2014 Anger General Greatest of All Time #19

[FPL]

But you can't really hold Bird's injury history against him vs. Magic either. After all... Magic had his own issues that limited him to only 9 more games.

I have Bird ahead of Magic because I think he was the superior player in his prime (didn't see either live, so this is from watching them after the fact). Magic really only played one season out of his prime (96, though I guess one can argue that his "prime" began when he became the full-time PG after Nixon left), while every game after the bone spurs surgery (especially since his back was shot at that point) was out of Bird's prime:

Bird - 711 prime games (856 including post-season), 186 non-prime games (205 including post-season)
Magic - 874 prime games (1060 including post-season), 32 non-prime games (36 including post-season)

So Magic really gives you 2 and a half more legitimate years, if one thinks their primes and non-primes are equal. In that sense, I can see why some justify slotting Magic ahead.

The HIV thing is strange though. Does he continue playing today? Unlike Bird's back, that's something that is treatable/containable in 2014. If so, how many more quality years does he give you?

[AbeVigodaLive]

But you can't really hold Bird's injury history against him vs. Magic either. After all... Magic had his own issues that limited him to only 9 more games.

I have Bird ahead of Magic because I think he was the superior player in his prime (didn't see either live, so this is from watching them after the fact). Magic really only played one season out of his prime (96, though I guess one can argue that his "prime" began when he became the full-time PG after Nixon left), while every game after the bone spurs surgery (especially since his back was shot at that point) was out of Bird's prime:

Bird - 711 prime games (856 including post-season), 186 non-prime games (205 including post-season)
Magic - 874 prime games (1060 including post-season), 32 non-prime games (36 including post-season)

So Magic really gives you 2 and a half more legitimate years, if one thinks their primes and non-primes are equal. In that sense, I can see why some justify slotting Magic ahead.

The HIV thing is strange though. Does he continue playing today? Unlike Bird's back, that's something that is treatable/containable in 2014. If so, how many more quality years does he give you?

Considering Magic was league MVP one year removed from retiring... and he came back to play heavy, valuable minutes for a playoff team 5 years, 50 pounds and another position later... yeah... I think he would have been just fine.

[FPL]

Considering Magic was league MVP the year before... and he came back to start for a playing team 5 years, 50 pounds and another position later... yeah... I think he would have been just fine.

Well, in that case, and presuming that you also have Bird ahead of Magic...

How many more seasons at his prime level does he need to surpass Bird? Can he jump anyone else?

[AbeVigodaLive]

Considering Magic was league MVP the year before... and he came back to start for a playing team 5 years, 50 pounds and another position later... yeah... I think he would have been just fine.

Well, in that case, and presuming that you also have Bird ahead of Magic...

How many more seasons at his prime level does he need to surpass Bird? Can he jump anyone else?

I don't have Bird ahead of Magic. Why?

Because you can't ignore the 5 rings vs. 3 rings. You can't ignore that Magic did hit that awful, terrible, gut-wrenching shot over McHale and his broken foot in the 1987 Finals after two Celtics bobbled a very available rebound out-of-bounds... just moments before Bird did miss a 23 foot jumper one inch too long that looked perfect to everybody watching...

[thedangerouskitchen]

The same way that it is nonsense for Kobe.

Nobody seems to hold the second-fiddle label over Kobe's head though... but they do for Pippen.

Because Kobe shed that label by winning titles without Shaq. Like the other way around, Pippen didn't win shit running a team without MJ. The 55 wins sure were pretty, but they got sent home.

Pippen led the 00 Blazers to the WCF... and he would have taken the 94 Bulls to at least the ECF if not for a horrific call. He was never afforded the opportunity to have a team built around him, around his strengths as a player like Kobe was (after Shaq left)... but that doesn't change the fact that in the short time he was top-dog he put up MVP caliber numbers, and took his teams deep into the playoffs.

That aside. if "titles" are so important then why isn't Hondo ranked on this list while Chucky is ranked #8? Havlicek won 2 rings withOut Russ, and 8 overall... more than Kobe. If Rings are so important why is Oscar #12 all-time? Why is Karl Malone ahead of Isiah?

Fact is there is no rhyme or reason with how posters are voting... but the fact of the matter is Pippen PROVED he was lead-dog material, yet people hold him down because he played #2 to the GOAT, which is nonsense.

[thedangerouskitchen]

The same way that it is nonsense for Kobe.

Nobody seems to hold the second-fiddle label over Kobe's head though... but they do for Pippen.

Pip have 1 excellent season and one solid one as a lead dog. That's not nearly enough of a sample size to shake off a second-fiddle label.

I will say this:

Scottie Pippen was a major contributer. He wasn't just a fine player and thus is definitely worthy of a top 20 selection.

Pippen put up legit MVP caliber production in 94 and 95... that was no fluke. Past his prime Pippen led the Blazers to the WCF.

Scottie proved he was lead-dog material.

[Robceltsfan]

Nobody seems to hold the second-fiddle label over Kobe's head though... but they do for Pippen.

Pip have 1 excellent season and one solid one as a lead dog. That's not nearly enough of a sample size to shake off a second-fiddle label.

I will say this:

Scottie Pippen was a major contributer. He wasn't just a fine player and thus is definitely worthy of a top 20 selection.

Pippen put up legit MVP caliber production in 94 and 95... that was no fluke. Past his prime Pippen led the Blazers to the WCF/.

Scottie proved he was lead-dog material.

You've stated that multiple times now.......please stop. Pippen averaged 12/6/5 that year. He was a solid contributor, but nothing spectacular that garners him favor in an all-time discussion.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Nobody seems to hold the second-fiddle label over Kobe's head though... but they do for Pippen.

Because Kobe shed that label by winning titles without Shaq. Like the other way around, Pippen didn't win shit running a team without MJ. The 55 wins sure were pretty, but they got sent home.

Pippen led the 00 Blazers to the WCF... and he would have taken the 94 Bulls to at least the ECF if not for a horrific call. He was never afforded the opportunity to have a team built around him, around his strengths as a player like Kobe was (after Shaq left)... but that doesn't change the fact that in the short time he was top-dog he put up MVP caliber numbers, and took his teams deep into the playoffs.

That aside. if "titles" are so important then why isn't Hondo ranked on this list while Chucky is ranked #8? Havlicek won 2 rings withOut Russ, and 8 overall... more than Kobe. If Rings are so important why is Oscar #12 all-time? Why is Karl Malone ahead of Isiah?

Fact is there is no rhyme or reason with how posters are voting... but the fact of the matter is Pippen PROVED he was lead-dog material, yet people hold him down because he played #2 to the GOAT, which is nonsense.

Scottie Pippen put up Derrick McKey-esque stats on that Portland team.

12.5 ppg
6.3 reb
5.0 ast

While that's very nice. Very versatile. I don't know how "lead dog" or "top dog" that is... whatever that really means. Those Portland teams were specifically designed to be deep.

And, Pippen's stats with Jordan... and without Jordan... didn't really change all that much.

In the playoffs without Jordan, Pippen's team lost in the 2nd round. Not bad. But was it lead dog material? Dunno... small sample size. We do know that Pippen put up Grant Hill type numbers but that his shooting dropped from 49% to 43% in the playoffs as THE guy. THE guy who petulantly pouted on the bench while Toni Kukoc won a thrilling game with a deciding jumper. If every player on a team on the wrong side of a contested call got to automatically get carried two more rounds in the playoffs... this list would look very different right?

Why should we grant Pipper that liberty?

[thedangerouskitchen]

Pip have 1 excellent season and one solid one as a lead dog. That's not nearly enough of a sample size to shake off a second-fiddle label.

I will say this:

Scottie Pippen was a major contributer. He wasn't just a fine player and thus is definitely worthy of a top 20 selection.

Pippen put up legit MVP caliber production in 94 and 95... that was no fluke. Past his prime Pippen led the Blazers to the WCF/.

Scottie proved he was lead-dog material.

You've stated that multiple times now.......please stop. Pippen averaged 12/6/5 that year. He was a solid contributor, but nothing spectacular that garners him favor in an all-time discussion.

Pippen was the leader of that Blazers team, fool... or do you think Rasheed Wallace was???

[thedangerouskitchen]

Because Kobe shed that label by winning titles without Shaq. Like the other way around, Pippen didn't win shit running a team without MJ. The 55 wins sure were pretty, but they got sent home.

Pippen led the 00 Blazers to the WCF... and he would have taken the 94 Bulls to at least the ECF if not for a horrific call. He was never afforded the opportunity to have a team built around him, around his strengths as a player like Kobe was (after Shaq left)... but that doesn't change the fact that in the short time he was top-dog he put up MVP caliber numbers, and took his teams deep into the playoffs.

That aside. if "titles" are so important then why isn't Hondo ranked on this list while Chucky is ranked #8? Havlicek won 2 rings withOut Russ, and 8 overall... more than Kobe. If Rings are so important why is Oscar #12 all-time? Why is Karl Malone ahead of Isiah?

Fact is there is no rhyme or reason with how posters are voting... but the fact of the matter is Pippen PROVED he was lead-dog material, yet people hold him down because he played #2 to the GOAT, which is nonsense.

Scottie Pippen put up Derrick McKey-esque stats on that Portland team.

12.5 ppg
6.3 reb
5.0 ast

While that's very nice. Very versatile. I don't know how "lead dog" or "top dog" that is... whatever that really means. Those Portland teams were specifically designed to be deep.

And, Pippen's stats with Jordan... and without Jordan... didn't really change all that much.

In the playoffs without Jordan, Pippen's team lost in the 2nd round. Not bad. But was it lead dog material? Dunno... small sample size. We do know that Pippen put up Grant Hill type numbers but that his shooting dropped from 49% to 43% in the playoffs as THE guy. THE guy who petulantly pouted on the bench while Toni Kukoc won a thrilling game with a deciding jumper. If every player on a team on the wrong side of a contested call got to automatically get carried two more rounds in the playoffs... this list would look very different right?

Why should we grant Pipper that liberty?

Bill Russell put up sub-par stats in a few Finals series yet that doesn't stop folks from considering him the leader of those Boston teams. You think Sheed was the leader of those Blazers? Damon Stoudemire?

Come on...

Bottom line Pippen put up legit MVP caliber production when Jordan left. He proved he was much more than just a second-fiddle... and any attempt to argue against that fact is futile.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Pippen led the 00 Blazers to the WCF... and he would have taken the 94 Bulls to at least the ECF if not for a horrific call. He was never afforded the opportunity to have a team built around him, around his strengths as a player like Kobe was (after Shaq left)... but that doesn't change the fact that in the short time he was top-dog he put up MVP caliber numbers, and took his teams deep into the playoffs.

That aside. if "titles" are so important then why isn't Hondo ranked on this list while Chucky is ranked #8? Havlicek won 2 rings withOut Russ, and 8 overall... more than Kobe. If Rings are so important why is Oscar #12 all-time? Why is Karl Malone ahead of Isiah?

Fact is there is no rhyme or reason with how posters are voting... but the fact of the matter is Pippen PROVED he was lead-dog material, yet people hold him down because he played #2 to the GOAT, which is nonsense.

Scottie Pippen put up Derrick McKey-esque stats on that Portland team.

12.5 ppg
6.3 reb
5.0 ast

While that's very nice. Very versatile. I don't know how "lead dog" or "top dog" that is... whatever that really means. Those Portland teams were specifically designed to be deep.

And, Pippen's stats with Jordan... and without Jordan... didn't really change all that much.

In the playoffs without Jordan, Pippen's team lost in the 2nd round. Not bad. But was it lead dog material? Dunno... small sample size. We do know that Pippen put up Grant Hill type numbers but that his shooting dropped from 49% to 43% in the playoffs as THE guy. THE guy who petulantly pouted on the bench while Toni Kukoc won a thrilling game with a deciding jumper. If every player on a team on the wrong side of a contested call got to automatically get carried two more rounds in the playoffs... this list would look very different right?

Why should we grant Pipper that liberty?

Bill Russell put up sub-par stats in a few Finals series yet that doesn't stop folks from considering him the leader of those Boston teams. You think Sheed was the leader of those Blazers? Damon Stoudemire?

Come on...

Bottom line Pippen put up legit MVP caliber production when Jordan left. He proved he was much more than just a second-fiddle... and any attempt to argue against that fact is futile.

All we know for sure about Pippen in Chicago, without Jordan, he put Grant Hill type numbers... with slightly better success in the playoffs.

In Portland, he put up complementary player stats for a balanced team that didn't rely on any single player to excel. He lost in a Game 7 both years... shooting 11 - 32 in the process (34% fg).

Those are facts. Trying to make any other claims seems to be a bit forced and full of conjecture that seems out of place in this exercise.

[Max]

Baylor

[876Stephen]

Why do i even try?

[vcsgrizzfan]

Baylor played with the Lakers, with West and Wilt (albeit with Wilt for not very long) and never won a ring. I know that it was Russell he was losing to more often than not, but still. It's enough for me to slide him lower than others here feel is appropriate. Note that I didn't vote for the Mailman either.

[Bush4Ever]

Pippen circa 92-95 was absolutely lead dog material, although title-winning lead dog material...the jury would be out on that one, I think.

There is absolutely nothing to scream about for Pippen once he left the Bulls, however. On Portland, he was "one of many" on a very deep and wide deep, and his Houston years (outside his prime no doubt) were relatively mediocre. Not every team has a clearly defined "lead dog". Not even every serious team (although it is relatively rare to see that structure at the elite level).

It is also tricky to wonder about how Pippen would have progressed as a player, if he didn't have the benefit of going against Jordan in practice and things like that. That sort of repeated exposure was very beneficial (and Jordan was helped as well at the other end, but probably not as much).

[Bush4Ever]

And again TDK, I have no idea how you *still* don't get the idea of weighting a multitude of variables to produce a judgment call.

No one says that winning titles TO THE EXCLUSION OF EVERYTHING ELSE is all-important.

What some have determined is that the relative advantages on those other variables is enough to overcome the defect created by having fewer lead dog rings.

What you are doing is like someone calling someone a hypocrite because they say they like big tits, but then say they would fuck Jennifer Lawrence over some 300 pound chick, because "you said you like big tits and fatty clearly has bigger tits".

It's inane, and you need to stop doing this if you want to discuss these things seriously.

[Y2K]

Whole-heartily agree. The main difference between the two is team success, which basically is: KG landed in shit and Duncan landed in sugar.

To simplify the difference down to that does a disservice to each player... and to this board.




[Note: While I agree the difference between the two in their primes was a lot less than most (elsewhere) would claim... Duncan has a decided advantage. He was an imposing inside defender. And, he has A LOT of rings that you can't just chalk up to circumstance. Otherwise, this entire exercise becomes a worthless "who had the most skill" discussion.]

Definitely superior to KG in that regard, but does it make a big difference how a guy defends, so long as he's effective?

From my recollection, the Admiral played better man post D than Hakeem (who got a lot of his blocks off the weak-side coming out of nowhere) and rim protector. Both are all-time greats on that end, but wouldn't you say Olajuwon was the superior defender? Like KG, he played dominant horizontal defense. Same with Russell and Wilt to a lesser extent...Wilt was a terrific paint protector, and while Russ blocked a ton of shots, his strength was in his ability to defend all over the floor, switch onto anyone, and recover when his teammates let guys through. Duncan was very mobile in his prime, but KG was quicker on his feet (you probably know a lot more than I do, but that's why that weird hybrid zone worked in the first season after illegal defense was eliminated, and why before getting hurt in 09, he was able to hamper both the pick-and-roll handler and man in Boston under Thibs).

As KG has gotten older and stronger, he's become a pretty damn good post defender as well. He's not blocking a high amount of shots but rather has transitioned into a disciplined, position post defender.

[Shill Jackson]

Nobody seems to hold the second-fiddle label over Kobe's head though... but they do for Pippen.

Because Kobe shed that label by winning titles without Shaq. Like the other way around, Pippen didn't win shit running a team without MJ. The 55 wins sure were pretty, but they got sent home.

Pippen led the 00 Blazers to the WCF... and he would have taken the 94 Bulls to at least the ECF if not for a horrific call. He was never afforded the opportunity to have a team built around him, around his strengths as a player like Kobe was (after Shaq left)... but that doesn't change the fact that in the short time he was top-dog he put up MVP caliber numbers, and took his teams deep into the playoffs.

That aside. if "titles" are so important then why isn't Hondo ranked on this list while Chucky is ranked #8? Havlicek won 2 rings withOut Russ, and 8 overall... more than Kobe. If Rings are so important why is Oscar #12 all-time? Why is Karl Malone ahead of Isiah?

Fact is there is no rhyme or reason with how posters are voting... but the fact of the matter is Pippen PROVED he was lead-dog material, yet people hold him down because he played #2 to the GOAT, which is nonsense.

he shot 66% FTs and BOTH Hakeem and Robinson outshot him at threes
MVP? - nonsense

and it's still Baylor

[Ghostown42]

Barkley

[thedangerouskitchen]

Scottie Pippen put up Derrick McKey-esque stats on that Portland team.

12.5 ppg
6.3 reb
5.0 ast

While that's very nice. Very versatile. I don't know how "lead dog" or "top dog" that is... whatever that really means. Those Portland teams were specifically designed to be deep.

And, Pippen's stats with Jordan... and without Jordan... didn't really change all that much.

In the playoffs without Jordan, Pippen's team lost in the 2nd round. Not bad. But was it lead dog material? Dunno... small sample size. We do know that Pippen put up Grant Hill type numbers but that his shooting dropped from 49% to 43% in the playoffs as THE guy. THE guy who petulantly pouted on the bench while Toni Kukoc won a thrilling game with a deciding jumper. If every player on a team on the wrong side of a contested call got to automatically get carried two more rounds in the playoffs... this list would look very different right?

Why should we grant Pipper that liberty?

Bill Russell put up sub-par stats in a few Finals series yet that doesn't stop folks from considering him the leader of those Boston teams. You think Sheed was the leader of those Blazers? Damon Stoudemire?

Come on...

Bottom line Pippen put up legit MVP caliber production when Jordan left. He proved he was much more than just a second-fiddle... and any attempt to argue against that fact is futile.

All we know for sure about Pippen in Chicago, without Jordan, he put Grant Hill type numbers... with slightly better success in the playoffs.

In Portland, he put up complementary player stats for a balanced team that didn't rely on any single player to excel. He lost in a Game 7 both years... shooting 11 - 32 in the process (34% fg).

Those are facts. Trying to make any other claims seems to be a bit forced and full of conjecture that seems out of place in this exercise.

Wrong...

Pippen put up (legit) MVP production as the LEAD DOG in 94 and 95; he was a Top 3-5 player in the game withOut Jordan.

Get it right...

... and Scottie was past his prime in Portland but he was still the leader of that team on the court, on both sides of the court.

That's a fact....

Thus, my point stands: Pippen accomplished enough withOut Jordan to clearly prove he was more than a second-fiddle, and perfectly capable of leading a team... and again, any attept to argue otherwise is an exercise in futility.