Reply With Quote
They were regarded as the best player in the world because they won a le.
Forget it Achilles, its Leftytown
They were regarded as the best player in the world because they won a le.
I always felt chuck is hard to build around because he has two major issues with his game.
First, his defence is subpar. Either he’s unwilling or unable I wouldn’t know. But compared to the other PF greats likely dirk was the only worse defender (or maybe on par).
Second his pound the ball offence is easy to stop for the better defensive teams. That Suns team had Kevin Johnson and Richard Dumas to help create and made it difficult to stop.
I love Barkley and found him to be funny and genuine but his game did have major holes that are hard to build around. With the right cir stances I think he could’ve had a dirk like le team where there is a big man to help do the dirty work inside and a bunch of shooters around him.
Barkley was stuck in the wrong ERA. Undersized PF with ball handling/outside shot. He is ideal for today.
If not for Pippen, MJ would have had to stick around longer diminishing his legacy - losing Finals and lower career stats. 3Peat in modern Era is incredibly rare so that probably would have not occurred, atleast not twice.
Yes he needed another all star
that’s the point tbh
Without another all star like Pip he was just a bald Derozan with a gambling addiction tbh
Compare the 98 Bulls and 99 Rockets. Pippen is the common denominator.
Was Rodman that superior to Hakeem or Barkley?
The massive drop off was because the 99 Rockets didn't have #23...
There are a lot of great players who could be ranked higher if they won rings. It's hard to think of them as best in the world because that comes from beating other teams. You aren't the best if you didn't win.
In that era it’s rare to have two superstars on one team. There’s Stockton and Malone, Kemp and Payton, shaq and penny. But when you look at the other top tier stars there aren’t another superstar teammate.
Ewing’s best teammate was either Starks or Oakley
Barkley had nothing in Philly and an oft injured Kevin Johnson
Robinson had Elliott
Olajuwon had Drexler for one year but the rest of them time he had Thorpe. Pippen and Barkley joined when he was pretty much done.
None of those second tier stars were at the level of pippen. You can make an argument most top tier stars second in command is comparable to grant or rodman than to Pippen.
Jordan had stacks of help and it’s not even close. Only pedo can claim to have someone as good as Stockton but he’s a world class choker and karma wouldn’t let him ring. Shaq and penny was short lived and they imploded. I’d say both Payton and kemp were Scottie level and not at the level of shaq, Ewing, robinson, or hakeem, let alone jordan
Why would you compare two teams with one common player rather than a much closer comparison like the 93 bulls be the 94 bulls?
Because the records between the 93 Bulls and 94 Bulls by themselves don't give a true picture of how the Bulls fell off because they were still winning. The team offense went from one of the best in the league to middle of the pack. And Pippen's individual numbers barely improved. So what did the 94 Bulls really prove? That they could still win games in a ty conference.
And just look at the following season when they were 34-31 when Jordan unretired and returned. Then finished the season 13-4 with Jordan. Doesn't get mentioned much.
People use the 94 Bulls as some evidence that Scottie was great. Horse . After a threepeat championship run, they lost in the ing second round. Pippen is a John Wall kind of superstar. He was Paul George before Paul George. Except Paul George can shoot.
Their defense improved without Jordan tbh
It did. But that team defense improvement wasn't just or even mostly because of Pippen. Some folks credit the 94 Bulls as proof that Pippen was his own superstar. I didn't view it that way at all.
Barkley's biggest weakness was he was in love with the three point shot despite shooting them terribly. This era would have brought out the worst in his game.
which is ironic considering how quick he is to criticize players who have size or good postup games yet overuse the 3
Larry Bird: "Pippen is the second best player in the league when he is playing with Michael and about the 5th best player without him"
there is no "maybe". he simply doesn't. lol. MJ has won a total of 1 playoff games(not series, but games) before the 87-88 season.
When the Bulls made the 2nd Round in '88, Pippen was a bench player. Jordan had "the Shot" against Cleveland. Rodman wasn't on the team.
He was still only 24 yrs old.
That's not really true when it comes to being the best player in the league. Which player was better than Russell and Wilt. Wilt averaged 50 a game and 24 rebounds and he didn't win. No players were better than Kareem and Dr. J or Bird Magic and Jordan. Even when Jordan lost to the Pistons, they all knew he was the best player. Everyone knew it. Same with LBJ. Same with Shaq, Duncan, Kobe. They win BECAUSE they're great. They aren't great because they win
Scottie lost the whole team after sitting out. Kerr said it. Phil said it. Grant said it. Scottie wasn't a main guy. That's why they fell apart the next year.
Tbh Chuck was robbed of a ring. But Chuck also had some bad luck when it came to injuries. He was injured after the 93 season a lot or KJ was injured a lot. They were a 1 year wonder due to that. The 93 team though was special and I don't think Chuck was that hard to build around.
Yeah his style of play where he pound the ball inside, back his man down, slow it down was repe ive, but a lot of successful teams played that way. The Celtics were the same style. Duncan and Shaq and Hakeem were too. He was also fantastic in the open court.
Barkley struggled with being in shape. It's why he jacked up so many 3s because he was too tired to play in the post. His defense wasn't that big an issue to me bc honestly you could hide him on a SF not named Pip. Also a lot of PFs in the East were really ty. Just bad luck for Chuck that he had to go against Malone and Kemp.
A bench player that still contributed. And when rodman wasn't on the team for the first 3 peat, they had grant from 91-93. Grant wasn't there in 95 when they were beat by Orlando. Jordan wasn't there in 94 when they were beat by the Knicks so yes the bulls were more than a 1 or 2 man show. Bringing in Rodman was like a cheat code and one of the top 5 worst trades in NBA history. but Popopvich makes that list twice and his ego/ stupidity has contributed to 4 rings for other franchises (bulls 96-98, Raptors '19)
Rodman was finished mentally which is why he flamed out shortly after Chicago. He had 1 eye on life off the court even with the Bulls in the 2nd & 3rd season.
No one is saying Jordan led a team of nobodies to the le. We all remember his 2 seasons with the Wizards. The point is Pippen was a bigger beneficiary of the relationship. I highly doubt Scottie would be anywhere near these 50 Greatest Players lists without Jordan. On the flip side MJ would still be in the GOAT discussion.
IMO Scottie made sacrifices and feels they are overlooked. But he doesn't realize his legacy is tied to the Bulls and their accomplishments. He's a 16PPG career player. Jordan's influence goes beyond even the basketball court. It might sting Pippen that he was 3rd in terms of being a Pop Icon to Rodman.
Chicago was the only team that would trade for Rodman after his gotry in the 95 playoffs.
Jordan definitely deserves credit for keeping Rodman in line. No one else in the league would have but Jordan would have probably beat the living out of Rodman if he pulled the crap he did in San Antonio in Chicago.
Phil Jackson also handled Rodman well tbh
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions