Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s

Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ

User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#101 » by MacGill » Mon Nov 27, 2023 10:59 pm

VanWest82 wrote:It's no less poor of an interpretation as assuming Scottie, Horace, and BJ were the same players from 91-94 or that the other role players were the same which is essentially what you're doing every time you bring this up. Again, it's like me saying Kawhi wasn't really worth much because Raptors were a 60 win pace team the following year with zero acknowledgement that VanVleet, Siakam, OG, and Powell vastly improved year over year.

The Bulls were often hapless with Jordan on the team but not on the court. The Bulls were a very good team without Jordan in 94. Both things can be true.


Yes, excellent post. It's basically my Raptors in reverse when dealing with LeBronto.

DD/Lowry were always a true superstar away from making the final leap, but through the regular season did well, and managed until they ran into LBJ or even Pierce/JJ for that reason.

Adding Kawhi put the team in true contention. This would be the 94 Bulls in reverse as so much was gained in team play/chemistry because they had won 3 times before MJ left.

Even my Raps got better, year after year but ask me 'how :evil: frustrating it was' knowing that once they matched up with a certain team or superstar, we had no answer. And again, this was the same MJ factor. I will never understand why some will think that a team should immediately get crippled if their best player left. From a team design, if your star got injured for the season, your basically a lottery team then and would not have no chance in holding position for a potential PS run, if that was the timing.

Moving average to good/great is far easier than going from good/great to excellent/elite. I think many underestimate the lift required to do so, regardless of how far you make it in the PS. Because I've lost count on how many times a certain team and player ended what we thought was next level evolution.
Image
MrLurker
Sophomore
Posts: 108
And1: 73
Joined: Oct 05, 2023

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#102 » by MrLurker » Tue Nov 28, 2023 8:35 am

VanWest82 wrote:
MrLurker wrote:
NO-KG-AI wrote:None of it is really shocking for anyone that was watching and not trying to overplay the Bulls to diminish Jordan. Dennis was still a valuable player but was past his prime, and flakey as ever. He was more dialed in come playoff time I'd say.

Scottie's value has been way overstated on offense for a while. He'd be prime to be the kind of guy to get blamed for needing the ball in his hands to thrive next to virtually every other star player aside from a handful, and got the luxury of playing with a guy who was both a better main creator, and was one of the best all time off the ball.



Not shocking either IMO. Pippen took the more difficult assignment a lot of the times when they shared the floor, but Jordan was just such a menace as a disruptor, it almost doesn't matter. You want Jordan able to attack passing lanes and blocking shots and causing the whole offense to hesitate.

Not to offend, but this strikes me as a very poor interpretation of evidence.

I am not sure why the desire to disregard what transpired with an extended absence is this potent. If the Bulls were as hapless as you describe - then they should not have appeared so formidable when Jordan retired.

It's no less poor of an interpretation than assuming Scottie, Horace, and BJ were the same players from 91-94 or that the other role players were the same which is essentially what you're doing every time you bring this up. Again, it's like me saying Kawhi wasn't really worth much because Raptors were a 60-win pace team the following year with zero acknowledgement that VanVleet, Siakam, OG, and Powell vastly improved year over year. Any discussion of year-to-year wowy without being contextualized with individual player analysis is misleading to the point of being worthless.

The Bulls were often hapless with Jordan on the team but not on the court. The Bulls were a very good team without Jordan in 94. Both things can be true.

Edit: and just in case you decide to bring up 84-87 Bulls again without any discussion about Dave Greenwood, Iceman, Orlando Woolridge, etc., just understand that Bulls fans from that era are going to wholesale dismiss you as someone who has no clue what they're talking about. Don't put yourself in that position.

All due respect to your fandom but

You seem to be the party less interested in individual player discussion - I believe Woodridge has been discussed. As have the circumstances surrounding those absences. The debate around Jordan has involved significantly more than the simply looking at a single year without him.


Your tendency to rely on your fandom - not as a source of experience - is poor form imho. Threatening those who do not agree with you really only grants me the impression you aren't quite the authority you see yourself as here.

I believe it would be accurate to say Kawhi was not so valuable in the regular-season. I also think quite a bit of emphasis is put on looking at the bigger picture regarding WAR/WOWY and even on/off - more emphasis than you seem willing to use when discussing certain numbers and stats.

I recall Kawhi receiving Kawhi receiving a fair bit of discussion regarding his WOWY - and the argumentation and conclusions were more nuanced than Kawhi simply not being good. It was other parties that seemed reluctant to acknowledge there were factors beyond Kawhi contributing to the Raptors year to year improvement.
MrLurker
Sophomore
Posts: 108
And1: 73
Joined: Oct 05, 2023

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#103 » by MrLurker » Tue Nov 28, 2023 9:33 am

NO-KG-AI wrote:
MrLurker wrote:
NO-KG-AI wrote:None of it is really shocking for anyone that was watching and not trying to overplay the Bulls to diminish Jordan. Dennis was still a valuable player but was past his prime, and flakey as ever. He was more dialed in come playoff time I'd say.

Scottie's value has been way overstated on offense for a while. He'd be prime to be the kind of guy to get blamed for needing the ball in his hands to thrive next to virtually every other star player aside from a handful, and got the luxury of playing with a guy who was both a better main creator, and was one of the best all time off the ball.



Not shocking either IMO. Pippen took the more difficult assignment a lot of the times when they shared the floor, but Jordan was just such a menace as a disruptor, it almost doesn't matter. You want Jordan able to attack passing lanes and blocking shots and causing the whole offense to hesitate.

Not to offend, but this strikes me as a very poor interpretation of evidence.

I am not sure why the desire to disregard what transpired with an extended absence is this potent. If the Bulls were as hapless as you describe - then they should not have appeared so formidable when Jordan retired.


Nobody said they were hapless, but people pretend Rodman was a 3rd megastar on par with other #3’s on superteams, and also gloss over very real flaws Scottie Pippen had offensively and act like he’s some super perfect second option, as if he’d fit with other ball dominant players.

The 1994 team was a nice feather for Scottie and the Bulls teammates for sure. :dontknow:

I think people take the Bulls results as confirmation bias: They were more successful than anyone else, because they were more stacked than anyone else ever. And I just don’t feel it’s the case at all. I think they are definitely top talent, but their success is basically unparalleled before and after, even with teams finding way better ways to stack the deck, getting much more dominant second and 3rd and even 4th stars, etc.

I do not believe that is a correct use of the term confirmation bias. If the hypothesis matches the results - it is reasonable to gain confidence.

With respect to the hypothesizes of your own - they don't strike me as the best founded and the vague nature - both of the statement and the rationale behind that statement - makes them at best difficult to engage with.

I think there is a distinction between perfect play and perfect synergy. Pippen's flaws seem to be strengths for Jordan. In turn his strengths are liabilities. And whatever one thinks of his offense - the degree of defensive value offered should go well with a player whose contributions tilt towards the other basket.

Given a roster that could legitimately push for a 4th successive title - it would seem natural that a great player enjoying that synergy could dominate. The disconnect seems that observations supporting greatness are construed as observations suggesting Jordan is the greatest - I believe that is where confirmation bias would be the correct term.

I think a neutral view of all these numbers leaves Russell - more dominant - and James - albeit in a less clean manner - advantaged. I think similarly, at least the possibility or viability of others is validated - Johnson, Jabbar, and Duncan fit in there I think. There has been a push for Olajuwon as well I believe - but that seems to hinge heavily on small playoff snippets and theory - so I think one leaves the realm of neutral there.

Incessantly explaining all that away - often with means that are highly assumption-laden - does not strike me as an even and fair appraisal.
User avatar
NO-KG-AI
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,148
And1: 20,188
Joined: Jul 19, 2005
Location: The city of witch doctors, and good ol' pickpockets

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#104 » by NO-KG-AI » Tue Nov 28, 2023 10:13 am

This notion that LeBron didn't end up as decorated as Michael because he was so unlucky, or had such underachieving teammates is insane to me at this point. Like I said, Pippen is viewed as a perfect synergistic fit with Jordan because Jordan made it work better than the current rival to his throne has been able to with any of hand picked partners.

Side bar: the idea that Tim Duncan was secretly as good or better than MJ all along and nobody realized it till like 20 years after his prime is so ridiculous to me, I don't even know where to start. I don't think we're even like on similar enough pages in how we view the game of basketball to have meaningful discussions with each other, even if we are both passionate and obviously care deeply about the sport.
Doctor MJ wrote:I don't understand why people jump in a thread and say basically, "This thing you're all talking about. I'm too ignorant to know anything about it. Lollerskates!"
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#105 » by MacGill » Tue Nov 28, 2023 2:59 pm

*Related to MJ's first retirement, as yes. sarcasm*

Could someone please explain to me how the Nuggets, without Jamal/Jokic, beat the LA Clippers last night? The reason I am asking is because I have been informed in this thread that teams should fall off a cliff without their superstar(s) unless the stars are overrated. I know the Nuggets are the defending champions but that should have no bearing on this very small sample size. We have just witnessed history and I am sure the advanced stats will explain what happened here or the terrible luck the Clippers organization is currently in.
Image
AEnigma
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,130
And1: 5,976
Joined: Jul 24, 2022

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#106 » by AEnigma » Tue Nov 28, 2023 3:04 pm

Yeah if they do it for 140 more games then I will probably agree that how people value Jokic is substantially off-base rather than just mildly to moderately off-base.
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#107 » by MacGill » Tue Nov 28, 2023 3:16 pm

AEnigma wrote:Yeah if they do it for 140 more games then I will probably agree that how people value Jokic is substantially off-base rather than just mildly to moderately off-base.


Well, how are they doing without their Scottie (Jamal) so far? And, point was this game had both Scottie & MJ out of the line-up against a team full of scrubs. I am sure someone is already writing a thesis around the impact stats that will change the way I actually viewed the game last night.
Image
Colbinii
RealGM
Posts: 34,243
And1: 21,858
Joined: Feb 13, 2013

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#108 » by Colbinii » Tue Nov 28, 2023 3:23 pm

MacGill wrote:
AEnigma wrote:Yeah if they do it for 140 more games then I will probably agree that how people value Jokic is substantially off-base rather than just mildly to moderately off-base.


Well, how are they doing without their Scottie (Jamal) so far? And, point was this game had both Scottie & MJ out of the line-up against a team full of scrubs. I am sure someone is already writing a thesis around the impact stats that will change the way I actually viewed the game last night.


The Nuggets have been better with Jamal than without him in every season of Jamal's career.
Djoker
Starter
Posts: 2,280
And1: 1,997
Joined: Sep 12, 2015
 

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#109 » by Djoker » Tue Nov 28, 2023 3:58 pm

MrLurker wrote:
NO-KG-AI wrote:
MrLurker wrote:Not to offend, but this strikes me as a very poor interpretation of evidence.

I am not sure why the desire to disregard what transpired with an extended absence is this potent. If the Bulls were as hapless as you describe - then they should not have appeared so formidable when Jordan retired.


Nobody said they were hapless, but people pretend Rodman was a 3rd megastar on par with other #3’s on superteams, and also gloss over very real flaws Scottie Pippen had offensively and act like he’s some super perfect second option, as if he’d fit with other ball dominant players.

The 1994 team was a nice feather for Scottie and the Bulls teammates for sure. :dontknow:

I think people take the Bulls results as confirmation bias: They were more successful than anyone else, because they were more stacked than anyone else ever. And I just don’t feel it’s the case at all. I think they are definitely top talent, but their success is basically unparalleled before and after, even with teams finding way better ways to stack the deck, getting much more dominant second and 3rd and even 4th stars, etc.

I do not believe that is a correct use of the term confirmation bias. If the hypothesis matches the results - it is reasonable to gain confidence.

With respect to the hypothesizes of your own - they don't strike me as the best founded and the vague nature - both of the statement and the rationale behind that statement - makes them at best difficult to engage with.

I think there is a distinction between perfect play and perfect synergy. Pippen's flaws seem to be strengths for Jordan. In turn his strengths are liabilities. And whatever one thinks of his offense - the degree of defensive value offered should go well with a player whose contributions tilt towards the other basket.

Given a roster that could legitimately push for a 4th successive title - it would seem natural that a great player enjoying that synergy could dominate. The disconnect seems that observations supporting greatness are construed as observations suggesting Jordan is the greatest - I believe that is where confirmation bias would be the correct term.

I think a neutral view of all these numbers leaves Russell - more dominant - and James - albeit in a less clean manner - advantaged. I think similarly, at least the possibility or viability of others is validated - Johnson, Jabbar, and Duncan fit in there I think. There has been a push for Olajuwon as well I believe - but that seems to hinge heavily on small playoff snippets and theory - so I think one leaves the realm of neutral there.

Incessantly explaining all that away - often with means that are highly assumption-laden - does not strike me as an even and fair appraisal.


You and several other critics of these numbers keep bringing up the large WOWY sample we have for Jordan when he retired to play baseball. You called these Bulls "formidable". It's worth noting that the 1991-1998 Bulls played at a 65-win +9.38 MOV pace (GOAT-level) with Jordan and at a 48-win +3.38 MOV pace (fringe top 10) without Jordan. That is NOT a small difference. I mean sure the +6.00 delta isn't among the highest ever but the Bulls were so obscenely dominant. There's only ten teams in league history with MOV of 9.38 or better... and the Bulls with Jordan maintained that average for 6 years! I think that is at times understated and speaks to Jordan's GOAT ceiling raising.

Image

Another problem is we don't have similarly clean WOWY data for other candidates including Lebron because they never left for an entire season. However if we simply discount two instances of his teams tanking following his departure (2011 Cavs and 2019 Cavs) just as we discount the instance of a post-Jordan team tanking (1999 Bulls), Lebron's other WOWY numbers in his prime can still be reasonably compared. Note that I'm using MOV and not SRS just so it's an apples-to-apples comparison.

2010 Heat: 47-win +2.28 MOV
2011 Heat: 58-win +7.46 MOV

Change with Lebron: +5.18

Out: Jermaine O'Neal, Michael Beasley, Quinton Richardson, Carlos Arroyo
In: Lebron James, Chris Bosh, Mike Miller, Mike Bibby

There were some significant pieces leaving but both Lebron and another perennial all-star in Bosh joined.

2014 Heat: 54-win +4.76 MOV
2015 Heat: 37-win -2.69 MOV

Change with Lebron: +7.36

Out: Lebron James, Ray Allen, Shane Battier
In: Luol Deng, Hassan Whiteside

The 2015 Heat had Wade miss 20 games, Bosh miss 38 games, Whiteside 34 games and Deng 10 games. That -7.36 drop is definitely inflated by large injuries to the remaining players. The 2016 Heat with a similar roster played at a 48-win +1.64 MOV pace.

2014 Cavs: 33-win -3.29 MOV
2015 Cavs: 53-win +4.48 MOV

Change with Lebron: +7.77

Out: Dion Waiters, Jarrett Jack, Luol Deng
In: Lebron James, Kevin Love, JR Smith, Timofey Mozgov

The Cavs has a big improvement here but they added another star in Love.

2018 Lakers: 35-win -1.55 MOV
2019 Lakers: 37-win -1.72 MOV

Change with Lebron: -0.17

Out: Julius Randle, Jordan Clarkson, Brook Lopez, Josh Hart
In: Lebron James, Rajon Rondo, Reggie Bullock

This team didn't improve at all by adding Lebron. There were major injuries here but the prior year's team also had injuries and a gross lack of continuity as well.

Average

Without Lebron: 38-win -1.31 MOV
With Lebron: 51-win +3.75 MOV

Change with Lebron: +5.06

And that's with Lebron getting full credit for the 2015 Heat declining and the 2015 Cavs improving. Notice that the ceilings of Lebron-led teams are much much lower too and it's easier to lift weaker teams and yet still his average delta is worse than Jordan's.
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#110 » by MacGill » Tue Nov 28, 2023 4:29 pm

Djoker wrote:And that's with Lebron getting full credit for the 2015 Heat declining and the 2015 Cavs improving. Notice that the ceilings of Lebron-led teams are much much lower too and it's easier to lift weaker teams and yet still his average delta is worse than Jordan's.


And to add to the underlined here. Mike James once averaged 20ppg on my Raptors. DD/KL almost won 60 games in the EC and won 50+ multiple times. Some could view it as they also overachieved in the RS as they beat many top quality teams but they never sniffed the finals until they had a superstar like Kawhi. And it wasn't all LBJ either as other teams in the PS took care of them quickly.

The Raptors still won 53 games after Kawhi left but are we really going to debate the value that Kawhi provided pre/post his year with the team? That is why the nba is all about match-ups and where one player has the ability to provide that lift as mentioned above. One player can affect both sides of the court and has the ability to play the majority of the game. With so many games being extremely close, the evaluation process of determining the 'value' of that star player is impossible. We just know that in the history of the league, these players are almost always needed otherwise you'd have a history of many more teams resembling the 04 Pistons than the Showtime Lakers, for example.
Image
Djoker
Starter
Posts: 2,280
And1: 1,997
Joined: Sep 12, 2015
 

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#111 » by Djoker » Tue Nov 28, 2023 7:14 pm

MacGill wrote:
Djoker wrote:And that's with Lebron getting full credit for the 2015 Heat declining and the 2015 Cavs improving. Notice that the ceilings of Lebron-led teams are much much lower too and it's easier to lift weaker teams and yet still his average delta is worse than Jordan's.


And to add to the underlined here. Mike James once averaged 20ppg on my Raptors. DD/KL almost won 60 games in the EC and won 50+ multiple times. Some could view it as they also overachieved in the RS as they beat many top quality teams but they never sniffed the finals until they had a superstar like Kawhi. And it wasn't all LBJ either as other teams in the PS took care of them quickly.

The Raptors still won 53 games after Kawhi left but are we really going to debate the value that Kawhi provided pre/post his year with the team? That is why the nba is all about match-ups and where one player has the ability to provide that lift as mentioned above. One player can affect both sides of the court and has the ability to play the majority of the game. With so many games being extremely close, the evaluation process of determining the 'value' of that star player is impossible. We just know that in the history of the league, these players are almost always needed otherwise you'd have a history of many more teams resembling the 04 Pistons than the Showtime Lakers, for example.


Yea as a Raptors fan I know how mediocre we were in the "trash brothers" era. Kawhi made us a ton better that one season he was there even if WOWY analysis doesn't paint him as having sizable (any?) impact. Kawhi is of course also infamous for stepping up his game a lot in the postseason which complicates matters since we are measuring regular season impact.

As for the games being close and that making it hard to determine value of star players... We can use point differential instead which is more correlated with team quality than W-L records anyways.
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,933
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#112 » by OhayoKD » Tue Nov 28, 2023 7:56 pm

Alright. Let's sonic this
Colbinii wrote:
MacGill wrote:
AEnigma wrote:Yeah if they do it for 140 more games then I will probably agree that how people value Jokic is substantially off-base rather than just mildly to moderately off-base.


Well, how are they doing without their Scottie (Jamal) so far? And, point was this game had both Scottie & MJ out of the line-up against a team full of scrubs. I am sure someone is already writing a thesis around the impact stats that will change the way I actually viewed the game last night.


The Nuggets have been better with Jamal than without him in every season of Jamal's career.

Yeah, the effect is not comparable to jokic's but it is there.
Djoker wrote:
MacGill wrote:
Djoker wrote:.


So if you take
-> Lebron's worst signals from his prime playing as pf with a similar teammate,
-> ignore the greater team-wide playoff improvement for Lebron's heat
he looks comparable to
-> Jordan in his team's best regular-seasons(92, 96)
-> Jordan in his individually statistically best regular-season(88)


And you think this helps Jordan's case?

If you need to compare a player's best stuff to another player's not best stuff, then they probably shouldn't be getting compared in the first place....
MacGill wrote:
Djoker wrote:And that's with Lebron getting full credit for the 2015 Heat declining and the 2015 Cavs improving. Notice that the ceilings of Lebron-led teams are much much lower too and it's easier to lift weaker teams and yet still his average delta is worse than Jordan's.


And to add to the underlined here.

except Lebron also looks flatly more valuable in his 30's on teams that played atg when he was in the games(especially in the playoffs...)

When your argument entirely depends on filtering out more corroborated samples as "noise", you don't really have one.

Also...
As for the games being close and that making it hard to determine value of star players... We can use point differential instead which is more correlated with team quality than W-L records anyways.
\
This is not going to help you in the slightest(cough 95 cough).
NO-KG-AI wrote:This notion that LeBron didn't end up as decorated as Michael because he was so unlucky, or had such underachieving teammates is insane to me at this point. Like I said, Pippen is viewed as a perfect synergistic fit with Jordan because Jordan made it work better than the current rival to his throne has been able to with any of hand picked partners..

Nah, I'm pretty sure he's viewed that way because some of us can assess the game outside of how much players score or actually drawing a distinction between what a player is asked to do or can do:
Spoiler:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
Djoker wrote:
MyUniBroDavis wrote:..


I still can't believe you said arguing Jordan is a dumb take. :noway:

Even big Lebron fans like Heej disagreed with you.

Anyway this is comfortably Jordan:
- much better shooter
- better at navigating around screens to get open; smaller frame, quicker
- better offensive rebounder (surprisingly..)
- quicker decision maker on the catch vs. Lebron's slower, more deliberate play
- also a lob threat - 6'6'' 48 inch vertical lol
- more proof of concept; actually scored many more points off ball vs. a bunch of hypotheticals for Lebron; we've seen Jordan lead elite offenses while playing a lot off-ball whereas we've never seen it with Lebron


Tagging me in a different thread while I’m suspended is hilarious lol.

You don’t understand Xs and Os sadly

What makes Lebron better off ball is you can conceptually do a lot more with him if you lean into that, Jordan did end up doing more off ball throughout their careers in the roles and offenses they played in, but that’s not the same thing as who was better off ball.

First of all, generally speaking the type of empty side clear out cuts (I forgot the name ngl) to create get overhyped as some sort of massive brained play, as well as cuts to draw help defenders, alot of those are built in or dependent on how a team functions. We saw in 2021 and 2022 the Lakers were stupid stagnant in their post offense, in terms of cutting off of both stunts and baseline hep, whereas in 2023 and 2024 they’ve id when to cut and when to flash or set pin in flares (digging vs baseline help) and you see the post data for AD suddenly looks alot better. Of those guys brons certainly the best cutter off of stunts to the point they can’t really do it off of him or they have to stunt and rotate high and give up the cut to someone else instead

And 45 stampede cut + lift people overhype the crap out of thinking it’s the pinnacle of bball intelligence lol, it’s really just how the offense decides to align for those opportunities and we’ve seen it with brin

There REALLY isn’t a comparison in terms of what they could do though

First of all, lebron is a better shooter off ball, because he can shoot the three. Yes, era matters there and it’s unfair to Jordan but in an absolute sense yeah this isn’t a close comparison, brons abour a 37-42% three point shooter throughout 2010-2023, he takes a lot of pullup jumpers in pick and roll and hits them at a respectable rate (relative to average players) that brings down his averages (35% off the dribble would be about 40% off the shoot probably)

Lebrons catch and shoot three point data per Synergy:

2010: 34.7%
2011: 39.3%
2012 34.7%
2013 42.1%
2014 42.5%
2015: 42%
2016 36.0%
2017 40%
2018 41.4%
2019 35.0%
2020 40.6%
2021 37.6%
2022 37.1%
2023 31.8%
2024 45.9%

In any case spot up shooting is much more not being bad than being an outlier unless ur a crazy outlier which neither of them are, I agree it’s unfair to say jordan didn’t shoot well from three therefore he’s worse because of era but arguing the other way around because bron doesn’t shoot catch and shoot midrange jump shots off of screens which has been largely phased out is equally unfair and it’s also a less valuable skill period if ur talking about midrange shots

As for being a lob threat:

Jordan was around 6ft4-6ft5 barefoot and his vertical from what I recall was measured at 45 inches in some UNC paper off an unlimited run ip and 41 inches with the ball. If you’ve ever played basketball you know that it’s not 1 to 1 with vertical and height, ur never gonna see a guard be a roll man lob threat consistently

That’s not a lob threat in a way that functionally matters at all in the context I was describing, which was as a roller. Lebron barely qualifies being 6ft8.5 barefoot with a 40+ inch vert as well, and I’m taking about pre Lakers for sure (maybe even only up to Miami but not sure)

It’s mitigated a tad by the fact that lebron on the move with the ball is basically unstoppable, but that doesn’t mitigate it all that much in the context of why you want a lob threat in pick and roll vs aggressive coverages

There’s a much stronger argument that neither of them are in that context than Jordan being one as well. Jordan isn’t tall enough to be one, bron probably barely meets the mark but I get the argument he doesn’t in the context of what I said

The entirety of how he improved in 2023 outside of Lebron getting to be more physical rather than quick was them starting to get him the ball on the move more, in the playoffs he couldn’t do anything on ball at all

Offensive rebounding:

I mean neither are threats in the way that someone should consider an off ball player, (using raw rebounding % makes no sense when that number has changed lol). But regardless of a 0-1% change either way, lebron technically is a bigger threat just based on size since off ball offensive rebounding is probably more about in mismatch situations on certain switches (beyond that, offensive rebounding is just… offensive rebounding lol)


Quicker decision maker on the catch:
Being a quick decision maker off the catch isn’t equivalent to possessions resetting when they pass it out at times but this really isn’t comparable to the other advantages lol


Anyways, a 38 year old lebron currently averaging less touches a game than Brandon Ingram with less time of possession than Austin reaves, he’s averaging 26-8-7 on 67%TS and noticeably taking it easy till the fourth, and is a +17.4 on offense which ranks poorly overall because they can’t function without him (which is a bit from bad luck to be clear)

A 37 year old bron in the 18 game stretch where AD was hurt and we desperately were clinging to the playoffs, with no spacing, averages 80.6 touches a game (14th) , an average time of possession of 6.3 minutes (15th) , an average time of 4.66 seconds per touch (52nd). Those numbers aren’t quite as low as they were in Miami (2014 only) where people say off ball bron was somewhat of a thing but they’re close ish, especially considering who the team had around them and the raw volume of their offensice production. If I recall lebron was like a +17-18 on offense and we were top 5 in the games he played on that end

Wouldn’t call it off ball at first, the caveat is he was averaging 33.5/8/8 on great effeciency (62.5TS), so those rankings are insane considering the production

So what we have here is a VASTLY declined Lebron put his foot on the gas for 20 games and pretty consistently was a top 3 offensive player in a league with Jokic, Luka, Curry, in that stretch before injuries got him, and currently brons averaging a career high percentage inside the arc and his average career numbers despite sleepwalking untill the fourth quarter because he definately wants that clutch player of the year award unless 500k is on the line or it’s a marquee/revenge game matchup (anyone that doubts this has not seen the Lakers, lebron is currently leading the league in ppg in the fourth other than tyus Jones whose played 1 fourth quarter, averaging 32-8-8 per 36 on 70.8TS)


Now shooting off of screens is genuinely important, but not as much from the midrange nowadays


Jordan is good in the context of an elite normal player off ball whereas Lebron has much more unique value off ball which is the main thing here

Jordan doesnt open things up schematically for you to be more creative and diverse with what you can do for your offense or to make your actions more effective, he is an incredibly smart and skilled player off ball

Lebron, especially the younger versions of him that would be a lob threat that still shoot well off the catch, if you play into that absolutely does those things.

As cutters their values aren’t even remotely close, an issue with synergy tracking is some post ups are considered cuts and stampede cuts aren’t classified as cuts iirc, but not only is bron historically effecient off cuts for awhile now, but it’s one of those things where it’s a unique value vs other guys. With most players off cuts it’s cuz they’re so fast and smart with it but if you can wall up it’s fine, with bron it’s because he’s fast and huge so if you wall up he’ll go overpower you and he knows how to not foul in those situations, hes unstoppable on the move and it shows in those situations. This should be a non starter, lebrons shooting 80-90% on cuts throughout his career, his cutting has unique value because of the combination of size, finishing, speed, and playmaking. An argument for Jordan here is as much of a non starter as saying he’s better in transition

The synergy stat sheet that’s someone made for Jordan awhile back is a bit broke because turnovers weren’t accounted for, but iirc over 142 games jordan was at 68% inside the arc on cuts with a little more than one a game

That is both impressive and lower than any season bron has had since and including 2010, especially in recent years where brons relied on it and focused on it more he’s at hovering at around 80%, on a bit more volume as well per game (My mistake, one year they had a similar percentage where bron was at 67%, but bron had more volume)



As an off rolling big, its REALLY hard to name a guy that has basically all the skills you need vs every coverage, spot up shooting, short roll passing, punishing mismatches, lob threat. Throw in offensive rebounding there too but that’s not usually one I think of to beat coverages as much as a bonus but its valid. There are ways to mitigate lacking in some of those skills but that gets tied into the ball handler and coaching.

Lebron checks at least 3/4 boxes super comfortably, and as a lob threat he’s 6ft8.5 barefoot with a 40-45 inch vert, At least when he was younger, he’s a tad short for that but he’s an inch or two shorter than AD and dwight so he could still be one.

Jordan does not qualify as a lob threat in that situation and it doesn’t even make sense to care about him in that situation


A lot of Arguments for Jordan on here in the context of their off ball ability are focused on what occurred situationally in the situations they were in ans the systems they played in (which is valid), but the arguments that hes actually better just always end up being super vague and not actual descriptive which just sounds like waffling things out of thin air lol, throwing out super vague descriptions of what happens on the court m to make a point is barely step better than throwing out a narrative out there imo. In a concrete sense lebrons just so more of a potent tool off ball you can do more things with, feel that’s a given if you have schematic knowledge of the freedom a guy like bron gives you over a guy like Jordan

I see a better argument for Jordan on ball than off ball in terms of them as players, people don’t get how ridiculous younger versions of lebron would be as a rolling small ball big that’s still a huge lob threat, but obviously it goes without saying he’s more impactful on ball than off ball. There are less than 5 players in nba history that check all the boxes as an rolling big probably and he would be one of them. You don’t need to check all
The boxes but it gives you so much more versatility and reseliency against coverages, we saw the warriors pick and roll attack somewhat die this past postseason against a high drop since Dray isn’t a lob threat and switching hurt it at times too even at their best, Westbrook and AD had issues because neither of them could should and Westbrook wasn’t as fast as he used to be so things like north south ball screens and flipping the screen weren’t quite as dominant as they had been

Heej is my boy but he was talking about shooting as a main point and more about the role bron did play, but also the fact that lebron was actually a good catch and shoot three point shooter is just a thing that’s weird and most people don’t expect, and he clarified it was a role thing and bron could be better even now if he leans into it more

When Jordan tries to lightly approximate Lebron on-ball, his team is vastly worse despite the cold data suggesting it's Lebron who has weaker support.

When Lebron tries to go off-ball, he's generating unprecedented impact in his late 30's(this is about when Jordan was blowing up a partially because he literally could not accept a future all-star taking some of his shots) and generating discernible impact Jordan has never generated on 73-win team-thumpers(or if you want to use when curry was at his worst vs okc, still an all-time playoff opponent of a calibre Jordan has never defeated).

Player B is likely more portable. Player A is likely less portable. So if you're running -2 port for player B to try and explain away player b being more valuable(feel free to deduce who that's aimed at), you're probably doing something wrong.
VanWest82
RealGM
Posts: 19,587
And1: 18,104
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#113 » by VanWest82 » Tue Nov 28, 2023 10:56 pm

MrLurker wrote:Your tendency to rely on your fandom - not as a source of experience - is poor form imho. Threatening those who do not agree with you really only grants me the impression you aren't quite the authority you see yourself as here.

For clarity, I'm not representing fandom as some be-all, end-all arbiter; I think it's very important though to help root out deep left field takes that have little basis in reality. As an experiment, I challenge you to go find 10 knowledgable Bulls season ticket holders from the 80s-90s and try and sell them on your version of events. You might also try to steelman my version as an alternative. My guess as someone whose family had seasons and was emersed in that team and had a reasonably deep basketball background (I red-shirted in college and was easily the least accomplished of my cousins and uncles who played), you'd have trouble finding anyone who disagreed with my take. Maybe I'm wrong on that but I don't think so.

I believe it would be accurate to say Kawhi was not so valuable in the regular-season. I also think quite a bit of emphasis is put on looking at the bigger picture regarding WAR/WOWY and even on/off - more emphasis than you seem willing to use when discussing certain numbers and stats.

Raptors were a +8 NRTG team with Kawhi on the court in 18/19 RS with him averaging a hyper-efficient 26 ppg. He strategically sat out a bunch of games vs. weak opponents. I believe you are very wrong here.

I recall Kawhi receiving Kawhi receiving a fair bit of discussion regarding his WOWY - and the argumentation and conclusions were more nuanced than Kawhi simply not being good. It was other parties that seemed reluctant to acknowledge there were factors beyond Kawhi contributing to the Raptors year to year improvement.

Care to actually reference some of these discussions? And what larger point are you making here, that player progression isn't a thing? Pascal Siakam was assisted on 97% of his threes in 18/19 vs. 66% in 19/20; 49% to 42% on 2s. VanVleet went from an 11 and 4 bench player to a 17 and 6 starter. Norm Powell went from averaging 8 ppg to 16 ppg and he did it on much better efficiency!

What’s your explanation for Scottie jumping almost a full steal per game 93-94? Why was he +127 TS ADD year-over-year despite the exponential increase in defensive attention?

You seem to be the party less interested in individual player discussion - I believe Woodridge has been discussed. As have the circumstances surrounding those absences. The debate around Jordan has involved significantly more than the simply looking at a single year without him.

I'm admittedly flummoxed by this accusation. I went back and re-read our previous convos. I'm the one providing the clues for player analysis which would explain the (significant) gaps in your thesis. You're not really providing anything other than very vague references to other discussions that might've taken place but which you provide zero proof of.

You claim Woolridge has been discussed but you misspell his name and I can't really find much intelligent discussion at least on this platform. I searched the PC Board "Dave Greenwood achilles" and found ONE post in this website's entire history, and it was a throwaway comment about him being in a trade. I've yet to read any educated analysis of George Gervin's time of the Bulls. There are certainly other plot lines to consider but the fact that so little has been said about these three in relation to Jordan kind of says it all wrt to the level of detail one would hope to find in year-to-year wowy context. In short, your entire comment here seems like an ad hominem lacking any justification whatsoever.
DraymondGold
Senior
Posts: 689
And1: 887
Joined: May 19, 2022

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#114 » by DraymondGold » Tue Nov 28, 2023 11:08 pm

This probably isn't the best thread to discuss LeBron vs Jordan WOWY. It's an interesting discussion, but perhaps making a new thread might be better?

To get back to Plus Minus stuff -- Squared2020, there has been some topic about scaling in the past few pages, and I was wondering if you might share your expertise
Squared2020 wrote:.
I know some RAPM will produce 'scaled' versions of RAPM, where I believe the intention is to allow comparisons between different samples of RAPM on the same playing field (e.g. Goldstein and Engelmann RAPM did this).

Do you know what the methodology for this is? If I had to make a naive guess, I would guess they just set the standard deviation for the RAPM data in each year to the same value. I.e.
1) Take a given RAPM sample within a given year,
2) measure the standard deviation in that sample,
3) multiply every value in your sample by (standard deviation you want)/(original standard deviation).

If you do this with two samples, they should be on the same scale. Or is there something more complex happening behind the scenes when people publish 'scaled RAPM'? If it's as simple as this, we should definitely have the ability now to start comparing some of your RAPM samples (e.g. 85/91/96) to more modern years.

We would still be limited by sample size -- a standard deviation measurement across the full RAPM sample will include the RAPM of players who have the fewest possessions logged (and wouldn't include the missing players), which might introduce additional uncertainty. There would be uncertainty in both the RAPM of the individual player we're looking at (because the sample's incomplete) and the standard deviation scaling factor for the entire sample (because all the other samples are incomplete too)... but it might at least be a first step for allowing an apples-to-apples RAPM comparison between your data and others like Goldstein/Engelmann.

But I may well be missing something! Let me know if so :D
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,933
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#115 » by OhayoKD » Tue Nov 28, 2023 11:38 pm

DraymondGold wrote:This probably isn't the best thread to discuss LeBron vs Jordan WOWY. It's an interesting discussion, but perhaps making a new thread might be better?

To get back to Plus Minus stuff -- Squared2020, there has been some topic about scaling in the past few pages, and I was wondering if you might share your expertise
Squared2020 wrote:.
I know some RAPM will produce 'scaled' versions of RAPM, where I believe the intention is to allow comparisons between different samples of RAPM on the same playing field (e.g. Goldstein and Engelmann RAPM did this).

Do you know what the methodology for this is? If I had to make a naive guess, I would guess they just set the standard deviation for the RAPM data in each year to the same value. I.e.
1) Take a given RAPM sample within a given year,
2) measure the standard deviation in that sample,
3) multiply every value in your sample by (standard deviation you want)/(original standard deviation).

If you do this with two samples, they should be on the same scale. Or is there something more complex happening behind the scenes when people publish 'scaled RAPM'? If it's as simple as this, we should definitely have the ability now to start comparing some of your RAPM samples (e.g. 85/91/96) to more modern years.

We would still be limited by sample size -- a standard deviation measurement across the full RAPM sample will include the RAPM of players who have the fewest possessions logged (and wouldn't include the missing players), which might introduce additional uncertainty. There would be uncertainty in both the RAPM of the individual player we're looking at (because the sample's incomplete) and the standard deviation scaling factor for the entire sample (because all the other samples are incomplete too)... but it might at least be a first step for allowing an apples-to-apples RAPM comparison between your data and others like Goldstein/Engelmann.

But I may well be missing something! Let me know if so :D

For what it's worth I believe Cheema and Cryptbeam actually outright list their methodologies for making things comparable(or at least more comparable) cross-years. I've heard JE keeps that behind a black box basically.
Squared2020
Sophomore
Posts: 111
And1: 314
Joined: Feb 18, 2018
 

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#116 » by Squared2020 » Wed Nov 29, 2023 3:06 am

.
Professional History:
2012 - 2017: Consultant for several NBA front offices.
2017 - 2018: Orlando Magic
2018 - 2021: Houston Rockets
2021 - Present: NBA League Office
Djoker
Starter
Posts: 2,280
And1: 1,997
Joined: Sep 12, 2015
 

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#117 » by Djoker » Tue Dec 5, 2023 3:53 pm

Squared2020 wrote:.


Can you post the latest plus minus game logs for MJ?

Your last update had 199 games. By my estimate, it's now close to 300 games! :D
MyUniBroDavis
General Manager
Posts: 7,827
And1: 5,034
Joined: Jan 14, 2013

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#118 » by MyUniBroDavis » Tue Dec 5, 2023 10:00 pm

Oh my god I just realized this isn’t even a lebron and jordan thread lmao
LukaTheGOAT
Analyst
Posts: 3,272
And1: 2,983
Joined: Dec 25, 2019
 

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#119 » by LukaTheGOAT » Tue Dec 5, 2023 10:21 pm

I might start compiling data for all the threads that go of off-topic and ends up in Lebron vs MJ debates.
User avatar
TheGOATRises007
RealGM
Posts: 21,506
And1: 20,153
Joined: Oct 05, 2013
         

Re: Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s 

Post#120 » by TheGOATRises007 » Wed Dec 6, 2023 4:38 am

LukaTheGOAT wrote:I might start compiling data for all the threads that go of off-topic and ends up in Lebron vs MJ debates.


That's inevitably happening in most threads that mention either player.

Return to Player Comparisons