Hakeem vs Duncan Part 2 [Archive] - Page 2

J_Paco

04-14-2009, 09:01 PM

I just can't understand how superior athletic ability and slightly superior stats, yet somehow they trump winning more championships and accolades. Hakeem was the superior individual talent, but at the end of the day he only got it done when it mattered twice.

You guys act as though Hakeem was some modern-day Wilt Chamberlain, yet Ewing, Robinson and Shaquille all put up stats against him. Yes, I'm a Spurs fan. But, I'm willing to look at their entire (or Hakeem's) body of work and realize Timmy got it done two more times than Hakeem. Timmy put away the most dominant duo in his era (something Hakeem never did), and he did in epic fashion.

Timmy will never be the athlete or superior defender Hakeem was, but he'll always remain the better champion and teammate.

Timmy +1

Oh, and some of the arguments against Duncan have been completely stupid. Yeah, Timmy never went up against HOF competition. Oh wait, we forgot about Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Chris Webber, Kevin Garnett and Dirk Nowitizki. Plus, the all-star calibur guys like Amar'e Stoudmire, Rasheed Wallace, Antonio McDyess, Chris Bosh, Elton Brand and others. :rolleyes:rolleyes

Spursmania

04-14-2009, 09:15 PM

Better overall talent: Hakeem Olajuwon
Better overall player: Tim Duncan

You want to win 1-on-1 games, pick Olajuwon. You want to win team games, pick Duncan.

Olajuwon had about four superstar seasons. Apart from than that he was no different from Patrick Ewing. Duncan has been the franchise player of the most successful franchise in pro sports since he laced them up.

Duncan carried the weakest supporting cast of them all to a title in 2003 ... no other player is/was going to win an NBA title with S-Jax as his second best player. The Olajuwon Rockets OTOH had the best outside shooting supporting cast in memory.

Olajuwon led the Rockets to mediocrity in 91-92 (42 wins), 89-90 (41 wins), 88-89 (45 wins), 87-88 (46 wins), 86-87 (42 wins). In that span, the Rockets actually did better in the one season (52 wins in 90-91) when Olajuwon missed 25 games. Most of you kids remember the 93 to 95 Olajuwon who looked unstoppable. Till that point, he was considered good but not great.

Duncan on the other hand has been regarded as great from his rookie season onwards. He was already anointed the greatest at his position after only 6 years (98 to 2003) in this league! A healthy Duncan has led the Spurs to 56 games or more every year till this one, and has been contending for a ring every single year. SA has been the winningest franchise in all of sports in the Duncan era.

More rings (4 to 2), more MVPs (2 to 1), more Finals MVPs (3 to 2), more All-NBA 1st team selections (9 to 6), more All-Defensive 1st team selections (8 to 5), a vastly superior team winning % with different supporting casts.

Hakeem's prime > Duncan's prime
Duncan's overall body of work > Hakeem's overall body of work

:toast

baseline bum

04-14-2009, 09:56 PM

Listen junior, focus on your points instead of trying to throw around insults. Saying shit like this is is a sure fire way to announce to the world your arguements have no weight.

BTW, heres some video for you. Please tell me more about the superior defense of 00. The referees coddle the players these days, whistling everything.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCCGWiJsn0k

You are making my week with this stuff, please give me more.

Your post might have been more relevant if the video wasn't 70% from the 80s, and 30% from 1990. Way to use a team of the 80s as an example of 1990s defense. :lol

TDMVPDPOY

04-14-2009, 09:59 PM

hey did you guys have a read of the jordan v hakeem comparisons in the realgm forum....a few mention duncan and robinson...yet some clowns think hakeem is in comparison with jordan or top5 goat

baseline bum

04-14-2009, 10:02 PM

I'm sure you will disagree, but I think all of the following teams would be favorites to win titles in the 00's:

1992 Blazers
1993 Suns
1994 Knicks
1995 Rockets
1995 Magic
1996 Sonics
1997 and 98 Jazz
1999 Spurs

If you want to say the 3peat Lakers are better than all of those teams then I may agree. But the secondary teams from this decade? All of those teams that made the Eastern Finals when the Spurs and Lakers won? Were the 06 Pistons really better than any of the above teams? The 03 Spurs? The Kings teams that challenged the lakers....did they really have more talent than the Jazz, Sonics or Blazers? Nash and Amare dominate but KJ and Barkley couldn't? Payton and Kemp with all the insane depth on those Sonics teams, and they actually did play defense.

Additionally, Hakeem did play like 7 seasons in the 80's, and got to the Finals once. Do you think the 00's were better than the 80's as well?

You lost me when you started talking about the 94 Knicks.

Lars

04-14-2009, 10:07 PM

Your post might have been more relevant if the video wasn't 70% from the 80s, and 30% from 1990. Way to use a team of the 80s as an example of 1990s defense. :lol

Silly me, I thought your last post referenced Horry comparing 80s/90s versus now, I must be stupid. Also Hakeem played in the 80s and 90s. You're seriously slipping.

Lars

04-14-2009, 10:10 PM

Tmac&Luther

04-14-2009, 10:14 PM

You lost me when you started talking about the 94 Knicks.

You lost all credibility with me as a basketball fan when you discarded the '94 Knicks. Those Knick teams were tough as shit....one of the toughest most physical teams that ever played (Charles Oakley in his prime would make Artest wet himself) and if Ewing played today, he'd most likely be the best center in the league today.....in his day he was the 4th best center.

SpursDynasty

04-14-2009, 10:29 PM

Duncan. Hakeem only has 2 championships because MJ was out of the league.

TDMVPDPOY

04-14-2009, 10:31 PM

Only Spurs homers are going to say Tim is better. You replace Hakeem with Duncan and the talent he played with throughout his career and he would have atleast 5 rings by now. Hakeem was simply the better player....and that isn't a knock against Tim at all, Hakeem was just that good.

you think hakeem would only have 5 rings with this squad?

duncan couldve have 6 rings in a row if it werent for injuries to him or the other players.....

Tmac&Luther

04-14-2009, 10:33 PM

Duncan. Hakeem only has 2 championships because MJ was out of the league.

Hakeem, because he atleast won one with Jordan playing......Duncan only won 4 because Jordan was out of the league. :rolleyes (I'm not counting the '03 title when Jordan was 40)

see how that works jackass.

Tmac&Luther

04-14-2009, 10:36 PM

you think hakeem would only have 5 rings with this squad?

duncan couldve have 6 rings in a row if it werent for injuries to him or the other players.....

Well then you're right....He probably would have more.

TDMVPDPOY

04-14-2009, 10:41 PM

I agree with the above 100% yes horry, maxwell, Elie hit clutch shots but only after Hakem wass double and even triple teamed ...yet according to BLake Robinson single covered Hakeem ...oh yeah right... all of the Clutch city highlight dagger 3's was due to Hakeem's presence ...to overrate those guys are just like the morons who gave Parker the Finals MVP when we all know TP would not get free reign at the lane without yes Tim he would score more but hes numbers would be down (FG% TO's without duncan)

I again state the 1st title team without drexler was one of the WEAKEST title teams in NBA history yet Hakeem carried them to the promise land TWICE the 2nd team was better and battle tested but no on would compare them to best spur, laker celts or bulls teams their ONE advantage was Hakeem ...

Hakeems first ring team
that team had it all, players made plays when it matter and hitting crucial shots, seriously maxwell + cassell + ellie + kenny smith were clutch from downtown....horry/thorpe/herrera they were no slouch players, they hustled and gave alot of rubbish points on 2nd chances. IMO they peaked/gelled at the right time in the playoffs.

now compared that to the spurs 99 team.
lol jaren jackson doesnt play a lick of defense, but loves to hit them 3s...one game his hot, the next his nowhere to be seen.
avery johnson lol cant hit a shot if his life depended on it, but he made them when it was needed.
mario elie was basically the same player he ever was from teh rockets, didnt lose much touch besides the grey hair.
outside of duncan/robinson/Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_/avery/elie/jackson...team had no fukn bench.

Tmac&Luther

04-14-2009, 10:53 PM

Okay 92 votes and a couple of days into it so far and Duncan still can't pull away from Hakeem on his home court..(which like I said earlier...speaks volumes).....wonder what the voting would've been like on a unbiased board?

This debate is officially over.

Blake

04-15-2009, 12:07 AM

kingmalaki

04-15-2009, 12:42 AM

You lost me when you started talking about the 94 Knicks.

Exactly what are you basing their sucktitude on? They were a Hakeem blocked shot away from winning the title. Not to mention they took the Bulls to 6 games in 1993 and 7 games in 1992.

The Knicks were a very good team.

kingmalaki

04-15-2009, 12:46 AM

Hakeems first ring team
that team had it all, players made plays when it matter and hitting crucial shots, seriously maxwell + cassell + ellie + kenny smith were clutch from downtown....horry/thorpe/herrera they were no slouch players, they hustled and gave alot of rubbish points on 2nd chances. IMO they peaked/gelled at the right time in the playoffs.

now compared that to the spurs 99 team.
lol jaren jackson doesnt play a lick of defense, but loves to hit them 3s...one game his hot, the next his nowhere to be seen.
avery johnson lol cant hit a shot if his life depended on it, but he made them when it was needed.
mario elie was basically the same player he ever was from teh rockets, didnt lose much touch besides the grey hair.
outside of duncan/robinson/Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_/avery/elie/jackson...team had no fukn bench.

It's interesting how you claim Rockets players were making all these clutch plays, when you have Jackson making big shots, Elie making big shots, Elliott draining a game winner on his tippie toes and Avery Johnson hitting the title winning jumper. I don't see how you can claim the Rockets support was so clutch but the Spurs support weren't. Not to mention, Robinson was light years better than any other Rocket in 94 or 95...outside of Hakeem.

You have a better argument sticking with the 03 team.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 01:05 AM

because there's as many rocketfans and spur haters, moron.

are you two people in one?

Again what I said before.........hope that makes you sleep better at night. LMFAO at these idiots who think it's just "so many rocketfans and spur haters" Wake up, the guy is losing on his own site (sorry, but where the poll result stands right now, he's losing) go back to your make believe land and buy some more pot off of that pussy.. It will definitely make you feel better.

Hakeem in Pop's system (who is right up there with Red and Phil for greatest alltime coach) and surrounded with the same players would absolutely DOMINATE today's league. All world defender, one of the best all around offensive players, and one of the greatest playoff performers.....he'd kill people today.

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 01:17 AM

Exactly what are you basing their sucktitude on? They were a Hakeem blocked shot away from winning the title. Not to mention they took the Bulls to 6 games in 1993 and 7 games in 1992.

The Knicks were a very good team.

The 06 Heat actually won a title, but no one would say they were a great team. The 94 Knicks were good defensively, but a trainwreck on the offensive end. Starks was a chucker and Ewing was vastly overrated. They'd prob take the Heat, but I can't see any other championship team of this past decade having too much trouble with them.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 01:25 AM

better individual player Hakeem.

better Team player Duncan.

If i had to take on in their prime I would take Hakeem. Hakeem abused my favorite player of all time Robinson when they went head to head the year the Admiral won the MVP.Robinson is 10 times a better defender than Duncan, and if he can't stop Hakeem, there is no way Duncan could. Hakeem had the most incredible post moves I have ever seen, and I hated him so much but as I have gotten older I realized how amazing of player he was. And this is no disrespect to Timmeth!!! I love Duncan but Hakeem was something out of this world

Plus Tim didn't make Manu or Tony into who they are, Manu was a star before he came to the Spurs and did all the crazy things that he does today even as a rookie!

Tony as a 19 year old took more shit from Pop than any other player I have ever seen and he never stopped improving. Tony made himself into a star by marrying a movie star and working on his outside shot.

Thanks for the unbiased opinion. Hakeem is my all time favorite besides Jordan :tu

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 01:30 AM

The 06 Heat actually won a title, but no one would say they were a great team. The 94 Knicks were good defensively, but a trainwreck on the offensive end. Starks was a chucker and Ewing was vastly overrated. They'd prob take the Heat, but I can't see any other championship team of this past decade having too much trouble with them.

My god you have to be downright retarded.....the guy's argument was "THAT KNICKS TEAM WOULD HAVE WON A CHAMPIONSHIP IN THIS ERA" and your argument is "they would beat the Heat"??? You just agreed with him dumbass.

and the Knicks (Ewing) weren't "overrated" they were vastly underrated. Ewing would be the #1 center in the league today....period. The guy's career is looked down upon, because he played in such a tough era with so many quality bigs. Think about it dumbass......he was arguably the 4th best center in his era and he still made it as a first ballot HOFer. Quick, list me how many 4th or even 3rd best centers in the game today that are going to be 1st ballot HOFers.......the entire board is waiting and your credibility is on the line, list them please ???

Oh BTW, that "chucker" chucked his team all the way to the finals and almost past the great bulls teams in other seasons.....he almost "chucked" his way to a title, but Hakeem blocked his shot (one would question if Duncan would have the skill/athleticism to run out there and make that play).

Those 90 Knick teams are extremely underrated and most likely win a couple of rings in this era...you're a fool for sweeping them under the rug. Even without a ring they're still one of the toughest teams that have ever played....they straight beat people up, and just about everybody didn't want to play them because of that. They were the "bad boys part II", they just didn't cash in and the reason why was Hakeem and Jordan....damn the luck they had to play against those two. :rolleyes

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 01:38 AM

My god you have to be downright retarded.....the guy's argument was "THAT KNICKS TEAM WOULD HAVE A CHAMPIONSHIP IN THIS ERA" and your argument is "they would be the Heat"??? You just agreed with him dumbass.

and the Knicks (Ewing) weren't "overrated" they were vastly underrated. Ewing would be the #1 center in the league today....period. The guy's career is looked down upon, because he played in such a tough era with so many quality bigs. Think about it dumbass......he was arguably the 4th best center in his era and he still made it as a first ballot HOFer. Quick, list me how many 4th or even 3rd best centers in the game today that are going to be 1st ballot HOFers.......the entire board is waiting and your credibility is on the line, list them please ???

Oh BTW, that "chucker" chucked his team all the way to the finals and almost past the great bulls teams in other seasons.....he almost "chucked" his way to a title, but Hakeem blocked his shot (one would question if Duncan could make that play).

Those 90 Knick teams are extremely underrated and most likely win a couple of rings in this era...you're a fool for sweeping them under the rug. Even without a ring they're still one of the toughest teams that have ever played....they straight beat people up.

You fucking stupid piece of shit, he said the Knicks would be favorites in the 00s, not just favorites in one fucking cherry-picked year. You could list practically every team that's ever been to the Finals and say they'd beat the 06 Heat. Ewing wasn't shit. He shot too many jumpers and was vastly overrated by the New York media. If he played in Denver he'd never get in on the first ballot. Starks was a sub-40% chucker. The fact that NY was one shot from a title is more an indictment of Houston's inability to hold leads in games than it is a tribute to their greatness.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 01:56 AM

You fucking stupid piece of shit, he said the Knicks would be favorites in the 00s

I'm sorry :lol whew :rollin Holy shit....right. :lmao you truly are a bum aren't you. :rollin holy crap I'm about to bust a freaking gut over here. :lmao wow. Did the Miami Heat flash forward and win a title in 3006?

Ewing wasn't shit. He shot too many jumpers and was vastly overrated by the New York media. If he played in Denver he'd never get in on the first ballot.

What the hell does Denver have to do with crap??? anyway retard...:lmao(BTW dumbass, if Ewing was in Denver and "PLAYED IN DENVER" at that time they easily win a title you idiot...the "rain man" Kemp wasn't a legit center which was ultimently their downfall).. Once again YOU FAIL, sorry but http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ewingpa01.html = you FAIL again....the guy was one of the best centers that ever played the game, too bad you were in diapers then and never saw it (but you're sure as shit is posting like you did) Oh and don't try to tell me you weren't in diapers......anybody that watched those Knicks teams know exactly what I'm talking about. You're a complete idiot who just walked himself into absolute failure, (especially with the crap you said about Ewing), you're just a kid that simply doesn't know crap about that era.

Starks was a sub-40% chucker. The fact that NY was one shot from a title is more an indictment of Houston's inability to hold leads in games than it is a tribute to their greatness.

Really....hmm, you honestly believe that don't you? You do realize the Knicks were heavy favorites in that series and Houston played some of there best ball in that series....or course you don't, because you don't know crap. You just throw shit up against a wall and except it to stick when at that time you didn't even know what a basketball was.

If anybody wants to watch a great alltime series in the NBA.....watch the 94 series...it was a 7 game series (not many of those) where every game went down to the wire and is probably one of the most underrated series of all time. This guy doesn't know his Ahole from a hole in the ground. :lmao

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 02:19 AM

I'm sorry :lol whew :rollin Holy shit....right. :lmao you truly are a bum aren't you. :rollin holy crap I'm about to bust a freaking gut over here. :lmao wow.

What the hell does Denver have to do with crap??? anyway retard...:lmao(BTW dumbass, if Ewing was in Denver and "PLAYED IN DENVER" at that time they easily win a title you idiot...the "rain man" Kemp wasn't a legit center which was their downfall).. Once again YOU FAIL, sorry but http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ewingpa01.html = you FAIL again....the guy was one of the best centers that ever played the game, too bad you were in diapers then and never saw it (but you're sure as shit is posting like you did)

Really....hmm, you honestly believe that don't you? You do realize the Knicks were heavy favorites in that series and Houston played some of there best ball in that series....or course not, you don't, because you don't know crap. You just throw shit up against a wall and except it to stick when at that time you didn't even know what a basketball was.

If anybody wants to watch a great alltime series in the NBA.....watch the 94 series...it was a 7 game series (not many of those) where every game went down to the wire and is probably one of the most underrated series of all time. This guy doesn't know his Ahole from a hole in the ground. :lmao

You're the one who doesn't know the playoff run of your own fucking team. You can talk shit better than you can analyze the game. I watched Ewing's whole career, and he was a colossal underachiever, and was never the player everyone thought he'd be out of Georgetown. I can't believe the shit Robinson gets for getting beaten by Olajuwon when Ewing was completely worthless in his series against Houston. If he was in Denver no one would ever forget the way he shit all over himself in the 94 Finals. What was his shooting percentage? 30 something? No wonder his team was better off when he started suffering injuries and missing games later on. You gotta be honest; no Spurs fan is ever going to say the 03 Finals were great basketball. The 95 Rockets were a hell of a team that was exciting to watch, but 94? No way; watching OJ in the split-screen game 4 was way more interesting.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 02:31 AM

You're the one who doesn't know the playoff run of your own fucking team. You can talk shit better than you can analyze the game. I watched Ewing's whole career, and he was a colossal underachiever, and was never the player everyone thought he'd be out of Georgetown. I can't believe the shit Robinson gets for getting beaten by Olajuwon when Ewing was completely worthless in his series against Houston. If he was in Denver no one would ever forget the way he shit all over himself in the 94 Finals. What was his shooting percentage? 30 something? No wonder his team was better off when he started suffering injuries and missing games later on. You gotta be honest; no Spurs fan is ever going to say the 03 Finals were great basketball. The 95 Rockets were a hell of a team that was exciting to watch, but 94? No way; watching OJ in the split-screen game 4 was way more interesting.

Umm, how do I not know my "own team" fill me in on that one? And the reason why Ewing shot poorly was because he went up against one of the greatest defensive players of alltime. (BTW, David Robinson didn't shoot much better.....guess he was a overrated turd too huh?......nobody got dominated like that guy, what Hakeem did to him was epic, legendary) So yeah, like I said before, you obviously didn't see the guy play and don't know crap about his team. Those Knick teams were great, they just played in the wrong era. I do know this, Ewing was a MUCH bigger threat than the make believe MVP y'all had, I bet he's still seeing stars and trying to get the # on that truck.

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 02:39 AM

Umm, how do I not know my "own team" fill me in on that one? And the reason why Ewing shot poorly was because he went up against one of the greatest defensive players of alltime. (BTW, David Robinson didn't shoot much better.....guess he was a overrated turd too huh?......nobody got dominated like that guy, what Hakeem did to him was epic, legendary) So yeah, like I said before, you obviously didn't see the guy play and don't know crap about his team. Those Knick teams were great, they just played in the wrong era.

45% isn't much better than 36%? Any more stupid shit you wanna spew? Why do I ask? Of course there will be.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 02:48 AM

45% isn't much better than 36%? Any more stupid shit you wanna spew? Why do I ask? Of course there will be.

Sorry, I don't give a crap about "stats', do you want to clarify you're trying to say?

BTW, you've spewed more dumbass shit to suffice every poster on this board completely.

"er..Hey guys, fudge that 90's Knicks team, they can't win shit in the 00's, but they can beat the '06 Heat.......durr".

:lmao:lmao:lmao (BTW, with your posts and "stat grabbing" on the Knicks it's easy to see you were in diapers and never saw them play.......sad, this dumbass just said one of the most physical and toughest teams had no shot at winning in the 00's......oh wait then he said the could, but didn't count the Heat as a '00 team, so then he acted like they couldn't :lmao

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 02:50 AM

36 vs 45 is "clearified" enough.

Nice edit

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 02:55 AM

36 vs 45 is "clearified" enough.

Nice edit

or 48% vs 47%, but who's keeping score :rolleyes

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 02:56 AM

Nice edit

What "nice edit" you retard....the only time I edited was to add more insults. :lol

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 02:58 AM

You're the one who can't count motherfucker.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 03:02 AM

You're the one who can't count motherfucker.

I can count just fine.....

http://www.siriusthinking.com/sirius/UserFiles/Image/countvoncount.jpg

1 dumbass, ha..ha..ha

J.T.

04-15-2009, 03:02 AM

Man it must be nice living in your "wonderland" where everything you say somehow becomes fact......let me guess, you're king there aren't you and you smoke pot with the Cheshire Cat, infact he's your dealer isn't he?

The Cheshire Cat smoked hookah, not weed, you dumb fucking moron.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 03:04 AM

The Cheshire Cat smoked hookah, not weed, you dumb fucking moron.

You need to get your money back....apparently he's selling the good shit to blake. Don't trust that pussy, he's holding out on you.

anonoftheinternets

04-15-2009, 03:04 AM

Tmac&Luther (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=11126) please stop embarassing yourself, you are way out of ur league here.

J.T.

04-15-2009, 03:06 AM

You need to get your money back....apparently he's selling the good shit to blake.

Do you live in a gated community?

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 03:07 AM

Tmac&Luther (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=11126) please stop embarassing yourself, you are way out of ur league here.

What is this opposite day... I'm doing just fine thank you. :lol Thanks for the concern though..really appreciate it.

Oh P.S.

Why the fuck isn't y'all's boy owning this poll on his home board? Questions that need to be answered.. hmm.

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 03:09 AM

What is this oppisite day... I'm doing just fine thank you. :lol Thanks for the concern though..really appreciate it.

Oh P.S.

Why the fuck isn't y'all's boy owning this poll on his home board? Questions that need to be answered.. hmm.

Because Rocket fans can't let go of the time they mattered 14 years ago?

anonoftheinternets

04-15-2009, 03:11 AM

Because Rocket fans can't let go of the time they mattered 14 years ago?

well it isnt fair to paint all rocket fans with the same brush. Its obvious this kid saw some videos and read some blog to give him his opinion. I say let him be.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 03:13 AM

Do you live in a gated community?

Nope, I stay in the average neighborhood, you know brick house, picket fence..the whole nine yards....but on other nights I can be found in yo mom's bed, but things are starting to get hairy down there if you know what I mean. :nope well maybe you don't, we'll have a talk next week.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 03:16 AM

Because Rocket fans can't let go of the time they mattered 14 years ago?

and you can't let go of the thought that you think you're right or that you think you know what you're talking about. ("94 Knicks can't win a title" = ultimate fail dumbass)

AGAIN, Hakeem is even with your boy on his own damn court in this poll....lucky this is "spurstalk" and not a unbaised board huh?

Thomas82

04-15-2009, 06:48 AM

Only a bias little fool would say Emmitt was better than Sanders. But the comparisons are great. Sanders=Hakeem, Emmitt=Duncan.

I'm not biased, but my opinion on that particular subject is not a popular one.

Thomas82

04-15-2009, 06:52 AM

12 Bruce Bowen
10 Speedy Claxton
21 Tim Duncan
35 Danny Ferry
20 Emanuel Ginobili
3 Stephen Jackson
25 Steve Kerr
9 Tony Parker
50 David Robinson
31 Malik Rose
8 Steve Smith
42 Kevin Willis

35 Jason Collins
12 Lucious Harris
24 Richard Jefferson
2 Anthony Johnson
5 Jason Kidd
30 Kerry Kittles
6 Kenyon Martin
55 Dikembe Mutombo
54 Rodney Rogers
21 Brian Scalabrine
8 Tamar Slay
34 Aaron Williams

Let me guess. Was it Jason Collins or the 40 year old Mutombo that Duncan had to guard. Im just saying...

Well, you asked if anybody had won a title without a second all-star, and I gave you an answer. Tim Duncan was the only all-star that the Spurs had in 2003.

spursfan09

04-15-2009, 09:06 AM

I would rather have 4 championships than 2 so I pick Duncan. O yeah! And cuz I'm a Spurs fan. But seriously are you taking into account how long Tim's teams have dominated. It wasn't just 2 years, its been a span of 10 years basically.

kingmalaki

04-15-2009, 09:28 AM

You fucking stupid piece of shit, he said the Knicks would be favorites in the 00s, not just favorites in one fucking cherry-picked year. You could list practically every team that's ever been to the Finals and say they'd beat the 06 Heat. Ewing wasn't shit. He shot too many jumpers and was vastly overrated by the New York media. If he played in Denver he'd never get in on the first ballot. Starks was a sub-40% chucker. The fact that NY was one shot from a title is more an indictment of Houston's inability to hold leads in games than it is a tribute to their greatness.

I'm assuming since you say you stopped reading at the NY Knicks that you didn't notice my entire post, mainly the bolded part.

I'm sure you will disagree, but I think all of the following teams would be favorites to win titles in the 00's:

1992 Blazers
1993 Suns
1994 Knicks
1995 Rockets
1995 Magic
1996 Sonics
1997 and 98 Jazz
1999 Spurs

If you want to say the 3peat Lakers are better than all of those teams then I may agree. But the secondary teams from this decade? All of those teams that made the Eastern Finals when the Spurs and Lakers won? Were the 06 Pistons really better than any of the above teams? The 03 Spurs? The Kings teams that challenged the lakers....did they really have more talent than the Jazz, Sonics or Blazers? Nash and Amare dominate but KJ and Barkley couldn't? Payton and Kemp with all the insane depth on those Sonics teams, and they actually did play defense.

Additionally, Hakeem did play like 7 seasons in the 80's, and got to the Finals once. Do you think the 00's were better than the 80's as well?

Sorry, but I'm not looking at the current teams and seeing how they were better than teams from the 90's. The only way that argument seems to make sense is if you compare the runner ups from the 90's to the winning teams from the 00's. I don't see how one can really argue that the runner ups from this decade are better than the above teams, especially the ones from the Eastern Conference. I don't think too many will agree that the 90's Bulls wouldn't be winning today, or the 91 Pistons...that's 7 of the 10 titles from the 90's. So even if you compare title winning teams from that decade, the 90's still comes out ahead. And I still would take most of those above teams over basically every title team today but the 3-peat Lakers, the 08 Celtics and possibly the 05 Spurs.

As far as the Knicks are concerned, Ewing did shoot a lot of jumpers, but like Robinson he made most of them. He did so poorly (offensively) in the 94 Finals because Hakeem was D'ing him up. As another poster noted, if Hakeem doesn't block Starks jumper in Game 6 then the Knicks probably win (he was on fire that game) and he is remembered for that instead of the Game 7 debacle. The Knicks were in that series not because we blew leads, but because their great defense made it difficult to score!! And again, they took the title Bulls to 7 games in 92 and 6 games in 93. The Knicks were a very good team.

GaryJohnston

04-15-2009, 10:22 AM

4>2 = duncan

end thread

djohn2oo8

04-15-2009, 10:26 AM

4>2 = duncan

end thread

We are talking about whose the better INDIVIDUAL player, not rings...

Blake

04-15-2009, 10:33 AM

Straight from the horses mouth.

We are comparing players, not the accomplishments of teams.

Well then Duncan has 2 mvps. Hakeem 1. End of thread.

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 10:54 AM

I'm assuming since you say you stopped reading at the NY Knicks that you didn't notice my entire post, mainly the bolded part.

Sorry, but I'm not looking at the current teams and seeing how they were better than teams from the 90's. The only way that argument seems to make sense is if you compare the runner ups from the 90's to the winning teams from the 00's. I don't see how one can really argue that the runner ups from this decade are better than the above teams, especially the ones from the Eastern Conference. I don't think too many will agree that the 90's Bulls wouldn't be winning today, or the 91 Pistons...that's 7 of the 10 titles from the 90's. So even if you compare title winning teams from that decade, the 90's still comes out ahead. And I still would take most of those above teams over basically every title team today but the 3-peat Lakers, the 08 Celtics and possibly the 05 Spurs.

As far as the Knicks are concerned, Ewing did shoot a lot of jumpers, but like Robinson he made most of them. He did so poorly (offensively) in the 94 Finals because Hakeem was D'ing him up. As another poster noted, if Hakeem doesn't block Starks jumper in Game 6 then the Knicks probably win (he was on fire that game) and he is remembered for that instead of the Game 7 debacle. The Knicks were in that series not because we blew leads, but because their great defense made it difficult to score!! And again, they took the title Bulls to 7 games in 92 and 6 games in 93. The Knicks were a very good team.

Why are you using Jordan and the Bulls to say Olajuwon had tougher competition?

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:08 AM

Robinson is 10 times a better defender than Duncan, and if he can't stop Hakeem, there is no way Duncan could. Hakeem had the most incredible post moves I have ever seen, and I hated him so much but as I have gotten older I realized how amazing of player he was. And this is no disrespect to Timmeth!!! I love Duncan but Hakeem was something out of this world

right. For one year.

What does Robinson not being able to stop Hakeem in 94 have anything to do with Duncan winning 2 MVPs, 4 titles and 3 Finals MVPs?

Over 30 games head to head, Hakeem averaged about 26 ppg against Robinson but David averaged 22 against Hakeem. It's not really either one was really stopping the other.

David was all NBA first team 4x. Hakeem 6x in a longer career.

Plus Tim didn't make Manu or Tony into who they are, Manu was a star before he came to the Spurs and did all the crazy things that he does today even as a rookie!

Manu has been an all star just once and and his highest scoring average has been 19 ppg.....

Tony as a 19 year old took more shit from Pop than any other player I have ever seen and he never stopped improving. Tony made himself into a star by marrying a movie star and working on his outside shot.

Drexler was already an all star and stayed an all star after joining the rockets.

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:12 AM

I can count just fine.....

1 dumbass, ha..ha..ha

apparently you don't know that 2 is a larger number than 1.

1 MVP dumbass, ha..ha..ha

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:13 AM

Nope, I stay in the average neighborhood, you know brick house, picket fence..the whole nine yards....but on other nights I can be found in yo mom's bed, but things are starting to get hairy down there if you know what I mean. :nope well maybe you don't, we'll have a talk next week.

when you're in bed, do you pretend you are Tmac or do you pretend you are luther? or both?

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:15 AM

We are talking about whose the better INDIVIDUAL player, not rings...

2 MVPs Duncan > 1 MVP Hakeem

3 Finals MVPs Duncan > 2 Finals MVPs Hakeem

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 11:19 AM

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:24 AM

Seriously, the 04 Pistons defense murders the 94 Knicks'. The Pistons allowed fewer point on lower shooting percentages without the benefit of the handcheck or refs who swallow their whistle on hard fouls. You're overrating the hell out of that team.

No kidding.

If Hakeem could pretty much stop Ewing one on one, imagine what Ben and Rasheed would do.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 11:27 AM

2 MVPs Duncan > 1 MVP Hakeem

3 Finals MVPs Duncan > 2 Finals MVPs Hakeem

It's hard to win MVP's when you're drafted in the same year as Michael Jordan. Please stop with the weak 3>2 argument as it's not the "be all and end all" of this discussion.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 11:28 AM

No kidding.

If Hakeem could pretty much stop Ewing one on one, imagine what Ben and Rasheed would do.

Just because maybe the greatest defender ever could stop someone doesn't mean Ben and Rasheed Wallace could :lol, although they're both solid defenders

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 11:29 AM

Seriously, the 04 Pistons defense murders the 94 Knicks'. The Pistons allowed fewer point on lower shooting percentages without the benefit of the handcheck or refs who swallow their whistle on hard fouls. You're overrating the hell out of that team.

Yeah the 2004 Pistons had one of the best team defenses ever before seen. It's too bad they let go of Ben and that team was never the same. Pretty much a one hit wonder

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:34 AM

Just because maybe the greatest defender ever could stop someone doesn't mean Ben and Rasheed Wallace could :lol, although they're both solid defenders

yes, it does.

how many times did Ben Wallace win defensive player of the year?

good job, idiot.

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:41 AM

It's hard to win MVP's when you're drafted in the same year as Michael Jordan. Please stop with the weak 3>2 argument as it's not the "be all and end all" of this discussion.

no, it's hard to win MVPs when you're team rarely ever wins 60 games.

Only 6 times was he ever even first team all NBA at the center position, and only 6 times was he ever in the top 5 in MVP voting so you can stop with the "yeah, well it was because Jordan was playing."

Only once has Duncan ever finished outside the top 5 in MVP voting from what I can tell.

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:43 AM

Yeah the 2004 Pistons had one of the best team defenses ever before seen. It's too bad they let go of Ben and that team was never the same. Pretty much a one hit wonder

they went to the finals the next year.

you are truly a jeenyus.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 11:46 AM

they went to the finals the next year.

you are truly a jeenyus.

"Pretty much" meaning they had one year of success, were damn good for a couple, and were dismantled prematurely. Go fuck yourself Mr. High and Mighty, that Pistons team had great D but were sadly only a flash in the pan

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:46 AM

The MVP argument is a joke since Steve Nash has two of them!

based on what the Suns did in those years, he deserved them.

but since he no western conference titles, he will still never be mentioned in the same breath with other greats that have actually been there.

He isn't better than Isiah, Kevin Johnson, or John Stocken, but he won 2 MVP awards.

during those 2 years, he was as good as those guys.

just like during 94 and 95, Hakeem was better than any one year Tim has had.

Now I'm not saying Tim doesn't deserve his but the argument is moot.

Also one of the finals MVP should have gone to Manu in 2005 he was actually the Mvp of those finals!

No because Manu disappeared in games 3-5.

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 11:47 AM

Yeah the 2004 Pistons had one of the best team defenses ever before seen. It's too bad they let go of Ben and that team was never the same. Pretty much a one hit wonder

They never recovered from losing Larry Brown. Brown would do little things like feed Big Ben a couple of possessions a game to keep him motivated and sharp. Saunders was an awful coach for that team.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 11:48 AM

yes, it does.

how many times did Ben Wallace win defensive player of the year?

good job, idiot.

:lmao Ben Wallace is on Hakeems level defensively? Get outta here..:lol

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:49 AM

"Pretty much" meaning they had one year of success, were damn good for a couple, and were dismantled prematurely.

"pretty much" like Hakeem and the Rockets.

Go fuck yourself Mr. High and Mighty, that Pistons team had great D but were sadly only a flash in the pan

you can take your imaginary 2006 championship and shove it up your red eye.

you're an idiot.

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:50 AM

:lmao Ben Wallace is on Hakeems level defensively? Get outta here..:lol

4 defensive player of the year awards.

Good lord you are one dumbass mother fokker.

Blake

04-15-2009, 12:52 PM

So Nash had two decent seasons, which were the norm for the other players mentioned and he wins back to back MVPS? This proves why the MVP award doesn't mean that much anymore! He wasn't even dominate unlike other MVP's were.

now you are trying to downplay the MVP award?

The Suns only won 29 games the year before he got there and were predicted to do basically the same the next year when they won 62.

He was the leader of that team averaging 16 on 50% shooting and 12 assists per game.

The next year he averaged 11 assists a game, but all his other stats across the board were even better than the previous season.

He absolutely deserved those awards.

Hakeem's career numbers are about the same as Duncan's.

right. And Duncan winning more MVPs and rings gives him the edge.

Nash's numbers aren't even close to other point guards for their careers

nobody is trying to compare Nash to anyone else.

Manu won game 1 and 2 and game 7 ..you act like Tim was perfect during the entire series!

where did I say Tim was perfect. you act like you can't read.

Tim was more consistent during the 7 games series and had to take on the Wallaces.

Manu made some clutch shots down the stretch, but after 8 straight missed shots, Tim nutted up and put the team on his back in the 4th quarter of game 7 and willed the team to win. He finished with 25 and 11. Manu finsihed with 23.

short memories.

Lars

04-15-2009, 01:44 PM

Clearly number of MVPs is relevant to this arguement.

Again, if Duncan comes into the league in the mid eighties he wins no MVPs, no DPOY awards and no rings. He would be Al Jefferson, a great player on a nothing team that no one ever talks about and quickly forgoten.

Its all about circumstance, he was incredibly fortunate to come in when he did. Duncan won MVPs because the level of talent in the league was fucking awful. If Jordan doesn't play, Hakeem takes atleast 4 of his 6 MVP awards. And if you want to keep playing this 4>2, 2>1 bullshit, lets go ahead and bring up Robinson's MVP, and then how he was completly dismantled by a far superior player and the true MVP of that season. People want to asterix our championships, fine, but this entire era is post Jordan so it is all one giant *.

kingmalaki

04-15-2009, 01:47 PM

Why are you using Jordan and the Bulls to say Olajuwon had tougher competition?

Was your point not that the 00's were better than the 90's, as in the teams were better? If so, then I don't see how you are coming to that conclusion.

IMO, the only team that Duncan beat on the way to a title that was better than the teams Hakeem beat on the way (Jazz, Suns, Knicks, Magic, Spurs) were arguably the Lakers, and he only beat them once when their two stars were fighting and their role players went to crap in the postseason. And even then, were those Lakers better than the 80's Lakers...who Hakeem did get through in 86? But who was the tough comp in 99? Who was the tough comp in 05...the Pistons? I would take every team I noted above over them. Who was the tough comp in 07...the Cavs? Nets...no defense Suns...how were they better than the Suns with Barkley and KJ for example?

I'm not seeing Duncan beat better teams. I'm not seeing him going up against superior players at his position, since Dream had more top centers in his era and also had top PF's (McHale, Malone, Barkley, Kemp, etc). I'm not seeing how Duncan wins the "better competition" argument.

So I guess my question is what exactly were you trying to argue on the better comp front?

Edit: As far as the Pistons being a better defensive team than the Knicks, we will just have to disagree on that one. Again, the Knicks took the Bulls to 7 and 6 games. The Pistons balled in 04 but where was their touted defense in 05, where you can argue they only made the Finals because Wade and Shaq got hurt. Or 06, when they let LeBron basically score all of the closing points in one game?

As far as the MVP argument goes, unless you think Duncan would be winning MVP's over MJ, Bird or Magic then the point is moot. Steve Nash has just as many MVP's as Kobe and Shaq combined and they are from the same era. He was deserving those years but no way he would have won them in the Magic/Bird/MJ era. Hell, look at the numbers KJ and Stockton were putting up then, and neither player sniffed the sward.

Blake

04-15-2009, 01:56 PM

Blake

04-15-2009, 01:58 PM

As far as the MVP argument goes, unless you think Duncan would be winning MVP's over MJ, Bird or Magic then the point is moot.

Hakeem finished in the top ten in MVP voting just 6 times.

If he had finished 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th every single year, then you might have a point.

Unfortunately for you, you don't.

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 01:59 PM

Clearly number of MVPs is relevant to this arguement.

Again, if Duncan comes into the league in 1984, he wins no MVPs, no DPOY awards and no rings. Its all about circumstance, he was incredibly fortunate to come in when he did. Duncan won MVPs because the level of talent in the league was fucking awful. If Jordan doesn't play, Hakeem takes atleast 4 of his 6 MVP awards. And if you want to keep playing this 4>2, 2>1 bullshit, lets go ahead and bring up Robinson's MVP, and then how he was completlly dismantled by a far superior player and the true MVP of that season. People want to * our championships, fine, but this entire era is post Jordan so it is all irrevelant.

Which 4 of those 6 (really 5) would those be?

87-88? Over Magic when they won 62 games and were favorites for the re-peat? I doubt it.
90-91? When he missed 36 games?
91-92? When the Rockets were one game over .500 despite Olajuwon playing 70 games?
95-96? As a 48 win team over Shawn Kemp with 64 wins and Shaq with 60?
97-98? When he missed half the season?

kingmalaki

04-15-2009, 02:10 PM

Hakeem finished in the top ten in MVP voting just 6 times.

If he had finished 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th every single year, then you might have a point.

Unfortunately for you, you don't.

So now it's finishing in the top 10 in MVP voting, and not having the actual award itself?

If you are arguing one player is better than the other based on MVP awards, then you are basically arguing that Nash > Kobe and Shaq since he has the same amount of those two combined. But of course that argument is silly since different circumstances determine if you can win the award or not. As I have pointed out, Stockton and KJ were putting up Nash numbers and their teams had top records and they weren't sniffing MVP awards. You can say the same about what Paul has done the last two seasons...he may have won awards in the Nash years.

Again, do you think Duncan would win those awards over MJ, Magic and Larry? They won like every award until MJ retired.

kingmalaki

04-15-2009, 02:14 PM

Which 4 of those 6 (really 5) would those be?

87-88? Over Magic when they won 62 games and were favorites for the re-peat? I doubt it.
90-91? When he missed 36 games?
91-92? When the Rockets were one game over .500 despite Olajuwon playing 70 games?
95-96? As a 48 win team over Shawn Kemp with 64 wins and Shaq with 60?
97-98? When he missed half the season?

I doubt he wins in either one of those years to be honest. You have to have top numbers and be on a top team (i.e. have a good supporting cast) to win an MVP award. Kobe didn't sniff the MVP in 06, arguably his best season where he drug a sorry team to the playoffs. Does that mean he wasn't a better player than the guys who won it? In the years that Nash won the MVP, would you say he was a better player than Duncan...and would you choose Nash if you had to pick between the two?

If your answer is no, then I don't see how the MVP award comes into play when comparing two players.

Texas_Ranger

04-15-2009, 02:18 PM

baseline bum

04-15-2009, 02:18 PM

I doubt he wins in either one of those years to be honest. You have to have top numbers and be on a top team (i.e. have a good supporting cast) to win an MVP award. Kobe didn't sniff the MVP in 06, arguably his best season where he drug a sorry team to the playoffs. Does that mean he wasn't a better player than the guys who won it? In the years that Nash won the MVP, would you say he was a better player than Duncan...and would you choose Nash if you had to pick between the two?

If your answer is no, then I don't see how the MVP award comes into play when comparing two players.

I love Olajuwon and he's one of my all-time favorites, but something as stupid as Lars saying he'd win 4 out 5 MVPs if Jordan wasn't there ain't gonna stand.

ambchang

04-15-2009, 02:25 PM

Arguing that Player A > Player B because Player A has more MVPs and titles is stupid.
It does not factor in factors such as teammates, competition, competition for awards, defensive schemes, etc ...
But I can say that if I want to start a franchise, I would pick Duncan. Reasons being:
1) Duncan had a far longer prime
2) Duncan has proven that he can adapt and excel in very different teams.
3) Hakeem pouted for a great chunk of his career, when he was theorhetically in his physical prime, Duncan never did.

In a one on one game, I am picking Hakeem 9 out of 10 times, but in a team game environment, give me Duncan.

Many PackYao

04-15-2009, 02:35 PM

All this ''what would'' talk is just stupid.
I'd picked Tim, but thats perhaps just cause I didn't watch Hakeem play a lot in his best years. But really you couldn't go wrong with any of those two. Respect to both of them.
Finally, someone who is at least honest about how much he actually saw Hakeem play, unlike these young 20 yr olds just going by looking up stats online.:toast

Blake

04-15-2009, 03:02 PM

So now it's finishing in the top 10 in MVP voting, and not having the actual award itself?

no, it's about the people saying that Hakeem could never win MVP because of Jordan, Magic and Bird.

Apparently in most of his career, there were 10 players that had better years than he did.

But thanks for missing the point.

If you are arguing one player is better than the other based on MVP awards, then you are basically arguing that Nash > Kobe and Shaq since he has the same amount of those two combined. But of course that argument is silly since different circumstances determine if you can win the award or not.

I'm not solely basing it on MVP awards.

Thanks for not reading my posts.

As I have pointed out, Stockton and KJ were putting up Nash numbers and their teams had top records and they weren't sniffing MVP awards. You can say the same about what Paul has done the last two seasons...he may have won awards in the Nash years.

nobody is comparing Nash to anyone else.

In any case, KJ played with a bunch of other all stars, Hornacek, Chambers, and Majerle and they still didn't win 60 games.

Playing next to Karl Malone, Stockton was never going to win it.....especially never averaging many ppg during the 60 win years in the 90s.

Nash won an improbable 62 games in his first MVP run and somehow the Suns won 54 the next year after trading Joe Johnson, Quentin Richardson and losing Amare to injury. Nash easily beat Kobe, LBJ and Dirk that 2nd time.

Again, do you think Duncan would win those awards over MJ, Magic and Larry? They won like every award until MJ retired.

If Duncan were to consistently win just 40+ games a year like Hakeem? No.

but take his 2003 season where the Spurs have the best record and no other all stars on the team, then yes, he wins the MVP.

Blake

04-15-2009, 03:06 PM

Finally, someone who is at least honest about how much he actually saw Hakeem play, unlike these young 20 yr olds just going by looking up stats online.:toast

because remembering what you saw on TV back in the 90s is always a better way to prove your point than using stats.

For the record, I saw Hakeem play throughout the 80s and 90s.

I distinctly recall the split screen during the Finals of NY/Hou on one side and the police chasing OJ in a bronco on the other side.

You are an idiot.

lol slayer
lol waiting for the lame steve blake picture comeback

Blake

04-15-2009, 03:09 PM

Arguing that Player A > Player B because Player A has more MVPs and titles is stupid.

no, it's not. If you don't factor that in, then all you have is biased opinion.

It does not factor in factors such as teammates, competition, competition for awards, defensive schemes, etc ...
But I can say that if I want to start a franchise, I would pick Duncan. Reasons being:
1) Duncan had a far longer prime
2) Duncan has proven that he can adapt and excel in very different teams.
3) Hakeem pouted for a great chunk of his career, when he was theorhetically in his physical prime, Duncan never did.

so you think judging someone by the number of MVPs he has is stupid, but judging someone on the way you think he pouted is smart.

great.

Fernando TD21

04-15-2009, 03:33 PM

All this ''what would'' talk is just stupid.
I'd picked Tim, but thats perhaps just cause I didn't watch Hakeem play a lot in his best years. But really you couldn't go wrong with any of those two. Respect to both of them.

Arguing that Player A > Player B because Player A has more MVPs and titles is stupid.
It does not factor in factors such as teammates, competition, competition for awards, defensive schemes, etc ...
But I can say that if I want to start a franchise, I would pick Duncan. Reasons being:
1) Duncan had a far longer prime
2) Duncan has proven that he can adapt and excel in very different teams.
3) Hakeem pouted for a great chunk of his career, when he was theorhetically in his physical prime, Duncan never did.

In a one on one game, I am picking Hakeem 9 out of 10 times, but in a team game environment, give me Duncan.

Agreed. Hakeem was probably the best individual player. While Duncan is probably the best team player.

I picked Duncan because I'm his fan. I'm biased, but a really unbiased person should pick the third option "Can't go wrong with either", since they both were/are amazing players.

And the question is "Who would you pick to be your franchise player?" and not who is the most dominant or who had the best career, so picking any one of them should be fine.

Many PackYao

04-15-2009, 03:35 PM

because remembering what you saw on TV back in the 90s is always a better way to prove your point than using stats.

For the record, I saw Hakeem play throughout the 80s and 90s.

I distinctly recall the split screen during the Finals of NY/Hou on one side and the police chasing OJ in a bronco on the other side.

You are an idiot.

lol slayer
lol waiting for the lame steve blake picture comeback
Good, I saw it too. Why do you make these things so personal? Calling people names like you're in elementary school. Are you this much of a dick outside of the forum? Also, I don't give a damn what you think of Slayer, so you can keep talkin' shit about them as much as you like.:toast

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 03:51 PM

Good, I saw it too. Why do you make these things so personal? Calling people names like you're in elementary school. Are you this much of a dick outside of the forum? Also, I don't give a damn what you think of Slayer, so you can keep talkin' shit about them as much as you like.:toast

No, he'd get punched in the mouth.

Can someone please come to my aid and tell this fucker that Hakeem > Ben Wallace defensively? Hakeem may be the best defender of all time, while Big Ben was certainly great at what he did he just didn't have the same physical tools Hakeem did, he was terribly undersized. Quit disrespecting an all time great by drastically underestimating him in order to prove a point. Flashy weakside blocks, being muscular and having a fro don't necessarily make you an all time great defender, although he was great. Just not all time great

Blake

04-15-2009, 03:53 PM

Good, I saw it too. Why do you make these things so personal? Calling people names like you're in elementary school.

it's not personal. Your posts are idiotic.

Are you this much of a dick outside of the forum? Also, I don't give a damn what you think of Slayer, so you can keep talkin' shit about them as much as you like.:toast

why are you making this personal? calling people names like you're in elementary school.

lol butt hurt

lol slayer

lol yao

lol rocketfan

Blake

04-15-2009, 04:00 PM

No, he'd get punched in the mouth.

lol butt hurt mav fan

lol fake championship

Can someone please come to my aid and tell this fucker that Hakeem > Ben Wallace defensively? Hakeem may be the best defender of all time, while Big Ben was certainly great at what he did he just didn't have the same physical tools Hakeem did, he was terribly undersized.

says who? you?

all you have is an opinion, moron, while Ben Wallace has 4 DPOY trophies.

if you are that insecure that you have to ask for "aid" then you're almost always wrong.

you're a biased mav fan that hates the Spurs.

Quit disrespecting an all time great by drastically underestimating him in order to prove a point. Flashy weakside blocks, being muscular and having a fro don't necessarily make you an all time great defender, although he was great. Just not all time great

What part of 4 DPOY trophies don't you understand?

Everything else is your own weak opinion.

:td

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 04:01 PM

lol butt hurt mav fan

lol fake championship

says who? you?

all you have is an opinion, moron, while Ben Wallace has 4 DMVP trophies.

if you are that insecure that you have to ask for "aid" then you're almost always wrong.

you're a biased mav fan that hates the Spurs.

What part of 4 DMVP trophies don't you understand?

Everything else is your own weak opinion.

:td

4 DMVP's, faggot!

4 rings, faggot!

4 inch dick you have, faggot!

Blake

04-15-2009, 04:04 PM

4 DMVP's, faggot!

4 rings, faggot!

4 inch dick you have, faggot!

:lol

that's what I thought.

If you were to say that to someone off the board, you'd get punched in the mouth.

lol meltdown

lol stupid mavs fan

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 04:09 PM

:lol

that's what I thought.

If you were to say that to someone off the board, you'd get punched in the mouth.

lol meltdown

lol stupid mavs fan

Only if they were also trained in martial arts and damn good at it

lol, spur fan bias

lol, hakeem > ben wallace

lol, you taking stretch's patented for mav fan use only "lol, _______" line

Many PackYao

04-15-2009, 04:30 PM

it's not personal. Your posts are idiotic.

why are you making this personal? calling people names like you're in elementary school.

lol butt hurt

lol slayer

lol yao

lol rocketfan:lol
You called about three or four people idiotic in this thread because they don't agree with you. I'm just saying can't you have a discussion without resorting to name calling? No butthurting here, I'm just asking a simple question.

Blake

04-15-2009, 04:30 PM

Only if they were also trained in martial arts and damn good at it

lol you=chuck norris

lol, spur fan bias

lol 2 MVPs from unbiased voters

lol, hakeem > ben wallace

lol 4 DPOY>2 DPOY

lol, you taking stretch's patented for mav fan use only "lol, _______" line

lol butthurt over lol

lol, lol

Blake

04-15-2009, 04:35 PM

:lol
You called about three or four people idiotic in this thread because they don't agree with you.

no, I'm not calling them idiots for not agreeing. I'm calling them/you idiots for using nothing but your own opinion from what you remember in 1994 as the basis for your "argument".

It's weak and it's idiotic.

I'm just saying can't you have a discussion without resorting to name calling? No butthurting here, I'm just asking a simple question.

You're asking me this after calling me a dick? ....which was after you basically called anyone who didn't agree with you a "20 something year old that obviously didn't watch Hakeem play"

You are a focking idiot.

Tmac&Luther

04-15-2009, 04:52 PM

370 replies and 3 or 4 days and the voting is still the same....I think it's time to close up shop, nobody's opinions are going to change.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 04:57 PM

Yeah Blake, all people have offered so far is opinions dating back to '94 :lol. Nevermind the horrid shooting % of those other Rocket players, Vernon Maxwell being the 2nd leading scorer at 13 points off 32% shooting, nevermind him being better than Duncan in every statistical category, or being better than him at simply every aspect of basketball. All you have is your weak "4 rings faggot" argument, the same shit Spur fans always fall back on as a crutch when they get upset or owned. Spur fans have been ridiculed so much for the very argument you're presenting that "4 rings faggot" has become a trademark spurstalk phrase. Offer something besides calling people idiots and saying 4>2 before you talk shit to us. If Robert Horry, the man who played along side both guys says it's true, then it's good enough for me. Look at the era of big men Hakeem played in and fast forward to today. Dwight Howard is the undisputed best center in the game, just because of raw athletic ability. He doesn't have a single post move, a shot, any ball handling skills, or really very many basketball skills for that matter. You can't just look at achievements ignoring the difference in era's, building you're entire argument upon "4>2." Discuss a point that hasn't yet been brought up and I'll respond, until then kindly take my dick out of your mouth and fuck off.

Many PackYao

04-15-2009, 04:59 PM

no, I'm not calling them idiots for not agreeing. I'm calling them/you idiots for using nothing but your own opinion from what you remember in 1994 as the basis for your "argument".

It's weak and it's idiotic.

You're asking me this after calling me a dick? ....which was after you basically called anyone who didn't agree with you a "20 something year old that obviously didn't watch Hakeem play"

You are a focking idiot.
I called you a dick for the way you react and respond to people not agreeing with you. You're always trying to turn things around just like a little kid.

Thomas82

04-15-2009, 05:41 PM

Just out of curiosity, does anybody remember how Tim and Hakeem did when they faced each other head to head a few times? I know Tim was just coming to the league and Hakeem was on his way out, but I was just curious about that. What made me curious is seeing that video of Hakeem jumping over Charles Barkley's back to block a fall away shot from Tim.

Lars

04-15-2009, 05:47 PM

endrity

04-15-2009, 05:51 PM

Double-Up

04-15-2009, 06:14 PM

As a career, Duncan > Hakeem. Hakeem had an incredibly high peak, and at that peak he arguably was the best big man ever. But that peak was very short lived, those two years when he won the rings. So if you take the whole body of work in consideration I will take Duncan, not only Mr.Fundamentals but also Mr.Consistency for over 10 years in the league.

Duncan's been more successful winning award/championships but as an individual talent to build a franchise around I'm picking Dream everytime. BTW I never though this thread would go 15 pages...

Blake

04-15-2009, 08:20 PM

Yeah Blake, all people have offered so far is opinions dating back to '94 :lol.

no they have also offered other lame opinions.

Nevermind the horrid shooting % of those other Rocket players, Vernon Maxwell being the 2nd leading scorer at 13 points off 32% shooting

agreed. nevermind teammates shooting %

nevermind him being better than Duncan in every statistical category,

check again, they are practically the same.

or being better than him at simply every aspect of basketball.

other than a few years, the rest is only your opinion. You've got nothing to back it up.

All you have is your weak "4 rings faggot" argument, the same shit Spur fans always fall back on as a crutch when they get upset or owned.

4 rings is only weak to penis envy fans like you whose team has zero rings no matter how much you cry about your fake 2006 title.

And it's not just 4 rings. Other than the short season, it's a 10 year streak of 50+ wins and finishing either 1st or 2nd in the division with totally different teammates than the ones he started with.

It's about winning 60 games and a title with no other all stars on the team.

It's about 2 MVPS while Hakeem has ONE.

Spur fans have been ridiculed so much for the very argument you're presenting that "4 rings faggot" has become a trademark spurstalk phrase.

because 4 rings faggot is good enough to put pussies like you in your place.

Offer something besides calling people idiots and saying 4>2 before you talk shit to us.

I have. I can't help you if you only read the part that says "you're an idiot."

If Robert Horry, the man who played along side both guys says it's true, then it's good enough for me.

good for you. After you get off of Horry's cock, maybe you can do some real research on the subject.

Look at the era of big men Hakeem played in and fast forward to today. Dwight Howard is the undisputed best center in the game, just because of raw athletic ability. He doesn't have a single post move, a shot, any ball handling skills, or really very many basketball skills for that matter.

People said the same things about Robinson too.

You can't just look at achievements ignoring the difference in era's, building you're entire argument upon "4>2."

yes you can because Duncan can't go back and play in the 80s and 90s.

There are plenty of big men in this era that Duncan has had to face that are just as good if not better than the centers of the 90s.

their stats are basically the same

2 MVPs>1MVP
4 Rings> 2Rings

Everything else is speculation.

Discuss a point that hasn't yet been brought up and I'll respond, until then kindly take my dick out of your mouth and fuck off.

Make a decent point other than "Hakeem had sorrier teammates and played against better players" and maybe you get taken a little more serious.

TDMVPDPOY

04-15-2009, 08:23 PM

As a career, Duncan > Hakeem. Hakeem had an incredibly high peak, and at that peak he arguably was the best big man ever. But that peak was very short lived, those two years when he won the rings. So if you take the whole body of work in consideration I will take Duncan, not only Mr.Fundamentals but also Mr.Consistency for over 10 years in the league.

bs, hakeems high peak was only those 2-3 years when jordan was out of the league, every other year was just the same....

Blake

04-15-2009, 08:25 PM

I called you a dick for the way you react and respond to people not agreeing with you. You're always trying to turn things around just like a little kid.

:lol because calling people a dick is real mature. Pot meet kettle. Why don't you open a new thread on me if youre this obsessed.

Stop crying like a 5 year old girl that had her candy stolen and start posting some real material in this thread.

nobody is forcing you to post here, you focking idiot.

Blake

04-15-2009, 08:28 PM

370 replies and 3 or 4 days and the voting is still the same....I think it's time to close up shop, nobody's opinions are going to change.

great. see ya.

Duncan>Hakeem

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 08:45 PM

This guy makes MrChug seem smart and rational

Blake

04-15-2009, 10:48 PM

This guy makes MrChug seem smart and rational

2006 Champions*, Faggot!

you're an idiot.

Thomas82

04-15-2009, 10:48 PM

great. See ya.

Duncan>hakeem

+1

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 10:53 PM

2006 Champions*, Faggot!

you're an idiot.

Lol, your parents named you Blake

One ring, faggot

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:23 PM

Lol, your parents named you Blake

One ring, faggot

lol, you named yourself mavs>spurs

One ring, faggot!

you are a focking idiot.

Blake

04-15-2009, 11:23 PM

lol still waiting for someone to come to your aid

:lmao

that was funny.

you are a focking idiot.

mavs>spurs2

04-15-2009, 11:52 PM

lol still waiting for someone to come to your aid

:lmao

that was funny.

you are a focking idiot.

No, it wasn't funny. Stop laughing at your own jokes, you look lame :td

Blake

04-16-2009, 12:20 AM

No, it wasn't funny. Stop laughing at your own jokes, you look lame :td

:lol yes, it was funny.

you are a focking idiot.

Duncan>Hakeem

Ben Wallace on D>Hakeem on D

One ring, Faggot!

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 12:27 AM

:lol yes, it was funny.

you are a focking idiot.

Duncan>Hakeem

Ben Wallace on D>Hakeem on D

One ring, Faggot!

exactly, one ring faggot

:lmao at you seriously trying to make a case for Ben Wallace over the greatest defender of all time on the basis of "Blake says so." If you're going to make such a bold claim, you better have some groundbreaking evidence to back you up. No one here will agree with you on this one

Blake

04-16-2009, 12:31 AM

exactly, one ring faggot

lol One ring, Faggot!

:lmao at you seriously trying to make a case for Ben Wallace over the greatest defender of all time on the basis of "Blake says so." If you're going to make such a bold claim, you better have some groundbreaking evidence to back you up. No one here will agree with you on this one

hakeem isn't the greatest defender of all time. Bill Russell is.

Ben might not be better than Hakeem, but he's in the same conversation.

Can you really not read? Ben won 4 DPOY awards in 5 years. That's more than enough evidence but I'm sure you'll dismiss it as usual and start talking about "different eras"

You are a focking idiot.

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 12:39 AM

hakeem isn't the greatest defender of all time. Bill Russell is.

You could make a good case for that, although it's very much up for grabs

Ben might not be better than Hakeem

Thanks

Ben won 4 DPOY awards in 5 years.

Ben was a great defender, but Nash is also a 2 time back to back MVP. Shouting out numbers and awards as you so often do isn't always all there is to it. Ben Wallace has looked like complete shit ever since leaving Detroit, and it's no coincidence. He was more a product of Larry Brown's system and the Piston's great team defense, they all covered eachother's asses but Ben got the majority of the credit since he was the anchor. You're really reaching if you're calling Ben the greatest defensive player of all time, because that's what you're saying when you say he > Hakeem since Hakeem and Russell are basically a wash.

Blake

04-16-2009, 12:47 AM

Ben was a great defender, but Nash is also a 2 time back to back MVP. Shouting out numbers and awards as you so often do isn't always all there is to it.

apparently numbers and awards < your opinion.

Awards aren't given out simply on numbers. They are handed out based on supposedly unbiased opinions.

so when hakeem only finishes in the top 10 in MVP voting just SIX times in his long career, that should tell you something.......but I'm gonna bet it doesn't.

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 12:51 AM

apparently numbers and awards < your opinion.

Awards aren't given out simply on numbers. They are handed out based on supposedly unbiased opinions.

so when hakeem only finishes in the top 10 in MVP voting just SIX times in his long career, that should tell you something.......but I'm gonna bet it doesn't.

It tells you that Hakeem had the most dominant several year stretch in basketball of any big man in the modern era, while playing in a tough era. If you miss alot of games, as Hakeem did a couple of those seasons, you're automatically excluded from MVP talks no matter how good you are. Your numbers are an empty hollow argument and don't mean shit. You're nitpicking, Blake. Reaching and grasping at any straw you can find. Ben Wallace > Hakeem? I mean, cmon guy, I'm feeling sorry for you right about now.

Blake

04-16-2009, 12:56 AM

If you miss alot of games, as Hakeem did a couple of those seasons, you're automatically excluded from MVP talks no matter how good you are.

If you miss a lot of games like Michael did in 94 and 95, you are automatically excluded from title talk.

Your numbers are an empty hollow argument and don't mean shit.

because you're an idiot that can't read.

You're nitpicking, Blake. Reaching and grasping at any straw you can find.

you mean like how duncan has 2 MVPs and Hakeem doesnt?

I don't think you know what nitpicking means.

Ben Wallace > Hakeem? I mean, cmon guy, I'm feeling sorry for you right about now.

you really can't read, can you.

I already said Ben might not be better, but belongs in the same conversation.

I feel sorry for illiterates.

Bob Lanier

04-16-2009, 12:59 AM

I already said Ben might not be better, but belongs in the same conversation.
He doesn't.

He belongs in the same tier as Tim Duncan as the best defenders of this decade, but both are below Hakeem Olajuwon, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Bill Russell, and Wilt Chamberlain.

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 01:00 AM

:lol You're the hardest kind of troll to deal with. Your entire gameplan consists of nitpicking, grasping at straws, throwing in some numbers when they suit your case, sprinkled with random insults. 16 Pages and we've accomplished that according to Blake I'm an idiot, 4>2, and 2 MVPs, faggot. Grats

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 01:00 AM

He doesn't.

:lol Thanks

ambchang

04-16-2009, 08:57 AM

Bob McAdoo > Charles Barkley because they have the same # of MVPs and McAdoo have two more rings.

so you think judging someone by the number of MVPs he has is stupid, but judging someone on the way you think he pouted is smart.
great.
But of course Hakeem pouting for the earlier part of his career, threatening a trade and almost destroyed the Rockets franchise was lost on you. This certainly is a better method that looking at awards and titles with absolutely no understanding of how those awards came about.

ambchang

04-16-2009, 09:06 AM

you really can't read, can you.

I already said Ben might not be better, but belongs in the same conversation.

I feel sorry for illiterates.

Why is that? Wallace has 4 DPoY, Hakeem has only two. Why would Wallace not be better by your own definition?

Blake

04-16-2009, 09:20 AM

He doesn't.

He belongs in the same tier as Tim Duncan as the best defenders of this decade, but both are below Hakeem Olajuwon, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Bill Russell, and Wilt Chamberlain.

opinion.

Blake

04-16-2009, 09:24 AM

:lol You're the hardest kind of troll to deal with.

it's even harder to deal with idiots like you that can't read.

nice obsessed meltdown you had on my profile page btw

:lol you're a focking idiot.

Your entire gameplan consists of nitpicking, grasping at straws, throwing in some numbers when they suit your case, sprinkled with random insults.

your entire game plan consists of lousy opinions and "you have to look at the era" arguments.

2 MVPs>1MVP is anything but nitpicking

16 Pages and we've accomplished that according to Blake I'm an idiot, 4>2, and 2 MVPs, faggot. Grats

Agreed. and also that Duncan>Hakeem

you are a focking idiot

Blake

04-16-2009, 09:30 AM

But of course Hakeem pouting for the earlier part of his career, threatening a trade and almost destroyed the Rockets franchise was lost on you. This certainly is a better method that looking at awards and titles with absolutely no understanding of how those awards came about.

yes, Bob McAdoo > Barkley. Why would you throw that out there or think differently?

How does Hakeem's pouting make him a better player than Duncan?

great argument.

Blake

04-16-2009, 09:38 AM

Why is that? Wallace has 4 DPoY, Hakeem has only two. Why would Wallace not be better by your own definition?

That's why I said "might". Looks to me from everything I've read that Wallace can legitimately be called the better defender.

I haven't really researched it much so I'd be willing to listen to an argument if someone gives something legitimate other than "I watched him on TV" or "he played in an era that is better than today"

ambchang

04-16-2009, 10:08 AM

yes, Bob McAdoo > Barkley. Why would you throw that out there or think differently? .
You just have no idea what you are talking about. McAdoo > Barkley.

How does Hakeem's pouting make him a better player than Duncan?
great argument.
Quote me where I said Hakeem's pouting make him a better player than Duncan. Great coming from a man mocking others for not being able to read.
I said Hakeem’s pouting makes Duncan my choice if I were to start a franchise.

That's why I said "might". Looks to me from everything I've read that Wallace can legitimately be called the better defender.
I haven't really researched it much so I'd be willing to listen to an argument if someone gives something legitimate other than "I watched him on TV" or "he played in an era that is better than today"
Why is it even a “might”? Wallace has 4 DPoY, Hakeem has 2 DPoY. It’s as clear as it is. 4>2. So what criteria are you using on this one? Is Wallace better or not? Why was there a moment that you would say that he “might” be? Where is that sliver of doubt coming from?

Bob Lanier

04-16-2009, 11:57 AM

opinion.
Yes, like the opinions of the hacks (no offense intended to our benefactor) who vote for the MVP, DPOY, etc. awards.

Blake

04-16-2009, 01:33 PM

You just have no idea what you are talking about. McAdoo > Barkley.

huh? I agree. McAdoo>Barkley.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I don't think you have an idea what you are talking about.

Quote me where I said Hakeem's pouting make him a better player than Duncan. Great coming from a man mocking others for not being able to read.
I said Hakeem’s pouting makes Duncan my choice if I were to start a franchise.

you said it is stupid to say that player A is better than player B because he has more MVPs....

but then you say Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted......

great logic.

and either you can't read what you wrote or you have a short memory.

Why is it even a “might”? Wallace has 4 DPoY, Hakeem has 2 DPoY. It’s as clear as it is. 4>2. So what criteria are you using on this one? Is Wallace better or not? Why was there a moment that you would say that he “might” be? Where is that sliver of doubt coming from?

why are there so many illiterates in this thread?

Duncan and Hakeem played similar positions and had similar stats across the board.

What separates them is wins, championships and MVP trophies.

Right now, if I had to pick one, I'd pick Wallace as being better. From what I know off the top of my head, other than the 4 DPOY trophies, he has several all star appearances and was the anchor for the 2005 title team, doing nothing really but playing defense.

While Hakeem has guarded against centers for his career, Wallace has succesfully guarded players from positions 1-5.

But that's as far as I know without really researching it. There are other factors to look into, such as how Wallace did nothing but focus strictly on defense and totally sucked ass on offense.

It's the Dennis Rodman rebounding argument......if you take guys like Hakeem and make them strictly defenders or rebounders, I think it's safe to say they would be easily considered among the greats of all time in those categories, based on their physical attributes.

This is the first thread I have ever seen at any basketball board that has tried to compare Wallace with Hakeem, so there's a chance someone can throw something legit out there that would put Hakeem over the top as the better defender.

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 03:23 PM

That's why I said "might". Looks to me from everything I've read that Wallace can legitimately be called the better defender.

I haven't really researched it much so I'd be willing to listen to an argument if someone gives something legitimate other than "I watched him on TV" or "he played in an era that is better than today"

:lmao So you're basing these shit posts of things you've read? That's a trip, you can't base your argument over what you read in the sports page after Ben's last DPOY but anyway I did already give an argument besides watching him on tv.

Ben Wallace has looked like complete shit ever since leaving Detroit, and it's no coincidence. He was more a product of Larry Brown's system and the Piston's great team defense, they all covered eachother's asses but Ben got the majority of the credit since he was the anchor.

Ben was a great defender, but not even close to a Hakeem or a Bill Russell. I'm starting to strongly suspect that you never really saw Hakeem play, never saw him run down guards for the swat on the fast break, or get multiple blocks on a single posession. Ben Wallace is a product of that great Detroit TEAM DEFENSE and Larry Brown's system, as they were still a good defensive team when he left but not great. Ben doesn't even have the physical tools to be compared with Hakeem, he was generously listed at 6'7 and didn't have a particularly long wingspan. Ben played to the best of his abilities and was a great defender, but by putting him over Hakeem defensively you're calling him the greatest defender of all time or close to it, making him a sure top 50 greatest players lock. You're saying he was a greater defender than David Robinson, which is at least more of an equal contest. If you just drop this ridiculous argument, I won't hold it against you in the future.

And as Ambchang pointed out, you're grasping at straws and all over the place when you backtrack and say Ben "might" be not as good a defender as Hakeem. According to your own retarded logic, Ben > Hakeem and it's not even close, hence 4>2. You're going against your very own logic that you've stuck by this entire thread, congrats on selling yourself out.

The Franchise

04-16-2009, 04:00 PM

I say Hakeem for two reasons. 1. I love the Rockets. :p: 2.Put Hakeem in Duncans place and the Spurs are a much better team. Anyone to argue that the Spurs wouldn't be better didn't see Hakeem play.

Blake

04-16-2009, 04:02 PM

:lmao So you're basing these shit posts of things you've read? .

why is an illiterate cuck making fun of someone that can read?

Read as far as "stats". Thanks for verifying that you really don't know how to read correctly.

That's a trip, you can't base your argument over what you read in the sports page after Ben's last DPOY but anyway I did already give an argument besides watching him on tv

yeah, you said he was "the greatest"

great argument.

Ben was a great defender, but not even close to a Hakeem or a Bill Russell. I'm starting to strongly suspect that you never really saw Hakeem play, never saw him run down guards for the swat on the fast break, or get multiple blocks on a single posession.

so you are going back to the TV argument.

great.

Ben Wallace is a product of that great Detroit TEAM DEFENSE and Larry Brown's system, as they were still a good defensive team when he left but not great.

opinion. anyone can easily say that Wallace made them great.

Ben doesn't even have the physical tools to be compared with Hakeem, he was generously listed at 6'7 and didn't have a particularly long wingspan.

comparing physical attributes is a fail.

It has nothing to do with accomplishments.

Ben played to the best of his abilities and was a great defender, but by putting him over Hakeem defensively you're calling him the greatest defender of all time or close to it.

He might just be. He is tied for the most DPoY awards.

making him a sure top 50 greatest players lock.

Fail. Players that play on only one side of the ball, especially on defense, don't usually get that kind of love. See Bruce Bowen.

You're saying he was a greater defender than David Robinson, which is at least more of an equal contest. If you just drop this ridiculous argument, I won't hold it against you in the future.

You're the one saying it. I'm not doing any rankings here.

You can keep on with your uneducated opinions. I'll still probably remember them later.

Your obsessed meltdown on my profile page tells me that you are an insecure b1tch that can't handle getting owned.

And as Ambchang pointed out, you're grasping at straws

he didn't say Im grasping at straws. You did.

hooked on phonics.

and all over the place when you backtrack and say Ben "might" be not as good a defender as Hakeem. According to your own retarded logic, Ben > Hakeem and it's not even close, hence 4>2.

I didn't say "it's not even close" you did.

I've said all along that 2 MVPs to 1 is the deciding factor.

it sucks try to explain this concept an insecure, illiterate hack.

You're going against your very own logic that you've stuck by this entire thread, congrats on selling yourself out.

No I'm not. Nash has 2 MVPs but I've made it pretty clear he is not one of the top great ones because he hasn't played in any Finals games.

Logic is different when talking about best defender of all time.

And let's see if you can read this:

Ben Wallace is the only player to record 1000 rebounds, 100 blocks and 100 steals in 4 consecutive seasons.

I know you would just rather go on what you remember from seeing him on TV 15 years ago, but it really helps an argument when you give some hard numbers..........but DAMn........it requires reading.........SUCKS for you.

YOU are a FOCKING idiot.

Blake

04-16-2009, 04:06 PM

I say Hakeem for two reasons. 1. I love the Rockets. :p: 2.Put Hakeem in Duncans place and the Spurs are a much better team. Anyone to argue that the Spurs wouldn't be better didn't see Hakeem play.

really?

then why couldn't he win a championship playing next to two all stars when he was still option #1?

Anyone to argue that Hakeem would win more titles than Duncan didn't remember Hakeem's injury problems and probably never watches Duncan play.

The Franchise

04-16-2009, 04:07 PM

Blake, comparing Ben Wallace to Hakeem is like comparing shit to ice cream. Everyone likes ice cream unless you're a maggot. :lol

The Franchise

04-16-2009, 04:12 PM

really?

then why couldn't he win a championship playing next to two all stars when he was still option #1?

Anyone to argue that Hakeem would win more titles than Duncan didn't remember Hakeem's injury problems and probably never watches Duncan play.

Because those allstars were washed up by that time. That's like asking why you couldn't win with Larry Bird and Kevin Mchale in 93. I am a Duncan fan but he's no Hakeem.

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 04:12 PM

:lmao Blake. Breaking down my post into fragments so it's easier to twist things around, real mature buddy.

Some things I'd like to point out:

Those Pistons were still pretty good defensively after Ben left, and Ben hasn't done shit since. He got buried on the bench in Chicago. This further proves my point

Comparing physical attributes is NOT fail, slow unathletic players suck at defense, great athletes have a much higher potential as a defender. Just as Earl Boykins and JJ Barrea can never be all nba defenders.

Ambchang DID point out that you sold yourself out, which was pathetic. You realize how silly it is to say Ben > Hakeem and started to backtrack

:lol Since you admitted the numbers game doesn't apply to MVP's in response to Nash, no more using 2>1 as an argument. Thanks for establishing that MVP's aren't the be all and end all of the conversation.

No one is going by 15 year old memories, and I didn't have a meltdown on your page. It was mostly incoherent jibberish posted just to fuck with you, just as I've been doing this entire thread and in others. It's fun going round and round in circles with you and exposing you as a dumbass. I've been a member of this board for over 3 years and don't normally post like this.

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 04:13 PM

Blake, comparing Ben Wallace to Hakeem is like comparing shit to ice cream. Everyone likes ice cream unless you're a maggot. :lol

:lmao This is gold

Blake

04-16-2009, 04:14 PM

Blake, comparing Ben Wallace to Hakeem is like comparing shit to ice cream. Everyone likes ice cream unless you're a maggot. :lol

the maggot likes your post

ambchang

04-16-2009, 04:17 PM

huh? I agree. McAdoo>Barkley.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I don't think you have an idea what you are talking about.

This is hilarious, Bob McAdoo > Barkley, very nice.

you said it is stupid to say that player A is better than player B because he has more MVPs....
but then you say Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted......
great logic.
Coming from a man who likes to lecture others on reading skills, this is quite humourous.

But I can say that if I want to start a franchise, I would pick Duncan. Reasons being:
1) Duncan had a far longer prime
2) Duncan has proven that he can adapt and excel in very different teams.
3) Hakeem pouted for a great chunk of his career, when he was theorhetically in his physical prime, Duncan never did.

First, I never said Duncan was better because of those reasons. Second, it was one of the 3 given reasons. To derive that Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted was wrong on two fronts.

and either you can't read what you wrote or you have a short memory.
why are there so many illiterates in this thread?
Duncan and Hakeem played similar positions and had similar stats across the board.
What separates them is wins, championships and MVP trophies.
Is that based on your opinions? And Ben Wallace DO have similar defensive stats compared to Hakeem. Check the rebounds, blocks and steals. What else is there to separate them?

Right now, if I had to pick one, I'd pick Wallace as being better. From what I know off the top of my head, other than the 4 DPOY trophies, he has several all star appearances and was the anchor for the 2005 title team, doing nothing really but playing defense.
Hakeem has several all star appearances and was the anchor of two title teams, on offense and defense. So the only thing separating the two would be DPoYs?

While Hakeem has guarded against centers for his career, Wallace has succesfully guarded players from positions 1-5.
Wallace guarded 1s and 2s?

But that's as far as I know without really researching it. There are other factors to look into, such as how Wallace did nothing but focus strictly on defense and totally sucked ass on offense.
How would a player being bad on offense translates to better on defense. Just because he concentrated on one end doesn’t mean that he is better on that end than a player who is good on both ends.

It's the Dennis Rodman rebounding argument......if you take guys like Hakeem and make them strictly defenders or rebounders, I think it's safe to say they would be easily considered among the greats of all time in those categories, based on their physical attributes.
Is that your opinion? Is that based off of your memory? What are you basing that on?

This is the first thread I have ever seen at any basketball board that has tried to compare Wallace with Hakeem, so there's a chance someone can throw something legit out there that would put Hakeem over the top as the better defender.
Such as what?

VBM

04-16-2009, 04:22 PM

Really tough call...(I even went with the cop out and chose option 3). However, you gotta go Dream when push comes to shove. Both are impossible to guard, but I think Dream was a better defender...

Blake

04-16-2009, 04:28 PM

:lmao Blake. Breaking down my post into fragments so it's easier to twist things around, real mature buddy.

No, it's easier to answer you point by point.

You're not very good at this.

Some things I'd like to point out:

Those Pistons were still pretty good defensively after Ben left, and Ben hasn't done shit since. He got buried on the bench in Chicago. This further proves my point

you finally made a good, solid point.

congratulations.

Comparing physical attributes is NOT fail, slow unathletic players suck at defense, great athletes have a much higher potential as a defender. Just as Earl Boykins and JJ Barrea can never be all nba defenders.

you just asnwered yourself why it's a fail. Physical attributes show your potential......not what was actually accomplished.

If Hakeem was the greatest defender of all time, he should have had at least 4 DPoY.

Ambchang DID point out that you sold yourself out, which was pathetic. You realize how silly it is to say Ben > Hakeem and started to backtrack

I still say Ben > Hakeem.

But he might not be. If someone makes a focking great argument, I have no problem changing my mind.

so far, you and he are failing.... which is unsurprising.

:lol Since you admitted the numbers game doesn't apply to MVP's in response to Nash, no more using 2>1 as an argumented. Thanks for establishing that MVP's aren't the be all and end all of the conversation.

I made that clear long ago.

Thanks for establising your illiteracy.

No one is going by 15 year old memories,

you are.

and I didn't have a meltdown on your page. It was mostly incoherent jibberish posted just to fuck with you, just as I've been doing this entire thread and in others.

:lol now youre grasping at straws

you're an insecure, obsessed jackass that has to ask others if you are right or not and go post incoherent jibberish on my profile page like some silence of the lambs stalker.

do you lower buckets down and force chicks to put the lotion on?

It's fun going round and round in circles with you and exposing you as a dumbass.

you've done a fine job.

One ring, Faggot!

I've been a member of this board for over 3 years and don't normally post like this.

it must suck to get owned this badly by someone who has been on this board for a few months.

I don't really blame you for the incoherent jibberish.

you are a focking idiot.

Duncan>Hakeem

mavs>spurs2

04-16-2009, 04:33 PM

:lol Blake you haven't owned anyone. I'm like Cartman disguising myself as a cripple in order to compete in the special olympics. I don't really belong here and I think I'll stop before you seriously lower my IQ and other posters start to think bad of me. Peace bro

Blake

04-16-2009, 04:41 PM

This is hilarious, Bob McAdoo > Barkley, very nice.

ok.

Coming from a man who likes to lecture others on reading skills, this is quite humourous.

So now you are saying you didn't say that you like Duncan over Hakeem because Hakeem "pouted"

I clearly read that. Obviously you didn't clearly read your own post.

To derive that Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted was wrong on two fronts.

I absolutely agree. It's why I can't figure out why you even brought up Hakeem pouting at all. It was nothing but a fail.

Is that based on your opinions?

no, it's a fact that Duncan and Hakeem have similar stats and that Duncan has more MVPs.

You're not very good at this either.

And Ben Wallace DO have similar defensive stats compared to Hakeem. Check the rebounds, blocks and steals. What else is there to separate them?

DPoY trophies. It's why I'm putting Wallace ahead of Hakeem.

Hakeem has several all star appearances and was the anchor of two title teams, on offense and defense. So the only thing separating the two would be DPoYs?

On defense yes. The offense part is why Ben would never win an MVP like Hakeem did.

Wallace guarded 1s and 2s?

Yes he did.

“From my memory of watching basketball, I can’t remember a guy wreak so much havoc on so many different parts of the floor,” said Joe Dumars, the Pistons’ president.

Unlike Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, Dumars said, Wallace does not guard only centers. “He can guard 1 through 5. The closest I’ve seen is Rodman,” Dumars, said, referring to his former teammate with the Pistons, Dennis Rodman, a two-time winner of the award.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/09/sports/basketball/09pistons.html

It's great to discuss things with posters that don't have the facts straight.

How would a player being bad on offense translates to better on defense. Just because he concentrated on one end doesn’t mean that he is better on that end than a player who is good on both ends.

A player being bad on offense does not automatically translate to being better on defense. You missed the point.

Is that your opinion? Is that based off of your memory? What are you basing that on?

It's my opinion. It's why I said "I think".

Such as what?

:lol If I knew, I wouldn't be asking you for it.

Good lord.

ambchang

04-16-2009, 05:03 PM

ok.
So now you are saying you didn't say that you like Duncan over Hakeem because Hakeem "pouted"
I clearly read that. Obviously you didn't clearly read your own post.
But that is not what I said you read wrong, you said:

you said it is stupid to say that player A is better than player B because he has more MVPs....
but then you say Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted......
great logic.
Saying someone is better and saying I would take one player over another are entire two different things.

I absolutely agree. It's why I can't figure out why you even brought up Hakeem pouting at all. It was nothing but a fail.
Trying reading the whole paragraph and not cut it up in pieces.

no, it's a fact that Duncan and Hakeem have similar stats and that Duncan has more MVPs.
You're not very good at this either.
What does that have to do with Duncan better than Hakeem? Do you simply derive this formula out of thin air?

DPoY trophies. It's why I'm putting Wallace ahead of Hakeem.
So you are now saying that the DPoY trophies are what separate Wallace from Hakeem. It seems pretty simple to me. Both of them have similar defensive stats, Wallace has 4 DPoY, Hakeem has 2. 4>2. So what MIGHT make Hakeem a better defender?

On defense yes. The offense part is why Ben would never win an MVP like Hakeem did.
So DPoY being the ONLY thing that would separate the two on defense, why would you earlier say that there that “Ben might not be better than Hakeem”?

Yes he did.
It's great to discuss things with posters that don't have the facts straight.
Isn’t this based on Dumar’s memory and opinion? I want facts. I don’t want quotes.

A player being bad on offense does not automatically translate to being better on defense. You missed the point.
What point have I missed? Care to elaborate? Why did you originally put it in your quote saying

But that's as far as I know without really researching it. There are other factors to look into, such as how Wallace did nothing but focus strictly on defense and totally sucked ass on offense.
What was the point of this?

It's my opinion. It's why I said "I think".
And all along you would imagine that people thinking Hakeem faced stronger opposition back in the day based on their observation were not opinions? You are quite bright.

:lol If I knew, I wouldn't be asking you for it.
Good lord.
Since when have you asked me for it?

sook

04-16-2009, 05:51 PM

ambchang probably has the most holistic approach in this thread, props for being one of the few non-homers

sook

04-16-2009, 05:52 PM

Blake is the master of self ownage, I stopped reading after he compared Ben's defense to Hakeem's :lol

sook

04-16-2009, 05:57 PM

If Hakeem was the greatest defender of all time, he should have had at least 4 DPoY.

I still say Ben > Hakeem.

But he might not be. If someone makes a focking great argument, I have no problem changing my mind.

so far, you and he are failing.... which is unsurprising.

I think its fair to say how long someone has been watching basketball or the

NBA rather, when they put forward such an absurd notion. That is the

quintessence of an insane man pleading his case, the epitome of idiocy, when

you think people will give credence to anything you say after that. May the

basketball gods illuminate the dark realm of what you call a "Brain."

Gummi Clutch

04-16-2009, 06:00 PM

I think its fair to say how long someone has been watching basketball or the

NBA rather, when they put forward such an absurd notion. That is the

quintessence of an insane man pleading his case, the epitome of idiocy, when

you think people will give credence to anything you say after that. May the

basketball gods illuminate the dark realm of what you call a "Brain."
LOL OWNAGE. I would still take my man Duncan as a lot people on here put, the better team player but this Blake guy is an idiot, don't listen to him.

Blake

04-16-2009, 07:26 PM

I think its fair to say how long someone has been watching basketball or the

NBA rather, when they put forward such an absurd notion. That is the

quintessence of an insane man pleading his case, the epitome of idiocy, when

you think people will give credence to anything you say after that. May the

basketball gods illuminate the dark realm of what you call a "Brain."

so you are saying you smarter than the MVP voters who have been watching basketball, or the NBA rather, that put forward the absurd notion that Hakeem only be in the top 10 in MVP voting just 6 times in his career.

Either you are absolutely brilliant or you fail.

Seeing as how you are a rocket fan, I'm gonna go with fail.

sook

04-16-2009, 07:51 PM

so you are saying you smarter than the MVP voters who have been watching basketball, or the NBA rather, that put forward the absurd notion that Hakeem only be in the top 10 in MVP voting just 6 times in his career.

Either you are absolutely brilliant or you fail.

Seeing as how you are a rocket fan, I'm gonna go with fail.

Again, I am still in disbelief about the Ben Wallace being better than Hakeemvthing. And if that is the sole basis of your argument, there is nothing more to argue with you noob, you are not an NBA fan, you are a newbie fan that hasn't watched more that 5 years of this league. A cup of bleach is waiting to be trickled down your esophagus this very moment. The NBA, Spurstalk, all the internets is ashamed of your embarrassing assertion.

Don't dig your cum infested hole any deeper.

sook

04-16-2009, 07:53 PM

OMG he wuz only in TOP 10 MVP voting ____ IN HIS CAREER!!!

:lol :lol

This kid can't be serious.

http://www.smidgy.com/smidgy/images/2007/07/26/lol_cat_icanhascheezburger.jpg

Blake

04-16-2009, 08:06 PM

Again, I am still in disbelief about the Ben Wallace being better than Hakeemvthing. And if that is the sole basis of your argument, there is nothing more to argue with you noob, you are not an NBA fan, you are a newbie fan that hasn't watched more that 5 years of this league. A cup of bleach is waiting to be trickled down your esophagus this very moment. The NBA, Spurstalk, all the internets is ashamed of your embarrassing assertion.

Don't dig your cum infested hole any deeper.

your whole argument is that I don't know what I'm talking about.

great argument.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/gallery/featured/GAL1139322/7/12/index.htm

Hakeem is listed at #5, Ben at #7.

wow, that must mean he doesn't belong on the same court as Hakeem.

get off of Hakeem's cock and do some real research, dipshit.

Blake

04-16-2009, 08:11 PM

LOL OWNAGE. I would still take my man Duncan as a lot people on here put, the better team player but this Blake guy is an idiot, don't listen to him.

whatever you say, mouse.

ambchang

04-16-2009, 08:16 PM

so when hakeem only finishes in the top 10 in MVP voting just SIX times in his long career, that should tell you something.......but I'm gonna bet it doesn't.

Hakeem finished top 10 in MVP voting 6 times in his career?
Year Hakeem's MVP voting rank
84-85 #12
85-86 #4
86-87 #7
87-88 #7
88-89 #5
89-90 #7
90-91 #18
91-92 N/A
92-93 #2
93-94 #1
94-95 #5
95-96 #4
96-97 #7

By my count, that's 10 times. He missed it in his rookie year, in 91, he missed most of the season, in 92, he caused a stench and almost destroyed the Rockets franchise. His career started to decline 98.

Blake

04-16-2009, 08:46 PM

But that is not what I said you read wrong, you said:

Saying someone is better and saying I would take one player over another are entire two different things.

so you are saying you would pick the lesser of the two players to start a franchise.

thank God you arent a GM.

Trying reading the whole paragraph and not cut it up in pieces.

I did. How exactly does breaking down your paragraph take away from you saying you don't want Hakeem because he "pouted".

still a great argument.

What does that have to do with Duncan better than Hakeem? Do you simply derive this formula out of thin air?

you asked if it was my opinion or facts. Duncan and Hakeem have similar stats but Duncan has the hardware.

If you have a better formula other than "pouting", then great, put it out there.

So you are now saying that the DPoY trophies are what separate Wallace from Hakeem. It seems pretty simple to me. Both of them have similar defensive stats, Wallace has 4 DPoY, Hakeem has 2. 4>2. So what MIGHT make Hakeem a better defender?

:lol I'm the one waiting for the legitimate reason why Hakeem might be the better defender. Why are you copying and pasting my posts?

So DPoY being the ONLY thing that would separate the two on defense, why would you earlier say that there that “Ben might not be better than Hakeem”?

For now it is. I'm still waiting for a legititmate reason.

But feel free to keep breaking down my posts instead of giving reasons why Hakeem was better.

Isn’t this based on Dumar’s memory and opinion? I want facts. I don’t want quotes.

The article said Wallace played against all different positions. It's what called "quoting a source."

Of course here's a quote from his coach:

"There's never been a player in our era that can impact the game like Ben does defensively," Pistons coach Flip Saunders said. "He can guard five guys on floor -- and sometimes he does it on one play....

....Wallace guarded James at times in Detroit's 113-86 win Sunday over the Cavs in the opener of their second-round series....

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2436694

In a court of law, it would be admitted as evidence, even if you still don't get it.

What point have I missed? Care to elaborate? Why did you originally put it in your quote saying

What was the point of this?

the point was to say that Wallace focused strictly on defense while Hakeem had to focus on his all around game.

Do I need to explain another time? do i need to type slower for you?

And all along you would imagine that people thinking Hakeem faced stronger opposition back in the day based on their observation were not opinions? You are quite bright.

Right and that's all they've been basing it on.

I've been basing it on the hardware.

Pretty tough to argue against hardware, but for some reason, you guys keep trying.

Since when have you asked me for it?

you as in you all. I said I'll be glad to change my mind if there is a legitimate reason.

still waiting.

and I'm sure I won't get it.

in the end, stats+hardware+opinion = Duncan>Hakeem.

/thread

Blake

04-16-2009, 08:53 PM

Hakeem finished top 10 in MVP voting 6 times in his career?
Year Hakeem's MVP voting rank
84-85 #12
85-86 #4
86-87 #7
87-88 #7
88-89 #5
89-90 #7
90-91 #18
91-92 N/A
92-93 #2
93-94 #1
94-95 #5
95-96 #4
96-97 #7

By my count, that's 10 times. He missed it in his rookie year, in 91, he missed most of the season, in 92, he caused a stench and almost destroyed the Rockets franchise. His career started to decline 98.

My mistake.

I meant top 5 just 6 times.....not top ten.

Duncan has been top ten every year and has failed to make the top 5 just twice.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/mvp.html

ambchang

04-17-2009, 08:28 AM

so you are saying you would pick the lesser of the two players to start a franchise.

thank God you arent a GM.
Seems like you are putting your fantastic comprehension skills at work. Since when have I said Duncan was the lesser player? You also seem to have a knack of jumping to illogical conclusions.

I did. How exactly does breaking down your paragraph take away from you saying you don't want Hakeem because he "pouted".
still a great argument.
Why would I want to start a franchise with a player who’s pouting almost broke the franchise apart?
And why aren’t people basing conclusions on their observations not “great arguments”? Is that your opinion?

you asked if it was my opinion or facts. Duncan and Hakeem have similar stats but Duncan has the hardware.
If you have a better formula other than "pouting", then great, put it out there.
I already did, and posted it twice. But then your top-notch reading ability got in the way.

:lol I'm the one waiting for the legitimate reason why Hakeem might be the better defender. Why are you copying and pasting my posts?
It’s pretty cut-and-dry. Why might you even consider it?
Outside of your comprehension ability, you seem to have difficulty grasping the argument that you are being inconsistent in your approach.

For now it is. I'm still waiting for a legititmate reason.
But feel free to keep breaking down my posts instead of giving reasons why Hakeem was better.
Why is the onus on me to prove Hakeem was the better defender? In fact, I am not really that interested in showing it. You are entitled to your opinions.
Besides, you still failed to come up with any criteria that would make convincing possible. You have stated that DPoY awards are the only thing that separates the two. 4>2, what is there to convince? But then at the same time, you said there might be a possibility that Hakeem would be better.
Unless you can come up with a situation where 2>4, I don’t see how you are contradicting yourself in the same thread.

The article said Wallace played against all different positions. It's what called "quoting a source."

Of course here's a quote from his coach:
I am sure quotes from his own coach is not biased at all.

In a court of law, it would be admitted as evidence, even if you still don't get it.
You are a lawyer? Are we in a court of law now?
Here is a quote from a CBS blogger, Brandon Smith:

http://the-big-b.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/view/5816874?tag=Hakeem%20Olajuwon
The Dream" was so good on offense that it made you forget how great his defense was. He was such a good offensive player that people tend to forget the best part of his game was his defense. He was the most athletic center in NBA history and used this too his advantage; most notably being one of only 4 players to record a quadruple-double. He is the 7th all time leader in steals, the highest of any center in history. His defense contributed to two titles for the Rockets. He won the DPOY twice, made 5 NBA All Defensive First teams, and is the only player in history to make the Top 10 in blocks, steals, rebounds, and scoring.
Or All Sports:

http://www.allsports.com/players/hakeem-olajuwon/
Within a few years, Olajuwon became the face of the franchise and became of the league's premier rebounders and shot blockers, as well as a center nimble enough to defend guards on the perimeter, dribble like a point guard and execute his “Dream Shake" series of spins and fakes in the paint

the point was to say that Wallace focused strictly on defense while Hakeem had to focus on his all around game.
And this added to the conversation about their defensive abilities in what manner?

Do I need to explain another time? do i need to type slower for you?
Yes, please do.

Right and that's all they've been basing it on.

I've been basing it on the hardware.

Pretty tough to argue against hardware, but for some reason, you guys keep trying.
Why is it that hard? People getting hardware within different years are judged differently. The competition is different, and the game certainly is different. Rules changed, defenses change, offenses change, and quite a bit is different between this era and the last.

you as in you all. I said I'll be glad to change my mind if there is a legitimate reason.

still waiting.

and I'm sure I won't get it.

in the end, stats+hardware+opinion = Duncan>Hakeem.

/thread
Why do you have to + opinion? Since when has that came in? Why is your opinion more convincing than other people’s opinion?
And why are you expecting me to have a response to a question I have no inclination of answering? You have already made your case that Duncan>Hakeem, others have made their case that Hakeem>Duncan, your refusal to accept their arguments doesn’t make those arguments pointless.

My mistake.

I meant top 5 just 6 times.....not top ten.

Duncan has been top ten every year and has failed to make the top 5 just twice.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/mvp.html
So what is there to argue? You have already set up your own criteria of judging their relative worth and place in history.

mavs>spurs2

04-17-2009, 11:11 AM

:lol You're trying too hard to hold a serious conversation with a moron, you're a good poster but it's just not possible. He will bring you down to his level where he can try to beat you

Bob Lanier

04-17-2009, 11:22 AM

Is Blake the reincarnation of whottt?

sook

04-17-2009, 01:27 PM

Is Blake the reincarnation of whottt?

lol whottt ACTUALLY uses common sense. Saying wallace is a better defender only shows therefore lack of :lol

Most blocked shots in NBA history? Most steals ever for a center? Quadrupole double? How the hell is this guy a better defender than wallace? That was the ultimate suicidal statement.

Double-Up

04-26-2009, 02:06 PM

Wow I wonder if Hakeem could do better with the Spurs current supporting cast than Duncan is? No knock on Tim...but I think he could.

La Peace

04-26-2009, 04:59 PM

I'd take Hakeem.

Larry Joe Bird

07-20-2019, 06:22 PM

1. McHale
2. Duncan
3. Olajuwon

Laker_1995

07-20-2019, 07:00 PM

Duncan greatest PF of all time and top ten player of all time. Absolutely love this nigga. Seen him play at staples years back. Came so damn close to an autograph lmao

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:39 PM

I saw this thread posted before in the Spurs section but wanted to get the opinion of other fanbases. So which would you pick to be your franchise player? Please don't let this become another off topic bashing thread.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tim_duncan/career_stats.html (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tim_duncan/career_stats.html)

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/hakeem_olajuwon/index.html (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/hakeem_olajuwon/index.html)

Dream >>> and it ain't even close. And I don't wanna hear about titles. Give Dream Pop for 20 years then come and talk to me.

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:40 PM

1. McHale
2. Duncan
3. Olajuwon

:lol

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:47 PM

Top 5 big men of all-time

1) KAJ
2) Dream
3) Shaq
4) Wilt
5) Russell

Jim somewhere after that. I just can't get that 2004 Olympic shitstain out if my mind. No other HOF big man has any Bronze Medals in their trophy case.

Edit: David Robinson has one from 1988. Never mind :lol

The best two players in Spurs history have Bronze Medals :rollin :lmao :rollin

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:49 PM

If I recall correctly, Dream has a Gold Medal from 1996. Dream >>> Jim :lmao

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:50 PM

I mean, Jim has been NBA ref-protected his whole NBA career. Them FIBA refs didn't play that shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!! :lmao

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:51 PM

Jim a system playa like Kawhi :lol

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 08:51 PM

How could a then 2x champ win Bronze? Damn :lmao

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 09:13 PM

Does Jim lead the NBA in anything all-time?

NBA blocks leader: Dream (3,830)

Let's look at traditional all-time lists for big men (points, blocks, rebounds and Olympic Medals primarily) and other shit.

Points
Dream: 26,946 (11th)
Jim: 26,496 (14th)
Advantage Dream

Rebounds
Dream 13,748 (13th)
Jim 15,091 (6th)
Advantage Jim

Blocks
Dream 3,830 (1st)
Jim 3,020 (5th)
Advantage Dream

Steals
Dream 2,162 (8th)
Jim 1,025 (158th :lmao)
Advantage Dream

Olympic Medal
Dream Gold (1996)
Jim Bronze (2004 :lmao)
Advantage Dream

So by my unofficial scientific tally, I got Dream winning 4 out of 5 categories. And he played 154 games less than Jim did. :lol

Conclusion: Dream >>> Jim :)

LkrFan

07-20-2019, 09:16 PM

Bonus points: Dream even repeated as champion :downspin:

phxspurfan

07-20-2019, 11:19 PM

Duncan had a much longer prime, better game for longevity (never had some crazy spin move), and was more loyal. Stayed with SA while Hakeem ran away from Houston at the end. Duncan also carried shittier Spurs teams (00-04) than Olajuwon, who played with all stars/future hall of famers in their primes pretty much his whole career.

Robz4000

07-21-2019, 01:43 AM

Ignoring that this thread is TD vs Hakeem, the fact Juancho had to post a dozen times to try to get across his opinion makes me immediately go the opposite direction.

Therefore, TD > Hakeem.

FrostKing

07-21-2019, 04:41 AM

LkrFan

07-21-2019, 07:41 AM

Ignoring that this thread is TD vs Hakeem, the fact Juancho had to post a dozen times to try to get across his opinion makes me immediately go the opposite direction.

Therefore, TD > Hakeem.

:lol

:cry

LkrFan

07-21-2019, 07:46 AM

Duncan + Robinson > Hakeem + Sampson

But I ultimately choose Duncan based on (not big) edge on Defense. Tim not needing to be Alpha in the media (forced today?) and ultimately the Rings / Championships

Edge: Duncan

Note: Tim arguably more effective in "todays NBA"

Wut? Dream is the all-time leader in blocks, 8th in steals (Jim is 158th). Dream absolutely played defense son.

And Dream swept Shaq. Neva lost! :lol Can Jim say he neva lost to Shaq in the playoffs? :downspin:

LkrFan

07-21-2019, 08:17 AM

Arcadian

07-21-2019, 10:23 AM

You made it too easy by framing it as "franchise player" - Timmy was the greatest franchise player of all time.

If you had said "best peak performance," then we might have a reasonable debate.

phxspurfan

07-21-2019, 10:55 AM

Best big man Dream ever played with? Otis Thorpe. Jim? The Admiral. Dream still repeated as champ and Jim didn't :lol

Horry, Barkley, Pippen...

Spurtacular

07-21-2019, 12:22 PM

Best big man Dream ever played with? Otis Thorpe. Jim? The Admiral. Dream still repeated as champ and Jim didn't :lol

The Admiral cost Tim a back to back by insisting on being 1A in 98 against Utah, tbh.

LkrFan

07-21-2019, 01:31 PM

Horry, Barkley, Pippen...
Forgot about Big Shot. The other 2 were TOSBs in Houston.

LkrFan

07-21-2019, 01:32 PM

The Admiral cost Tim a back to back by insisting on being 1A in 98 against Utah, tbh.

Jim cost himself a repeat when big bad shot blocking sensation Battier intimidated him on det pathetic layup attempt :lol

Spurtacular

07-21-2019, 01:53 PM

Jim cost himself a repeat when big bad shot blocking sensation Battier intimidated him on det pathetic layup attempt :lol

TBF, it was him trying to win a championship for the second time after Poop fu'd it.

dbreiden83080

07-22-2019, 10:52 PM

Hakeem carried the team to both championships

With Jordan striking out in the Minor Leagues..

KobeOwnsDuncan

07-22-2019, 11:45 PM

zURUcwgvhDY

7:49 Duncan vs Hakeem = Duncan Travel
8:03 Duncan vs Hakeem = Dream blocking the shit out of Jim

Hakeem had the lateral quickness to guard any position 1-5.

Spurtacular

07-22-2019, 11:52 PM

zURUcwgvhDY

7:49 Duncan vs Hakeem = Duncan Travel
8:03 Duncan vs Hakeem = Dream blocking the shit out of Jim

Hakeem had the lateral quickness to guard any position 1-5.

:lol Those Spurs/Rockets teams would probably kick the shit out of today's Spurs/Rockets teams.

KobeOwnsDuncan

07-22-2019, 11:52 PM

And then getting dunked on by an old ass Dream? Yet somehow that slowass could handle Dream in his prime :lol
dvH9EvWTfBY

Spurtacular

07-23-2019, 12:08 AM

And then getting dunked on by an old ass Dream? Yet somehow that slowass could handle Dream in his prime :lol
dvH9EvWTfBY

Wish that was D-Rob on the help. He had mad hops. He would've sent that shit flying; would've been a much better sight to see over Hakeem barely getting the ball over the rim. Perhaps something epic like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCqefcY7lpI

ambchang

07-23-2019, 06:19 AM

And then getting dunked on by an old ass Dream? Yet somehow that slowass could handle Dream in his prime :lol
dvH9EvWTfBY

So you are saying Hakeem can’t compare to Kevin Johnson?

LkrFan

07-23-2019, 07:02 AM

Wish that was D-Rob on the help. He had mad hops. He would've sent that shit flying; would've been a much better sight to see over Hakeem barely getting the ball over the rim. Perhaps something epic like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCqefcY7lpI

You kidding right? MVP Admiral didn't want any parts of the original Nigerian Nightmare. This, my friend, is the difference between a Gold Medal winner (1996) and a Bronze Medal loser (1988)
e8KycyU47rs

:rollin :lmao :rollin

LkrFan

07-23-2019, 07:05 AM

Prime for Prime, Dream would've destroyed Jim. Ask Shaq about that African smoke :lol

KobeOwnsDuncan

07-23-2019, 07:24 AM

Prime for Prime, Dream would've destroyed Jim. Ask Shaq about that African smoke :lol
Hell, even Robinson said if he started a team, he would pick Hakeem first. Over Duncan :lol

LkrFan

07-23-2019, 08:11 AM

Hell, even Robinson said if he started a team, he would pick Hakeem first. Over Duncan :lol

An ass kicking is like truth serum :lol

Spurtacular

07-23-2019, 09:05 AM

Hell, even Robinson said if he started a team, he would pick Hakeem first. Over Duncan :lol

They played different positions. But if you got a quote....

Larry Joe Bird

07-23-2019, 09:07 AM

1. McHale
2. Duncan
3. Olajuwon

:lol

Check out the 86 Finals stats. My boy outplayed Akeem so badly he was in H. Dude had to change his name to commemorate the ass kicking.

KobeOwnsDuncan

07-23-2019, 09:36 AM

They played different positions. But if you got a quote....
As for Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O’Neal and who was tougher to play against?

“Size wise Shaq was just a monster. You couldn’t move him. From a skills standpoint though, Hakeem had everything. If I’m starting a team that is probably the guy that I would start with.”

- Robinson

KobeOwnsDuncan

07-23-2019, 09:37 AM

He would start his team with Hakeem. Not Duncan :lol

Spurtacular

07-23-2019, 10:01 AM

As for Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O’Neal and who was tougher to play against?
“Size wise Shaq was just a monster. You couldn’t move him. From a skills standpoint though, Hakeem had everything. If I’m starting a team that is probably the guy that I would start with.”

- Robinson

He would start his team with Hakeem. Not Duncan :lol

Well, he did shit on Shaq if you prefer at C. But it's no secret that Duncan was a PF.

ambchang

07-23-2019, 10:23 AM

As for Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O’Neal and who was tougher to play against?

“Size wise Shaq was just a monster. You couldn’t move him. From a skills standpoint though, Hakeem had everything. If I’m starting a team that is probably the guy that I would start with.”

- Robinson

So between shaq and Hakeem, Robinson would choose Hakeem, not duncan. Robinson also picked Hakeem over Jordan, jabbar, magic, bird, Russell and wilt

Double-Up

07-23-2019, 01:39 PM

Damn, time flies.

Thread

07-23-2019, 01:58 PM

Damn, time flies.

Hey, fart face!

Double-Up

07-23-2019, 02:04 PM

Hey, fart face!

Still alive, eh?

Thread

07-23-2019, 04:54 PM

Still alive, eh?

We did have us some times, Dubs.

Arcadian

07-23-2019, 04:57 PM

Both are top 5 all time, above Shaq and Kobe.

:lol GTFO of here, Laker faggots.

Larry Joe Bird

03-01-2020, 12:36 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAEf73XOaYc

FrostKing

03-01-2020, 01:00 AM

Both Hakeem titles occurred before Duncan joined the Association. Flag on titles without Jordan.

daslicer

03-01-2020, 01:17 AM

Duncan in his prime had to take out two defending champs in the Lakers and Pistons. That's much harder than what Hakeem had to deal with.

Spurtacular

03-01-2020, 06:53 PM

Check out the 86 Finals stats. My boy outplayed Akeem so badly he was in H. Dude had to change his name to commemorate the ass kicking.

:lmao

dbreiden83080

03-03-2020, 02:27 PM

Hakeem does not have enough finals appearances for all the love he gets. Ewing lost 4 times in the East to Jordan's Bulls. Who was the West Superpower Hakeem and The Rockets just could not get past?

Larry Joe Bird

03-06-2020, 03:14 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROWAj7pAeZM

FrostKing

03-07-2020, 03:43 AM

From 1984-1991 a team called THE LAKERS with magic Johnson before the AIDS. Durring that stretch Orlando Blackman Mavs werent bad along with Portland and Clyde Drexler.

From 1992-1995 They Did Alright,

After 1996 he was fucking old.

WOW, like you guys never watched the NBA prior to discovering the SPURMS or something
Right but he didn't lose to the Lakers til the 90s. His boogeyman seemed to be the Sonics, losing to them 3 times (twice in the 80s). Jazz also bested him in 80s. And the Mavericks you mentioned

https://i.ibb.co/4ZnWWtc/Screenshot-2020-03-07-00-37-32-1.png

That is a-lot of 1st Round exits

Ed Helicopter Jones

03-10-2020, 05:10 PM

Right but he didn't lose to the Lakers til the 90s. His boogeyman seemed to be the Sonics, losing to them 3 times (twice in the 80s). Jazz also bested him in 80s. And the Mavericks you mentioned

https://i.ibb.co/4ZnWWtc/Screenshot-2020-03-07-00-37-32-1.png

That is a-lot of 1st Round exits

You'll just confuse people with all those FACTS.

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 10:24 AM

Bumping this.. This Quarantine has me watching so many old NBA games.. I watched most of the 94 finals games. I was a kid back then, watching that series, but as an adult I didn't see anything so incredible from Hakeem in those 7 games that screams to me he puts Duncan to shame in any area of the game. Maybe people fell in love with the Dream Shake or something. Sure he destroyed David in 95 and Shaq but Duncan had his epic playoff runs of his own. You beat Shaq/Kobe in 2003 with Tony just out of High School, and Manu mostly getting yelled at by Pop you are pretty fucking great..

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 10:41 AM

From 1984-1991 a team called THE LAKERS with magic Johnson before the AIDS. Durring that stretch Orlando Blackman Mavs werent bad along with Portland and Clyde Drexler.

From 1992-1995 They Did Alright,

After 1996 he was fucking old.

WOW, like you guys never watched the NBA prior to discovering the SPURMS or something

86 they reached the finals.
87 2nd round loss to Sonics. Sonics didn't reach finals..
88 Loss to Dallas. Dallas didn't reach finals..
89 Loss to Sonics. Sonics didn't reach finals.
90 Lost to Lakers
91 Lost to Lakers
92 Missed playoffs
93 Lost to Sonics.

Shouldn't Hakeem have been facing the Lakers most of the 80's? A lot of losses to mediocre teams..

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 03:47 PM

Spurtacular

04-28-2020, 03:59 PM

86 they reached the finals.
87 2nd round loss to Sonics. Sonics didn't reach finals..
88 Loss to Dallas. Dallas didn't reach finals..
89 Loss to Sonics. Sonics didn't reach finals.
90 Lost to Lakers
91 Lost to Lakers
92 Missed playoffs
93 Lost to Sonics.

Shouldn't Hakeem have been facing the Lakers most of the 80's? A lot of losses to mediocre teams..

88 Mavs were not mediocre. The Lakers had to get league welfare against them to make the finals.

Nonetheless, I tend to feel that Hakeem gets over-rated.

94 Rockets basically beat a Suns team in seven that should've beat them in five and been back in the finals. They then beat a Knicks team that frankly should've handled the business. Ewing is such a choker.
95 Rockets were mediocre all season; but Drexler was the add-on that put them over the top as they caught lightning in a bottle. Beating Utah, lucky. Getting past Phoenix again, lucky. Spurs choked; but I wouldn't call it lucky. Playing a team in the finals that worse than all their western opponents. :lol

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 04:10 PM

88 Mavs were not mediocre. The Lakers had to get league welfare against them to make the finals.

Nonetheless, I tend to feel that Hakeem gets over-rated.

94 Rockets basically beat a Suns team in seven that should've beat them in five and been back in the finals. They then beat a Knicks team that frankly should've handled the business. Ewing is such a choker.
95 Rockets were mediocre all season; but Drexler was the add-on that put them over the top as they caught lightning in a bottle. Beating Utah, lucky. Getting past Phoenix again, lucky. Spurs choked; but I wouldn't call it lucky. Playing a team in the finals that worse than all their western opponents. :lol

Ewing was awful in the series. And it was not amazing D by Hakeem that shut him down, he shut himself down.. He loved that Jump shot way too much and settled for it over and over.

Joey Gallo

04-28-2020, 05:38 PM

Jordan was scared of Dream

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 06:53 PM

Jordan was scared of Dream

I don't see why? Dream got dumped out in Round 1 with alarming regularity..

Joey Gallo

04-28-2020, 07:03 PM

I don't see why? Dream got dumped out in Round 1 with alarming regularity..
Hakeem’s teams had a winning record against Jordan. One of the few. Hakeem elevated his performance in the playoffs. Shot 47% against the McHale frontline Celtics. And was the best player on each of his finals teams. Duncan, got outscored by Parker in 07, shot 41% against Ben and Rasheed Wallace, choked about 8 free throws in a pivotal game in the 4th quarter, lost another finals MVP to Kawhi. Statistically, Duncan was only the best finals player twice out of his 5 rings.

Joey Gallo

04-28-2020, 07:04 PM

And yes, Manu was the real MVP in the 05 finals. Everybody knows that.

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 07:54 PM

Hakeem’s teams had a winning record against Jordan. One of the few. Hakeem elevated his performance in the playoffs. Shot 47% against the McHale frontline Celtics. And was the best player on each of his finals teams. Duncan, got outscored by Parker in 07, shot 41% against Ben and Rasheed Wallace, choked about 8 free throws in a pivotal game in the 4th quarter, lost another finals MVP to Kawhi. Statistically, Duncan was only the best finals player twice out of his 5 rings.

I repeat he was out in Round 1 with alarming regularity.. So elevating his level of play in the playoffs looked nice on the stat sheet.. And that's about it.. Larry Bird lost a finals MVP to Cedric Maxwell.. Magic won 3 of the 5 same as Tim. Duncan was better for longer than Hakeem. Easier to build around, and far more lasting success..

Duncan first 8 years of his career did more than Hakeem in his whole career..

98 Round 2
99 Champ Finals MVP
2000 Injured for playoffs
2001 Conference Finals
2002 Round 2
2003 Champs Finals MVP
2004 Round 2
2005 Champs Finals MVP

2 league MVP's and nothing but first team all NBA for 8 years.. Hakeem didn't win like Duncan until late in his career with Jordan playing Baseball. And even then the Knicks pushed them to the limit..

I’m pretty confident Tim Duncan and the 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2014, Spurs would handle business against Patrick Ewing and the Knicks.. Ewing He’s lucky he was injured in 1999. Because Tim Duncan was going to kick his ass.

daslicer

04-28-2020, 09:40 PM

I repeat he was out in Round 1 with alarming regularity.. So elevating his level of play in the playoffs looked nice on the stat sheet.. And that's about it.. Larry Bird lost a finals MVP to Cedric Maxwell.. Magic won 3 of the 5 same as Tim. Duncan was better for longer than Hakeem. Easier to build around, and far more lasting success..

Duncan first 8 years of his career did more than Hakeem in his whole career..

98 Round 2
99 Champ Finals MVP
2000 Injured for playoffs
2001 Conference Finals
2002 Round 2
2003 Champs Finals MVP
2004 Round 2
2005 Champs Finals MVP

2 league MVP's and nothing but first team all NBA for 8 years.. Hakeem didn't win like Duncan until late in his career with Jordan playing Baseball. And even then the Knicks pushed them to the limit..

I’m pretty confident Tim Duncan and the 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2014, Spurs would handle business against Patrick Ewing and the Knicks.. Ewing He’s lucky he was injured in 1999. Because Tim Duncan was going to kick his ass.

Knicks always got pushed to the limits by Miami which had PJ Brown/ZO. Duncan/Robinson was much better than PJ/ZO so I definitely agree the Spurs would have still won had Ewing played.

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 09:43 PM

Knicks always got pushed to the limits by Miami which had PJ Brown/ZO. Duncan/Robinson was much better than PJ/ZO so I definitely agree the Spurs would have still won had Ewing played.

Patrick Ewing was also old and didn’t have much in terms of movement on defense at that stage of his career. But even in his prime he didn’t play well In big playoff series. The 1994 finals I was re-watching a lot of those games, and he basically stopped himself. Constantly settling for bad jump shots and just missing them.

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 09:56 PM

And yes, Manu was the real MVP in the 05 finals. Everybody knows that.

God that is so fucking lame. That’s like Skip Bayless level bullshit right there. Manu played very well, but it’s like “well if you didn’t win the finals MVP Tim that means you fucking suck”. And when he does, you talk shit like he should not have. You should apply for a job on first take. Or undisputed.

daslicer

04-28-2020, 10:12 PM

Patrick Ewing was also old and didn’t have much in terms of movement on defense at that stage of his career. But even in his prime he didn’t play well In big playoff series. The 1994 finals I was re-watching a lot of those games, and he basically stopped himself. Constantly settling for bad jump shots and just missing them.

To me growing up it was weird how Rik Smits always seemed to play him to a standstill. I thought that was a match up he should dominate. He did have some big moments like when he played big in game 7 of the ECF in '94 but your right most of the time he wasn't there when it really mattered in the playoffs. On a side note Ewing's offensive game is very similar to LMA. Both have a fade away, great mid range shot.

dbreiden83080

04-28-2020, 10:31 PM

To me growing up it was weird how Rik Smits always seemed to play him to a standstill. I thought that was a match up he should dominate. He did have some big moments like when he played big in game 7 of the ECF in '94 but your right most of the time he wasn't there when it really mattered in the playoffs. On a side note Ewing's offensive game is very similar to LMA. Both have a fade away, great mid range shot.

Good points. It’s weird because out of college they thought he was going to be a monster on defense and rebounding like Bill Russell. He was good on defense, and a good rebounder. But he ended up being Actually better on offense than any of those categories. But he wasn’t consistent in big moments. He didn’t have classic low post skills. It wasn’t a lack of desire that I saw. He just didn’t get it done. Tim Duncan in only his second season at 23 years of age was ready to become a champion. And play at a dominant level to make it happen.

KobesAchilles

04-28-2020, 11:36 PM

Akeem Olajuwon<<<<<< Tim Duncan. He made it to the finals in 86 but man he was a mess of a player and people forget how bad of a franchise player he was. He fought teammates. He fought coaches. He missed the playoffs. He was so fucked up that the Rockets were trying to trade him. People rarely talk about Akeem Olajuwon.

Hakeem Olajuwon is more competitive when comparing the two players. The sad part is that Hakeem only lasted like 4 years. But for those 4 years he was pretty damn dominate. Once the Rockets got an actual coach and a game plan on how to build a team around him, they were amazing. I mean peak for peak it’s hard to decide. Both won a championship without another all star on the team (only 4 people have ever done that as lead dog). Both had amazing all time performances in the playoffs. Both were monsters on defense. Both were so fundamentally sound and unguardable. Career wise it isn’t even close as obviously Duncan had the better career, but I think I would choose peak Hakeem over peak Duncan. Though barely.

Sidenote: Drexler really saved Hakeem’s legacy as well as the 95 Rockets SUCKED in the regular season without him. I know they had some injuries but they weren’t even in the playoffs when they got Drexler and had to win like 16 out of there last 20 to even get the 6th seed. But once they did make the playoffs, Olajuwon dominated and that’s why I chose him slightly over Tim. I haven’t seen a player that dominate ever. He went through every big man in the game to win and that’s damn impressive to me. Ewing, Malone, Barkley, Robinson, Shaq. They all fell to Hakeem.

Joey Gallo

04-29-2020, 12:24 AM

God that is so fucking lame. That’s like Skip Bayless level bullshit right there. Manu played very well, but it’s like “well if you didn’t win the finals MVP Tim that means you fucking suck”. And when he does, you talk shit like he should not have. You should apply for a job on first take. Or undisputed.
Manu was actually better that entire playoff run

Joey Gallo

04-29-2020, 12:24 AM

At the age of 28 for Duncan, Manu outplayed Duncan in the playoffs in 05.

FrostKing

04-29-2020, 03:46 AM