# Pippen or Payton?



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

What a season people. I think that Portland for the sake of the team needs to as Hap put it *"Thin the herd"* a bit. Now you have to be careful not to trim off so much fat that you go hungry. So this is my thread that I hope will live up to that *Jerry Stackhouse* thread last year.

I was sitting back thinking the other day about what one player that makes this squad better when he is in the game. Many would argue that *Rasheed* is the man or even *Zach Randolph* now that he has emerged from the bench in these playoffs. I had to go back to when *Scottie Pippen* went out with his knee injury, this squad was rolling, but once Pippen was sidelined things kinda feel apart.










*Scottie Pippen* is a wealth of knowledge when it comes to basketball. He does the little things that don't also show in the box score. He may not even score in a game, but what he does give you is a defensive presence with long arms that knows how to do the little things to beat you. His natural position is small forwad, but in Portland he is counted on being a point forward. Pippen will turn 38 years old this coming September and has had his share of injuries as of late. Pippen does work hard on keeping his body in shape and should be ready for next season with Portland or any number of other teams. He averaged just under 30 minutes a game and some even say he gives leadership to this raw group of players in Portland. Here is a question for you, can Pippen really lead this team by example or does Portland need more of a vocal leader like..................











*Gary Payton* known as the glove has spent most of his NBA career in Seattle before a trade deadline move that sent him to Milwaukee. Payton will be 35 this Summer and is known for his defense and his talking. During the last season Payton played an average of 40 minutes a night. Payton is also a true point guard, something that Portland is in need of desperately. Many people believe that Payton will not stay in Milwaukee, instead opting to move to a ball club that he will have a shot at winning a title. IMO, Portland fits that bill, Payton doesn't want to move his family again and Seattle is a short trip from the Rose City.

So here is my question to you Blazer fans. Which of these two players would make Portland a better team? Would Rasheed Wallace and Bonzi Wells listen to the constant yapping of a Gary Payton or would they better follow a leading by example of a Scottie Pippen? Both are great players, but which one is better and which one is better for Portland?








vs.









You tell me who is better and why? Which one would be a better fit for the Trailblazers. Is there a possiblity that they could both be Blazers next year and would you welcome that thought? Chances are that Payton would have to come in a sign & trade, so who would you be willing to part with to bring in *"The Glove?"* Maybe another question would be, what number would Payton play with in Portland? Would he be man enough to call Mr. Lucas and asks his permission to unretire his number?  Is Scottie Pippen done in Portland? Would you rather that he played in Los Angeles? Did the Blazers play in games 4,5, and 6 change his mind about Portland?

All these and I am sure many more questions will be asked and answered in *Howie's*, 
"Who is better thread?"













Does this guy even look like he knows what he is talking about? I know that Kniner would love to see Payton as a Blazer! How about you? :greatjob:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Okay, I will get us started on this subject. I think that Payton would be a great addition to this Blazer squad. I think that his constant yapping in the ears of Rasheed and Bonzi might do some good. Both of these players should be going to the All Star game. Maybe they need someone to give them a little push in the right direction.

I know that Payton won't let things go unsaid if you play lazy basketball. I think that Payton's yapping might be just want the Blazers need. He would also make players around him better. Payton is a very vocal leader and IMO that is what this team needs now. Pippen and Anderson are quiet leaders and that is now working for this team. This team shows that it needs to be motivated to play good basketball. Mr Payton is a great motivator! :yes:

I can't see Gary letting Rasheed Wallace and Bonzi Wells drift off to Neverland while he is running this team. I would love to see Payton tell Wallace to get his butt down in the post. I think that Payton would lead this team much better then a Scottie Pippen. Even if Scottie does sign on for another year, Payton is a must get player in the offseason. :yes:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

They're both good. Why not keep them both? Payton at point guard, Pippen at small forward. Pippen can be resigned, via the Bird exception, and the team can do whatever they want to acquire Payton.

I would *love* to watch the following lineup:

PG: Payton
SG: Wells
SF: Pippen
PF: Randolph
C: Wallace

Defense and scoring all over the place and two heady veterans, two play-makers.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

If Minstrel isn't going to go to battle for Pippen, I don't see how this thread can get going. It's going to be too one-sided.

Pippen's been great in his career. He was VERY good when healthy this season.

But he's like 3 years older than GP, and Gary's been remarkably durable... he's missed 7 games in his CAREER... and that includes 2 this season, when he was traded otherwise he might not have missed that many.

Pippen's missed considerably more games than that. To be fair, Pippen was very durable until 97-98, but that was a while ago.

Payton will be the straw that will stir the drink. For better or for worse. Plug him in at the 1 with Bonzi, Wallace, ZR and Davis (or Kandi, if we trade for GP and can get Olowokandi for the MLE). 

Ed O.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Payton. If Pippen doesn't *want* to be here, don't let the door hit yah. if Pippen *wants* to be here, try to get both.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> If Minstrel isn't going to go to battle for Pippen, I don't see how this thread can get going. It's going to be too one-sided.


Well, the state of my "battle" is that I feel Pippen is still quite valuable. But Pippen is clearly past his prime, while Payton is still in his last late-prime years. At this point, there's no arguing that Payton is superior.

Besides, as my avatar shows, I respect the hell out of Payton. He's my second-favourite player from that generation. Very Pippen-like, in my opinion.

Here's my one contention that may draw controversy...I think Pippen is still the superior team defender. Due to having lost a step or two, he can no longer compare to Payton as an individual defender. I think Pippen is still the best at organizing and keying the whole defense, in knowing where to double, when to play passing lanes. He simply can't lock down quick players anymore. Payton still can.

I'd *love* to watch Pippen and Payton play together, with some young studs like Wallace and Randolph. Ideally, I'd love to somehow mesh Anderson and Wells, via trade, into a shooting guard superior to both...but I doubt that will happen. Unless Seattle got desperate and was willing to deal Ray Allen for two pieces.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Will I did leave this thread open to possible sign & trade options too. What does Portland have that Milwaukee would want for Payton?

It Pippen does come back for another season how much does he deserve? I wouldn't mind one more season with Pippen on the floor before he becomes an assistant coach for Cheeks. I think that he could groom Woods into becoming a great player.

I think that Portland would look good with both, but if I had to pick one, it would be Payton. :yes:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Okay, I dropped a hint on the Chicago board on this topic. Maybe there will be some of them coming to Pippen's defense. Who know!


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Schilly*!
> 
> Portland has Rasheed Wallaces expiring contract to offer. I think with the emegence of Zach Randolph that Portland definately will be willing to look at options for Rasheed. Perhaps Rasheed ($18 mil) to Milwaukie for Gary Payton and Tim Thomas or Toni Kukoc.


Wow, would you really trade Wallace for Payton and Thomas? I like the combo of Wallace and Randolph on the court at the same time. Just think if they had Payton running the offense for them! :yes:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Nate22*!
> 
> I have been told this will happen. This soundsl ike one of those my mates, sisters, friends, plumber told his things, but I promise you is legit. I have a freind in Seattle who does security work (electronic gates, cameras etc) and one of his clients are the payton. *Mrs Payton said that Gary has decided on portland so he can still live in the Seatle house.* I promise you this is the truth, and makes more sense then anything, he has ties to the Seattle community, but doesnt want to play there again...


Will then this really sounds like a done deal. Portland welcomes Gary Payton with open arms!


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> 
> 
> > Originally posted by <b>Nate22</b>!
> ...


Where did you read this? I don't see Nate22's post here...


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

It is from the thread that I got this idea kinda from......

Where will Gary Payton end up next year? (Poll) 

I thought that maybe this might get people talking on this thread. :yes:


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Hmmm...

I don't know if I can trust a guy with only one post!


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Well, you're going to be disappointed if you expected a Chicago fan's unequivocal defense of Pip as the better player. At least at this point.

A healthy Pip at the same age as a healthy Payton, and I pick Pip 100 times out of 100.

But time has not been kind to Pip's body, and time has had longer to work on it too. I think he's got maybe one good year left, and then one where he looks like Ho Grant or Patrick Ewing, or Ron Harper's last year.

Payton I think might have 2-3 good years left and then another couple as he falls off.

So for the Blazers, who I think need to be looking more than a year ahead of time, Payton is the better choice. They're a veteran team, but they've got younger guys that aren't going to hit their peak for a couple years at least. I know Pip won't be around for that, and I doubt Payton will, but at least there's a chance. And while you've got younger guys, they aren't complete neophytes like the Bulls kids are, which is good because I wouldn't want my babes in the woods learning the ways of the world from Payton.

Conversely, I'd kind of like to have Pippen back on the Bulls next year. If we get a younger SF to groom behind him, his short amount of tread remaining wouldn't be a problem for us. He could teach our kids a lot and make us better while they come into their own.

Actually, the more I think about it, I'm not sure that the same logic doesn't apply to you all either; and that I wouldn't rather have Pippen (at a fair price) and then look at trading a couple of your uh... leadership challenged guys for a couple of players that would be better fits.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I think that Pippen might be a good player to resign for one year in Portland. I think that his best playing days are behind him now, but as you stated he could still groom the young players.

Payton might not be the best point guard to lead this Portland squad, but if Pippen's "Do as I do" leadership hasn't motivated these players, maybe Payton's in your face leadership might.

Both Payton and Pippen on the same squad would be something to see. 

It could happen, but most likely it won't. :sigh:


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Question - Why would Payton sign with Portland if Patterson is here? They both despise each other.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Loyalty4Life</b>!
> Question - Why would Payton sign with Portland if Patterson is here? They both despise each other.


The media likes to make big things out of things. Sometimes things that get reported ARE big things, but other times they're not. Big things sell papers.

IF they hate one another, and that becomes an issue, I can see RP getting traded since he might have some lingering issues with ZR, as well...

I like RP, but I like GP + ZR more 

Ed O.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I agree with Ed O on this one Loyalty4Life. While Patterson has been a great spark plug off the bench I think that you trade him away if you get the chance to land a player like Gary Payton.

Maybe the whole Patterson/Payton fued was all media, maybe it wasn't. You make the move based on Basketball IQ, of which Payton is lightyears ahead of Patterson. :yes:

Simply put, it makes the Blazers better.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Hey *Ed O*, nice to see that you made the 1,000th post club! :grinning: 

I'll give you a................ :banana::rbanana::gbanana::vbanana: so you don't feel left out!


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Don't get me wrong, I would trade Patterson if it meant getting Payton to sign with us. 

Hey Howie - How confident are you that Nate22's post was the truth? Call me skeptical if you wish.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Another problem that might have to be dealth with is the fact that both Payton and Stoudamire have the same agent. Something is going to have to happen to Damon if Payton is to become a Blazer. Will Damon finally restructure his contract or will he let his play in this playoff series strengthen his cause for not doing so? How would Damon react to having Payton start in front of him instead of Pippen? Would he care?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Loyalty4Life*!
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I would trade Patterson if it meant getting Payton to sign with us.
> 
> Hey Howie - How confident are you that Nate22's post was the truth? Call me skeptical if you wish.


I have no idea. I have heard the same from differnt news article that Payton wants to stay close to home so that he doesn't have to move his family. Nate22's post kinda states the same, but he is saying that he know's someone that know's something. I put it up more as a joke than as the word of God.


----------



## Vinsanity (May 28, 2002)

Payton


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Care to backup that statement with any reasons,*Vinsanity*?


----------



## blazerbraindamage (May 5, 2003)

I would love to bring Payton in here and I'd move Patterson in a heartbeat if that's the only obstacle to GP coming here.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Well, if I had to choose between the two, I'd take Payton for all the reasons that have been stated here (health, age, true PG, etc.)

Gary just said to the media that he's taking the next month to decide who he wants to play for. I'm assuming that if it's not the Bucks, then he'll ask for a sign-and-trade. If no trade can be worked out, he'll sign for the MLE. But he holds all the cards, and it sounds like he's going to play them his way.

Payton to take 3-4 weeks to decide 



> After the Bucks were eliminated with a 113-101 loss at home Thursday night, Payton said he'll take about a month to decide where he wants to end his career.
> 
> ``I'm going to take my time with it. And the right decision is going to be my last decision,'' Payton said. ``Three weeks or four weeks will come and I'll make it known where I want to be.''
> 
> If that isn't Milwaukee, coach George Karl hopes Payton, whom he coached for five seasons in Seattle, will at least agree to a sign-and-trade deal so the Bucks get compensation.


So, we'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>So Cal Blazer Fan</b>!
> 
> So, we'll just have to wait and see.


:wait:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I think that is what I hate most about the Summer, waiting! :whatever:

Anyone care to guess what Milwaukee would want from Portland in a sign & trade for Payton? Do you think that a third team would have to come into play for this to happen? What does Milwaukee need and do we have it?


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Loyalty4Life</b>!
> 
> 
> :wait:


Hmmm... I think I need to cut my fingernails. :|


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

L4L ~ care to guess how Payton will become a Blazer?


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> L4L ~ care to guess how Payton will become a Blazer?


I think he'll be nice to Milwaukee and try to get a sign and trade. If that doesn't work, I think he'll sign here with the MLE.

Help my *thread* by making your vote known on GP!


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Okay, fair enough. But what does Portland have that Milwaukee needs? One would think that in a sign & trade someone else is coming to Portland with Payton. :yes:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Just a little news on our favorite (hopeful) new Blazer, Mr Gary Payton

*By TOM ENLUND*

JSOnline, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

If Payton does go elsewhere, it undoubtedly would be to a contender, and San Antonio is the one such team that would be able to break the bank to sign him this summer. The Jason Kidd situation in New Jersey might enter in. If Kidd decides to re-sign with the Nets, the Spurs may turn their attention to Payton, especially if they should falter in the playoffs.

Another option for Payton is what one general manager recently called Payton's "Lakers deal." If Payton agreed to take a pay cut for one season, he could sign with a contender that had a salary-cap exception available for next season. That team could then re-sign him, as its own free agent, the following season and the sky would then be the limit on his salary.

If Payton does bolt for greener pastures and the trade ends up being nothing more than a cost-cutting move so the Bucks do not have to pay the luxury tax, then they might have trouble explaining the trade to their fans.

LINK


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Damon? Antonio? I have no idea. :devil:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

No, no, no, no............you gotta save Damon Stoudamire for the big trade with Cleveland for Zydrunas Ilgauskas. I thought that you have seen the threads on this! My dream would be to get both Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Gary Payton to Portland this Summer! :yes: 

If Payton comes, Damon has to go!


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Howie, do you want this thread to reach 500 replies like your *Bonzi Wells vs. Jerry Stackhouse* thread? I'm sure we could do it, if we worked together!

Whaddya say?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I think that I should have saved it for later in the offseason. I think that a lot of people are all basketballed out and are not going to checkout this fourm for a few days. I know that in a week this place will be hopping with trade ideas and draft prospects. I should have waited. :nonono:

Maybe you and I could get this thing rolling till Hap wakes up from his nap. I can't believe that there is not one person out there that will stick up for Pippen. Is Payton that much better or is it out with the old and in with the new?


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Right now, Payton is twice the player Pippen is (health, skill level, leadership), IMO. Let's compare efficiency rankings:

Pippen: EFF + 13.42 

Payton: EFF + 21.18 



Quite the difference. Pippen averaged 10, 5, and 5 during the regular season, while Payton averaged 20, 4, and 8 a game! 

Payton or bust, if you ask me.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

True, Payton is what this team needs. Someone that is going to make Rasheed listen. I can't wait to see the first time Payton calls out Rasheed for his lazy play. Rasheed works hard sometimes, but he has a habbit of getting lazy. I don't see that happening with Payton as the floor general.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

I wonder if the attendance at the RG will increase if/when we DO get Gary Payton.

One would think the Blazers' popularity would rise!


----------



## blazerbraindamage (May 5, 2003)

The Blazers would certainly be more popular with me  

Payton can do it all (and shoot too!)

Just think If we could get GP and keep Pippen too?

With McInnis and AD on the bench I've never been more hopeful 
that Stoudamire's tyranny is finally over


----------



## Nate22 (May 1, 2003)

I see my post about Garys wife made it onto here, I was told that and found this board to tell people about it, most others are pretty slow about trade and fa signinigs at the moment, but it is the truth, stranger things have happened, but if anyone would know above his agent, team or anyone else for that matter, would be his wife, if not portland (best chance for a title) I would say GS for closeness to Seattle, but Portland makes the most sense (Im not a Blazer fan o Im not just hoping).


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Payton, besides his bad attitude, he scores the ball and dishes it out, and gives a lot mor eminutes then Pip can now adays


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

So you think that Payton's attitude will be bad for Portland? Do you really think that Pippen that it could be any worse than Pippens "Lead by example" leadership?


Huh? Will do ya? :yes:


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

*both*

I believe we will see both GP and Pip as Blazers next year. I think having GP here will be the cement that keeps Pip here as well. Pip to GP-has a great "ring" to it.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

bfan1 ~ Do you really think that Pippen is going to want to come back to Portland when he could run off to Los Angeles and play with Shaq and Kobe? He could be coached by the man that got him six titles and could coach him to his seveth? Do you really think that he would pick Portland over that?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> bfan1 ~ Do you really think that Pippen is going to want to come back to Portland when he could run off to Los Angeles and play with Shaq and Kobe? He could be coached by the man that got him six titles and could coach him to his seveth? Do you really think that he would pick Portland over that?


Yah, because Pippen wants to be known as the guy who gravey trained to his 7th title, after people (ESPECIALLY Laker fans) already said he gravey trained to his first 6...


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

*yep*



> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> bfan1 ~ Do you really think that Pippen is going to want to come back to Portland when he could run off to Los Angeles and play with Shaq and Kobe? He could be coached by the man that got him six titles and could coach him to his seveth? Do you really think that he would pick Portland over that?


yes, I most certainly do.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Anytime that I read a "rumor", the factor of reliability and believability come into play. Given that, let's take a look at what Mr. Tom Enlund has to say in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:



> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> 
> *By TOM ENLUND*
> 
> ...


 He is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! 10 years ago this would be true, but cap rules now prevent this kind of "cap circumvention". Payton would have to play in LA (or anywhere else besides Milwaukee) for 3 years before he would earn his Bird rights in order to sign a new deal with "the sky as the limit". The whole reason that this rule is in place is to prevent this very thing from taking place. Incidently, it was Portland - in the Chris Dudley situation - that first did this type of circumventing of cap rules under a previous CBA and brought about this rule.

The most that LA can offer him is the same amount that Portland can offer him - the MLE (probably about $4.7 million this summer). And there is no way that LA offers that to him - they will use most or all of their MLE to sign help at PF and backup C. They might offer him the veteran's exception of approximately $1.2 million, but he won't get more than that to play for the Lakers. And since he has no ties to the team or to the area, I don't see him in Laker gear next year.

This guy's lack of understanding kills his credibility in my eyes.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> bfan1 ~ Do you really think that Pippen is going to want to come back to Portland when he could run off to Los Angeles and play with Shaq and Kobe? He could be coached by the man that got him six titles and could coach him to his seveth? Do you really think that he would pick Portland over that?


Let's put it another way:

Do you think that Pippen would agree to a $1.2 million contract with a $5-6 million offer from the Blazers on the table? Remembering that this could be his last contract? And taking into account that after the 10% player withholding and taxes, he might clear $600,000 out of the first offer? That adds another dimension to his consideration.

He very well might do just that and move to LA. But make no mistake, $ will be part of his consideration. Remember that infamous article a few weeks ago where Scottie admitted that he might leave for Chicago or LA? He specifically said he would consider it if he were offered the MLE from either of those teams. Chicago might make that kind of offer, but LA won't.


----------



## brewmaster (Dec 31, 2002)

I like all this speculation and differing views on where Pippen will end up.

And the funny thing is everyone is right in their speculations. I honestly beleive that Scottie doesn't know where he'll end up. And I beleive there is a slight chance of him retiring, if his knee doesn't get better this summer.

I see the Pippen/Payton rumors happening all summer on this board. And there's nothing wrong with that!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>So Cal Blazer Fan</b>!
> This guy's lack of understanding kills his credibility in my eyes.


Yeah, me, too. I emailed him yesterday (?) morning when this story was posted. It's just sloppy... if a person writes about the NBA for a living, knowing the CBA would be a good start.

Ed O.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

So Ed O, care to share with the rest of the class what you said to Tommy Enlund? I like the idea of Pippen coming back as player with less minutes. I think that maybe Pippen might have changed his mind on next season seeing how the team played in pushing the series to seven games.

I think that with Stoudamire's play in this series he might have uped his stock on the market. I read in the Oregonian that Boston might be interested and his style of play suits Boston. The article also made mention of Oregon's Luke Ridnour could be a target for the Blazers. No wouldn't that be a hoot if Payton does come to Portland. A Beaver teaching a Duck the ropes of the NBA. :laugh:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Fact of the matter is, Stoudamire is going to have to be moved if you want Gary Payton in a Blazer uniform next season. I wonder how Damon looks in Green? We could call him Lucky!


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, me, too. I emailed him yesterday (?) morning when this story was posted. It's just sloppy... if a person writes about the NBA for a living, knowing the CBA would be a good start.
> ...


say Ed, seriously..you ever thought about writing for a sports paper?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I think that Ed O would make a good sports writter. He seems to have a good head on this shoulders! So I guess that leaves Hap and myself as comic relief!


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

I ask all of you what GP would bring to this team that Pip could not have two years ago? The reason I ask is because GP is a half step faster than Pip now and they are both a full step slower than, Parker, Nash, Bibby, Sura,Miller and for sure Marbury! GP comes in about the same age Pip did here and I believe will have similar results. That is a strong basketball mind and leadership but to slow to really make a huge difference. I have seen GP smoked this year by Marbury,Nash and Bibby, so how will he make us that much better and get us past these teams? Three years ago I would have loved to have GP, but now he is Pip two years ago and we couldn't win the title then. 

I say go after Parker when Kidd goes to San Antonio and our PG problems will be solved for the next 10 years. Go young and build for the future. Adding GP will just bring us one more year of 1 and done. Time catches up with all of us.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

There are two things that Payton brings to the team.

1. Baksetball IQ, he is a smart player and is a natural point guard.

2. He is a vocal leader, something that Pippen is not. He will tell Rasheed what he wants and ride him if he doesn't get what he wants out of him. Yes people, Payton is a *YAPPER*!  

I like the idea of both Pippen and Payton on the same team, but Payton will lead better than Pippen. :yes:


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Terrible--

the difference is that two years ago Damon was our starting PG. If we had actually used Pip like a point forward as we should've, we might've had a lot more success. 

regardless, I'd put Payton at least on par with a 2000 Pippen. Seems to me that Y2K Pip was a key ingredient of a team that got us to the WCF and 12 minutes from a ring. not too shabby.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Get both guys on the Blazers and add an outside shooter, then you have something! :yes:


----------



## bfan1 (Mar 5, 2003)

*yep*



> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> Get both guys on the Blazers and add an outside shooter, then you have something! :yes:


yes-and I think this is precisely what they will do.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

In order to do that Portland will need to get Payton or the "Outside Shooter" via trade. Which way will be easier for them to get via trade?  

Ed O, can to give it a go on this? :yes:


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Check this thread out for some good thoughts on Payton's options:

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?threadid=28966


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

This is the guy that will either bring Pippen back or not. Allen is going to have to pay for the return of Pippen. I believe that Pippen will go where the money is and that would favor Portland! :yes:


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

I'm new to this forum, but I've gotta say, I'm loving having found a hoops forum with intelligent discussion -- something I had decided must not be possible.

Anyway, for my first post, I thought I'd throw something into the ring that may be of relevance to this thread. I know someone who did P.T. work on Pippen 2 or 3 years ago in Portland and said it was absolutely amazing that Scottie was able to play at all, let alone at a high level. He said he's never seen a body so beaten up. (This guy was a very accomplished athlete in his own right.) Given that and Scottie's injury history since, I seriously doubt we'll see a full, productive season out of him.

Unfortunately, I don't think any player is worth an above average investment if you are counting on them being injured at least part of the time. Who's to say the injury won't come right at the end of the season (when it's probably most likely due to wear and tear)? Scottie can still contribute, but he should only be brought back if he's willing to accept a salary that reflects his average contribution. Probably $3-4 million, given the current economic climate.

Portland's major problem will be parting ways with what I consider to have been Whitsitt's major downfall (I'm in favor of most of what he did) -- signing players to more than market value just to keep everyone happy. That trend has to be reversed, but the first few guys that end up on the short end of the stick aren't going to be too happy about it...

My biggest fear with Payton is that he'll demand super star money and be a malcontent if he doesn't get it. The Blazer's recent past indicates they will pay him $10-15 million a year for 4-5, further hampering the push to turn things around. As much as I love Payton, I think I'd rather see them seriously pursue Andre Miller (was he *that* overrated in Cleveland???) or Jason Kidd, or try working a trade for one of several excellent young point guards, i.e. Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, Tony Parker, Mike Bibby or Steve Nash (yeah, right), etc.

One last thing about Pippen. Much has been said about how he was the stabilizer and leader of the team this past year. I can't really argue with that, but I think that aspect was a bit overrated. I mean, all he was doing was balancing out a bunch of headcases who don't know right from wrong. It's not like Scottie's ever been considered a leader during his career... I think if you plugged any bona fide star into his place, you'd have just as much leadership, if not more. Good player, but hardly irreplaceable. His biggest contribution at this point might be the $40 million (after luxury tax) off the books...

Dan


----------



## RipCityBlazer (May 11, 2003)

Wait a second, if I'm not mistaken, which I very well could be, Isn't Payton a Free Agent this year? I could have sworn I heard something about Payton's contract expiring this year. So, with Pippen probably re-signing with Portland, if they can sign Payton, That be huge. Then again, I could be wrong and he could have some years left on his contract. IF that's the case, who would MIL want for Payton? Cause I would enjoy watching this lineup next year:

PG-Payton SG-Wells


C-Wallace

SF-Pippen PF-Randolph

And maybe if Indiana is interested in Damon, POR could get Jermaine O'neal or possibly sign O'neal since he's a FA this year. And maybe switch around Wallace and Randolph at Center with O'neal as the PF. Randolph has played Center before during the regular season. What do you think about that lineup?


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

Payton is indeed a free agent, but I'm guessing he's loyal enough to George Karl (and to the Bucks for getting him out of Seattle!) that he won't just leave without them getting anything in return. A sign and trade is most likely, which is also the best chance of Payton getting much more than the mid-level exception.

Dan


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> Payton is indeed a free agent, but I'm guessing he's loyal enough to George Karl (and to the Bucks for getting him out of Seattle!) that he won't just leave without them getting anything in return. A sign and trade is most likely, which is also the best chance of Payton getting much more than the mid-level exception.


Welcome to the board, Dan!

While you MIGHT be right about not getting nothing for Payton, in fact they WILL be getting something by letting him walk: a lot of money for their coffers. If they sign him to a deal larger than the MLE, whether they keep him or trade him for a like salary in a sign and trade, it could cost them millions of, and probably over ten million, dollars.

If they sign him to, say, a contract with a $6m first year salary (or take $6m back for a deal), that would cost them $12m ($6m for the salary itself, $6m for luxury tax).

If they sign him to the same deal, and he takes them from under the threshold to over it (and thereby triggering the tax), it would cost them even more... a team that is under the threshold is on the _receiving_ end of the luxury tax dollars. While that figure is TBD, it could easily be another $8m.

So by letting Payton walk, they could save themselves $20m in the first year and several multiples of that over a 4+ year contract.

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> I mean, all he was doing was balancing out a bunch of headcases who don't know right from wrong. It's not like Scottie's ever been considered a leader during his career...


Sure he has. Phil Jackson has twice said that Pippen was just as much a leader on the Bulls as Jordan, perhaps more so. Jackson also said that's one of the major reasons he wanted Pippen on the Lakers in 1999, to provide leadership for an inexperienced team.

Whether *fans* have ever considered him a leader before is fairly irrelevant.

And why does "balancing out a bunch of headcases" merit an "all he did was..."? Is it extraordinarily easy to balance out a bunch of headcases?


----------



## Terrible (Jan 3, 2003)

Yeah but can't he do that from the bench as an assistant coach and let a guy like Parker or Miller run this team? I think Pip might even be more effective as a coach instead of a injury prone floor general. There is no mistake that he has a great mind Minstrel, but his body is just not doing it anymore!

I personally think that Mo and Pip could make a hell of a coaching team. Let's go in that direction before we hear Walton making comments about Pip the same as he does for Sabas. I don't want to see that do you?


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> Welcome to the board, Dan!


Thanks. 



> While you MIGHT be right about not getting nothing for Payton, in fact they WILL be getting something by letting him walk: a lot of money for their coffers.


True, but they would have lost the heart of their team (Allen/Payton) in so doing, and anything they pay Payton is likely to be less than they saved by moving Allen. They have a valuable commodity in Payton, and they'd be foolish to not try and getting something in return; probably in a package deal like has been discussed with Tim Thomas.



> Sure he has. Phil Jackson has twice said that Pippen was just as much a leader on the Bulls as Jordan, perhaps more so.


I vaguely remember those comments, but wasn't it more of a leader by example type thing than a coach on the floor? I sure don't remember much in the way of leadership qualities when MJ briefly retired the first time. That only reinforced Scottie's reputation as the quintisential complimentary player.



> And why does "balancing out a bunch of headcases" merit an "all he did was..."? Is it extraordinarily easy to balance out a bunch of headcases?


No. What I meant is that that the team had absolutely no leadership qualities without Scottie on the floor. With him, they were good at times, bordering on great for a stretch. Even with Scottie, they were quite inconsistent in the leadership and direction department, which leads me to believe he's not strong enough in that area to do what's expected of him night in and night out. Because the team is so lacking in leadership, anyone who provides even an average amount is going to look better, just like a good player's numbers going up on a bad team.

Dan


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> True, but they would have lost the heart of their team (Allen/Payton) in so doing, and anything they pay Payton is likely to be less than they saved by moving Allen. They have a valuable commodity in Payton, and they'd be foolish to not try and getting something in return; probably in a package deal like has been discussed with Tim Thomas.


You're missing my point, I think. It's not about on-court value.

It's about the bottom line.

$20m is a LOT of money to Senator Kohl. According to Forbes magazine from this February, the franchise is valued at $168m. 

A good chunk of change (he only paid $19m for the team in 1985), but the lowest value in the NBA and giving away $20m in a SINGLE SEASON to keep the team at the 42-win level doesn't make much sense.

Especially considering the team is reportedly going to be sold soon... a new owner would be foolish to come into a situation where they're committed to long-term contracts and luxury-taxation.

So while I agree that an NBA team SHOULD try to maximize the talent they have and the product they put on the court (which would entail doing a sign and trade with GP), in this case I'm pretty confident they'll let him walk.

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> I vaguely remember those comments, but wasn't it more of a leader by example type thing than a coach on the floor?


Jackson said that while Jordan led with fury, in a sense, Pippen was able to actually relate to players, in a way Jordan couldn't. Both inspired, each in different ways, according to PhilJax.



> I sure don't remember much in the way of leadership qualities when MJ briefly retired the first time. That only reinforced Scottie's reputation as the quintisential complimentary player.


Well, how would you know what Pippen was saying to his team in meetings and in practices, etc? It is quite impressive that he, alone as the only superstar on the team, took the team to within what many consider a phantom call of the Eastern Conference Finals. Contrast that to, for example, Tracy McGrady...a brilliant player also, but hasn't lifted the team out of the first round by himself, as the lone superstar.

I'd guess that leadership is at least some of the difference. Also, Jordan, alone, never took a team as far as Pippen took the Bulls, alone. Was Jordan also a quintessential complimentary player?



> Even with Scottie, they were quite inconsistent in the leadership and direction department, which leads me to believe he's not strong enough in that area to do what's expected of him night in and night out.


To me, it seemed the team was awfully consistent with Pippen in. In fact, wouldn't the stretch where they had to play without Rasheed Wallace and still played with focus and direction and had a tremendous record without their best player constitute some extra points for Pippen's leadership? Columnists around the country credited Pippen for keeping the team together, and they also credited him with leading the team to a fourth quarter comeback against Dallas in Game Five.

Does it seem like coincidence that the two worst stretches for the team happened to occur at the beginning of the season before Pip was installed as point guard and at the end of the season when Pippen was out? Again, in between I'd say that the team was quite consistent. Sure, they had bad games at times, but every team in the league has those.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> You're missing my point, I think. It's not about on-court value.
> 
> It's about the bottom line.


I understood that, but it isn't contradictory to what I was saying. They can still pay attention to the bottom line with a package deal like the Tim Thomas rumor. They get something in return because of Payton's attractiveness, and they move two large contracts. They can probably pick up one overpaid player in return and swallow the loss for a year, coming out ahead in both the short term and the long run. Case in point the Rasheed rumor. They get a very good player and no commitment beyond next year.



> Well, how would you know what Pippen was saying to his team in meetings and in practices, etc?


I don't, obviously. Doesn't mean I can't observe, though. The team had structure, but no real killer instinct. That's what a leader brings, in my opinion. As for the McGrady comparison, he's in a system with no structure to speak of. Plug him into a Phil Jackson team and I imagine he would thrive. And for what it's worth, Pippen had some solid help from Kukoc and a still in his prime Horace Grant (for the first year, as I recall). He certainly wasn't going it alone to the degree McGrady is.



> Also, Jordan, alone, never took a team as far as Pippen took the Bulls, alone. Was Jordan also a quintessential complimentary player?


Much earlier in his career, though. What does that really tell us? Took Pippen a few years just to contribute in the playoffs, let alone get them there.



> Does it seem like coincidence that the two worst stretches for the team happened to occur at the beginning of the season before Pip was installed as point guard and at the end of the season when Pippen was out?


Pippen was playing well at the start of the season, he just wasn't officially playing the point. A true leader would have demanded the ball regardless of position... Rasheed played horrible to start the year, so that's an equally likely cause of the team's slow start.

More importantly, other than that ~30 game stretch with Pippen at the point, the team's identity for the past several years has been not finishing games. That has to be the #1 sign of lack of leadership. Pippen may be a steadying factor, but he's been in the game handling the ball in many, if not most, of those situations. Being a good teammate (Kerr's favorite) and a true leader are not the same thing.

Dan


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> I understood that, but it isn't contradictory to what I was saying. They can still pay attention to the bottom line with a package deal like the Tim Thomas rumor. They get something in return because of Payton's attractiveness, and they move two large contracts. They can probably pick up one overpaid player in return and swallow the loss for a year, coming out ahead in both the short term and the long run. Case in point the Rasheed rumor. They get a very good player and no commitment beyond next year.


If they took Wallace's salary, they'd get nailed in the short term. Wallace makes about $6m more next year than Thomas, and they'd need to sign Payton to a deal starting at least $5m (because otherwise he'd just go elsewhere for the MLE). That would cost the Bucks $10m or more (and probably closer to $20m).

But you make a good point about the long-run... if they can move GP and a big contract (Thomas ideally for them, but Johnson, Mason or Caffey would be nice to move, too) for an expiring deal they COULD come out in better shape down the road.

Thanks for pointing that out!

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> And for what it's worth, Pippen had some solid help from Kukoc and a still in his prime Horace Grant (for the first year, as I recall). He certainly wasn't going it alone to the degree McGrady is.


Actually, if you check the stats, McGrady has been getting pretty solid help from Gooden and Giricek since the Magic acquired them.



> Much earlier in his career, though. What does that really tell us? Took Pippen a few years just to contribute in the playoffs, let alone get them there.


It tells us as much as Pippen's results in his *first year* as the main man...very little. When Jordan got superstar help from Pippen and the Bulls began winning big, Jordan had had several years of learning the role of being the main man. Pippen had had no previous years of adjusting to that role prior to that year that Jordan went to play baseball. So that year probably isn't very informative on Pippen's leadership abilities.



> Being a good teammate (Kerr's favorite) and a true leader are not the same thing.


That's true. However, I'm sure Phil Jackson is aware of that distinction, and he didn't call Pippen a "good teammate." He called him a "leader" and equated him to Jordan and even hedged that Pippen may have been more of one.

And Jackson is certainly more qualified to say so than we are. Whether you believe Jackson knows more than us, which I'd imagine he does, he has been able to observe Pippen much more than us, especially all the hidden-from-the-public stuff.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

Phil also has a track record of saying a lot of stuff to motivate players or get under the skin of opponents. Pippen was thought to be fairly easily rattled early in his career (think Detroit), so it wouldn't surprise me if many of Phil's comments were meant to build up Scottie's confidence. Just conjecture, of course.

I agree that Gooden and Giricek were a big upgrade for the Magic, but they still aren't established to the point where they can be counted on as consistently as Kuckoc and Grant were in the mid 90's.

Other than that, this debate has gotten a bit too vague for me to be sure what we're disagreeing about, so I'll let it lie.

Ed, we're on the same page now.  Milwaukie would basically be even from this year to next on salaries, but they'd have much less future commitment and would still have a star player in their stable. If they in turn re-signed Rasheed, it would probably be for less than they're currently paying either Thomas or Payton... Seems to make a lot of sense.

Dan


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Yes, if you have not already. Check out the link that L4L made to the other thread. It shows some of the options as well. 

I seem to remember at the time of the deal that the Bucks would save the money just by letting Payton go. Figuring they would not get anything in return and still feel good about it. After all they would be saving $ in the long run. 

Getting back to Payton or Pippen. I really believe we have a great shot at having both... let me ramble a bit here..



Sign Payton with the MLE and start him at $4.5 mill - $4.7 mill... we can do a 7 year deal, BUT we can make it guarenteed money.... depending on the worth of the MLE this year. It can be between $41-43 mill or so

he can retire after 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 years and still get the same amount of money....

2 years for $42 mill, or 3 or 7... whatever. At his age, maybe he plays 4-5 years.....

4 years would be over $10 mill, and 5 years would be over $9 mill a year..... theoretically you can double those numbers if it were pre the last CBA contract to see old contract vaues

Payton is getting a good deal by letting us sign him for smaller money but extending it and giving him more over the long run. This also gives us a break by not putting a large contract on the books each year. Its a medium sized $ amount over the term of the contract.

So he gets paid pretty well.

It is said he is interested in San Antonio, New Jersey, Minnesota and Portland. I think only SA can sign him next year by being under the cap (some capologists can verify NJ) Minnesota is over I know, so are we.

We would be willing to go over the cap, how about NJ and Minnesota?

Can the others give him $9-10 mill a year, and plant him on a contending team in the state of his college team? How about placing him on a team reasonably near his home town? or near his foundation just a few hours north of us?

I think we are in pretty good shape to land him. I also heard on the radio a few weeks ago (Mike Rice pre game), that his family wanted to go back to the NW, and that it was a consideration GP would make. But GP would have the final decision, but his family's wishes were definately going to be considered.



I think if Pip decides he can play, he will stay. I think with Whitsitt going he will stay now. He seems to genuinely like it here, and likes Cheeks. He also knows he might be able to work into a front office job here in a few years.


I can hope we will get both at very reasonable $. I can not see Pippen signing for the same $19+ mill he gets now. His balloon has now popped. But I think he might be worth between $8-12 mill. Sabas is about $7-8... Pippen should be more. Just my :twocents:


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> Sabas is about $7-8... Pippen should be more.


Sabonis is part of that same "pay 'em above market value" problem I referred to previously. He made what, $10-11 million before his 1 year sabbatical? Whitsitt and Allen seemed happy to pay Sabonis more than he was worth this past year -- if he played double the minutes, would he really be worth $15 million a year??? -- and not have to deal with the sticky pay cut situation like San Antonio went through with the Admiral. Sabonis' salary is inflated. Pippen's next contract shouldn't follow the same pattern just because they made the mistake in the past... They really need to start bringing the payroll down before Allen decides the investment isn't worthwhile. I'm not terribly confident that Whitsitt's replacement will be as creative as he was at trading "untradeable" contracts...

Something that rarely gets talked about is salary structures and how they relate to the salary cap that suddenly isn't going up anymore. With each player's salary typically increasing 15% or so each year, adding on anything new gets more and more expensive. I doubt Allen has set a goal of getting under the salary cap, but I imagine they could get down around $70 million within the next year and be no worse off. If they were to resort to signing players to guaranteed post-retirement contracts, I can't see the new GM's name not being taken in vain like Whitsitt's before long... Can you say Kemp? They need to get back to paying players for what they can bring to the court now, not in the past. Long term contracts just pile up at the end and become dead weight like Damon and Rasheed's, unfortunately.

Ok, so I can ramble, too. 

Dan


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I agree with you 100% but the transition period calls for some negotiating skills until all contracts are in the new CBA era....

For Pip to even consider resigning, he needs to get fair value. He has openly stated in recent interviews that he needs to get a fair vaue. I think for him to get a reduction from $19.7 mill to under $9 mill is more than asking a lot for a future hall of famer. But I think its entirely reasonable for us to ask too.

I think Sabonis was paid a bit much for his entire contributions on a consisatnt level this year. But I am sure glad we had him. His last 2 games against Dallas in the playoffs were inspiring. He is well worth watching at any price.

Yega!

Portland salary will easily drop down to around $90 mill. maybe more
Pippen $19.7, Davis $8 mill, Daniels $3.375 mill, Dudley $1 mill, Smith $0.6 mill = $32.6 mill. maybe even Sabas at $7 mill more

making it about $72-73 mill team total... 
add back in Pippen $8 mill, Payton $4.5, Daniels $3, Davis $6 mill.... all guesses

takes it back up to about $90....

Next year Kemps is fully off the books. Soon after both Stoudamire and Wallace are off... big $... but we want to keep Wallace or his trade

Portland is posistioned well in the next few years to make big strides


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> Phil also has a track record of saying a lot of stuff to motivate players or get under the skin of opponents. Pippen was thought to be fairly easily rattled early in his career (think Detroit), so it wouldn't surprise me if many of Phil's comments were meant to build up Scottie's confidence. Just conjecture, of course.


Except Jackson didn't say it back then. His comments have come in the last few years, while coaching LA.

More along the lines of a "setting the record straight" context. Like, "Everyone thinks it was just Jordan, but in reality..."

And Detroit "rattled" Jordan, too. They played the Bulls physically and basically smashed them to the ground on every drive. Both Jordan and Pippen were less effective as the early series between the two teams wore on.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> I think for him to get a reduction from $19.7 mill to under $9 mill is more than asking a lot for a future hall of famer.


I think it's very wrong to look at the last year balloon payment as a basis for what's fair in a subsequent contract. If anything, the average over the life of the previous contract should be used, as the balloon payment was simply a ploy to bring the average up within the rules. I hope Scottie (and Garnett and others) can see that... If not, that's too big of a gap between the two sides' perceived worth.

Then again, if he indeed thinks ~ $10 million is "fair," who other than the Blazers would step up and pay it? San Antonio is the only possibility I see -- a contendor with money to spend. I think it would make them a worse team, though... It would be like Scottie's situation in Houston, where he was a somewhat below average shooter in a drive and kick offense. Run things through him and they lose the impact of up and coming Tony Parker... Defense would be very good, though.



> And Detroit "rattled" Jordan, too.


Sure, but Jordan never backed down with a migraine or any other excuses. He took his beatings and came back relentlessly. In all fairness, Scottie was a late bloomer and may not have been in his physical or mental prime then. Of course, he did sort of quit on the team in the playoffs during Jordan's absence and well into his prime years.

Maybe a matter for another topic, but who thinks Scottie was really even the star player on that Chicago team the first year Jordan was gone? He was the most visible, for sure, but that team seemed fairly similar to the recent Blazers teams. Good balance but no one to take charge.

Dan


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> Sure, but Jordan never backed down with a migraine or any other excuses. He took his beatings and came back relentlessly.


The migraines weren't just little headaches. They left him half-blinded. Half-blind players, I've heard, don't shoot, pass or defend well. Or do much of anything in basketball well. So that doesn't seem like some poor excuse. I doubt even Jordan would have played blind. Of course, I've never had migraines that left me blinded, so I don't have first-hand knowledge of it.



> Maybe a matter for another topic, but who thinks Scottie was really even the star player on that Chicago team the first year Jordan was gone? He was the most visible, for sure, but that team seemed fairly similar to the recent Blazers teams. Good balance but no one to take charge.


Well, he led the team in points per game, rebounds per game, assists per game, steals per game and blocks per game, for one thing. So that's pretty *un*balanced.

As far as his raw stats went (opposed to relative stats compared to his team), I did a comparison between Pippen in that year and Kobe in the 2000-2001 season, because someone claimed that that season was better than any of Pippen's. That was the first year people touted Kobe for MVP, as he started blazing hot. These stats, for Kobe, are from that point in the season, when he was on fire. Pippen's stats are from his entire '93-94 season:



> (everything but field goal percentage is per-game)
> 
> Scoring
> -----------
> ...


Pippen also was on the short list for MVP that season and was one of the leading vote-getters at the All-Star game (where he won MVP). Just as Kobe today gets mentions for best player in the game, Pippen got mentions back then.

I think it's about impossible to claim Pippen *wasn't* superstar level.

And none of that includes the unquantifiable part of defense, the part that isn't encapsulated in steals and blocks. Pippen was considered one of the greatest individual and team defenders in history in his prime. So toss that in with the stats.

And, Pippen was, perhaps, a greater leader than Jordan.  So, that seems like the final accolade necessary for superstardom.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> The migraines weren't just little headaches. They left him half-blinded. Half-blind players, I've heard, don't shoot, pass or defend well.


I've had my share of migraines, and I can attest to them being unpleasant. I don't recall too many people believing he really had the migraines, though.

Pippen's stats were of course very good, as they have been most of his career. You'd expect no less from someone long regarded as one of the best stat sheet fillers in the league. Still, aside from scoring a bit more, which is to be expected in Jordan's absence, how much better were those stats from the rest of his Chicago title runs? Looks fairly similar at first glance.



> And, Pippen was, perhaps, a greater leader than Jordan. So, that seems like the final accolade necessary for superstardom.


I disagree (with both statements). The final accolade can only be one thing, and that is consistently finishing games by providing direction down the stretch. Scottie rarely had to do that while at Jordan's side, and he has consistently failed to do so in Portland or Houston.

Dan


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> I've had my share of migraines, and I can attest to them being unpleasant.


But have you had blinding ones? And as far as Pippen lying, this is a guy who would go on to play through back injuries, knee injuries and the like. He doesn't seem like a wimp or something, as people who for whatever reason dislike him try to paint him.



> I disagree (with both statements).


Well, the first statement was said, twice, by Phil Jackson, who's in a much better position to comment than us. So disagreeing with it seems to be trying to get to the conclusion you *want* rather than the one that's likely to be *true*.



> The final accolade can only be one thing, and that is consistently finishing games by providing direction down the stretch. Scottie rarely had to do that while at Jordan's side, and he has consistently failed to do so in Portland or Houston.


He did it quite a bit at Jordan's side. While the hype is that Jordan closed out every single game, the reality is that Pippen closed out plenty of games with his offense and defense. One instance I can recall straight off the top of my head was in a first round game against the Wizards, Jordan missed a shot to win it (the Bulls were trailing with a few seconds left) and Pippen swooped in, got the rebound, drove baseline and dunked it for the win with perhaps a second left. Things like that he did all the time, it's just not recorded in song like Jordan's exploits.

He didn't really do it in Houston (though their only playoff win that season came when Pippen broke out for 40+ points)...but it's hard to be that guy when you're asked to simply be a post-feeder to Barkley and Olajuwon. Pippen was a bad fit for that team and misused by Tomjanovich.

In Portland, he did it many times, especially in that 2000 playoff run. I'm sure you'll immediately say, "Well, he didn't do it in the fourth quarter of game seven of the Western Conference Finals," which is true...but of course, we should note that he was playing with injured fingers. His defense was one of the biggest reasons they had that lead going into quarter four and, if the fingers on his shooting hand were injured, I'd think players like Wallace, Wells and Smith would be better bets to score a few points. They didn't. Pippen got the ball to the right people...he provided direction. They simply missed shots.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

back to Pip's salary--
would you go buy a new car based off of what your last car was worth? what if your last car was a Maserati and now you want a Honda? would you go to a car dealership and tell them you are willing to spend up to $125,000 on a Honda?

say you paid somebody 18 years ago to reshingle your roof. should you expect to pay the same amount now?

why should Paul Allen even consider what he used to pay Pippen when deciding on his salary? it's irrelevant. 

Pippen is worth ONLY WHAT THE MARKET WILL PAY. It's a little thing called capitalism. Yeah, he's Mr. Intangible, so it's hard to put an exact figure on it. But he should probably make about what a 38 year old former all-star (but breaking down) small forward is going for in the NBA. Throw in an added 25% for his leadership and potential management. 

If Portland offers him $6 mil a year, it'll be more than 25% better than he'll get anywhere in the NBA. Seems more than fair to me.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> But have you had blinding ones?


Yes. While driving, even. I'm not saying it isn't unpleasant, and I'm not even saying Pippen lied outright (although many believe he did). People in sports get scared or intimidated for all sorts of reasons -- lack of confidence, fear of mistake, fear of losing, etc. -- and excuses are often manufactured and repeated internally until they are believed.

As for Phil's comments, I already stated that he has a reputation for saying lots of things for various motivational reasons. Who knows what he was thinking? People close to a situation often have the most reason to not say what they truly think...



> He doesn't seem like a wimp or something, as people who for whatever reason dislike him try to paint him.


It's obvious you are a very big Scottie Pippen fan. What you don't seem to understand is that it is possible to like him and at the same time be critical of him. I consider him one of the best defensive players ever and the best complimentary player. That is by no means a back handed compliment. It's simply an observation (again, shared by many) of what his strengths are.



> He did it quite a bit at Jordan's side. While the hype is that Jordan closed out every single game, the reality is that Pippen closed out plenty of games with his offense and defense. One instance I can recall straight off the top of my head was in a first round game against the Wizards, Jordan missed a shot to win it (the Bulls were trailing with a few seconds left) and Pippen swooped in, got the rebound, drove baseline and dunked it for the win with perhaps a second left.


Yes, but how many of those situations did Pippen actually create? Very few that I can remember... The example you gave is once again an example of him being the sidekick. Jordan created the situation and Pippen finished it up in a much lower pressure role. That's where he has always thrived. Sure, he's made some big shots like the one against Utah a couple years ago, but that's the exception...



> His defense was one of the biggest reasons they had that lead going into quarter four


The way I remember it, Smith and Wallace's flurry of 3's in the third quarter was the reason they had the lead... Regardless, you keep coming back to defense as a contrary example to my saying he doesn't provide true offensive leadership. That's irrelevant, sorry.

Dan


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> People in sports get scared or intimidated for all sorts of reasons -- lack of confidence, fear of mistake, fear of losing, etc. -- and excuses are often manufactured and repeated internally until they are believed.


Without having any idea what his thought process was, stating as fact that he was scared or intimidated shows that you have a bias in this.

And yes, I have a bias too. But I'm not the one stating opinions about other's motives as facts.



> As for Phil's comments, I already stated that he has a reputation for saying lots of things for various motivational reasons. Who knows what he was thinking?


Yes, and you've also ignored the fact that Jackson said it in the last few years, when no longer coaching Pippen or the Bulls. If he was trying to motivate a rival player, you must think he's a fool. 

Essentially, you're taking more objective evidence then our own opinions and trying to explain it away as lies. Why are you so desperate to discredit Pippen's leadership? If every teammate said Pippen was a brilliant leader, would you explain that away as more lies? How deep does this "Pippen was a leader" conspiracy go, that people keep lying to prop it up?



> It's obvious you are a very big Scottie Pippen fan. What you don't seem to understand is that it is possible to like him and at the same time be critical of him.


Certainly, and I'm critical of him for deserved things, like sitting out that one play and getting into a war of words with Barkley while in Houston.

However, when someone in a far better position than us says, more than once, that Pippen was a great leader, I think your bias is shining much more brightly to explain it away as "lies to motivate," even if he was no longer coaching Pippen and, in fact, coaching a rival team.



> Yes, but how many of those situations did Pippen actually create? Very few that I can remember... The example you gave is once again an example of him being the sidekick. Jordan created the situation and Pippen finished it up in a much lower pressure role.


*laugh* This is really reaching. *Missing a shot* is "creating"? Sign me up for the NBA. I'll miss so many shots, I'll be remembered as the greatest play-maker and creator the league has ever seen.

The rebound was a long rebound, and Pippen had to drive baseline, through the defense, for the dunk. It wasn't a tip-in. If Jordan makes this play, off a Pippen miss, you'd use it as an example of Pippen blowing it and Jordan's brilliance being the bail-out.  You wouldn't say, "Well, Pippen beautifully created the offense by missing the shot right to Jordan...Jordan's rebound, drive and finish was just the completion of Pippen's magical play."



> Regardless, you keep coming back to defense as a contrary example to my saying he doesn't provide true offensive leadership. That's irrelevant, sorry.


Until this moment, you never specified "offensive leadership." You just kept saying that Pippen never provided leadership and direction. So, it's not true that I've used defense as a contrary example to lack of offensive leadership. Further, the fact that he didn't provide "scoring leadership" in that quarter *was* explained...injured fingers on his shooting hand.

In previous games of the series, before his hand injury, he provided plenty of both offensive and defensive leadership. And in previous series that playoffs, like against Utah and Minnesota.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

Man, you're really taking this personally. I'm critiquing elements of Scottie's game, not you...



> Without having any idea what his thought process was, stating as fact that he was scared or intimidated shows that you have a bias in this.


Please point out where I stated any such thing as fact. I gave my opinion of the situation and a supporting explanation of what might have played out.



> Yes, and you've also ignored the fact that Jackson said it in the last few years, when no longer coaching Pippen or the Bulls. If he was trying to motivate a rival player, you must think he's a fool.


I haven't ignored it, I just don't have any basis for commenting on it. I don't recall the timing or context of those statements, and I don't know what Phil's motives were. For all I know, he could have been laying the groundwork for bringing Scottie to L.A., or he could have merely been sticking up for one of his favorite players. Neither is terribly hard to believe.

And again, I never construed it as lying. Try and let that one go, 'cause it came from you, not me. Is Phil lying when he says he doesn't think Shaq gets enough calls? Of course not, he's just stating his opinion and trying to influence people's opinions. You're getting too caught up in right or wrong, lying vs. telling the truth, and losing track of these being differences of opinion.



> Why are you so desperate to discredit Pippen's leadership?


I'm not. All I'm saying is I've seen little evidence of Pippen being the true leader the Blazers need. On the flip side, why are you so desparate to prove Pippen's leadership? Or would you rather not have unanswerable and pointless questions thrown back at you?



> *laugh* This is really reaching. Missing a shot is "creating"?


You can't seriously have misunderstood me that badly?! I said Jordan created the *situation*. Pippen was a role player in your example. There's very little pressure on a role player to create, which is why someone like Rick Fox is so much better with Shaq and Kobe than he ever was earlier in his career. They just have to be ready to react, knowing the defense isn't keying on them.



> Until this moment, you never specified "offensive leadership."


I thought I was pretty clear in saying that I have no complaints with his defense but that his supposedly great leadership has not been evident in late game offensive breakdowns...

Dan


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> *Missing a shot* is "creating"? Sign me up for the NBA. I'll miss so many shots, I'll be remembered as the greatest play-maker and creator the league has ever seen.


Allen Iverson?

Is that you?



Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> Man, you're really taking this personally. I'm critiquing elements of Scottie's game, not you...


I'm not taking it personally at all. However, I find the debating style "Well, sure, maybe you have more objective evidence than your opinion, while I don't, but your evidence is surely just Phil Jackson saying something he doesn't believe," to be fairly annoying.



> Please point out where I stated any such thing as fact. I gave my opinion of the situation and a supporting explanation of what might have played out.


"People in sports get scared or intimidated for all sorts of reasons -- lack of confidence, fear of mistake, fear of losing, etc. -- and excuses are often manufactured and repeated internally until they are believed."

Nothing in this suggests "might." It implies that Pippen definitely was scared or intimidated, but the reason *why* is up for debate. It doesn't suggest that the foundation, that Pippen was scared or intimidated, is up for debate. You're using an unfounded assumption as your foundation.



> For all I know, [Jackson] could have been laying the groundwork for bringing Scottie to L.A., or he could have merely been sticking up for one of his favorite players. Neither is terribly hard to believe.


Neither of those suggests that he didn't believe what he said about Pippen, either.



> And again, I never construed it as lying.


When you claim that Jackson said it for reasons other than believing it to be true, you *are* construing it as lying. Lying is the act of making a statement one doesn't believe.



> Is Phil lying when he says he doesn't think Shaq gets enough calls? Of course not, he's just stating his opinion and trying to influence people's opinions.


Either Jackson really believes Shaq doesn't get enough calls and wants Shaq to get them or he *is* lying in an attempt to get a greater edge in future games. However, while lying for an edge make sense when it'll benefit your team, it doesn't make sense when you're saying something most people don't believe and it gains you no advantage.



> I'm not. All I'm saying is I've seen little evidence of Pippen being the true leader the Blazers need. On the flip side, why are you so desparate to prove Pippen's leadership? Or would you rather not have unanswerable and pointless questions thrown back at you?


I'm not trying to spin supporting evidence as, "Well, he said it, but doesn't really feel that way, so it doesn't really mean anything." If I *were* doing that, yes, I'd be exhibiting desperation. Especially in forum discussions, people often feel determined to "win" their point, even if the evidence doesn't support them.



> You can't seriously have misunderstood me that badly?! I said Jordan created the *situation*. Pippen was a role player in your example.


Getting a long rebound and then slashing through the defense for a dunk is being a role-player? In that case, Jordan was a role-player most of his career.



> There's very little pressure on a role player to create, which is why someone like Rick Fox is so much better with Shaq and Kobe than he ever was earlier in his career. They just have to be ready to react, knowing the defense isn't keying on them.


That would be a good comparison if Pippen had just gotten a tip-in or something. In getting a rebound near the perimeter, and then facing up the defense and jamming the ball down their throat, Pippen pretty well beat a defense keying on him. And he did it all his Bulls career. Claiming that Pippen wasn't "keyed on" by opposing defenses would be patently false. Both Jordan and Pippen were keyed on, just as both Shaq and Kobe are keyed on today. Pippen wasn't merely a react-and-perform sidekick. There were plenty of times when he faced up the defense and made the play himself. And, as point forward, he often created offense for his teammates, including Jordan. In those cases, by your logic, I guess Jordan was the role-player, because he reacted and scored off Pippen's drawing the defense and making nice passes.



> I thought I was pretty clear in saying that I have no complaints with his defense but that his supposedly great leadership has not been evident in late game offensive breakdowns...


You kept saying that Pippen provided no direction and leadership. A player can provide direction and leadership on both sides of the ball. I was giving an example of Pippen doing so on defense, as most people recognize that Pippen keyed the team's defense. I was only talking about that game because I was fairly sure you'd bring it up as lack of leadership, but it's not a great example since Pippen's shooting hand was injured, making him not a good choice to lead the scoring charge in the fourth quarter. However, even then, he *did* provide offensive direction by taking on a point forward role. He got the ball to the right people (a previously-hot Smitty and an all-series-long dominant Wallace), but they just missed shots. Offensive direction doesn't mean that all your teammates will execute.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I'll let you have last word, Dan, as I don't have the passion or interest to argue back and forth for pages.

I look forward to reading your responses, and then we can call the discussion concluded, agree to disagree.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

This will be my last post to this thread, as I'm not sure I can bear repeating myself much longer... Although, just as I clicked on Reply, I see you posted exactly the same sentiment.



> I find the debating style "Well, sure, maybe you have more objective evidence than your opinion, while I don't, but your evidence is surely just Phil Jackson saying something he doesn't believe," to be fairly annoying.


Consider us to be in mutual agreement on that point, then. If for no other reason than because you have continually misinterpreted what I'm saying with regards to Phil. I never said he is lying, nor do I have any reason to believe that he has done so with regards to Pippen. Why you can't get over this point is beyond me. I spent the past 4 years coaching (not basketball) and am very familiar with the way coaches word things in support of their athletes. It isn't about lying, it's about motivation, confidence building, and personal relationships.

I've said several times now that I don't know what Phil said or thought on various subjects. I'm baffled at how you see that as me calling him a lier. I hope others reading this silly debate can understand how frustrating it is to beat my head against the wall on this matter...



> "People in sports get scared or intimidated for all sorts of reasons -- lack of confidence, fear of mistake, fear of losing, etc. -- and excuses are often manufactured and repeated internally until they are believed."
> 
> Nothing in this suggests "might." It implies that Pippen definitely was scared or intimidated, but the reason why is up for debate. It doesn't suggest that the foundation, that Pippen was scared or intimidated, is up for debate. You're using an unfounded assumption as your foundation.


That's ridiculous, plain and simple. I said _for all sorts of reasons_ and gave a few examples that may or may not have been applicable. You somehow read that as me saying exactly what happened. Try reading what people say instead of reacting to a perceived slight that isn't even there.



> "For all I know, [Jackson] could have been laying the groundwork for bringing Scottie to L.A., or he could have merely been sticking up for one of his favorite players. Neither is terribly hard to believe. "
> 
> Neither of those suggests that he didn't believe what he said about Pippen, either.


Nor did I say they do! :upset: I haven't been around this forum long enough to know if you normally twist around people's statements this badly, but I can't believe how stuck you are on this thing about me saying Phil has lied about his beliefs of Scottie. To quote Mike Tyson, "that's ludicreth."



> When you claim that Jackson said it for reasons other than believing it to be true, you are construing it as lying.


Sure, if that's actually what I said. But seeing as how it's what you said and not what I said, there isn't much for me to work with there.



> Getting a long rebound and then slashing through the defense for a dunk is being a role-player?


In many cases, yes. The magnitude of the effort doesn't change the fact that it came from feeding off of someone else's initiative. Even if your one example somehow proves that Scottie provided offensive leadership on that one play, that hardly makes a career. Scottie may have played point-forward, but Jordan was often the one with the ball when big shots were needed. It just doesn't add up to Scottie being an offensive leader.

Now I'll go vent and see if I can recapture some of the enthusiasm I had a mere day ago when I found this forum...

Dan


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

Ok, so consider this Part B of my last post in this thread... Let me clarify one thing about my view of Scottie as an offensive leader: Most of the current Blazers run around like chickens with their heads cut off (Sabonis is an obvious exception). With Scottie on the floor, they adhere to the offense much better and generally have a sense of direction. That's what is typically being referred to when people talk about how much he means to the team's offense. However, they always talk at the same time about the common knowledge that the team is not good at finishing games. That's where I differentiate between a calming influence (i.e. a good teammate) and a leader. Paraphrasing Jordan, "it's not how hard you push along the way, it's how much you have left at the finish." The Blazers need someone who can consistently produce at the finish, not an overpaid guy with lots of injuries who has a rather limited offensive game these days.

Dan


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Incidentally, I disagree that I twisted your statements. I'm done with the debate on Pippen, but I thought I'd respond to that accusation.

Claiming that Jackson had "motives" for saying Pippen was a great leader *does* suggest that Jackson said something he didn't believe. Which is lying.

That's not a twisting. You simply don't seem to like it being put clearly.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Welcome to the boards dkap :clap:

I am in Salem too... South Salem...

I hope you enjoy it here... I think we have a great forum.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> I am in Salem too... South Salem...


Ditto, and thanks. 

Dan


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Wow, this thread kinda lost everything when Bob Whitsitt left town! Oh wait, he was never really here!  

I am almost at the point that I can't see Payton coming here anymore. Looks like he might have his eye on Los Angeles next year! :sigh:


----------

