CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics History => Topic started by: Big333223 on June 14, 2018, 07:54:38 PM
-
As a Celtic fan board, I feel pretty confident I know how this will play out but I saw some comments in a thread a few days ago really extolling Pippen and I'm curious just how well regarded he is and thought this could be an interesting match up.
Greater player, Pierce or Pippen?
-
I wonder what Pippen’s career would’ve looked like had he been the #1 a team was built around.
Obviously I’m biased because Paul is one of my favourite Celtics ever, but even trying to think as objectively as I can this is hard
-
Pippen had a better all around game.
-
Pippen better all around, Paul Pierce is a better closer
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
-
Scottie Pippen.
-
Pierce was the better offensive player.
-
Pippen. I mean, he actually lead a 50+ win Bulls without Jordan.
-
People forget how ridiculously good Scottie pippen was because how over shadowed he was by Michael..it's insane that they even played on the same team. That would be like if Kobe and Pierce teamed up...scary to think about. If the Celtics drafted Kobe instead of Antoine in 96 I think those two would have teamed up for 7 or 8 titles...okay I'm getting off track
-
Pierce. Not even an argument
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
To say it's not close is a bit strong. Pierce made 3 more all star games, was was more clutch, better 3 point shooter, more potent offensive player all around. Was also better for longer. Pippens game really declined around 32/33. Pierce was still the 1st offensive options on some great teams at that age.
I'll give pippen the edge defensively. Perhaps the best defensive wing the league has ever seen. Pierce was no slouch either though.
-
Pierce more crafty. More clutch.
Pippen much better defender. Better athlete. And much better in open court.
Poll anyone outside Boston, 90% take Pippen.
-
People forget how ridiculously good Scottie pippen was because how over shadowed he was by Michael..it's insane that they even played on the same team. That would be like if Kobe and Pierce teamed up...scary to think about. If the Celtics drafted Kobe instead of Antoine in 96 I think those two would have teamed up for 7 or 8 titles...okay I'm getting off track
I think that a better analogy would have been taking Kobe in 1996 and Tracy McGrady in 1997 - an idea that was entertained by, as usual, Jerry West :o. Jesus :o. Dude is beyond incredible, lol ;D -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgly9vnC2gY
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
It's really not close. Seven All-NBA teams for Pippen (3-first; 2-second; 2-third); 10 All-Defense selections. Pierce four All-NBA selections (1-second; 3-third); zero All-Defense.
Pippin leads in titles (obviously), but also rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, eFG%. Pierce leads in scoring and FT%. That's despite Pippen being a #2 option (behind the NBA's career leader in Usage) and Pierce being a clear #1 (six times being in the top-10 in Usage).
I stand by my statement: it's not really close.
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
It's really not close. Seven All-NBA teams for Pippen (3-first; 2-second; 2-third); 10 All-Defense selections. Pierce four All-NBA selections (1-second; 3-third); zero All-Defense.
Pippin leads in titles (obviously), but also rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, eFG%. Pierce leads in scoring and FT%. That's despite Pippen being a #2 option (behind the NBA's career leader in Usage) and Pierce being a clear #1 (six times being in the top-10 in Usage).
I stand by my statement: it's not really close.
Those All-NBA selections can be attributed to playing on 8 teams that won more than 55 games, many of those teams winning more than 60, in which he was always the second or sometimes third best player (by a huge margin) on every one of those teams but one. In the 94-95 season, where Pippen led the Bulls, they won a whopping 47 games. The following year when Jordan returned, they won a record setting 72 games at the time.
-
I don't believe that Pierce ever refused to enter a game because he wasn't getting the last shot ALA Pippen. Pierce would've taken the Blazers home in Portland/Lakers in that terrible 4th quarter. Blazers blow a 15 point 4th quarter lead. Pierce was way more clutch and more of an Alpha than Pippen.
-
for me, a tough call. Pierce was much better offensively and right from the get go. Pippen needed a few years to get going. Pippen was a much better defender and rebounder. having said that, PP showed what he could do against one of the top players ever in Lebron in the playoffs. Pippen didn't really have to play against anyone on that level - he played with the one player of that caliber in the league at that time.
the eras they played in I think favored Pippen in terms of thinner rosters of the teams in the league at that time. of course, Pierce's early career had a paucity of talent in the East (when Sixers and Nets are getting to the finals with those rosters, the East was very weak) but over their careers, particularly during their peaks, I think Pierce played against better competition.
always felt Pippen was overrated and PP was underrated which would play into a poll like this if done nationally.
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
It's really not close. Seven All-NBA teams for Pippen (3-first; 2-second; 2-third); 10 All-Defense selections. Pierce four All-NBA selections (1-second; 3-third); zero All-Defense.
Pippin leads in titles (obviously), but also rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, eFG%. Pierce leads in scoring and FT%. That's despite Pippen being a #2 option (behind the NBA's career leader in Usage) and Pierce being a clear #1 (six times being in the top-10 in Usage).
I stand by my statement: it's not really close.
The All-Defence teams is what swayed me to Pippen. Crazy good defender
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
It's really not close. Seven All-NBA teams for Pippen (3-first; 2-second; 2-third); 10 All-Defense selections. Pierce four All-NBA selections (1-second; 3-third); zero All-Defense.
Pippin leads in titles (obviously), but also rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, eFG%. Pierce leads in scoring and FT%. That's despite Pippen being a #2 option (behind the NBA's career leader in Usage) and Pierce being a clear #1 (six times being in the top-10 in Usage).
I stand by my statement: it's not really close.
Those All-NBA selections can be attributed to playing on 8 teams that won more than 55 games, many of those teams winning more than 60, in which he was always the second or sometimes third best player (by a huge margin) on every one of those teams but one. In the 94-95 season, where Pippen led the Bulls, they won a whopping 47 games. The following year when Jordan returned, they won a record setting 72 games at the time.
93-94 the Bulls swapped Jordan for Kukoc but otherwise were basically the same team as the first 3 peat. Pippen was by far the best player on that team. They won 55 games and Pippen had his best statistical season if his career. He finished 3rd in MVP voting.
-
...and the year after he only won 47.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
-
...and the year after he only won 47.
Because Jordan came back and ruined things.
But yeah, anyway, 93-94 he looked pretty good leading a team by himself.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
Because I was focusing on how Pierce was a far better offensive player and scorer. I never made the argument that he was a better defender.
-
Pierce and I feel like it shouldn't even be a discussion.
Pippen is obviously miles better defensively. But Pierce still gets the underrated and most underappreciated award.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
And that Pippen was a low-usage second option, and Pierce was a high-usage first option.
Under those circumstances, 4 points per game is nothing. It's especially nothing when you consider pace. For his career, Pierce averaged 20.7 points per 100 possessions (21.4 in Boston). Pippen averaged 24.0 points per 100 possessions (25.7 in Chicago).
Not close.
-
Pierce and I feel like it shouldn't even be a discussion.
Pippen is obviously miles better defensively. But Pierce still gets the underrated and most underappreciated award.
Underappreciated, sure.
But he wasn't close to Pippen. He simply wasn't the defender, passer, rebounder, or (per 100 possessions) scorer. Pippen outproduced Pierce pretty much across the board, despite surrendering many, many, many touches to Jordan.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
And that Pippen was a low-usage second option, and Pierce was a high-usage first option.
Under those circumstances, 4 points per game is nothing. It's especially nothing when you consider pace. For his career, Pierce averaged 20.7 points per 100 possessions (21.4 in Boston). Pippen averaged 24.0 points per 100 possessions (25.7 in Chicago).
Not close.
He may average more under those simulated conditions, but Pippen would still a less efficient offensive player.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
And that Pippen was a low-usage second option, and Pierce was a high-usage first option.
Under those circumstances, 4 points per game is nothing. It's especially nothing when you consider pace. For his career, Pierce averaged 20.7 points per 100 possessions (21.4 in Boston). Pippen averaged 24.0 points per 100 possessions (25.7 in Chicago).
Not close.
He may average more under those simulated conditions, but Pippen would still a less efficient offensive player.
It depends on how you define efficiency. Despite Pierce's superior outside shooting (because of the modern era), Pippen leads in eFG%.
And, "per 100 possessions" isn't a simulation. It's adjusting for pace, but still looking at what actually happened. Give Pippen 100 possessions (as a low-usage second option) and he'd produce 24.0 points. Give Pierce the same 100 possessions (as a high-usage first option), and he'd score 20.7 points (while producing fewer assists and rebounds, and being an inferior defender).
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
And that Pippen was a low-usage second option, and Pierce was a high-usage first option.
Under those circumstances, 4 points per game is nothing. It's especially nothing when you consider pace. For his career, Pierce averaged 20.7 points per 100 possessions (21.4 in Boston). Pippen averaged 24.0 points per 100 possessions (25.7 in Chicago).
Not close.
For his career Pierce averaged 30.0 pts per game per 100 possessions. Pierce was, without a doubt, the better offensive player.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
And that Pippen was a low-usage second option, and Pierce was a high-usage first option.
Under those circumstances, 4 points per game is nothing. It's especially nothing when you consider pace. For his career, Pierce averaged 20.7 points per 100 possessions (21.4 in Boston). Pippen averaged 24.0 points per 100 possessions (25.7 in Chicago).
Not close.
For his career Pierce averaged 30.0 pts per game per 100 possessions. Pierce was, without a doubt, the better offensive player.
You’re right, I must have been looking at the wrong numbers for Pierce. I do think the difference in usage is substantial.
-
Pippens points per game per 100 possessions career average is essentially what a washed up Pierce did on the Wizards.
-
Career averages for Pierce:
ppg: 20.7
Ts%: .568
3pt%: .368
FT%: .806%
Career averages for Pippen:
ppg: 16.1
ts%: .536
3pt%: .326
FT%: .704
Pierce was definitely the better offensive player. Pippen realized early that he was playing with the greatest player who ever lived and carved out a defensive niche for himself. As a highly athletic player, he had the ability to score. But he had nowhere near the offensive arsenal, efficiency, shooting touch, or foot work that Pierce had. Substitute Pierce for Pippen and the Bulls do not win any less than 6 titles still.
You're conveniently ignoring that Pippen blows Pierce out of the water defensively, as well as playmaking. Pippen also had the edge rebounding the ball
And that Pippen was a low-usage second option, and Pierce was a high-usage first option.
Under those circumstances, 4 points per game is nothing. It's especially nothing when you consider pace. For his career, Pierce averaged 20.7 points per 100 possessions (21.4 in Boston). Pippen averaged 24.0 points per 100 possessions (25.7 in Chicago).
Not close.
For his career Pierce averaged 30.0 pts per game per 100 possessions. Pierce was, without a doubt, the better offensive player.
Yeah, there's no question Pierce was the better offensive player. The year Jordan was gone, Pippen had the keys to the car, no one else he really had to share the ball with, he was in his prime and he topped out at 22 ppg. The season after, just about the same. Pierce had 6 seasons scoring more than Pippen's career high and he was much more versatile.
This is a real debate, but I think what should be settled is that Pippen was the superior defender and Pierce was the superior scorer.
-
Pierce is obviously underrated nationally. But he's a bit underrated locally, too. He was a great offensive player and also one of the toughest players I've ever seen, who was able to sustain great play for a long time.
-
Reggie Lewis :'(.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
It's really not close. Seven All-NBA teams for Pippen (3-first; 2-second; 2-third); 10 All-Defense selections. Pierce four All-NBA selections (1-second; 3-third); zero All-Defense.
Pippin leads in titles (obviously), but also rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, eFG%. Pierce leads in scoring and FT%. That's despite Pippen being a #2 option (behind the NBA's career leader in Usage) and Pierce being a clear #1 (six times being in the top-10 in Usage).
I stand by my statement: it's not really close.
You say "despite" as if being a second option hurts your rebounds assists steals blocks and efg. It affects assists. That's it. In fact I would say that Pippen playing next to Jordan inflated is efficiency and allowed him to be way more active on the boards and defense.
The overall point is correct. Pippens better, but "despite" is not appropriate there.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
You can be a top 10 player of your era without making a bunch of all-NBA teams.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
You can be a top 10 player of your era without making a bunch of all-NBA teams.
It’s not particularly likely though. When voters had to look at the top six forwards and top six guards every year, they only selected Pierce four times. Only once was he voted to the second team, and never to the first.
So, if only once was he a top-8 guard/forward, and never was he a top-4 guard/forward, then it’s hard to put him in the top-10.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
You can be a top 10 player of your era without making a bunch of all-NBA teams.
It’s not particularly likely though. When voters had to look at the top six forwards and top six guards every year, they only selected Pierce four times. Only once was he voted to the second team, and never to the first.
So, if only once was he a top-8 guard/forward, and never was he a top-4 guard/forward, then it’s hard to put him in the top-10.
In 05-06 Pierce had the best year of his career. However, he was not an All-NBA selection. All-NBA selections typically reward winning. Unfortunately, Pierce did not play with Jordan his whole career. The best player he ever had during his prime was Antione Walker. Wow.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
-
Pierce, and it really isnt that close
-
Pierce, and it really isnt that close
Would really like to hear how Pierce is considerably better than Pippen
-
Pierce, and it really isnt that close
Would really like to hear how Pierce is considerably better than Pippen
How old are you? Serious question. I'm old enough to have watched both of these guys play. Pippen was a better defensive player than Pierce. Pierce was a better offensive player than Pippen. Pierce was a very good all around player. Pippen was too. I believe Pierce was better. I watched both guys play in prime years. The numbers show Pierce was a much better offensive player, and Pierce played with scrubs most of his career.
-
https://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/9/9290999/nba-90s-scottie-pippen-michael-jordan
https://www.blogabull.com/2015/9/24/9358331/scottie-pippen-stats-analytics-chicago-bulls
I’m curious, can anybody come up with even one non-Celtic media / NBA site that ranks Pierce over Pippen?
-
It’s harder to tell than it should be due to all the variables, but it’s Pippen.
-
Equal votes... This is why fans of other teams don’t take us seriously. I love Pierce, but it’s Pippen by a landslide.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Yeah he was. When I watch a lot of random Bulls games from 90-93 or 96-98, frequently Pippin looks underrated to me and Jordan looks underrated vs his Paul Bunyan status (not vs. other players).
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYcjCoy7R4I
Give me Pierce please. Especially in the last two seconds of a tied game.
-
Equal votes... This is why fans of other teams don’t take us seriously. I love Pierce, but it’s Pippen by a landslide.
Pierce made it to the NBA finals twice, once being the best player on the team and the next being arguably the best player on the team. He also made it to the eastern conference finals as the best player on the team. Do people think if Pippen played for some other team in the league and wasn't drafted into the perfect situation he would have had success as any type of winner at all? Purely hypothetical, but I'm just curious as to what people think. Pierce was a bonafide go-to scorer with good efficiency as well as being a good all-around-player. Pippen was a great defensive player, with a good all-around game, and was a solid offensive player/scorer. How many great defensive players who are solid offensively have every carried a team to the finals being the supposed "best player" on a team. Pierce achieved these marks being the best guy on the team.
-
https://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/9/9290999/nba-90s-scottie-pippen-michael-jordan
https://www.blogabull.com/2015/9/24/9358331/scottie-pippen-stats-analytics-chicago-bulls
I’m curious, can anybody come up with even one non-Celtic media / NBA site that ranks Pierce over Pippen?
Maybe we could find some Croatian ones.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
-
I could make an easy argument that from 96-96 to 97-98 Pippen is the third best player on the Bulls.
-
I could make an easy argument that from 96-96 to 97-98 Pippen is the third best player on the Bulls.
Then make it
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
Dikembe Mutombo who is a HOF and one of the greatest defensive players of all time.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
Dikembe Mutombo who is a HOF and one of the greatest defensive players of all time.
.... and was also 35, and not at all the player he was at Denver nor Atlanta
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
Dikembe Mutombo who is a HOF and one of the greatest defensive players of all time.
.... and was also 35, and not at all the player he was at Denver nor Atlanta
Still a much more impactful player than Walker, who was simply not a valuable player.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Yeah he was. When I watch a lot of random Bulls games from 90-93 or 96-98, frequently Pippin looks underrated to me and Jordan looks underrated vs his Paul Bunyan status (not vs. other players).
Whenever I watch those contests it's always amazing to me as to how much difficulty that Pippen had with guarding practically anyone who could utilize a pick/screen off of the ball and, well, as to how badly Jordan fared against post players. Dudes would bite on almost every pump fake, LOL ;D, and yet they somehow never managed to commit a foul ::).
-
Pippen was the 2nd to 4th best player in the league for a large part of the 90's. He was probably the best defender in the league for much of that time too. Pierce was never a top 5 player in the league at any point in his career.
I love Paul Pierce, but he just wasn't as good of a player as Pippen. During the Dream Team Olympics, I read a column that the two best players on that team, at that time, were Jordan and Pippen, because both were in their prime, had tremendous chemistry together and were the two best defenders on the planet.
-
Pippen was the 2nd to 4th best player in the league for a large part of the 90's. He was probably the best defender in the league for much of that time too. Pierce was never a top 5 player in the league at any point in his career.
I love Paul Pierce, but he just wasn't as good of a player as Pippen. During the Dream Team Olympics, I read a column that the two best players on that team, at that time, were Jordan and Pippen, because both were in their prime, had tremendous chemistry together and were the two best defenders on the planet.
I agree that Pippen was better, but really?
Just off the top of my head I remember MJ, Hakeem, David Robinson, Karl Malone as better than Pippen. Shaq and Pippen were probably a level below these guys, alongside Stockton
-
Great discussion, I did not vote because to me the answer completely depends on the other 4 starters surrounding Pippen/Pierce. Pippen could never be a number 1 option and lead his team to a championship. With that said you could argue he is the best supporting #2 player to ever play the game. Pippen needed an Alpha (MJ).
Pierce was our closer, our #1 but needed the second coming of the Big 3 to win a title.
Circumstances are so important in these debates of who is a better player.
I think the Bulls teams would have been worse with Pierce on them (instead of Pippen) and I don’t think the Celtics win the banner if Pippen was on the Celtics (instead of Pierce)
-
Pippen was the 2nd to 4th best player in the league for a large part of the 90's. He was probably the best defender in the league for much of that time too. Pierce was never a top 5 player in the league at any point in his career.
I love Paul Pierce, but he just wasn't as good of a player as Pippen. During the Dream Team Olympics, I read a column that the two best players on that team, at that time, were Jordan and Pippen, because both were in their prime, had tremendous chemistry together and were the two best defenders on the planet.
I agree that Pippen was better, but really?
Just off the top of my head I remember MJ, Hakeem, David Robinson, Karl Malone as better than Pippen. Shaq and Pippen were probably a level below these guys, alongside Stockton
Shaq was not a level below. Charles Barkley was better too.
-
Pippen was the 2nd to 4th best player in the league for a large part of the 90's. He was probably the best defender in the league for much of that time too. Pierce was never a top 5 player in the league at any point in his career.
I love Paul Pierce, but he just wasn't as good of a player as Pippen. During the Dream Team Olympics, I read a column that the two best players on that team, at that time, were Jordan and Pippen, because both were in their prime, had tremendous chemistry together and were the two best defenders on the planet.
Iirc, didn't Chuck Daly say that Barkley was the MVP of that team, not to mention the fact that, well, didn't said coach actually try to get Jordan to calm Charles down in terms of intensity, even though, ultimately, nothing worked, lol? ;D
-
As a Celtic fan board, I feel pretty confident I know how this will play out but I saw some comments in a thread a few days ago really extolling Pippen and I'm curious just how well regarded he is and thought this could be an interesting match up.
Greater player, Pierce or Pippen?
Love Pierce. Pippen was better. People forget that after Pippen and Jordan won 57 games and their 3rd title, Jordan retired and Pippen won 55 games without him. Pierce never sniffed 50 wins until KG showed up and carried the team.
-
I could make an easy argument that from 96-96 to 97-98 Pippen is the third best player on the Bulls.
Then make it
Yeah, it wouldn’t be a very good case.
Random question, though: where do Pippen / Jordan / Rodman rank all-time as a defensive trio? Those guys are all easily top-10 defenders all-time at their position.
-
https://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/9/9290999/nba-90s-scottie-pippen-michael-jordan
https://www.blogabull.com/2015/9/24/9358331/scottie-pippen-stats-analytics-chicago-bulls
I’m curious, can anybody come up with even one non-Celtic media / NBA site that ranks Pierce over Pippen?
fwiw, Bill Simmons had Pierce #47 in his pyramid and Pippen all the way up to #24. Pierce is almost certainly higher now after admirable supporting turns in the twilight of his career in Brooklyn and Washington, but there's no way he's covered that gap.
I do think he's got Pippen a little too high (above John Stockton, Rick Barry, and David Robinson) and I think there's something about Pippen being underrated for so long that he's now became slightly overrated by today's generation of fans but we've still got Simmons putting Pippen firmly ahead of Pierce.
-
...and the year after he only won 47.
Because Jordan came back and ruined things.
But yeah, anyway, 93-94 he looked pretty good leading a team by himself.
not really, but they did lose 2 starters in Grant and Cartwright (along with Williams and Paxson who were the 9th and 10th men in the 94 playoffs). So they went from a nearly identical team to a team that was down 2 starters, so a bit of a step back isn't all that surprising.
-
Equal votes... This is why fans of other teams don’t take us seriously. I love Pierce, but it’s Pippen by a landslide.
Pierce made it to the NBA finals twice, once being the best player on the team and the next being arguably the best player on the team. He also made it to the eastern conference finals as the best player on the team. Do people think if Pippen played for some other team in the league and wasn't drafted into the perfect situation he would have had success as any type of winner at all? Purely hypothetical, but I'm just curious as to what people think. Pierce was a bonafide go-to scorer with good efficiency as well as being a good all-around-player. Pippen was a great defensive player, with a good all-around game, and was a solid offensive player/scorer. How many great defensive players who are solid offensively have every carried a team to the finals being the supposed "best player" on a team. Pierce achieved these marks being the best guy on the team.
Pierce was not better than Garnett. It isn't even close really and Garnett absolutely should have been the Finals MVP as he drove that entire team and played with consistency that Pierce lacked (even in that final series against the Lakers). In fact, I think you could make a reasonable argument that in the Lakers series, Allen was better than Pierce (though Pierce was the better player). Pierce was basically given a lifetime achievement award with that Finals MVP and it shouldn't have been his. Let's remember, KG gets hurt the next year and Boston loses in the 2nd round, and then the C's miraculously are back in the Finals with KG in 2010 (hmm I wonder why that is). The simple reality is Pierce was a very good player for a very long time, but he is not even in the same league as a player as Scottie Pippen. The fact that the voting is tied is actually quite embarrassing.
EDIT: This thread has a lot of similar themes as the one from a couple of weeks ago talking about Pierce hate. http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=96673.0
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
Dikembe Mutombo who is a HOF and one of the greatest defensive players of all time.
.... and was also 35, and not at all the player he was at Denver nor Atlanta
Still a much more impactful player than Walker, who was simply not a valuable player.
Dikembe put up 11-11-1 that year with over 2 blocks, solid, but that very same year Antoine put up 22-9-5 with 1.5 steals and made the all star team, and that's just a random Antoine season. He was definitely better than Dikembe at age 35, and it's not close.
Then you consider peak Antoine and young prime Paul got obliterated by JKidd and the Nets, and that Iverson obliterated those Nets by himself to get to the finals... That's why Iverson gets props, and gets to claim he did less with more. Piece got less far than Iverson, with better teammates.
-
For the record, Pierce might be my favorite Celtic, but watch a bunch of Bulls games between 90-98 and Pippen will jump off the screen to you. Like I said before, when I watch many of the old games, Pippen looks EDIT: OVERrated and Jordan looks underrated. Pippen was a top 5-10 player of the 90's.
-
I don’t understand how people are picking Pippen in a “landslide.” Basketball is a two-way sport. Yes, Pippen was a better defensive player. But Pierce was clearly the better offensive player. The numbers prove this. Therefore, how is Pippen clearly the better player if he is only better on one side of the ball?
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
Dikembe Mutombo who is a HOF and one of the greatest defensive players of all time.
.... and was also 35, and not at all the player he was at Denver nor Atlanta
Still a much more impactful player than Walker, who was simply not a valuable player.
Dikembe put up 11-11-1 that year with over 2 blocks, solid, but that very same year Antoine put up 22-9-5 with 1.5 steals and made the all star team, and that's just a random Antoine season. He was definitely better than Dikembe at age 35, and it's not close.
Then you consider peak Antoine and young prime Paul got obliterated by JKidd and the Nets, and that Iverson obliterated those Nets by himself to get to the finals... That's why Iverson gets props, and gets to claim he did less with more. Piece got less far than Iverson, with better teammates.
I don’t care how many points Walker put up. He was a horribly inefficient player, which led to his rather quick NBA demise. Mutombo was better.
-
I don’t understand how people are picking Pippen in a “landslide.” Basketball is a two-way sport. Yes, Pippen was a better defensive player. But Pierce was clearly the better offensive player. The numbers prove this. Therefore, how is Pippen clearly the better player if he is only better on one side of the ball?
Because Pippen was almost as good as Pierce on offense (only slightly behind in scoring despite being a second option, while being a much better passer), he was a better rebounder (despite playing next to Rodman), and the defense wasn’t remotely close.
-
Pippen.
Not much of a debate in my book, either. If any.
-
Equal votes... This is why fans of other teams don’t take us seriously. I love Pierce, but it’s Pippen by a landslide.
Pierce made it to the NBA finals twice, once being the best player on the team and the next being arguably the best player on the team. He also made it to the eastern conference finals as the best player on the team. Do people think if Pippen played for some other team in the league and wasn't drafted into the perfect situation he would have had success as any type of winner at all? Purely hypothetical, but I'm just curious as to what people think. Pierce was a bonafide go-to scorer with good efficiency as well as being a good all-around-player. Pippen was a great defensive player, with a good all-around game, and was a solid offensive player/scorer. How many great defensive players who are solid offensively have every carried a team to the finals being the supposed "best player" on a team. Pierce achieved these marks being the best guy on the team.
Pierce was not better than Garnett. It isn't even close really and Garnett absolutely should have been the Finals MVP as he drove that entire team and played with consistency that Pierce lacked (even in that final series against the Lakers). In fact, I think you could make a reasonable argument that in the Lakers series, Allen was better than Pierce (though Pierce was the better player). Pierce was basically given a lifetime achievement award with that Finals MVP and it shouldn't have been his. Let's remember, KG gets hurt the next year and Boston loses in the 2nd round, and then the C's miraculously are back in the Finals with KG in 2010 (hmm I wonder why that is). The simple reality is Pierce was a very good player for a very long time, but he is not even in the same league as a player as Scottie Pippen. The fact that the voting is tied is actually quite embarrassing.
EDIT: This thread has a lot of similar themes as the one from a couple of weeks ago talking about Pierce hate. http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=96673.0
TP to all of this in its entirety.
-
Pierce was probably a top 10 player of his era. Can we say the same about Pippen? I don't think I can.
All-NBA voters disagreed.
Allen Iverson had 7 ALL-NBA selections. I'd love for you to mathematically prove to me Iverson was a better offensive player than Pierce.
Iverson did more with less.
That's very subjective. In 10 seasons with Philadelphia, Iverson could only manage 5 seasons with records above .500%. Statistics show he was horribly inefficient and not a winner.
Who do you think the 2nd best player was on AI’s team that made the finals? Pick a guy, then make a case for that guy being better than Antoine that includes comparing all star appearances, keeping in mind Pierce never made a finals without 2-3 HOFers.
Dikembe Mutombo who is a HOF and one of the greatest defensive players of all time.
.... and was also 35, and not at all the player he was at Denver nor Atlanta
Still a much more impactful player than Walker, who was simply not a valuable player.
Dikembe put up 11-11-1 that year with over 2 blocks, solid, but that very same year Antoine put up 22-9-5 with 1.5 steals and made the all star team, and that's just a random Antoine season. He was definitely better than Dikembe at age 35, and it's not close.
Then you consider peak Antoine and young prime Paul got obliterated by JKidd and the Nets, and that Iverson obliterated those Nets by himself to get to the finals... That's why Iverson gets props, and gets to claim he did less with more. Piece got less far than Iverson, with better teammates.
I don’t care how many points Walker put up. He was a horribly inefficient player, which led to his rather quick NBA demise. Mutombo was better.
Well, when we basically just took Walker off those teams, teams Walker helped made the playoffs and peak in the ECF once, and they then were led by only Pierce with weak supporting talent (like Iverson had), the Celtics became one of the worst teams in the league, finishing 2nd worst in 2006-7.
With a similarly bad surrounding roster (Snow-AI-McKie-Ratliff-Deke, they were bad, I watched them a lot, 2 of them couldn’t play in the NBA today), Iverson made the finals and finished 2nd best.
Iverson making the finals with that roster is the loser’s version of Dirk beating the Heat with no all star teammate. It’s a truly incredible achievement, and Iverson was amazing, and an offensive system all by himself like a Dirk or Curry or Lebron (but less efficient, as it’s hard to do that at 5’11”).
Pierce is great, probably a top 30 player for at least the next 5 years, as is AI, but he needed 2 HOFers (a top 20 all timer and the 2nd best shooter ever) to get as far as AI did with scraps.
-
I don’t understand how people are picking Pippen in a “landslide.” Basketball is a two-way sport. Yes, Pippen was a better defensive player. But Pierce was clearly the better offensive player. The numbers prove this. Therefore, how is Pippen clearly the better player if he is only better on one side of the ball?
“Landslide” is debatable and you won’t get it if you’re focusing heavily on offense, or stats in general, or if you watched a lot more full games of PP than Pippen. I’m in my mid 30s, I saw both a lot.
You watch the full games and how amazing he looks, rely on advanced metrics especially team oriented ones, consider Pip got less shots and was featured less, what he did when MJ was gone, and compare PP and Pip in 1st and 2nd teams (5 to 1) and that’s why some say landslide.
You can argue Pippen benefitted from Jordan (correct), to downplay some of Pippens achievements, but if we go down that road, makes it hard to pump up Russell (best coach and teammates in history) or Pierce (only won a title with 2 other HOFers and a future multi all star).
-
I don’t understand how people are picking Pippen in a “landslide.” Basketball is a two-way sport. Yes, Pippen was a better defensive player. But Pierce was clearly the better offensive player. The numbers prove this. Therefore, how is Pippen clearly the better player if he is only better on one side of the ball?
“Landslide” is debatable and you won’t get it if you’re focusing heavily on offense, or stats in general, or if you watched a lot more full games of PP than Pippen. I’m in my mid 30s, I saw both a lot.
You watch the full games and how amazing he looks, rely on advanced metrics especially team oriented ones, consider Pip got less shots and was featured less, what he did when MJ was gone, and compare PP and Pip in 1st and 2nd teams (5 to 1) and that’s why some say landslide.
You can argue Pippen benefitted from Jordan (correct), to downplay some of Pippens achievements, but if we go down that road, makes it hard to pump up Russell (best coach and teammates in history) or Pierce (only won a title with 2 other HOFers and a future multi all star).
I've seen this a lot this thread. Obviously playing alongside Jordan means Jordan gets the most touches but we have a really good indication of what Pippen would look like without Jordan, since he played essentially two full seasons (72 games and then 63 games) without him in his prime. He averaged basically the same thing both seasons, 22-8-5 playing All NBA defense.
So while Jordan has to be taken into account, there is evidence that suggests Pippen would not have been scoring a lot more if he'd been with a different teammate.
-
I don’t understand how people are picking Pippen in a “landslide.” Basketball is a two-way sport. Yes, Pippen was a better defensive player. But Pierce was clearly the better offensive player. The numbers prove this. Therefore, how is Pippen clearly the better player if he is only better on one side of the ball?
Because Pippen was almost as good as Pierce on offense (only slightly behind in scoring despite being a second option, while being a much better passer), he was a better rebounder (despite playing next to Rodman), and the defense wasn’t remotely close.
I completely disagree. Pippen was the better athlete, yes, but never had Pierce's footwork, never mind jump shot from any distance, not to mention the fact that Scottie was always a sub-par free throw shooter, at best. The only common thread between the two, offensively, imo, is that neither of them ever really developed a post game >:(.
-
Equal votes... This is why fans of other teams don’t take us seriously. I love Pierce, but it’s Pippen by a landslide.
Pierce made it to the NBA finals twice, once being the best player on the team and the next being arguably the best player on the team. He also made it to the eastern conference finals as the best player on the team. Do people think if Pippen played for some other team in the league and wasn't drafted into the perfect situation he would have had success as any type of winner at all? Purely hypothetical, but I'm just curious as to what people think. Pierce was a bonafide go-to scorer with good efficiency as well as being a good all-around-player. Pippen was a great defensive player, with a good all-around game, and was a solid offensive player/scorer. How many great defensive players who are solid offensively have every carried a team to the finals being the supposed "best player" on a team. Pierce achieved these marks being the best guy on the team.
Pierce was not better than Garnett. It isn't even close really and Garnett absolutely should have been the Finals MVP as he drove that entire team and played with consistency that Pierce lacked (even in that final series against the Lakers). In fact, I think you could make a reasonable argument that in the Lakers series, Allen was better than Pierce (though Pierce was the better player). Pierce was basically given a lifetime achievement award with that Finals MVP and it shouldn't have been his. Let's remember, KG gets hurt the next year and Boston loses in the 2nd round, and then the C's miraculously are back in the Finals with KG in 2010 (hmm I wonder why that is). The simple reality is Pierce was a very good player for a very long time, but he is not even in the same league as a player as Scottie Pippen. The fact that the voting is tied is actually quite embarrassing.
EDIT: This thread has a lot of similar themes as the one from a couple of weeks ago talking about Pierce hate. http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=96673.0
Forget about the MVP of The NBA Finals - KG should have been the MVP of the league in 2007-08. Giving it to Kobe was an absolute joke and slap in the face, imo.
-
So for the Pippen people. You guys are saying if you trade Pierce from a decent Celtics team to the MJ Bulls for Pippen the Celtics get better and the Bulls get worse? Is that the theory?
-
That poll is taken in any blog but a Boston one and it would be even more lopsided folks. A lot of peeps hate PP. I dislike Pippen because he played with Jordan whom I don't care or the Bulls. I loved PP but love aside. I think at the end of the day Pippen was more versatile. I love the guy who cherrypicked stats with the shooting.
That was patently absurd. Pippen was a strong rebounder, passer and defender, he could play point. Now if I had a gun to my head and had to pick a guy to make a shot or my life depended on it. I would take Pierce. Anything else, Pippen.
-
So for the Pippen people. You guys are saying if you trade Pierce from a decent Celtics team to the MJ Bulls for Pippen the Celtics get better and the Bulls get worse? Is that the theory?
Yes, especially if you adjust for era.
-
So for the Pippen people. You guys are saying if you trade Pierce from a decent Celtics team to the MJ Bulls for Pippen the Celtics get better and the Bulls get worse? Is that the theory?
The 2008 Cs were one of the best defensive teams of the last 3 decades. Can you imagine dropping Pierce to put in one of the best defensive players of the last 3 decades to that team while keeping similar offense? Rondo, Ray, Pippen, KG and Perk? Who the heck scores on that team? In the playoffs having Pippen on Lebron, Kobe, and Joe Johnson?
That 2008 squad would have been an all time defensive juggernaut
-
So for the Pippen people. You guys are saying if you trade Pierce from a decent Celtics team to the MJ Bulls for Pippen the Celtics get better and the Bulls get worse? Is that the theory?
The 2008 Cs were one of the best defensive teams of the last 3 decades. Can you imagine dropping Pierce to put in one of the best defensive players of the last 3 decades to that team while keeping similar offense? Rondo, Ray, Pippen, KG and Perk? Who the heck scores on that team? In the playoffs having Pippen on Lebron, Kobe, and Joe Johnson?
That 2008 squad would have been an all time defensive juggernaut
Thinking about the defensive chemistry KG and Pippen would’ve had is insane. Good luck scoring 80 points on that team, lol
-
So for the Pippen people. You guys are saying if you trade Pierce from a decent Celtics team to the MJ Bulls for Pippen the Celtics get better and the Bulls get worse? Is that the theory?
The 2008 Cs were one of the best defensive teams of the last 3 decades. Can you imagine dropping Pierce to put in one of the best defensive players of the last 3 decades to that team while keeping similar offense? Rondo, Ray, Pippen, KG and Perk? Who the heck scores on that team? In the playoffs having Pippen on Lebron, Kobe, and Joe Johnson?
That 2008 squad would have been an all time defensive juggernaut
Pippen was certainly the better defender but how much more dominant of a defensive team could they have been? As it was, they ranked #1 in opponent ORtg, effective field-goal percentage allowed and in percentage of turnovers forced.
I think Pierce's defense is underrated, especially when he wasn't having to work as hard to get his points. He wasn't the all-timer that Pippen was but he was very good. I suspect the impact on defense of swapping Pierce and Pippen wouldn't be that drastic.
-
The revisionism on Pippen here is hilarious.
Pierce was the better shooter and was a 10 time all star to Pippen's 7, and for all the talk of Pippen's defense he played in the era when you actually could play defense whereas Pierce shut down Kobe in the era when you couldn't.
Further Pippen had his shot to be the guy. He lost MJ, but was given upgrades everywhere else. He was given Kukoc, Longley, a phenomenal 3 point shooter, and a draft pick, and that was in addition to 4 time all star Horace Grant (who had the best year of his career) that was on the team.
What did Pippen do? He wet the bed. Not only did the Bulls not make the Finals, they didn't make the conference finals. They didn't win the central division. Then he sat and sulked in the last two seconds of a tied playoff game where Kukoc hit the winning shot.
Pippen was just a guy in the right place at the right time that never led a team to a conference finals. He's nothing like Barkley or Karl Malone or even Ewing or Reggie Miller. He was a good player but should never be confused with a prime guy.
He's Carmelo Anthony with way better defense. Woop de doo. Give me Pierce all day every day.
-
The revisionism on Pippen here is hilarious.
Pierce was the better shooter and was a 10 time all star to Pippen's 7, and for all the talk of Pippen's defense he played in the era when you actually could play defense whereas Pierce shut down Kobe in the era when you couldn't.
Further Pippen had his shot to be the guy. He lost MJ, but was given upgrades everywhere else. He was given Kukoc, Longley, a phenomenal 3 point shooter, and a draft pick, and that was in addition to 4 time all star Horace Grant that was on the team.
What did Pippen do? He wet the bed. Not only did the Bulls not make the Finals, they didn't make the conference finals. They didn't win the central division. Then he sat and sulked in the last two seconds of a tied playoff game where Kukoc hit the winning shot.
Pippen was just a guy in the right place at the right time that never led a team to a conference finals. He's nothing like Barkley or Karl Malone or even Ewing or Reggie Miller. He was a good player but should never be confused with a prime guy.
He's Carmelo Anthony with way better defense. Woop de doo. Give me Pierce all day every day.
Lol at that last line. Melo was a better scorer than Pierce, so that comparison is very funny
-
The revisionism on Pippen here is hilarious.
Pierce was the better shooter and was a 10 time all star to Pippen's 7, and for all the talk of Pippen's defense he played in the era when you actually could play defense whereas Pierce shut down Kobe in the era when you couldn't.
Further Pippen had his shot to be the guy. He lost MJ, but was given upgrades everywhere else. He was given Kukoc, Longley, a phenomenal 3 point shooter, and a draft pick, and that was in addition to 4 time all star Horace Grant that was on the team.
What did Pippen do? He wet the bed. Not only did the Bulls not make the Finals, they didn't make the conference finals. They didn't win the central division. Then he sat and sulked in the last two seconds of a tied playoff game where Kukoc hit the winning shot.
Pippen was just a guy in the right place at the right time that never led a team to a conference finals. He's nothing like Barkley or Karl Malone or even Ewing or Reggie Miller. He was a good player but should never be confused with a prime guy.
He's Carmelo Anthony with way better defense. Woop de doo. Give me Pierce all day every day.
Lol at that last line. Melo was a better scorer than Pierce, so that comparison is very funny
Melo has some good stats but he's nothing special. Although he does have the same number of all star games.
Vince Carter with better defense? TMac with better defense? One of those overrated overhyped guys
-
Truth!
In all honesty
-
Deleted.
-
Come on now. Pippen, and it’s not close.
I get it if people pick Pippen, but to say it's not close is a bit much. It's pretty darn close. A lot of Pippens' career he was aided by the fact that defenses had to focus so much on Jordan. I'm not saying that negates his greatness, but you need to take that into account.
It's really not close. Seven All-NBA teams for Pippen (3-first; 2-second; 2-third); 10 All-Defense selections. Pierce four All-NBA selections (1-second; 3-third); zero All-Defense.
Pippin leads in titles (obviously), but also rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, eFG%. Pierce leads in scoring and FT%. That's despite Pippen being a #2 option (behind the NBA's career leader in Usage) and Pierce being a clear #1 (six times being in the top-10 in Usage).
I stand by my statement: it's not really close.
as much as i loath pippen as a person and adore pierce for wearing green, pippen was better. there might not have been as large a gap as some here posit, but pippen, clearly.
roy's points are good ones. add to that pippen's great, great defense. pippen's defense was outstanding. he was arguably the greatest perimeter defender in the history of the NBA.
what i think will be a more interesting debate in a decade will a "who's better - pierce or tatum?"
;D
-
Maybe I am a "homer", but I think Phil Jackson should get mentioned when talking MJordan or SPippen.
I don't think Phil gets enough credit for his contribution during the Championship years - both as a Bull or Laker. To put it bluntly, no Phil, then Jordan/Pippen don't win 6 championships.
Pierce did his with bad coaching and poor front office. Pippen did his with arguably the second best coach in the History of the NBA (second to good old Red only - another Homer comment ;D)
In short, LeBron with Phil ...... Instead of 3, LeBron would have 6 by now.
-
Does anyone here think Pippen could straight up defend Kobe (or LeBron)? Using today's rules?
I just got finished watching Marcus Smart for years. Pippen's defense was good but not that good. He wasn't even the best defender on his team.
Are we also going to start asking if maybe Kawhi Leonard is better than Pierce?
-
Are we all going to start talking about how great Horace Grant was? He was a 4 time 2nd team all defensive player. I mean maybe he was better than Al Horford.
-
Does anyone here think Pippen could straight up defend Kobe (or LeBron)? Using today's rules?
I just got finished watching Marcus Smart for years. Pippen's defense was good but not that good. He wasn't even the best defender on his team.
Are we also going to start asking if maybe Kawhi Leonard is better than Pierce?
Leonard is better than Pierce (or at least he was, no idea if he gets back to where he was).
-
Are we all going to start talking about how great Horace Grant was? He was a 4 time 2nd team all defensive player. I mean maybe he was better than Al Horford.
That is actually an interesting question.
-
Pierce, and it really isnt that close
Would really like to hear how Pierce is considerably better than Pippen
Scottie Pippen was the beneficiary of one of the best run organizations in BB in a long time. He also benefited from playing with arguably the GOAT. Paul Pierce has numerous memorable games and shots in his career, Pippen was a solid contributor to the Bulls like Rodman, Grant, Harper. Pierce was THE MAN, Pippen was one of the OTHERS.
-
Does anyone here think Pippen could straight up defend Kobe (or LeBron)? Using today's rules?
I just got finished watching Marcus Smart for years. Pippen's defense was good but not that good. He wasn't even the best defender on his team.
Are we also going to start asking if maybe Kawhi Leonard is better than Pierce?
Leonard is better than Pierce (or at least he was, no idea if he gets back to where he was).
Kawhi has never made it past 74 games in a season. Pierce did it routinely. You gotta look at totals. Not just averages
-
Are we all going to start talking about how great Horace Grant was? He was a 4 time 2nd team all defensive player. I mean maybe he was better than Al Horford.
That is actually an interesting question.
He's just another good player that got a little bit of MJ's glory to fall on him.
-
While i was gone did anyone get into whether Kukoc was a better sixth man than McHale and whether BJ Armstrong was a better backup pg than Marcus Smart and that Jason Caffey was better than Leon Powe?