Jordan and Pippen best one - two punch?

by saalikjazz on Nov 14, 2006 1:03 AM CST

Sometimes when I'm feeling nostalgic I like to bring out my old tapes of the Bulls. I have have come to this conclusion. I think Pippen and Jordan were the best duo ever. what do you think

You can make an argument about Magic and Worthy or Cousy and Russell. It's only an opinion. I think this is a good topic to debate. And if you don't see anyone on the poll give me a couple others.

Poll

The best duo in NBA History

Earl Monroe & Walt Frazier

0 votes

Lary Bird & Kevin Mchale

1 votes

Dr. J & Moses Malone

1 votes

Bob Cousy & Bill Russell

1 votes

Jerry West & Wilt Chamberlain

4 votes

Magic Johnson & Kareem Abdul Jabbar

6 votes

MAgic Johnson and James Worthy

1 votes

Shaq & Wade

1 votes

Shaq & Kobe

4 votes

Jerry Sloan & Norm Van Lier

0 votes

19 votes | Poll has closed

FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

What about

Shaq and young Penny?
Malone and Stockton
Kemp and Payton
Zo and L.J.
Zo and Hardaway
Mash and Jkidd .....jk

Jordan & Pippen best all time!

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 14, 2006 1:34 AM CST reply actions

sure why not

I would give Stockton and Malone a vote

Bulls fan till death

by saalikjazz on Nov 14, 2006 3:31 AM CST up reply actions

I wanted to vote for

Pargo and Piatkowski, but I see you made the mistake of leaving them off.

"all the girls loved BJ." -sue369

by Colossus @ Blog a Bull on Nov 14, 2006 7:11 AM CST reply actions

I prefer this roster

I like the Piatkowski choice, but you can't have two guards that play the same position, so I like the Piatkowski and Jared Reiner combo. It's all about inside-outside presence.

by majoyenrac on Nov 14, 2006 9:09 AM CST reply actions

Actually

I love the Marbury/Francis blockbuster combo, arguably the most... shall we say, entertaining to Chicago in recent history... and I hope they continue to play as well as they did last year.

Now if only they'd make that rule change to let there be two balls on the court at once, and then Marbury and Francis could really show the world who's boss.

by Bullschicago on Nov 14, 2006 10:28 AM CST reply actions

I like

"It will work out, somehow. That's a hell of a duo right there, Marbury, Crawford and Houston."
-- Carmelo Anthony assessing the future of the 2004-05 Knicks

by Whitebacon on Nov 14, 2006 12:17 PM CST reply actions

Ha!

Did he just say duo and then mention three players? Besides only one can shoot and thats all they do anyways. Carmelo is over rated.

MJ & PIP
Stockton & Malone
Kobe & Shaq
Magic & Kareem
Robinson & Duncan

I left ou the older generation because I don't reall think they were as athletic as todays generation.

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 14, 2006 1:05 PM CST reply actions

Sorry. Although I really like Duncan and Robinson. To qualify for the best one-two, you had to have won at least once. Sometimes the great two man game is the reason you lose. Remember the Orlando rematch? Shaq and Penny went off for like 85 the first game, and the main thing they accomplished was to take the fire out of Scott's and Anderson's games; before game one was over, you could see them standing around giving "what's up" looks as they stood around open in the spots that they'd burned the Bulls from the previous year. Wasn't too long before they quit rebounding, giving hard fouls, etc.
Some other great duos? Thomas/Lambier (hate 'em), Jabbar/Robertson or Dandridge, Unseld/Hayes, Walton/Lucas.

by California Al on Nov 16, 2006 1:18 AM CST up reply actions

yeah...

I think I have to go with Walton/Lucas weren't fit to sniff Stockton's jock, let alone Stockton and Malone's. I do hate the comparison of eras, but for argument's sake the Walton Blazers weren't playing the 90's Bulls in the Finals.

by Paxson Jackson @ Blog a Bull on Nov 16, 2006 2:10 AM CST up reply actions

True, but

They did take out a Bulls team that I thought would have won it all IF they got by the Blazers. Both teams played GREAT team ball, and if you want to see what slow, white stiffs from the 70's looked like, check out the 76-77 Blazers in your NBA encyclopedia. But A-Train, Van Lier & Co couldn't handle them. Now, since that team had relatively nothing but Walton and Lucas, and took out J's 76er, they rank. And if you really don't think they deserve to sniff Stockton's jock, you really don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. Pre-injuries, Walton was one of the greatest players in history, end of topic. And Lucas would probably still be the premier PF today.
I wonder one thing about you. How in the hell did you pick your moniker? What part of either of those class acts do you identify with. A better nick might be "The Sicilian" (Princess Bride reference). And yes, the old movies were better too, you little twerp.

by California Al on Nov 16, 2006 1:21 PM CST up reply actions

Wallace Shawn's better work aside...

Hyperbole doesn't mean much, but I will still say Walton was one of the 'greatest' college players of all time. His NBA career certainly doesn't compare, and your self-serving criteria for greatness doesn't offer much in the way of a rational argument for any of these guys.

These discussions are soooo pointless, but I suppose I'll defend Stockton/Malone to prove a point. This diary is a poll for best one-two punch, dynamic duo, whatever you want to call it. Stockton and Malone played together and had more success statistically and in the postseason than most 2 player combinations in the history of the NBA. Awards/stats/wins aside, they actually played like a duo - their inside/outside complimentary skills are unmatched - something many of these guys didn't really do or have. There is an argument for Stockton/Malone as the epitome of a 1-2 punch/duo.

I have no problem with you being old. I really don't care. The past does however, remain the past. The NBA has a larger talent pool and players need to be more elite athletically and mentally than the early decades of the NBA. "end of topic."

And I chose Paxson Jackson because it rhymed. I have never even seen the flick. What's going on with the old movies knock? Have I been staunchly defending the Matrix III or some other nuevo big screen wastes of of time? I would certainly prefer to view Oldboy over a sleepy John Wayne Western or an MGM musical, but I'm not going to judge someone by what they're into, or what their age is.

by Paxson Jackson @ Blog a Bull on Nov 16, 2006 2:24 PM CST up reply actions

Maybe even throw in

Isiah & Dumars

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 14, 2006 1:07 PM CST reply actions

Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler

With the next Shaq and the next Kevin Garnett, no one will be able to stop us! Who needs Elton Brand?

by Big D on Nov 14, 2006 1:16 PM CST reply actions

Now that's funny

by California Al on Nov 16, 2006 12:15 AM CST up reply actions

Personally

I vote for Ren & Stimpy followed closely by Bo & Luke and Woodward & Bernstein

Fleece the Pig, Flog the Pony

by james@lifeinthecell on Nov 14, 2006 5:18 PM CST reply actions

Malone and Stockton

are definitly beneath Magic and Kareem, Kobe and Shaq, Bird and Mchale.

JackHaleyandthePlanetLovetron

by JackHaleyand the planetlovetron on Nov 14, 2006 10:09 PM CST reply actions

Bill Russell and any of the other Celt stars

No disrespect intended for today's players, but according to anyone who played with or against him, he'd be the number one player in the game still, and this includes men who are still winning coaches. I saw a lot of him, and beyond his obvious talents, it was easy to miss how he made other teams lose. Apparently he had MJ's sense of what you THOUGHT could do and used it against you. One game he might beat by you by shutting down Wilt, the next by making him score 50.
I put Russell, Bird, Magic and MJ on the same pedestal; men among boys. They all had mad skills, but more importantly, they put winning first. Put any of them with any all-star and you have a winning team. Kareem, Shaq and Wilt are very close to that level, but those 4 are the ones I'd want to build a team around.

by California Al on Nov 15, 2006 8:20 AM CST reply actions

Really?

Consider this.

by tofferr on Nov 15, 2006 4:48 PM CST up reply actions

thank you

by Paxson Jackson @ Blog a Bull on Nov 15, 2006 6:02 PM CST up reply actions

Good points

I agree with the entire thread. It's frustrating to compare players across eras for all of the obvious reasons. Kareem did remain a dominant force across 3 decades of the NBA, but he really wasn't THAT much more dominant against the likes of Wilt and Russell as one might think considering the general advance of physical characteristics in the NBA. If the premise that the 60's guys were stiffs and unathletic, why didn't Jabbar average 40/25? He had a great team around him in Milwaukee, one of my all-time favorite defensive teams and as I remember, one of the top scoring teams of the era.
My thoughts are that if you take the premier players and bring them up in today's environment, they'd be bigger, faster, etc as well. Russell had to go head to head with Wilt, who was a track star and had legendary strength. They'd both have better games if they played against today's competition instead of the generally mediocre level prevalent then.
As I said, no disrespect intended for today's players. It just seems that their primary skills are one on one, and the game looks like 5 games of one on one going on simultaneleously with one ball. I especially enjoyed the question posed in that thread about the lack of acceptance of the triangle. Another challenge to today's "superiority" would be our dismal performance in international play.
All that said, my vote is still for Jordan/Pippen. I just was suggesting that Russel and his 13 championships or whatever it was certainly puts him on the list.

by California Al on Nov 16, 2006 12:13 AM CST up reply actions

ahem

Another challenge to today's "superiority" would be our dismal performance in international play.

Considering basketball wasn't an international sport when Cal-Al's game was Cal-Al's game (I'm going to have nightmares of Bob Cousy rising from the grave and dribbling with one skeletal hand - thanks), that doesn't seem to be a very valid argument for the greatness of the pre-Magic/Bird NBA.

Bill Russel was really good/great/whatever, but it's futile to put him in another era of basketball. His production could range anywhere from Michael Ruffin to a combination of Zo, Ben Wallace, and Tim Duncan. It really doesn't matter, and is impossible to prove.

by Paxson Jackson @ Blog a Bull on Nov 16, 2006 2:00 AM CST up reply actions