Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 17 of 20 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 293
  1. #241
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,334
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    And again, should we assume that Drexler wasn't widely considered a superstar because he was widely passed over for guys who weren't superstars? Even the years you cite Drexler as being clearly better than Pippen, he didn't even make the All-NBA team in 87 or 89, and only made the 3rd team in 90. Going by All-NBA teams, public perception was that Drexler was also not a superstar.

    And this is again what I'm talking about, here is you talking about Drexler earlier in the thread:

    Both Ewing and Drexler led their teams annually to top seeds in their conferences (or contention for a top seed) and they made multiple deep runs.

    And now it's well Drexler was only really on a contender for 3 years. It's not just about the words, it's about the tenor of your posts. The earlier tenor was that Drexler was constantly having Portland as a contender or top seed in the league and now you're bashing how small a time period he was on contenders to justify his not making All-NBA teams.

    You literally pick and choose how you perceive players and situations to bolster whatever argument you're making at the time.
    I think after 92 Drexler was not widely considered a superstar. Prior to that I think he was or at least in 92 he was, as he was compared to MJ by some. I think the amount of time that Drexler was considered a superstar was perhaps short-lived but whether he was or wasnt considered a superstar doesn't directly speak to whether he was. I think definitely in 92 he was considered a superstar.

    The point was that Drexler made multiple deep runs and so did Ewing and they were the #1, whereas this was not the case for Pippen (perennial might've been too strong a word to describe Drexler's teams, but I think it is fitting for Ewing as they were near the top seeds for a good chunk of the 90s). When Pippen was the #1 they got to the second round and were then kind of struggling the following year.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 06-16-2021 at 05:47 PM.

  2. #242
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,502
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    It's not that at all man. I basically define a superstar as a player who is highly potent offensively and can warp the floor in a way that other teams have to double and triple team them and their own team can run an entire offense around and which the opposing team has to game plan their entire defense around. Pippen was never that, imo and was never remotely close to being that. I think guys like Drexler and Ewing did have this quality (especially Ewing). If a player has this quality and can check a few other boxes (e.g., good rebounder, good defender, etc.) I generally consider them superstars. There might be some randomly exceptions here and there but for the most part, this is what I'm considering when I say a player is a superstar and this is also the part of the game that I consider to be the most impactful.
    Sure but that ignores so much of the game and is very subjective on the warping aspect or "running a team". As shown one guy could make playoffs the time given a chance and 2nd round (pretty normal finish for a lot of Ewing/Drexler teams, Ewing had many years with teams built around him as focal point and only made it past 2nd round 4 times total and never won) the others never have lead teams to playoffs though from the actual examples anyways. My point is you are narrowly playing the terms and avoiding overall context and pushing specific rankings/stats on shorter periods of time. The reason is to fit that narrative as that past thread showed. In actuality the one time we saw Pippen lead without MJ for a season he was closer to Ewing/Drexler but you still run with the narrative anyways going back to the cherry picked aspects etc.

    The logical inconsistencies are still there so people will call it out. You can't really change anything or back it up in a consistent way but it also would destroy that narrative if you changed it. It's just going to be a never ending circle but I don't think it is because others are the homers. It's based on the same inconsistent logic.

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I think after 92 Drexler was not widely considered a superstar. Prior to that I think he was or at least in 92 he was, as he was compared to MJ by some. I think the amount of time that Drexler was considered a superstar was perhaps short-lived but whether he was or wasn't considered a superstar doesn't directly speak to whether he was. I think definitely in 92 he was considered a superstar.

    The point was that Drexler made multiple deep runs and so did Ewing and they were the #1, whereas this was not the case for Pippen (perennial might've been too strong a word to describe Drexler's teams, but I think it is fitting for Ewing as they were near the top seeds for a good chunk of the 90s). When Pippen was the #1 they got to the second round and were then kind of struggling the following year.
    He was considered a superstar in 92 when he had his best season coupled with the Blazers' best year.

    Yes, Drexler and Ewing made multiple deep playoff runs, but they had more than one year to do it. It took Drexler 6 years to even get out of the first round, and most of those seasons the Blazers were .500. It's unfair to say Pippen couldn't do something when he had a literal year to try.

  4. #244
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,334
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Sure but that ignores so much of the game and is very subjective on the warping aspect or "running a team". As shown one guy could make playoffs the time given a chance and 2nd round (pretty normal finish for a lot of Ewing/Drexler teams, Ewing had many years with teams built around him as focal point and only made it past 2nd round 4 times total and never won) the others never have lead teams to playoffs though from the actual examples anyways. My point is you are narrowly playing the terms and avoiding overall context and pushing specific rankings/stats on shorter periods of time. The reason is to fit that narrative as that past thread showed. In actuality the one time we saw Pippen lead without MJ for a season he was closer to Ewing/Drexler but you still run with the narrative anyways going back to the cherry picked aspects etc.

    The logical inconsistencies are still there so people will call it out. You can't really change anything or back it up in a consistent way but it also would destroy that narrative if you changed it. It's just going to be a never ending circle but I don't think it is because others are the homers. It's based on the same inconsistent logic.
    Well it is subjective, I agree with that. All of this is subjective though. I really don't think 94 Pippen was that close to prime Ewing or Drexler. Like I said before, if we pick Pippen's best years and compare them to Ewing and Drexler's it's kind of not that close.

    The things I am talking about arent cherry picked aspects, they are the things I consider most important in a player. We can disagree about that, but that's what I take into account when rating players. You can take different things into account. It's what makes rating players a subjective process. If I give you a list of players I would prefer and how I rank guys in today's NBA that would be the most consistent factor, at least among superstars.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 06-16-2021 at 06:47 PM.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,334
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    He was considered a superstar in 92 when he had his best season coupled with the Blazers' best year.

    Yes, Drexler and Ewing made multiple deep playoff runs, but they had more than one year to do it. It took Drexler 6 years to even get out of the first round, and most of those seasons the Blazers were .500. It's unfair to say Pippen couldn't do something when he had a literal year to try.
    I don't entirely disagree with you, but its oddly similar to the discussion we had about Kyrie (me saying it was premature to say he has to be a #2). In the end, I don't think Pippen was a superstar because of his offensive limitations and I think Ewing and Drexler were because I think they didnt have these limitations (although I do think you make a fair point about Drexler also being an open court guy, but I think he had a lot more of a half court game than Pippen). That's really what it boils down to for me when comparing those guys. If Pippen was more of an offensive force, I would agree that he was on par with Ewing and Drexler.

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    29,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I think it's fine when there are multiple super teams and those teams play each other. That's actually great when that happens. The issue is when there is only one super team, then I think it's bad for the league. I definitely didn't like watching the KD warriors because they had such an unfair advantage. Sure, if there was another super team that would've been fine. There were the cavs, but they broke up after 2017 and so then it was basically a few years of one team being way better than everyone else.
    Fair enough I get what you’re saying

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Well it is subjective, I agree with that. All of this is subjective though. I really don't think 94 Pippen was that close to prime Ewing or Drexler. Like I said before, if we pick Pippen's best years and compare them to Ewing and Drexler's it's kind of not that close.

    The stuff I am talking about arent cherry picked aspects, they are the things I consider most important in a player. We can disagree about that, but that's what I take into account when rating players. You can take different things into account. It's what makes rating players a subjective process.
    How do you compare them? I think the best years between them all was Ewing in 1990 followed by Drexler in 92. After that it very well could be Pippen's 94. It seems you forgot the Bulls were picked to finish 5th in the East that year.

    Heck, the highest points per possession Clyde ever had in the playoffs was 33.2 per 100 possessions in 92, and Pippen was at 33.4 points per 100 possessions in 94. So Pippen was as much of a volume scorer that year in the playoffs as Drexler was at his best in the playoffs.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,032
    Pippen lowkey one of the worst playoff scorers amongst all time great players. He's a tricky player to evaluate

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I don't entirely disagree with you, but its oddly similar to the discussion we had about Kyrie (me saying it was premature to say he has to be a #2). In the end, I don't think Pippen was a superstar because of his offensive limitations and I think Ewing and Drexler were because I think they didnt have these limitations (although I do think you make a fair point about Drexler also being an open court guy, but I think he had a lot more of a half court game than Pippen). That's really what it boils down to for me when comparing those guys. If Pippen was more of an offensive force, I would agree that he was on par with Ewing and Drexler.
    And I care about impact. Pippen's impact was as great as Drexler's for sure.

  10. #250
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,032
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    How do you compare them? I think the best years between them all was Ewing in 1990 followed by Drexler in 92. After that it very well could be Pippen's 94. It seems you forgot the Bulls were picked to finish 5th in the East that year.

    Heck, the highest points per possession Clyde ever had in the playoffs was 33.2 per 100 possessions in 92, and Pippen was at 33.4 points per 100 possessions in 94. So Pippen was as much of a volume scorer that year in the playoffs as Drexler was at his best in the playoffs.
    Pippen's playoff scoring was usually on garbage efficiency though. Like below league average efficiency for the time.

    I find it odd that he played next to the GOAT who demanded unfathomable levels of attention from the opposing team defenses and Pippen still couldn't scrape up to even league average efficiency. In an era of no zone at that.

  11. #251
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,502
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Well it is subjective, I agree with that. All of this is subjective though. I really don't think 94 Pippen was that close to prime Ewing or Drexler. Like I said before, if we pick Pippen's best years and compare them to Ewing and Drexler's it's kind of not that close.

    The things I am talking about arent cherry picked aspects, they are the things I consider most important in a player. We can disagree about that, but that's what I take into account when rating players. You can take different things into account. It's what makes rating players a subjective process. If I give you a list of players I would prefer and how I rank guys in today's NBA that would be the most consistent factor, at least among superstars.
    Of course it is but some arguments are still better than others based on evidence we can point to. The stats/data/rankings others share aren't less valuable than the ones you do it's just you are ignoring certain aspects to make your points. That's always going to be called out when you approach topics that way it seems disingenuous to have those types of double standards.

    In overall impact they were closer than Pippen is to Love for example though. You often call things like young Kobe and Peak Shaq somewhat close as well then when it gets to Pippen it changes. The way you switch up whether all of these top guys are pretty close so it isn't really that crazy to think (Kobe vs Lebron) or there is no way Pippen is a superstar he just wasn't close to Ewing or Drexler is pretty interesting. Pippens best year is the only real example we got of him and we know how variable stuff like this can be. For him to be 8th in scoring that season and 19th in assists is pretty impressive offensively while leading a team to 2nd round as well (no player with more points had as many assists per game). Ewing did have a better scoring year obviously a few years prior and was 3rd right above Tom Chambers that year but never was the playmaker as a point forward Pippen was either. As a lot of those list show many even have Pippen higher let alone not close rankings wise from others.

    Yes they are, focusing on Love to prop him up like that instead of full context and ignoring a similar look for Pippen is pretty crazy. They are discounting Pippen's impact in the one instance we saw him "lead a team" as your subjective aspect supposedly cares a lot as well to prop up someone never leading to the playoffs. Again the point is it just all seems very inconsistent. Valade has shown plenty of examples of where Scottie was MVP All NBA rankings wise and I covered the stats already plenty as we noted too. You just seem very inconsistent in how you handle the evidence.

  12. #252
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,745
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    Pippen lowkey one of the worst playoff scorers amongst all time great players. He's a tricky player to evaluate
    He is massively overrated by all the magazines and lists, where he usually falls between 20-25th.

  13. #253
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,745
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    Pippen's playoff scoring was usually on garbage efficiency though. Like below league average efficiency for the time.

    I find it odd that he played next to the GOAT who demanded unfathomable levels of attention from the opposing team defenses and Pippen still couldn't scrape up to even league average efficiency. In an era of no zone at that.
    Sure, but it's not like Ewing or Drexler were very efficient scoring wise in the playoffs either.

  14. #254
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,032
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Sure, but it's not like Ewing or Drexler were very efficient scoring wise in the playoffs either.
    I guess I don't know the debate here lol. Pippen definitely above Drexler all time in my book. Maybe ahead of Ewing as well idk.

  15. #255
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,745
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    I guess I don't know the debate here lol. Pippen definitely above Drexler all time in my book. Maybe ahead of Ewing as well idk.
    The debate is BigMoves (and to a lesser extent Ewing) says Pippen is not on the same level as Drexler or Ewing because they were #1's whereas because of his offensive limitations, he views Pippen as a #2 and therefore not on their level (that being Ewing and Drexler were superstars while Pippen was not).

Page 17 of 20 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •