his best.
No shit only a rookie can win ROY. Amazing observation. The overall point was that Hill excelled in the league immedetly and against the same competition that Pippen was excelling against. It's not liek Hill had to wait for the league to soften up to become a stand out player. He became a standout player immedietly.

Once again, get a clue.


Offensive production is directly tied to the style they play. For christ sakes. How are you NOT getting this? I wouldn't expect a banging PF or low post player to "produce" like a point forward. I wouldn't expect a three point shooting SG to product the same as a point forward. I also like how you completely ignore the fact that I pointed out you leave out a stat like assists from your "offensive production" argument even though assists is an offensive production statistic. Simply looking at PPG for the measure of a players offensive production is myopic and asinine..even if one is only viewing scoring. The way the player comes about those points and how efficient they are at it MATTERS.
why wouldn't you expect players with different styles to produce the same? Its called a tradeoff. Larry bird and charles barkley produced roughly the same amount of ppg. But their styles were different.

I never said he was better than Pippen. Ever. Pippen to me is a borderline Top 50 player ever. Hill isn't. The entire point of everything I said is that IMO Hill, had he stayed healthy, would have easily surpassed Pippen as a player. As I've stated about 20 times in this thread: That's not a slight at Pippen, not a cut down, not discrediting Pippen, etc etc etc. It's simply an amazingly large compliment to Grant Hill and how damn good a player he was before he was hurt.
pippen is a borderline top 50 player? Well now I see where your comming from. And you lost the little bit of credibility that you had. Only people that don't respect pippen would call him a borderline top 50 player.
Because he got hurt. Holy shit?! Have you been following along at all?


And he had other seasons where he averaged nearly 10RPG and over 7APG during his early seasons. Stats will flucuate. That's why I directly said those numbers would have been an average.

Pippen wasn't the greatest defender ever. Rodman was easily a betetr defensive player than Pippen. You'd have a tough times proving Pippen was a better defender than Sidney Moncrief(a two time DPOY). Pippen was a great defender, an all-timer, but not the best ever.


LOL at this. No. Pippen was a more powerful at the rim player but Hill was the superior leaper and "above the rim" player.

Hill>Pippen as a passer and ball handler.

The rest of the stuff you said is just dumb. Except for the rodman thing. I might have to agree rodman was a better defender thatn pippen. Especially since he was so versitle.

And let me address this "how are you not getting this" phrase that you continue to use. I think your problem is comprehension. You don't understand the difference between disagreeing with a point of view, and not getting a point of view. I understand you pov. I just don't agree with it.

 

[97Bulls]

97Bulls wants to believe in something irrationally and I doubt anybody changes his mind.

There's nothing irrational about what I said or believe in. Im just talented enough to be able debate a pov on your terms. Notice that we are just going back and forth about the offensive side of the ball?

That's cuz if you guys really believed that hill and pippen were similar defensively, you be trying to harp on that too.

Now if you want to talk irrational let's do it. You saying dumb things like wallace is a top 5 defender ever, stackhouse is just as prolific a scorer as jordan, pippen defense was similar to that of a shitty center. Those are irrational.

And the other guy saying stupid things like pippen is a borderline top 50 player, for shits and giggles hill is the greatest defender ever, and trying to assess what grant hill would've could've, should've done based on no theory, deduction, reason. Hill was on his way. To jordan status. The six year we did see hill were enough to draw a fair conclusion as to what kind of player he was.

Just all nonsense and hog wash.

Just man up and admit you guys really don't think scottie pippen was that good. And that jordan was 90% the reason that the bulls won 6 championships, set the alltime record for wins and second best record too. It was all jordan and nothing else.

And the reason why you say pippen was a "good" player was cuz you really spewing your views would go directly against the general consensus that pippen is arguably the greatest defender ever, and normally ranked between 20 to 35 all-time. Which is firmly entrenched in the all-time rankings.

 

[FirstTimer]

And let me address this "how are you not getting this" phrase that you continue to use. I think your problem is comprehension. You don't understand the difference between disagreeing with a point of view, and not getting a point of view. I understand you pov. I just don't agree with it.

Your posts and responses have repeatedly shown that you aren't understanding it.

And you forgot the part where you say your 6'4 230 lbs of solid muscle. Gotta love the internet

6'3 190 of mostly bone and a bit of muscle.

but you can't show your proof that hill didn't peak.

You don't think I'm not aware of that?..hence why I've repeatedly said it's a hypothetical...............

you just don't know

I KNOW THAT.

And when he did play in a decent amount of games, he didn't hit 26 10 7. He went right back to his 20 ppg scoring self.

Already covered this....he went back to playing decent amount of games after missing pretty much 2-3 full seasons with injury. Diminished abilities etc etc etc. Gale Sayers example...etc etc etc Again..already covered.

and again why does him winning co rookie of the year matter.

But I agree hill did hit the ground running.

That's why it matters.....

Way to answer your own question.

Which is why I don't give very much weight to your claim that he wasn't at his best.

Grant Hill was not at his best as a rookie. What the ROY shows is that against the same competition that you loud Pippen for playing so well against Hill came in as a rookie and excelled. He didn't need to wait for this "softer" NBA you claim existed in the late 1990's..he was excelling right off the bat.

I'm convinced you can't comprehend anything.

why wouldn't you expect players with different styles to produce the same?

Seriously? You missed this point? The end result is the same the way it was actually produced is different? I ask again: HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?GRASP that?

Larry bird and charles barkley produced roughly the same amount of ppg. But their styles were different.

Yet Larry Bird is universally seen as the better player even though they put up the same numbers? Hmm...I wonder why?..Oh yeah effiency and style of output...and on top of that There is more to offensive production than just points..for about the 18th time.

pippen is a borderline top 50 player? Well now I see where your comming from. And you lost the little bit of credibility that you had. Only people that don't respect pippen would call him a borderline top 50 player.

How is saying Pippen is borderline one of the Top 50 players to ever play the game a slight against him or a show of lack of respect? I'd put him in the Top 50. Many wouldn't. I've had the conversations elsewhere and defended Pippen. That's why I use the term borderline. It's like you have no concept of sports discussions that have been occuring for years

 

[FirstTimer]

There's nothing irrational about what I said or believe in.

Except two posts ago you said Pippen was the best defender ever...then backtracked when I mentioned Rodman..among your other illogical conclusions and comparisons in here.

That's cuz if you guys really believed that hill and pippen were similar defensively, you be trying to harp on that too.

Already covered that and my feeling on it.

And the other guy saying stupid things like pippen is a borderline top 50 player

Already clarified.

for shits and giggles hill is the greatest defender ever

This is you STILL not understanding the point of me saying that even though I explained it already.

To jordan status

I wasn't the one who crowned Hill that in the late 1990's.


.

Just man up and admit you guys really don't think scottie pippen was that good.

Completely false. I've said over and over in this thread that I think Pippen was an all-time great, a "fantastic player", had damn impressive seasons, "cemented himself as a Top 5 player in the two seasons where Jordan was gone. etc etc etc.

Now you'r spewing hyperbolic BS

And that jordan was 90% the reason that the bulls won 6 championships, set the alltime record for wins and second best record too. It was all jordan and nothing else.

Not true.

And the reason why you say pippen was a "good" player was cuz you really spewing your views would go directly against the general consensus that pippen is arguably the greatest defender ever, .

LOL at this guy saying all this a week after I get roasted on these boards for saying what I truly thought about the ECF.

You're absolutely clueless.

 

[Utahbullsfan]

Hill had no chance to become great the minute he decided to play for Duke he was cursed from the start lol

 

[FirstTimer]

Hill had no chance to become great the minute he decided to play for Duke he was cursed from the start lol

I do hate Duke...and their rat face coach.

:beerbang:

But I have to respect what they've accomplished.

 

[FirstTimer]

I hope to God Rory has something to say here...even if it's calling me an idiot. I could go for some good discussion on the subject...finally.

 

[FirstTimer]

grant hill >>>> penny hardaway >>>> scott pippen

damn!

 

[Utahbullsfan]

I do hate Duke...and their rat face coach.

:beerbang:

But I have to respect what they've accomplished.

Lol I have just been looking into that "Duke Curse" that no NBA starter has ever won a ring that went to Duke..

We are screwed until we send away Lu an Carlos

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

I do hate Duke...and their rat face coach.

:beerbang:

But I have to respect what they've accomplished.

cmon son

and danny ferry has won a ring

so there is no curse lol

 

[Utahbullsfan]

cmon son

and danny ferry has won a ring

so there is no curse lol

Lol he wasnt a starter

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Lol he wasnt a starter

you missed the point

he still won a ring

 

[FirstTimer]

Hill was the more skilled player of the two. Pippen was one of the greatest role players in NBA history, but he was never really a superstar player. Hill was a superstar player. He was probably the most well-rounded player to come out of Duke.

Pippen benefited by playing on the Bulls. Put Pippen on a different team like the Atlanta Hawks, and its possible that his name is mentioned nowadays as infrequently as Sid Moncrief or Bobby Jones. That said, I think Pippen was a great fit for the Bulls. Put Hill on those Bulls teams, and I think the Bulls aren't as good.

I think that's a fair assessment. I never bought into Jordan "teaching" Pippen the game in general. I think Jordan and the type of player and practicer he was demanded that Pippen reach potential and become as skilled as he did but IMO of what I know about Jordan he wasn't one, at that age, to take time out to mentor people. He basically taught by kicking your ass on the floor until you got it. Pippen had the skill and work ethic to become the player he did and Jordan IMO helped him achieve but not really through any "coaching" or "teaching" maybe more leading by example.

Tough to say if the Bulls would be any better or worse with Hill than Pippen but I tend to elan towards them not being as good with Hill just because, as you said, Pippen was a really good fit. Hill was more of a scoring point forward while Pippen always seemed to me to be more of a facilitator at that position, even when Jordan was retired. I can't realyl quantify it but Pippen always seemed to score simply as a function of him having the ball as much as he did where as Hill seemed to be the guy who was looking to score a bit more. Neither is neccessarily better or worse than the other but on those Bulls team Pippen may have been a better fit. Obviously Pippen had the edge of what we were able to see of them defensively as well.

 

[Utahbullsfan]

you missed the point

he still won a ring

You missed my point

Lol I have just been looking into that "Duke Curse" that no NBA starter has ever won a ring that went to Duke..

We are screwed until we send away Lu an Carlos

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Hill was the more skilled player of the two. Pippen was one of the greatest role players in NBA history, but he was never really a superstar player. Hill was a superstar player. He was probably the most well-rounded player to come out of Duke.

Pippen benefited by playing on the Bulls. Put Pippen on a different team like the Atlanta Hawks, and its possible that his name is mentioned nowadays as infrequently as Sid Moncrief or Bobby Jones. That said, I think Pippen was a great fit for the Bulls. Put Hill on those Bulls teams, and I think the Bulls aren't as good.

Excellent post man

 

[FirstTimer]

Excellent post man

Don't worry. 97Bulls will quickly ruin the good posting vibe we have going.

 

[97Bulls]

I think that's a fair assessment. I never bought into Jordan "teaching" Pippen the game in general. I think Jordan and the type of player and practicer he was demanded that Pippen reach potential and become as skilled as he did but IMO of what I know about Jordan he wasn't one, at that age, to take time out to mentor people. He basically taught by kicking your ass on the floor until you got it. Pippen had the skill and work ethic to become the player he did and Jordan IMO helped him achieve but not really through any "coaching" or "teaching" maybe more leading by example.

Tough to say if the Bulls would be any better or worse with Hill than Pippen but I tend to elan towards them not being as good with Hill just because, as you said, Pippen was a really good fit. Hill was more of a scoring point forward while Pippen always seemed to me to be more of a facilitator at that position, even when Jordan was retired. I can't realyl quantify it but Pippen always seemed to score simply as a function of him having the ball as much as he did where as Hill seemed to be the guy who was looking to score a bit more. Neither is neccessarily better or worse than the other but on those Bulls team Pippen may have been a better fit. Obviously Pippen had the edge of what we were able to see of them defensively as well.

Great post first timer. I think what pippen did was more out of necessity. People just don't understand the toll playing the kind of defense pippen played takes on your energy. Ever notice that when most big time scorers have to take on a tough defensive assignment (and they take it seriously) they barely crack 20 pts. Look at wade in the ecf this year his offense really suffered when he had to defend rose. Him defending rose really took alot of his energy. Same with kobe and chris paul. And pippen diidnt just play great man defense. He did run the offense as you guys said, rebound, play amazing help defense. Pick up a full court press, trap. Just alot of stuff. He literraly shut down the indianna pacer in the 98 finals. And he did all these things at a high level on a consistant basis night in and out. Along with dropping 20 ppg and on almost 50% shooting. What more do you want or expect from him? I mean the man is only human.

And I take exception to rory sparrow saying pippen was a role player. role players don't lead teams to 55 wins. And turn in mvp type seasons. Based on the criteria today, pippen would've won the mvp in 94. In 95 some gms were polled as to who they pick to build a team around. And the majority picked pippen. In 94 he got most vote for all nba 1st team. An award that's voted on by the coaches at the time.

Pippen was a superstar.