Jordan and Pippen Plus/Minus Numbers in the 90s

[colts18]

First off, thanks to Squared2020 for providing lineup data for the Chicago Bulls for the 1991, 1993, and 1996 seasons. There are a total of 157 games in the sample.

I have combined the lineup data for the 3 seasons and listed the data below.



As you can see, Jordan looks good no matter who is playing. MJ's offensive numbers are very impressive no matter the circumstances. Pippen looks next to MJ but not as good without him. The surprising part is how little having Rodman or Grant on the court mattered for the Bulls. MJ and Pippen played regardless of who was next to them. In 1996, they were a +17 team with MJ+Pippen+Rodman and a +23 team with MJ and Pippen and without Rodman.

[MrVorp]

Jordan + No Pippen: 100.6 DRTG
Pippen + No Jordan: 106.2 DRTG

[One_and_Done]

Data provided by one guy has to be viewed with scepticism. It's not of the same ilk as official data produced by a team of people, and able to be vetted, tracked and reviewed. It's just some guy's being like 'here's some data I claim is true'.

[ShaqAttac]

Data provided by one guy has to be viewed with scepticism. It's not of the same ilk as official data produced by a team of people, and able to be vetted, tracked and reviewed. It's just some guy's being like 'here's some data I claim is true'.

aint squared an nba employeee

anyway looks like pip>mj aint happenin

hakeem n magic tho

[Jaivl]

Data provided by one guy has to be viewed with scepticism. It's not of the same ilk as official data produced by a team of people, and able to be vetted, tracked and reviewed. It's just some guy's being like 'here's some data I claim is true'.

aint squared an nba employeee

anyway looks like pip>mj aint happenin

...why would that happen anyway?

[ShaqAttac]

Data provided by one guy has to be viewed with scepticism. It's not of the same ilk as official data produced by a team of people, and able to be vetted, tracked and reviewed. It's just some guy's being like 'here's some data I claim is true'.

aint squared an nba employeee

anyway looks like pip>mj aint happenin

...why would that happen anyway?

r jokes illegal

[eminence]

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

[colts18]

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

1991-
37-20 in sampled games
24-1 in non-sampled games

1993-
19-8 in sampled games
38-17 in non-sampled games

1996-
65-8 in the sampled games
7-2 in non-sampled games

It looks like the sample fit the whole season totals for 93 and 96. In 91, the Bulls are missing a lot of good games in their sample so MJ's on numbers would be higher.

[Djoker]

Yea I too am surprised that the presence of Grant and Rodman mattered so little. The most interesting is that even the defense gets better without them. In terms of WOWY data the 1991-1993 Bulls were 8-2 (65.6-win pace) with a +10.80 MOV without Grant and the 1996-1998 Bulls were 38-9 (66.3-win pace) with a +9.62 MOV without Rodman.

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

1991 - 57 games (37-20)
1993 - 27 games (19-8)
1996 - 73 games (65-8)

In the sampled games the Bulls have a 121-36 record (63.2-win pace) and in the others 69-20 (63.6-win pace).

[colts18]

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

Rodman has good numbers in the 1991 RAPM in a season where Isiah missed half of the season. He was also solid in 1997.

The Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc lineups were insanely good. They were +17 in 1996, +29 in 1997, and +20 in 1998.

[eminence]

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

Rodman has good numbers in the 1991 RAPM in a season where Isiah missed half of the season. He was also solid in 1997.

The Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc lineups were insanely good. They were +17 in 1996, +29 in 1997, and +20 in 1998.

I'd be hesitant to call the '91 data an RAPM, but I didn't mean to say Rodman was bad or anything, just that he was well off MJ/Pippen and more comparable to Kukoc. Being (probably) the #3 on a GOAT tier team is no shame or anything. KD was still pretty good afterall.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

Rodman has good numbers in the 1991 RAPM in a season where Isiah missed half of the season. He was also solid in 1997.

The Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc lineups were insanely good. They were +17 in 1996, +29 in 1997, and +20 in 1998.

I'd be hesitant to call the '91 data an RAPM, but I didn't mean to say Rodman was bad or anything, just that he was well off MJ/Pippen and more comparable to Kukoc. Being (probably) the #3 on a GOAT tier team is no shame or anything. KD was still pretty good afterall.

Lmao spicy

[rk2023]

Rodman has good numbers in the 1991 RAPM in a season where Isiah missed half of the season. He was also solid in 1997.

The Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc lineups were insanely good. They were +17 in 1996, +29 in 1997, and +20 in 1998.

I'd be hesitant to call the '91 data an RAPM, but I didn't mean to say Rodman was bad or anything, just that he was well off MJ/Pippen and more comparable to Kukoc. Being (probably) the #3 on a GOAT tier team is no shame or anything. KD was still pretty good afterall.

Lmao spicy

[MacGill]

It's simple - just watch the full games as they're all available. In 20 years, when the formula's change, as they did after Westbrook, we'll all be changing our narrative on (enter said stars of today).

[homecourtloss]

It's simple - just watch the full games as they're all available. In 20 years, when the formula's change, as they did after Westbrook, we'll all be changing our narrative on (enter said stars of today).

Maybe you're making a general point here, but there are no "formulas" involved in this thread, just pure on/off numbers. There have been formula changes for other things, e.g., BKREF BPM, Real Plus-Minus, etc.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Are they all RS games in the sample? And could you give me the Bulls record in those games?

But at first glance, it lines up with expectations for me. Bit bummed for Horace, but we have the '97/'98 stuff (and '96 plus minus), Rodman has always looked like a pretty distant #3 (at best).

Rodman has good numbers in the 1991 RAPM in a season where Isiah missed half of the season. He was also solid in 1997.

The Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc lineups were insanely good. They were +17 in 1996, +29 in 1997, and +20 in 1998.

I'd be hesitant to call the '91 data an RAPM, but I didn't mean to say Rodman was bad or anything, just that he was well off MJ/Pippen and more comparable to Kukoc. Being (probably) the #3 on a GOAT tier team is no shame or anything. KD was still pretty good afterall.

You aren't kidding, are you?

[MyUniBroDavis]

Rodman has good numbers in the 1991 RAPM in a season where Isiah missed half of the season. He was also solid in 1997.

The Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc lineups were insanely good. They were +17 in 1996, +29 in 1997, and +20 in 1998.

I'd be hesitant to call the '91 data an RAPM, but I didn't mean to say Rodman was bad or anything, just that he was well off MJ/Pippen and more comparable to Kukoc. Being (probably) the #3 on a GOAT tier team is no shame or anything. KD was still pretty good afterall.

You aren't kidding, are you?

Bro got hit with the fishing lure cheese

[TheGOATRises007]

I'm surprised that the numbers aren't higher with Grant on the court.

[lessthanjake]

MJ having such a massive net rating with his #2 player on the court, while simultaneously that #2 player has a negative net rating without him (and even when the third best player is on the court with the #2) is incredibly impressive and plainly supportive of him as GOAT. A +15 with your best teammate is very rare and not something most GOAT candidates achieved as far as we know. Of course it’s all caveated by not being full samples, though.

[ShaqAttac]

MJ having such a massive net rating with his #2 player on the court, while simultaneously that #2 player has a negative net rating without him (and even when the third best player is on the court with the #2) is incredibly impressive and plainly supportive of him as GOAT. A +15 with your best teammate is very rare and not something most GOAT candidates achieved as far as we know. Of course it’s all caveated by not being full samples, though.

how do numbers that dont exist for russell or kareem put mj over russell or kareem? cant wait till someone shows a graph or something where bron was doing this in his 30's