If Pippen won in 1994 - Where does he rank alltime

[KobesScarf]

Depends on how he'd play.

This hypothetical seems fairly improbable though.

Improbable how?

If Pippen and Grant don't miss 20 games they easily have homecourt throughout the playoffs and considering they went to 7 against the Knicks and Knicks went to 7 vs Houston it's not just realistic its likely they win in 94

[TheGOATRises007]

Depends on how he'd play.

This hypothetical seems fairly improbable though.

Improbable how?

If Pippen and Grant don't miss 20 games they easily have homecourt throughout the playoffs and considering they went to 7 against the Knicks and Knicks went to 7 vs Houston it's not just realistic its likely they win in 94

Sports isn't always linear like that.

[migya]

Depends on how he'd play.

This hypothetical seems fairly improbable though.

Improbable how?

If Pippen and Grant don't miss 20 games they easily have homecourt throughout the playoffs and considering they went to 7 against the Knicks and Knicks went to 7 vs Houston it's not just realistic its likely they win in 94

Sports isn't always linear like that.

Yet it's all we have to go by. Pippen didn't step up in the Knicks series and they still had a great chance. Point is here that Pippen would rise significantly alltime having won that season. It'd be similar if Durant was in Butler's place in Miami and won a championship with that team.

[TheGOATRises007]

Improbable how?

If Pippen and Grant don't miss 20 games they easily have homecourt throughout the playoffs and considering they went to 7 against the Knicks and Knicks went to 7 vs Houston it's not just realistic its likely they win in 94

Sports isn't always linear like that.

Yet it's all we have to go by. Pippen didn't step up in the Knicks series and they still had a great chance. Point is here that Pippen would rise significantly alltime having won that season. It'd be similar if Durant was in Butler's place in Miami and won a championship with that team.

I never said he wouldn't rise. It's just an improbable scenario.

You can't make an argument of "the Bulls almost beat the knicks, who went to 7 vs Houston, so they'd have a great chance vs Houston". Sports aren't linear that way.

Here's another example that exposes that logic: 2014, the Spurs get pushed to 7 by the Mavs. They beat the Heat in 5 in record margin. So using linearity, the Mavs would beat the Heat in a series. And it just does not work like that.

[Cavsfansince84]

And a basis was offered. But instead of reading and responding you acted like nothing had been provided, misrepresented what was offered, and then complained about my tone. If you're not going to read what people say, why reply in the first place?

Here's the thing, I can read something someone writes, which they may think proves they are right or something but not feel the need to argue it with them. I just don't feel the need to argue with this any more. Could I? I'm sure I could. I just don't want to. It doesn't mean enough to me and I doubt either of our opinions will change so it seems pointless to bother.

[giordunk]

This discussion is merely a reflection of the psychology involved in ranking players lol.

[Buckets22]

I was only 7 years old at that time. How come that without Jordan the Bulls didnt sign another big ticket player? They should've had some cap space?

But if Pippen wins if somewhat fair and square(as in Hakeem doesn't get injured in game 1 of the Finals and misses the series) he gets into top 15 with ease

[DQuinn1575]

If Pippen plays no better, and the Bulls win because the ball bounces the right way in the Knicks series, then they win in 6-7 games the next 2 series, then I really dont think I would rate him a lot higher than where he currently is. The play in a couple of series at his 1994 level doesnt make him better than Barkley, Karl Malone, to throw out 2 contemporaries who didnt win a title. And at peak, not better than DWade, who would have similar resume.
Harder question is if he stays in SEA, improves the same amount, but never wins a title, where does he rank? Give him all the accolades, but no championships, only other thing that changes FWIW is he doesnt make 92 Dream Team.

[Owly]

I was only 7 years old at that time. How come that without Jordan the Bulls didnt sign another big ticket player? They should've had some cap space?

But if Pippen wins if somewhat fair and square(as in Hakeem doesn't get injured in game 1 of the Finals and misses the series) he gets into top 15 with ease

I was of the impression (and this source supports it: https://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/misc/salaries94.txt) that the Bulls still honored MJ's contract, paid him his basketball salary, even in his absence.

Seemed to work out okay in the end.

Though honestly given when MJ announced his retirement it would have to have been in '94 that they made a free agency play in any case (and IRL, Jerry R would be well acquainted with the strike [don't know if/when he knew MJ wasn't interested in breaking the strike, as I understand it anyway from public statements ... I don't know/care about baseball] and how well or otherwise MJ was doing by that point and felt it worth retaining Jordan's rights in purely pragmatic terms ... I don't know).

Had he not been still tied to the Bulls (by contract) and Reinsdorf (who signed him for baseball too) his return might have been different.

[magicman1978]

If Pippen plays no better, and the Bulls win because the ball bounces the right way in the Knicks series, then they win in 6-7 games the next 2 series, then I really dont think I would rate him a lot higher than where he currently is. The play in a couple of series at his 1994 level doesnt make him better than Barkley, Karl Malone, to throw out 2 contemporaries who didnt win a title. And at peak, not better than DWade, who would have similar resume.
Harder question is if he stays in SEA, improves the same amount, but never wins a title, where does he rank? Give him all the accolades, but no championships, only other thing that changes FWIW is he doesnt make 92 Dream Team.

Yeah, this scenario is not about Pippen becoming a better player - just him winning the chip in 94. So there's no valid reason to move him above the likes of Wade, Robinson, Malone, Ewing etc. He's already ranked as high as he is in part of the championships, so giving him one more without Jordan would move him up even more because people focus on championships much more than actual performance. If the focus is on performance, how can you justify moving Pippen above the aforementioned players when he's consistently put up series like the ones below during what should be his prime years (ages 24-32):

16.6pts on 52% TS, 101ortg, 3.7assts/3tos
16.0pts on 49%TS, 106ortg, 6.6assts/2.7tos
15.3pts on 45.7%TS, 100rtg, 5.3assts/3.3tos
15.6pts on 41.6%TS, 100ortg, 5.2assts/2.2tos
15.7pts on 42.9%TS, 106ortg, 5.2assts/1.8tos
16.7pts on 49.8%TS, 106ortg, 3.0assts/3.0tos
16.8pts on 52.6%TS, 102ortg, 2.8assts/3.0tos
16.6pts on 46.3%TS, 102ortg, 5.3assts/3.0tos
15.7pts on 50%TS, 104ortg, 4.8assts/2.8tos
18.3pts on 44.8%TS, 102ortg, 5.5assts/3.3tos

A couple of those were from 98, which is hard to hold against him because he played with a bad back that was particularly bad in the Jazz series, but just imagine how other players would get picked apart for those types of performances. We're not talking about a bad series here or there - this is 30-40% of his prime. Yeah, he makes up for some of it on defense - but he doesn't have elite C level impact on defense, otherwise we'd see that impact reflected more in his on/off (even though we only have on/off at the tail-end of his prime and post-prime years - it shows that his elite impact there was probably only over the course of a 5-7 year span.

At a cursory glance, I can see why people would have him top 20 or even 15 when they see 7 chips, and one without MJ on what was not a championship level roster. But looking more closely at his actual level of play across his actual prime years - he shouldn't be thought of at that level.

[Owly]

If Pippen plays no better, and the Bulls win because the ball bounces the right way in the Knicks series, then they win in 6-7 games the next 2 series, then I really dont think I would rate him a lot higher than where he currently is. The play in a couple of series at his 1994 level doesnt make him better than Barkley, Karl Malone, to throw out 2 contemporaries who didnt win a title. And at peak, not better than DWade, who would have similar resume.
Harder question is if he stays in SEA, improves the same amount, but never wins a title, where does he rank? Give him all the accolades, but no championships, only other thing that changes FWIW is he doesnt make 92 Dream Team.

I think ... holding all else equal (and we kind of can't because his play affects picks [and indeed Seattle retaining might affect who the Bulls pick and thus everyone else picks] etc and at the margins Polynice [with 2 firsts] becomes Benjamin who [with Christie] becomes Perkins) adding (a just as good) Pippen to a team that from 93-97 5 year SRS is 7.512 and 94-98 is 7.446 (two elite numbers) ... plus with the Bulls looking ... at least different ... probably lesser ... I would guess in Seattle specifically Pippen would have a pretty good shot at a title.

Again they don't get Perkins (though maybe they keep/develop Christie? but) other stuff can't necessarily be held stationary. But if Seattle want/take him and don't go off on a wildly different track I think their chances of a title (or more) are pretty good.

[KobesScarf]

Sports isn't always linear like that.

Yet it's all we have to go by. Pippen didn't step up in the Knicks series and they still had a great chance. Point is here that Pippen would rise significantly alltime having won that season. It'd be similar if Durant was in Butler's place in Miami and won a championship with that team.

I never said he wouldn't rise. It's just an improbable scenario.

You can't make an argument of "the Bulls almost beat the knicks, who went to 7 vs Houston, so they'd have a great chance vs Houston". Sports aren't linear that way.

Here's another example that exposes that logic: 2014, the Spurs get pushed to 7 by the Mavs. They beat the Heat in 5 in record margin. So using linearity, the Mavs would beat the Heat in a series. And it just does not work like that.

Yall are missing my point. The team with homecourt won all those 7 game series and if Pippen and Grant dont miss 20 games they would have for sure gotten homecourt and which would make them likely winners

[Owly]

If Pippen plays no better, and the Bulls win because the ball bounces the right way in the Knicks series, then they win in 6-7 games the next 2 series, then I really dont think I would rate him a lot higher than where he currently is. The play in a couple of series at his 1994 level doesnt make him better than Barkley, Karl Malone, to throw out 2 contemporaries who didnt win a title. And at peak, not better than DWade, who would have similar resume.
Harder question is if he stays in SEA, improves the same amount, but never wins a title, where does he rank? Give him all the accolades, but no championships, only other thing that changes FWIW is he doesnt make 92 Dream Team.

I think ... holding all else equal (and we kind of can't because his play affects picks [and indeed Seattle retaining might affect who the Bulls pick and thus everyone else picks] etc and at the margins Polynice [with 2 firsts] becomes Benjamin who [with Christie] becomes Perkins) adding (a just as good) Pippen to a team that from 93-97 5 year SRS is 7.512 and 94-98 is 7.446 (two elite numbers) ... plus with the Bulls looking ... at least different ... probably lesser ... I would guess in Seattle specifically Pippen would have a pretty good shot at a title.

Again they don't get Perkins (though maybe they keep/develop Christie? but) other stuff can't necessarily be held stationary. But if Seattle want/take him and don't go off on a wildly different track I think their chances of a title (or more) are pretty good.

Tangent and self-response but just thinking about this ...
Just throwing a lineup out there from this ...

Kemp
McKey
Pippen
Christie
Payton

This circa '96 ... with McMillan covering 1-3 off the bench, Askew 2-4, E Johnson for when you want a legit center, Wingate as deep fringe rotation guy. Karl/Kloppenburg would have had fun with that. Schrempf would be better overall but wanted the defensive tilt version so kept McKey. That's without using one of the actual SGs ... Gill had the tools but from what I've read never really put it all together ... Hawkins was clearly less toolsy [athleticism, strength, height] but one source says after '96 he was "as good or better" than Gill on that end (Barry, Cohen, '96) ... some may be higher on Gill than this. Perkins is a loss to be sure but ... this could have been fun to see.

[TheGOATRises007]

Yet it's all we have to go by. Pippen didn't step up in the Knicks series and they still had a great chance. Point is here that Pippen would rise significantly alltime having won that season. It'd be similar if Durant was in Butler's place in Miami and won a championship with that team.

I never said he wouldn't rise. It's just an improbable scenario.

You can't make an argument of "the Bulls almost beat the knicks, who went to 7 vs Houston, so they'd have a great chance vs Houston". Sports aren't linear that way.

Here's another example that exposes that logic: 2014, the Spurs get pushed to 7 by the Mavs. They beat the Heat in 5 in record margin. So using linearity, the Mavs would beat the Heat in a series. And it just does not work like that.

Yall are missing my point. The team with homecourt won all those 7 game series and if Pippen and Grant dont miss 20 games they would have for sure gotten homecourt and which would make them likely winners

Yeah again, you're assuming linearity. It doesn't always work like that.

[DQuinn1575]

I never said he wouldn't rise. It's just an improbable scenario.

You can't make an argument of "the Bulls almost beat the knicks, who went to 7 vs Houston, so they'd have a great chance vs Houston". Sports aren't linear that way.

Here's another example that exposes that logic: 2014, the Spurs get pushed to 7 by the Mavs. They beat the Heat in 5 in record margin. So using linearity, the Mavs would beat the Heat in a series. And it just does not work like that.

Yall are missing my point. The team with homecourt won all those 7 game series and if Pippen and Grant dont miss 20 games they would have for sure gotten homecourt and which would make them likely winners

Yeah again, you're assuming linearity. It doesn't always work like that.

No, but we assuming the Bulls win in 94, that either happens here because
(1) Pippen plays better and they win, or
(2) circumstances, luck is better so they win.

So say 2 plays out, they win the title because HoGrant & Pippen miss less games. In that case, Pippen really is no better, and he shouldn't rank any higher.

[DQuinn1575]

If Pippen plays no better, and the Bulls win because the ball bounces the right way in the Knicks series, then they win in 6-7 games the next 2 series, then I really dont think I would rate him a lot higher than where he currently is. The play in a couple of series at his 1994 level doesnt make him better than Barkley, Karl Malone, to throw out 2 contemporaries who didnt win a title. And at peak, not better than DWade, who would have similar resume.
Harder question is if he stays in SEA, improves the same amount, but never wins a title, where does he rank? Give him all the accolades, but no championships, only other thing that changes FWIW is he doesnt make 92 Dream Team.

I think ... holding all else equal (and we kind of can't because his play affects picks [and indeed Seattle retaining might affect who the Bulls pick and thus everyone else picks] etc and at the margins Polynice [with 2 firsts] becomes Benjamin who [with Christie] becomes Perkins) adding (a just as good) Pippen to a team that from 93-97 5 year SRS is 7.512 and 94-98 is 7.446 (two elite numbers) ... plus with the Bulls looking ... at least different ... probably lesser ... I would guess in Seattle specifically Pippen would have a pretty good shot at a title.

Again they don't get Perkins (though maybe they keep/develop Christie? but) other stuff can't necessarily be held stationary. But if Seattle want/take him and don't go off on a wildly different track I think their chances of a title (or more) are pretty good.

Tangent and self-response but just thinking about this ...
Just throwing a lineup out there from this ...

Kemp
McKey
Pippen
Christie
Payton

This circa '96 ... with McMillan covering 1-3 off the bench, Askew 2-4, E Johnson for when you want a legit center, Wingate as deep fringe rotation guy. Karl/Kloppenburg would have had fun with that. Schrempf would be better overall but wanted the defensive tilt version so kept McKey. That's without using one of the actual SGs ... Gill had the tools but from what I've read never really put it all together ... Hawkins was clearly less toolsy [athleticism, strength, height] but one source says after '96 he was "as good or better" than Gill on that end (Barry, Cohen, '96) ... some may be higher on Gill than this. Perkins is a loss to be sure but ... this could have been fun to see.

okay, that's fine, two options then

1. He wins a title with SEA, with Payton & Kemp - does he get rated higher than now, lower than now, the same and
2. He goes wherever, SEA or not, and wins no titles, does he get rated lower than now

[Owly]

I think ... holding all else equal (and we kind of can't because his play affects picks [and indeed Seattle retaining might affect who the Bulls pick and thus everyone else picks] etc and at the margins Polynice [with 2 firsts] becomes Benjamin who [with Christie] becomes Perkins) adding (a just as good) Pippen to a team that from 93-97 5 year SRS is 7.512 and 94-98 is 7.446 (two elite numbers) ... plus with the Bulls looking ... at least different ... probably lesser ... I would guess in Seattle specifically Pippen would have a pretty good shot at a title.

Again they don't get Perkins (though maybe they keep/develop Christie? but) other stuff can't necessarily be held stationary. But if Seattle want/take him and don't go off on a wildly different track I think their chances of a title (or more) are pretty good.

Tangent and self-response but just thinking about this ...
Just throwing a lineup out there from this ...

Kemp
McKey
Pippen
Christie
Payton

This circa '96 ... with McMillan covering 1-3 off the bench, Askew 2-4, E Johnson for when you want a legit center, Wingate as deep fringe rotation guy. Karl/Kloppenburg would have had fun with that. Schrempf would be better overall but wanted the defensive tilt version so kept McKey. That's without using one of the actual SGs ... Gill had the tools but from what I've read never really put it all together ... Hawkins was clearly less toolsy [athleticism, strength, height] but one source says after '96 he was "as good or better" than Gill on that end (Barry, Cohen, '96) ... some may be higher on Gill than this. Perkins is a loss to be sure but ... this could have been fun to see.

okay, that's fine, two options then

1. He wins a title with SEA, with Payton & Kemp - does he get rated higher than now, lower than now, the same and
2. He goes wherever, SEA or not, and wins no titles, does he get rated lower than now

Don't really have strong feelings but as you ask ...

Background:
Is/would be rated and should are different things.
Pippen is tough to grade: part of me thought for a long while he's overrated versus others in his archetype because of RINGz(tm). On the other hand his best asset is D and it's hard even now to measure that accurately, but especially then, and maybe others like him are just underrated.
Whilst I want to rate players more than seasons and so try to view players holistically, I understand my limitations enough that I know my guess at what a player who, no matter how many videos I have, I haven't watched regularly for a long time, didn't watch analytically (or a great deal) at the time and even now don't possess a strong "eye test" so I don't think a great deal about (or weight) what would (old) player X do in (specific) situation Y a great deal or think I have a great answer.

As your question is "does" rather than "should" ...
1) Depends ... how is he perceived in the hierarchy of the team. How does he play in the playoffs they win. Is there a good narrative hook to his performance. He emerges first as a star (and much before Payton, the other high pick) so that probably helps his perception ("leader" and might require actively dislodging as "star"). Does "he gets a title" mean exactly one or merely that he at least reaches that threshold. What else changes in his narrative etc
2) Hard to be absolutely absolute because there's a great deal left unsaid here. But in the vast majority of cases his narrative is worse and - even assuming playing just as well- he's probably less regarded, especially in the mainstream.

[KobesScarf]

Yall are missing my point. The team with homecourt won all those 7 game series and if Pippen and Grant dont miss 20 games they would have for sure gotten homecourt and which would make them likely winners

Yeah again, you're assuming linearity. It doesn't always work like that.

No, but we assuming the Bulls win in 94, that either happens here because
(1) Pippen plays better and they win, or
(2) circumstances, luck is better so they win.

So say 2 plays out, they win the title because HoGrant & Pippen miss less games. In that case, Pippen really is no better, and he shouldn't rank any higher.

Yall are still missing the point the Bulls were very unlucky not to win in 94

Pippen and Grant never missed more than 6 games during the 3peat. They missed 22 games in 94 if they win 4 more games they get homecourt throughout the playoffs.

There was no dominant team that year which is why there were so many game 7s. The home team wins about 75% of the time and that's what played out

That's not just assuming linearity or the ball bouncing that's just the odds

[Cavsfansince84]

Yall are still missing the point the Bulls were very unlucky not to win in 94

Pippen and Grant never missed more than 6 games during the 3peat. They missed 22 games in 94 if they win 4 more games they get homecourt throughout the playoffs.

There was no dominant team that year which is why there were so many game 7s. The home team wins about 75% of the time and that's what played out

That's not just assuming linearity or the ball bouncing that's just the odds

Performing well in the 1st or 2nd is not the same as in the conf finals and finals. Our minds tell us it is but 40 years of watching the nba tells me it isn't. Just like we saw Tatum crushing every series in the east last year then got to the finals and it got to him. Same way it sort of got to LeBron in 2011. Can't just assume that if Chicago had gotten hca throughout that they win every series that year. Doesn't work that way.

[KobesScarf]

Yall are still missing the point the Bulls were very unlucky not to win in 94

Pippen and Grant never missed more than 6 games during the 3peat. They missed 22 games in 94 if they win 4 more games they get homecourt throughout the playoffs.

There was no dominant team that year which is why there were so many game 7s. The home team wins about 75% of the time and that's what played out

That's not just assuming linearity or the ball bouncing that's just the odds

Performing well in the 1st or 2nd is not the same as in the conf finals and finals. Our minds tell us it is but 40 years of watching the nba tells me it isn't. Just like we saw Tatum crushing every series in the east last year then got to the finals and it got to him. Same way it sort of got to LeBron in 2011. Can't just assume that if Chicago had gotten hca throughout that they win every series that year. Doesn't work that way.

Performing better at home doesn't change from the 1st or 2nd round to the Conference Final/Finals