Revisiting The Trade that almost made Scottie Pippen a Celtic

[JSD]

A frantic night of trade talks throughout the National Basketball Association led to one very interesting possibility involving the Bulls' Scottie Pippen. Those close to the situation said Boston Coach Rick Pitino was mulling a deal in which he would send his team's third and sixth picks in tonight's draft to Chicago for Pippen and center Luc Longley...

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/25/sports/pippen-in-celtics-green.html

I remember being ecstatic about the idea as a kid. In retrospect, it probably did not matter too much either way as I trust Pitino would have failed to put the proper pieces around Pippen to make the Celtics a legitimate contender. This trade also would have taken Pierce out of the equation as the Celtics would have been too good to be in the lottery as a low seeded playoff team. I do wonder though, could a more competent GM have gotten the Celtics back to the promise land sooner? That 97 Roster that Pitino all but totally dissolved and renounced, had some talent on it. Imagine if Ainge or Bird were brought in to run the team instead of Pitino. What do you think? Would Pippen have made the Celtics a destination back then?

Celtics 96-97 Roster:

Dana Barros
Frank Brickowski
Dee Brown
Marty Conlon
Todd Day
Nate Driggers
Pervis Ellison
Rick Fox
Steve Hamer
Michael Hawkins
Stacey King
Alton Lister
Greg Minor
Dino Radja
Brett Szabo
Antoine Walker
David Wesley
Eric Williams

[Eja117]

I don't think we woulda got Pierce the next year

[BballTim]

  That trade rumor came before Pitino coached his first game and was a good indication that the team had made a mistake hiring him. The rumor I heard (IIRC) was actually worse than that, with one of or both of Antoine and a future 1st going along with the two top 5 picks, which he didn't have any interest in because he didn't get Duncan. Quite a ransom for a 15 win team to pay for a "second best player on a title team" star that was on the decline.

[Eja117]

I remember suggestions that it would take Toine, the 3 and 6 picks, and next year's pick to get Tim Duncan.

I wish they had done that

[Jon]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

[slamtheking]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

[Jon]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

Maybe. But what does that say about other stars of that era including Jordan? And it also wouldn't have changed the fact that Pippen likely would have made the C's a lot better in said watered down league.

[Moranis]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

I think you probably need to look at the league during those years again.  There were quite a few very good teams.  Magic, Knicks, and Hawks were all very solid teams in the East.  Pacers, Nets, and Heat were on the rise.  Cavs were still pretty solid.  Out west the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Jazz were all excellent teams.  Spurs, Warriors and Blazers were pretty darn good.  Now granted none of those teams would go down as all time great teams, but the league on the whole was pretty strong in 93/94 and 94/95. 

[slamtheking]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

Maybe. But what does that say about other stars of that era including Jordan? And it also wouldn't have changed the fact that Pippen likely would have made the C's a lot better in said watered down league.

It just says what everyone pretty much agrees on -- Jordan was by far the dominant player in that time.    He was that much better than everone else that his team won 6 'consecutive' titles in the seasons he played (I'm not alone in the opinion that if he played basketball in that 2-year retirement period he'd have won the title those years as well -- no disrespect to Hakeem).

Agreed, Pippen would have made the C's better but he wouldn't have made them contenders.  Probably would have given people a better idea of just how good he was --> people like myself who discounted his being labeled the 'second best player in the league' after Jordan because his offense was mediocre would have had a chance to see what he could do as the true alpha dog on a team that he would have had to carry.  If Pippen carried that C's team to 50+ wins, I'd have higher opinion of him than I do. 

[slamtheking]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

I think you probably need to look at the league during those years again.  There were quite a few very good teams.  Magic, Knicks, and Hawks were all very solid teams in the East.  Pacers, Nets, and Heat were on the rise.  Cavs were still pretty solid.  Out west the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Jazz were all excellent teams.  Spurs, Warriors and Blazers were pretty darn good.  Now granted none of those teams would go down as all time great teams, but the league on the whole was pretty strong in 93/94 and 94/95. 

no need to look back.  many decent teams that had a couple of star players and a lot of middling role players.  no teams that would have been a title threat in the 80's or 2000's. 

probably one of the reasons I discount the 'greatness' label bestowed on Jordan's title teams.  I don't those teams would have won a title in the 80's either.  those 80's teams (C's, Lakers, Sixers first half of decade, even Pistons at the end of the decade though I hated their style of winning) I use as a standard for greatness. 

[Moranis]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

I think you probably need to look at the league during those years again.  There were quite a few very good teams.  Magic, Knicks, and Hawks were all very solid teams in the East.  Pacers, Nets, and Heat were on the rise.  Cavs were still pretty solid.  Out west the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Jazz were all excellent teams.  Spurs, Warriors and Blazers were pretty darn good.  Now granted none of those teams would go down as all time great teams, but the league on the whole was pretty strong in 93/94 and 94/95. 

no need to look back.  many decent teams that had a couple of star players and a lot of middling role players.  no teams that would have been a title threat in the 80's or 2000's. 

probably one of the reasons I discount the 'greatness' label bestowed on Jordan's title teams.  I don't those teams would have won a title in the 80's either.  those 80's teams (C's, Lakers, Sixers first half of decade, even Pistons at the end of the decade though I hated their style of winning) I use as a standard for greatness.

a Houston team led by a 2nd year Hakeem was in the Finals in the 80's.  Seattle was a pretty darn good team led by Payton and Kemp, but that also had Schrempf, Perkins, Gill, and McMillan.  The Jazz of course had Malone and Stockton, but also had Russell, Hornacek, Chambers, other Malone, etc.  Knicks were pretty good with Ewing, Oakley, Starks, Mason, Anthony, etc.  Magic with Shaq, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Skiles, etc. were pretty good (frankly that Magic is pretty darn close to Shaq's title winning LA teams).  Pacers had no superstars (though Miller was darn good), but went about 9 deep with guys like Antonio Davis, Byron Scott, and Sam Mitchell coming off the bench.

I think Jordan's dominance has significantly skewed what people felt of the other teams during the 90's.  There were a lot of really strong teams, the Bulls were just so good it overshadowed everyone else.   

[slamtheking]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

I think you probably need to look at the league during those years again.  There were quite a few very good teams.  Magic, Knicks, and Hawks were all very solid teams in the East.  Pacers, Nets, and Heat were on the rise.  Cavs were still pretty solid.  Out west the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Jazz were all excellent teams.  Spurs, Warriors and Blazers were pretty darn good.  Now granted none of those teams would go down as all time great teams, but the league on the whole was pretty strong in 93/94 and 94/95. 

no need to look back.  many decent teams that had a couple of star players and a lot of middling role players.  no teams that would have been a title threat in the 80's or 2000's. 

probably one of the reasons I discount the 'greatness' label bestowed on Jordan's title teams.  I don't those teams would have won a title in the 80's either.  those 80's teams (C's, Lakers, Sixers first half of decade, even Pistons at the end of the decade though I hated their style of winning) I use as a standard for greatness.

a Houston team led by a 2nd year Hakeem was in the Finals in the 80's.  Seattle was a pretty darn good team led by Payton and Kemp, but that also had Schrempf, Perkins, Gill, and McMillan.  The Jazz of course had Malone and Stockton, but also had Russell, Hornacek, Chambers, other Malone, etc.  Knicks were pretty good with Ewing, Oakley, Starks, Mason, Anthony, etc.  Magic with Shaq, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Skiles, etc. were pretty good (frankly that Magic is pretty darn close to Shaq's title winning LA teams).  Pacers had no superstars (though Miller was darn good), but went about 9 deep with guys like Antonio Davis, Byron Scott, and Sam Mitchell coming off the bench.

I think Jordan's dominance has significantly skewed what people felt of the other teams during the 90's.  There were a lot of really strong teams, the Bulls were just so good it overshadowed everyone else.   

the key word you keep going back to is "good".  I'm not saying they weren't "good" teams.  They weren't GREAT teams. 
If they were GREAT teams, they would have been able to beat Jordan's VERY GOOD teams.  I still can't look at his title teams and think of them as great.  That record-setting regular season or not.  I realize not many people here share my opinion of that era but having watched it as it unfolded after being introduced to the NBA during Bird's rookie year, everything else after the Bird/Magic glory years is an anti-climax.

[Hemingway]

yeah you are right in saying many people don't share your opinion.

[Moranis]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

I think you probably need to look at the league during those years again.  There were quite a few very good teams.  Magic, Knicks, and Hawks were all very solid teams in the East.  Pacers, Nets, and Heat were on the rise.  Cavs were still pretty solid.  Out west the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Jazz were all excellent teams.  Spurs, Warriors and Blazers were pretty darn good.  Now granted none of those teams would go down as all time great teams, but the league on the whole was pretty strong in 93/94 and 94/95. 

no need to look back.  many decent teams that had a couple of star players and a lot of middling role players.  no teams that would have been a title threat in the 80's or 2000's. 

probably one of the reasons I discount the 'greatness' label bestowed on Jordan's title teams.  I don't those teams would have won a title in the 80's either.  those 80's teams (C's, Lakers, Sixers first half of decade, even Pistons at the end of the decade though I hated their style of winning) I use as a standard for greatness.

a Houston team led by a 2nd year Hakeem was in the Finals in the 80's.  Seattle was a pretty darn good team led by Payton and Kemp, but that also had Schrempf, Perkins, Gill, and McMillan.  The Jazz of course had Malone and Stockton, but also had Russell, Hornacek, Chambers, other Malone, etc.  Knicks were pretty good with Ewing, Oakley, Starks, Mason, Anthony, etc.  Magic with Shaq, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Skiles, etc. were pretty good (frankly that Magic is pretty darn close to Shaq's title winning LA teams).  Pacers had no superstars (though Miller was darn good), but went about 9 deep with guys like Antonio Davis, Byron Scott, and Sam Mitchell coming off the bench.

I think Jordan's dominance has significantly skewed what people felt of the other teams during the 90's.  There were a lot of really strong teams, the Bulls were just so good it overshadowed everyone else.   

the key word you keep going back to is "good".  I'm not saying they weren't "good" teams.  They weren't GREAT teams. 
If they were GREAT teams, they would have been able to beat Jordan's VERY GOOD teams.  I still can't look at his title teams and think of them as great.  That record-setting regular season or not.  I realize not many people here share my opinion of that era but having watched it as it unfolded after being introduced to the NBA during Bird's rookie year, everything else after the Bird/Magic glory years is an anti-climax.

Those Bulls teams were all time great teams (at least the second three).  The first three were great teams.  The fact that you are even debating this, says all I need to know.

[slamtheking]

It certainly would have been interesting. People forget that even with Jordan on hiatus for two years, the Bulls still won 55+ games with Pippen and had deep playoff runs.

While Pippen couldn't have done that with the Celtic team he was going to, it wouldn't be a stretch to think he could have done it had Pitino found a way to get another star next to him, even if that star wasn't on Jordan's level.

to me, that speaks volumes about the low-quality of basketball at that time rather than anything great about Pippen.  I know that's not a popular opinion but that's how I recall those days in the league.

I think you probably need to look at the league during those years again.  There were quite a few very good teams.  Magic, Knicks, and Hawks were all very solid teams in the East.  Pacers, Nets, and Heat were on the rise.  Cavs were still pretty solid.  Out west the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Jazz were all excellent teams.  Spurs, Warriors and Blazers were pretty darn good.  Now granted none of those teams would go down as all time great teams, but the league on the whole was pretty strong in 93/94 and 94/95. 

no need to look back.  many decent teams that had a couple of star players and a lot of middling role players.  no teams that would have been a title threat in the 80's or 2000's. 

probably one of the reasons I discount the 'greatness' label bestowed on Jordan's title teams.  I don't those teams would have won a title in the 80's either.  those 80's teams (C's, Lakers, Sixers first half of decade, even Pistons at the end of the decade though I hated their style of winning) I use as a standard for greatness.

a Houston team led by a 2nd year Hakeem was in the Finals in the 80's.  Seattle was a pretty darn good team led by Payton and Kemp, but that also had Schrempf, Perkins, Gill, and McMillan.  The Jazz of course had Malone and Stockton, but also had Russell, Hornacek, Chambers, other Malone, etc.  Knicks were pretty good with Ewing, Oakley, Starks, Mason, Anthony, etc.  Magic with Shaq, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Skiles, etc. were pretty good (frankly that Magic is pretty darn close to Shaq's title winning LA teams).  Pacers had no superstars (though Miller was darn good), but went about 9 deep with guys like Antonio Davis, Byron Scott, and Sam Mitchell coming off the bench.

I think Jordan's dominance has significantly skewed what people felt of the other teams during the 90's.  There were a lot of really strong teams, the Bulls were just so good it overshadowed everyone else.   

the key word you keep going back to is "good".  I'm not saying they weren't "good" teams.  They weren't GREAT teams. 
If they were GREAT teams, they would have been able to beat Jordan's VERY GOOD teams.  I still can't look at his title teams and think of them as great.  That record-setting regular season or not.  I realize not many people here share my opinion of that era but having watched it as it unfolded after being introduced to the NBA during Bird's rookie year, everything else after the Bird/Magic glory years is an anti-climax.

Those Bulls teams were all time great teams (at least the second three).  The first three were great teams.  The fact that you are even debating this, says all I need to know.

the fact I rarely ever agree with your posts just reinforces my evaluation.  At least I recognize it's not a popular one.