Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s

[Squared2020]

.

[Heej]

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.

1) The reason it's insane to you is due to the fact that most fans don't care to consider context regarding front office and coaching quality when discussing players head to head, because most fans frame basketball as a 1v1 game in a vacuum.

2) The reason they were a "perfect synergistic fit" is because illegal defense rules existed in that era and coaches couldn't and didn't schematically take advantage of non-spacers like they do today. If they played together now and the team's front office decision making was only average as far as deployment of assets goes, we'd be getting think pieces every week about whether both players needed to be split up the way the media occasionally does with the 2 Jays because both of them are sub-par spacers.

[NO-KG-AI]

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.

1) The reason it's insane to you is due to the fact that most fans don't care to consider context regarding front office and coaching quality when discussing players head to head, because most fans frame basketball as a 1v1 game in a vacuum.

2) The reason they were a "perfect synergistic fit" is because illegal defense rules existed in that era and coaches couldn't and didn't schematically take advantage of non-spacers like they do today. If they played together now and the team's front office decision making was only average as far as deployment of assets goes, we'd be getting think pieces every week about whether both players needed to be split up the way the media occasionally does with the 2 Jays because both of them are sub-par spacers.

But they’d be win titles, and people would still use it as an excuse to why Jordan got titles when someone else didn’t, because he had the perfect fit: because they won, so it was perfect.

But nah. They were dominant first and foremost because Jordan was unguardable, and illegal defense or not wasn’t going to change that. The same way it didn’t slow D-Wade(the lesser version of Jordan) down. It’s just an excuse for guys that had a much longer adjustment period to it, to where it cost them championships.

Jordan and Scottie meshed together better than the other ball dominant stars would, simply because Jordan is more skilled and dominant off the ball than those heliocentric scorers of today are. Blaming rule changes and schemes, when it’s easier to score and get to your spots than it has ever been is laughable.

There isn’t a scheme that takes advantage of Jordan being a “non spacer.” Lmfao.

[Heej]

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.

1) The reason it's insane to you is due to the fact that most fans don't care to consider context regarding front office and coaching quality when discussing players head to head, because most fans frame basketball as a 1v1 game in a vacuum.

2) The reason they were a "perfect synergistic fit" is because illegal defense rules existed in that era and coaches couldn't and didn't schematically take advantage of non-spacers like they do today. If they played together now and the team's front office decision making was only average as far as deployment of assets goes, we'd be getting think pieces every week about whether both players needed to be split up the way the media occasionally does with the 2 Jays because both of them are sub-par spacers.

But they’d be win titles, and people would still use it as an excuse to why Jordan got titles when someone else didn’t, because he had the perfect fit: because they won, so it was perfect.

But nah. They were dominant first and foremost because Jordan was unguardable, and illegal defense or not wasn’t going to change that. The same way it didn’t slow D-Wade(the lesser version of Jordan) down. It’s just an excuse for guys that had a much longer adjustment period to it, to where it cost them championships.

Jordan and Scottie meshed together better than the other ball dominant stars would, simply because Jordan is more skilled and dominant off the ball than those heliocentric scorers of today are. Blaming rule changes and schemes, when it’s easier to score and get to your spots than it has ever been is laughable.

There isn’t a scheme that takes advantage of Jordan being a “non spacer.” Lmfao.

If you truly think there's no schemes that exist in basketball that would use the fact that Jordan is a sub-par 3 point shooter against him, then we don't even watch the same game

[homecourtloss]

1) The reason it's insane to you is due to the fact that most fans don't care to consider context regarding front office and coaching quality when discussing players head to head, because most fans frame basketball as a 1v1 game in a vacuum.

2) The reason they were a "perfect synergistic fit" is because illegal defense rules existed in that era and coaches couldn't and didn't schematically take advantage of non-spacers like they do today. If they played together now and the team's front office decision making was only average as far as deployment of assets goes, we'd be getting think pieces every week about whether both players needed to be split up the way the media occasionally does with the 2 Jays because both of them are sub-par spacers.

But they’d be win titles, and people would still use it as an excuse to why Jordan got titles when someone else didn’t, because he had the perfect fit: because they won, so it was perfect.

But nah. They were dominant first and foremost because Jordan was unguardable, and illegal defense or not wasn’t going to change that. The same way it didn’t slow D-Wade(the lesser version of Jordan) down. It’s just an excuse for guys that had a much longer adjustment period to it, to where it cost them championships.

Jordan and Scottie meshed together better than the other ball dominant stars would, simply because Jordan is more skilled and dominant off the ball than those heliocentric scorers of today are. Blaming rule changes and schemes, when it’s easier to score and get to your spots than it has ever been is laughable.

There isn’t a scheme that takes advantage of Jordan being a “non spacer.” Lmfao.

If you truly think there's no schemes that exist in basketball that would use the fact that Jordan is a sub-par 3 point shooter against him, then we don't even watch the same game

Hagiographic thinking.

[Squared2020]

.

[Heej]

If you truly think there's no schemes that exist in basketball that would use the fact that Jordan is a sub-par 3 point shooter against him, then we don't even watch the same game

The only thing I'd add here is that Jordan is not a subpar 3pt shooter. Statistically speaking, you cannot prove he was significantly below league average, especially for 1985 through 1998. I think there's three seasons that are statistically below average. There is one season statistically above. But overall, he's average, not subpar.

Now given the data perspective, from watching several hundred games over that era and gathering nearly 300 games worth of data on Jordan, his realized percentages are lower than his ability because floor spacing didn't exist for him (as -- for example -- in the early 90's BJ was a spacer, playing the Scott/Ainge C&S role at 15-18 feet) and he's definitely got a higher heave rate than most other players in his time.

He shot 29% from behind the unshortened line. This is deeply unserious. The heaves argument is desperate to me. Jordan proved during the shortened season that if he could've shot the 3 well with volume, he would've. But alas, he didn't.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Squared2020 spent hours tracking this and it devolved into lebron vs Jordan by page like two you hate to see it

[OhayoKD]

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.

1) The reason it's insane to you is due to the fact that most fans don't care to consider context regarding front office and coaching quality when discussing players head to head, because most fans frame basketball as a 1v1 game in a vacuum.

2) The reason they were a "perfect synergistic fit" is because illegal defense rules existed in that era and coaches couldn't and didn't schematically take advantage of non-spacers like they do today. If they played together now and the team's front office decision making was only average as far as deployment of assets goes, we'd be getting think pieces every week about whether both players needed to be split up the way the media occasionally does with the 2 Jays because both of them are sub-par spacers.

But they’d be win titles, and people would still use it as an excuse to why Jordan got titles when someone else didn’t, because he had the perfect fit: because they won, so it was perfect.

Well that and Chicago reeling off a 53-win worthy SRS without Jordan, Grant while Pippen was demanding a trade. For any neutral party, that alone would be sufficient explanation, especially paired with the mountain of examples of Lebron elevating similar-preforming teams more...but no, having a teammate who could turn average Jordan-led defenses into elite ones is not a matter of Jordan's playstyle, it's a matter of Pippen's.

Even if we pretend Jordan didn't have weaknesses as a decision-maker and playmaker Pippen also took care of, a more defensively slanted-star paired to an offensive-slanted star makes for naturally superior fit than an offensive one paired next to another defensive one.

If you want to argue for Jordan as the 2nd best player ever on the basis of rings won, go ahead. I'm just confused why you insist on regurgitating poorly supported Ben Taylorisms to pretend the argument is something other than team-success(under a very narrow definition of the term).

[OhayoKD]

Squared2020 spent hours tracking this and it devolved into lebron vs Jordan by page like two you hate to see it

Was Jordan vs Magic for a bit tbf

[Squared2020]

.

[Squared2020]

Was Jordan vs Magic for a bit tbf

Yeah, where's all the Pippen vs. Magic talk? (Please don't throw rotten tomatoes at me)

[OhayoKD]

Was Jordan vs Magic for a bit tbf

Yeah, where's all the Pippen vs. Magic talk? (Please don't throw rotten tomatoes at me)

Worthy vs Jordan first

[Squared2020]

.

[AEnigma]

Why are we disputing that 21 inches make no difference to shots now?

There is indeed a reason we highlight guys like Tucker and Bowen who only seem to be effective shooters from a specific distance. It is not moving goalposts to be able to recognise that.

I am pretty confident Jordan could be fine from the corners, but corner shooting was never the question. A lot of players are going to look above average if you assess their specific corner percentages against a much broader league average; does doing so seem like any sort of honest approach?

Pippen saw a similar jump with the shortened line, so I suppose he was secretly a modern spacing forward after all.

[OhayoKD]

Yeah, where's all the Pippen vs. Magic talk? (Please don't throw rotten tomatoes at me)

Worthy vs Jordan first

Well this is obvious. Worthy scored approximately 15,248 points with goggles on while MJ scored only roughly 14 with goggles. Therefore it's clear that Worthy > MJ all day long. Anyone who doesn't see that is a fool.

Worthy analysis

[Squared2020]

.

[NO-KG-AI]

If you truly think there's no schemes that exist in basketball that would use the fact that Jordan is a sub-par 3 point shooter against him, then we don't even watch the same game

The only thing I'd add here is that Jordan is not a subpar 3pt shooter. Statistically speaking, you cannot prove he was significantly below league average, especially for 1985 through 1998. I think there's three seasons that are statistically below average. There is one season statistically above. But overall, he's average, not subpar.

Now given the data perspective, from watching several hundred games over that era and gathering nearly 300 games worth of data on Jordan, his realized percentages are lower than his ability because floor spacing didn't exist for him (as -- for example -- in the early 90's BJ was a spacer, playing the Scott/Ainge C&S role at 15-18 feet) and he's definitely got a higher heave rate than most other players in his time.

He shot 29% from behind the unshortened line. This is deeply unserious. The heaves argument is desperate to me. Jordan proved during the shortened season that if he could've shot the 3 well with volume, he would've. But alas, he didn't.

It wouldn’t happen because Jordan wouldn’t settle for 3’s because he doesn’t have to. That’s why he never cost his team a championship because he was so unaggressive and afraid to score while teams went to a zone with aging defenders and Deshawn “next MJ” Stevenson, that it turned him into the 4th best player in the finals series.

You have no evidence that teams could force Jordan to take 3’s and render him a useless scorer. We know teams can and did dare LeBron to shoot, to mostly poor results, but sometimes it cost LeBron series, or even titles. we only know for sure that one of them could be coaxed into being a non factor, and it wasn’t Mike.

[AEnigma]

Why are we disputing that 21 inches make no difference to shots now?

There is indeed a reason we highlight guys like Tucker and Bowen who only seem to be effective shooters from a specific distance. It is not moving goalposts to be able to recognise that.

I am pretty confident Jordan could be fine from the corners, but corner shooting was never the question. A lot of players are going to look above average if you assess their specific corner percentages against a much broader league average; does doing so seem like any sort of honest approach?

Pippen saw a similar jump with the shortened line, so I suppose he was secretly a modern spacing forward after all.

Again, the argument was that Jordan was not a subpar three point shooter.

Saying subpar for entire career and then changing to a subset of years is moving goalposts, whether you like it or not. I haven't made any other claims.

Claiming someone said “subpar for entire career” when they did not is lying, whether you like it or not.

That said, by your own numbers, his career percentage was below the league average mark even with the shortened line. If you want to make a point about confidence intervals, by all means, but that is a hell of a lot closer to “moving goalposts” than highlighting how his percentages jump up disproportionately during the only three years in league history where the line for three point shooting was reduced.

Until actual data is provided for a constructive conversation, I'll be off.

Have a good night!

Yeah heej should have said a sub-par three-point shooter from 23+ feet — as should everyone who makes general claims about shooting, because after all, corner shots count too.

Good addition, very constructive conversation, definitely not an empty and purposeless attempt at pedantry.

[NO-KG-AI]

The 3 ball argument is a WILD argument for LeBron, who has such long stretches of going ice cold from 3 and the line that it goes months, before finally catching fire.

Jordan shot 35.2% up until his first retirement(before the line was moved in) in the post season. He shot over 38% from 3 in 5 of those 9 seasons.

LeBron shot 33.1% from 3 in his career in the playoffs… and he shot over 38% in 3 of his 16 post season appearances.

The real story of the 3 ball isn’t whether or nto Jordan’s would be good enough. The real 3 ball discussion no one wants to have is that LeBron(and another prominent wing that will only muddy this discussion even further lmao) shot the 3 ball too much, and he would have been better if he found other ways to attack and wasn’t so willing to let teams off the hook and bail them out by launching a 3. (And the line, but that’s another story as well.)

Every team in the league counts it as a win if MJ or LeBron(aside from those rare times he’s smoking hot)take a 3 because it’s so much more beneficial than them attacking. One guy just has more ways to keep himself out of that situation, and less inclination to go to it. Old Lebron should and has to be more reliant on his shooting, but I feel like he left something on the table overusing it in his prime.