People: Pippen ain't Worthy
David Starr
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala wrote:
>: teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
>: in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
>: season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
>: the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
>: (not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
>: --
>Except the sooting %, he's doing great; I mean look at his reb., asst., stl,
>and outstanding defensive play. You should have an unbiased view to appreciate
>what he is doing. He was also great in the PO's when MJ retired.
>For some reason, many oldies only tend to apprecaite the older players
>(or players of older times).
>The other thing is Pippen is an all-around player; he does almost all the
>things; doesn't dominate one particular category like many others.
>You want a great game from him? How about game 2/3 vs Orlando?
I think the reason why the point was brought up in the first place is that
most fans today tend only to think of the current great teams (ie, remember
how many people felt that Hakeem was better than Jordan last year?).
DAVE
Craig Bowden
It's amazing when people debate how great players are or teams are and then use
their season stats and such to show their player is obviously better, or this
team is better because this player is so great. Well, Scottie Pippen is another
great example of being one of the best in the regular season but suffers some
serious drop off when money time comes. How many 'big games' has Scottie had in
all his years in the playoffs? I mean, he must have played fifty or sixty playoff
games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
they happened to be in game one or the deciding game? You would think that if you
are a superstar and the other team is concentrating heavily on #23 that you would
be able to just score at will...that's of course if you are a superstar.
As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts. So, when you say,
hey, the Pip could do this or that better than James, remember that when it
counted, the Pip has been known more for being MIA then getting any medals like
finals MVP. When Phil Jackson commented on Scottie's "shooting slump" he said he
didn't expect him to come out of it soon - that's because Phil has been coaching
Scottie through all those playoff games and knows Scottie won't come out of it
until the Playoffs are over.
So, when you stack Pip up against James, or these Bulls up against the great
teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
(not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
--
Craig Bowden
Chevron Information Technology Co.
1300 South Beach Blvd.
La Habra, CA 90631
p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com
Profs:HOVMB(pcb)
Voice:(310)694-7959
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala
Craig Bowden wrote:
: teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
: in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
: season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
: the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
: (not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
: --
Except the sooting %, he's doing great; I mean look at his reb., asst., stl,
Vincent Musolino
Craig Bowden wrote:
>
> As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
> for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts.
Mmm you know, scoring on the fast break is equally hard in the regular season or in
the playoffs. Creating your own shot in the playoofs is another story : more
half-court game (unless you're a Sonic :) ), better defenses all over.
Now the question is : of the points Worthy scored in the playoffs, how many were
really his and how many were of the "Stockton to Malone" kind, where you fill that
Egomaniac in for Stockton ?
> So, when you say,
> hey, the Pip could do this or that better than James, remember that when it
> counted, the Pip has been known more for being MIA then getting any medals like
> finals MVP.
True of Worthy. But that was one time. Maybe Pippen will have HIS series once.
But all in all I think they even out.
--
--Vincent Musolino
--Physics PhD student, System Manager
I.R.R.MA phone : 0041 21 693 46 00
INR-Ecublens fax : 0041 21 693 66 55
1015 Lausanne (Switzerland) e-mail muso...@irrmasg5.epfl.ch
http://irrmawww.epfl.ch http://irrmawww.epfl.ch/vm/vm.html
"Modern art is easy to understand. If it hangs on the wall, it's a
painting. If you can walk around it, it's a sculpture."
English Graffitis
Sean Mitchell
p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com (Craig Bowden) wrote:
>It's amazing when people debate how great players are or teams are and then use
>their season stats and such to show their player is obviously better, or this
>team is better because this player is so great. Well, Scottie Pippen is another
>great example of being one of the best in the regular season but suffers some
>serious drop off when money time comes. How many 'big games' has Scottie had in
>all his years in the playoffs? I mean, he must have played fifty or sixty playoff
>games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
>they happened to be in game one or the deciding game? You would think that if you
>are a superstar and the other team is concentrating heavily on #23 that you would
>be able to just score at will...that's of course if you are a superstar.
>As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
>for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts. So, when you say,
>hey, the Pip could do this or that better than James, remember that when it
>counted, the Pip has been known more for being MIA then getting any medals like
>finals MVP. When Phil Jackson commented on Scottie's "shooting slump" he said he
>didn't expect him to come out of it soon - that's because Phil has been coaching
>Scottie through all those playoff games and knows Scottie won't come out of it
>until the Playoffs are over.
>So, when you stack Pip up against James, or these Bulls up against the great
>teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
>in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
>season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
>the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
>(not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
>--
>Craig Bowden
>Chevron Information Technology Co.
>1300 South Beach Blvd.
>La Habra, CA 90631
>p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com
>Profs:HOVMB(pcb)
>Voice:(310)694-7959
Now, don't get me wrong, but I'm not making excuses for Pip's poor
showing in the finals, but I think it should be pointed out that he is
not even close to 100%. Pippen has sore ankles and a sore lower back,
which impinges greatly on one's ability to play the game.
Having said that, he has blown the goat so far, hasn't he....
Except maybe for game 2 (or was it 3?) when he went for around 25 or
so.
Sean Mitchell
smit...@direct.ca
Vijay Ramanujan
In article <4pqkn4$n...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com> Craig Bowden,
p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com writes:
>Well, Scottie Pippen is another
>great example of being one of the best in the regular season but suffers some
>serious drop off when money time comes. How many 'big games' has Scottie had in
>all his years in the playoffs?
Let's see. In the last six seasons his team has made the championship
series four times and has lost to the eventual Eastern Conference
Champions twice. Without Jordan, Pippen led his team to a seventh game
against the Knicks after coming within two games of taking the best
record in the East. Is that a great enough track record of sucess for you?
So when has Pippen fallen apart at crunch time and cost his team a
*series*? Do we have to go all the way back to his migraines against
Detroit?
>I mean, he must have played fifty or sixty playoff
>games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
>they happened to be in game one or the deciding game?
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that in the big games there's this
one other guy the Bulls have who likes to take over? Perhaps ...
>You would think that if you
>are a superstar and the other team is concentrating heavily on #23 that you would
>be able to just score at will...that's of course if you are a superstar.
Just like Worthy scored at will? What did he average, 40 PPG? 50 PPG?
What exactly is scoring at will anyway? When you're team wins three
consecutive championships, perhaps you scored as much as you needed to.
>As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
>for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts.
He also wasn't known for playing incredible defense, the way Pippen is. I
don't remember Worthy ever being mentioned for DPOY, do you?
>So, when you stack Pip up against James, or these Bulls up against the great
>teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
>in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
>season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
>the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
>(not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
Well, maybe Brick Masons can play better defense than James Worthy, too.
Maybe Brick Mason's can pass better than Worthy as well. Because, when
you match up the Bulls and those old Laker teams, consider this. The
Magic vs. Jordan matchup? The Worthy vs. Pippen matchup? Say what you
will about their respective offenses. It's close on both matchups. But
there is no question on defense. Jordan and Pippen form a defensive duo
that is far far far ahead of Magic and Worthy.
Paul Botts
In article <4pqkn4$n...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com>,
Craig Bowden <p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com> wrote:
>It's amazing when people debate how great players are or teams are and then use
>their season stats and such to show their player is obviously better, or this
>great example of being one of the best in the regular season but suffers some
>serious drop off when money time comes. How many 'big games' has Scottie had in
>games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
>they happened to be in game one or the deciding game?
I have no real stats, just a couple of anecdotal notes: the game in
which the Bulls clinched their first-ever title, Pippen was the leading
scorer with 32 points and also just missed a triple-double. And when the
Bulls knocked out Knicks in the Eastern Conference finals in that brutal
6-game war in 1993 (the "Charles Smith" series for the Knick fans in the
audience), Pippen was sensational, prompting a lot of groans in this
newsgroup from Knick fans along the lines of, "Jordan's always gonna be
Jordan, but we gotta do something about Pippen..." And of course, it was
Pippen whose block of Smith's last layup attempt
was blown up on the back of the NY Daily News to show that Smith
actually was fouled (which he was, but never mind, it was still a
bigtime play....).
And, when the Bulls lost to the clearly superior Knicks in 7 games in
1994 on the infamous Hue Hollins call, Pippen was the entire Bulls
offense for that whole tough series, as any Knick fan reading this could
no doubt attest. And the NBA's supervisor of officials admitted after
the game that Hollins' call was one that is rarely made and shouldn't
have been, either.
> You would think that if you
>are a superstar and the other team is concentrating heavily on #23 that you would
>be able to just score at will...that's of course if you are a superstar.
>
>As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
>for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts. So, when you say,
>hey, the Pip could do this or that better than James, remember that when it
>counted, the Pip has been known more for being MIA then getting any medals like
>finals MVP. When Phil Jackson commented on Scottie's "shooting slump" he said he
>didn't expect him to come out of it soon - that's because Phil has been coaching
>Scottie through all those playoff games and knows Scottie won't come out of it
>until the Playoffs are over.
>
>So, when you stack Pip up against James, or these Bulls up against the great
>teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
>in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
>season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
>the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
>(not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
>
Heh. He starts out asking for some facts, and then decides that nothing
so prosaic as actual evidence is really needed. Damn the facts, full
speed ahead!
Anybody got an NBA register handy with some year-by-year playoff stats
for Worthy and Pippen?
--
This email was sent by Paul Botts: p...@mcs.com
Dave Meeks
In article <4prr3u$i...@crcnis3.unl.edu> 0004...@bigred.unl.edu (Prabhakar Reddy Vangala) writes:
>
>Except the sooting %, he's doing great; I mean look at his reb., asst., stl,
>and outstanding defensive play. You should have an unbiased view to appreciate
>what he is doing. He was also great in the PO's when MJ retired.
>For some reason, many oldies only tend to apprecaite the older players
>(or players of older times).
>The other thing is Pippen is an all-around player; he does almost all the
>things; doesn't dominate one particular category like many others.
>You want a great game from him? How about game 2/3 vs Orlando?
Even with an unbiased view of things, Scottie just does not live up to the
media hype of 'best all-around player in the game', or 'one of the top 2-3
players in the game', or even 'possible MVP' labels he's been given. Now,
this isn't his fault, obviously, in the sense it's not him going around saying
such things, but when you watch him in the playoffs, he just doesn't live
up to the hype.
Now, before I continue, I will say that Scottie Pippen is STILL an excellent
player, and while we/I may criticize his play in the playoffs throughout the
years, I'd still rather have him on my team than have to play against him.
Having said that, does anyone consider him the 2nd best player on the court
during the Orlando or Seattle series (or the New York one for that)? During
the Seattle series, I don't know if I would honestly list him in the top 4 of
that series (Jordan, Kemp, Payton, Rodman maybe...) Offensively, he was
almost a liability at times. Especially in the Seattle series, as he lost
all confidence in his shot.
Defensively, he still played relatively well, though he had troubles against
some players I never figured him to have trouble against.
--
David T. Meeks || "Walking the line of innocence and guilt
Senior Software Engineer || Are you fine with circumstance?"
VMark Software, Inc. || Iluvatar - Children
e-mail: da...@vmark.com || www: http://infoserv.vmark.com/~davem
Dave Meeks
In article <Dt0x5...@news2.new-york.net> Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
>In article <4pqkn4$n...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com> Craig Bowden,
>p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com writes:
>
>Let's see. In the last six seasons his team has made the championship
>series four times and has lost to the eventual Eastern Conference
>Champions twice. Without Jordan, Pippen led his team to a seventh game
>against the Knicks after coming within two games of taking the best
>record in the East. Is that a great enough track record of sucess for you?
Well, that should actually read 'In the last six seasons, Jordan's team...',
with the exception of 2 years ago.
Without Jordan, the Bulls couldn't get past the 2nd round of the playoffs.
Without Jordan, the Bulls went from finishing 1st in the East to 3rd in the
East, and they added Toni Kukoc to the team that year. Last year, even with
Jordan for the final 17 games and with adding Ron Harper, Scottie Pippen
could only take the Bulls to 47 wins, 5th in the East.
So, this 'track record of success' doesn't really amount to much more than
many other players can claim.
>So when has Pippen fallen apart at crunch time and cost his team a
>*series*? Do we have to go all the way back to his migraines against
>Detroit?
Well, that's kind of a misleading question. Counting this year, the Bulls
have won the NBA championship in 4 of the last 6 years. So, they Bulls have
only lost 2 series during that time. Where was Scottie in Game 7 against
the Knicks? And, what about last season? Who was it that threw a fit and
decided to sit on the bench when the coach decided to give Kukoc the final
shot ( a plan that worked very well, thank you very much Scottie ). And,
while Scottie didn't cause them to lose the series this year, his 4-17 and
5-20 didn't do much to improve the Bulls chances in games 4 and 5 of the
Finals this year, did it? But then, being he only had one game where he
even shot over 42%, and shot in the 20% range twice in the series, doesn't
add much to his resume..
>>I mean, he must have played fifty or sixty playoff
>>games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
>>they happened to be in game one or the deciding game?
>
>Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that in the big games there's this
>one other guy the Bulls have who likes to take over? Perhaps ...
Or, maybe, just maybe, this other guy on the Bulls just HAS to take over,
because Scottie's shooting 5-20. Take a look at his shooting during this
years playoffs... From the New Series on:
4-15, 7-21, 10-29, 3-11, 5-12, 7-20, 7-19, 11-14**, 4-11, 5-15, 8-16**,
5-14, 4-17, 5-20, 7-17....
That translates into:
27%, 33%, 34%, 27%, 42%, 35%, 37%, 79%**, 36%, 36%, 33%, 50%**, 36%, 24%,
20%, 41%
So, in 16 games in the final 3 series, Scottie shot over 40% just 4 times,
only 2 times at 50% or better.
Scottie took 105 3pters in the playoffs, and missed 75 of them. He missed
more 3pters than anyone else on his team took. And, he did this while being
guarded by the likes of Dennis Scott, Detlef Schrempf, and Anthony Mason.
Only Mason has ever been known to even spell defense.
>Just like Worthy scored at will? What did he average, 40 PPG? 50 PPG?
>What exactly is scoring at will anyway? When you're team wins three
>consecutive championships, perhaps you scored as much as you needed to.
Or, perhaps the other guy (MJ) made up for it all? Or, perhaps you had
Dennis Rodman getting all those offensive rebounds for your team, to make
up for the missed shots.
>He also wasn't known for playing incredible defense, the way Pippen is. I
>don't remember Worthy ever being mentioned for DPOY, do you?
That's very true, though Worthy was decent. Offensively, though, Worthy
was a true big game threat.
>Well, maybe Brick Masons can play better defense than James Worthy, too.
>Maybe Brick Mason's can pass better than Worthy as well. Because, when
>you match up the Bulls and those old Laker teams, consider this. The
>Magic vs. Jordan matchup? The Worthy vs. Pippen matchup? Say what you
>will about their respective offenses. It's close on both matchups. But
>there is no question on defense. Jordan and Pippen form a defensive duo
>that is far far far ahead of Magic and Worthy.
Great. Not argued in the least. But, by the same token, Kareem far, far
outshines Luc Longely. Michael Cooper far, far outshines Toni Kukoc. And
so on. Oh yeah, Kareem is also about a 100x better offensively than Longely.
If you want to talk about matchups between the Bulls/Lakers, you have to
get past the Jordan/Pippen vs. Magic/Worthy. I might even give the Jordan
Pippen tandem the overall advantage. But, the difference comes when you
compare Kareem/Scott/Green vs. Longely/Harper/Rodman. Huge edge to the Lakers.
Then, you have the bench of Thompson, Cooper, and Rambis vs Kukoc, Wennington,
and Kerr.
Scottie Pippen is a great player... Don't make him out to be something he
isn't. If you replace Pippen, the Bulls remain a championship caliber team.
If you replace Jordan, the Bulls are not championship caliber. Michael showed
this to the world quite convincingly while he was gone.
Vijay Ramanujan
In article <4q3us8$1n...@uvmark.vmark.com> Dave Meeks,
da...@uvmark.vmark.com writes:
>>Maybe Brick Mason's can pass better than Worthy as well. Because, when
>>you match up the Bulls and those old Laker teams, consider this. The
>>Magic vs. Jordan matchup? The Worthy vs. Pippen matchup? Say what you
>>will about their respective offenses. It's close on both matchups. But
>>there is no question on defense. Jordan and Pippen form a defensive duo
>>that is far far far ahead of Magic and Worthy.
>Great. Not argued in the least. But, by the same token, Kareem far, far
>outshines Luc Longely. Michael Cooper far, far outshines Toni Kukoc. And
>so on. Oh yeah, Kareem is also about a 100x better offensively than Longely.
>If you want to talk about matchups between the Bulls/Lakers, you have to
>get past the Jordan/Pippen vs. Magic/Worthy. I might even give the Jordan
>Pippen tandem the overall advantage. But, the difference comes when you
>compare Kareem/Scott/Green vs. Longely/Harper/Rodman. Huge edge to the Lakers.
>Then, you have the bench of Thompson, Cooper, and Rambis vs Kukoc, Wennington,
>and Kerr.
And I won't disagree with anything you've said. My only point being that
when people look at this Bulls team and insist that they couldn't have
beaten those great Lakers teams (as one example) they almost universally
overlook the fact that this Bulls team is one of the finest defensive
teams in history. There is no question in any one's mind, I am sure, that
the Lakers team (despite having some defensive stars like Coop) was not
an exceptional defensive team. Magic was a weakness at guard and Worthy
was adequate. That's two of the top three. Kareem was a force in his
better days, and still a presence in aging. But if you look at the Bulls
now, the top two players are both top notch defenders, and it is unfair
to compare Worthy's average offensive performance to Scottie's average
offensive performance and make judgments on that matchup from there. Same
with Magic and Michael. Quite simply, it is much more likely that Magic
and/or Worthy would be held to subpar performances by the Bulls defense
than it is that Jordan and/or Pippen would be held to subpar performances
by the Lakers defense.
-----
>Even with an unbiased view of things, Scottie just does not live up to the
>media hype of 'best all-around player in the game', or 'one of the top 2-3
>players in the game', or even 'possible MVP' labels he's been given. Now,
>this isn't his fault, obviously, in the sense it's not him going around saying
>such things, but when you watch him in the playoffs, he just doesn't live
>up to the hype.
The reason all that talk surfaced was that everyone figured the Bulls
would be also rans the minute Jordan retired, but they managed to come
within a couple games of taking the best record in the East. How did they
do it? Pippen led the team in every major statistical category. That is
the definition of MVP, and even if he wasn't the *best* player in the NBA
that year, I certainly think he was the most *valuable*.
>Now, before I continue, I will say that Scottie Pippen is STILL an excellent
>player, and while we/I may criticize his play in the playoffs throughout the
>years, I'd still rather have him on my team than have to play against him.
>Having said that, does anyone consider him the 2nd best player on the court
>during the Orlando or Seattle series (or the New York one for that)? During
>the Seattle series, I don't know if I would honestly list him in the top 4 of
>that series (Jordan, Kemp, Payton, Rodman maybe...) Offensively, he was
>almost a liability at times. Especially in the Seattle series, as he lost
>all confidence in his shot.
>Defensively, he still played relatively well, though he had troubles against
>some players I never figured him to have trouble against.
It should also be pointed out that Scottie Pippen has not been Scottie
Pippen since his injuries. He was clearly struggling through the Seattle
series in particular. I'm not whining for him, he can do that for
himself, but it's not fair to put all the blame on pressure or inability
to perform at playoff time when, clearly, health was a major factor.
---
Anyway, I never bought into the argument that Pippen was near Jordan's
level or that he was one of the best players in the NBA. I think he is
the best #2 man in the NBA right now. That includes Penny, Stockton,
Payton and whoever. Partially because he is more versatile than those
guys and partially because he seems to know his runningmate better than
any other #2 man in the league.
But, in all honesty, I think he was the second best player on the court
for the Knicks series. He might not have played his best at times, but if
I had to take a player off that court and put him on my team, I would
take Jordan first and Pippen second, without even a thought as to Ewing
slipping into #2.
Vijay R.
Martin Shobe
p...@MCS.COM (Paul Botts) wrote:
[stuff deleted]
>Anybody got an NBA register handy with some year-by-year playoff stats
>for Worthy and Pippen?
Sure thing
Pippen G Min FGM FGA FG% FTM FTA FT% ORB DRB REB AST STL BLK TO
1988 10 294 46 99 46.5 5 7 71.4 24 28 52 24 8 8 26
1989 17 619 84 182 46.2 32 50 64.0 34 95 129 67 23 16 41
1990 15 612 104 210 49.5 71 100 71.0 33 75 108 83 31 19 49
1991 17 704 142 282 50.4 80 101 79.2 37 114 151 99 42 19 55
1992 22 899 152 325 46.8 118 155 76.1 59 134 193 147 41 25 70
1993 19 789 152 327 46.5 74 116 63.8 37 95 132 107 41 13 71
1994 10 384 85 196 43.4 46 52 88.5 17 66 83 46 24 7 37
1995 10 396 58 131 44.3 48 71 67.6 24 62 86 58 14 10 27
1996 (Sorry, I don't have these yet)
Worthy
1984 21 708 164 274 59.9 42 69 60.9 36 69 105 56 27 11 39
1985 19 626 166 267 62.2 75 111 67.6 35 61 96 41 17 13 26
1986 14 539 121 217 55.8 32 47 68.1 22 43 65 45 16 10 36
1987 18 681 176 298 59.1 73 97 75.3 31 70 101 63 28 22 40
1988 24 896 204 390 52.3 97 128 75.8 53 86 139 106 33 19 55
1989 15 600 153 270 56.7 63 80 78.8 37 64 101 42 18 16 33
1990 9 366 90 181 49.7 36 43 83.7 11 39 50 27 14 3 22
1991 18 733 161 346 46.5 53 72 73.6 25 48 73 70 19 2 40
1992 5 148 32 86 37.2 3 5 60.0 7 10 17 13 5 0 7
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
Cameron Laird
In article <4q3us8$1n...@uvmark.vmark.com>,
Dave Meeks <da...@uvmark.vmark.com> wrote:
.
[harsh words about
Scotty Pippen]
.
.
>outshines Luc Longely. Michael Cooper far, far outshines Toni Kukoc. And
.
.
I'm expecting the neophytes to jump all over this.
Mr. Kukoc is a remarkably talented player who
deserved the recognition he received this year with,
for example, the Sixth Man award; on the other hand,
few fans today (already!) seem to remember Michael
Cooper. I think Dave is right, though: Mr. Cooper
was a far more valuable player than Mr. Kukoc. In
fact, I often associate him with Dennis Rodman, as
someone who deserves consideration for the Hall of
Fame, even though fundamentally a bench player.
They're also alike in that they could easily have
washed out of the league if their careers had
languished under less capable coaches.
--
Cameron Laird http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html
cla...@NeoSoft.com +1 713 623 8000 #227
+1 713 996 8546 FAX
Jonathan Richards
Cameron Laird (cla...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM) wrote:
> I'm expecting the neophytes to jump all over this. Mr. Kukoc is a
> remarkably talented player who deserved the recognition he received this
> year with, for example, the Sixth Man award; on the other hand, few fans
> today (already!) seem to remember Michael Cooper. I think Dave is right,
> though: Mr. Cooper was a far more valuable player than Mr. Kukoc.
Well, I certainly remember Cooper; he was one of my favorite players on the
Lakers. (I lived in California during LA's back-to-back, so they were my
second-favorite team) But I'd still take Kukoc now over Cooper in his prime,
for most teams. He played excellent defense for the time, but his offense
was very limited. If it wasn't for Showtime, and the fact that he rarely
faced Pistons/Knicks/Cavs style defenses (or even Sonics/Bulls style ones),
his offensive deficiencies would have been much more glaring. Kukoc is a
much more complete player, especially when he starts. His defense, while
still average, is very underrated, as is his rebounding, and his offensive
diversity makes him a mismatch against almost any defender. That having been
said, for the Bulls team as currently constituted, I'd prefer Cooper in his
prime, because Kukoc can't start, and because I'm still not sold on the idea
that Harper can consistently defend quick point guards.
> In fact, I often associate him with Dennis Rodman, as someone who deserves
> consideration for the Hall of Fame, even though fundamentally a bench
> player.
Rodman, huh? He hasn't been a bench player in a while. I'd say Cooper is
more like a cross between Randy Brown and Steve Kerr.
--
Jonathan Richards
littl...@nwu.edu
http://www.ils.nwu.edu/~richards
"The only reason Mom and Dad are my parents is because I was BORN to them."
"A biological conspiracy, huh?"
Air Judden
Vincent Musolino <muso...@irrmasg5.epfl.ch> writes:
>Craig Bowden wrote:
>>
>> As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
>> for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts.
>Mmm you know, scoring on the fast break is equally hard in the regular season or in
>the playoffs. Creating your own shot in the playoofs is another story : more
>half-court game (unless you're a Sonic :) ), better defenses all over.
>Now the question is : of the points Worthy scored in the playoffs, how many were
>really his and how many were of the "Stockton to Malone" kind, where you fill that
>Egomaniac in for Stockton ?
The Lakers got on the break during the playoffs as well, but that's
not the point.
Big Game James (a nickname Pippen will NEVER earn) won a playoff
MVP in 1988. This series consisted of Magic toss it down low to James, who
had replaced Jabbar as the Lakers primary low post threat) who would then
score.
James was ambedextrous. He was lightning quick and went both ways
equally. When he posted up a player, that guy was dead. James had a
million fakes and when you bit one, you were done, because James went around
the sucker for the dunk. James also had the quickest first step in the game
(that was pretty much accepted all around) and could drive by suckas. He
also had a nice turn around J in the blocks and a nice mid-range J.
To clear up any attempts to cheapen Big Game James' dominance by
trying to credit it to Magic, go back and look at game 4 of the 1989 finals.
Magic is on the bench all game with a hamstring pull and James, taking
those threaded needle Michael Cooper passes (yes, this is sarcasm) lit up
Dennis Rodman for 40 points. James was ALL that.
I'll give Pip props for his all around game, but in a match-up of the
2, I'd go with James in a minute (unless James had a bum knee, like 1991).
Pippen supporters can cry all they want about Michael's shadow, but James
made his own mark while playing in Magic and Kareem's.
>> So, when you say,
>> hey, the Pip could do this or that better than James, remember that when it
>> counted, the Pip has been known more for being MIA then getting any medals like
>> finals MVP.
>True of Worthy. But that was one time. Maybe Pippen will have HIS series once.
>But all in all I think they even out.
Hardly. James was fierce in 1989 as well, the Lakers were just too
injured to have a chance (Magic and Scott). Detroit knew James was going to
take the shots and still couldn't stop the man! He didn't get the nickname
"Big Game" because of one playoff series.
Maybe Pippen should get the nickname "Big Game Migrane" ...heh heh.
Judden
Air Judden
Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
>In article <4pqkn4$n...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com> Craig Bowden,
>p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com writes:
>>Well, Scottie Pippen is another
>>great example of being one of the best in the regular season but suffers some
>>serious drop off when money time comes. How many 'big games' has Scottie had in
>>all his years in the playoffs?
>Let's see. In the last six seasons his team has made the championship
>series four times and has lost to the eventual Eastern Conference
>Champions twice. Without Jordan, Pippen led his team to a seventh game
>against the Knicks after coming within two games of taking the best
>record in the East. Is that a great enough track record of sucess for you?
Pippen did this all by himself? Then how come they did much
worse without Grant? Even when Jordan came back?
>So when has Pippen fallen apart at crunch time and cost his team a
>*series*? Do we have to go all the way back to his migraines against
>Detroit?
How about "Sitting Bull?"
>>I mean, he must have played fifty or sixty playoff
>>games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
>>they happened to be in game one or the deciding game?
>Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that in the big games there's this
>one other guy the Bulls have who likes to take over? Perhaps ...
Funny, James played with Magic and Kareem--a couple of guys known
for taking over.
>>You would think that if you
>>are a superstar and the other team is concentrating heavily on #23 that you would
>>be able to just score at will...that's of course if you are a superstar.
>Just like Worthy scored at will? What did he average, 40 PPG? 50 PPG?
>What exactly is scoring at will anyway? When you're team wins three
>consecutive championships, perhaps you scored as much as you needed to.
Pippen's performances in 1988 and 1989 finals far overshadow anything
that Pippen ever did. And Yes, he was a lot closer to scoring at will than
Big Game Migrane ever got.
>>As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
>>for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts.
>He also wasn't known for playing incredible defense, the way Pippen is. I
>don't remember Worthy ever being mentioned for DPOY, do you?
Oh contraire. Big Game James could D-up. The guy took guards and
forwards--at 6'9". I'd also say the competition for all-defensive team was
stronger back then, look at the guys who beat James: McHale, Jones, Moncrief,
Rodman, Nance, Buck Williams. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's pretty awesome
competition every year.
>>So, when you stack Pip up against James, or these Bulls up against the great
>>teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
>>in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
>>season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
>>the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
>>(not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
>Well, maybe Brick Masons can play better defense than James Worthy, too.
>Maybe Brick Mason's can pass better than Worthy as well. Because, when
>you match up the Bulls and those old Laker teams, consider this. The
>Magic vs. Jordan matchup? The Worthy vs. Pippen matchup? Say what you
>will about their respective offenses. It's close on both matchups. But
>there is no question on defense. Jordan and Pippen form a defensive duo
>that is far far far ahead of Magic and Worthy.
Not too close on offense. James has much more to his offensive
game. He is light years ahead of Pippen in low post offense and gets the
nod on the drive. James was better on the break and better from the stripe
and both were about the same from the 3-pt line (unless you're going to
use Pip's attmepts from the baby-3, in which case I'll laugh).
I'll give Pip the passing, especially since his role was point forward
and James had a better man running the offense on his team. I'll give Pip
the nod on defense, though James is a lot better than you're giving him
credit for.
Comparing Michael to Magic is apples and oranges. Dead even. Period.
Funny thing, is you forgot to mention the supporting casts: AC Green, Kurt
Rambis, Byron Scott, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Cooper,Mychal Thompson vs.
Luc Longley, Dennis Rodman, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Bill Wennington, Randy
Brown? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! And don't bring up coaches...Phil isn't
going to teach anything to Riles. Lakers just have too many weapons and
their fast break would have the poor Bulls weezin'!
Judden
Lee Rusk
Brown and Kerr??? That's ridiculously funny. Could Randy Brown guard Larry
Bird? Yeah right. Could Steve Kerr finish a coop-a-loop? I think not.
Bottom line is Cooper was a GREAT defender. Larry Bird said the best he
ever faced. Kukoc can't guard his own shadow. How many times did we
see Phil Jackson yelling at Kukoc for sloppy D in the finals....numerous.
As far as offense goes, Coop at one point held the record for most trey's
made in a playoff game (something like 7). Back when the line was at
real distance. What was Toni in this year's playoffs? Not too good!
Lee
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala
Air Judden wrote:
: Comparing Michael to Magic is apples and oranges. Dead even. Period.
: Funny thing, is you forgot to mention the supporting casts: AC Green, Kurt
: Rambis, Byron Scott, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Cooper,Mychal Thompson vs.
: Luc Longley, Dennis Rodman, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Bill Wennington, Randy
: Brown? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! And don't bring up coaches...Phil isn't
: going to teach anything to Riles. Lakers just have too many weapons and
Nope, you are wrong on most counts except on Kareem.
MJ >> Magic
Pippen > Worthy
Rodman >> AC Green
Harper >> Byron Scott
Kareem >> Luc
And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
Fude Max Chuang
In article <4q6qde$g...@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>,
Air Judden <judd...@ksu.ksu.edu> wrote:
> Big Game James (a nickname Pippen will NEVER earn) won a playoff
>MVP in 1988. This series consisted of Magic toss it down low to James, who
>had replaced Jabbar as the Lakers primary low post threat) who would then
>score.
He had not just a fabulous Finals, but an entire playoff as well. And
topped it off with a triple double in Game 7 vs Detroit, the biggest
game of his life in the most clutch situation.
And if not for one errant pass in 84, he would have gotten serious
consideration for MVP that year too.
> To clear up any attempts to cheapen Big Game James' dominance by
>trying to credit it to Magic, go back and look at game 4 of the 1989 finals.
>Magic is on the bench all game with a hamstring pull and James, taking
>those threaded needle Michael Cooper passes (yes, this is sarcasm) lit up
>Dennis Rodman for 40 points. James was ALL that.
You could see it in the Piston huddles, all Daly was saying was, "Worthy,
Worthy, Worthy!" One of the greatest defensive teams the league has
ever seen could not stop James that night.
I read somewhere that MJ and Worthy used to play one-on-one quite
a bit in college, and Mike says that James was the only guy who
he'd ever seen go left and dunk right (or vice versa).
I think a reason for people forgetting about Worthy was that he had
such a quick decline. Not surprising ... once he lost that explosive
first step he became just an average jumpshooting forward.
Max
--
==============================================================================
F. Max Chuang || "...like putting butter on a piece of bread."
(ma...@csua.berkeley.edu) || -P. Bure on stickhandling
Douglas Hayden
On Stardate 18 Jun 1996 21:04:50 GMT, Prabhakar Reddy Vangala stated:
: Nope, you are wrong on most counts except on Kareem.
You're wrong too, Praby:
: MJ = Magic (Judden said it best: apples and oranges.)
: Worthy > Pippen (Scottie's good. James is better.)
: Rodman > AC Green (Advantage to Wormy although Green is up there too.)
: Byron Scott > Harper (Scott can do D and score too!)
: Kareem >> Luc (No contest)
Lakers bench = Bulls bench (Yes, the Bulls have Kukoc et al. The Lakers
also had Woolridge, Thompson, Cooper, et al.)
: And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
No, the two would probably battle it out in six games with the Lakers
proving how great Showtime really was in the end. See Praby, it *is* easy!
----------
Doug "Sheesh" Hayden
Grand Duke, Czardom of Cleveland
SDMD: Of course, I could be totally wrong.
----------
Craig Bowden
That's what I'm looking for - facts that can help me see that Pippen has proven
himself as a superstar because superstars step it up when it counts.He is no doubt
a major star in regards to the regular season where I have seen him dominate
games. My problem is, does he do this in the playoffs or finals? Is he more apt
to play below his regular season or step it up? I don't remember seeing him do
anything like that and unless somebody can list some big time efforts how can I
give him big time credit? So yes, as you mention below, a year-by-year playoff
stat comparison, and finals comparison (on the west coast I'm more likely to
have seen the Bulls finals games rather then their earlier round playoff games),
would be interesting to see because other then basic observation of his
performances over the years, the only facts I do have are that Worthy was a
Finals MVP and Scottie pulled the 'Sitting Bull' at a clutch moment in a big game.
So, does he stand up, or sit down? Show up, or disappear? James is 'Big Game'
James, Scottie is Sitting Bull. So, as you can see, it would be nice to have
more info on a plus side for Pippen, especially if he's to be lauded as a
superstar. Stars are made in the regular season, superstars are made in the
playoffs (not just single games, shots, etc but as Kemp did even in losing, he
was the force for his team and consistantly made the big plays or hit big shots
through most of the series).
|> Anybody got an NBA register handy with some year-by-year playoff stats
|> for Worthy and Pippen?
|>
|> --
|> This email was sent by Paul Botts: p...@mcs.com
|>
--
Craig Bowden
In article <Dt0x5...@news2.new-york.net>, Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
|> In article <4pqkn4$n...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com> Craig Bowden,
|> p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com writes:
|>
|> >Well, Scottie Pippen is another
|> >great example of being one of the best in the regular season but suffers some
|> >serious drop off when money time comes. How many 'big games' has Scottie had in
|> >all his years in the playoffs?
|>
|> Let's see. In the last six seasons his team has made the championship
|> series four times and has lost to the eventual Eastern Conference
|> Champions twice.
Pippen is supposed to be a superstar, his performance in the regular season does
help his team get in position for such runs through the playoffs. However, a
superstar is a player that also dominates in the playoffs, it is here where
Pippen falls short. Yes, his team has 4 championships, because of MJ, not Pippen.
Pippen has not been dominant in any of these and that's the point - he goes from
what people think is a superstar to a bricklayer and they win despite his dismal
playoff shooting obviously not because of it.
As a simple illustration of what the difference is, the finals that just finished.
Kemp's team lost but Kemp gained superstar status because he was able to make key
plays and hit big shots when his team needed it in the finals. Pippen on the
other hand has been given the mantle of superstar for regular season performances
but in the playoffs, and these finals, was his game on the level of Kemp's?
That's the difference. And, as a side note, Pippen with a history of 'No Shows'
got a chance to ice game two with 2 free throws and missed them both. Remember
last year when Nick Anderson missed those free throws, I bet he wished he had
Rodman around to bail him out.
Without Jordan, Pippen led his team to a seventh game
|> against the Knicks after coming within two games of taking the best
|> record in the East. Is that a great enough track record of sucess for you?
|>
Yeah, those mighty Knicks when people who didn't know anything about basketball
finally realized what a sad state of affairs the NBA had become when the Knicks
and Houston met in the finals to see who could give the thing away - what a
series. The series that showed the world what a watered down league the NBA had
become - those mighty Knicks...that beat the Bulls. Yeah, and the Knicks did win
in the finals - they beat Houston at giving it away when Starks pulled a
Pippenesque 4-18. Yeah, that's quite a feather in your hat to almost beat those
Knicks.
|> So when has Pippen fallen apart at crunch time and cost his team a
|> *series*? Do we have to go all the way back to his migraines against
|> Detroit?
|>
Actually, that's the point. MJ has kept Pippen from costing his team any series.
Do you honestly think the Bulls could have won if Jordan was playing on the same
level as Pippen? And, Pippen does have Toni to thank for bailing him out on the
'Sitting Bull' episode. Again, Pippen should be upping his numbers in the
playoffs since the other team must spend so much time stopping MJ. Has he? A game
here, and a couple there, but overall?
|> >I mean, he must have played fifty or sixty playoff
|> >games by now, does anyone have some stats for all the big games he had and if
|> >they happened to be in game one or the deciding game?
|>
|> Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that in the big games there's this
|> one other guy the Bulls have who likes to take over? Perhaps ...
|>
MJ does take over the games but he also spends a lot of time looking for help
during the game all the while he's drawing double teams and such. This makes it
easier for his other players to play over their heads - like Paxson and BJ. But
did Pippen do better? Did he stand up and knock 'em down ala Kemp in this series?
When?
|> >You would think that if you
|> >are a superstar and the other team is concentrating heavily on #23 that you would
|> >be able to just score at will...that's of course if you are a superstar.
|>
|> Just like Worthy scored at will? What did he average, 40 PPG? 50 PPG?
|> What exactly is scoring at will anyway? When you're team wins three
|> consecutive championships, perhaps you scored as much as you needed to.
|>
Worthy wasn't building a city of bricks. He scored on a level consistent or above
his regular season while shooting at a percentage at or above the regular season.
You needed a bucket, he could get it. Can you say that about Pippen? Has Pippen
ever been there for any big shots let alone the many big shots that occur during
a series when your team needs it? Scoring as much as he needs too? So did
everybody else on the team - does that make them superstars too?
|> >As for James Worthy who people degraded to points lower then the Pip, he showed up
|> >for the big games and wasn't known for any disappearing acts.
|>
|> He also wasn't known for playing incredible defense, the way Pippen is. I
|> don't remember Worthy ever being mentioned for DPOY, do you?
|>
No, never said he was. Pippen plays very good defense. So, in the playoffs he
becomes Michael Cooper...except Cooper did hit a few big 3's at the men's 3pt
line. Maybe he doesn't get to Cooper's level.
|> >So, when you stack Pip up against James, or these Bulls up against the great
|> >teams of the 80's, just remember, you can throw out what the Pip plays like
|> >in the regular season - it ain't applicable in the second season, and the second
|> >season is when the 'real season' starts. Scottie looks great on paper, great in
|> >the regular season but, when the playoffs come he looks more like a brick mason
|> >(not to be confused with Anthony Mason).
|>
|> Well, maybe Brick Masons can play better defense than James Worthy, too.
|> Maybe Brick Mason's can pass better than Worthy as well. Because, when
|> you match up the Bulls and those old Laker teams, consider this. The
|> Magic vs. Jordan matchup? The Worthy vs. Pippen matchup? Say what you
|> will about their respective offenses. It's close on both matchups. But
|> there is no question on defense. Jordan and Pippen form a defensive duo
|> that is far far far ahead of Magic and Worthy.
The problem with that scenario is that Cooper would guard MJ and no one on the
Bulls could guard Magic. As far as Pippen vs Worthy, Pippen didn't have much
success when they did play and Worthy wouldn't even have to guard Pippen since
Pippen is self-guarding: just let him shoot. ANd we won't even get into who would
match up with Kareem.
Look, this is all just for pointing out levels of stardom and when you get into
the nuts and bolts of what makes certain players better than others you have to
dissect what they do when the stakes go up because that's what it's all about. I
have seen Pippen dominate regular season games like a man among boys in this
expansion league and if he did this throughout the playoffs we wouldn't be having
this discussion. If he played consistantly like he did the one Orlando game when
he shot so well, I'd be able to say that he was a true superstar and better
then James, but when I look for such performances when it counts, they're few if
at all. If they were, I'd give him credit. Since they aren't, I have to point out
that when people do make comparisons between players such as Worthy and Pippen,
make sure you look at what they do when it counts because that's where the
superstars step up, not sit down. And when you measure teams people match players
up and they compare regular season stats and they say, this player wins this
matchup basing their opinion on regular season stats - and thus this team would
win. I'm just saying, wait a second. If these teams did play in a finals scenario
since we are matching them up as such (in greatest teams debates) you have to
understand how the players performed in those situations because that is more
inidicative of the matchup - not regular season stats. So when Pippen looks like
he may have an advantage, look at his playoff and finals stats, not his regular
season. That advantage disappears. That's all I'm saying. And to me, when you
measure greatness, that's where you see it - when it counts. Not just once like a
single big shot because anyone can get lucky, or a single game here or there
(ala Kenny Smith), but how many times, how often, how consistent are they
there when it counts like a rock that their team can depend on for the big play,
the big shot. Sometimes that play or shot occurs at a time long before the final
shot but everyone knows it is the back breaker. Sometimes it's a series of
plays or shots. In this past series, the two people who did this most often
were Kemp and Rodman and with Rodman, it goes to show that it doesn't have to
be a made shot, but a key rebound can do it too.
I have to give Pippen credit though for the fact that although he was shooting
terrible, he still hustled, still played good D. When he finally matches his
offense to that then I would have no problem giving him his due. Until then it's
hard to build that case.
Vincent Musolino
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala wrote:
[Judden saying that the Lakers would kill the Bulls]
>
> Nope, you are wrong on most counts except on Kareem.
>
> MJ >> Magic
">>" What are you nuts ? Even ">" is a troll !!! You could argue
about ">=", but that's all anyone with some sense and knowledge
of basketball could give you.
> Pippen > Worthy
(turning around) Juuuuuuuddennnnnnn ? You there ? :)
I thought so myself. Until I ran into you know who.
> Rodman >> AC Green
For the mental Bullsh*t only. Rest of the game, AC Green digests Rodman.
Green is way more complete than Rodman. Now if you look at their impact
on their respective teams, you might get an "=". That's it.
> Harper >> Byron Scott
Harper can shoot. So can Scott. What else can Harper do that Scott can't ?
>
> Kareem >> Luc
Can't mention those two in the same sentence. Hell, not even in the same post !
>
> And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
Oh darn, I bit again. Prab, you're good at fishing you know that ?
--
--Vincent Musolino|muso...@irrmasg5.epfl.ch|phone : +41 21 693 46 00
http://irrmawww.epfl.ch | http://irrmawww.epfl.ch/vm/vm.html
"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" Sigmund Freud
Vijay Ramanujan
In article <4q7kra$1...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com> Craig Bowden,
p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com writes:
>The problem with that scenario is that Cooper would guard MJ and no one on the
>Bulls could guard Magic.
That's interesting. You think the defensive matchups would have favored
the Lakers?
You must have stopped watching basketball when Kareem was in his prime.
Even a die-hard Lakers fan has to admit that the Bulls starting lineup is
a far superior defensive unit. They have Jordan (DPOY), Rodman (DPOY),
Pippen (deserving) and Harper (damn good, but no DPOY). The mere
existence of Magic Johnson (YOPD) downgrades the Lakers to a notch below
the Bulls (and probably more like 3 notches).
The Lakers were much deeper, and it all evens out (until we see them play
against each other. No one knows what happens then).
Riffster
Vincent Musolino wrote:
>
> Craig Bowden wrote:
>
> True of Worthy. But that was one time. Maybe Pippen will have HIS series once.
> But all in all I think they even out.
I like Pippen's game and he has disappeared from some series. But he was a big reason that the Bulls beat the
Knicks in the '93 conference finals and was considered the unofficial series MVP by most. So he has good series
as well. I think the comparison of Pippen living in the shadow of Jordan being the same as Worthy with Magic
and Kareem isn't necessarily valid (at least as far as their basetball talents are concerned -- of course the
shadow of Magic and Kareem eclipsed Worthy's.) Pippen and Jordan are both creators AND finalizers who need the
ball -- Worthy could handle the ball well for his position and size, but there was no doubt that he was a
finalizer and thus was never in conflict with Magic. While he didn't get the ball at times because of the Big
Guy, he did feast on weakside boards off of Kareem's misses (he was good, but not perfect!!!) Worthy was a
perfect fit in the great Laker teams of the early 80's. Jordan and Pippen compliment each other most of the
time (always on defense!) but they occasionally stunt their own and the teams' offense with their moves. Ergo,
the shadow of Jordan lies larger on Pippen than on Worthy.
That being said, Worthy is one of the great all-time players in the league and never got his due because he was
on the same team with Magic and Kareem. NO ONE combined his ability to run the wings on the break (or even
bring the ball up!) and his low post moves. The only player in recent memory who had (arguably) better low-post
moves than James was Kevin McHale (Lakers fans can grit their teeth here ;-})
I know this is the pro section and I respect Dean Smith but can anyone see how he didn't win more championships
with Jordan-Worthy-Perkins? Maybe not enough ball?
One more question -- I know Pippen is no angel apparently off the court, but don't you think that the infamous
hooker incident hurt Worthy in many people's eyes?
>
> --
> --Vincent Musolino
> --Physics PhD student, System Manager
>
> I.R.R.MA phone : 0041 21 693 46 00
> INR-Ecublens fax : 0041 21 693 66 55
> 1015 Lausanne (Switzerland) e-mail muso...@irrmasg5.epfl.ch
> http://irrmawww.epfl.ch http://irrmawww.epfl.ch/vm/vm.html
>
> "Modern art is easy to understand. If it hangs on the wall, it's a
> painting. If you can walk around it, it's a sculpture."
>
> English Graffitis
--
I was in a diner in Allentown, PA 'bout four AM (got up way too early, made a terrible mistake),
staring at a bowl of horribly forshortened cornflakes and a glass of orange juice 'bout a big as a finger
And I said to myself -- this is the life!
-- FRANK ZAPPA "200 Years Old"
Judd Vance
rich...@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Jonathan Richards) writes:
>Cameron Laird (cla...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM) wrote:
>> I'm expecting the neophytes to jump all over this. Mr. Kukoc is a
>> remarkably talented player who deserved the recognition he received this
>> year with, for example, the Sixth Man award; on the other hand, few fans
>> today (already!) seem to remember Michael Cooper. I think Dave is right,
>> though: Mr. Cooper was a far more valuable player than Mr. Kukoc.
>Well, I certainly remember Cooper; he was one of my favorite players on the
>Lakers. (I lived in California during LA's back-to-back, so they were my
>second-favorite team) But I'd still take Kukoc now over Cooper in his prime,
>for most teams. He played excellent defense for the time, but his offense
>was very limited.
Evidently, you DON'T remember Cooper. He played both guard positions.
He could run the point or shoot at the #2. He had a great 3 point shot and
since you're talking about primes, he had amazing athletic abilty and hops.
If it wasn't for Showtime, and the fact that he rarely
>faced Pistons/Knicks/Cavs style defenses (or even Sonics/Bulls style ones),
^^^^^^^
>his offensive deficiencies would have been much more glaring.
You REALLY don't remember Coop, I see. Do you remember who Coop
played in the 1988 and 1989 finals? And Toni faced a Detroit-style defense?
Is this supposed to compliment Toni somehow? And Coop did face Bulls/Sonics
style defense. Traps weren't THAT rare.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Cooper is MADE for this watered down league. Coop
could run most of the teams from the point and D-up the Penny Hardaway and
other assorted tall point guards who really aren't point guards.
And today's offenses, by and large, consist of pass it down low,
stand around, and when the double team comes, kick it back out for the 3.
Coop could shoot the long 3. He'd eat up this baby 3.
Kukoc is a
>much more complete player, especially when he starts. His defense, while
>still average, is very underrated, as is his rebounding, and his offensive
>diversity makes him a mismatch against almost any defender.
I see you haven't seen Kukoc play either. Gheorghe Muresan could
drive by Kukoc and leave him standing still. Kukoc has to have THE
slowest feet of any defender in the league. Toni is a weak rebounder, or I
don't suppose you don't know why the Bulls went after Rodman last summer--
because they were DESPERATE for rebounding from the PF slot and Toni wasn't
cutting it.
I'll give you offense: He can post, bury the baby 3 (had some
problems with that long 3 pointer, though (.271 -- the same one that Coop
used to bury), and he's a decent passer, but Coop is too.
The only thing I'd give Toni the nod over Coop in is post-up ability.
Coops a better long range shooter, passer, JUST as versatile though different,
& an INFINATELY better defender (you know, former defensive player of the year).
That having been
>said, for the Bulls team as currently constituted, I'd prefer Cooper in his
>prime, because Kukoc can't start, and because I'm still not sold on the idea
>that Harper can consistently defend quick point guards.
Good job...giving Coop the props.
>> In fact, I often associate him with Dennis Rodman, as someone who deserves
>> consideration for the Hall of Fame, even though fundamentally a bench
>> player.
>Rodman, huh? He hasn't been a bench player in a while. I'd say Cooper is
>more like a cross between Randy Brown and Steve Kerr.
Phew. Just when you had some momentum going, you had to spew up
a Bill Waltonism. Neither of these guys can defend Larry Legend, neither
were as athletic, and neither could run an offense.
Also, Coop could have started for most teams in the league. Houston
desperately wanted him in Coop's free agent year (1986), but Coop was loyal
to his team and stayed in L.A, even though he knew he'd be coming off the
bench -- and he didn't cry about non starting, unlike Kukoc.
Judden
Just when everyone associated me with 60's/70's, I had to go off and
start defending the 80s. :)
Judd Vance
0004...@bigred.unl.edu (Prabhakar Reddy Vangala) writes:
>Air Judden wrote:
>: Comparing Michael to Magic is apples and oranges. Dead even. Period.
>: Funny thing, is you forgot to mention the supporting casts: AC Green, Kurt
>: Rambis, Byron Scott, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Cooper,Mychal Thompson vs.
>: Luc Longley, Dennis Rodman, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Bill Wennington, Randy
>: Brown? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! And don't bring up coaches...Phil isn't
>: going to teach anything to Riles. Lakers just have too many weapons and
>Nope, you are wrong on most counts except on Kareem.
>MJ >> Magic
>Pippen > Worthy
>Rodman >> AC Green
>Harper >> Byron Scott
>Kareem >> Luc
>And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
Either this is a troll, or you are Bill Walton.
Magic 1987: .522 fg%, .848 ft%, 23.9 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 12.2 apg 1.7 spg
Michael 1996: .495 fg%, .834 ft%, 30.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.3 apg 2.2 spg
Both were MVPs and both were the best guards in their respective years.
Neither is going to stop the other. Magic is going to post Mike up hard
and he's a lot better creator. You tell me how MJ>>Magic.
Harper-Scott is laughable!!!!!
Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
To rub salt in the wound, Byron shot .436 from a long range 3 point line
Harper shot .269 from a baby 3 point line.
Harper >> Scott? Whatever!!!!
Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
Green: .538 fg%, .780 ft%, 10.8 ppg, 7.8 rpg, 1.1 apg
Rodman: .480 fg%, .528 ft%, 5.5 ppg, 14.9 rpg, 2.5 apg
I'll give Rodman >, but not a >>. Because when they square up, A.C. is
going outside. Rodman will either give up his defense (and let A.C. take
those mid-range jumpers) or give up rebounds. A.C. was faster and since
that L.A. team was built for the fast break, it will only play into his
hands. Not nearly enough to come close to Rodman, but I won't give Rodman
a >>.
Yes, I won't argue Kareem >> Luc. Most anyone is >> Luc.
and I noticed how convinient it was of you to neglect the bench. I can see
why, since the 1987 Defensive player of the year is sitting on the Laker
bench, and I can see why you would want to neglect:
Cooper>Kukoc
Thompson >> Wennington
Rambis>Buchler, Brown, or any of those castoffs who wear Bulls' jerseys.
And this Bulls team would get schooled by the 82 Lakers, 83 (if healthy),
84, 85 and possibly 88 and 80.
Judden
Judd Vance
dha...@cps.udayton.edu (Douglas Hayden) writes:
>On Stardate 18 Jun 1996 21:04:50 GMT, Prabhakar Reddy Vangala stated:
>: Nope, you are wrong on most counts except on Kareem.
>You're wrong too, Praby:
>: MJ = Magic (Judden said it best: apples and oranges.)
>: Worthy > Pippen (Scottie's good. James is better.)
>: Rodman > AC Green (Advantage to Wormy although Green is up there too.)
>: Byron Scott > Harper (Scott can do D and score too!)
>: Kareem >> Luc (No contest)
>Lakers bench = Bulls bench (Yes, the Bulls have Kukoc et al. The Lakers
>also had Woolridge, Thompson, Cooper, et al.)
Doug,
You're a good man as 2nd Tiger of the Nation of Spoon, but I have
to point out that Woolridge didn't join until 2 years later. The Lakers did
have Cooper (defensive player of the year), Mychal Thompson (who is also
better than Longley), Rambis, and Billy Thompson. It is easily better than
the Bulls bench of Kukoc and the waiver-journeymen (sounds like a musical
group).
>: And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
>No, the two would probably battle it out in six games with the Lakers
>proving how great Showtime really was in the end. See Praby, it *is* easy!
True. I'm partial to the 83 Sixers, but if I had to bet money on
one team from the 80s, it would be the 87 Lakers...dang, they were awesome!
Killer running game and too many half-court weapons to stop. And a great
defense that was overshadowed by their offense (similar to the problem
Jordan had that year).
Judden
Martin Shobe
Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> wrote:
>In article <4q7kra$1...@gaudi.lahabra.chevron.com> Craig Bowden,
>p...@natasha.lahabra.chevron.com writes:
>>The problem with that scenario is that Cooper would guard MJ and no one on the
>>Bulls could guard Magic.
>That's interesting. You think the defensive matchups would have favored
>the Lakers?
>You must have stopped watching basketball when Kareem was in his prime.
>Even a die-hard Lakers fan has to admit that the Bulls starting lineup is
>a far superior defensive unit. They have Jordan (DPOY), Rodman (DPOY),
>Pippen (deserving) and Harper (damn good, but no DPOY).
Neither Jordan nor Rodman were in DPOY form this year. They were still
excellent defenders, but not quite that good.
> The mere
>existence of Magic Johnson (YOPD) downgrades the Lakers to a notch below
>the Bulls (and probably more like 3 notches).
And Longly doesn't do the same for the Bulls. Ewing (not exactly known for his
quickness) was driving past him like he was a quard. Shaq simply overpowered
him. When the Bulls wanted to slow down an opposing center, they put Rodman on
him (or swarmed).
>The Lakers were much deeper, and it all evens out (until we see them play
>against each other. No one knows what happens then).
Defensively, the Lakers were the 6th best team (in terms of FG%), the Bulls were
7th. Now, I do believe that the Bulls were better defensively (mostly from
turnovers and rebounding), but I don't think they were far superior to the
Lakers.
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala
Douglas Hayden wrote:
:
: : Nope, you are wrong on most counts except on Kareem.
: You're wrong too, Praby:
:
: : MJ = Magic (Judden said it best: apples and oranges.)
: : Worthy > Pippen (Scottie's good. James is better.)
: : Rodman > AC Green (Advantage to Wormy although Green is up there too.)
: : Byron Scott > Harper (Scott can do D and score too!)
: : Kareem >> Luc (No contest)
: Lakers bench = Bulls bench (Yes, the Bulls have Kukoc et al. The Lakers
: also had Woolridge, Thompson, Cooper, et al.)
: : And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
:
: No, the two would probably battle it out in six games with the Lakers
: proving how great Showtime really was in the end. See Praby, it *is* easy!
You are way off, Doogie.
Worthy is good but Pip would torture him. Pip >> Worthy
Harper can score & defend better than Byron.
MJ >> Magic (except passing)
As always I give you Kareem over Longley
To be fair, I should mention that the Knicks would kill those Lakers.
This is much easier, Doogie "It ain't my heydey" H?&*^().
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala
Judd Vance wrote:
:
: >MJ >> Magic
: >Pippen > Worthy
: >Rodman >> AC Green
: >Harper >> Byron Scott
:
: >Kareem >> Luc
: >And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
:
: Magic 1987: .522 fg%, .848 ft%, 23.9 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 12.2 apg 1.7 spg
: Michael 1996: .495 fg%, .834 ft%, 30.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.3 apg 2.2 spg
Is defense part of a game? Is quickness a part of a game?
It's not just stats.
: Both were MVPs and both were the best guards in their respective years.
: Neither is going to stop the other. Magic is going to post Mike up hard
: and he's a lot better creator. You tell me how MJ>>Magic.
Nope, that might be UR opinion. I think MJ is better, the only thing is MJ
creates more often for himself so U wouldn't tend to appreciate it, especially
if you are a Bulls' hater.
: Harper-Scott is laughable!!!!!
:
: Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
: Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
Again, #s don't give you the complete picture. Harper can always score more
points. He is also quicker and is better on D.
: To rub salt in the wound, Byron shot .436 from a long range 3 point line
: Harper shot .269 from a baby 3 point line.
Don't be so harsh on yourself but I'm sure you can bear that pain. After all
you have been in pain since the Bulls started winning titles.
I give you that Byron is more consistent from long range.
: Harper >> Scott? Whatever!!!!
:
: Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
: Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
:
: Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
: Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
: so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
Defense, versatility, shooting from distance.
:
: and I noticed how convinient it was of you to neglect the bench. I can see
: why, since the 1987 Defensive player of the year is sitting on the Laker
: bench, and I can see why you would want to neglect:
Just like you ignored the defensive juggernaut that the Chicago team is.
But actually, this is very minor when compared to the advantages the other
Bulls have over the other Lakers.
: Cooper>Kukoc
: Thompson >> Wennington
: Rambis>Buchler, Brown, or any of those castoffs who wear Bulls' jerseys.
:
: And this Bulls team would get schooled by the 82 Lakers, 83 (if healthy),
: 84, 85 and possibly 88 and 80.
Nope, despite what most old-sticks-in-the-mud think, the Bulls would crush
any Laker or Celtic teams. Even this Seattle team would whip any of the 80's
Lakers teams.
Douglas Hayden
On Stardate 20 Jun 96 05:45:53 GMT, Judd Vance stated:
: Doug,
: You're a good man as 2nd Tiger of the Nation of Spoon, but I have
Third - I already abdicated Second to Martin.
: to point out that Woolridge didn't join until 2 years later. The Lakers did
Doh! My fault - I was confusing the '89 Lakers with the '87 version...
----------
Doug "Czar + Spoon = 97-0" Hayden
Grand Duke, Czardom of Cleveland
Third Tiger, Nation of Spoon
----------
Gintas Jazbutis
Judd Vance wrote:
>
> Craig,
>
> Wow! Excellent work my friend. Have we met? My name is Air Judden
> and I'm a Bulls jockrider's worst nightmare come true. I enjoyed your
> well thought-out analysis of Scottie Pippen.
>
> It's funny, we can acknowledge Pippen's solid, well-rounded game,
> but when we point out the things that keep Pippen from being a superstar
> like MJ, Magic, Big Game James, or Kemp, they come back with:
>
> He's injured
> He's in Michael's shadow
> You're speculating
> or my personal favorite
>
> Pippen >> Worthy
Comes from watching NBA Propaganda Weekly, er , Inside Stuff
Jaz
--
Gintas Jazbutis
Georgia Tech
e-mail: gin...@ecrc.gatech.edu
http://www.ecrc.gatech.edu/~gintas
David Crotty
In article <4qbpkp$1...@crcnis3.unl.edu>,
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala <0004...@bigred.unl.edu> wrote:
>
>Nope, that might be UR opinion. I think MJ is better, the only thing is MJ
>creates more often for himself so U wouldn't tend to appreciate it, especially
>if you are a Bulls' hater.
>
Is it just me, or have Bulls fans become increasingly sensitive and
fragile as this season has gone on? If one dares criticize any Bulls
player in any way, despite any objectivity shown, one must be a "Bulls'
hater", and that objective opinion (even when backed up with numbers
can be discarded).
>
>Again, #s don't give you the complete picture. Harper can always score more
>points. He is also quicker and is better on D.
>
If Harper "can always score more points", why didn't he? Especially with
Pippen and Kukoc mired in awful slumps throughout the playoffs. I'll give
him an edge on D over Scott, but not an edge in quickness.
dave
Judd Vance
0004...@bigred.unl.edu (Prabhakar Reddy Vangala) writes:
>You are way off, Doogie.
>Worthy is good but Pip would torture him. Pip >> Worthy
If Pip could hit a basket against Detlef "the fingerless glove" and
Hersey "the dog ran off with my glove" Hawkins, then maybe he could begin
to tickle Worthy. Torture? Bwahahahahahaha! Big Game James will take that
rock and teach Big Game Migrane how to show up for the finals.
>Harper can score & defend better than Byron.
Harper couldn't outscore Byron on Hollywood Boulevard if Byron
left his wallet at home. If Byron hadn't have scored 2 times as many points
as Harper, this wouldn't be so laughable. Or if Byron hadn't nearly doubled
Harper from 3 point range, shooting longer-ranged 3's, then I wouldn't
have my gut hurting so much from laughing at your assessment. Harper
didn't outscore Byron THIS YEAR, let alone in Byron's prime. And no, Harper
isn't a better defender. Defense is even.
I suppose you'll tell me the reason Byron outscored Harper 17 to 7.4
was because Harper wasn't first option and Byron was (heh! please do).
>MJ >> Magic (except passing)
And rebounding and fg%, and ft%, and post-up offense, and leading
a fast break, and making those around him better, and clutch performances,
and rings, and MVPs, and playoff MVPs, and versatility, and all-star MVPs
and ....
>As always I give you Kareem over Longley
>To be fair, I should mention that the Knicks would kill those Lakers.
Please tell me you aren't talking about that sorry Knick team from
this year. Please tell me you got way sidetracked and was daydreaming about
the 1970 Knicks. Please tell me you didn't just make the most ridiculous
statement of the year.
...what Bulls fans will do to overhype their players.
Judden
Judd Vance
Craig,
Wow! Excellent work my friend. Have we met? My name is Air Judden
and I'm a Bulls jockrider's worst nightmare come true. I enjoyed your
well thought-out analysis of Scottie Pippen.
It's funny, we can acknowledge Pippen's solid, well-rounded game,
but when we point out the things that keep Pippen from being a superstar
like MJ, Magic, Big Game James, or Kemp, they come back with:
He's injured
He's in Michael's shadow
You're speculating
or my personal favorite
Pippen >> Worthy
I don't know how long you've been around here, but your work in
stomping cockroaches has gained the admiration of a fellow cockroach-stomper.
Keep up the good work.
Judden
Michael McDonald
Ok...there's an arguement here, and a DAMN one at that, no matter what
I say you'll hold your respective sides until hell freezes over and
probably a little longer, but what the hey.
Let's look at the matchups.
Number one. Screw ALL stats, the two teams played in different eras,
and you've got to admit the league's become a lot more watered down
since the mid 80's. Blow off the records, it doesn't matter. Let's look
at game flow.
Earvin vs. Kerr/Harper.
Earving would have a relatively strong game, scoring somewhere in the
mid twenties, and gathering a few assists, while Harper would gain a
LOT of respect during the time he was in for his defensive efforts. You
can't stop a guy like Johnson, like it or not it's just not going to
happen. He might not score up in the astronomical figures, but he'll
get his job done.
Jordan vs. Scott
Similar to the Earvin/Harper matchup, Scott would prove himself a lot
stronger of a defender than he's normally credited as being. It would
probably be a matchup close to what we saw of Ehlo vs. Jordan when the
Cavs were at their peak. Jordan would get his job done, scoring aprox.
27 points.
Pippen/Kukoc vs. Cooper
This would prove to be the true marquee matchup where the game would be
won. Neither player would get a great deal of rest, but Cooper's
defensive skills could potentially frustrate Pippen, who although
talented can get streaky at times. I'd look for Cooper to win this
BARELY on points, Pippen would win statistically, but the closeness of
this battle would be IMHO the downfall of the Bulls. Nothing against
Kukoc, but I just can't see him taking on Cooper defensively.
Rodman vs. Worthy/Green
Worthy would have a strong advantage in this matchup for two reasons.
A) His superior scoring abillity
B) His stamina. With Green coming in off the bench, the Bulls would
have trouble resting Rodman.
Kareem vs. Longley
This would be a closer than people would normally assume, but you've
got to give it to Kareem. Longley n' co. would keep Kareem in check, so
it wouldn't exactly be a game to beat Chamberlain's 100 pointer, but it
wouldn't be shabby either. I'd expect Kareem to score aproximately 42
points.
Bench vs. Bench
You really wouldn't see too much of either bench with the previously
noted exceptions of Kukoc and Green.
I'm sorry, but the Laker's would win the game, it would be tight, but
in the end the Lakers would win.
Fude Max Chuang
>
>creates more often for himself so U wouldn't tend to appreciate it, especially
>if you are a Bulls' hater.
Even if you think MJ is better than Magic, I don't see how anyone
can say he is, "vastly superior," which is what >> means. I mean,
Magic is one of the top 5 player of all time, no one is going to
be crushing him in any matchup, not even Mike.
>: Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
>: Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
>
>Again, #s don't give you the complete picture. Harper can always score more
>points. He is also quicker and is better on D.
Nope, sorry, Scott was a top-notch defender in those days. If
Scott, Magic, and Worthy were the sieves that Bulls fans would have
you believe, then there's no way they win as many championships
as they did. Besides, those Laker teams were pretty good defensively,
usually finishing pretty good in the pts allowed column considering
they liked to play at a breakneck pace. Usually, teams that go run-
and-gun end up near the bottom in points allowed, but not those
LA teams. And the FG% allowed in 1987 was pretty good as I recall.
Byron Scott, slower than Harper, right. It's not even clear that
Harper was a better player than Byron in 1989, yet he's supposed
to be better when he's older compared to Scott in his prime?
>: Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
>: Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
>:
>: Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
>: Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
>: so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
>
>Defense, versatility, shooting from distance.
While Worthy dominates him in the postup game, is not a shabby defender
himself, and comes up big in big games. And shoots almost 10% higher
in some playoff years. Yeah, Pippen is going to be >> than Worthy.
>: and I noticed how convinient it was of you to neglect the bench. I can see
>: why, since the 1987 Defensive player of the year is sitting on the Laker
>: bench, and I can see why you would want to neglect:
>
>Just like you ignored the defensive juggernaut that the Chicago team is.
>But actually, this is very minor when compared to the advantages the other
>Bulls have over the other Lakers.
Well, the Lakers in 87 were the ultimate offensive juggernaut, and a
very good defensive team to boot. The Bulls are a defensive juggernaut,
and a very good offensive team. It's a close call at best, not the
decisive knockout for the Bulls that you'd like to claim.
>Nope, despite what most old-sticks-in-the-mud think, the Bulls would crush
>any Laker or Celtic teams. Even this Seattle team would whip any of the 80's
>Lakers teams.
Boy, this is really getting ridiculous. What, is Payton >> Magic now?
Or is Schrempf a better player than Worthy, even though he was
vastly inferior at the time? How about Johnson/Perkins >> Jabbar/Thompson.
McMillan >> Cooper?
Here's a clue, the Sonics win ONE matchup: Kemp over Green, and not by
a huge amount. They lose everywhere else. Even Coz wouldn't dare
claim these Sonics could whip those Lakers.
Max
--
==============================================================================
F. Max Chuang || "Let's break down all the barriers! Hairy men
(ma...@csua.berkeley.edu) || in spartan costumes holding bake sales in shady
|| boulevards!" -Tom Servo
David Crotty
In article <juddstud.835296173@gandalf>,
Judd Vance <judd...@engg.ksu.edu> wrote:
>
> It's funny, we can acknowledge Pippen's solid, well-rounded game,
>but when we point out the things that keep Pippen from being a superstar
>like MJ, Magic, Big Game James, or Kemp, they come back with:
>
>He's injured
>He's in Michael's shadow
>You're speculating
>or my personal favorite
>
You forgot:
You're just a Bulls hater
You have sour grapes
dave
David Crotty
In article <4qck00$5...@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>,
Michael McDonald <mcdo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>Earvin vs. Kerr/Harper.
>
>Earving would have a relatively strong game, scoring somewhere in the
>mid twenties, and gathering a few assists, while Harper would gain a
>LOT of respect during the time he was in for his defensive efforts. You
>can't stop a guy like Johnson, like it or not it's just not going to
>happen. He might not score up in the astronomical figures, but he'll
>get his job done.
>
Since most of Magic's "job" consisted of passing to others, Harper's
defensive abilities wouldn't make as big of an impact as they would
had the Lakers been relying on Magic's scoring.
>
>Pippen/Kukoc vs. Cooper
>
Cooper was a bench player, who probably would have spelled Scott adn
covered MJ. The real matchup you need to look at would be Pippen
vs. Worthy.
dave
Air Judden
mcdo...@ix.netcom.com(Michael McDonald) writes:
>Let's look at the matchups.
Nice ideas, but these matchups aren't how they would be, IMO.
>Earvin vs. Kerr/Harper.
>Earving would have a relatively strong game, scoring somewhere in the
>mid twenties, and gathering a few assists, while Harper would gain a
>LOT of respect during the time he was in for his defensive efforts. You
>can't stop a guy like Johnson, like it or not it's just not going to
>happen. He might not score up in the astronomical figures, but he'll
>get his job done.
If Kerr were in the game, Jordan would swith over to Magic. I don't
know Harper is getting all of this hype. He never had a glove reputation
before this final. Back when he had good knees in Cleveland, Ehlo was
matching up on Jordan--wonder why?
Dennis Johnson and Joe Dumars and Michael Jordan were better defenders
than Harper (and I'm talking YOUNG MJ), and these guys couldn't stop Magic.
These guys are legendary defenders--just a notch below Walt Frazier and
Sidney Moncrief. Magic is a million times better on the offensive end than
Gary Payton. He has more range, a better drive, better passing (for the
drive and dish) and better post-up. There isn't a Chicago guard that's going
to stop Magic if he decides to post up. Pippen would be the best person
to put on Magic (just like he did in 1991, after Magic spanked Michael in
game #1), but Scottie has his hands full with James. If Rodman takes James,
that will leave a guard on A.C. Green, so Pippen can't leave James and
Magic is going to have his way with these guys.
Brown is just too small to guard Magic. He'll probably get
some minutes against Scott (if Kerr goes cold or Byron abuses Kerr too
badly). Buechler may see minutes here just because he has some size.
Michael won't be here if it can be avoided because Michael WILL
pick up fouls (Magic had a way with refs, also) and because it will wear
him out. But he will probably get minutes here out of necessity.
>Jordan vs. Scott
>Similar to the Earvin/Harper matchup, Scott would prove himself a lot
>stronger of a defender than he's normally credited as being. It would
>probably be a matchup close to what we saw of Ehlo vs. Jordan when the
>Cavs were at their peak. Jordan would get his job done, scoring aprox.
>27 points.
Scott will start on Jordan, but Cooper will see significant minutes
guarding Jordan. Scott's only prayer of containment is that Jordan is old
and not as dominating as he used to be, as we saw in the finals.
Cooper, OTOH, will have a LOT of sucess on Jordan. Jordan won't
be humbled, but if he could only shoot 41% against Seattle, 35% against
Coop isn't hard to imagine. Jordan will get his 20 from gunning, but don't
expect to see a 1993-finals performance.
>Pippen/Kukoc vs. Cooper
>This would prove to be the true marquee matchup where the game would be
>won. Neither player would get a great deal of rest, but Cooper's
>defensive skills could potentially frustrate Pippen, who although
>talented can get streaky at times. I'd look for Cooper to win this
>BARELY on points, Pippen would win statistically, but the closeness of
>this battle would be IMHO the downfall of the Bulls. Nothing against
>Kukoc, but I just can't see him taking on Cooper defensively.
Coop is busy with Jordan. Worthy is on Pippen. People who don't
remember (clearly) Worthy forget his quickness. The guy was explosive.
He also has 2 inches on Pippen. My guess is he will play off Pippen a
little and make him shoot (especially if they use the 1987 3-point line--let
Scottie shoot all he wants out there) and Pippen just won't be flying
by James. Pip will be solid on the assists and boards, but this guy never
does anything in the finals when shooting -- why expect anything different?
Pip is going to HAVE to guard Worthy. Rodman won't because he's a
better post defender and is better roaming the boards. If he takes Worthy,
James will step out and make Rodman follow him. If Rodman doesn't, James
shoots open J's. If he does, not only is Rodman out of rebound position, but
he's not quick enough to take James and his drive. Also, Pippen will have to
take A.C. Green, who will post up. Doing this plays both of their weaknesses.
Pippen will just have to work like a dog and guard James. James schooled
Dennis Rodman back in Rodman's prime. He's Big Game James for a reason, and
as good as Pippen is, he just can't contain this man.
Kukoc will stay far far away from James. Kukoc is just toooooo slow
for James. Toni will go for A.C. Green, and Rodman will switch over to
James.
>Rodman vs. Worthy/Green
>Worthy would have a strong advantage in this matchup for two reasons.
>A) His superior scoring abillity
>B) His stamina. With Green coming in off the bench, the Bulls would
>have trouble resting Rodman.
Green was a starter that year (I flubbed in an earlier post. A.C.
was a rookie/bench player in 1986). Rodman will just WIN this matchup.
Green was only a 10 ppg scorer with little in range. Green won't have to
worry about Rodman scoring, but he won't win the board battle. On the nice
side, they can slide A.C. over to Pippen and bring in Rambis to fight for
boards...it adds nice versatility, and allows Coop to keep fighting Jordan.
>Kareem vs. Longley
we know who wins this.
>Bench vs. Bench
>You really wouldn't see too much of either bench with the previously
>noted exceptions of Kukoc and Green.
>I'm sorry, but the Laker's would win the game, it would be tight, but
>in the end the Lakers would win.
If they played best of 7, I see the Lakers taking it in 5 with the Bulls
taking 1, making 1 close, a couple of normal Laker wins and one blowout.
The Bulls will have extreme problems with the Lakers' trap, especially when
Pippen is resting/foul trouble, and just look at the matchups: The Bulls
are going to have real problems with this. To make it worse that Laker
team was fast, young/in their prime (except Kareem) and ran one of the
greatest fast breaks ever. This will only serve to tire the Bulls starters
that much faster and expose that bench.
When the Lakers have the ball, here's how I see the matchups:
Magic: guarded by Harper first and then Jordan and Buechler
Scott: guarded first by Jordan and then Kerr and Brown
Worthy: guarded first by Pippen and then Rodman
Green: guarded first by Rodman and then Kukoc
Jabbar: guarded first by Longley, and assorted center stiffs and maybe
Rodman (why not try it? Nothing else works and Rodman is the
best post defender they have)
Rambis: Rodman, and if Rodman is on Pippen, Kukoc will be here.
Thompson: Longley, Wennington
Cooper: Jordan (when Harper is on Magic) and Kerr/Brown/Buechler (when
Michael is on Magic)
Thompson: No big threat. He is athletic, but Pippen/Rodman will glove him.
Matthews: The lesser of the 2 defensive guards. No threat.
When the Bulls have the ball, here's how I see it:
Jordan: guarded by Scott, but Cooper will get lots of minutes here
Harper: Magic first, and when Cooper comes in for Magic, Scott will move here
and allow Coop to cover Jordan.
Pippen: Worthy first and then Green
Rodman: Green first and then Rambis
Longley: Kareem first and then Thompson
Wennington: same as Longley
Kukoc: If he's in for Pippen, Green/Rambis take Rodman and Worthy takes Toni
Otherwise, if he's in for Rodman, A.C./Rambis cover him.
Buechler: Magic and Scott (Coop will focus on Jordan)
Brown: Same as Buechler
Kerr: Same as Buechler
Now, Bulls fans, if you disagree, go by something other than "different
eras" (1987 was not that long ago), and "Pippen will abuse Worthy" (give
reasons and point out my error), and if the matchups disturb you, point out
why. At least give a thought-out retort.
Judden
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
In article <juddstud.835247999@gandalf>, judd...@engg.ksu.edu (Judd Vance) writes...
>
>Magic 1987: .522 fg%, .848 ft%, 23.9 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 12.2 apg 1.7 spg
>Michael 1996: .495 fg%, .834 ft%, 30.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.3 apg 2.2 spg
>
>Neither is going to stop the other. Magic is going to post Mike up hard
Magic was effectively stopped by Pippen in 1992, and of course Magic cannot
stop Michael.
>
>Harper-Scott is laughable!!!!!
>
>Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
>Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
>
>To rub salt in the wound, Byron shot .436 from a long range 3 point line
> Harper shot .269 from a baby 3 point line.
Who can possibly give a damn? They don't give prizes for shooting well.
All you need to do is outscore the other team.
Back then everybody (and inparticular everybody on the Lakers) shot above
50%. The average playoff team would score 105ppg. Nowadays (check the
numbers) it is 88ppg.
There was little defense and no athleticism. Hey, Harper and Scott
were drafted within a year of each other, and guess who is playing
for the Bulls, and who for Vancouver.
>
>Harper >> Scott? Whatever!!!!
>
>Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
>Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
>
>Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
> Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
> so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
>
Since you asked.
1) Worthy was an average defender at best, even on small forwards.
2) Worthy could not hope of deciding series by shutting down Magic or
controlling Penny Hardaway.
3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
year, is in his second DT.
4) Worthy has precious few personal recognitions. Pip is a perennial all-NBA,
all-defense, steal champion, 2DT, All-Star MVP
5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
6) Worthy shot 54%, without 3, in a team that shot 52%. Pippen shot 46%
in a team that shot 47%, with lots of threes. Pippen scored a higher
percentage of the points for his team.
7) Worthy collapsed when required to carry a Magic-less team. Pip won
55 without Mike and got within one call of going to the East Finals.
Worthy shot better than Bird, but nobody would confuse him with Bird.
Worthy is one-dimensional, so much so that Mullin was chosen ahead of him.
Pippen is a franchise player, as Bird was.
Neal Bauer
Michael McDonald (mcdo...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: Earvin vs. Kerr/Harper.
: You can't stop a guy like Johnson, like it or not it's just not going to
: happen. He might not score up in the astronomical figures, but he'll
: get his job done.
Well, you're right - I couldn't stop Johnson. But in 1992 I remember
Pippen doing just that.
Fude Max Chuang
In article <21JUN199...@axcrna.cern.ch>,
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP <bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch> wrote:
>>Neither is going to stop the other. Magic is going to post Mike up hard
>>and he's a lot better creator. You tell me how MJ>>Magic.
>
>Magic was effectively stopped by Pippen in 1992, and of course Magic cannot
>stop Michael.
An older Magic, of course. 1987 was his best year.
>>Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
>>Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
>Who can possibly give a damn? They don't give prizes for shooting well.
>All you need to do is outscore the other team.
Yes, of course, when you lose a matchup this badly, you HAVE to disregard
it.
>Back then everybody (and inparticular everybody on the Lakers) shot above
>50%. The average playoff team would score 105ppg. Nowadays (check the
>numbers) it is 88ppg.
EVERYBODY shot over 50%? Show me some numbers.
>There was little defense and no athleticism. Hey, Harper and Scott
>were drafted within a year of each other, and guess who is playing
>for the Bulls, and who for Vancouver.
"I have no facts, I better make something up." Scott-1983. Harper-1986
>>Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
>>Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
>>
>>Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
>> Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
>> so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
>>
>
>Since you asked.
>
>1) Worthy was an average defender at best, even on small forwards.
Bullshit. He often drew the assignment of containing Bird when
Coop wasn't out there, and did quite well. They also liked to
use him on shooting guards when he still had his quickness.
He was a very good defender, though not great.
>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
> year, is in his second DT.
He had a quick decline when he lost his quickness. That has nothing
to do with how good he was in 1987. By 1992, he did not deserve to
go. But in 1987, he was considered the quintessential SF.
>4) Worthy has precious few personal recognitions. Pip is a perennial all-NBA,
> all-defense, steal champion, 2DT, All-Star MVP
All-Star MVP? Big deal. 2DT? Well, judging from the guys that have
gotten left off, it looks like it's more politics than anything else.
Besides, if they had a DT in James' glory days, he'd have been a starter.
>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
This is too stupid to even talk about.
>6) Worthy shot 54%, without 3, in a team that shot 52%. Pippen shot 46%
> in a team that shot 47%, with lots of threes. Pippen scored a higher
> percentage of the points for his team.
This seems to me to indicate that Pippen hogged the ball when he should
have been letting his better-shooting teammates take more shots,
while James helped up his team's percentage.
>7) Worthy collapsed when required to carry a Magic-less team. Pip won
> 55 without Mike and got within one call of going to the East Finals.
You fail to mention how the Lakers had no PG on the roster, having
to play a career backup (Threatt) on the team. And you still fail
to note that he had a quick decline. Again, just because he faded
very fast has nothing to do with how good he was in 1987.
>Worthy shot better than Bird, but nobody would confuse him with Bird.
>Worthy is one-dimensional, so much so that Mullin was chosen ahead of him.
>Pippen is a franchise player, as Bird was.
For all the Bulls fans claiming how versatile and well-rounded Pippen
is, it seems to me that he never really dominates a game when
he's not scoring. Bird did it, Magic did it, even Mike does it.
Pippen, when his shot's not falling (which according to people who
have posted playoff stats in this thread, is quite often) simply
is not that good.
Air Judden
0004...@bigred.unl.edu (Prabhakar Reddy Vangala) writes:
>: >And the Bulls would school any Lakers team. See, it's so easy.
>:
>: Either this is a troll, or you are Bill Walton.
>:
>: Magic 1987: .522 fg%, .848 ft%, 23.9 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 12.2 apg 1.7 spg
>: Michael 1996: .495 fg%, .834 ft%, 30.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.3 apg 2.2 spg
>Is defense part of a game? Is quickness a part of a game?
>It's not just stats.
I've analyzed this in full...matchups without stats. Cooper is
a better defender and he is quick.
NEXT!
>: Harper-Scott is laughable!!!!!
>:
>: Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
>: Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
>Again, #s don't give you the complete picture. Harper can always score more
>points. He is also quicker and is better on D.
ALWAYS? Please! Both of these lines are a complete joke. The
only place Harper will beat Scott in is a dunk contest. Why not say
Harper can always shoot more accurate 3's? Equally as absurd.
>: To rub salt in the wound, Byron shot .436 from a long range 3 point line
>: Harper shot .269 from a baby 3 point line.
>Don't be so harsh on yourself but I'm sure you can bear that pain. After all
>you have been in pain since the Bulls started winning titles.
I have no pain for Bulls. I am not a Bulls hater. Not everyone who
disagrees to the Bulls being the best of all time is a bulls hater. I was
pulling for the Bulls to win the finals, I just wanted the Sonics to show
what we already know, and both happened.
>: Harper >> Scott? Whatever!!!!
>:
>: Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
>: Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
>:
>: Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
>: Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
>: so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
>Defense, versatility, shooting from distance.
Distance? Same Pippen who couldn't shoot over .320 until they
moved the 3 pt line in? Yes, this is better than James, but James knew
where he could shoot and took smarter shots.
How about we look at this criteria:
shooting accurace, post-up ability, abilty to take over a game, and ability
to hit crucial free throws? Interesting, eh?
>:
>: and I noticed how convinient it was of you to neglect the bench. I can see
>: why, since the 1987 Defensive player of the year is sitting on the Laker
>: bench, and I can see why you would want to neglect:
>Just like you ignored the defensive juggernaut that the Chicago team is.
>But actually, this is very minor when compared to the advantages the other
>Bulls have over the other Lakers.
I haven't overlooked the "juggernaut" thing. You've ignored how
good LA was at defense. I think Martin said both were 6th or 7th in the
league in opponents fg%. The Bulls never faced a team as explosive as this
Laker team.
>: Cooper>Kukoc
>: Thompson >> Wennington
>: Rambis>Buchler, Brown, or any of those castoffs who wear Bulls' jerseys.
>:
>: And this Bulls team would get schooled by the 82 Lakers, 83 (if healthy),
>: 84, 85 and possibly 88 and 80.
>Nope, despite what most old-sticks-in-the-mud think, the Bulls would crush
>any Laker or Celtic teams. Even this Seattle team would whip any of the 80's
>Lakers teams.
Well, I think we've established your knowledge with this statement.
Judden
Russ Smith
In article <4qeo3r$l...@fox.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) wrote:
> bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>
> >Who can possibly give a damn? They don't give prizes for shooting well.
> >All you need to do is outscore the other team.
> >Back then everybody (and inparticular everybody on the Lakers) shot above
> >50%. The average playoff team would score 105ppg. Nowadays (check the
> >numbers) it is 88ppg.
>
> Has to do with better shooters, son. And Magic is why those Lakers
> shot so well. After he retired, the Lakers fg% went to pot.
So how come Jerry West is so outspoken about how there's not any good
shooters anymore?
Defense has changed a lot, illegal defensive rules have gotten more
defined,with the short 3 pointer you have more marginal shooters taking
3's, all of this has contributed to the lower FG%. If anything the absence
of shooters should increase FG% because most shooters don't shoot over 50%
it's the guys who take the ball to the rim and play inside that do that.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but I think the better
shooters son comment was overly simplistic, I think defense is stressed
far more today than it was in the early 80's.
--
Russ Smith
"There's the real world, and the joke world,
the joke world can get pretty rough, so bring a cup!"
------Dennis Miller------
Air Judden
bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>In article <juddstud.835247999@gandalf>, judd...@engg.ksu.edu (Judd Vance) writes...
>>
>>Magic 1987: .522 fg%, .848 ft%, 23.9 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 12.2 apg 1.7 spg
>>Michael 1996: .495 fg%, .834 ft%, 30.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.3 apg 2.2 spg
>>
>>Both were MVPs and both were the best guards in their respective years.
>>Neither is going to stop the other. Magic is going to post Mike up hard
>>and he's a lot better creator. You tell me how MJ>>Magic.
>Magic was effectively stopped by Pippen in 1992, and of course Magic cannot
>stop Michael.
Of course he was stopped, but not by Pippen. Magic was retired
that year. The only game Magic played that year (besides exhibitions), I
remember his schooling the whole eastern all-star team.
You talking 1991? An older, slower version Magic who wasn't league
MVP and didn't have a career year? The same Magic that had the worst shooting
year of his career?
Like I said, Pippen's gotta take James and Magic won't guard Michael,
Cooper will.
Next!
>>
>>Harper-Scott is laughable!!!!!
>>
>>Harper: .467 fg%, .705 ft%, 7.4 ppg, 2.6 apg, 1.3 spg
>>Scott: .489 fg%, .892 ft%, 17.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 1.5 spg
>>
>>To rub salt in the wound, Byron shot .436 from a long range 3 point line
>> Harper shot .269 from a baby 3 point line.
>Who can possibly give a damn? They don't give prizes for shooting well.
>All you need to do is outscore the other team.
>Back then everybody (and inparticular everybody on the Lakers) shot above
>50%. The average playoff team would score 105ppg. Nowadays (check the
>numbers) it is 88ppg.
Has to do with better shooters, son. And Magic is why those Lakers
shot so well. After he retired, the Lakers fg% went to pot.
I laugh at you trying to defend a 7ppg guy. Like I said, Scott
ouscored Harper THIS YEAR, as an old man.
NEXT!
>There was little defense and no athleticism. Hey, Harper and Scott
>were drafted within a year of each other, and guess who is playing
>for the Bulls, and who for Vancouver.
WRONG! Scott 1983, Harper 1986.
And is this somehow supposed to be a point?
As for no defense and athleticsm, you're just flaunting ignorance.
Harper and Jordan, for example, were far more athletic in 1987, then they
are now...as if that made a difference. Worthy was an exceptional athlete.
The list just goes on and on....
NEXT!
>>
>>Worthy: .539 fg%, .751 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.3 spg
>>Pippen: .463 fg%, .679 ft%, 19.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.7 spg
>>
>>Both had different roles: Worthy a post threat and a finisher on the break
>> Pippen, point forward. Pippen has more problem with post players,
>> so tell me how this is Pippen>>Worthy.
>>
>Since you asked.
>1) Worthy was an average defender at best, even on small forwards.
WRONG! The Lakers don't get to be 6th (? Is that what you said,
Martin?) in the league vs. fg% with poor defenders. James wasn't all-NBA
defense, because the competition was a lot stiffer. Think about who the
really exceptional defenders are at forward this year...Pippen, Oakley, and
Rodman (who many say is overrated). In 1987: McHale, Nance, Moncrief,
Pressey, Cooper, McCray, Buck Williams, and even Rodman....
NEXT!
>2) Worthy could not hope of deciding series by shutting down Magic or
> controlling Penny Hardaway.
That would be Cooper's job:
NEXT!
>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
> year, is in his second DT.
Glen Robinson made it in his second year. Do you have a point?
(Worthy would have been on the 1988 DT, had they let pros play).
Also, Worthy had completed his 10th year in 1992.
NEXT!
>4) Worthy has precious few personal recognitions. Pip is a perennial all-NBA,
> all-defense, steal champion, 2DT, All-Star MVP
Steal champion? oooooh. My my. what a recognition! Let's put
him up there with the legends of the game: Slick Watts and Michael Ray
Richardson!
All-star MVP? My my. Tom Chambers is soooooooooo PHAT!
Dream Team: Hall of fame people, prepare to accept Glen Robinson
and Steve Smith!
Worthy has his own form of recognition: He made the finals 7 times
in his first 9 years. He has a finals MVP. Not a goof-around,
playground all-star game, but the crucial games--something Pippen
never shows up for.
>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
Well, I guess you missed the "different roles". Only a fool would
make Worthy point forward when Magic is on the court. Also, when did Pippen
go against Payton...did you see a different set of finals than I did?
>6) Worthy shot 54%, without 3, in a team that shot 52%. Pippen shot 46%
> in a team that shot 47%, with lots of threes. Pippen scored a higher
> percentage of the points for his team.
Is it me, or does this sound very Bill Waltonish? Worthy shoots
better. Worthy's teammates shoot better. Pippen is better.
>7) Worthy collapsed when required to carry a Magic-less team. Pip won
> 55 without Mike and got within one call of going to the East Finals.
Thank Toni for that, or it would have been over in 6, no thanks
to Pippen, the leader.
Worthy scored 40 points without Magic in the finals against Mr.
defensive stud Rodman.
And where was Pippen without Grant? If Pippen did all of this
by himself, why did they do worse the next year, and why, with Mike, couldn't
they beat Orlando?
NEXT!
>Worthy shot better than Bird, but nobody would confuse him with Bird.
>Worthy is one-dimensional, so much so that Mullin was chosen ahead of him.
>Pippen is a franchise player, as Bird was.
Pippen is not a franchise player, that's why they almsot traded
him. He's a bad attitude, a prima donna, and a player who is a nice
accompaniment to Jordan, but can't take over a team if Jordan is sucking.
X-man....nuff said.
Worthy is not Bird. You finally got something right. Pippen is not
Bird, either. Worthy's game is not as well rounded as Pippen, and I've
already said that. But Worthy is a good defender, good rebounder, an explosive
driver, the best fast break finisher the game ever saw, and a dominant low
post threat. Most of all, he's a big time player who comes to play the
big game. Pippen is regular season player who dissapears in the big games.
When Worthy and co. won the 1988 finals, he finished off the Pistons (and
Rodman) with a 40 pt performance and a triple double. What can Scottie
compare with that?)
NEXT!
oops, no more.
*Flush*
Judden
The Animal
> Evidently, you DON'T remember Cooper. He played both guard positions.
>He could run the point or shoot at the #2. He had a great 3 point shot and
>since you're talking about primes, he had amazing athletic abilty and hops.
Steel's web page doesnt have stats for before 88-89, so...
In 88-89 Cooper had a Tendex/48 of 18, while this year Toni had a Tendex/48
of 27. That's surprisely a 50% differential in favor of Kukoc. Why were
Cooper steals/48 so low at 1.8, given that he was an excellent defender?
Even Toni had 1.5, and Randy Brown had 4.5. Cooper was the worst rebounder
on the team that year at 4.5 rbs/48 mins.
If you really want to talk about shooting:
M/Gm FGm FGa PCT 3m 3a PCT FTm FTA PCT AVG
kukoc,toni 26.0 386 787 .490 87 216 .403 206 267 .772 13.1
cooper,micha 24.3 213 494 .431 80 210 .381 81 93 .871 7.3
http://rainbow.rmii.com/~doug/88-89/LALakers.html
http://rainbow.rmii.com/~doug/95-96/ChicagoBulls.html
Toni's underrated. IMO, he's one of the 10-15 best forwards in the NBA, he
just doesn't get a chance to show it playing behind Pippen.
-----
Daniel DuBois http://www.pobox.com/~ddubois/
Donna Anderson
Prabhakar Reddy Vangala wrote:
>
> Air Judden wrote:
> : Comparing Michael to Magic is apples and oranges. Dead even. Period.
> : Funny thing, is you forgot to mention the supporting casts: AC Green, Kurt
> : Rambis, Byron Scott, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Cooper,Mychal Thompson vs.
> : Luc Longley, Dennis Rodman, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Bill Wennington, Randy
> : Brown? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! And don't bring up coaches...Phil isn't
> : going to teach anything to Riles. Lakers just have too many weapons and
>
>
> Pippen > Worthy
> Rodman >> AC Green
> Harper >> Byron Scott
>
> Kareem >> Luc
>
Magic would not go and shoot 30 percent in the final three playoff
games; Pippen always tries to fall back on his supposedly superior
defense but whoever he is guarding euals him out and shoots a better
percentage; Rodman only averaged a couple rebounds a game less than
kemp and that is supposed to be his only good thing about him,
advantage has to go to Green; Harper cannot stroke it like Scott
could; MJ and Magic are even with advantages to the purle and yellow
on everything else. michael
David Crotty
You obviously did not watch much basketball during the 80's. Have you
ever heard of the Pistons Bad Boys teams? The Celtics played a mean
brutal and physical style of defense ("Blue Collar" was the term used,
though when the Knicks did the same thing, "Thugball" was the popular
phrase).
>
>Since you asked.
>
>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
>
Huh? Why would Worthy have needed to bring the ball up court against
Payton. The Lakers had Magic, Cooper and Scott, all of whom were
better ballhandlers than Pippen. Irrelevant.
6) Worthy shot 54%, without 3, in a team that shot 52%. Pippen shot 46%
> in a team that shot 47%, with lots of threes. Pippen scored a higher
> percentage of the points for his team.
So what you're saying here is that Worthy is a better shooter who had
better teammates than Pippen. Fair enough.
>7) Worthy collapsed when required to carry a Magic-less team. Pip won
> 55 without Mike and got within one call of going to the East Finals.
>
Yeah, Worthy at the end of his career vs. Pippen in his prime. But we're
talking a matchup of this year's Pippen vs Worthy in his prime.
dave
Air Judden
judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) writes:
>Worthy is not Bird. You finally got something right. Pippen is not
>Bird, either. Worthy's game is not as well rounded as Pippen, and I've
>already said that. But Worthy is a good defender, good rebounder, an explosive
>driver, the best fast break finisher the game ever saw, and a dominant low
>post threat. Most of all, he's a big time player who comes to play the
>big game. Pippen is regular season player who dissapears in the big games.
>When Worthy and co. won the 1988 finals, he finished off the Pistons (and
>Rodman) with a 40 pt performance and a triple double. What can Scottie
>compare with that?)
Let me fix this up. It was on the NBA Calender today, ironically,
36 pts, 16 reb, and 10 or 12 assts. Does Scottie have some finals performance
you'd like to compare with this?
Judden
Air Judden
russ_...@genmagic.com (Russ Smith) writes:
>In article <4qeo3r$l...@fox.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) wrote:
>> bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>>
>> >Who can possibly give a damn? They don't give prizes for shooting well.
>> >All you need to do is outscore the other team.
>> >Back then everybody (and inparticular everybody on the Lakers) shot above
>> >50%. The average playoff team would score 105ppg. Nowadays (check the
>> >numbers) it is 88ppg.
>>
>> Has to do with better shooters, son. And Magic is why those Lakers
>> shot so well. After he retired, the Lakers fg% went to pot.
>So how come Jerry West is so outspoken about how there's not any good
>shooters anymore?
What? Russ, the better shooters are in 1987, not now. Jerry is right.
I made the point. They make rules to help the crappy shooters today and
the crappy shooters are part of why the scores are so low today.
>I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but I think the better
>shooters son comment was overly simplistic, I think defense is stressed
>far more today than it was in the early 80's.
Perhaps on a league whole, where taking some role players and playing
solid defense will get you in the watered-down playoffs (right Lenny and Czar?)
But the Lakers, Celts, and 76ers in the day had defense that could hang
with any team today. And remember this particular thread is about 1987
Lakers (or James in particular) vs. 1996 Bulls (and Pippen).
Doug Moe's Nuggets are a black eye in the defense of the 80s, but
it worked, in it's own weird way, at least during the regular season. Notice
how when the defense stepped up in the playoffs, his teams always took an
early exit?
I don't think the Knicks and Rockets were such defensive wonders in
1994. Kenny Smith and Otis Thorpe aren't that great defenders, for example.
Those scores had to do with the suck offense. Do you really think the
Houston defense is why Starks went 3-18?
Detroit (late 80s) played the best defense I ever saw from 1980-present.
They could put Laimbeer, Mahorn, Rodman, Dumars, and Thomas on the same
court. That is impressive! Aguirre and Microwave were really the only guys
in the 9 deep rotation who weren't excellent defenders.
In 1988, the fast breaking Lakers averaged 99 pts in their win
against Detroit (funny enough, Detroit avg. 101). Pretty low score for a
high octane fast breaking team, no? Especially against one of the better
defenses in league history. LA beat them at their own game.
Judden
Gary Lorigan
If I was in the Finals and had the choice of picking Worthy or Pippen.
The answer is easily Big Game James!! I think that Pippen is a better
all around player, but when the pressure is on Worthy is the better player.
Gary
#########################################################################
Gary A. Lorigan phone:(215)-898-8301
Department of Chemistry fax:(215)-573-3899
University of Pennsylvania lor...@chestnut.chem.upenn.edu
231 South 34th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
#########################################################################
Air Judden
ne...@cnd.hp.com (Neal Bauer) writes:
BZZZZZZZZZT! WRONG!!!!!!!!!!! The only non-exhibiition game
Magic played in 1992 was the all-star game. Pippen, Jordan and the whole
East couldn't stop Magic.
If you're talking 1991, so nice to neglect Worthy was playing with a
knee injury and Magic was forced to become first option while playing a
slow down system. Hardly something to boast about. It's even worse when you
factor in Byron Scott was injured for game #5.
Also, he didn't glove Magic. Magic got his numbers, just had a
Pippen-like fg%.
Judden
Jazzy J
: I know this is the pro section and I respect Dean Smith but can anyone see how he didn't win more championships
: with Jordan-Worthy-Perkins? Maybe not enough ball?
Or maybe not enough years? The 1981-82 season was the only one in
which all 3 players played on the same team (Jordan was a frosh,
Worthy was a junior -- his last year in school).
A better question might be to ask how they don't win in 1983-84
with Jordan, Perkins, Kenny Smith (yeah, yeah the wrist injury)
and Brad Daugherty.
Jazzy J
--
Jazzy J v4.0 "'95" (Netcom) | (O):(214) 419-2377
MCS Consultant - Price Waterhouse | (H):(214) 306-1262
The most complete college hoops stats WWW site: http://www.tyrell.net/~jazzyj
1996 NBA Draft Preview at http://www.tyrell.net/~jazzyj/owen.html
Fude Max Chuang
In article <31cb0876...@news.enteract.com>,
The Animal <ddu...@enteract.com> wrote:
>
>In 88-89 Cooper had a Tendex/48 of 18, while this year Toni had a Tendex/48
>of 27. That's surprisely a 50% differential in favor of Kukoc. Why were
>Cooper steals/48 so low at 1.8, given that he was an excellent defender?
>Even Toni had 1.5, and Randy Brown had 4.5. Cooper was the worst rebounder
>on the team that year at 4.5 rbs/48 mins.
Of course, by 89, Coop was winding down ... how much longer was he
around? But in his prime, he was a fine player. Forget the steals...
that's not the kind of defender he was. Even when he was widely
regarded as the best defender in the league, he didn't rack up a
bunch of thefts. He relied on denying the ball to his man, and then
playing solid position defense, relying on his hops and quickness
and size to challenge shots. He never really gambled much for
steals, but ask anyone if that made him a poor defender. Michael
Williams used to rack up steals, but he was an absolute sieve.
In the games against Larry Legend, you'll note he limited Larry's
touches as much as possible, and when Larry got the ball he didn't
try to pick his pocket so much as make him take a low percentage
shot. That is the way coaches want you to play defense.
Martin Shobe
ddu...@enteract.com (The Animal) wrote:
>> Evidently, you DON'T remember Cooper. He played both guard positions.
>>He could run the point or shoot at the #2. He had a great 3 point shot and
>>since you're talking about primes, he had amazing athletic abilty and hops.
>Steel's web page doesnt have stats for before 88-89, so...
>In 88-89 Cooper had a Tendex/48 of 18, while this year Toni had a Tendex/48
>of 27. That's surprisely a 50% differential in favor of Kukoc. Why were
>Cooper steals/48 so low at 1.8, given that he was an excellent defender?
There is a lot more to defense than steals. In fact, steals are a very small
part of good defensive players game. Cooper prevented players from getting the
ball in the first place, and when they did get the ball, Cooper would force them
to take bad shots. Look at Joe Dumars, considered one of the better defensive
guards in the league (in his prime). He didn't get many steals either. Rodman
didn't get many steals or blocks when he was winning his DPOTYs.
>Even Toni had 1.5, and Randy Brown had 4.5. Cooper was the worst rebounder
>on the team that year at 4.5 rbs/48 mins.
>If you really want to talk about shooting:
> M/Gm FGm FGa PCT 3m 3a PCT FTm FTA PCT AVG
>kukoc,toni 26.0 386 787 .490 87 216 .403 206 267 .772 13.1
>cooper,micha 24.3 213 494 .431 80 210 .381 81 93 .871 7.3
Now consider that Kukoc is shooting from closer, gets more post opportunaties,
etc.
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
"Everything you know is wrong
Black is white, up is down, and short is long
And everything you thought was just so important doesn't matter"
"Weird Al" Yankovic, "Everything You Know is Wrong" _Bad Hair Day_
Michael R. Hicks
In article <4q7ui5$k...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>,
ma...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (Fude Max Chuang) wrote:
> In article <4q6qde$g...@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>,
> Air Judden <judd...@ksu.ksu.edu> wrote:
[...]
> I read somewhere that MJ and Worthy used to play one-on-one quite
> a bit in college, and Mike says that James was the only guy who
> he'd ever seen go left and dunk right (or vice versa).
>
> I think a reason for people forgetting about Worthy was that he had
> such a quick decline. Not surprising ... once he lost that explosive
> first step he became just an average jumpshooting forward.
Actually, I think it was the combination of becoming older *and* Kareem's
retirement... Worthy could be focused on better on defense...
--
Michael R. Hicks - Louisville, KY
a "new jack scholar"
"It is always better to form the habit of learning how to
see things for yourself, listen to things for yourself, and
think for yourself; then you are in a better position to
judge for yourself." - Malcolm X
Michael R. Hicks
In article <4qfk3d$4...@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden)
wrote:
> judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) writes:
>
> >Worthy is not Bird. You finally got something right. Pippen is not
> >Bird, either. Worthy's game is not as well rounded as Pippen, and I've
> >already said that. But Worthy is a good defender, good rebounder, an
explosive
> >driver, the best fast break finisher the game ever saw, and a dominant low
> >post threat. Most of all, he's a big time player who comes to play the
> >big game. Pippen is regular season player who dissapears in the big games.
> >When Worthy and co. won the 1988 finals, he finished off the Pistons (and
> >Rodman) with a 40 pt performance and a triple double. What can Scottie
> >compare with that?)
>
>
> Let me fix this up. It was on the NBA Calender today, ironically,
> 36 pts, 16 reb, and 10 or 12 assts. Does Scottie have some finals performance
> you'd like to compare with this?
Closest thing I can come up with is the 32/13/7 he had in Game 5 in '91...
Hey, guys, they're both great players... James has 4 titles, Scottie 4.
They'll both be in the Hall of Fame... why the pissin' contest?
Larry Coon
Air Judden wrote:
> BZZZZZZZZZT! WRONG!!!!!!!!!!! The only non-exhibiition game
> Magic played in 1992 was the all-star game. Pippen, Jordan and the whole
> East couldn't stop Magic.
>
> Judden
I think you'd better scratch "non-exhibition" from that sentence ;-)
But yes, I know what you meant....
Larry Coon
University of California
la...@fs2.assist.uci.edu
Fude Max Chuang
In article <24JUN199...@axcrnb.cern.ch>,
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP <bonv...@axcrnb.cern.ch> wrote:
>>>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
>>> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
>>> year, is in his second DT.
>>He had a quick decline when he lost his quickness. That has nothing
>>to do with how good he was in 1987. By 1992, he did not deserve to
>>go. But in 1987, he was considered the quintessential SF.
>I guess we agree that his career was not great enough to warrant
>an "honoris causa" DT spot. Thomas did get a spot. And being beaten
>by Mullin, frankly (and I am a Warrior fan)...
Thomas was on Dream Team?!? That's news to me.
You still did not address the fact that in his prime, he was widely
considered the SF by which all others were measured. So basically,
you're telling me you'd have rather had Chris Mullin in 1987 than
James Worthy. Right, I'm sure you'll drum up a lot of support for
that one.
Mullin was still a prime-time player in 1992. James was not. The
only person who got on dream team for past glory was Bird, who I'll
admit is a better player than James.
Using the dream team as some kind of knock against James is ridiculous.
First of all, it's politics. Second of all, Pippen was in his prime,
James was not. So because Scottie was a better player in 1992, the
96 version of Pippen is better than the 1987 Worthy? Tell me what
possible relevance a selection process in 1991 would have on an
analysis of a player four years earlier?
>>Besides, if they had a DT in James' glory days, he'd have been a starter.
>Actually he would not have, with Bird and even Wilkins ahead of him.
Bird, probably (though he played quite a bit of PF). Wilkins, only on
the basis of hype. Nique was nowhere near the PLAYER James was.
He shot about 10% lower, didn't pass as well, didn't defend as well,
didn't show up for the playoffs ...
>>>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
>>This is too stupid to even talk about.
>It just shows a substantial fault in Worthy's play. he was a poor
>ballhandler and needed a support cast. Ho could not do with a point guard
>as good as Armstrong. He was a so-so rebounder and could not do with,
>say, Longly at center. Pippen could.
It's bullshit, that's what it is. First of all, why would Payton
be guarding Worthy, and for that matter why would Worthy be handling
the ball up the court? 15 TO's a game, yeah right. Poor ballhandler?
He was no Pippen, but he was good enough to share in the pushing of
the ball up the court on the break at times. Not very turnover prone
for his career, but yet he's supposed to get eaten alive by Gary?
If he was such a poor ballhandler, how come he wasn't getting
stripped on his drives to the hoop?
>In 1987, the Lakers shot 52% in the regular season, though I have no
>playoff numbers.
But again, if he shot 54%, that seems to me to indicate that he
helped RAISE his teams' FG%, whereas Pippen dragged his team's down.
How is shooting a high percentage bad? Let's see, Pippen shoots
below his team average, Worthy shoots above his team average, so
Pippen > Worthy? What kind of reasoning is that?
>>to note that he had a quick decline. Again, just because he faded
>>very fast has nothing to do with how good he was in 1987.
>
>Unfortunately a short career is not a good thing. Just like playing injuried
>in the playoffs is counted against Pippen all the time.
But if you had been paying any attention at all in this thread, you'd
know we're comparing the Worthy in his prime with Pippen in 96.
So a short career (if you could call 9 all-star caliber years short)
has NO RELEVANCE in this thread, and is just an attempt to bring down
a great player. I don't count Pippen's injuries against him, I count
his sit-down antics, and generally inconsistent performances in the
postseason against him.
>But my main point, of course, is that you can't compare a do-it-all
>franchise player with an excellent specialst.
"Specialist." You make him sound like a Steve Kerr or something.
Yeah, James was a specialist all right .. he specialized in postup
offense, fastbreak finishes, combined with good passing, solid defense,
crunctime steals, and clutch all-around performances in the playoffs.
Fine, he wasn't a do-it-all player. So what? Did he dominate games?
Derrick McKey is more versatile than Worthy. Big deal. The point
is James consistently won his matchup on the basis of his unstoppable
post moves and transition game. I don't care that he only wins his
matchup one way, I just care that he wins it.
>>For all the Bulls fans claiming how versatile and well-rounded Pippen
>>is, it seems to me that he never really dominates a game when
>>he's not scoring. Bird did it, Magic did it, even Mike does it.
>
>It depends. Five steals give your team ten shots more than the other team.
>And at times, Pippen has dominated. New York in 1993, or that orlando game
>where he shot 11/14 and was the only one scoring threat for Chicago, are
>examples. In the 3rd quarter, he scored every time down the court, just
>like Jordan or Bird have done.
Apparently, reading comprehension is not your strong suit. I said
he doesn't dominate when he's not scoring, and you've just given
examples of him dominating when he is scoring. So how does this
disprove my point? Given the playoff stats presented in this thread,
it looks like he has bad shooting nights on a fairly regular basis
in the playoffs. Worthy has dominated games with his scoring,
and he did it very consistently. Whereas Pippen CAN dominate, but
only does it when he's scoring, so how is his, "versatility," an
advantage if it doesn't help him take over games when his shot's
not falling?
Fude Max Chuang
>>MVP and didn't have a career year? The same Magic that had the worst shooting
>>year of his career?
>
But what does this have to do with a younger, faster Magic in his prime
having a career year in 1987? You don't suppose Pippen held him to
just an average series because Magic wasn't as good in 1991 as he was
when he was 28? So are we supposed to judge the 1991 Jordan based on his
poor FG% in the Finals this year?
>> Like I said, Pippen's gotta take James and Magic won't guard Michael,
>>Cooper will.
>
>If you say so. In real life, Pip took Magic.
Only because Worthy was hobbled by an ankle injury and wasn't doing anything
but jumpshooting. Would you put Pippen on Magic and let Worthy post
up Jordan if we're talking about the 1987 Lakers (which everyone has
been)?
>>>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
>>> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
>>> year, is in his second DT.
>> Glen Robinson made it in his second year. Do you have a point?
>>(Worthy would have been on the 1988 DT, had they let pros play).
>>Also, Worthy had completed his 10th year in 1992.
>Yep. I have a point plenty. Being beaten by Mullin does not look good
>on your resume'.
But this has nothing to do with the current topic, which is to
compare James in 1987 against Pippen now. Would you have selected
mullin ahead of Worthy 4 years earlier?
Let's see, Mullin isn't getting selected for this next Dream Team.
Getting beat by Glen Robinson does not look good on his resume. Better
not give him any HOF votes.
This whole Dream Team thing is completely irrelevant to the topic
at hand. You see, most of us rate players based on stats and
a novel concept of watching them play. Others look at things like
completely arbitrary selection processes.
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
In article <4qdbb2$e...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>, ma...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (Fude Max Chuang) writes...
>
>While Worthy dominates him in the postup game, is not a shabby defender
>himself, and comes up big in big games. And shoots almost 10% higher
>in some playoff years. Yeah, Pippen is going to be >> than Worthy.
>
Back then, the playoff FG% was 10% higher, so I don't see the point.
Today's playoff FG% is in average at 42-43%. No surprise Worthy shot
10% better. Magic also shot above 50%, and Michael shot 41% this year.
Yeah, Magic>>Michael.
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
In article <4qefmu$2...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>, ma...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (Fude Max Chuang) writes...
>
>>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
>> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
>> year, is in his second DT.
>
>He had a quick decline when he lost his quickness. That has nothing
>to do with how good he was in 1987. By 1992, he did not deserve to
>go. But in 1987, he was considered the quintessential SF.
I guess we agree that his career was not great enough to warrant
an "honoris causa" DT spot. Thomas did get a spot. And being beaten
by Mullin, frankly (and I am a Warrior fan)...
>
>>4) Worthy has precious few personal recognitions. Pip is a perennial all-NBA,
>> all-defense, steal champion, 2DT, All-Star MVP
>
>All-Star MVP? Big deal. 2DT? Well, judging from the guys that have
>gotten left off, it looks like it's more politics than anything else.
>Besides, if they had a DT in James' glory days, he'd have been a starter.
Actually he would not have, with Bird and even Wilkins ahead of him.
>
>>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
>
>This is too stupid to even talk about.
It just shows a substantial fault in Worthy's play. he was a poor
ballhandler and needed a support cast. Ho could not do with a point guard
as good as Armstrong. He was a so-so rebounder and could not do with,
say, Longly at center. Pippen could.
>
>>6) Worthy shot 54%, without 3, in a team that shot 52%. Pippen shot 46%
>> in a team that shot 47%, with lots of threes. Pippen scored a higher
>> percentage of the points for his team.
>
>This seems to me to indicate that Pippen hogged the ball when he should
>have been letting his better-shooting teammates take more shots,
>while James helped up his team's percentage.
In 1987, the Lakers shot 52% in the regular season, though I have no
playoff numbers.
>
>>7) Worthy collapsed when required to carry a Magic-less team. Pip won
>> 55 without Mike and got within one call of going to the East Finals.
>
>You fail to mention how the Lakers had no PG on the roster, having
>to play a career backup (Threatt) on the team. And you still fail
>to note that he had a quick decline. Again, just because he faded
>very fast has nothing to do with how good he was in 1987.
Unfortunately a short career is not a good thing. Just like playing injuried
in the playoffs is counted against Pippen all the time.
But my main point, of course, is that you can't compare a do-it-all
franchise player with an excellent specialst.
>
>>Worthy shot better than Bird, but nobody would confuse him with Bird.
>>Worthy is one-dimensional, so much so that Mullin was chosen ahead of him.
>>Pippen is a franchise player, as Bird was.
>
>For all the Bulls fans claiming how versatile and well-rounded Pippen
>is, it seems to me that he never really dominates a game when
>he's not scoring. Bird did it, Magic did it, even Mike does it.
It depends. Five steals give your team ten shots more than the other team.
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
In article <4qeo3r$l...@fox.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) writes...
>
> You talking 1991? An older, slower version Magic who wasn't league
>MVP and didn't have a career year? The same Magic that had the worst shooting
>year of his career?
that Magic. He could not make it with Pippen.
>
> Like I said, Pippen's gotta take James and Magic won't guard Michael,
>Cooper will.
If you say so. In real life, Pip took Magic.
>
>>Who can possibly give a damn? They don't give prizes for shooting well.
>>All you need to do is outscore the other team.
>>Back then everybody (and inparticular everybody on the Lakers) shot above
>>50%. The average playoff team would score 105ppg. Nowadays (check the
>>numbers) it is 88ppg.
>
> Has to do with better shooters, son. And Magic is why those Lakers
>shot so well. After he retired, the Lakers fg% went to pot.
>
> I laugh at you trying to defend a 7ppg guy. Like I said, Scott
>ouscored Harper THIS YEAR, as an old man.
HOT Damn! somebody alert Krause. I am sure Scott can be had for a pick,
or even for Harper straight.
>
>>Since you asked.
>
>>1) Worthy was an average defender at best, even on small forwards.
>
> WRONG! The Lakers don't get to be 6th (? Is that what you said,
>Martin?) in the league vs. fg% with poor defenders. James wasn't all-NBA
>defense, because the competition was a lot stiffer. Think about who the
>really exceptional defenders are at forward this year...Pippen, Oakley, and
>Rodman (who many say is overrated). In 1987: McHale, Nance, Moncrief,
>Pressey, Cooper, McCray, Buck Williams, and even Rodman....
wow! nowadays there is Pippen and that's it. Point taken.
>
>>2) Worthy could not hope of deciding series by shutting down Magic or
>> controlling Penny Hardaway.
>
> That would be Cooper's job:
So if Pip is not shooting straight, that is because it's Michael's job?
>
>NEXT!
>
>
>>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
>> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
>> year, is in his second DT.
>
> Glen Robinson made it in his second year. Do you have a point?
>(Worthy would have been on the 1988 DT, had they let pros play).
>Also, Worthy had completed his 10th year in 1992.
Yep. I have a point plenty. Being beaten by Mullin does not look good
on your resume'.
>
>
>NEXT!
>
>
>>4) Worthy has precious few personal recognitions. Pip is a perennial all-NBA,
>> all-defense, steal champion, 2DT, All-Star MVP
>
> Steal champion? oooooh. My my. what a recognition! Let's put
>him up there with the legends of the game: Slick Watts and Michael Ray
>Richardson!
Not to mention Cheeks, Stockton and a few other of my favorite players.
>
> All-star MVP? My my. Tom Chambers is soooooooooo PHAT!
>
> Dream Team: Hall of fame people, prepare to accept Glen Robinson
> and Steve Smith!
>
> Worthy has his own form of recognition: He made the finals 7 times
> in his first 9 years. He has a finals MVP. Not a goof-around,
> playground all-star game, but the crucial games--something Pippen
> never shows up for.
Hey, that is Michael's job.
>
>>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
>
> Well, I guess you missed the "different roles". Only a fool would
>make Worthy point forward when Magic is on the court. Also, when did Pippen
>go against Payton...did you see a different set of finals than I did?
probably. I saw five of the games, and Pip was most times guarded by payton
when carrying the ball. Only a fool would make Worthya point forward because
he did not have the skillz. It's good that Worthy had Cooper and magic
(and Green, and Jabbar) with him, or else how could you or others say
Worthy>Pippen? Pippen had Grant, Longley, and Armstrong. Or, if you wish,
he could make a team function without a PG, without great rebounding,
and without a defensive stopper. Because he was all three.
And that is why...
Martin Shobe
bonv...@axcrnb.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) wrote:
Nope, try again. Today's average FG% was 45.7% (48.8% from 2). In 1987, the
average FG% was 48.5% (49.8% from 2). Hardly a 10% difference. Oh, if Magic
shoots 54% and Michael shoots 41% and both have normal (for them) games
elsewhere, I would say Magic > Michael. (NOTE: not >>, just >. Michael is a
much better defender than Magic.)
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
Martin Shobe
bonv...@axcrnb.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) wrote:
[stuff deleted]
>>>5) Worthy would have caused 15TO per game carrying the ball against Payton.
>>
>>This is too stupid to even talk about.
>It just shows a substantial fault in Worthy's play. he was a poor
>ballhandler and needed a support cast. Ho could not do with a point guard
>as good as Armstrong. He was a so-so rebounder and could not do with,
>say, Longly at center. Pippen could.
So? You can't put Pippen on a player like Shaq. Pippen also needs that
supporting cast. Worthy was never asked to bring the ball upcourt, and he never
needed to. He had teammates who were better at that than Pippen. I agree that
Pippen is a much better ball handler and a better rebounder than Worthy, but
Worthy is a much better scorer, and not all that far behind Pippen in defense to
make a big deal out of.
>>
>>>6) Worthy shot 54%, without 3, in a team that shot 52%. Pippen shot 46%
>>> in a team that shot 47%, with lots of threes. Pippen scored a higher
>>> percentage of the points for his team.
>>
>>This seems to me to indicate that Pippen hogged the ball when he should
>>have been letting his better-shooting teammates take more shots,
>>while James helped up his team's percentage.
>In 1987, the Lakers shot 52% in the regular season, though I have no
>playoff numbers.
They shot 52% (54% from 2) in the playoffs as well. Worthy shot 59% (59% from
2) in the playoffs.
Pippen shot 39% (45% from 2), on a team that shot 44% (50% from 2) in the
playoffs.
[stuff deleted]
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
Russ Smith
In article <4qfks0$4...@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden)
wrote:
>
> What? Russ, the better shooters are in 1987, not now. Jerry is right.
> I made the point. They make rules to help the crappy shooters today and
> the crappy shooters are part of why the scores are so low today.
Sorry incomplete thought. You said that when Magic left the Lakers FG%
went to pot, right after saying the shooters were bettter then than now. I
was just saying I've heard West make the same shooters comment but if the
Lakers FG% went down with the loss of Magic then it can't just be the
shooters can it? I'd suspect that what you mean is Magic's departure hurt
the Lakers because they didn't get all those easy shots, while the league
wide drop is due to poor shooting.
>
> I don't think the Knicks and Rockets were such defensive wonders in
> 1994. Kenny Smith and Otis Thorpe aren't that great defenders, for example.
> Those scores had to do with the suck offense. Do you really think the
> Houston defense is why Starks went 3-18?
No but they were a good defensive team. I really think the single biggest
factor in declining FG% is defenses getting better followed by the 3 point
shot becoming a staple for lots of teams.
David Crotty
>Today's playoff FG% is in average at 42-43%. No surprise Worthy shot
>10% better. Magic also shot above 50%, and Michael shot 41% this year.
>Yeah, Magic>>Michael.
>
Huh? So your argument is that Worthy shot better because the other
players in the league were better shooters, while Pippen shot worse
because other players today are poorer shooters? What does the
shooting of every other player in the league have to do with the
percentages put up by two individuals?
dave
Vijay Ramanujan
In article <4qmia1$k...@gap.cco.caltech.edu> David Crotty,
dacr...@cco.caltech.edu writes:
>>Back then, the playoff FG% was 10% higher, so I don't see the point.
>>Today's playoff FG% is in average at 42-43%. No surprise Worthy shot
>>10% better. Magic also shot above 50%, and Michael shot 41% this year.
>>Yeah, Magic>>Michael.
>>
>
>Huh? So your argument is that Worthy shot better because the other
>players in the league were better shooters, while Pippen shot worse
>because other players today are poorer shooters? What does the
>shooting of every other player in the league have to do with the
>percentages put up by two individuals?
Ignoring his point won't make it go away. If shooting percentages were so
much higher than, there are TWO possibilities, and not just the one that
you would like. Perhaps shooters were better. Or, perhaps, defenfes was
worse. And the fact that the great defensive players on those teams
(especially in the backcourt) were often backups and specialists, while
the great defensive players of today are often starters and megastars
(Jordan, Pippen, Payton, Rodman, not Mutombo) indicates that defense is a
more sought after and praised asset than it was in Magic's day.
Vijay R.
Philip Kasiecki
Michael R. Hicks (afr...@iglou.com) wrote:
: Hey, guys, they're both great players... James has 4 titles, Scottie 4.
: They'll both be in the Hall of Fame... why the pissin' contest?
Actually, Michael, I'm inclined to disagree about Pippen. I'd say
he may well be headed there, but right now, I wouldn't call him a sure
future Hall Of Famer. Part of that is because I agree about the ongoing
debate about whether or not he has a heart, as I've often questioned
that about him. He's always been one who, if you put a body on him, can
be held in check. I just don't know about his mental toughness. He may
still make it regardless, though...
Phil Kasiecki
--
Philip T. Kasiecki
Co-op, Testability and Diagnostic Engineering
PictureTel Corporation
Northeastern University Class of 1999
Air Judden
bonv...@axcrnb.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>In article <4qeo3r$l...@fox.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) writes...
>>
>> You talking 1991? An older, slower version Magic who wasn't league
>>MVP and didn't have a career year? The same Magic that had the worst shooting
>>year of his career?
>that Magic. He could not make it with Pippen.
>>
>> Like I said, Pippen's gotta take James and Magic won't guard Michael,
>>Cooper will.
>If you say so. In real life, Pip took Magic.
Bonvicini Baby,
You gotta wake up and smell the coffee. No one is saying that the
1991 Bulls didn't beat the 1991 Lakers. We are talking about the 1987
Lakers -- a younger and far more studly cast of charcters...comprende?
If you would like, I can make conclusions based upon what Pippen did
against the 87-88 Lakers, but that would be just as absurd.
>> Has to do with better shooters, son. And Magic is why those Lakers
>>shot so well. After he retired, the Lakers fg% went to pot.
>>
>> I laugh at you trying to defend a 7ppg guy. Like I said, Scott
>>ouscored Harper THIS YEAR, as an old man.
>HOT Damn! somebody alert Krause. I am sure Scott can be had for a pick,
>or even for Harper straight.
And somebody alert Bonvicin that a guy who scores 7 ppg cannot hang
with a guy averaging 17 in the scoring dept, or else by similar lack
of reasoning, Kurt Rambis could outscore Jordan.
>>
>>>2) Worthy could not hope of deciding series by shutting down Magic or
>>> controlling Penny Hardaway.
>>
>> That would be Cooper's job:
>So if Pip is not shooting straight, that is because it's Michael's job?
Michael doesn't take Pippen's shots, but he could take Pippen's
man. But actually, it goes the other way around--when jordon is getting
toasted by someone (Penny, Stoudamire) then Pippen gets put on him. Pippen
takes a guard because the first team all-defense guard can't defend the
guy? Gee, does that say something about Jordan (as well as something
good about Pippen?).
Point is (aside from that sidebar) is that Cooper is going to cover
the toughest guard on the court. Even the small forward, if the situation is
right (Bird).
Ed Loryer tried to deny that Worthy has taken guards while Magic
defended the forward. Well, in my nasty little fingers, I have Pat Riley's
book on the 1987 Lakers, and in their playoff series against Golden State,
Magic took Rod Higgins (forward) James took Chris Mullin (guard), and Byron
took Sleepy Floyd (point man). Sorry, Ed--straight out of Pat Riley's forget-
ful mind. James on Mullin -- and you say he can't d-up?
But given the choice, especially with a guy like Jordan, Cooper is
going to get the role. No matter how good Worthy is, Coop was Def. player
of the year.
>> Steal champion? oooooh. My my. what a recognition! Let's put
>>him up there with the legends of the game: Slick Watts and Michael Ray
>>Richardson!
>Not to mention Cheeks, Stockton and a few other of my favorite players.
And not including defensive dominators Dennis Johnson, Joe Dumars,
and Sidney Moncrief. Next!!!!
>> Worthy has his own form of recognition: He made the finals 7 times
>> in his first 9 years. He has a finals MVP. Not a goof-around,
>> playground all-star game, but the crucial games--something Pippen
>> never shows up for.
>Hey, that is Michael's job.
Hate to tell you, but YOU just lost the argument. It's the team's
job to win the championship. Just because Michael Jordan is one of the
greatest players of all time, does not excuse Pippen to go out and suck.
Kareem and Magic were also 2 of the greatest players to ever play
the game, but Worthy was a Big Game man as well. Teammates' shadows didn't
intimidate him. Same with Cornbread Maxwell winning it over Larry Bird, or
Joe Dumars over Isaiah Thomas, or Dennis Johnson over Gus Williams.
This is THE biggest point against Pippen, and none of Pippen's
supporter's have been able to answer this yet!
>probably. I saw five of the games, and Pip was most times guarded by payton
>when carrying the ball. Only a fool would make Worthya point forward because
>he did not have the skillz. It's good that Worthy had Cooper and magic
>(and Green, and Jabbar) with him, or else how could you or others say
>Worthy>Pippen? Pippen had Grant, Longley, and Armstrong. Or, if you wish,
>he could make a team function without a PG, without great rebounding,
>and without a defensive stopper. Because he was all three.
>And that is why...
It's a good thing that Pippen has good rebounders, because he hasn't
done squat without them. The year they didn't have the PF, they got
creamed in the semis--even with the great Jordan.
It's a good thing Pippen had Jordan to carry the offense, because
Pippen just dissapears.
Face it, he's a highly skilled role player incapable of taking over
a game. Even Robert Horry comes to play in the championships!
Judden
Air Judden
bonv...@axcrnb.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>In article <4qefmu$2...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>, ma...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (Fu
de Max Chuang) writes...
>>
>>>3) Worthy, in his 9th year in the NBA, could not beat Bird, Pippen,
>>> Mullin (!!!!!!) or swingman Drexler for a DT slot. Pippen, in his 9th
>>> year, is in his second DT.
>>
>>He had a quick decline when he lost his quickness. That has nothing
>>to do with how good he was in 1987. By 1992, he did not deserve to
>>go. But in 1987, he was considered the quintessential SF.
>I guess we agree that his career was not great enough to warrant
>an "honoris causa" DT spot. Thomas did get a spot. And being beaten
>by Mullin, frankly (and I am a Warrior fan)...
And Bonvicini just keeps up with the fiction. Let's get this
settled once and for all.
Dream Team.
Magic Johnson, John Stockton, Clyde Drexler, Michal jordon, Scottie
Pippen, Larry Bird, Karl Malone, Chris Mullin, Charles Barkley, Christian
Laettner, David Robinson, Patrick Ewing.
Isaiah Thomas was nowhere on this. DT2 was not an olympic team,
but a team made up of hype and Joe Dumars. Clowns like Majerle and Smith
were on it. And that proves Max's point PERFECTLY!
>>
>>>4) Worthy has precious few personal recognitions. Pip is a perennial all-NBA,
>>> all-defense, steal champion, 2DT, All-Star MVP
>>
>>All-Star MVP? Big deal. 2DT? Well, judging from the guys that have
>>gotten left off, it looks like it's more politics than anything else.
>>Besides, if they had a DT in James' glory days, he'd have been a starter.
>Actually he would not have, with Bird and even Wilkins ahead of him.
BZZZZZZZZZT! WRONG! James over Nique any day. Unless we are
picking the all-hype team.
The rest of this lunacy, I'm not even going to respond to. I will
say this, though, the decline of Worthy isn't as grand and fast as made out
to be. It was a contribution of things.
#1) A knee injury. Worthy was explosive and had the quickest first
step of any forward (Pippen included).
#2) The shift from Showtime to Slowtime. Worthy was made for the
open court.
#3) The retirement of Magic and Kareem. It was far easier to
double James in the paint when his teammates were Vlade, Threat, (an old and
declining Byron), Peeler, and Lynch.
#4) The poor Laker Chemistry. They were counting on Magic to come
back in 1992. When he retirmed for the 2nd time, they had an odd collection
of role players, with no plan at all: Too many slow veterens and too many
inexperienced kids. Both West and Pfund acknowledged this. It was even
worse than the Bulls pre-March 1995 team.
Judden
Judden
Air Judden
ddu...@enteract.com (The Animal) writes:
>> Evidently, you DON'T remember Cooper. He played both guard positions.
>>He could run the point or shoot at the #2. He had a great 3 point shot and
>>since you're talking about primes, he had amazing athletic abilty and hops.
>Steel's web page doesnt have stats for before 88-89, so...
>In 88-89 Cooper had a Tendex/48 of 18, while this year Toni had a Tendex/48
>of 27. That's surprisely a 50% differential in favor of Kukoc. Why were
>Cooper steals/48 so low at 1.8, given that he was an excellent defender?
>Even Toni had 1.5, and Randy Brown had 4.5. Cooper was the worst rebounder
>on the team that year at 4.5 rbs/48 mins.
Alrighty....
And how about showing us what makes up those Tendex ratings again?
I have never put stock in those, especially after seeing how high Sabonis
was this year. Coop's role was defense. Steals are not an indicator of
defense. (As Martin already beat me to with the Dumars and Rodman examples).
Remember, the game is played on both ends of the court and on the defensive
end, there is absolutly NO comparison.
Rebounds: A forward versus a guard. Nice. Mason has more than
Jordan. Mason is better. See the absurdity?
>If you really want to talk about shooting:
> M/Gm FGm FGa PCT 3m 3a PCT FTm FTA PCT AVG
>kukoc,toni 26.0 386 787 .490 87 216 .403 206 267 .772 13.1
>cooper,micha 24.3 213 494 .431 80 210 .381 81 93 .871 7.3
Well, I would like to talk about shooting. Funny that you use
numbers from 2 years AFTER the season in question.
I've alsow pointed out Toni's (lack of) 3 point shooting from the men's
3 point line. That alone will make a hefty difference in a shooting
comparison. And I noticed that you convieniently neglected this factoid.
Furthermore, Coop's job wasn't to score. When you have Worthy, Kareem, Magic,
and Scott on the team, with Thompson coming off the bench, Coop isn't supposed
to go score 20ppg. His job was to shut people down (did it), play both
guard spots (did it). Run the point when Magic wasn't in (did it) and rain
in 3's to keep the opponents from sagging on the post players (did it).
Cooper shot a large amount of 3's and this pulls the old fg% down, but he
was an excellent 3-point shooter, so he's still the better shooter.
Cooper started 2 games in place of Magic that year and the Lakers
kept on rolling. The man can do the job and he can run the fast break.
>Toni's underrated. IMO, he's one of the 10-15 best forwards in the NBA, he
>just doesn't get a chance to show it playing behind Pippen.
And he's such a lousy rebounder and poor defender that the Bulls went
shopping for a legitimate power forward, because their 6'11" man couldn't
do the job, so he got sent to the bench. Coop did his job FAR better than
Toni did his.
Judden
AKA Marlon Perkins (Wild Kingdom) and on this week's episode, me and Jim
(Martin) will film The Animal make a major DOAH-error.
Russ Smith
In article <4qpr5d$c...@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden)
wrote:
> ddu...@enteract.com (The Animal) writes:
>
> >Toni's underrated. IMO, he's one of the 10-15 best forwards in the NBA, he
> >just doesn't get a chance to show it playing behind Pippen.
>
> And he's such a lousy rebounder and poor defender that the Bulls went
> shopping for a legitimate power forward, because their 6'11" man couldn't
> do the job, so he got sent to the bench. Coop did his job FAR better than
> Toni did his.
Wow agreeing with Pinhead and Judden in one week, I must have a sinus
infection or something! Kukoc is overrated as it is IMHO, what was the 2
keys to Seattle's back to back wins in the series this year, putting
Payton on Jordan, and making the conscious decision to attack Kukoc
whenever he was on the court. I almost felt sorry for Toni because who
ever he "guarded" would suddenly try to score everytime on him, at one
point they had him on Askew and they even isolated for him.Toni is a good
offensive player but soft is a polite way of describing his defense, I
honestly think I could score on him and I'm so slow right now(6 months
after knee surgery and stilly carrying my bad leg) it's painful to watch.
That's why in the usenet draft I said I wouldn't pick a foreign player,
outside of Schrempf and Sabonis they just aren't that good and even Detlef
can't guard very well. Sabonis is hard to quantify, he can barely run with
his injuries but his offense is terrific. I've yet to see a European born
player who can actually guard NBA players so I sure as heck wouldn't pick
one at #11 where the Warriors pick, especially not a Greek guy who
averaged less than 10PPG THIS YEAR in Greece(Retzius).
I honestly think Kukoc looks good because he's on the Bulls, not in spite,
if he was on a weaker team where he had to carry the load more I think
he'd have a real problem, way too inconsistent and has no mean streak.
--
Russ Smith
"UCLA lucked into that title last year. Their debacle this year
exposed that. PAC-10 basketball is weak relative to the teams west
of the Rockies."
---------- Roy "Huh, Geography?" Navarre---------
Martin Shobe
judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) wrote:
[stuff deleted]
> Face it, he's a highly skilled role player incapable of taking over
>a game. Even Robert Horry comes to play in the championships!
And people were calling him the next Pippen. Oops.
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
In article <4qlm7b$s...@newserv.ksu.ksu.edu>, kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu (Martin Shobe) writes...
>
>So? You can't put Pippen on a player like Shaq. Pippen also needs that
>supporting cast. Worthy was never asked to bring the ball upcourt, and he never
>needed to. He had teammates who were better at that than Pippen. I agree that
>Pippen is a much better ball handler and a better rebounder than Worthy, but
>Worthy is a much better scorer, and not all that far behind Pippen in defense to
>make a big deal out of.
I don't think so. Possible evidence is the fact that, despite visibility,
Worthy was never selected for an NBA defensive team (second or third).
Politics can justify only so much. If Worthy were a fine defender, he would
have made those teams. But more to the point, defense is underrated,
and as a result people get into those stoopid (no offense to you, Martin)
"player vs player" comparisons which mean nothing. Detroit had no great
individual players, and Houston definitely would lose that comparison vs
Orlando.
>
>
>>In 1987, the Lakers shot 52% in the regular season, though I have no
>>playoff numbers.
>
>They shot 52% (54% from 2) in the playoffs as well. Worthy shot 59% (59% from
>2) in the playoffs.
>Pippen shot 39% (45% from 2), on a team that shot 44% (50% from 2) in the
>playoffs.
>
which proves that FG% might be misleading though not all of Worthy's
advantage is erased. Pippen shot a bunch of 3,(and he is seldom at the
receiving end of an assist), so a better comparison would be how many points
per shot did Pip score, compared to his team.
Of course, if we want to compare a healthy Worthy
with a doubly banged Pippen, better accept also that a ninth year's Worthy
could not get a DT berth when Pippen can, easily, in his 8th. It is not
only politics:
worthy never accumulated enough recognition to get one. I would insist that
he may have never made it in 1988, with Bird and Wilkins ahead of him at
that slot, had DT existed back then.
Air Judden
>In article <4qrqlo$1...@news.acns.nwu.edu> Jonathan Richards,
>rich...@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu writes:
>>Judden, have you really been reduced to acting like a newbie? If you don't
>>know what you are talking about, shut the hell up.
>He knows exactly what he's doing, and you have been around long enough to
>know what he is doing. He's grasping. Unwilling to accept that Cooper's
>supposed superiority is not a cut and dry affair, he is simply attacking
>the veracity of even the most obvious statements. Hell, the guy won't
>even accept that Cooper is not a high-scoring PG. Cooper would probably
>object to the way Judden is talking about him.
Nice one Vijay. Bonvicini been teaching you? When all else fails,
make something up. Where did I say Cooper was a high scoring point guard?
For starters, he was a 3 guard and I never said he was high scoring. What
I said was he was a better shooter, especially from 3 point than Kukoc.
Got a beef with that?
>>> & an INFINATELY better defender (you know, former defensive player of the
>>> year).
>>Again, I've always agreed that Cooper had a significant edge on the defensive
>>end, but it's not as vast a gap as you make it seem.
>This is amusing. An even stronger version of this Coop vs. Kukoc argument
>can be made to show that Jordan is an "infinately" (sic) better defensive
>player than Magic (an obvious truth to anyone who has half a brain) but
>Judden won't accept that, I expect.
Cooper is one of the finest defenders in the history in basketball.
Kukoc is a defensive liability. It was funny that Seattle was running right
at him. Magic was no Moncrief, but he sure isn't a sieve, like Kukoc is.
You might have a point on Jordan if you were using a younger version,
but the comparison IS 1987 LA vs. 1996 Chicago and we've seen Jordan fail
to stop the likes of Stoudamire, Penny, and Clyde. You think he's going
to take Magic when it's obvious he's lost quickness and has problems with
big guards? The guy is no Kukoc, but he definately isn't the glove he used
to be, and the 1996 version sure isn't as good as the 1987 Cooper, or are you
going to tell me that this Jordan could guard Bird in his prime? Whatever.
Also, Jonathan's post isn't showing up here. When I have more time,
I'll grab it off of DejaNews and rip it up.
*Flick*
Judden
Cameron Laird
Jonathan Richards <rich...@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu> wrote:
>Judd Vance (judd...@engg.ksu.edu) wrote:
.
.
.
>> The only thing I'd give Toni the nod over Coop in is post-up ability.
>> Coops a better long range shooter, passer, JUST as versatile though
>> different,
>
>I've always agreed with you that Cooper had far better range, but you are
>flat-out wrong on the passing ability and versatility. Even with the
.
.
.
Judden surely was just operating on momentum when he
labeled Cooper a better passer. I named this thread,
but there's no doubt in my mind that Kukoc handles
the ball better.
--
Cameron Laird http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html
cla...@NeoSoft.com +1 713 623 8000 #227
+1 713 996 8546 FAX
Dave Meeks
>
>> He played both guard positions. He could run the point or shoot at the #2.
>
>(My stat encyclopedia is at home, but I can get you hard numbers if you want)
>Kukoc also is a better scorer than Cooper was, so offensively, he has better
>qualifications for point or shooting guard than Cooper.
Bzzztt... Incorrect assumption. Larry Bird was a better scorer and had
better assist numbers than the majority of point guards in the NBA. This
does NOT make him more qualified to be a point or shooting guard. Toni
Kukoc would get destroyed if the Bulls tried to play him as a PG or 2G.
If you think his quickness liabilities against SFs (and even many PFs) is
bad now, imagine him trying to handle PG/SGs.
Kukoc's overall numbers for this year were:
Player MPG PPG RPG APG BPG SPG FG% 3pt% FT%
Kukoc 26.0 13.1 4.0 3.5 .3 .8 49.0% 40.3% 77.2%
vs Coopers 86-87 season, you get:
Cooper 27.5 10.5 3.1 4.5 .5 1.0 43.8% 38.5% 85.1%
So, no. Kukoc did NOT have better assist numbers than Cooper. And remember
that Kukoc plays on a team where there is no PG whereas Cooper had to get
his assists at the expense of Magic (who in 86-87 led the league in assists,
and had almost as many by himself as Jordan, Pippen, and Kerr or Harper.)
And this wasn't a one year fluke by Cooper either. In 85-86, he had 5.7apg
and 5.9 in 83-84.
And, as far as scoring, Kukoc is the 3rd scoring option on his team by
far, taking nearly 10 shots a game. Kukoc comes in off the bench and IS
the scoring threat for the Bulls (with MJ/Pippen out), where as Cooper
was never the primary scoring option. Yet he was only 2.6ppg off Kukoc's
pace.
As you can see, Cooper had more assists, more blocks, more steals, was a better
FT shooter, and was, IMHO, a better 3 pt threat, as his 38.5% came from the
real 3pt line (he was the 8th best that year, just behind Larry Bird...)
>> He had a great 3 point shot and since you're talking about primes, he had
>> amazing athletic abilty and hops.
>
>Yes, and those were his only offensive skills. He couldn't create for
>himself or his teammates, and he never drew double-teams.
>> You REALLY don't remember Coop, I see. Do you remember who Coop
>> played in the 1988 and 1989 finals?
>
>Fine, I don't remember Coop, whatever, but you don't understand English. Do
>you know what "rarely" means?
Well, how often did the Bulls face a 'Seattle style defense' this year?
8 times. Cooper, in 88/89, faced a 'Detroit style defense' 15 times in
those two years.
>> And Toni faced a Detroit-style defense? Is this supposed to compliment
>> Toni somehow? And Coop did face Bulls/Sonics style defense. Traps weren't
>> THAT rare.
>
>Again, you prove your memory more faulty than mine. Practically nobody in
>the 80's played defense anywhere near the level that Chicago and Seattle do
>now. Sure, there was the occasional trap and full-court press, but they
>didn't execute anywhere near as well. They didn't have consistent rotation
>schemes, where every player knows where he is expected to go to cover up for
>the double-team.
Couple of problems with your theory. Yes, in the 80s, there were still
many teams that played very tough defense. And, let's not forget that in
the 80s, the rules weren't set in such a way that favored the offense so
much. The defense was much more like that the Knicks/Pistons/Celtics
played, which was very physical. 'No layups' was the rule, and enforced
rather fiercly. Nowadays, if a player gets looked at with too much of
a glare, he gets hit with a T.
I'd say that these days, perimeter defense is somewhat better, whereas in
the 80s, interior defense was better.
>
>Judden, have you really been reduced to acting like a newbie? If you don't
>know what you are talking about, shut the hell up. Toni is not a great
>defender by any stretch of the imagination, but he is no longer the liability
>he once was. More and more often, he's been showing quick hands, maybe not
>always coming up with the steal, but disrupting the pass. He's learned how
>to push defenders farther out from the blocks, and his long arms help him to
>compensate for his relatively poor footwork. He only suffers by comparison
>to Pippen, Jordan, and Rodman.
Heh.. and just about every other SF/PF in the league. Yes, his defense
has improved, but it's kind of like Chris Mullin and how he improved.
Mullin always had quick hands, but he would get beat all over the place.
Toni gets beat pretty regularly. His 'quick hands' have translated into
less than a steal a game, and his 'long arms' have only translated into
about .3blks/game (less than the much smaller Cooper). While Judden
may be exaggerating, Toni is still a defensive liability.
>
>> Toni is a weak rebounder, or I don't suppose you don't know why the Bulls
>> went after Rodman last summer-- because they were DESPERATE for rebounding
>> from the PF slot and Toni wasn't cutting it.
>
>Gee, think that might be because, uh, Toni isn't a power forward? For a
>small forward, he is actually a pretty solid rebounder. He isn't as good as
>Pippen or Grant Hill, but he's better than Derrick McKey, and about the same
>as Big Dog.
Bzzzt... Try again next year... His sparkling 4rpg is pretty average, all
things considered. Looking through the list of SFs out there, the only
guys I see him 'better' than would be:
Dennis Scott 6-8" G/F
Tracey Murray 6-7" G/F
Sean Elliot 6-8" F
Chris Mullin 6-7" G/F
Blue Edwards 6-4" G/F
I'd list him about equal to:
Derrick McKey 6-10" F
Walt Williams 6-8" G/F
Cliff Robinson 6-10" F
Detlef Schrempf 6-10" F
Chris Morris 6-8" G/F
Byron Russel 6-7" G/F
Glenn Robinson 6-8" F
Jamal Mashburn 6-8" F
I'd list him as 'worse' than:
Anthony Mason George Lynch
Charles Smith Robert Horry
Grant Hill Danny Manning
Scottie Pippen Ty Corbin
Terry Mills Lionel Simmons
Ken Norman Jerome Kersey
Billy Owens Don MacLean
Rick Fox LaPhonso Ellis
PJ Brown Kevin Garnett
Clarence Weatherspoon Cedric Ceballos
David Benoit
Toni Kukoc is a 6'11 guy who's rebounding is only better than a bunch of
6-4" to 6-8" G/Fs. The 'best' guy out of that bunch is Sean Elliot. Scott
and Murray are pure perimeter players, Mullin is old, and Edwards is a SF
only because his shooting isn't good enough for a SG.
Putting him about equal to the 2nd group doesn't come out that well either.
With the exception of McKey, Robinson, and Schrempf, all those guys are
6-8" wingmen.
Being in the bottom 1/3rd is about right for Toni...
>> The only thing I'd give Toni the nod over Coop in is post-up ability.
>> Coops a better long range shooter, passer, JUST as versatile though
>> different,
>
>I've always agreed with you that Cooper had far better range, but you are
>flat-out wrong on the passing ability and versatility. Even with the
>fast-paced Showtime offense and the dearth of premier defensive teams, he
>still only managed about 10 ppg for his career, on lower fg% than Kukoc.
Yeah, and Kukoc's mighty PPG average is now sitting right around what,
12ppg? Wow... what an amazing difference between the two...
And, while Toni is a very good passer, the APG comparison ends up slightly
in coopers favor. Cooper was, for most of his career, at or around 5-6
apg. Kukoc has yet to break 3.5apg in a season.
Kukoc is definitely versatile. But he is also limited. He is a defensive
liability. He is argueably more versatile offensively than Cooper, though
Cooper does very well as a PG, SG, or even SF if necessary. Defensively,
it's night and day. Kukoc is a liability, Cooper is a DPOTY and 8 time
AllDefensive team stopper.
>Sure, you can argue that scoring wasn't his role, but being a defensive
>stopper isn't Kukoc's role, either.
True, but the difference between the two offensively is argueable at
best, while the difference defensively is huge.
>
>> & an INFINATELY better defender (you know, former defensive player of the
>> year).
>
>Again, I've always agreed that Cooper had a significant edge on the defensive
>end, but it's not as vast a gap as you make it seem.
It's huge. Period. Again, 8 times AllDefensive, 1 time Def. POY.
Both were helps on the offensive end. Both brought positive things to
the offensive game. If you want to argue Toni was slightly better, I'd
likely not argue much. But, defensively, the gap was huge. When it was
time to play defense, the Bulls put Toni at the end of the bench while the
Lakers brought in Cooper.
Kind of like 'who would you rather have... Mark Eaton from 88-89 or
Luc Longely from 95-96??'
Luc scored a little more, passed a little better while Eaton rebounded better.
At least here, Luc is a decent defensive player while Eaton was a 2 time
DPOTY.
--
David T. Meeks || "Walking the line of innocence and guilt
Senior Software Engineer || Are you fine with circumstance?"
VMark Software, Inc. || Iluvatar - Children
e-mail: da...@vmark.com || www: http://infoserv.vmark.com/~davem
Vijay Ramanujan
da...@uvmark.vmark.com writes:
>So, no. Kukoc did NOT have better assist numbers than Cooper. And remember
>that Kukoc plays on a team where there is no PG whereas Cooper had to get
>his assists at the expense of Magic (who in 86-87 led the league in assists,
>and had almost as many by himself as Jordan, Pippen, and Kerr or Harper.)
I agree with much of your logic, but this I don't agree with. The reason
I don't agree is that assists aren't gotten at the expense of another
player, unless you mean that a player has to have the ball in order to
get assists. Obviously, Cooper would have had difficulty holding onto the
ball long enough to set up teammates when Magic Johnson was on the court.
BUT, Toni Kukoc faces the exact same problem playing alongside Michael
Jordan and Scottie Pippen. Although neither of them is the passer that
Magic Johnson was, Kukoc hardly held the ball long enough to amass big
assist numbers because Scottie and MJ took the whole 24 for themselves.
>And, as far as scoring, Kukoc is the 3rd scoring option on his team by
>far, taking nearly 10 shots a game. Kukoc comes in off the bench and IS
>the scoring threat for the Bulls (with MJ/Pippen out), where as Cooper
>was never the primary scoring option. Yet he was only 2.6ppg off Kukoc's
>pace.
Point taken. Kukoc is not the scoring threat he can be, should be or
appears to be. He has amazing moves for a 6'11" forward, has good range
on his shot and can create, yet somehow it doesn't add up. I think two
reasons are a) he is not able to stay into the game mentally with Pip and
MJ doing the ball handling and b) he is forced to take a lot of his shots
under less than ideal circumstances. (e.g. 4 seconds left on the shot
clock, MJ gets the double team and kicks to Kukoc for the 3 pointer).
Anyway, one thing to keep in mind is that the running argument over
whether or not defense is better now also impacts the scoring averages. I
won't rehash the argument, but if scoring was higher because of weaker
defense, it follows that individual's averages were similarly inflated.
>As you can see, Cooper had more assists, more blocks, more steals, was a better
>FT shooter, and was, IMHO, a better 3 pt threat, as his 38.5% came from the
>real 3pt line (he was the 8th best that year, just behind Larry Bird...)
Assists were significant, as is FT%. Agreed that the marginal superiority
of Kukoc's 3 PT shooting from closer in probably means that he is not as
good at long range shooting, but it could also mean that, with the
shorter line, Kukoc is firing them up when he shouldn't be. Either way,
it's still a negative. I don't think a 0.2 advantage in blocks/steals is
significant in any way, however.
>Couple of problems with your theory. Yes, in the 80s, there were still
>many teams that played very tough defense. And, let's not forget that in
>the 80s, the rules weren't set in such a way that favored the offense so
>much. The defense was much more like that the Knicks/Pistons/Celtics
>played, which was very physical. 'No layups' was the rule, and enforced
>rather fiercly. Nowadays, if a player gets looked at with too much of
>a glare, he gets hit with a T.
That's true. There was more intimidation then, from Kurt Rambis to the
Bad Boys. Layups were rarer in the halfcourt and three point plays were
much more infrequent. However, that isn't always defense. Sending a guy
to the floor when he's going for a layup still gives him an average of
1.5 points (if he is a 75% free throw shooter). Trapping him at the top
of the key and forcing him to give up the dribble or stripping the ball
from him on the drive deprives him of his scoring opportunity.
The Pistons were a dirty team and they were a great defensive team, but
that doens't mean that one equals the other. The reason they were a great
defensive team was that they had great balance, rarely got beaten off the
drive, could put pressure on the PG and the SG and rely on guys like
Rodman to clean up the glass. The Lakers usually started 2-3 good
defensive players and the Celtics started 2-3 as well. The Bulls start 4
good defensive players (and unlike the Celts and Lakers, have no starter
who is a major defensive liability, unless you count Luc's ability to
foul out in 10 minutes while playing decent defense). The Supersonics
seem to start 6 good defensive players at times.
>I'd say that these days, perimeter defense is somewhat better, whereas in
>the 80s, interior defense was better.
That might be true, if you believe that intimidation is a huge factor. I
honestly don't know, because I've never been sent realing by a 6'10"
power forward and then gone back into the lane. But as a fan, not a GM, I
would rather have Shawn Bradley and his shot blocking skills in the lane
than have some guy who can knock people down when they come too close.
>Heh.. and just about every other SF/PF in the league. Yes, his defense
>has improved, but it's kind of like Chris Mullin and how he improved.
>Mullin always had quick hands, but he would get beat all over the place.
>Toni gets beat pretty regularly. His 'quick hands' have translated into
>less than a steal a game, and his 'long arms' have only translated into
>about .3blks/game (less than the much smaller Cooper). While Judden
>may be exaggerating, Toni is still a defensive liability.
Judden was exaggerating. Kukoc is a liability. But you neglect two things
that Kukoc does now that he didn't even a year ago. He has become *very*
adept (one of the best, I would say) at legally reaching around and
swatting entry passes back out where they came from. No steal. No block.
No stat. But a very effective form of defense. And he has gotten much
better at boxing out. Perhaps it just seems like that with Dennis Rodman
snatching 15 a game, but boxing out is a key part of defense, and I think
he has improved.
Martin Shobe
>Judd Vance (judd...@engg.ksu.edu) wrote:
>> Evidently, you DON'T remember Cooper.
>Whatever.
>> He played both guard positions. He could run the point or shoot at the #2.
>Kukoc has better assist numbers (from a forward, no less) than Cooper had.
>(My stat encyclopedia is at home, but I can get you hard numbers if you want)
>Kukoc also is a better scorer than Cooper was, so offensively, he has better
>qualifications for point or shooting guard than Cooper.
Let's see here. For the season 373 to 287 Cooper. Per game 4.55 to 3.54
Cooper. Per 48 minutes 7.95 to 6.55 Cooper. In what way were Kukoc's assist
number better?
[stuff deleted]
>> I see you haven't seen Kukoc play either. Gheorghe Muresan could
>> drive by Kukoc and leave him standing still. Kukoc has to have THE
>> slowest feet of any defender in the league.
>Judden, have you really been reduced to acting like a newbie? If you don't
>know what you are talking about, shut the hell up. Toni is not a great
>defender by any stretch of the imagination, but he is no longer the liability
>he once was. More and more often, he's been showing quick hands, maybe not
>always coming up with the steal, but disrupting the pass. He's learned how
>to push defenders farther out from the blocks, and his long arms help him to
>compensate for his relatively poor footwork. He only suffers by comparison
>to Pippen, Jordan, and Rodman.
And Schrempf, and Mahmoud, and .... Anyway you slice it, Kukoc is a poor
defender. He may be better than he was, but that isn't saying much.
>> Toni is a weak rebounder, or I don't suppose you don't know why the Bulls
>> went after Rodman last summer-- because they were DESPERATE for rebounding
>> from the PF slot and Toni wasn't cutting it.
>Gee, think that might be because, uh, Toni isn't a power forward? For a
>small forward, he is actually a pretty solid rebounder. He isn't as good as
>Pippen or Grant Hill, but he's better than Derrick McKey, and about the same
>as Big Dog.
True enough, he plays both forward slots and some shooting guard. However, he
does play quite a bit of power forward, and 4 rpg from your power forward just
doesn't cut it.
>> The only thing I'd give Toni the nod over Coop in is post-up ability.
>> Coops a better long range shooter, passer, JUST as versatile though
>> different,
>
>I've always agreed with you that Cooper had far better range, but you are
>flat-out wrong on the passing ability and versatility. Even with the
>fast-paced Showtime offense and the dearth of premier defensive teams, he
>still only managed about 10 ppg for his career, on lower fg% than Kukoc.
>Sure, you can argue that scoring wasn't his role, but being a defensive
>stopper isn't Kukoc's role, either.
What does ppg and fg% have to do with versatility and passing?
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
Martin Shobe
>In article <4qlm7b$s...@newserv.ksu.ksu.edu>, kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu (Martin Shobe) writes...
>>
>>So? You can't put Pippen on a player like Shaq. Pippen also needs that
>>supporting cast. Worthy was never asked to bring the ball upcourt, and he never
>>needed to. He had teammates who were better at that than Pippen. I agree that
>>Pippen is a much better ball handler and a better rebounder than Worthy, but
>>Worthy is a much better scorer, and not all that far behind Pippen in defense to
>>make a big deal out of.
>I don't think so. Possible evidence is the fact that, despite visibility,
>Worthy was never selected for an NBA defensive team (second or third).
>Politics can justify only so much. If Worthy were a fine defender, he would
>have made those teams.
There is no third NBA defensive team. And failure to make it just means he was
behind people like Michael Cooper, Kevin McHale, Paul Pressey, Rodney McCray,
Karl Malone, Buck Williams, Larry Nance, Dennis Rodman, Sidney Moncrief, Bobby
Jones, etc. Not making the team isn't that much of a knock on Worthy.
>But more to the point, defense is underrated,
>and as a result people get into those stoopid (no offense to you, Martin)
>"player vs player" comparisons which mean nothing. Detroit had no great
>individual players,
Isiah Thomas? Joe Dumars? Dennis Rodman? Bill Laimbeer (won a rebounding
title, very good defender, good passer, old 3-pt line range)? Yeah, they were
all a bunch of stiffs.
> and Houston definitely would lose that comparison vs
>Orlando.
That's true enough.
>>
>>
>>>In 1987, the Lakers shot 52% in the regular season, though I have no
>>>playoff numbers.
>>
>>They shot 52% (54% from 2) in the playoffs as well. Worthy shot 59% (59% from
>>2) in the playoffs.
>>Pippen shot 39% (45% from 2), on a team that shot 44% (50% from 2) in the
>>playoffs.
>>
>which proves that FG% might be misleading though not all of Worthy's
>advantage is erased. Pippen shot a bunch of 3
Which is why I included the 2 pt %. Where Worthy beats Pippen by a mere 14%.
Martin Shobe
[stuff deleted]
>The Pistons were a dirty team and they were a great defensive team, but
>that doens't mean that one equals the other. The reason they were a great
>defensive team was that they had great balance, rarely got beaten off the
>drive, could put pressure on the PG and the SG and rely on guys like
>Rodman to clean up the glass. The Lakers usually started 2-3 good
>defensive players and the Celtics started 2-3 as well.
Both teams started 4 good defensive players. The Lakers started Jabbar, Worthy,
Scott, Green. The Celtics started McHale, Parish, Ainge, Johnson. The first
players off the bench for both of these teams were good defensive players as
well. The second player off the bench for the Lakers also played good defense.
>The Bulls start 4
>good defensive players (and unlike the Celts and Lakers, have no starter
>who is a major defensive liability, unless you count Luc's ability to
>foul out in 10 minutes while playing decent defense).
Larry Bird (before the injuries) was not a defensive liability. (At least, not
any more than Luc). Neither was Johnson. (Again, compared to Luc).
[stuff deleted]
>Judden was exaggerating. Kukoc is a liability. But you neglect two things
>that Kukoc does now that he didn't even a year ago. He has become *very*
>adept (one of the best, I would say) at legally reaching around and
>swatting entry passes back out where they came from. No steal. No block.
>No stat. But a very effective form of defense.
No it isn't. For each time that he does get a piece of the ball, his player is
going to get by him 4-5 times. What you just described is a desparation move.
Chris Mullin was a master at this, and no one is going to confuse him with an
effective defender. (And Chris Mullin would tap it out to teammates, thus
getting a steal).
Martin Shobe
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
Brian
>bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) wrote:
>That's true enough.
>[stuff deleted]
>Martin Shobe
>kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu
comparing Scottie Pippen to James Worthy is like comparing apples and
oranges. Two different styles and personalites, and the teams they
played for were much different. I think that the abilities that a
player tends to develop, are the ones that help him excel at his
particular role in a team. Pippen's role for the Bull's was much
different than Worthy's role for the Lakers.
Air Judden
>>
>>I've always agreed with you that Cooper had far better range, but you are
>>flat-out wrong on the passing ability and versatility. Even with the
> .
> .
> .
>Judden surely was just operating on momentum when he
>labeled Cooper a better passer. I named this thread,
>but there's no doubt in my mind that Kukoc handles
>the ball better.
>--
Your mind is deceiving you. No way in this world could Kukoc run the
team and a fast break offense. He's nice for a forward, but hardly compares
to Cooper.
As for Jonathan. Seeing how Martin sliced and diced you, I really
don't need to add much other than yes, there is that vast of a defensive
difference. On offense, Cooper can run the team and bomb the 3s a lot
better. I never said he will average more ppg, because he didn't have to,
with those teammates. But passing, ball handling, and range are all
aspects of offense. Give Kukoc the ability to post up, but he doesn't have
all that much on Cooper on offense
Judden
Air Judden
>The Pistons were a dirty team and they were a great defensive team, but
>that doens't mean that one equals the other. The reason they were a great
>defensive team was that they had great balance, rarely got beaten off the
>drive, could put pressure on the PG and the SG and rely on guys like
>Rodman to clean up the glass. The Lakers usually started 2-3 good
>defensive players and the Celtics started 2-3 as well. The Bulls start 4
>good defensive players (and unlike the Celts and Lakers, have no starter
>who is a major defensive liability, unless you count Luc's ability to
>foul out in 10 minutes while playing decent defense). The Supersonics
>seem to start 6 good defensive players at times.
Vijay. Hold up your fingers and count after me.
Larry Bird
Kevin McHale
Robert Parish
Dennis Johnson
That is 4. Can you say 4? Good job!
And who is this defensive liablity on the floor? Ainge? Magic? Scoot?
Worthy? Jabaar? Wait a second....A.C. Green!!!!!
>>Heh.. and just about every other SF/PF in the league. Yes, his defense
>>has improved, but it's kind of like Chris Mullin and how he improved.
>>Mullin always had quick hands, but he would get beat all over the place.
>>Toni gets beat pretty regularly. His 'quick hands' have translated into
>>less than a steal a game, and his 'long arms' have only translated into
>>about .3blks/game (less than the much smaller Cooper). While Judden
>>may be exaggerating, Toni is still a defensive liability.
>Judden was exaggerating. Kukoc is a liability. But you neglect two things
>that Kukoc does now that he didn't even a year ago. He has become *very*
>adept (one of the best, I would say) at legally reaching around and
>swatting entry passes back out where they came from. No steal. No block.
>No stat. But a very effective form of defense. And he has gotten much
>better at boxing out. Perhaps it just seems like that with Dennis Rodman
>snatching 15 a game, but boxing out is a key part of defense, and I think
>he has improved.
Judden did not exaggerate. The only thing Judden exaggerated on is
that Georghe Muresan could drive by Kukoc. You don't need stats to see
defense. Good defenders often will not have great stats. What you see is
Seattle taking turns going at Kukoc and Seattle taking turns USING Kukoc.
That is not good defense.
Class Dismissed.
Judden
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
>
>
> Dream Team.
>
> Magic Johnson, John Stockton, Clyde Drexler, Michal jordon, Scottie
>Pippen, Larry Bird, Karl Malone, Chris Mullin, Charles Barkley, Christian
>Laettner, David Robinson, Patrick Ewing.
>
> Isaiah Thomas was nowhere on this. DT2 was not an olympic team,
>but a team made up of hype and Joe Dumars. Clowns like Majerle and Smith
>were on it. And that proves Max's point PERFECTLY!
>
Oh man, I got Judd another chance to type a list of names - with first names
too. Proving the point perfectly by saying that DT2 was all hype is not much,
y' know.
Anyway, I am sorry I put down athletes that were playing while you were
going through puberty. Since this thread will be gone by the time i get back,
let me summarize my main points:
- you can't compare stats from different periods. Nowadays it is harder
to shoot a basket than it was in the mid 1980, the reason being that
both individual (read: better athletes) and team (read: after the Pistons)
defenses are here. If you want to compare
stats, you have to adjust them. A good way is probably to find a
significant (for example, points scored per shot, not FG%)
mean and standard deviation for each period, and give the
player's value wrt to his time. (Although it is insufficient, I pointed out
that Worthy was no better than the third small forward and probably no
better than the 15th player of his time. He never was in the top ten,
not even in 1987. Pippen has been in the top three, and is currently in
the top ten. And, of course, the player's base has increased enormously,
both in US and foreign-born players.)
- statistics, anyway, don't measure a players' value. They can't measure
defense, amongst other things. Stats like "how well did guy A did playing
with Green and Threatt, compared to what guy B did with Grant and BJ"
do convey more information about one player's impact on his team success.
- if you are willing to take certain parts of Pippen's career as a comparison,
for example the migraine and this year's hobbled playoffs, you will have
to accept that Worthy injuries (that happened conveniently at a time
when he could no longer be supported by other stars) be taken into
account.
- more on defense and versatilty, which are the strong parts of my argument.
Nowadays it is very evident that a team tends to be as good offensively
as the best off. player (because he will always be able to create some shot)
and as bad defensively as the worst defensive one (because other teams
will pick on him every time). Likewise two ballhandlers in a successful
team are an absolute necessity. Recent examples are Kukoc being attacked by
Seattle, and the Bulls denying the ball to Penny to create a 20pt comeback.
The main point is that, at least in modern basketball, defense and
versatility are more than 50% of the game and being bad defensively is
worse than being bad offensively - plus a versatile player gives more
options in the more strategic, less-role-oriented play of today.
I wonder how Pip can't be Worthy when he holds a huge edge on these
categories (Worthy a stopper or ballhandler? pls). It's not like Magic ever
needed Worthy to win it all (unlike jordon with Pip). We are looking
at one player with one incredible skill and another with three or four
such skills.
That's it. I don't think that you, Judd, have played the game much,
or else you would have seen the effects of top defensive players with your
own eyes. Seen from the court, gives you another perspective. Here we
have a bunch of clueless students like you, and of course the hot shooter
tends to be their fave. Anybody who is familiar with my posts knows
that I have consistently valued defense a lot - I would even intervene
in the Cooper/Kukoc debate if you weren't involved in it.
I also think that you will have trouble graduating unless
you learn to use statistics beyond Total Basketball or whatever book
you keep near your terminal. It's not that difficult. Another thing that
might help you graduate is to stop living in the past, at you age it
shouldn't be difficult either.
Fude Max Chuang
Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> wrote:
>>And who is this defensive liablity on the floor? Ainge? Magic? Scoot?
>>Worthy? Jabaar? Wait a second....A.C. Green!!!!!
>
Yet again, we get this, "poor defensive player," stuff. Hey, this
isn't Kukoc we're talking about. In his halcyon days, Magic was
a very average defensive player, not a liability. You don't
win five championships with a defensive sieve out on the court for
most of the game.
Max
--
==============================================================================
F. Max Chuang || "Let's break down all the barriers! Hairy men
(ma...@csua.berkeley.edu) || in spartan costumes holding bake sales in shady
|| boulevards!" -Tom Servo
Judd...@ksu.ksu.edu
From: judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden)
Subject: Re: People: Pippen ain't Worthy
Organization: Kansas State University
Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
>The Pistons were a dirty team and they were a great defensive team, but
>that doens't mean that one equals the other. The reason they were a great
>defensive team was that they had great balance, rarely got beaten off the
>drive, could put pressure on the PG and the SG and rely on guys like
>Rodman to clean up the glass. The Lakers usually started 2-3 good
>defensive players and the Celtics started 2-3 as well. The Bulls start 4
>good defensive players (and unlike the Celts and Lakers, have no starter
>who is a major defensive liability, unless you count Luc's ability to
>foul out in 10 minutes while playing decent defense). The Supersonics
>seem to start 6 good defensive players at times.
Vijay. Hold up your fingers and count after me.
Larry Bird
Kevin McHale
Robert Parish
Dennis Johnson
That is 4. Can you say 4? Good job!
And who is this defensive liablity on the floor? Ainge? Magic? Scoot?
Worthy? Jabaar? Wait a second....A.C. Green!!!!!
>>Heh.. and just about every other SF/PF in the league. Yes, his defense
>>has improved, but it's kind of like Chris Mullin and how he improved.
>>Mullin always had quick hands, but he would get beat all over the place.
>>Toni gets beat pretty regularly. His 'quick hands' have translated into
>>less than a steal a game, and his 'long arms' have only translated into
>>about .3blks/game (less than the much smaller Cooper). While Judden
>>may be exaggerating, Toni is still a defensive liability.
>Judden was exaggerating. Kukoc is a liability. But you neglect two things
>that Kukoc does now that he didn't even a year ago. He has become *very*
>adept (one of the best, I would say) at legally reaching around and
>swatting entry passes back out where they came from. No steal. No block.
>No stat. But a very effective form of defense. And he has gotten much
>better at boxing out. Perhaps it just seems like that with Dennis Rodman
>snatching 15 a game, but boxing out is a key part of defense, and I think
>he has improved.
Judden did not exaggerate. The only thing Judden exaggerated on is
that Georghe Muresan could drive by Kukoc. You don't need stats to see
defense. Good defenders often will not have great stats. What you see is
Seattle taking turns going at Kukoc and Seattle taking turns USING Kukoc.
That is not good defense.
Class Dismissed.
Judden
--
|Fidonet: Judd...@ksu.Ksu.Edu 1:377/51.2
|Internet: Judd...@ksu.Ksu.Edu
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
Vijay Ramanujan
kh...@unix.ksu.ksu.edu writes:
>>But more to the point, defense is underrated,
>>and as a result people get into those stoopid (no offense to you, Martin)
>>"player vs player" comparisons which mean nothing. Detroit had no great
>>individual players,
>Isiah Thomas? Joe Dumars? Dennis Rodman? Bill Laimbeer (won a rebounding
>title, very good defender, good passer, old 3-pt line range)? Yeah, they were
>all a bunch of stiffs.
The problem is that when making player-player comparisons, too many posts
either ignore defense or make it a black and white consideration. There's
a paragraph on ball handling skills, passing, dribble drives, etc - and
then at the end defense is thrown in to justify a conclusion that might
not seem obvious.
Detroit was a great team, and history has already short-shrifted them
(jumping over them to get from LA to Chicago). But if you ignore defense,
you'll never predict them to be a champion. Isiah, an all-time great. No
others. Dumars, minus defense, is just a hot shooting guard. Not a
passer. Not a driver. Not a rebounder. Laimbeer minus defense is Terry
Mills (exag, but not much). Rodman minus defense is, well, 15 rebounds
and nothing else. Detroit minus defense would have been no threat to
reach the Finals, but their defense was about as good as any team has
played in 20 years.
>> and Houston definitely would lose that comparison vs
>>Orlando.
No way.
Hakeem vs. Shaq - Hakeem
Brown vs. Grant - Grant
Horry vs. Scott - Horry
Drexler vs. Anderson - Drexler
Smith vs. Hardaway - Hardaway
Bench - Houston
Coaching - Houston
Houston was a much superior team, whether judged on the court or on paper.
Vijay Ramanujan
writes:
>>The Lakers usually started 2-3 good
>>defensive players and the Celtics started 2-3 as well. The Bulls start 4
>>good defensive players (and unlike the Celts and Lakers, have no starter
>>who is a major defensive liability, unless you count Luc's ability to
>>foul out in 10 minutes while playing decent defense). The Supersonics
>>seem to start 6 good defensive players at times.
> Vijay. Hold up your fingers and count after me.
>Larry Bird
ZERO - Pippen against Bird? Get real. Bird was a better player, but
Pippen would still be able to do damage against Bird's defense.
>Kevin McHale
1
>Robert Parish
2
>Dennis Johnson
3
> That is 4. Can you say 4? Good job!
No, that's 3. Can you say 3? I didn't think so.
But last time I checked, 2-3 included the number 3.
>And who is this defensive liablity on the floor? Ainge? Magic? Scoot?
>Worthy? Jabaar? Wait a second....A.C. Green!!!!!
Magic. Great passer. Good scorer. Great leader. Poor defensive player.
And Scoot? Is that a cross between Coop and Scott, or is that Scooter
Barry?
> Judden did not exaggerate. The only thing Judden exaggerated on is
>that Georghe Muresan could drive by Kukoc. You don't need stats to see
>defense. Good defenders often will not have great stats. What you see is
>Seattle taking turns going at Kukoc and Seattle taking turns USING Kukoc.
> That is not good defense.
Let's see, that's Judden didn't exaggerate, but Judden did exaggerate.
But we don't need stats on defense, we just need stats on offense. Of
course, they are entirely different, right? I mean, scoring a lot means
great offense. Getting scored on a lot doesn't mean bad defense. Hitting
every shot is good offense. The opponent hitting every shot is not bad
defense.
>Class Dismissed.
Not so fast, Judden. You might have to repeat this class if you don't
grasp the basics.
Dave Meeks
>In article <4qus2e$g...@uvmark.vmark.com> Dave Meeks,
>da...@uvmark.vmark.com writes:
>
>>was never the primary scoring option. Yet he was only 2.6ppg off Kukoc's
>>pace.
>
>Point taken. Kukoc is not the scoring threat he can be, should be or
>appears to be. He has amazing moves for a 6'11" forward, has good range
>on his shot and can create, yet somehow it doesn't add up. I think two
>reasons are a) he is not able to stay into the game mentally with Pip and
>MJ doing the ball handling and b) he is forced to take a lot of his shots
>under less than ideal circumstances. (e.g. 4 seconds left on the shot
>clock, MJ gets the double team and kicks to Kukoc for the 3 pointer).
Well, one thing I think of when I think of Kukoc is that he and Pippen are
very similar, in the sense they are both better suited to be complementary
players. I firmly believe that Scottie is NOT suited to be the kind of
leader the Jordan, Bird, Magic, etc... players are. He's extremely talented,
but is not the kind of guy you rest your hopes on. Kukoc is similar (though
not as talented). One thing that seperates them is that Kukoc has shown the
ability to step up and hit the big shot, where Pippen has shown a tendency to
occasionally disappear in crunch time.
>Anyway, one thing to keep in mind is that the running argument over
>whether or not defense is better now also impacts the scoring averages. I
>won't rehash the argument, but if scoring was higher because of weaker
>defense, it follows that individual's averages were similarly inflated.
Well, I disagree that scoring was higher because of the weaker defense, but
that's another story. I will agree that in a system that has more points
scored (or more rebounds available, etc..), that statistical measures
involving such things are often in need of adjustment.
Irregardless of that fact, I'd have to say that Kukoc is the better overall
offensive player. However, I think the overall benefit he provides is only
slightly better. This is, of course, without talking about defense.
>it's still a negative. I don't think a 0.2 advantage in blocks/steals is
>significant in any way, however.
I agree totally. But, it is interesting only because someone (you?? maybe
not you) mentioned steals and how Cooper wasn't real big in the steals or
blocks categories.
>That's true. There was more intimidation then, from Kurt Rambis to the
>Bad Boys. Layups were rarer in the halfcourt and three point plays were
>much more infrequent. However, that isn't always defense. Sending a guy
>to the floor when he's going for a layup still gives him an average of
>1.5 points (if he is a 75% free throw shooter). Trapping him at the top
>of the key and forcing him to give up the dribble or stripping the ball
>from him on the drive deprives him of his scoring opportunity.
True. But one thing you forget is that intimidation is NOT, I repeat, NOT
intended to just send everyone to the floor. The purpose of the intimidation
is so that the next time that player thinks about driving to the hole, he may
remember that foul and decide to pull up for the lower % jumper instead.
Not only did you see fewer layups, you saw fewer people TRYING for them...
>defensive players and the Celtics started 2-3 as well. The Bulls start 4
>good defensive players (and unlike the Celts and Lakers, have no starter
>who is a major defensive liability, unless you count Luc's ability to
>foul out in 10 minutes while playing decent defense). The Supersonics
>seem to start 6 good defensive players at times.
Heh.. if they are starting 6 good def. players, the league needs to look into
that :)
Seriously though, you underestimate the Celtics (and others). The Bulls are,
without a doubt, a superb defensive team. However, the Celtics started 3
guys who had AllDefensive team spots on their resumes, and had one guy (Parish)
who was worthy of such an award, but with Eaton, Olajuwon, etc... he just
didn't make it. Dennis Johnson was a 9 time member of the AllDefensive squad,
McHale was on it 6 times. Those two players represented two of the best their
position ever saw defensively. Bird was a 3 time AllDefensive player. Parish
was a great defensive player, rebounder, and shot blocker as well. And, while
Ainge wasn't AllDefensive material, he was, like Harper, an above average
defender.
Defense is a combination of many factors. Not all are needed to be a great
defensive team, but all can help. Major things are, IMHO:
Defensive Rebounding - Prevents multiple opportunites
Interior defense/shot blocking - forces teams to shoot outside (relates
to forcing lower FG%)
Perimeter disruption/steals/causing turnovers - forces teams into
not getting opportunities, or taking so much clock they get
into a bad shot attempt
Individual defense - the ability to shut down a player on an individual
basis
Help defense - the ability to react to the offense and help teammates
out.
The Bulls aren't real great in the first two items, but are excellent at
the last three. THe Pistons were great at rebounding, individual defense, and
help defense. The Sonics are great at the last three as well. The Celtics
were great at defensive rebounding, interior defense/shot blocking,
help defense, and individual defense at certain positions. I think the key to
being a great defensive team is you either have to (a) control the interior or
(b) control the perimeter. I think a team that does (a) has an easier road.
A team with the ability to control the interior can erase many mistakes or
weaknesses on the perimeter. The same isn't as true with (b). Controlling
the perimeter is very tough to do. The Bulls (and Sonics) are excellent at
it. On the other hand, the Celtics were great at (a) and were pretty good
at (b).
>power forward and then gone back into the lane. But as a fan, not a GM, I
>would rather have Shawn Bradley and his shot blocking skills in the lane
>than have some guy who can knock people down when they come too close.
WIthout a doubt. But, look at today's 'great' defensive teams... Just about
none of them (Bulls, Seattle, Cleveland, etc..) have the great interior
defense... they don't have the great shotblockers. Houston and San Antonio,
two other great defensive teams, do. You seem to forget that the Lakers and
Celtics, in the persons of Kareem and Parish/McHale were excellent shot
blocking teams as well, and this instills another form of 'intimidation' that
teams definitely react to.
>snatching 15 a game, but boxing out is a key part of defense, and I think
>he has improved.
I'd agree totally. And, as a big Bird fan, I'd agree with boxing out as well.
He once was asked who his favorite player in the league was, and he responded
by pointing out a guy (name slips me at the moment) who was one of the toughest
guys and best at boxing out in the league. It surprised people he didn't
pick a scorer, a passer, etc.. but picked a guy who was great at boxing out
and setting picks. Boxing out is a fundamental requirement in being a great
defensive rebounding team, and this is a fundamental requirement in being
a great defensive team. Bird was, IMHO, one of the best in recent memory at
boxing people out and getting defensive position, which was why he was such
a great defensive rebounder (much like Rodman is the best at getting offensive
position for the offensive rebound.)
Dave
Dave Meeks
In article <DtqtI...@news2.new-york.net> Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
>In article <4r1hk5$7...@nbc.ksu.ksu.edu> Air Judden, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu
>writes:
>ZERO - Pippen against Bird? Get real. Bird was a better player, but
>Pippen would still be able to do damage against Bird's defense.
Well, Bird was actually very good at certain aspects of defense. He was a
great defensive rebounder, great at boxing out, had excellent hands and
anticipation, was very good at playing 'help' defense. He didn't make the
AllDefensive team 3 times for nothing.
Besides, if you want to 'get real', you'd realize that Bird would NOT be
defending Pippen, but would be put up against Rodman or whomever was the
PF on the Bulls at the time (Grant in previous years). McHale was always
assigned to the quicker SFs, and was extremely effective. Worthy, Wilkins,
etc... all had to contend with McHale, and McHale handled them so well he
was a member of many AllDefensive teams.
Tom Day
Air Judden (judd...@ksu.ksu.edu) wrote:
: Big Game James (a nickname Pippen will NEVER earn) won a playoff
: MVP in 1988. This series consisted of Magic toss it down low to James, who
: had replaced Jabbar as the Lakers primary low post threat) who would then
: score.
All true stories but I'm getting pretty tired of hearing how James
was a defensive liability. What was it, '86, when he wouldn't
let Bird put the ball on the floor for nearly the entire series?
James could block shots, steal passes, and body-up with the best
in any era. And today's best defensive team, would have a hell
of a time with the kind of break the Lakers used to run. Today,
we are stuck with 48 minutes of guys trotting down the court like
they are football players going to the line. The Lakers
burned rubber. And James often got the rebound, threw the outlet,
and got there for the finish.
--
T.W. Day tw...@netcom.com
Air Judden
Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
>> Vijay. Hold up your fingers and count after me.
>>Larry Bird
>ZERO - Pippen against Bird? Get real. Bird was a better player, but
>Pippen would still be able to do damage against Bird's defense.
>>Kevin McHale
>1
>>Robert Parish
>2
>>Dennis Johnson
>3
>> That is 4. Can you say 4? Good job!
>No, that's 3. Can you say 3? I didn't think so.
>But last time I checked, 2-3 included the number 3.
Vijay "I need a clue about the 80's",
Bird would not take Pippen, McHale would. Since McHale guarded other
drivers in the day, Pippen would be no different. (Besides, who is going
to waste all that defensive studliness on Rodman?) And the question isn't
who could gaurd Pippen, because Chief would have problems with this, but the
man was a defensive giant. Bird could play defense. He is "4" (counting
with your fingers). If you don't think Bird played D, u need to buy a
clue, before you spin the "wheel of hoops" next.
>>And who is this defensive liablity on the floor? Ainge? Magic? Scoot?
>>Worthy? Jabaar? Wait a second....A.C. Green!!!!!
>Magic. Great passer. Good scorer. Great leader. Poor defensive player.
>And Scoot? Is that a cross between Coop and Scott, or is that Scooter
>Barry?
Let's use deductive reasoning:
1) Scotter never played for the Lakers.
2) Scott was a starter (though you seem to think Cooper was)
3) Judden is notorious for typos.
Who do you think it is?
And is this an attempt to cover your cluelessness, since you claim
that each team had a defensive liablity on the floor? Oh, you
think it's Magic. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Vijay, get real!
Just because your sinking in a pool of ignorance doesn't mean you
have to start making up things about people. This seems to be a
common tactic of the Bulls cockroach:
Harper could outscore Scott
Pippen >> Worthy, Jordan>>Magic
Kukoc had better assists numbers than Cooper
etc, etc, etc.
>> Judden did not exaggerate. The only thing Judden exaggerated on is
>>that Georghe Muresan could drive by Kukoc. You don't need stats to see
>>defense. Good defenders often will not have great stats. What you see is
>>Seattle taking turns going at Kukoc and Seattle taking turns USING Kukoc.
>> That is not good defense.
>Let's see, that's Judden didn't exaggerate, but Judden did exaggerate.
>But we don't need stats on defense, we just need stats on offense. Of
>course, they are entirely different, right? I mean, scoring a lot means
>great offense. Getting scored on a lot doesn't mean bad defense. Hitting
>every shot is good offense. The opponent hitting every shot is not bad
>defense.
I did not exaggerate on Kukoc's ability. I did exaggerate on Muresan.
It's called "Hyperbole" and it's used to make a point. My arguments on
Kukoc being a defensive liablity were not exagerrated, nor were they when I
said Cooper is lighty years ahead of Kukoc in this category.
Since you are stat god, care to give me those defensive stats you
have? How about steals and blocks? Got them? Good! Now go to the 1989
season, look up Rodman and Dumars and explain to me why they made first team
all defense. Then try to explain to me why Eaton got DPOTY over Olajuwon,
then try to explaim how Rodman got it twice.
>>Class Dismissed.
>Not so fast, Judden. You might have to repeat this class if you don't
>grasp the basics.
Vijay, go enroll in "80s basketball" first, then we'll talk (still
hurting over that Pippen 1995 butt-kicking?)
Judden
The Eraser
Air Judden
ma...@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (Fude Max Chuang) writes:
>In article <DtqtI...@news2.new-york.net>,
>Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> wrote:
>>>And who is this defensive liablity on the floor? Ainge? Magic? Scoot?
>>>Worthy? Jabaar? Wait a second....A.C. Green!!!!!
>>
>>Magic. Great passer. Good scorer. Great leader. Poor defensive player.
>Yet again, we get this, "poor defensive player," stuff. Hey, this
>isn't Kukoc we're talking about. In his halcyon days, Magic was
>a very average defensive player, not a liability. You don't
>win five championships with a defensive sieve out on the court for
>most of the game.
Vijay seems to be into stats, so much. In 1980-81 Magic averaged
4.4 steals/48 minutes, which if vastly superior to Pippen's 3.7, better than
Jordan's 3.9 (note these are career bests).
But Magic didn't need steals to prove his defense (since it's hardly
an indicator of defensive ability). Since Vijay has proven so clueless about
the 80's, I'm guessing he saw Magic in 1991, and thinks that Magic's had
that same quickness his whole life, just like he probably saw Bird in 1992
and thought that Bird played the same way in his prime.
Judden
Air Judden
bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>Anyway, I am sorry I put down athletes that were playing while you were
>going through puberty. Since this thread will be gone by the time i get back,
>let me summarize my main points:
>- you can't compare stats from different periods. Nowadays it is harder
> to shoot a basket than it was in the mid 1980, the reason being that
> both individual (read: better athletes) and team (read: after the Pistons)
> defenses are here. If you want to compare
> stats, you have to adjust them.
Harder to hit baskets? Jordan and Pippen both have higher fg% in the
90s than in the 80s. It's not harder to shoot, it's not as frequent, since
the teams play slow down.
Those Pistons are the best defensive team I've seen in the modern
era (1980-present). And Worthy thrashed them. The Lakers beat them and
scored 100+ points in 3 victories. They even scored 100 twice in 1989
WITHOUT Magic and Byron.
You need to give that better athletes thing up. That is weak. You
can try to compare Jesse Owens to todays track stars, and go over a 60
year span, but you don't have an IOTA of evidence that players are better
athletes now than 10 years ago. You also screw up in that athleticism isn't
the most important factor in basketball, which is why 4 of the dream
teamers wern'te that great of athletes (Ewing, Malone, Bird, Mullin).
A good way is probably to find a
> significant (for example, points scored per shot, not FG%)
> mean and standard deviation for each period, and give the
> player's value wrt to his time.
And how about we just ignore that closer 3 point line and hand
check rules. If the athletes were so great, they should be shotting FARTHER
out, not closer, and shouldn't need so much help scoring, no? Athleticism
works 2-ways you know. If these players were so much greater athletes,
then they would better offensive players as well. Maybe that's why Jordan
is so hard to stop! No, we have to add those fundamentals, because less
athletic Reggie can outshoot Michael from distance and at the stripe.
(Although it is insufficient, I pointed out
> that Worthy was no better than the third small forward and probably no
> better than the 15th player of his time. He never was in the top ten,
> not even in 1987. Pippen has been in the top three, and is currently in
> the top ten. And, of course, the player's base has increased enormously,
> both in US and foreign-born players.)
Ouch. You just hurt your own argument here. If you think Pippen
is that high and Worthy that low, you point out that players are worse
today. Who are these 15 players who were better than Worthy. Let's see:
Magic, Bird, Jordan -- but they were better than Pippen. Barkley? Perhaps.
Olajuwon? Yeah. Isaiah? Yeah, you could make an argument there. Dominique?
Nope. English? Nope. 2 gunners with no defense -- no thanks. I suppose
ViJay would try to say Stockton (who was a bench player), but that's ViJay
for you. McHale? Yeah, I'd say so. I'd also say his 26 ppg, 9.5+ rpg, and
60% fg% and first team all-defense would put him ahead of Pippen. Robertson?
I don't know-- but he did have a nicer all-around game than Pippen. Moses?
You could make an argument.
I've helped you out, but this list is 9. I'm curious to see who
these other 7 are. I'm especially anxious to see who these SF's are that
would keep Worthy off a Dream Team. Bird and ... uh, er, ah, um...
>- statistics, anyway, don't measure a players' value. They can't measure
> defense, amongst other things. Stats like "how well did guy A did playing
> with Green and Threatt, compared to what guy B did with Grant and BJ"
> do convey more information about one player's impact on his team success.
How about that triple-double against Rodman and his great defensive
comrades in game 7? 36 pts not enough for you? How about this one.
Worth with player A and B (Cooper and Tony Campbell) versus C and D (Magic
and Scott) -- as in the 1989 vs. 1988 finals: 40 points in the deciding
game against Rodman and his defensive comrades. Lot's of difference, there?
Yeah....DOAH! would be right.
>- if you are willing to take certain parts of Pippen's career as a comparison,
> for example the migraine and this year's hobbled playoffs, you will have
> to accept that Worthy injuries (that happened conveniently at a time
> when he could no longer be supported by other stars) be taken into
> account.
Oh, I pointed out the Worthy shining against without the teams'
backcourt and against the best defensive team of the modern era. Good enough?
I'm waiting for some Pippen championship bragging...we have 4 samples to
chose from. Where is his finals MVP?
>- more on defense and versatilty, which are the strong parts of my argument.
> Nowadays it is very evident that a team tends to be as good offensively
> as the best off. player (because he will always be able to create some shot)
> and as bad defensively as the worst defensive one (because other teams
> will pick on him every time). Likewise two ballhandlers in a successful
> team are an absolute necessity.
Cooper and Magic. Next.
Versatility: Magic played 5 postitions in one finals game. Cooper,
a back-up point gaurd/shooting guard, routinely defended the best
small forward in history. Worthy, who came into the league with more
minutes at PF, moved to SF, and defended SGs when the need arised.
AC Green sucessfully played both forward positions and Mychal Thompson
backed up PF and C. Any questions?
Recent examples are Kukoc being attacked by
> Seattle, and the Bulls denying the ball to Penny to create a 20pt comeback.
Maybe it's because Penny isn't a true point guard. Also, seems like
they decided to put the shots in the hands of Anderson, Shaw, and Scott, who
once again were firing blanks. Read: POORER SHOOTERS!
Water the talent level down, and you get guys who can't shoot
getting big minutes, shooting more, and worse fg% and ppg. Try, TRY to
take the ball out of Magic's hand and who are you going to let shoot? Scott?
Worthy? Green? How about Jabbar!!!
Why couldn't the Sonics take the ball out of Stockton's hands and
make the others beat them? Perhaps a flaw in your thinking?
> The main point is that, at least in modern basketball, defense and
> versatility are more than 50% of the game and being bad defensively is
> worse than being bad offensively - plus a versatile player gives more
> options in the more strategic, less-role-oriented play of today.
This versatility is a result of players who can't do a job well
enough. Penny is not a real point guard. He can't create like one either.
Creating point guards are a rarity today. Look at your SGs...college SFs
converted to SGs. Many of who cannot handle the ball and are little more
than stand-still shooters or posters. Look at the non-point guards of the
80s powerhouses: Toney, Nixon, Cooper, Ainge, Dumars -- sound like these
guys couldn't run the point?
> I wonder how Pip can't be Worthy when he holds a huge edge on these
> categories (Worthy a stopper or ballhandler? pls).
Because this is YOUR criteria? I said Pippen couldn't STOP Worthy.
It's not like Magic ever
> needed Worthy to win it all (unlike jordon with Pip).
Hello....1988? Worthy has done far more for the Lakers in the finals
than Pippen did for the Bulls. Don't even argue this one...you only make
yourself look worse.
We are looking
> at one player with one incredible skill and another with three or four
> such skills.
One? Superior posting skills, driving, finishing.
If Pippen's shooting is incredible, than Worthy's defense is awesome.
Pippen has a nice mix of skills and plays great defense (although he
plays against a lower caliber of small forward). He's a great
point forward with his ball handling. But his shooting really pales
compared to James and his 3 pointers are a major liablity, unless the
line gets moved in for him (what about this superior athleticism?)
Different roles, yes. But what we are talking about is a MATCH-UP.
Pippen cannot stop Worthy, but Worthy can contain Pippen. Pippen
isn't quicker, so Worthy can let him fire his long range blanks and
defend his drive. Pippen on the other hand isn't going to stop
Worthy's post-up or drive any more than Rodman did.
Funny on this athleticism that not only is Pippen taller, but
faster and quicker.
>I also think that you will have trouble graduating unless
>you learn to use statistics beyond Total Basketball or whatever book
>you keep near your terminal. It's not that difficult. Another thing that
>might help you graduate is to stop living in the past, at you age it
>shouldn't be difficult either.
Wait a minute!!! You mean you've been doing this? Your politcal-
bias dream team argument matches this? Trying to use an old and injured
Worthy (5 years after the year in question) versus this Pippen, when the
argument all along has been the 1987 Lakers? Hello?
Judden
Vijay Ramanujan
In article <4r8vhp$q...@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu> Air Judden, judd...@ksu.ksu.edu
writes:
>Vijay Ramanujan <vij...@cybernex.net> writes:
> Vijay "I need a clue about the 80's",
> Bird would not take Pippen, McHale would. Since McHale guarded other
>drivers in the day, Pippen would be no different.
Irrelevant. The post concerned Bird's defensive abilities. Bird was a
small forward. So I compared him to another small forward. If you want to
bring up matchups and point out that McHale would guard Pip, go ahead.
But maybe you should also point out that the reason that matchup was so
often changed was because the Celtics thought McHale could do a better
job on those small forwards than Bird. Now, we can argue about whether
that's because McHale was a sensational defensive player or Bird was not.
You want to spend 3 weeks on that?
>(Besides, who is going
>to waste all that defensive studliness on Rodman?)
I don't know, but let me ask you this: Bird has some hardware for his
defensive play, right? Why? Is it because of his Gary Paton like
agressiveness against driving players? No. Pressure on the ball handlers?
No. Shot-blocking ability? No. Rebounding and positioning? Sure. Do you
want to put a putz against Dennis Rodman? Of course not, he'll get to the
glass with regularity. You have to put a half decent defender on him or
he will ride you to the backboard.
Playing straight up, Bird would not be able to stop Scottie Pippen
because Scottie Pippen's strenghts on offense do not line up with Bird's
strengths on defense. They play to Bird's weaknesses. (Athletic ability,
foot speed). As a result, the Celtics would switch matchups.
Bird was a better player than Pippen. He was a better shooter, a better
passer, a better leader and a more stable contributor. But if the two
matched straight up, Pippen would slow Bird down more than Bird would
slow Pippen down. And since they play the same position, it's not an
unfair comparison to make.
> Harper could outscore Scott
> Pippen >> Worthy, Jordan>>Magic
> Kukoc had better assists numbers than Cooper
> etc, etc, etc.
Maybe you can't read, or maybe you don't bother to distinguish between
posters. There's just "Judden" and all who disagree.
Point 1) I don't remember saying Harper could outscore Scott. It would be
intersting
to see evidence of that. In fact, if you remember (and you seem to have
forgotten
already) I made quite a point of why I brought up Cooper instead of
Scott, who
you said was mysteriously missing from discussion. The threads I have read
(and I have read many) have regularly ignored Scott in the discussion. In
an attempt
to duplicate such discussion, I did the same. Why 90% of posters to this
newsgroup
(Lakers fans, Bulls fans, Celtics fans, neutrals alike) choose to spend
more time
discussing Cooper than Scott is beyond me, but it's not my job to inject
his name into
every discussion.
Summary: YOU MUST BE THINKING OF SOMEONE ELSE.
Point 2) I didn't say Pippen is better than Worthy. I merely objected to
the arguments that were being put forth for Worthy's superiority claim. I
was one of the few/many who whole-heartedly agreed with the notion that
the two were/are both great players and don't need to be compared.
Summary: YOU MUST BE THINKING OF SOMEONE ELSE.
Post-Summary: I reserve the right to say Michael Jordan was better than
Magic Johnson.
Point 3) I remember the thread on Kukoc vs. Cooper and assist statistics,
but once again that wasn't me you were arguing with.
Summary: YOU MUST BE THINKING OF SOMEONE ELSE.
So, overall, it looks like you are grasping. If I wanted to I could
follow your lead and ascribe every idiotic comment made by a Bulls
critic/doubter to you, but that would be silly, wouldn't it. And I would
look like a fool when you came back and pointed out, one by one, that all
the things I had accused you of saying were actually said by other
people. But seeing how painful it must be for you to be in that
situation, I don't think I want to put myself there.
> Since you are stat god, care to give me those defensive stats you
>have? How about steals and blocks? Got them? Good! Now go to the 1989
>season, look up Rodman and Dumars and explain to me why they made first team
>all defense. Then try to explain to me why Eaton got DPOTY over Olajuwon,
>then try to explaim how Rodman got it twice.
Let my try ONE MORE TIME with this.
80s. Points. More.
90s. Points rare. Shooting percentages? Down. Fast break baskets? Down.
Possibly answers? Offense bad now. Defense good now.
See? It's not that hard.
Defensive statistics? How about POINTS AGAINST? How about FG% AGAINST?
Do you want to talk about those? No.
Example: The Charlotte Hornets gave up a buttload of points this year.
Kenny Anderson sucks on defense. Glen Rice is playing out of position.
Larry Johnson has lost a step. Robert Parish is about 90 years old.
My conclusion: The Charlotte defense sucks.
Your conclusion: Offenses played better against Charlotte than they did
against other teams in the league.
> Vijay, go enroll in "80s basketball" first, then we'll talk (still
>hurting over that Pippen 1995 butt-kicking?)
What a butt kicking you laid on me. Kind of like the butt-kicking the
Toronto Raptors laid on the Orlando Magic this season.
Air Judden
bonv...@axcrna.cern.ch (BONVICINI,GIOV./EP) writes:
>going through puberty. Since this thread will be gone by the time i get back,
>let me summarize my main points:
>- you can't compare stats from different periods. Nowadays it is harder
> to shoot a basket than it was in the mid 1980, the reason being that
> both individual (read: better athletes) and team (read: after the Pistons)
> defenses are here. If you want to compare
> stats, you have to adjust them. A good way is probably to find a
> significant (for example, points scored per shot, not FG%)
> mean and standard deviation for each period, and give the
> player's value wrt to his time. (Although it is insufficient, I pointed out
> that Worthy was no better than the third small forward and probably no
> better than the 15th player of his time. He never was in the top ten,
> not even in 1987. Pippen has been in the top three, and is currently in
> the top ten. And, of course, the player's base has increased enormously,
> both in US and foreign-born players.)
Certainly not in ability. The center position has increased in the
90s. Hakeem is better than Akeem. Ewing has improved, and Robinson really
can't be considered much of an "80s" player. Guys like Mourning, Mutombo,
and Shaq make up the difference over Moses, Kareem, and Gilmore when you
take the lump sum and put them against each other.
But everything else....oooooh boy!
PG: Magic, Isaiah, and Stockton are hands down better than any
group in this decade. Toss in Cheeks and Nixon and the carnage continues
to grow. The drive and dish point guard is quickly becoming a thing of the
past, and not because of evolving PGs. They just lack the skills.
SG: Jordan, Clyde, Blackman, Scott, Toney, Gervin, Ellis, Dumars are
better. The best guys now are 80s guys in their latter years, with the
notable exception of Mitch Richmond, who put up 2 fine years in the 80s.
SF: This is where it gets ugly: Bird, Dr. J, Dominique Wilkins,
Alex English, Bernard King, Kiki Vandeweigh, James Worthy, Jamaal Wilkes, X-man.
Dang! Blowout. The fashionable thing coming is to put a small PF-type who
can't shoot over at the SF: Mason, Brown, McKee, etc. Pippen is nice, but
he's no Bird. There are a couple of other nice ones (Hill), but the group
just PALES in comparison. You claim the 90s guys are better athletes. I
claim they suck at shooting. The de-evolution of the SF slot proves my point.
PF: The best of the 90s seem to be old 80s guys: Barkley and Malone.
Kemp is solid, but he's no McHale. Buck Williams, Bobby Jones, Larry Nance,
Ralph Sampson (pre-injury), Tom Chambers, Michael Cage (who is better than
he's been in the 90s). Oakley is basically the same player he was in the
80s. The 90s have these great athletes you have mentioned, like Coleman and
Webber, but all they do is prove my point. They are a lot of hype that make
your mouth drool, but when it comes down to it, I'd easily take unathletic
McHale and his long arms and killer moves over a crybaby with athleticism and
poor fundamentals.
Face it: Athleticism is the most overrated part of a basketball
player. I'd rather have a guy who can shoot, box out, and guard his man,
works hard, tries to improve his game, works with weights, or has court
vision, than a guy who can sprint, leap high, and dunk. If both aspects are
combined, then you've got something special: A Wilt, Dr J, Elgin Baylor,
Kareem, Hakeem, or Jordan, but you can't tell me there are more of those
guys in the 90s.
Are you going to take Isaiah Rider or Harold Miner over Mitch Richmond?
Why not? Mitch isn't quick and he's not a leaper! I'll take Bill Walton or
Bill Laimbeer over Ervin Johnson. I'll take Magic over Robert Pack, Boggues,
or Abdul-Rauf anyday. I'll take Mailman over Coleman as well!
Funny you say Magic isn't athletic. You say these guys today are
more athletic. How many of the 6'9" guys today can dribble and pass like
Kukoc is a lousy athlete in the same aspect. He maybe 6'11", but he can't
soar like Kemp, and he's slow-afoot, so he's no athlete. Forget his passing
and dribbling skills, Sauce for Magic is sauce for Toni.
Another point: I haven't seen any guys like Ralph Sampson. 7'4" with
ball handling skills. The reason the trendy "twin towers" of the mid 80s
failed was because nobody else had a giant PF as athletic as Sampson.
I also find it amusing that the most athletic SGs were drafted in
1983 and 1984! Where are these studs of today?
Also, since this topic all stems from 87 Lakers vs. 96 Bulls (you
did remember, didn't you?), I'll be glad to compare the athleticism of
each team. I'll give you Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, and Harper as athletes. But
it really gets shallow after that. Salley? Edwards? Kerr? No.
The Lakers, OTOH, have Worthy (who I'd gladly stack up against
any 6'9"+ on the Bulls and even Pippen), Cooper, Kareem (who was far more
athletic at 40 than any Bulls big stiff), AC Green, Mychal Thompson, Wes
Matthews, Adrian Branch, Byron Scott, and most of all, Billy Thompson. Who?
Yeah, Billy an awesome athlete. Problem was, he wasn't much of a basketball
player, which is why he didn't get much P.T. and couldn't even make a name
for himself on the expansion Heat. And I'll still stick by Magic: a 6'9"
guy with the coordination to be a point guard and is a better ball handler
and passer than any Bull. Magic did something no one has come close to.
There has never been another Magic and there doesn't appear to be one for a
long, long time. He was supposed to reinvent the position. Problem was, there
wasn't any 6'9" guys with his skills. Steve Smith flopped, Walt Williams
flopped, and Penny Hardaway is a flop compared to Magic. Penny's skills
are a SGs. He doesn't have Magic's ball-handeling or passing skills, and
he is still 2 inches shorter and lighter. You can't tell me that isn't
athletic! Anthony Mason can take 5 dribbles without bouncing it off his
foot and he's hailed a great athlete and ball-handler. Magic could run
circles around Mason and you claim he is not. Whatever.
And don't worry about the thread dieing. I'll mail you a copy. If
you want to keep it up, post it back up and I'll continue. My bazooka is
always ready.
Judden
Air Judden
judd...@ksu.ksu.edu (Air Judden) writes:
> SF: This is where it gets ugly: Bird, Dr. J, Dominique Wilkins,
>Alex English, Bernard King, Kiki Vandeweigh, James Worthy, Jamaal Wilkes, X-man.
>Dang! Blowout. The fashionable thing coming is to put a small PF-type who
>can't shoot over at the SF: Mason, Brown, McKee, etc. Pippen is nice, but
>he's no Bird. There are a couple of other nice ones (Hill), but the group
>just PALES in comparison. You claim the 90s guys are better athletes. I
>claim they suck at shooting. The de-evolution of the SF slot proves my point.
>
The 80s was so good at SF, I neglected Dantley, Aguirre, Tripuka,
Marques Johnson, Paul Pressey, and Kelly Tripuka. Figure I'd better get them
in before Dave Meeks drops the hammer on me. But feel free to join in on
this one Dave. It's like shooting fish in a barrell.
Judden