OK MJ Haters, this whats gonna happen?

Question

We gonna go back an forth an make points... if you wana compare jordan to pippen, or anybody else to jordan for that matter ,do it here...

My first point is Jordan vs. Pippen

-All I hear is how Jordan never won without Pippen... Well, lets see... Pippen never won without Jordan either... They were eliminated by the knicks, then when Pippen was on Houston (With Barkley, Olajuwan) They were eliminated in the first round....

Answer 1

first of all it takes a team to win a championship and pippen and  the rockets organization sucked and MJ and Pippen had the best most winning coach of all time and a great back court and front court  

Answer 2

Does MJ still play?

Turn the page ppl!!

Answer 3

Of course MJ was better than Pippen! People only say that because they're agrogant, and want to take away from MJ's greatness. MJ not being able to win without Pippen isn't a shocker. Kobe can't win without anyone. Lebron can't win without anyone. Right there are two of the best players in the league right now who can't do it by themselves.  

Answer 4

Pippen took the bulls farther than MJ ever did.  Pippen also led them to a better regular season record than MJ ever did.   Post Chicago bulls for both is irrelevant since they were both on the downside of their career.  The main comparison is during their time on the chicago bulls.  

If you really want to prove your point you have to analyze MJ's teamates before pippen got there and compare the era MJ played in before pippen got there.  Then analyze the one year MJ left and it was pippen's team wich is 93-94 season.  Analyze pippens teamates and competition and see who had the better team and was competition a factor.

Answer 5

MJ = Overrated

Answer 6

I think it's better not give those idiots the attention they want.

Answer 7

you have to be more delusional than kobe jockers to think pippen is better than mj.

Answer 8

it seems they needed each other to win

Answer 9

The MJ haters like to point out that Pippen's post-Jordan team made the playoff and had more success compared to Jordan's post-Pippen teams.  They neglect the fact that Pippen has played alongside guaranteed future Hall of Famers Drexler and Olajuwon in Houston.  Then he moved on to a deeper Portland Team with Damon Stoudemire, Steve Smith, Shrempf, Rasheed, Wells, Sabonis, Augmon, Brian Grant, Jermaine O'Neal, etc.  The fact is, those post-Jordan teams Pippen was on, would have achieved the same level of success with or without him.

Answer 10

Jordan - Pippen = 1-10 In Playoffs

Pippen - Jordan = WCF

MICHAEL JORDAN SUCKS!

Answer 11

the bulls was awesome because of jordan and pippen but also because of rodman and all the other players on the Team

Answer 12

Nobody hates Jordan more then I do, but the man is top 5 of all time.  I do think it was WAY WAY WAYYYYYYYYYYY overdone with him.  He could do a lay up and the announcers were like "oh my Goddddddddddddd oh myyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy".  Pippen does the same thing 2 second later an its "nice job by Scottie".  Jordan score 50 an there is a commercial and t shirts and posters about it.  I mean come on, we get it, he can play!!  I dont need to be told every 3 minutes everywhere I go.  The dunks he did are nothing compared to what is done today.  He wasnt the first to go from the foul line either, that was Dr J, but of course, all you see and hear about is Jordan doing it.  I added up the numbers, and he avg'd  2 more shots per game then Kobe Bryant takes so far in his career, butttttt you will NEVER hear any Jordan backers say he is a ball hog, but you WILL hear them say Bryant is?  He scored 63 in the playoffs, but did anyone know he took 45 shots or so?  Thats not even including foul shots!  Is there a player in the league that cant score 63 points on 45 shots?  My point is, he was very good and one of the best in league history, but I just dont see why people look at this guy as a God or someone who does things that cant be done.  Before anyone says "6 rings".........one word........Bill Russell.  Im a Lakers fan too, not a Celtics fan.  

Answer 13

I'n getting sick of all the Jordan Haters- so I'm just going to show you the facts- I'll compare each player's abilities as well as their performances in big games. This is going to be long, but hopefully it will be worth the read.

To understand this debate there is two things that needs to be understood:

1) Jordan and Pippen played differerent roles: Pippen was the point forward and was relied on more to be a facilitator in the beginning of the game. Jordan played in the high post more and was there to take the midrange shot or to penetrate the defense and either score or pass off to a teammate.

2) Pippen was the facilitator- meaning he iniated the offense like a point guard. Jordan was counted on to be a playmaker just as much though- except he would do it by penetrating the defense and kicking out to the open man or feeding it to a big man. Pippen was to play off-ball more and get his assists by moving without the ball/setting up in good position. Jordan played on the ball more because he was the superior attacker.

Now to compare their abilities:

Scoring: Jordan was better- using True Shooting% (TS%) (which combines three point, free throw, and field goal percentage) he was more efficient despite taking more shots, got the line more which put the opposing big men/guards in foul trouble (nearly twice as much), and was the better finisher and midrange shooter. Pippen was the better three point shooter- mainly because he got open threes from when Jordan would drive to the hoop and kick it out.

Passing: Jordan was superior- as I said they played different roles: Jordan was the better playmaker, driving past the defense, but Pippen played more of a point guard role since Jordan was the scorer. When Jordan played Pippen's role earlier in his career, he averaged 8 assists a game. To note, when on the court, Jordan assisted 25% of his teammate's field goals, Pippen assisted 22%. Not to mention, Jordan was less turnover prone.

Rebounding: This goes to Pippen because of his size- though both were excellent rebounders for their position.

Defense: Draw- Pippen was better against the bigger guys because of his size and length, Jordan was better against the smaller guys because of quickness and his quick hands.

Ball Handling: Jordan was better- less turnovers despite having a higher usage rate which means he had the ball in his hands more than Pippen did. When on the court, Jordan would get a turnover about 9 times in 100 possessions: Pippen would get a turnover about 15 times per 100 possessions despite handling the ball less (he had a usage rate of 27 compared to Jordan who had a usage rate of 33).

So Jordan was just as good a defender as Pippen, and better at everything else other than rebounding.

Here's how each performed in the playoffs (the biggest stage) through their career:

Jordan averaged 33 points, 6 rebounds, 6 assists while shooting 49% from the field.

Pippen averaged 18 points, 7.5 rebounds, 5 assists while shooting 44% from the field.

Jordan's stats all went up or stayed the same while Pippen's stats went down (most noticeably his field goal percentage went down from 47% to 44% in the playoffs).

In The Finals:

Jordan still averaged more points, more assists, shot a higher field goal percentage, and averaged less turnovers.

He won all 6 Finals MVPs.

In the 6 years when they won championships, Jordan's lowest finish in League Wide MVP voting was 3rd, once.

Pippen's highest finish was 3rd, once.

MVP Finishes just gives an idea of how much higher Jordan was regarded than Pippen at the time- it wasn't even close

It's literally like comparing Tim Duncan's career to Tracy McGrady's: in other words there's no comparison.

I like Pippen- great all around player, basically did it all, but he was never as good as Jordan, never even close.

And their stats during the season, playoffs, finals, as well as their MVP finishes, and Finals MVPS, and their overall skill sets, indicates that Jordan was clearly, without a doubt regarded as the better player.

To say anything else would be revisionist history.