Kobe or Hakeem

[blink]

in their primes, who do you pick to build a team/contend for a championship with?

[Donkeybong]

kobe

[Culburn369]

Kobe.

Hakeem fell off a cliff at the end/squared the curve. That's a great lifespan strategy, but, sucks for an NBA career. There was no gradual decline.

[blink]

how the fck do you add a poll, this crap is all kinds of fubar'd

[mavs>spurs2]

Kobe.

Hakeem fell off a cliff at the end/squared the curve. That's a great lifespan strategy, but, sucks for an NBA career. There was no gradual decline.

Except he said IN THEIR PRIMES which has nothing to do with their declines

Hakeem. No one dominated both sides of the ball like he did

[ElNono]

Some people need to learn how to read (yeah, that means you Culbert...)

in their primes

It's a difficult question to answer because they play two different positions and the rules were also different back then...

In what era we're talking about here?

[Culburn369]

Yer right, I misread the query. My fault.

[Darthkiller]

hakeem in his prime was better than Jordan.

[NuGGeTs-FaN]

If your are building the Denver Nuggets, then you take Hakeem. You don't want Kobe living in Colorado

Anywhere else = Kobe

[Chieflion]

Hakeem. Plays both sides of the court as a big. A wing player like Kobe cannot anchor an interior defense.

[Cane]

Hakeem. Basketball is a big man's game and he was one of the best big men. If he was in his prime today he'd be the best big in the league and right there at the #1 overall spot.

If you want to win with Kobe you have to deal with primadonna bullshit and either have a prime HOF like Shaq or steal another team's cornerstone player such as Gasol.

[Culburn369]

If you want to win with Kobe you have to deal with primadonna bullshit and either have a prime HOF like Shaq or steal another team's cornerstone player such as Gasol.

Or, have Fish take a sighting off the top of Nelson's head from 23 feet out.

tee, hee.

[PGDynasty24]

Hakeem. Basketball is a big man's game and he was one of the best big men. If he was in his prime today he'd be the best big in the league and right there at the #1 overall spot.

If you want to win with Kobe you have to deal with primadonna bullshit and either have a prime HOF like Shaq or steal another team's cornerstone player such as Gasol.

like when Duncan had Stephen Jackson,David Robinson,Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli?

[Cane]

As usual Lakers fans get their panties in a bunch. This is a thread about Kobe versus Hakeem. A prime Hakeem > everyone in the league now including Duncan.

[FkLA]

In his prime Dream is probably the best big man ever, if he wouldve maintained that level longer there probably wouldnt be any doubt about who the best Center ever was.


like when Duncan had Stephen Jackson,David Robinson,Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli?

You mean 48 yr old Robinson? Wild an erratic rookie Ginobili? 2nd year Parker that got benched in favor or Speedy fucking Claxton in the 4th qtr of numerous games? And journeyman Stephen Jackson?

[mystargtr34]

like when Duncan had Stephen Jackson,David Robinson,Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli?

Or when Mr 35% Kobe had Shaq, Malone and Payton and still couldnt win.

[HarlemHeat37]

Hakeem needed just an average/above average championship supporting cast, Kobe needed collusion..hmmmm...

[mystargtr34]

Career wise Kobe, but those two title years for Hakeem is second to none.

Why career wise Kobe? What did he do prior to last season that was better than anything Hakeem did out of his prime.

Not counting second fiddle championships.

[mystargtr34]

What idiot makes a comparison, then handicaps one of the players in the comparison. Dude, don't post in this tread again. PM me to get permission first.

:lol i cant take you seriously.

[baseline bum]

Hakeem by a mile.

[iggypop123]

how long was hakeems prime? kobe's is still going

[dirk4mvp]

Hakeem. Best post player of all time? Give me that guy.

[eisfeld]

In their primes Hakeem get's the edge with his dominating game on both ends of the court. Still, with the knowledge we have now about the careers of Kobe and Hakeem it would be Kobe. He's able to play at a high level longer than Hakeem could.

[Culburn369]

Your step children, the Pistons

:rollin

[LakeShow]

In their primes Hakeem get's the edge with his dominating game on both ends of the court. Still, with the knowledge we have now about the careers of Kobe and Hakeem it would be Kobe. He's able to play at a high level longer than Hakeem could.

I agree with this.

I am a big fan of Hakeem and Kobe, with what I know about their careers, I would take Kobe.

[lefty]

Except he said IN THEIR PRIMES which has nothing to do with their declines

Hakeem. No one dominated both sides of the ball like he did
I fully agree


Plus, when the Rockets won the title in 1994, he didn't have the talent around him that Kobe has today

[ambchang]

Hakeem had more than 2 years of prime.
He 20/12/3/2 for 8 years, then 26/11/4/2 for four years.
He needed a particular kind of team for him to win championships (surrounded by 3 pt shooters), but so did Bryant (3pt shooting PG and dominating inside play).

Hakeem by a mile, either in their primes for throughout their careers.

[LakeShow]

Hakeem had more than 2 years of prime.
He 20/12/3/2 for 8 years, then 26/11/4/2 for four years.
He needed a particular kind of team for him to win championships (surrounded by 3 pt shooters), but so did Bryant (3pt shooting PG and dominating inside play).

Hakeem by a mile, either in their primes for throughout their careers.

I find this to be one of lamest comments on this forum. Please tell me, what former champion did not need a particular type of team to win? That is ridiculous. Particular kinds of teams are what win championships. If they didn't need a special kind of team they would have won championships every year. :rolleyes

[weebo]

Didn't Kobe go seek out Hakeem this past summer to help him with his post game? That right there speaks volumes to me. Why didn't he seek out some other scrub? He went to probably the greatest big man of all time to seek help and advise. However, ofcourse, laker fans will never admit that Kobe is 2nd tier to anyone, aside from maybe MJ.

[TheMACHINE]

ill take Kobe...he'll dominate you in the post AND dominate you in the peremiter..and his defense aint so shabby either. ;)

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

For 1 year, give me 1994 or 1995 Hakeem.

For the next 10 years, give me Kobe. I get more respect for this guy every time I've watched him play this year. He's added more to his game than Lebron and Dwight have combined, the sad part for them is he's the one who didn't need to add to his game. They shoulda been the ones begging Hakeem to give them an edge.

[JamStone]

Malone didn't play. Your step children, the Pistons, they can only beat us when we have starters injured, 89/04.

Interesting. The only time the Lakers beat the Pistons in the NBA Finals, Isiah had a severely sprained ankle in game 6 and still dropped 43 points on that ass, 25 points in a quarter even after that ankle sprain. And, the Lakers needed a phantom foul call on Laimbeer on a Kareem sky hook. How do you foul a guy shooting a sky hook?

Lakers could only beat the Pistons in the Finals when the Pistons best player was walking on one foot and still needed help with a foul call.

:toast

[JamStone]

In his absolute prime, Hakeem was probably the greatest basketball player ever. Completely dominated both sides of the ball. For their first title, had a very weak supporting cast. And, as several have mentioned already, although it's not 100% true all the time, I still take the dominant big man over the dominant perimeter player.

I'm admittedly a Kobe fan, but I'd take Hakeem in his prime.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I'd take Hakeem in his prime.


Me too, but, Kobe's prime has lasted a lot longer than Olajuwon's has so in the long run it's Kobe.

It's scary to think of what would've happened if that rumored Sampson for Clyde and the #2 overall pick draft day deal went down, Hakeem + MJ + Clyde :wow

[Culburn369]

Plus, when the Rockets won the title in 1994, he didn't have the talent around him that Kobe has today

Poppycock.

[Culburn369]

How do you foul a guy shooting a sky hook?

You cheat & fail.

[JoeTait75]

I'd take Hakeem over Kobe in a second. I'd take Hakeem over LeBron too while I'm at it. Actually, I'd take Hakeem over pretty much any wing player who's ever played outside of MJ.

[boston.balla]

if we are discussing people in their prime i'd take hakeem over ANYONE for 5v5 ball. Furthermore, in a 1v1 game kobe is the best ever. I'll put it this way: "if kobe gets the ball than nobody will receive it until the game is finished" if the foul calls are legit.

[JamStone]

You cheat & fail.

2003-04 Lakers?

[Culburn369]

2003-04 Lakers?

No, Laimbeer thinkin' he could sneak a foul in on Jabbar.

Uh, uh.

[JamStone]

So you're saying the 2003-04 Lakers is not the "cheat & fail" you were referring to, just a different "cheat & fail?"

[Culburn369]

So you're saying the 2003-04 Lakers is not the "cheat & fail" you were referring to, just a different "cheat & fail?"

Yes, that's what I'm stating: The 2003-04 Lakers were not cheat & fail.

What was cheat & fail was Laimbeer figuring he'd try and sneak a foul in hoping that the refs wouldn't call it.

Uh, uh.

[JamStone]

Cool, Cul.

But, the 2003-04 LA Lakers were definitely a cheat & fail.

[Culburn369]

But, the 2003-04 LA Lakers were definitely a cheat & fail.

Horseshit.

[BlackBellamy]

Nobody's winning a 'ship without a quality big man on their squad. Is there better quality to be had at 5 than Hakeem in his prime? Kobe's an all time great too, but this is a pretty obvious vote for the Dream, in my opinion.

[JamStone]

Horseshit.

Agreed.

The 2003-04 LA Lakers were horseshit as well as being a cheat & fail.

Good point, Cul.

[BlackBellamy]

Agreed.

The 2003-04 LA Lakers were horseshit as well as being a cheat & fail.

Good point, Cul.

:lol Now this thread is going on for-fucking-ever.

[Culburn369]

Agreed.

The 2003-04 LA Lakers were horseshit as well as being a cheat & fail.

Good point, Cul.

Horseshit.

[ambchang]

I find this to be one of lamest comments on this forum. Please tell me, what former champion did not need a particular type of team to win? That is ridiculous. Particular kinds of teams are what win championships. If they didn't need a special kind of team they would have won championships every year. :rolleyes

Duncan won with 3 very different teams, for starters.

Magic won with 2 very different teams (80 vs. 87 and 88, 85 is somewhere in between).

Champs don't necessarily win every year if they don't need a particularly different type of team to win, that logic is so twisted, I am not even sure how that conclusion came about.

[lefty]

Kobeem Bryantuwon

[Culburn369]

Duncan won with 3 very different teams, for starters.

Magic won with 2 very different teams (80 vs. 87 and 88, 85 is somewhere in between).

Champs don't necessarily win every year if they don't need a particularly different type of team to win, that logic is so twisted, I am not even sure how that conclusion came about.

& Kobe won with two very different teams.

[ambchang]

As a supporting member, and then as a lead, yes.

I should have clarified and said led his team to championships with very different teams.

Or else we would have to include players like Horry and Rodman.

[Lars]

Pssh Dream schools Kobe

(literally, like a month ago)

[pauls931]

After watching him wreck the best suns teams repeatedly while surrounded by scrubs, I'll go with Hakeem. Dominant on both ends of the floor. Many people like Cassel, Horry, and Kenny owe everything they have to the Dream.

[noob cake]

Hakeem owned HoF centers in his career.

Kobe vs who???

[Culburn369]

After watching him wreck the best suns teams repeatedly while surrounded by scrubs, I'll go with Hakeem. Dominant on both ends of the floor. Many people like Cassel, Horry, and Kenny owe everything they have to the Dream.

It was sweet....

- "It's over."

- A.C. Green - in Houston, up 3-1, heading back to Phoenix.

***Watching Hakeem sternly admonishing Smith for fouling KJ instead of letting him come to Hakeem.

***Elie sternly admonishing Horry not to go after Ainge---after the f'k had thrown the inbounds straight into Elie's face. Horry heard him, waited his chance then threw towel into Coach Ainge's face, summarily exiled to Los Angeles he later put CWEBB & the Adelbrained one to their knees and put a 9MM slug right behind their ear. Just like that.

[pauls931]

Ya, I forgot Mario....

[Culburn369]

Ya, I forgot Mario....

***Mario, throwing Colangelo a kiss after he buried that last 3 and the Suns with it.

[Culburn369]

****Mario, the stupid ass signing in here...then getting humiliating after Colangelo sent him and the rest of the team into area malls to hawk tickets. Good Lord.

[IronMexican]

Hakeem. I almost always go big man.

[JoeTait75]

***Mario, throwing Colangelo a kiss after he buried that last 3 and the Suns with it.

I thought it was Joe Kleine, but it could have been Colangelo.

That '95 Rockets team is one of my all-time favorites. Show me a more impressive playoff run against tougher odds. For my money, there isn't one.

[Culburn369]

I thought it was Joe Kleine, but it could have been Colangelo.

That '95 Rockets team is one of my all-time favorites. Show me a more impressive playoff run against tougher odds. For my money, there isn't one.

No, it was Colangelo.

I thought that series was over at 3-1. Barkley could never close the deal. Not in the '93 Finals and two years later he couldn't.

[Allanon]

To build a franchise/championship team around, I'd take Kobe in his prime; hands down.

Hakeem didn't hit his prime until around 32 years old. It's no surprise his prime was short lived...he was already a bit too old. You don't start to build franchises around 32 year old players...especially big men. In his prime, Hakeem was > Jordan > Kobe. This is why Kobe went to see Hakeem over the summer, to learn from the best.

Hakeem was the best, but, by the time Hakeem was 34, he started showing his age with only 2 short prime years.

Kobe on the other hand; we don't even know when his prime is, seems like it's been on-going for 4-5 years already and he's better today than he was 4 years ago. Kobe's leading the league in scoring at a ridiculous (for a SG) 49FG% and 30ppg.

Just like Michael, Kobe took his game to the post after age 30. Many forget MJ didn't win his 4th championship until he was 33 years old and continued to be a dominant player past 36 years old and his 6th ring. And like MJ, I think Kobe's ring last year is just the start of many more to come.

[LakeShow]

Duncan won with 3 very different teams, for starters.

Magic won with 2 very different teams (80 vs. 87 and 88, 85 is somewhere in between).

Champs don't necessarily win every year if they don't need a particularly different type of team to win, that logic is so twisted, I am not even sure how that conclusion came about.

Ok, I must have confused this thread with the others. I thought you were insinuating that Theodore didn't need a special team to win a title. That you could throw anybody out there and he would win. My bad

[Medvedenko]

I love the Dream, but for longevity I take #24.

[TheSullyMonster]

One year? Hakeem.

[ffadicted]

Hakeem, because when in doubt, take the big man (except for oden/durant, but anyone who thought oden was gonna be good is an idiot)

[Allanon]

Hakeem, because when in doubt, take the big man (except for oden/durant, but anyone who thought oden was gonna be good is an idiot)

I think Oden's gonna be good. Maybe not HoF'er but a top NBA center.

I'm ok with being an idiot until it happens though. :lol

[Chieflion]

Hakeem, because when in doubt, take the big man (except for oden/durant, but anyone who thought oden was gonna be good is an idiot)
I think you are mistaken. Oden has blossomed and is recording 11/8 in 24 minutes of playing time and leads all centers in PER. He still gets called for really stupid fouls that has nothing to do with him. Plus, the Blazers are one of the top defensive teams this season and much of it has to do with Oden.

[IronMexican]

Hakeem, because when in doubt, take the big man (except for oden/durant, but anyone who thought oden was gonna be good is an idiot)

A lot of people must be idiots then. I think about 25 in 30 GM's take Oden, at the least.

[JamStone]

To build a franchise/championship team around, I'd take Kobe in his prime; hands down.

Hakeem didn't hit his prime until around 32 years old. It's no surprise his prime was short lived...he was already a bit too old. You don't start to build franchises around 32 year old players...especially big men. In his prime, Hakeem was > Jordan > Kobe. This is why Kobe went to see Hakeem over the summer, to learn from the best.

Hakeem was the best, but, by the time Hakeem was 34, he started showing his age with only 2 short prime years.

Kobe on the other hand; we don't even know when his prime is, seems like it's been on-going for 4-5 years already and he's better today than he was 4 years ago. Kobe's leading the league in scoring at a ridiculous (for a SG) 49FG% and 30ppg.

Just like Michael, Kobe took his game to the post after age 30. Many forget MJ didn't win his 4th championship until he was 33 years old and continued to be a dominant player past 36 years old and his 6th ring. And like MJ, I think Kobe's ring last year is just the start of many more to come.

Why do you think Hakeem's prime only started when he won his first title?

In his second season in the league, he was already putting up 23/11/3. By his third season, he was already first team all NBA and all NBA defense. He was all NBA first team in 1987, 1988, and 1989 in his third, fourth, and fifth seasons, from the ages of 24 through 26. He won his two rebounding titles when he was 26 and 27, the blocked shots titles when he was 27, 28, and 30. He started dominating the league very early on in his NBA career.

His very first season in Houston, he helped improve their record from 29 wins to 48 wins, his rookie season. He helped lead the Rockets to a 51 win season by his second season and a trip to the NBA Finals, his second season.

I don't know why you assume Hakeem's prime only started the season he won his first title. It's like suggesting Kobe wasn't in his prime from 2002-03 through 2007-08, from age 24 through 29, because he wasn't winning any titles during that time.

Hakeem's prime started much earlier than when he was 32. He was dominating the league a couple seasons into his NBA career. The title years may have been his peak, but his prime was much longer than you suggest.

[Allanon]

Why do you think Hakeem's prime only started when he won his first title?

In his second season in the league, he was already putting up 23/11/3. By his third season, he was already first team all NBA and all NBA defense. He was all NBA first team in 1987, 1988, and 1989 in his third, fourth, and fifth seasons, from the ages of 24 through 26. He won his two rebounding titles when he was 26 and 27, the blocked shots titles when he was 27, 28, and 30. He started dominating the league very early on in his NBA career.

His very first season in Houston, he helped improve their record from 29 wins to 48 wins, his rookie season. He helped lead the Rockets to a 51 win season by his second season and a trip to the NBA Finals, his second season.

I don't know why you assume Hakeem's prime only started the season he won his first title. It's like suggesting Kobe wasn't in his prime from 2002-03 through 2007-08, from age 24 through 29, because he wasn't winning any titles during that time.

Hakeem's prime started much earlier than when he was 32. He was dominating the league a couple seasons into his NBA career. The title years may have been his peak, but his prime was much longer than you suggest.

Hakeem was a good player prior to the championship years but he didn't learn to be a great player until the mid 90's. His 22ppg average through the early part of his career was very mediocre for a superstar. We're comparing Hakeem to Kobe in this discussion...he may have been good compared to other players but not in comparison to Kobe.

Kobe was/is easily better than Hakeem prior to his championship years.

[duhoh]

as great as kobe is, the dream carried a pile of crap to a title. but then again, kobe took a even bigger pile of crap to the playoffs, so moot-point?

[JamStone]

You can't be serious. Not all superstars are 30 ppg type scorers.

Tim Duncan has only averaged more than 23 ppg once in his career. Are we still waiting for him to be a superstar? Magic Johnson averaged over 22 ppg only three times in his career. Guess Magic was a mediocre superstar too. Your logic fails.

Hakeem's scoring average is actually pretty consistent through the "prime" of his career, starting in his second season. The years he was averaging 26-27 ppg, he was playing around 40 mpg while when he was averaging 22-23 ppg, he was playing around 36 mpg.

He was FIRST TEAM ALL NBA his third, fourth, and fifth at the ages of 24-26. He wasn't just "good" compared to other players. He was the best compared to other players in the league by his third season in the league.

And, while this thread is about comparing Hakeem and Kobe, that's not what I have issue with. I have issue with you suggesting and assuming Hakeem didn't hit his prime until he was 32 in the season when he won his first title. It's blatantly inaccurate to suggest that. And all you have is the fact he was averaging 22 ppg? Well heck, Kobe never averaged double digits in rebounding or assists, so I guess he never had a prime at all.

[Allanon]

You can't be serious. Not all superstars are 30 ppg type scorers.

Tim Duncan has only averaged more than 23 ppg once in his career. Are we still waiting for him to be a superstar? Magic Johnson averaged over 22 ppg only three times in his career. Guess Magic was a mediocre superstar too. Your logic fails.

Hakeem's scoring average is actually pretty consistent through the "prime" of his career, starting in his second season. The years he was averaging 26-27 ppg, he was playing around 40 mpg while when he was averaging 22-23 ppg, he was playing around 36 mpg.

He was FIRST TEAM ALL NBA his third, fourth, and fifth at the ages of 24-26. He wasn't just "good" compared to other players. He was the best compared to other players in the league by his third season in the league.

And, while this thread is about comparing Hakeem and Kobe, that's not what I have issue with. I have issue with you suggesting and assuming Hakeem didn't hit his prime until he was 32 in the season when he won his first title. It's blatantly inaccurate to suggest that. And all you have is the fact he was averaging 22 ppg? Well heck, Kobe never averaged double digits in rebounding or assists, so I guess he never had a prime at all.

I'd give a pass to Hakeem on sub-par scoring if he won rings. He was a good player prior to age 32 but not a great player compared to players like Duncan, Magic and Kobe.

Tim Duncan won rings scoring 22ppg, Hakeem did not. Magic won rings scoring 22ppg, Hakeem did not.

So Hakeem neither had outstanding Superstar numbers nor did he win rings.

Kobe's won rings and had oustanding Superstar numbers. Hakeem didn't do this until he was 32 years old and finally put all aspects of his game together.

No comparison really.

[JamStone]

You didn't qualify the 22 ppg. You said 22 ppg was mediocre for a superstar. Period. Now you want to change it and qualify it by adding that it's ok if you win a ring. Clearly back-pedaling b.s.

Winning rings still takes a team effort. Hakeem had already become a superstar as early as his second season in the league.

In Hakeem's second season when the Rockets made the NBA Finals and lost to Boston, Hakeem averaged 27 ppg, 12 rpg, and 3 bpg in those playoffs, while leading that Rockets team past the defending Championship LA Lakers in the Western Conference Finals. That same Laker team featuring Magic, Kareem, and Worthy.

Ask Magic if Hakeem didn't hit his prime until 32.

[Spursfan092120]

hakeem in his prime was better than Jordan.
:lmao:lmao

[Allanon]

You didn't qualify the 22 ppg. You said 22 ppg was mediocre for a superstar. Period. Now you want to change it and qualify it by adding that it's ok if you win a ring. Clearly back-pedaling b.s.

Disagreeing with thrown out numbers compared to Duncan, Magic, Kobe is back-pedaling? hahah. Would you shoot me down if I stupidly brought in Dwight's 20ppg and 14 rebounds? :lol

I'm refuting your stance that 22ppg is acceptable in this conversation of Kobe vs Hakeem. Next thing you know, you're going to bring up irrelevant stuff like Robert Horry's 8 rings to make him the greatest like the basic sheep does.

If you ain't winning and/or having outstanding superstar numbers, you're not great. Simple stuff.



Winning rings still takes a team effort. Hakeem had already become a superstar as early as his second season in the league.

Hakeem was a superstar; so was Kobe. Pretty irrevelant in comparing the two players.



In Hakeem's second season when the Rockets made the NBA Finals and lost to Boston, Hakeem averaged 27 ppg, 12 rpg, and 3 bpg in those playoffs, while leading that Rockets team past the defending Championship LA Lakers in the Western Conference Finals. That same Laker team featuring Magic, Kareem, and Worthy.

Ask Magic if Hakeem didn't hit his prime until 32.

Flukes happen. Outside of this fluke; he didn't reach the promised land again until he was 32.

Just ask LeBron in 2007.

[mystargtr34]

I'd give a pass to Hakeem on sub-par scoring if he won rings. He was a good player prior to age 32 but not a great player compared to players like Duncan, Magic and Kobe.

Tim Duncan won rings scoring 22ppg, Hakeem did not. Magic won rings scoring 22ppg, Hakeem did not.

So Hakeem neither had outstanding Superstar numbers nor did he win rings.

Kobe's won rings and had oustanding Superstar numbers. Hakeem didn't do this until he was 32 years old and finally put all aspects of his game together.

No comparison really.

Wow.

[Allanon]

Wow.

Do you think Hakeem in his 20's was a Kobe, Duncan, Magic caliber player?

[mystargtr34]

Do you think Hakeem prior to his championship years was a Kobe, Duncan, Magic caliber player?

Absolutely, he was. He was every bit the player Duncan was...

88-89 - 24.8 PPG, 13.5 RPG, 1.8 APG, 2.6 SPG, 4.6 BPG
89-90 - 24.3 PPG, 14.0 RPG, 2.9 APG, 2.1 SPG, 4.6 BPG

You are saying Hakeem in 1988-1990, before his 'prime' wasnt of the caliber of Duncan and Magic? I struggle to even put Kobe in that group in terms of all time. Any scoring advantage Kobe has on Hakeem which you brought up, is made by Hakeem being the best defensive player, EVER. And then some.

Just look at those numbers, no player can touch that today. He makes Dwight Howard look like freakin role player.

[Allanon]

Absolutely, he was. He was every bit the player Duncan was...

88-89 - 24.8 PPG, 13.5 RPG, 1.8 APG, 2.6 SPG, 4.6 BPG
89-90 - 24.3 PPG, 14.0 RPG, 2.9 APG, 2.1 SPG, 4.6 BPG

You are saying Hakeem in 1988-1990, before his 'prime' wasnt of the caliber of Duncan and Magic? I struggle to even put Kobe in that group in terms of all time. Any scoring advantage Kobe has on Hakeem which you brought up, is made by Hakeem being the best defensive player, EVER. And then some.

Just look at those numbers, no player can touch that today. He makes Dwight Howard look like freakin role player.

Dwight put up close numbers last year...and Dwight is nowhere near the caliber of Duncan, Magic and Kobe.

I think you're selling Tim Duncan and Magic way short, in addition to their stats, they were championship winners.

Kobe has been a great defender while putting up godly scoring. Kobe's made the All Defensive first team numerous times. All the while being considered the best player in the game... a distinction I think Hakeem only held in 95.

[Allanon]

Just look at those numbers, no player can touch that today. He makes Dwight Howard look like freakin role player.

In 2008-2009, Dwight put up

21 points, 14 rebounds, and 3 blocks.

So Hakeem scored 3 more points and added 1.5 more blocks and that makes Hakeem a Tim Duncan caliber player but Dwight is a role-player with those numbers?

That doesn't make sense to me. By your logic, Dwight is a Duncan caliber player and that's just laughable.

[mavs>spurs2]

allanon is so fucking dumb, i don't have the patience to argue with him right now. i'll be back to battle you after a good nights sleep, you're giving me a headache

[Allanon]

Hahah Mavs > Spurs is still butt-hurt over my previous pwnage. Run along to bed now, see you tomorrow M>S :lol

[mavs>spurs2]

there was no pwnage involved, but you putting kobe ahead of the 2nd best player of the modern era and best defensive player of all time is pwning the fuck out of my head.

I think i could come up with a cure for cancer and aids before i could even attempt to comprehend your shitty logic

[Allanon]

there was no pwnage involved, but you putting kobe ahead of the 2nd best player of the modern era and best defensive player of all time is pwning the fuck out of my head.

Don't be stupid.

I said Kobe is better than Hakeem in his years prior to the championships. Hakeem was a basketball god during the championship years, nobody denies that.

I'd like to see your counter and proof tomorrow on how Hakeem was better (prior to the Championships) than Kobe; should be entertaining pwnage :lol

[ezau]

Hakeem in his prime. That guy shitted on Drob like no one else and if Jordan's Bulls have met Hakeem's Rockets in those two title years, MJ is screwed.

[ambchang]

Hakeem prior to his championship years >>>>>>>>>>>>> Kobe prior to his championship years, not even close.

Then Hakeem during championship run >>>> Kobe during championship run.

Look it up.

[Allanon]

Hakeem prior to his championship years >>>>>>>>>>>>> Kobe prior to his championship years, not even close.

This is true, Kobe was still in his rookie contract prior to his championship.

[ambchang]

This is true, Kobe was still a rookie, sophomore prior to his championship.

Thus Hakeem > Kobe, cuz you already said Hakeem > Kobe during their respective primes, no?

[Allanon]

Thus Hakeem > Kobe, cuz you already said Hakeem > Kobe during their respective primes, no?

No, I didn't say that.

Rookie years are not in their prime.

[Lars]

Kobe is not really a guy you build around. Shaq, Gasol those are good guys to build around. Just look how good they make Kobe look to ignorant fans.

[Allanon]

Kobe is not really a guy you build around. Shaq, Gasol those are good guys to build around. Just look how good they make Kobe look to ignorant fans.

Shaq, Yes.

But Gasol no. Pau was the king of getting swept in the first round before he hooked up with Kobe.

Did y'all forget that Pau didn't win ANY Playoff games until Kobe showed him the way in 08?

Pau's a good #2 guy, but should never be a #1 guy.

Kobe in the meantime, had already won 3 championships.

[Donkeybong]

It was sweet....

- "It's over."

- A.C. Green - in Houston, up 3-1, heading back to Phoenix.

***Watching Hakeem sternly admonishing Smith for fouling KJ instead of letting him come to Hakeem.

***Elie sternly admonishing Horry not to go after Ainge---after the f'k had thrown the inbounds straight into Elie's face. Horry heard him, waited his chance then threw towel into Coach Ainge's face, summarily exiled to Los Angeles he later put CWEBB & the Adelbrained one to their knees and put a 9MM slug right behind their ear. Just like that.

Culburn, your posts are a constant mindfuck to read. Sometimes they don't have any coherency whatsoever. what the hell are you saying man.

[Lars]

swing and a miss

[DJB]

Malone didn't play. Your step children, the Pistons, they can only beat us when we have starters injured, 89/04.


Hahaha. That '04 Pistons team was going to steamroll you regardless of who you had on the floor. :nope

[mystargtr34]

Dwight put up close numbers last year...and Dwight is nowhere near the caliber of Duncan, Magic and Kobe.

I think you're selling Tim Duncan and Magic way short, in addition to their stats, they were championship winners.

Kobe has been a great defender while putting up godly scoring. Kobe's made the All Defensive first team numerous times. All the while being considered the best player in the game... a distinction I think Hakeem only held in 95.

Kobe wasnt considered the consensus best player in the league until Pau Gasol came along. Even now, LeBron still gets talked about as the best player in the league. With what LeBron has been doing all the while, i dont think Kobe has even ever been the 'consensus' best like Hakeem was during his repeat. While Kobe was scoring 30+ a game, Dywane Wade was winning Finals MVP and LeBron was taking his crummy team to the Finals putting up 30-7-7.

Comparing Howard favourably to Hakeem isnt right either. Defensively maybe (Hakeem was much better still), but offensively its a no contest. Comparing Hakeem to Howard is like comparing 2005 Ray Allen to Kobe, the numbers at first glance may be comparable, but its a no contest. And using defense to compare Kobe to Hakeem isnt going to do Kobe any favours either - defensively, wings can only limit the output of one player, a big man like Hakeem or Duncan limits and entire opposition, all five players on the court.

[Allanon]

Kobe wasnt considered the consensus best player in the league until Pau Gasol came along. Even now, LeBron still gets talked about as the best player in the league. With what LeBron has been doing all the while, i dont think Kobe has even ever been the 'consensus' best like Hakeem was during his repeat. While Kobe was scoring 30+ a game, Dywane Wade was winning Finals MVP and LeBron was taking his crummy team to the Finals putting up 30-7-7.

I believe Kobe's been a consensus best individual player at least since the 81 point year....if not sooner.



Comparing Howard favourably to Hakeem isnt right either. Defensively maybe (Hakeem was much better still), but offensively its a no contest. Comparing Hakeem to Howard is like comparing 2005 Ray Allen to Kobe, the numbers at first glance may be comparable, but its a no contest. And using defense to compare Kobe to Hakeem isnt going to do Kobe any favours either - defensively, wings can only limit the output of one player, a big man like Hakeem or Duncan limits and entire opposition, all five players on the court.

Sure, but it's semantics. Hakeem was neither outstanding in stats nor was he winning games. Dwight had Hakeem like numbers and both resulted in the same. If Dwight had won last year; we'd be looking at him differently. But he didn't so he's just another Superstar player.

I think Patrick Ewing even had a few monster years very comparable to Hakeem prior to his Championship.

There's always been Superstars like Hakeem, but guys like Duncan, Magic, Kobe transcended the Superstar ranks. Hakeem didn't transcend his fellow Superstars until he was 32. Kobe's been beyond the regular superstars for a few years now.

[mystargtr34]

In 2008-2009, Dwight put up

21 points, 14 rebounds, and 3 blocks.

So Hakeem scored 3 more points and added 1.5 more blocks and that makes Hakeem a Tim Duncan caliber player but Dwight is a role-player with those numbers?

That doesn't make sense to me. By your logic, Dwight is a Duncan caliber player and that's just laughable.

Dwight's best year

20.6 PPG, 13.8 RPG, 1.4 APG, 1.0 SPG, 2.9 BPG

Hakeem's best before his 'prime'...

24.3 PPG, 14.0 RPG, 2.9 APG, 2.12 SPG, 4.59 BPG

Thats a healthy advantage in points and scoring, passing out of double teams, steals and blocks. In every aspect of the game, scoring, passing out of double and triple teams, and defense, Hakeem was better than Howard. They are equal's only in rebounding.

The reason Howard still isnt talked about as the best player in the league like a Duncan or a Hakeem is because he doesnt have a reliable post game outside of dunks from within 5 feet. There's a reason Dwight only takes 12 shots per game, he hasnt got the offensive game to get more baskets of his own back. You cant give him the ball further than 10 feet from the basket and let him create for himself and for others. If you look back, all of the great big men of the modern era have had that ability to have a championship offense run through them in the post, and make their entire team better. Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem and Kareem, they all had that ability. Dwight Howard does not.

When it comes to big men, that's what seperates a superstar, from a legend.

[mystargtr34]

I believe Kobe's been a consensus best individual player at least since the 81 point year....if not sooner.



Sure, but it's semantics. Hakeem was neither outstanding in stats nor was he winning games. Dwight had Hakeem like numbers and both resulted in the same. If Dwight had won last year; we'd be looking at him differently. But he didn't so he's just another Superstar player.

I think Patrick Ewing even had a few monster years very comparable to Hakeem prior to his Championship.

There's always been Superstars like Hakeem, but guys like Duncan, Magic, Kobe transcended the Superstar ranks. Hakeem didn't transcend his fellow Superstars until he was 32. Kobe's been beyond the regular superstars for a few years now.

That's where i think your wrong. Hakeem was as transcedent as they come. Nobody ever saw a Hakeem before Hakeem.... before Kobe, there was Michael Jordan. Who do you think was like Hakeem before he came along? The freak athleticism, combined with the skill level of a guard? Wilt was there as a freak athlete, but he was more Shaq than Hakeem in that he overpowered his opposition. Skill wise, Kevin Mchale, but he was no where near the athlete Hakeem was.

Since Hakeem, there has been Duncan, but even he never had that freak explosive athleticism, but he had the fluidity and 'ground athleticism' that almost no other 7 footer has had.

[Allanon]

Dwight's best year

20.6 PPG, 13.8 RPG, 1.4 APG, 1.0 SPG, 2.9 BPG

Hakeem's best before his 'prime'...

24.3 PPG, 14.0 RPG, 2.9 APG, 2.12 SPG, 4.59 BPG

Thats a healthy advantage in points and scoring, passing out of double teams, steals and blocks. In every aspect of the game, scoring, passing out of double and triple teams, and defense, Hakeem was better than Howard. They are equal's only in rebounding.

The reason Howard still isnt talked about as the best player in the league like a Duncan or a Hakeem is because he doesnt have a reliable post game outside of dunks from within 5 feet. There's a reason Dwight only takes 12 shots per game, he hasnt got the offensive game to get more baskets of his own back. You cant give him the ball further than 10 feet from the basket and let him create for himself and for others. If you look back, all of the great big men of the modern era have had that ability to have a championship offense run through them in the post, and make their entire team better. Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem and Kareem, they all had that ability. Dwight Howard does not.

When it comes to big men, that's what seperates a superstar, from a legend.

So if Dwight put up 3.7 more points, 1.5 assists and 1.7 more blocks, he'd be in Duncan's company?

Duncan and Magic are great because they won Championships as major pieces to their team. Hakeem never won with that 22ppg average which makes him an average superstar like Dwight. It wasn't until later that Hakeem became the real Dream by putting together all the pieces to his game.

Kobe's best statistical year was 35ppg and not winning anything. That in itself I think is also greater than any of Hakeem's pre-championship years.

Kobe put up 27 points and 5 assists last year while winning a championship. I think that in itself is greater than anything Hakeem ever did prior to winning a championship.

Kobe had pre-championship Hakeem beat both statistically and through winning.

[mystargtr34]

Nooo, dumb dumb, not Shaq, take him off that list. Shaq was lucky to have Chris Jackson, Penny, Kobe, Wade, and now James to carry him. His game was 5ft and in, and he never developed a go-to move like the others on your list.

Shaq had a better post game than Howard. Drop steps, hook shots, up and unders. Plus, he was one of the best passing big men of all time, even better than Hakeem and every bit as good as Duncan.

[ChrisRichards]

So if Dwight put up 3.7 more points, 1.5 assists and 1.7 more blocks, he'd be in Duncan's company?

Duncan and Magic are great because they won Championships as major pieces to their team. Hakeem never won with that 22ppg average which makes him an average superstar like Dwight. It wasn't until later that Hakeem became the real Dream by putting together all the pieces to his game.

Kobe's best statistical year was 35ppg and not winning anything. That in itself I think is also greater than any of Hakeem's pre-championship years.

Kobe put up 27 points and 5 assists last year while winning a championship. I think that in itself is greater than anything Hakeem ever did prior to winning a championship.

Kobe had pre-championship Hakeem beat both statistically and through winning.
Dude please dont tell me you're serious.


If Kobe leads his Lakers into another championship this season, then you have a case. Until then, Kobe is not better than Olajuwon. Olajuwon is a far better defensive player than Kobe, and though KB is a much more talented offensive player than the Dream, Olajuwon and his dream shake, 13 foot jumper was no slouch either.

[Allanon]

Dude please dont tell me you're serious.


If Kobe leads his Lakers into another championship this season, then you have a case. Until then, Kobe is not better than Olajuwon. Olajuwon is a far better defensive player than Kobe, and though KB is a much more talented offensive player than the Dream, Olajuwon and his dream shake, 13 foot jumper was no slouch either.

I'm comparing pre-championship Hakeem to Kobe right now. Kobe right now is better than Hakeem was prior to his championships.

Pre-championship Hakeem was just one of the very good players. He didn't become the Great Dream until he was 32.

[mystargtr34]

So if Dwight put up 3.7 more points, 1.5 assists and 1.7 more blocks, he'd be in Duncan's company?

Duncan and Magic are great because they won Championships as major pieces to their team. Hakeem never won with that 22ppg average which makes him an average superstar like Dwight. It wasn't until later that Hakeem became the real Dream by putting together all the pieces to his game.

Kobe's best statistical year was 35ppg and not winning anything. That in itself I think is also greater than any of Hakeem's pre-championship years.

Kobe put up 27 points and 5 assists last year while winning a championship. I think that in itself is greater than anything Hakeem ever did prior to winning a championship.

Kobe had pre-championship Hakeem beat both statistically and through winning.

To do what Hakeem and Duncan were doing number's wise, Howard would have to add alot to his game. The key isnt necessarily the numbers, its that ability to have an offense run through him, and make his team mates better - thats what all the great big men had. That shows in the numbers indirectly, scoring and assists, but alot of it doesnt.

[Allanon]

To do what Hakeem and Duncan were doing number's wise, Howard would have to add alot to his game. The key isnt necessarily the numbers, its that ability to have an offense run through him, and make his team mates better - thats what all the great big men had. That shots in the numbers indirectly, scoring and assists, but alot of it doesnt.

I don't deny that Hakeem was a very good player prior to becoming a Champion. Just like Dwight. And, yes, it's laughable to compare Dwight to Hakeem although they could put up similar numbers. That's the point, the modicum of numbers didn't really distinguish Hakeem, nor did his winning ways.

However, at the same time, I don't think Hakeem ever entered Kobe, Duncan, Magic territory until that Championship year.

It's equally laughable to compare a ringless, non stat-stuffer in Hakeem to a 4 time NBA Champion with mega stats and mega 81 point games like Kobe.

[mystargtr34]

I don't deny that Hakeem was a very good player prior to becoming a Champion. Just like Dwight. And, it's laughable to compare Dwight to Hakeem although they could put up similar numbers.

However, at the same time, I don't think Hakeem ever entered Kobe, Duncan, Magic territory until that Championship year.

We should compare pre championship Hakeem to pre 2009 champion Kobe. Im not taking anything away from the 3-peat, but historically, theres a difference between winning championships as the main guy, and as the second guy. Kobe was the best side kick of all time, but its a fairer comparison this way.

[Allanon]

We should compare pre championship Hakeem to pre 2009 champion Kobe. Im not taking anything away from the 3-peat, but historically, theres a difference between winning championships as the main guy, and as the second guy. Kobe was the best side kick of all time, but its a fairer comparison this way.

Pre-championship Hakeem would still lose to Kobe due to Kobe's statistical wonder years and 3 championships even as a sidekick.

The only comparison Hakeem would win is post championship Hakeem vs current Kobe or pre 1st championship Kobe to Hakeem at any time.

[mystargtr34]

Pre-championship Hakeem would still lose to Kobe due to Kobe's statistical wonder years and 3 championships even as a sidekick.

The only comparison Hakeem would win is post championship Hakeem vs current Kobe or pre 1st championship Kobe to Hakeem at any time.

OK, lets talk compare the two before they won championship's as the main dogs. Offensively, Kobe was greater, i agree with you there. Defensively Hakeem was greater. You brought up Kobe being an All-NBA first team defender as one of your arguments for him. I just want to show you how much of an impact Hakeem has defensively, compared to Kobe.

Ill be back in about half an hour, i still havent had a shower after the gym.

[Allanon]

OK, lets talk compare the two before they won championship's as the main dogs. Offensively, Kobe was greater, i agree with you there. Defensively Hakeem was greater. You brought up Kobe being an All-NBA first team defender as one of your arguments for him. I just want to show you how much of an impact Hakeem has defensively, compared to Kobe.

Ill be back in about half an hour, i still havent had a shower after the gym.

Sounds good. Pre-championship Hakeem vs pre 4th championship Kobe is a debateable argument.

[JamStone]

Would you consider the following stats to be a superstar level the likes of "superstar" Kobe in his prime?

26.9 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.45 bpg, 2.0 apg, 2.0 spg, 53.0% FG
29.2 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 4.0 bpg, 2.5 apg, 1.3 spg, 61.5% FG

[Allanon]

Would you consider the following stats to be a superstar level the likes of "superstar" Kobe in his prime?

26.9 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.45 bpg, 2.0 apg, 2.0 spg, 53.0% FG
29.2 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 4.0 bpg, 2.5 apg, 1.3 spg, 61.5% FG

Yes they would be.

[JamStone]

Yes they would be.

Those are the stats Hakeem put up in the playoffs in his second year in the league as a 23 year old (20 games) and his third year in the league as a 24 year old (10 games).

Those second year stats include a five game series against the defending LA Lakers where Hakeem totaled 40 points, 35 points, and 30 points in the final three games of that 1986 WC Finals.

Imagine if Hakeem actually was in his prime already...

[Allanon]

Those are the stats Hakeem put up in the playoffs in his second year in the league as a 23 year old (20 games) and his third year in the league as a 24 year old (10 games).

Those second year stats include a five game series against the defending LA Lakers where Hakeem totaled 40 points, 35 points, and 30 points in the final three games of that 1986 WC Finals.

Imagine if Hakeem actually was in his prime already...

That's the knock on Hakeem right there. He was an outstanding player for the first couple years. First 3 years of Hakeem's career, he had Kobe's 1st 3 years beat hands down.

Then he became just one of the guys for like the rest of his 20's and into his 30's.

If he had kept up that monster game throughout his career, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Kobe's been consistently great (even compared to other superstars) for a decade now.

[JamStone]

Are you now changing your argument to Hakeem starting his prime in his second year in the league and then for the following three seasons, then not being in his prime again until he was 32?

Come on now. Your arguments are nonsensical. My arguments haven't even been about who was greater in their prime. My issue with what you've said was that Hakeem's prime didn't even start until he was 32. That's what I have a problem with. Hakeem was a superstar early on in his career, and yes, a superstar the level of a Kobe, Duncan, and Magic. Perhaps he was more like Duncan in that he didn't have the pub and hype and Hollywood storyline to make him a "commercial" superstar that Kobe or Magic or MJ or LeBron were/are. But, on the basketball court, he was every bit the superstar, and it wasn't only when he was 32 and won a title.

I'll keep repeating the same things. As a second year NBA player, he was the best player on the Houston Rockets that went all the way to the NBA Finals and on the way beating the defending NBA Champion Lakers. A "mediocre" superstar doesn't do that. And it wasn't a fluke.

Winning titles, heck, winning playoff series takes a team effort. Why would you knock Hakeem when he was putting up superstar numbers but his team couldn't beat better teams. Look at his 1988 playoff stats in a first round exit to Dallas, 37.5 ppg and 16.8 rpg. You know what, look at Hakeem's playoff stats before Houston won their first title:

26.4 ppg
12.8 rpg
2.6 apg
3.8 bpg
1.8 spg
53.5% FG
39.9 mpg

Compare those to Kobe's playoff stats from 2003 to 2008, when the Lakers weren't winning titles. I won't even include his first three playoff seasons when he wasn't a full time starter because those stats will skew his numbers.

28.6 ppg
5.3 rpg
5.3 apg
1.55 spg
45.0% FG
43.2 mpg

And, that's with Kobe averaging over 3 more minutes a game. Look at the per 36 minute stats to even them out.

Hakeem: 23.8 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.3 apg, 3.4 bpg, 1.6 spg
Kobe: 23.8 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.29 spg

This is 2003-08 Kobe, mind you, all in what you would consider his "prime."

[Capt Bringdown]

Tough call, but I'd chose Hakeem due to his strength of character and warrior mental toughness.
Kobe is great, and it's not really his fault, but he has been wrapped in cotton wool, protected, pampered and promoted his entire career. He hasn't faced many obstacles in his career, only greased skids. He's not an overcomer, he's a performer who excels when placed in ideal circumstances.

By contrast, Hakeem faced long odds his entire career and triumphed in many challenging situations. His passion for improving himself and his teammates makes him the hands down winner IMO.

[Allanon]

Are you now changing your argument to Hakeem starting his prime in his second year in the league and then for the following three seasons, then not being in his prime again until he was 32?

Not at all, Hakeem had 2 good years then disappeared. That's not his prime unless you're into 2 year players.



Come on now. Your arguments are nonsensical. My arguments haven't even been about who was greater in their prime. My issue with what you've said was that Hakeem's prime didn't even start until he was 32. That's what I have a problem with. Hakeem was a superstar early on in his career, and yes, a superstar the level of a Kobe, Duncan, and Magic. Perhaps he was more like Duncan in that he didn't have the pub and hype and Hollywood storyline to make him a "commercial" superstar that Kobe or Magic or MJ or LeBron were/are. But, on the basketball court, he was every bit the superstar, and it wasn't only when he was 32 and won a title.

I disagree. For 2 playoffs he played like Kobe, Duncan and Magic, then he became Dwight Howard for the rest of his 20's.

If you can accept his average superstar numbers and lack of winning rings; then you can also accept Dwight Howard as being on Duncan's level.

Nonsensical right there. This is what you call "flashes of brilliance", not their "prime".



I'll keep repeating the same things. As a second year NBA player, he was the best player on the Houston Rockets that went all the way to the NBA Finals and on the way beating the defending NBA Champion Lakers. A "mediocre" superstar doesn't do that. And it wasn't a fluke.

Yup, 1 great year, and what did he do the following years? Dwight got to the Finals against the Lakers last year, does that put him in Kobe, Duncan and Magic terirtory?



Winning titles, heck, winning playoff series takes a team effort. Why would you knock Hakeem when he was putting up superstar numbers but his team couldn't beat better teams. Look at his 1988 playoff stats in a first round exit to Dallas, 37.5 ppg and 16.8 rpg. You know what, look at Hakeem's playoff stats before Houston won their first title:

Woohoo, Hakeem put up 37.5 and 17 rpg against Bill Wennington and en-route to losing 3-1. Bill friggin' Wennington. :lol

And since you brought up those Mavs, here's the HoF'er stacked Mavs team the Great Hakeem lost to 1-3.

Mark Aguirre
Derek Harper
Rolando Blackman
Roy Tarpley
Sam Perkins
Detlef Schrempf
James Donaldson
Brad Davis
Uew Blab
Bill Wennington
Jim Farmer
Steve Alford



Compare those to Kobe's playoff stats from 2003 to 2008, when the Lakers weren't winning titles. I won't even include his first three playoff seasons when he wasn't a full time starter because those stats will skew his numbers.

28.6 ppg
5.3 rpg
5.3 apg
1.55 spg
45.0% FG
43.2 mpg

And, that's with Kobe averaging over 3 more minutes a game. Look at the per 36 minute stats to even them out.

Hakeem: 23.8 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.3 apg, 3.4 bpg, 1.6 spg
Kobe: 23.8 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.29 spg

This is 2003-08 Kobe, mind you, all in what you would consider his "prime."

Rather odd that you would leave out Kobe's Championship years. Oh that's right, Hakeem never had any until 32.

And why skew it to per minute stats, the great Hakeem couldn't even get as much floor time as Kobe?

So while Hakeem was getting bounced 3-1 and taking off during the regular season, Kobe was beasting in both the regular season and Playoffs while bringing home 4 rings.

How is this a comparison again? :lol

[ezau]

That's where i think your wrong. Hakeem was as transcedent as they come. Nobody ever saw a Hakeem before Hakeem.... before Kobe, there was Michael Jordan. Who do you think was like Hakeem before he came along? The freak athleticism, combined with the skill level of a guard? Wilt was there as a freak athlete, but he was more Shaq than Hakeem in that he overpowered his opposition. Skill wise, Kevin Mchale, but he was no where near the athlete Hakeem was.

Since Hakeem, there has been Duncan, but even he never had that freak explosive athleticism, but he had the fluidity and 'ground athleticism' that almost no other 7 footer has had.

Very well said. Hakeem had the crazy combination of skills and agility. He was like a SF playing the center position. Kobe meanwhile is no more than MJ's most recent version. Before Hakeem, there was nothing like him that the league has ever seen. As far as athleticism is concerned, Howard is comparable, but he's nothing compared to Hakeem's skills.

[Lars]

Im pretty sure Allanon has never even seen Hakeem play.

[Allanon]

Im pretty sure Allanon has never even seen Hakeem play.

Do you think pre-championship Hakeem was better than Kobe right now, Lars?

0 ring Hakeem compared to 4 ringed Kobe, 4 ringed Duncan and 5 ring Magic is laughable.

[Amaso]

You can tell the people who don't truly know basketball when they think Hakeem only had 2 prime years during his career. Hakeem was an absolute monster every year he played and carried his team to 2 championships by himself. He would've beaten Michael's Bulls had they met in those finals, and would've added to his legend. I have Hakeem as the greatest center ever, and I would probably say its a tie between Kobe (when he retires) and Hakeem.

[JamStone]

Not at all, Hakeem had 2 good years then disappeared. That's not his prime unless you're into 2 year players.

Disappeared? Now you're just flat-out lying.

From the 1987-88 season to the 1992-93 season, Hakeem averaged:

23.7 ppg
13.1 rpg
3.9 bpg
2.5 apg
2.1 spg
51.1% FG

In those six seasons, he garnered 3 all NBA first team honors, 1 second team honor, 1 third team honor, 3 all NBA defense first team, and 1 all NBA defense second team. He won a DPOY, two rebounding titles, and 2 blocked shots titles.

Disappeared?

In the playoffs in those same 6 seasons, he averaged:

25.9 ppg
14.0 rpg
4.15 bpg
3.3 apg
2.0 spg
52.3% FG

Disappeared?

Does that mean Kobe disappeared from 2004-05 through 2006-07? So Kobe had his "prime" cut out for three seasons as well? GTHO with that nonsense.



I disagree. For 2 playoffs he played like Kobe, Duncan and Magic, then he became Dwight Howard for the rest of his 20's.

Look above at his playoff numbers after those 2 "superstar" playoffs until before his 1993-94 title. He was still a superstar player on a team that couldn't beat better teams in the playoffs.



If you can accept his average superstar numbers and lack of winning rings; then you can also accept Dwight Howard as being on Duncan's level.

Nonsensical right there. This is what you call "flashes of brilliance", not their "prime".

First of all, those weren't "average" superstar numbers. They were elite superstar numbers, both regular season and playoffs.

He had two low 20s scoring averages in 1990-91 and 1991-92. He also encountered injuries those two seasons. That broken eye-socket bones in 1990-91, which accompanied a season where the Rockets finally added some more potent perimeter scoring with Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell (his first full season with Houston) so that the scoring responsibility wasn't so much on Hakeem. Then he had an irregular heartbeat at the begining of 1991-92, which likely made Hakeem and his coaches a little cautious about him taking on too much. But the rest of his numbers outside of scoring were right on par with his production beforehand.

It's ridiculous to contend Hakeem only showed "flashes of brilliance" during that time period.

Once again, winning takes a team. Hakeem didn't have great teams in those seasons.



Yup, 1 great year, and what did he do the following years? Dwight got to the Finals against the Lakers last year, does that put him in Kobe, Duncan and Magic terirtory?

1 great year? Are you crazy? I already put up what he did in the following years, both in the regular season and the playoffs, and they were superstar numbers.

Once again, do we say that Kobe from 2004-05 though to 2006-07 disappeared and wasn't a superstar and wasn't in his prime? Do we cut out those three years of Kobe's career?




Woohoo, Hakeem put up 37.5 and 17 rpg against Bill Wennington and en-route to losing 3-1. Bill friggin' Wennington. :lol

And since you brought up those Mavs, here's the HoF'er stacked Mavs team the Great Hakeem lost to 1-3.

Mark Aguirre
Derek Harper
Rolando Blackman
Roy Tarpley
Sam Perkins
Detlef Schrempf
James Donaldson
Brad Davis
Uew Blab
Bill Wennington
Jim Farmer
Steve Alford

Bill Wennington played an entire 14 minutes the entire playoffs for the Mavs that post season. He only played 6 of the 17 playoff games. Do you want to continue to lie and spew out blatantly inaccurate information?

Hakeem mostly faced Roy Tarpley, Sam Perkins, and Detlef Schrempf. He probably plaed against James Donaldson more than Bill Wennington.

At any rate, Hakeem's front court teammates that series were Rodney McCray, Robert Reid, and Purvis Short. Ralph Sampson did not play in that series. Think Hakeem got doubled and tripled a little bit that series? McCray, Reid, and Short averaged a combined 22.8 ppg on 37.8% FG shooting. They were averaging just under 8 points each. That was what Hakeem's help in the front court was doing for that series.

Oh, and let's not ignore the fact that the Houston Rockets were 46-36 that season and the Dallas Mavs were 53-29. The Mavs were supposed to win that series.



Rather odd that you would leave out Kobe's Championship years. Oh that's right, Hakeem never had any until 32.

I was actually doing you a favor. Kobe's championship numbers bring his stats down. Here's adding Kobe's playoff numbers from the 2000, 2001, 2002 playoffs:

27.1 ppg
5.2 apg
5.5 rpg
1.52 spg
44.8% FG

The only stat improved by adding Kobe's championship numbers was his rebounding. You should have thanked me for not including his championship numbers. His stats would drop even more if I added his first three post season stats.



And why skew it to per minute stats, the great Hakeem couldn't even get as much floor time as Kobe?

Because it's a more accurate gauge of production. Are you seriously asking that? It's not like Hakeem was playing 24 mpg. I'm just giving the stats a more accurate gauge by making the minutes played a constant.



So while Hakeem was getting bounced 3-1 and taking off during the regular season, Kobe was beasting in both the regular season and Playoffs while bringing home 4 rings.

How is this a comparison again? :lol

Once again, are you prepared to claim that Kobe was not a superstar or in his prime from 2004-05 to 2006-07?

Hakeem's stats during the time period are very much superstar numbers. His playoff numbers during that time before his first title are actually better than Kobe's playoff numbers in Kobe's "prime."

The comparison actually favors Hakeem. :rollin

[Allanon]

Disappeared? Now you're just flat-out lying.

From the 1987-88 season to the 1992-93 season, Hakeem averaged:

23.7 ppg
13.1 rpg
3.9 bpg
2.5 apg
2.1 spg
51.1% FG

In those six seasons, he garnered 3 all NBA first team honors, 1 second team honor, 1 third team honor, 3 all NBA defense first team, and 1 all NBA defense second team. He won a DPOY, two rebounding titles, and 2 blocked shots titles.

Disappeared?

Yup, those numbers look like Dwight. I believe Dwight was DPOY last year too along with All NBA defensive teams; rebounding title, etc. Maybe he's ready to join Kobe, Duncan, Magic and Hakeem.



In the playoffs in those same 6 seasons, he averaged:

25.9 ppg
14.0 rpg
4.15 bpg
3.3 apg
2.0 spg
52.3% FG

Disappeared?

Does that mean Kobe disappeared from 2004-05 through 2006-07? So Kobe had his "prime" cut out for three seasons as well? GTHO with that nonsense.

Ah, Hakeem disappears in the regular season and decides to show up in the Playoffs, after his team gets the low seeds, eh? Consequently ending up with a bunch of 1-3 first round exits. :lol



Look above at his playoff numbers after those 2 "superstar" playoffs until before his 1993-94 title. He was still a superstar player on a team that couldn't beat better teams in the playoffs.

Sure he was a superstar player who played average in the regular season and picked it up in the Playoffs. By coasting through the regular season, he always got lowly seeds.

Why are you ignoring his average season numbers? Free pass? :lol



First of all, those weren't "average" superstar numbers. They were elite superstar numbers, both regular season and playoffs.

I suppose that makes Dwight an elite Superstar then. Good for Hakeem to compare so favorably to Dwight.



He had two low 20s scoring averages in 1990-91 and 1991-92. He also encountered injuries those two seasons. That broken eye-socket bones in 1990-91, which accompanied a season where the Rockets finally added some more potent perimeter scoring with Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell (his first full season with Houston) so that the scoring responsibility wasn't so much on Hakeem. Then he had an irregular heartbeat at the begining of 1991-92, which likely made Hakeem and his coaches a little cautious about him taking on too much. But the rest of his numbers outside of scoring were right on par with his production beforehand.

Excuses for the great Hakeem? :)



It's ridiculous to contend Hakeem only showed "flashes of brilliance" during that time period.

Once again, winning takes a team. Hakeem didn't have great teams in those seasons.

Hakeem had Ralph Sampson, 4 time All-Star with him. Kobe won with 2 time All Star Pau. No excuses please.



1 great year? Are you crazy? I already put up what he did in the following years, both in the regular season and the playoffs, and they were superstar numbers.

Yes superstar numbers. Melo puts up superstar numbers too.

But Kobe, Duncan and Magic are all beyond regular superstars. Hakeem didn't reach his prime until 32, that's when he became a Kobe, Duncan, Magic type player.



Once again, do we say that Kobe from 2004-05 though to 2006-07 disappeared and wasn't a superstar and wasn't in his prime? Do we cut out those three years of Kobe's career?

No, because Kobe had statistically great seasons. 81 points, 62-61. Hakeem never did this even wit the shitty team he head. Kobe got 81 points playing with guys like Smush, Luke and Kwame.

Hakeem couldn't get no 81 points playing with the scrubs?



Bill Wennington played an entire 14 minutes the entire playoffs for the Mavs that post season. He only played 6 of the 17 playoff games. Do you want to continue to lie and spew out blatantly inaccurate information?

Hakeem mostly faced Roy Tarpley, Sam Perkins, and Detlef Schrempf. He probably plaed against James Donaldson more than Bill Wennington.

Oh, I'm sorry, James Donaldson (starter most of the games) really has me shaking in my boots. OMFG, how could I confuse the shitty Bill Wennington with the Great James Donaldson? :lol



Oh, and let's not ignore the fact that the Houston Rockets were 46-36 that season and the Dallas Mavs were 53-29. The Mavs were supposed to win that series.

Oh, yes, let's make more excuses for Hakeem's failings.



I was actually doing you a favor. Kobe's championship numbers bring his stats down. Here's adding Kobe's playoff numbers from the 2000, 2001, 2002 playoffs:

27.1 ppg
5.2 apg
5.5 rpg
1.52 spg
44.8% FG

The only stat improved by adding Kobe's championship numbers was his rebounding. You should have thanked me for not including his championship numbers. His stats would drop even more if I added his first three post season stats.

Nope, you're wrong. Thank you for pointing it out. Because with your stats now, you can include 4 rings for Kobe and 0 for Hakeem. Thanks!



Because it's a more accurate gauge of production. Are you seriously asking that? It's not like Hakeem was playing 24 mpg. I'm just giving the stats a more accurate gauge by making the minutes played a constant.

You mean skewing numbers for your argument? I understand.



Once again, are you prepared to claim that Kobe was not a superstar or in his prime from 2004-05 to 2006-07?

Hakeem's stats during the time period are very much superstar numbers. His playoff numbers during that time before his first title are actually better than Kobe's playoff numbers in Kobe's "prime."

The comparison actually favors Hakeem. :rollin

Actually no it does not. Kobe was the best individual basketball player in those years although his team was weak.

I don't fault Olajuwon if he had statistical individual greatness without winning, but he didin't.

Kobe did.

33 ppg average, 81 points on the Raptors. 62-61 versus the Mavs.

While Hakeem was putting up average superstar numbers, Kobe was breaking records.

Hakeem, in his years prior to the Championship, did nothing that Superstar X doesn't do every year in the NBA.

Try again. :lmao

[JamStone]

Why do you look only at scoring to define a superstar? Any other rational person would look at Hakeem's numbers and call him a superstar throughout basically his entire career. It's actually pretty incredible you're really trying to argue that Hakeem didn't hit his prime until 32 years of age. That's what you've been arguing. That was the initial comment that I had issue with. Hakeem's prime didn't start until he was 32. I can't believe you're really standing by that.

But, oh well. It's obvious you're a lost cause. Even a fellow Laker fan called you out.

One thing I will point out is that James Donaldson was an all star in 1988, that season Hakeem faced the Mavs and put up 37.5 and 16.8 in the series. Not exactly Dikembe Mutombo, but an all star, along with Roy Tarpley and Sam Perkins, both of whom played more minutes in the playoffs than Donaldson. Not that it matters with who warped you look at things. But I just wanted to point that out.

[Allanon]

Why do you look only at scoring to define a superstar? Any other rational person would look at Hakeem's numbers and call him a superstar throughout basically his entire career. It's actually pretty incredible you're really trying to argue that Hakeem didn't hit his prime until 32 years of age. That's what you've been arguing. That was the initial comment that I had issue with. Hakeem's prime didn't start until he was 32. I can't believe you're really standing by that.

He was a superstar player; I never said he wasn't. But there are superstars like Dwight and Melo. And there are Super duper stars.

I say:
1) He didn't reach his prime until 32
2) He didn't attain Kobe, Duncan Magic level until age 32



But, oh well. It's obvious you're a lost cause. Even a fellow Laker fan called you out.
Fellow Laker fans are all entitled to their opinion. He has the conversation confused...note that he has included the championship years. If he had not included the Championship years, I'd see your point. Please don't try to increase your argument with faked support.

Most fans here are saying Hakeem was in his prime in his championship years; just like I do.

Only you contend that Hakeem was in his prime prior to that.

6 pages of this thread and only Jamstone has said Hakeem was in his prime in his 20's.

Is there ANYBODY other than you saying Hakeem was in his prime in his 20's? Let them come forth.



One thing I will point out is that James Donaldson was an all star in 1988, that season Hakeem faced the Mavs and put up 37.5 and 16.8 in the series. Not exactly Dikembe Mutombo, but an all star, along with Roy Tarpley and Sam Perkins, both of whom played more minutes in the playoffs than Donaldson. Not that it matters with who warped you look at things. But I just wanted to point that out.

Donaldson was the starter that year and even Wally Szcerbiak was a 1 time all-star.

[Chieflion]

Hakeem was a superstar from his 2nd season on. He hit his peak right on time after MJ retired for the first time. His prime was quite long.

[JamStone]

If you say so.


To build a franchise/championship team around, I'd take Kobe in his prime; hands down.

Hakeem didn't hit his prime until around 32 years old. It's no surprise his prime was short lived...he was already a bit too old. You don't start to build franchises around 32 year old players...especially big men. In his prime, Hakeem was > Jordan > Kobe. This is why Kobe went to see Hakeem over the summer, to learn from the best.

Hakeem was the best, but, by the time Hakeem was 34, he started showing his age with only 2 short prime years.

Kobe on the other hand; we don't even know when his prime is, seems like it's been on-going for 4-5 years already and he's better today than he was 4 years ago. Kobe's leading the league in scoring at a ridiculous (for a SG) 49FG% and 30ppg.

Just like Michael, Kobe took his game to the post after age 30. Many forget MJ didn't win his 4th championship until he was 33 years old and continued to be a dominant player past 36 years old and his 6th ring. And like MJ, I think Kobe's ring last year is just the start of many more to come.

[Allanon]

Hakeem was a superstar from his 2nd season on. He hit his peak right on time after MJ retired for the first time. His prime was quite long.

So my question to you is, was 0 ring Hakeem on the same level as 4 ring Kobe, 4 ring Duncan and 5 ring Magic?

[JamStone]

I see you edited that post where you said you never said Hakeem hit his prime at 32...

[Allanon]

If you say so.

I do.

[Allanon]

I see you edited that post where you said you never said Hakeem hit his prime at 32...

You are mistaken.

[JamStone]

You initially wrote, "I never said Hakeem didn't hit his prime until he was 32."


You are mistaken.


When I went to find the comment to quote it, you had edited your post...

Last edited by Allanon; Today at 07:52 AM..

[JamStone]

So anyone who agrees that Hakeem's "prime" started at 32 also speak up.

[Allanon]

You initially wrote, "I never said Hakeem didn't hit his prime until he was 32."




When I went to find the comment to quote it, you had edited your post...

Last edited by Allanon; Today at 07:52 AM..

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm not even sure what that quote means "I never said Hakeem didn't hit his prime until he was 32." ... that's a double negative.

Perhaps it's late and you're imagining things.

[mystargtr34]

Yup, those numbers look like Dwight. I believe Dwight was DPOY last year too along with All NBA defensive teams; rebounding title, etc. Maybe he's ready to join Kobe, Duncan, Magic and Hakeem.

How do they look like Dwight's numbers? Your completely ignoring what i was trying to tell you in my last 10 posts. One guy has the offensive game to have an entire offense run through him, and make his team mates better by providing easy offense for them, and also himself.

The other guy relies on others to get him the ball in good positions for dunks and lay ups, while throwing in the occasional hook shots. One guy relies on his team mates, and the other, his team mates rely on him. Thats a massive difference between the two. You just continue to ignore this and look at raw numbers and somehow come up with the conclusion that they are equal, when even in raw numbers they are not.

How about i make a similar comparison for Kobe. Last season...

Danny Granger - 25.8 PPG, 5.1 APG, 2.7 APG, 1.5 BPG
Kobe Bryant - 26.8 PPG, 5.2 RPG, 4.9 APG, 0.5 BPG


Granger = Kobe?


Ah, Hakeem disappears in the regular season and decides to show up in the Playoffs, after his team gets the low seeds, eh? Consequently ending up with a bunch of 1-3 first round exits. :lol



Sure he was a superstar player who played average in the regular season and picked it up in the Playoffs. By coasting through the regular season, he always got lowly seeds.

Why are you ignoring his average season numbers? Free pass? :lol



I suppose that makes Dwight an elite Superstar then. Good for Hakeem to compare so favorably to Dwight.

You have it the wrong way around. Increasing your output in the playoffs is the mark of a great player. Opposition gets tougher, defenses get tougher, and calls are harder to come by. Look at their respective careers...

Hakeem

Regular Season - 21.8 PPG, 11.1 RPG, 2.5 APG, 1.7 SPG, 3.1 BPG, 35.7 MPG, .512%
Post Season - 25.9 PPG, 11.2 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.7 APG, 3.3 BPG, 39.6 MPG, .528%

Kobe

Regular Season - 25.2 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 36.4 MPG, .455%
Post Season - 25.0 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 4.7 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.7 BPG, 39.4 MPG, .447%

Hakeem increases his output by 4 PPG AND increases his FG%, while creating more offense through assists. Kobe's minutes go up, yet his scoring drops slightly, as does his efficiency.

The great players step up in the playoffs.




No, because Kobe had statistically great seasons. 81 points, 62-61. Hakeem never did this even wit the shitty team he head. Kobe got 81 points playing with guys like Smush, Luke and Kwame.

Hakeem couldn't get no 81 points playing with the scrubs?

How about i list some of Hakeem's individual games...

29 PTS, 18 RBS, 10 AST, 11 BLK, 5 STL
52 PTS, 18 RBS, 5 AST, 3 BLK, 3 STL
32 PTS, 25 RBS, 10 BLK
41 PT, 14 RBS, 4 AST, 4 STL, 7 BLK

Thats just from ONE season. All of those games you could argue were just as dominant as an 81 point game where a guy takes 46 shots at the basket, and doesnt create anything for anyone else.



Actually no it does not. Kobe was the best individual basketball player in those years although his team was weak.

No, he wasn't. In those weak seasons...

Kobe

27.6 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 6.0 APG, .433%
35.4 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 4.3 APG, .450%

LeBron

27.2 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 7.2 APG, .472%
31.4 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 6.6 APG, .492%

Both of LeBron's seasons were statistically better. So, going by your logic, LeBron was the better player.

[sonic21]

holy $#t

6 pages for a Hakeem vs Kobe thread

[Allanon]

How do they look like Dwight's numbers? Your completely ignoring what i was trying to tell you in my last 10 posts. One guy has the offensive game to have an entire offense run through him, and make his team mates better by providing easy offense for them, and also himself.

The other guy relies on others to get him the ball in good positions for dunks and lay ups, while throwing in the occasional hook shots. One guy relies on his team mates, and the other, his team mates rely on him. Thats a massive difference between the two. You just continue to ignore this and look at raw numbers and somehow come up with the conclusion that they are equal, when even in raw numbers they are not.

How about i make a similar comparison for Kobe. Last season...

Danny Granger - 25.8 PPG, 5.1 APG, 2.7 APG, 1.5 BPG
Kobe Bryant - 26.8 PPG, 5.2 RPG, 4.9 APG, 0.5 BPG


Granger = Kobe?

Kobe has 4 rings and a Finals MVP; Granger does not. Let's not bring in regular players to the conversation. This is like bringing up Al Jefferson compared to Duncan.



You have it the wrong way around. Increasing your output in the playoffs is the mark of a great player. Opposition gets tougher, defenses get tougher, and calls are harder to come by. Look at their respective careers...

Hakeem

Regular Season - 21.8 PPG, 11.1 RPG, 2.5 APG, 1.7 SPG, 3.1 BPG, 35.7 MPG, .512%
Post Season - 25.9 PPG, 11.2 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.7 APG, 3.3 BPG, 39.6 MPG, .528%

Kobe

Regular Season - 25.2 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 36.4 MPG, .455%
Post Season - 25.0 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 4.7 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.7 BPG, 39.4 MPG, .447%

Hakeem increases his output by 4 PPG AND increases his FG%, while creating more offense through assists. Kobe's minutes go up, yet his scoring drops slightly, as does his efficiency.

The great players step up in the playoffs.

And a great player like Hakeem stepped it up in the Playoffs and brought home 0 rings while Kobe didn't step up and got 4 rings? How does that make any sense?



How about i list some of Hakeem's individual games...

29 PTS, 18 RBS, 10 AST, 11 BLK, 5 STL
52 PTS, 18 RBS, 5 AST, 3 BLK, 3 STL
32 PTS, 25 RBS, 10 BLK
41 PT, 14 RBS, 4 AST, 4 STL, 7 BLK

Thats just from ONE season. All of those games you could argue were just as dominant as an 81 point game where a guy takes 46 shots at the basket, and doesnt create anything for anyone else.]

If it was that easy to score 81, there would be more 81 point games. It's not easy as throwing up 46 shots.

Fact is only 1 person has done it and there is no comparison other than Wilt's 100.





No, he wasn't. In those weak seasons...

Kobe

27.6 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 6.0 APG, .433%
35.4 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 4.3 APG, .450%

LeBron

27.2 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 7.2 APG, .472%
31.4 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 6.6 APG, .492%

Both of LeBron's seasons were statistically better. So, going by your logic, LeBron was the better player.

How is LeBron statistically better? Kobe scored 27.6, LeBron had 27.2
Kobe had 35.4 ppg,Lebron had 31.4.

Kobe had an 81 point game. Outscored the Mavs 62-61. LeBron didn't have any of those spectacular feats.

Guys like Jeff Van Gundy regularly say Kobe has been the best player for years. There's a whole thread of quotes of players/coaches/gm's great players saying Kobe was the best all those years.

Let me ask you a simple question.

Was 0 ring Hakeem on the same level as Kobe right now?

[jonnybravo]

I don't know the entire gist of this debate but on no planet is Dwight Howard even a shadow of the Dream. That's ridiculous on so many levels.

[Allanon]

I don't know the entire gist of this debate but on no planet is Dwight Howard even a shadow of the Dream. That's ridiculous on so many levels.

Yup. My point exactly. It's a ridiculous comparison.

Just like it's ludicrous to compare 0 ring Hakeem to 4 ring Kobe.

[JamStone]

Using Allanon's logic, before last season, Scottie Pippen was a better player than Kobe since he had 6 titles compared to 3 titles, both as sidekicks.

Pippen > Kobe before the 2009 Lakers championship

[Lars]

Allanons 2 arguments:
1.) ppg is the end all be all of stats despite what % it is at.
2.) number of rings won determines who is better.

Both weak, as is trying to compare one of, if not the most dominant center ever to a stat padding rapist.

[Culburn369]

Allanons 2 arguments:
1.) ppg is the end all be all of stats despite what % it is at.
2.) number of rings won determines who is better.

Both weak, as is trying to compare one of, if not the most dominant center ever to a stat padding rapist.

Lars borrowed Double's rag. Now's he on it.

I God's!

[IronMexican]

Hahaha. That '04 Pistons team was going to steamroll you regardless of who you had on the floor. :nope

I think they steamroll any team not the 2001 Lakers in this decade. They played they're absolute best ball when it mattered. That was just a team on a mission.

[LakasRool4eva]

He was a superstar player; I never said he wasn't. But there are superstars like Dwight and Melo. And there are Super duper stars.

thanx for bringing this up. if u think about it Dwight=Olojuwon and Kobe>Dwight. u would need to a blind homer not to see it.

LOLing@ the hataz just trying to bring down Kobe..........keep trying and talk to me @ the end of the seasen.

[IronMexican]

thanx for bringing this up. if u think about it Dwight=Olojuwon and Kobe>Dwight. u would need to a blind homer not to see it.

LOLing@ the hataz just trying to bring down Kobe..........keep trying and talk to me @ the end of the seasen.

Fuck whoever made this troll. Whoever you are, fuck you.

[noob cake]

Hakeem played with Robinson, Ewing, Oneal, Mourning, and Mutombo.

Dwight needs to GTFO out of this thread. His DPOY is worth dogshit.

[ffadicted]

I think Oden's gonna be good. Maybe not HoF'er but a top NBA center.

I'm ok with being an idiot until it happens though. :lol

Ok, maybe I worded that wrong. What I meant to say was Oden was gonna be good enough to pick over KD.

[Lars]

lars borrowed double's rag. Now's he on it.

I god's!

i dont understand you

[mavs>spurs2]

i dont understand you

don't worry, not many of us speak "molester"

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Fuck whoever made this troll. Whoever you are, fuck you.


I don't think it's a troll.

[Culburn369]

I think they steamroll any team not the 2001 Lakers in this decade. They played they're absolute best ball when it mattered. That was just a team on a mission.

Wallace got a hard on to act like somebody for the first & only time in his life. Unfortunately it was against us.

[JamStone]

Rasheed averaged 13 points on 45% FG shooting as a 6'11 PF in the 2004 NBA Finals.

Both Billups and Hamilton averaged 21 ppg. Billups shot 51% from the field and 47% from three point range. Rasheed absolutely helped, but he wasn't the main reason the Pistons beat the Lakers in 2004. It was the guard play, team defense, and Kobe shooting the Lakers out of most of those games.

I actually think the 2008 Celtics could have beaten the 2004 Pistons. Pistons still could win but it wouldn't be a "steamrolling." But that's not to say the Celtics are the best team among the rest of the 2000-09 championship teams. It's just that that Boston team would have matched up extremely well against the 2004 Pistons.

[Culburn369]

don't worry, not many of us speak "molester"

Need I remind you, that just a smidge over 3 short years (& a million Maverick tears ago) the Heat bent you over the state of Florida and hid the salami where the sun don't shine, and I don't mean London?

[Culburn369]

Rasheed averaged 13 points on 45% FG shooting as a 6'11 PF in the 2004 NBA Finals.

+ he was such a calming influence on his hot-headed Piston mates. Every time they'd take off after a ref he'd play peacemaker. Yeah! Can ya f'in imagine it, that lunatic being civilized?

[JamStone]

No he wasn't. Billups played peacemaker when anyone on the team got upset with officiating. If anything, especially in 2004, Rasheed made his teammates blow up at officials even more, particularly Rip and Ben. Even in the Finals, you don't remember Rasheed going after Medvedenko and yelling and screaming at him?

Wth were you watching?

[Culburn369]

Wth were you watching?

Ha! I was watching Wallace (cast against type) playing peacemaker for the first & only time in his looney tune life.

[Allanon]

Allanons 2 arguments:
1.) ppg is the end all be all of stats despite what % it is at.
2.) number of rings won determines who is better.

Both weak, as is trying to compare one of, if not the most dominant center ever to a stat padding rapist.

You still are avoiding the question, Lars.

Was 0 championship Hakeem on the same level as 4 ring Kobe, 4 ring Duncan or 5 ring Magic?

[Tacker]

This is a no brainer, Kobe ain't got shit on Hakeem. Hakeem can win champions without help. Kobe can't.....

[Allanon]

Ok, maybe I worded that wrong. What I meant to say was Oden was gonna be good enough to pick over KD.

Yeah, although I believe Oden's going to be a very good Center, Durant will always be better I think.

[Mad_Hatter]

hakeem and the question shouldn't be asked.

[Lars]

You still are avoiding the question, Lars.

Was 0 championship Hakeem on the same level as 4 ring Kobe, 4 ring Duncan or 5 ring Magic?

LOL of course he was better than Kobe and Duncan....not sure about Magic because I didnt see him play much in his prime. Modern era players are no where near the level of the 80s/90s. I wouldnt even put Kobe as the second best player of this era. Shaq > Duncan > Kobe.

I have never ever seen anyone with the grace and finese that the Dream had. He literally had zero weaknesses, not even one. Do you realize he is the only center even near the top of the all time steals list. I think Drob is second all the way down at 42. His defense was unbelievable, he might even be the greatest defensive player or all time. Not to mention he put up unreal rebounding numbers, especially when considering he played alongside some of the best rebounders in business (Barkley, Sampson, Thorpe). He is the only player in NBA history placed in the top ten for all four categories (scoring, rebounding, blocks, steals)

Kobe Bryant is a fantastic offensive player and an average defender, despite what "Experts" might say. Dream is superior in nearly every facet of the game, save scoring and even then it is very very close.

You keep saying 4 ring Kobe like it means something, Kobe was no ring Kobe until Shaq arrived, then Shaq left and he became not very good Kobe again, until Gasol was gifted to him, then he gets put up on a pedestool because he is the closest thing to marketable in the NBA. Kobe Bryant is a product of the corporate NBA. Stacked teams, favorable officiating, hand checking rule change, etc. If you want to compare him to someone, compare him to Drexler, thats a decent comparison, because he sure as hell aint no Jordan.

Kobe Bryant never won anything unless he was on an extremely stacked team and that is a fact. He never overcame adversity ever. When times where tough he quit and demanded a trade. So this "four ring" crap means nothing. The Lakers won those rings, not the Kobe Bryants.

[Allanon]

Was 0 championship Hakeem on the same level as 4 ring Kobe, 4 ring Duncan or 5 ring Magic?


LOL of course he was better than Kobe and Duncan.

That answers the question, you're a blind homer. That's ok, though, you gots your opinion.

In my opinion, no way 0 ring Hakeem belongs in the convseration with 4 ring Kobe, 4 ring Duncan and 5 ring Magic.

[ambchang]

No, I didn't say that.

Rookie years are not in their prime.

So you are saying that Kobe during his prime is better than a God?

Because not too long ago, you said ....


Don't be stupid.

I said Kobe is better than Hakeem in his years prior to the championships. Hakeem was a basketball god during the championship years, nobody denies that.

I'd like to see your counter and proof tomorrow on how Hakeem was better (prior to the Championships) than Kobe; should be entertaining pwnage :lol

Otherwise, you said Hakeem > Kobe during their primes, and it's pretty obvious Hakeem > Kobe prior to their primes.

We have yet to see Kobe's decline.

So from the available sample, Hakeem > Kobe both prior to their primes and during their primes.

And why would anyone ever compare Kobe's prime years to Hakeem's non-prime years? Was Kobe really that far away from Hakeem that you have to compare his best to Hakeem's worst?

[Allanon]

So you are saying that Kobe during his prime is better than a God?

Because not too long ago, you said ....

Please read the thread, you're totally confused.

I have not said that Kobe > Hakeem in their primes. That's yet to be determined.



Otherwise, you said Hakeem > Kobe during their primes, and it's pretty obvious Hakeem > Kobe prior to their primes.

Incorrect, I didn't say this either and I dispute that Hakeem > Kobe prior to their primes.



So from the available sample, Hakeem > Kobe both prior to their primes and during their primes.

And why would anyone ever compare Kobe's prime years to Hakeem's non-prime years? Was Kobe really that far away from Hakeem that you have to compare his best to Hakeem's worst?

How's Hakeem greater than Kobe prior to their primes?

They both had great output while Kobe came home with 3 rings to Hakeem's 0.

Kobe was far better than Hakeem prior to their Prime years.

[mystargtr34]

Kobe has 4 rings and a Finals MVP; Granger does not. Let's not bring in regular players to the conversation. This is like bringing up Al Jefferson compared to Duncan.

My comparison has nothing to do with rings, but strictly stats. The reason i compared the two in terms of stats and say they are equal, is because thats what you did with Dwight Howard and Hakeem. You said, Dwight = Hakeem, because they have similar stats. Remember the comparison was before Hakeem won any rings, so rings dont come into it.

Im trying to prove to you that there is alot more to the game than stats, especially when it comes to great big men like Hakeem.




And a great player like Hakeem stepped it up in the Playoffs and brought home 0 rings while Kobe didn't step up and got 4 rings? How does that make any sense?

Again, we are comparing the two BEFORE they won championships as the main dogs - that means rings dont come in to. Your initial argument was that before Hakeems prime, Kobe > Hakeem, because Kobe had better stats and numbers. This is what we are arguing about, rings dont come in to it unless we are talking about their entire careers. You admitted, during their primes, Hakeem>Kobe. Im trying to say even before Hakeem's 2 championships, or his prime, he was better than Kobe.

]


If it was that easy to score 81, there would be more 81 point games. It's not easy as throwing up 46 shots.

Fact is only 1 person has done it and there is no comparison other than Wilt's 100.

And if it was that easy, there would have been more quadruple-doubles. Hakeem and David Robinson were the only two guys to EVER register a quadruple double. In my eyes, 81 points, and a quadruple double are equally impressive, especially when the guy is doing it with 30+ points and 20+ rebounds






How is LeBron statistically better? Kobe scored 27.6, LeBron had 27.2
Kobe had 35.4 ppg,Lebron had 31.4.

Kobe had an 81 point game. Outscored the Mavs 62-61. LeBron didn't have any of those spectacular feats.

LeBron shoots a better %, averages 2+ more rebounds, and 3+ more assists. If my maths is correct, 3 assists equates to more than the 4 point advantage Kobe has in scoring. And even if we are just looking at scoring, which is silly because thats only one part of the game, i still think LeBron is equally as impressive because he requires less shots, and thus less possessions to get his numbers compared to Kobe, meaning he is increasing his teams efficiency, and ultimately increasing his teams chances of winning the game.


Guys like Jeff Van Gundy regularly say Kobe has been the best player for years. There's a whole thread of quotes of players/coaches/gm's great players saying Kobe was the best all those years.


Your reaching now.

Facts + stats > Opinion.



Let me ask you a simple question.

Was 0 ring Hakeem on the same level as Kobe right now?

That wasnt the comparison, we were comparing the two before they won championships as the main dogs. Pre 94 Hakeem vs Pre 2008 Kobe. But even then, i think 0 ring Hakeem was at least equal as a player to 4 ring Kobe. But, having said that, if you compare the two in terms of greatness, then Kobe would be looked at more favourably, because in the end, its about winning rings as the main dog. Again, that wasnt the comparison, its unfair to handicap one guy and compare one before he won a ring, and a guy after he has his rings, in terms of their standing in history.

If you replace 88-90 Hakeem with Kobe on that 2009 Laker team, i think they steamroll their way to a championship, even if their opposition was 100% healthy.

[Allanon]

My comparison has nothing to do with rings, but strictly stats. The reason i compared the two in terms of stats and say they are equal, is because thats what you did with Dwight Howard and Hakeem. You said, Dwight = Hakeem, because they have similar stats. Remember the comparison was before Hakeem won any rings, so rings dont come into it.

Im trying to prove to you that there is alot more to the game than stats, especially when it comes to great big men like Hakeem.

No need to explain that one, I brought in Dwight to make the same point.



Again, we are comparing the two BEFORE they won championships as the main dogs - that means rings dont come in to. Your initial argument was that before Hakeems prime, Kobe > Hakeem, because Kobe had better stats and numbers. This is what we are arguing about, rings dont come in to it unless we are talking about their entire careers. You admitted, during their primes, Hakeem>Kobe. Im trying to say even before Hakeem's 2 championships, or his prime, he was better than Kobe.

Ah, wasn't sure if you had moved to that conversation yet. Fair enough, prior to rings then.

Kobe had outlandish stats as an individual player, Hakeem did not. Hakeem was a superstar type player, no doubt. But he had your standard superstar numbers.

Kobe had historical feats like his 81 points, 62-61. Hakeem did not.



And if it was that easy, there would have been more quadruple-doubles. Hakeem and David Robinson were the only two guys to EVER register a quadruple double. In my eyes, 81 points, and a quadruple double are equally impressive, especially when the guy is doing it with 30+ points and 20+ rebounds

Nah, Nate Thurmond, Alvin Robertson also have official quadruple doubles. And Wilt, Russell and West are all said to have had quaduple doubles as well but they weren't recorded back then.

Guys like Michael Ray Richardson, Johnny Moore, Larry Steele, Rick Barry, Drexler, Bird also missed it by 1.

A nice feat but not nearly as rare as an 81 point game. Kobe's 81 point is only second to Wilt's 100.



LeBron shoots a better %, averages 2+ more rebounds, and 3+ more assists. If my maths is correct, 3 assists equates to more than the 4 point advantage Kobe has in scoring. And even if we are just looking at scoring, which is silly because thats only one part of the game, i still think LeBron is equally as impressive because he requires less shots, and thus less possessions to get his numbers compared to Kobe, meaning he is increasing his teams efficiency, and ultimately increasing his teams chances of winning the game.

If you want pure stats, I think LeBron surpassed Kobe in 2008-09 but not before.



Your reaching now.
Facts + stats > Opinion.


The stats are close enough to merit opinion. As much as I value your opinion, I'd take JVG's and Larry Bird's over yours.



That wasnt the comparison, we were comparing the two before they won championships as the main dogs. Pre 94 Hakeem vs Pre 2008 Kobe. But even then, i think 0 ring Hakeem was at least equal as a player to 4 ring Kobe. But, having said that, if you compare the two in terms of greatness, then Kobe would be looked at more favourably, because in the end, its about winning rings as the main dog. Again, that wasnt the comparison, its unfair to handicap one guy and compare one before he won a ring, and a guy after he has his rings, in terms of their standing in history.

How can 0 ring Hakeem equal 4 ring Kobe? Now that's just ridiculous. Without his rings, Hakeem's another Barkley and Malone taking a back-seat to Duncan and Kobe.



If you replace 88-90 Hakeem with Kobe on that 2009 Laker team, i think they steamroll their way to a championship, even if their opposition was 100% healthy.

Nah, the Lakers Shooting Guard would have been Vujacic. That Laker team would have lost 1-3 in the first round just like most of Hakeem's pre-championship years.

[Blake]

I'd take Kobe. His drive, determination, work ethic and killer instinct are greater than Hakeem's, imo

[Lars]

That answers the question, you're a blind homer. That's ok, though, you gots your opinion.

In my opinion, no way 0 ring Hakeem belongs in the convseration with 4 ring Kobe, 4 ring Duncan and 5 ring Magic.

Well you are a little dense then.

[dbreiden83080]

Hakeem by a mile..

[mystargtr34]

No need to explain that one, I brought in Dwight to make the same point.

Your using what you call Dwight Howard's comparable stats (they are not, Hakeems are by far superior) to say that Dwight = Hakeem, because of those very stats. But, when I use exactly the same logic as you, and say LeBron > Kobe between 2004-2007 because his stats are superior (or at least equal) - you change the basis of your argument to Jeff Van Gundy and Larry Bird said Kobe was better.

Which one is it? Opinion or stats?





Ah, wasn't sure if you had moved to that conversation yet. Fair enough, prior to rings then.

Kobe had outlandish stats as an individual player, Hakeem did not. Hakeem was a superstar type player, no doubt. But he had your standard superstar numbers.

Kobe had historical feats like his 81 points, 62-61. Hakeem did not.



Nah, Nate Thurmond, Alvin Robertson also have official quadruple doubles. And Wilt, Russell and West are all said to have had quaduple doubles as well but they weren't recorded back then.

Guys like Michael Ray Richardson, Johnny Moore, Larry Steele, Rick Barry, Drexler, Bird also missed it by 1.

A nice feat but not nearly as rare as an 81 point game. Kobe's 81 point is only second to Wilt's 100.

You are right, there have only been four players to ever do it, i dont wanna know about the ones that came close. He also has the most 5x5 games in history with 6, and is the only guy to ever have a 5x6 game. Personally, i dont think these numbers, or Kobe's 81 matter when comparing the two in terms of their standing in history. Both had remarkable feats, so your wrong to say Kobe's were any greater. Hakeem holds his own against any player in history in terms of statistical feats.

You seem way too hung up on points, you almost ignore all other facets of the game. David Robinson scored 71 points in a game. He also had 10 rebounds and 5 assists and 2 blocked shots. Kobe scored 81, with only 6 rebounds and 2 assists. These two arent comparable? What about David Thompson, he scored 73 aswell. Wilt scored 100, and numerous 70 point games, including a 78.





If you want pure stats, I think LeBron surpassed Kobe in 2008-09 but not before.



The stats are close enough to merit opinion. As much as I value your opinion, I'd take JVG's and Larry Bird's over yours.

You are confusing my use of the word 'stats', with what you are talking about, 'points'. LeBron has more rebounds, more assists, shoots a better % thus is more efficienct. Kobe scores more points because he took more shots, resulting in less efficiency. Theres more to stats than points scored.

So because JVG and Larry Bird say Kobe is the best we all have to take their word as final. These guys are human just like the rest of us, they have emotional attachment to the players aswell. One might be more aestheticlaly pleasing for a particular person. Im sure there are many players, past and present, who think LeBron was the best player in the League in that period, especially after he took his team to the Finals while Kobe was being bounced in the first round.

Ill use facts and stats - you can use your select opinions. No problem.




How can 0 ring Hakeem equal 4 ring Kobe? Now that's just ridiculous. Without his rings, Hakeem's another Barkley and Malone taking a back-seat to Duncan and Kobe.



Nah, the Lakers Shooting Guard would have been Vujacic. That Laker team would have lost 1-3 in the first round just like most of Hakeem's pre-championship years.

I said in terms of historical standing, Kobe would be > Hakeem because he would have 4 rings and Hakeem 0. But thats not the case, Hakeem has 2 rings as the main dog, and 2 finals MVP's, Kobe has more rings, but less as the main dog, and less Finals MVP's. Unfortunately its not as easy as 4>2.

How about we stop handicapping Hakeem by comparing him pre his championships as the main guy, to Kobe after his championship as the main guy.

Throw away all the rings, my point was that if you swap 1990 Hakeem with 2008 Kobe on last years Laker team, they still win the championship. Thats my opinion, if you disagree, thats fine - neither of us can prove it. You asked the question, i answered it.

[duhoh]

who would you start a franchise with, a prime hakeem, or a prime kobe?

but very good options, but I think the answer to my question settles it.

[Allanon]

Your using what you call Dwight Howard's comparable stats (they are not, Hakeems are by far superior) to say that Dwight = Hakeem, because of those very stats. But, when I use exactly the same logic as you, and say LeBron > Kobe between 2004-2007 because his stats are superior (or at least equal) - you change the basis of your argument to Jeff Van Gundy and Larry Bird said Kobe was better.

Which one is it? Opinion or stats?

How are Hakeem's stats far superior to Dwight?

Dwight 20.7 ppg, 14.2 rbd, 2.2 blocks, 60 FG%
Hakeem 24.8 ppg, 13.5 rbd, 3.44 blocks 51 FG%

Hakeem scored 5 more ppg at almost 10% less accuracy and had 1.2 more blocks. While Dwight had more rebounds and better accuracy. Pretty comparable to me.

We know Dwight's not as good as Hakeem but the end result was pretty much comparable. End result was the same, a Finals appearance and a bunch of near sweep first round exits.



You are right, there have only been four players to ever do it, i dont wanna know about the ones that came close. He also has the most 5x5 games in history with 6, and is the only guy to ever have a 5x6 game. Personally, i dont think these numbers, or Kobe's 81 matter when comparing the two in terms of their standing in history. Both had remarkable feats, so your wrong to say Kobe's were any greater. Hakeem holds his own against any player in history in terms of statistical feats.

I say you're wrong, you say I'm wrong. Opinion I suppose.



You seem way too hung up on points, you almost ignore all other facets of the game. David Robinson scored 71 points in a game. He also had 10 rebounds and 5 assists and 2 blocked shots. Kobe scored 81, with only 6 rebounds and 2 assists. These two arent comparable? What about David Thompson, he scored 73 aswell. Wilt scored 100, and numerous 70 point games, including a 78.

There's only one 81 point game in history and one of 100. Those are supernatural feats that haven't been duplicated. 1 by Wilt and the 2nd by Kobe.

Hakeem never came close to such a feat and he didn't have rings either.



You are confusing my use of the word 'stats', with what you are talking about, 'points'. LeBron has more rebounds, more assists, shoots a better % thus is more efficienct. Kobe scores more points because he took more shots, resulting in less efficiency. Theres more to stats than points scored.

Points win games so it's the most important stat. That's your opinion versus mines again.



So because JVG and Larry Bird say Kobe is the best we all have to take their word as final. These guys are human just like the rest of us, they have emotional attachment to the players aswell. One might be more aestheticlaly pleasing for a particular person. Im sure there are many players, past and present, who think LeBron was the best player in the League in that period, especially after he took his team to the Finals while Kobe was being bounced in the first round.

Ill use facts and stats - you can use your select opinions. No problem.


Hey, they're human but they also know more about basketball than you or I. And I'll take their opinion over yours any day. No disrespect to you, I'd take them over my opinion as well.



I said in terms of historical standing, Kobe would be > Hakeem because he would have 4 rings and Hakeem 0. But thats not the case, Hakeem has 2 rings as the main dog, and 2 finals MVP's, Kobe has more rings, but less as the main dog, and less Finals MVP's. Unfortunately its not as easy as 4>2.

I thought we're keeping this to prior to Kobe's main ring and Hakeem's rings. Simply put Kobe had 3 rings while Hakeem had none. His historical standing was less than Barkley's at that point.



How about we stop handicapping Hakeem by comparing him pre his championships as the main guy, to Kobe after his championship as the main guy.

I have no argument with Hakeem post his championship rings. This whole conversation evolved from pre-ring Hakeem. Pre-ring Hakeem was another Charles Barkley while Kobe had already gotten 3.

I'm not going to debate post championship Hakeem, that was the Dream and Kobe isn't there yet.



Throw away all the rings, my point was that if you swap 1990 Hakeem with 2008 Kobe on last years Laker team, they still win the championship. Thats my opinion, if you disagree, thats fine - neither of us can prove it. You asked the question, i answered it.

That's cool. I don't think Hakeem would have won the championship with Sasha Vujacic as the shooting guard.

But of course, that's just opinion.

[Allanon]

Well you are a little dense then.

And you're quite obtuse yourself then if you think 0 ring Hakeem was on 4 ringed Kobe/Duncan's level.

[Lars]

What the fuck are you talking about 0 ring Hakeem. Players don't magically become better players once they win rings. Teams win rings, not players.

Bottom line:
1.) Hakeem took an average talent team vs. insurmountable odds (2 60 win teams) and came away victorious.
2.) Duncan took an average talent team (2003) vs. above average teams and came away victorious.
3.) Kobe took extremely stacked teams and won "some" of the time.

If Hakeem played in this era it would be complete and utter domination.

[Allanon]

What the fuck are you talking about 0 ring Hakeem. Players don't magically become better players once they win rings. Teams win rings, not players.

Bottom line:
1.) Hakeem took an average talent team vs. insurmountable odds (2 60 win teams) and came away victorious.
2.) Duncan took an average talent team (2003) vs. above average teams and came away victorious.
3.) Kobe took extremely stacked teams and won "some" of the time.

If Hakeem played in this era it would be complete and utter domination.

READ the Fucking discussion before you open your fat mouth and you won't be so lost next time, Rocketfan.

[Lars]

I read the entire discussion, you are an idiot, you flop on your points, you qualify every statement and we end up with "Kobe is a better player on Tuesdays when wearing green shoes"

You can try and put up as many conditions to the argument as you want, but Hakeem is still better than Kobe every day of the week.

[Allanon]

Hakeem with zero, zilch, nada, 0 rings was equal to Kobe/Duncan with 4 rings.

:lol

Like I said, stupid homer with the blinders on. Not surprising.

[dbreiden83080]

:lol

Like I said, stupid homer with the blinders on. Not surprising.

Barkley by his own admission could not guard his own grandma.. Hakeem was one of the most dominant defensive big men of all time..

[Allanon]

Barkley by his own admission could not guard his own grandma.. Hakeem was one of the most dominant defensive big men of all time..

I don't deny Hakeem was a great player, everybody knows this.

My contention is that prior to Hakeem's championship years, Hakeem < Kobe.

Only blind homers like Lars would be stupid enough to put O ring'ed Hakeem in Kobe/Duncan territory.

[Sportstudi]

You are right, there have only been four players to ever do it, i dont wanna know about the ones that came close. He also has the most 5x5 games in history with 6, and is the only guy to ever have a 5x6 game. Personally, i dont think these numbers, or Kobe's 81 matter when comparing the two in terms of their standing in history. Both had remarkable feats, so your wrong to say Kobe's were any greater. Hakeem holds his own against any player in history in terms of statistical feats.



I don't want to get into your discussion with Allanon, but here I have to insert that you are wrong. Hakeem wasn't the only one ever to record a five-by-six.

See here... (http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200601030UTA.html)

[Lars]

I don't deny Hakeem was a great player, everybody knows this.

My contention is that prior to Hakeem's championship years, Hakeem < Kobe.

Only blind homers like Lars would be stupid enough to put O ring'ed Hakeem in Kobe/Duncan territory.

Nice argument

Keep digging yourself deeper

[Allanon]

Nice argument



Thanks, Lars.

[mystargtr34]

I don't want to get into your discussion with Allanon, but here I have to insert that you are wrong. Hakeem wasn't the only one ever to record a five-by-six.

See here... (http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200601030UTA.html)

Sorry, Kirilenko aswell? You will have to excuse my one game fact checking :lol.

So its been done twice in history?

[Rummpd]

Duncan over either of them he has the highest winning percentage of any player in major sport history and Hakeem would be second and Kobe a very distant third - bigs lead championships historically period.

[wekko368]

Duncan over either of them he has the highest winning percentage of any player in major sport history and Hakeem would be second and Kobe a very distant third - bigs lead championships historically period.

The flaw in your argument is that it depends on the team as a whole. Both Duncan and Kobe's teammates were far superior to Olajuwon's. That's also why Allanon's argument regarding rings is invalid as well.

But you are correct that bigs lead championships. That's why bigs with potential are always drafted high (Oden, Bargnani, Bogut, Howard, Yao, Kwame, Olowokandi, etc...). And this thread is talking about one of the best big men of all time. Of course Olajuwon is the obvious choice.

[Allanon]

The flaw in your argument is that it depends on the team as a whole. Both Duncan and Kobe's teammates were far superior to Olajuwon's.

That's also why Allanon's argument regarding rings is invalid as well.


Hakeem had 4 time All Star Ralph Sampson and they were the original "Twin Towers".

Kobe won a ring with Pau Gasol, only a 2 time All Star that everybody said was soft and a choker. Pau had never won even 1 Playoff game until he played with Kobe.

[wekko368]

Hakeem had 4 time All Star Ralph Sampson and they were the original "Twin Towers".

Olajuwon and Sampson played less than 4 seasons together, and during those seasons, Olajuwon was still very raw. Also, keep in mind that Sampson himself was a very young player. Sampson was only in his 2nd year when Olajuwon joined the Rockets.

The 80's Rockets' team had the potential to be a dynasty, but injuries and drugs destroyed it.

You've continually harped on the caliber of the pre-championships Olajuwon. No offense, but I'm going to assume you've never seen him play unless it was within the last few year of his career.

During the few years preceding his titles, Olajuwon was easily the best center in the game. The main reason the Rockets were able to win their first championship was the addition of Sam Cassell and the development of Robert Horry. The 1994 Olajuwon was largely the same as the 1993 one.



Kobe won a ring with Pau Gasol, only a 2 time All Star that everybody said was soft and a choker. Pau had never won even 1 Playoff game until he played with Kobe.

No offense, but using all-star appearances is a poor determination of a player's caliber, especially when the western conference had perennial all-star pf's of Dirk, Duncan, and Garnett.

A more relevant fact is that Gasol was both Memphis's franchise player and a highly effective big in a league where highly effective bigs are few and far between.

I get that you're a Kobe fan, but trying to prop him up by criticizing Gasol is pure idiocy. Anyone can see that he's a beast.

[duhoh]

Olajuwon and Sampson played less than 4 seasons together, and during those seasons, Olajuwon was still very raw. Also, keep in mind that Sampson himself was a very young player. Sampson was only in his 2nd year when Olajuwon joined the Rockets.

The 80's Rockets' team had the potential to be a dynasty, but injuries and drugs destroyed it.

You've continually harped on the caliber of the pre-championships Olajuwon. No offense, but I'm going to assume you've never seen him play unless it was within the last few year of his career.

During the few years preceding his titles, Olajuwon was easily the best center in the game. The main reason the Rockets were able to win their first championship was the addition of Sam Cassell and the development of Robert Horry. The 1994 Olajuwon was largely the same as the 1993 one.



No offense, but using all-star appearances is a poor determination of a player's caliber, especially when the western conference had perennial all-star pf's of Dirk, Duncan, and Garnett.

A more relevant fact is that Gasol was both Memphis's franchise player and a highly effective big in a league where highly effective bigs are few and far between.

I get that you're a Kobe fan, but trying to prop him up by criticizing Gasol is pure idiocy. Anyone can see that he's a beast.

FINALLY!

a reasonable post by a rockets fan :lol

[Galileo]

Here's a stat for you all.

Hakeem had the highest peak on any player in NAB history, not in '94/'95, but in 1988.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_season_p.html

Hakeem had the highest playoff PER of all time.

STATS

4 games

38 points per game
17 rebounds per game
38 of 43 free throws
3 blocks per game
2 steals per game

FG% = 57%
TS% = 64%

DRB% = 33%
TRB% = 23%

ORtg = 134




PER = 39.0! = Best in NBA history

[Sportstudi]

Sorry, Kirilenko aswell? You will have to excuse my one game fact checking :lol.

So its been done twice in history?

No problem :lol

Yes, twice.

[Darrin]

Am I getting this right--Kobe Bryant is underachieving?

:lol

[ambchang]

Kobe's prime is only good enough to be compared to Hakeem's pre-prime.
Gotcha.

[Killakobe81]

In his prime Dream is probably the best big man ever, if he wouldve maintained that level longer there probably wouldnt be any doubt about who the best Center ever was.



You mean 48 yr old Robinson? Wild an erratic rookie Ginobili? 2nd year Parker that got benched in favor or Speedy fucking Claxton in the 4th qtr of numerous games? And journeyman Stephen Jackson?

Disagree here. Agree hakeem was most dominant center of his era and ever since (in his prime) BUT Kareem in his prime was even more dominant offensivelyand only a little less so on defense ...

[Killakobe81]

HAkeem is the 2nd greatest center I ever saw BUT you still take Kobe ...NO ONE kills the ROX for passing Mj for Hakeem because he was a HOF'er ...but if they could do it over they take mj no doubt. when all is said and done KOBE COULD BE the 2nd greatest to MJ so you take Kobe ...
But I will say this the 1st title team Hakeem had not many other players could of carried them to a title ...on the other hand not many could carry Luke, Sasha and Dfish as a starting PG at age 30 to a title either ...

[Culburn369]

on the other hand not many could carry Luke, Sasha and Dfish as a starting PG at age 30 to a title either ...

Though Dfish hoisting Kobe out of Orlando in a fireman's carry was adorable.:lobt2:

[z0sa]

Allanon with yet another epic failure.

These threads are still good though. Makes it easy to see who is an absolute dimwit with no bball knowledge or history, though we all knew Allanon before.

[ambchang]

HAkeem is the 2nd greatest center I ever saw BUT you still take Kobe ...NO ONE kills the ROX for passing Mj for Hakeem because he was a HOF'er ...but if they could do it over they take mj no doubt. when all is said and done KOBE COULD BE the 2nd greatest to MJ so you take Kobe ...
But I will say this the 1st title team Hakeem had not many other players could of carried them to a title ...on the other hand not many could carry Luke, Sasha and Dfish as a starting PG at age 30 to a title either ...

Kobe could be the 2nd greatest to MJ?

Magic, Kareem, Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Russell, Big O, Bird are all clearly > Kobe at this point. Kobe's been in the league for more than a dozen years, it's highly unlikely that he can keep this up for enough years to pass any of the ones mentioned above.

[Allanon]

Allanon with yet another epic failure.

These threads are still good though. Makes it easy to see who is an absolute dimwit with no bball knowledge or history, though we all knew Allanon before.

Z0sa with the same idiotic trash as usual. This guy can't be this stupid, he's gotta be trolling Lakerfan :lol

So let's hear it...

Was 0 ring Hakeem on the same level as 4 ring Kobe/Duncan?

[z0sa]

Z0sa with the same idiotic trash yet again.

So let's hear it...

Is 0 ring Hakeem on the same level as 4 ring Kobe/Duncan?

Anyone stupid enough to even entertain such a debate as this^ should be impaled by a spork. It has no consequence whatsoever, on whether Kobe or Hakeem is the better player to win titles around (notice I didn't say WITH, leadership and the ability to make teammates better without an assist are the two most underrated aspects of guys like Hakeem). Which is why I called it an epic fail.

[Allanon]

Anyone stupid enough to even entertain such a debate as this^ should be impaled by a spork. It has no consequence whatsoever, on whether Kobe or Hakeem is the better player to win titles around (notice I didn't say WITH, leadership and the ability to make teammates better without an assist are the two most underrated aspects of guys like Hakeem). Which is why I called it an epic fail.

What a tool...you avoided the question like the pussy I knew you were, Z0sa.

GTFO with that weak shit :lol

[z0sa]

What a tool...you avoided the question like the pussy I knew you were, Z0sa.

GTFO with that weak shit :lol

Youngin, one day you'll learn that calling people weaksauce and their takes shitty grants you negative points at the final tally.

[Allanon]

Youngin, one day you'll learn that calling people weaksauce and their takes shitty grants you negative points at the final tally.


Makes it easy to see who is an absolute dimwit with no bball knowledge or history, though we all knew Allanon before.

Yes it does son, yes it does. As does hypocrisy.

[z0sa]

Yes it does son, yes it does. As does hypocrisy.

I'm not part of the competition, just a judge. The tally speaks for itself

[Allanon]

I'm not part of the competition, just a judge. The tally speaks for itself

Hahah, a judge? Judges are impartial, you're a freaking Kobe and Lakerfan hater for years now.

I've argued heatedly with Mystar for a few seasons now. Although we often disagree, he shames you as far as impartiality goes.

In your 4 years and 4,000 posts, have you EVER said anything positive about Kobe or Lakerfan?

GTFO judge. :lol

[wekko368]

on the other hand not many could carry Luke, Sasha and Dfish as a starting PG at age 30 to a title either ...

You do realize the Lakers also had Gasol, Bynum, Odom, and Ariza, right?

Off the top of my head, here's a list of players who could won with that roster: Lebron, Wade, Carmelo, Pierce, Roy, Joe Johnson, and maybe Vince Carter.

[Killakobe81]

Kobe could be the 2nd greatest to MJ?

Magic, Kareem, Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Russell, Big O, Bird are all clearly > Kobe at this point. Kobe's been in the league for more than a dozen years, it's highly unlikely that he can keep this up for enough years to pass any of the ones mentioned above.

First, I said COULD BE ... no one knows for sure. And when I say 2nd greatest to MJ that is for players since 1980 SINCE I DID NOT watch basketball BEFORE then I dont compare magic, Kobe MJ Duncan to players I have never sEEN myself NBA Classic games doesnt count because they ALWAYS show those guy's greatest games ...

I could also say duncan can pass Kareem or Hakeem IMHO i doubt it but how do I know how much game and winning Duncan has left he is the greatest PF (if you insist on keepin him there (in my book) 3rd best PF/C To kareem and hakeem but he is not retired yet ...Kobe can definitely pass all the 80 - present guy on that list except maybe MJ and Kareem ...

Bird though great has already been passed and Kobe is closing in on Magic ...
Will he be my favorite player or the people's choice? probably not (i still favor Magic) ...too many haters. But he will have rings and stats to back that up so if you want to argue on either point ...Kobe since 1980 Only trails Magic, Kareem and MJ when you factor in both rings and stats ...Duncan/Shaq/Hakeem/Kobe are all in the same class at this point with titles rings and MVP's to back their case.

[Killakobe81]

You do realize the Lakers also had Gasol, Bynum, Odom, and Ariza, right?

Off the top of my head, here's a list of players who could won with that roster: Lebron, Wade, Carmelo, Pierce, Roy, Joe Johnson, and maybe Vince Carter.

Bynum = hurt
Odom & ariza = inconsistent

Gaosl = all-star

As for your list Roy has better all-around talent (ask tlong) they the deepest in the NBA ...so does melo so did Pierce ...


Only true advantage Kobe has is coaching ...

Also talent alnone does not win titles ...many could argue that the suns teams that KEEP losing to the Spurs has more TALENT but Spurs have the best player and coach in the matchup (pop and duncan) same with Lakers over Nuggs ...

[wekko368]

Bynum = hurt
Odom & ariza = inconsistent

Odom was inconsistent? Seriously? Against the Magic, he shot 54% for the series.



Gaosl = all-star

Gasol shot 60% for the series against the Magic. That's why you'll lose this argument. That and the fact that Kobe scored his points against the Magic through volume shooting. Any player on my list has the ability to replicate Kobe's performance, but even if we assume they don't, they could just throw the ball down low to Gasol.


As for your list Roy has better all-around talent (ask tlong) they the deepest in the NBA ...so does melo so did Pierce ...

The Blazers may have a deeper roster, but no one on their team can come close to Gasol. I don't think you appreciate how dominant Gasol really is. There are only a handful of bigs who have a refined post game. The same logic applies to the Nuggets and Celtics (Garnett was injured). You really underestimate how important bigs are.



Also talent alnone does not win titles ...many could argue that the suns teams that KEEP losing to the Spurs has more TALENT but Spurs have the best player and coach in the matchup (pop and duncan) same with Lakers over Nuggs ...

The only argument people can logically make is that the Suns have more offensive talent. However, the Spurs have plenty of offensive talent themselves are are built for the playoffs. The Suns were built for the regular season. Not to mention that the Spurs are a far more talented defensive team.

[Killakobe81]

Odom was inconsistent? Seriously? Against the Magic, he shot 54% for the series.



Gasol shot 60% for the series against the Magic. That's why you'll lose this argument. That and the fact that Kobe scored his points against the Magic through volume shooting. Any player on my list has the ability to replicate Kobe's performance, but even if we assume they don't, they could just throw the ball down low to Gasol.



The Blazers may have a deeper roster, but no one on their team can come close to Gasol. I don't think you appreciate how dominant Gasol really is. There are only a handful of bigs who have a refined post game. The same logic applies to the Nuggets and Celtics (Garnett was injured). You really underestimate how important bigs are.



The only argument people can logically make is that the Suns have more offensive talent. However, the Spurs have plenty of offensive talent themselves are are built for the playoffs. The Suns were built for the regular season. Not to mention that the Spurs are a far more talented defensive team.

Silly rabbit how are you gonna argue with someone that has watched every Laker game (almost) since 1980 about MY team? That is fine if you want to diminish Kobe's contributuions to the title doesnt matter to me ...

But Odom also had games of 2, 5 and 6 once and games of 7 and 8pts twice INCONSISTENT ...
Gasol was great we should of gotten him the ball even more no doubt ...

But the thing is not every volume shooter can win games Joe Johnson is good so is Roy and Vince but if you seriously feel you can insert anyone in Kobe's place and get the same results you know little about basketball.

What you fail to see the importance of is "it" Kobe has it, Duncan has it, Hakeem had it, Bird magic and of course "MJ". Pippen did a great Jordan impression but he never had "it", Mcgrady some argued he was as good if not better than Kobe at one time but he doesnt have it either. I think Melo, LBJ wade and Pierce do ...not sure about the others you mentioned ... Point is onl;y pierce and Wade have also proven thay can lead teams like Shaq and duncan have to a ttile all that replace stuff is bullshit conjecture.
I bet you one of those clowns that argue if barry had emitt's line ...but truth of the matter is Emmitt had "it" Barry did not. Barry had the highlights spectacular plays but I take Emmitt, walter Payton, Faulk and Marcus allen all day over him. Winners have that "it" but I guess you dont recognize "it" cuz you haven't been able to watch it up close since Hakeem left ...

[Killakobe81]

and before the Barry lovers or Cowboy haters flame me ...here is my point.
Name the greatest alltime of any sport? How many NEVER won a title? I mean the ABSOLUTELY no doubt best player of a decade that DID not win a title?

Now i only have watched sports since 1980
NFL? Marino, you could make a case for ...but many would argue Elway and Montana were greater.
NBA? Miller, Stockton, malone were they better than Magic, Bird, MJ, Kobe Shaq HAkeem or Duncan?
MLB? Here you may have some arguments here Bonds, and Griffey but the other greats Puckett, Clemens, Jeter, Arod, Schilling, Manny, Randy Pujols
NHL? Grezky, Mario, Crosby Messier, Roy,

Point is cream ALWAYS rises to the top the best I have ever seen Rice, Irvin, Lott, Magic , Bird, Hakeem, LT (real one), Jagr etc they find a way to win at LEAST ONE title if you don't you can be great but you can't be the ALL-time best sorry ...

[Killakobe81]

I love Reggie miller Im a UCLA alumnus great clutch player and probably one of the "few" truly clutch players NOT to win a title in the NBA he, chuck and Stockton. Malone was not clutch ... he shrunk in many big games so I discount him in the greatest players argument. But Miller did not win so as much as I love the guycant be the greatest ...

[wekko368]

Silly rabbit how are you gonna argue with someone that has watched every Laker game (almost) since 1980 about MY team? That is fine if you want to diminish Kobe's contributuions to the title doesnt matter to me ...

I would love for you to explain how watching the Lakers since 1980 gives you a better understanding of the 2009 finals than anyone else.

That being said, I'm not diminishing Kobe's contributions. I'm just putting them in the proper context. I said he scored his points through volume shooting. This is a fact. Check the box scores.



But Odom also had games of 2, 5 and 6 once and games of 7 and 8pts twice INCONSISTENT ...

I'm talking about the finals. What're you talking about? Are you seriously trying to prove your point by cherry picking stats for the entire playoffs? Get real.



Gasol was great we should of gotten him the ball even more no doubt ...

But the thing is not every volume shooter can win games Joe Johnson is good so is Roy and Vince but if you seriously feel you can insert anyone in their place and get the same results you know little about basketball.

Sorry, but the logic is sound. My point is that Gasol was so effective that the Lakers could've replaced Kobe with an inferior (albeit still a star) player and still beaten the Magic.

It would be one thing if Kobe had a great series, but he simply didn't. Look at the stats. Like I said before, Kobe scored his points through volume shooting.



Winners have that "it" but I guess you dont recognize "it" cuz you haven't been able to watch it up close since Hakeem left ...

It's true that I root for the Rockets, but when they get eliminated, I root for the other Texas teams. I appreciate quality basketball. Why do you think I'm on a Spurs forum?

[Killakobe81]

And I agree Gasol is great glad we have him but his contributions does not take away what Kobe has done ...of course Kobe needed Gasol to win everyone needs help. But I could sub in KG or Duncan in that spot and Lakers still win so what is your point?

[Killakobe81]

No, I did not Cherry pick Wekko you said he was great in the Finals and yes that was true ... BUT to get to the FINALS we had to beat 3 other teams and LO was inconsistent especially vs. Nuggs and ROX ...
Kobe did take a lot of shots but to even take that many requires talent and stamina ...
And again I disagree ...Pierce, LBJ wade and Kobe can thrive on the biggest stage but those other guys unproven ...
But that's ok you stick your stats Hollinger because they always tell the WHOLE story ...
Trevor Ariza is a GREAT shooter and scorer cuz he is averaging almost 20 points ... points ...right?

[Killakobe81]

Look the Lakers are good no disputing that ... but Bynum was hurt, Ariza and LO came up big (FINALS) and Gasol was consistent. The reason why those guys shine cuz Kobe takes those shots and takes the defense with him ...Before Kobe ...Gasol stuggled to win a playoff game let alone a series ...Ariza was bench warmer before LA, Dfish is a clutch role player Odom an enigma ...they all get open looks beacuse of Kobe 1st and Gasol 2nd. Gasol make Kobe's job easier Kobe takes pressure off of Pau ...

[Killakobe81]

Also even look at Pau's international career ...before Last year he choked in the Olympics and Euro Finals because Manu cam through in the clutch when Pau could not ...Pau is a great player bbut not a leader he does not have "it" but he is doing better I would credit Phil 1st and Kobe 2nd for his further development ...

[Killakobe81]

Read this ...Pau was known for coming up short ...

Speaking of redemption, well, Spanish superstar Pau Gasol's circle is complete as well. After being roundly criticized for his role in the Lakers' defeat in the 2008 Finals, Gasol established himself as arguably one of the NBA's top dozen players in 2008-09, capped off by his skilled performance in L.A.'s championship run through the 2009 Playoffs and Finals. Pau averaged 18.6 points, 9.2 rebounds, and 1.8 blocks while also shooting .600 and doing a fine job defensively against Dwight Howard in the Finals.

Meanwhile, NBA fans may not be as aware that Gasol had unfinished business at the Eurobasket as well, as his disastrous fourth quarter in the 2007 gold-medal game may well have cost Team España the game. As we wrote in 2007:

"After such a tremendous Eurobasket for two weeks, Pau Gasol had a nightmare of a final--he just couldn't connect on his interior shots. Some of that has to be credited to the Russian defense, but Pau just could not get shots to fall.

Then he had a 4th quarter he would soon like to have wiped from the records. Pau was 3/8 on FTs and combined that with 3 TOs, including the costly TO with :25 left. All these miscues would have been forgotten if Pau could have knocked down a desperation jumper with :02 left, but his shot just rimmed out. Overall on the night, the Spanish go-to guy was just 4/13 from the floor and 5/12 at the line (14 pts, 14 reb, 3 ast, 3 blk, 5 TO)."

[Killakobe81]

Not meant to demean Gasol just facts.

[wekko368]

Also even look at Pau's international career ...before Last year he choked in the Olympics and Euro Finals because Manu cam through in the clutch when Pau could not ...Pau is a great player bbut not a leader he does not have "it" but he is doing better I would credit Phil 1st and Kobe 2nd for his further development ...

Hate to break it to you, but Gasol's international career is absolutely irrelevant (I didn't watch it). Basketball is about matchups, and the NBA lacks quality big men. Look at Gasol's opposition during the playoffs. Boozer? Gasol towers over him. Scola? You can't be serious. Kenyon Martin? All those guys are simply too small to stop Gasol. Howard has adequate size, but he's a poor man to man defender against other bigs.

[wekko368]

No, I did not Cherry pick Wekko you said he was great in the Finals and yes that was true ... BUT to get to the FINALS we had to beat 3 other teams and LO was inconsistent especially vs. Nuggs and ROX

Do you realize that there's a difference between "points" and "consistency"? Against the Nuggets, Odom was fairly consistent with his percentages except for game 4 where he shot terribly. In any case, you listed 7 games where you felt he was "inconsistent". That means he played well in 16 games....and you think that's something to complain about...

Look, everyone has bad games. It's idiocy to cherry pick these bad games and accuse the player of being "inconsistent".



Kobe did take a lot of shots but to even take that many requires talent and stamina ...

Wow. You're actually using this as an argument. After reading something this retarded, I usually call the poster an idiot and call it a night.

You're an idiot. Goodnight.

[Killakobe81]

Do you realize that there's a difference between "points" and "consistency"? Against the Nuggets, Odom was fairly consistent with his percentages except for game 4 where he shot terribly. In any case, you listed 7 games where you felt he was "inconsistent". That means he played well in 16 games....and you think that's something to complain about...

Look, everyone has bad games. It's idiocy to cherry pick these bad games and accuse the player of being "inconsistent".



Wow. You're actually using this as an argument. After reading something this retarded, I usually call the poster an idiot and call it a night.

You're an idiot. Goodnight.

Mature.
Tried to have an intelligent debate but you heardthe story about arguing with fools .... LOL I kid.
So you think it's easy to take 30 shots in any game? Do you EVEN play basketball? How many games did AI , MJ, etc take 30 shots? Being a great scorer you will take shots Volume shots (as you call it) but it puts pressure on the defense whether you make or miss them ...of course it helps to make them. I agree the Finals was not Kobe's most efficient work ...but you have to really "know" the game to see why he was MVP ...I'll give you an example. Despite his lack of scoring I still felt Duncan was the Finals vs. the Cavs because he anchored the defense and set the picks, rebounded and scored when called on and set up the opther guys ...it was his "presence" that freed up Parker ...but stats whore like yourself normally give it to Parker ...I agree big man presence means a lot ...but As good as Gasol is his presence is not equal to Duncan's Kobe's is ...because the opposing coach designs their defense to stop him ...it wa sKobe fighting for loose balls and knocking down Howard in the clutch ...Kobe passing to Fisher for the OT 3 ...

[Killakobe81]

Hate to break it to you, but Gasol's international career is absolutely irrelevant (I didn't watch it). Basketball is about matchups, and the NBA lacks quality big men. Look at Gasol's opposition during the playoffs. Boozer? Gasol towers over him. Scola? You can't be serious. Kenyon Martin? All those guys are simply too small to stop Gasol. Howard has adequate size, but he's a poor man to man defender against other bigs.

I didnt watch it so it's not relevant. Point is he made the playoffs and got swept in Mamphis at least two times that I saw ...
Gasol is great we have ALREADY established that ...but without Kobe he was always coming up short Kobe needed him as well no one disagrees here. Point is Kobe is an all-time great Gasol an all-star HUGE difference.

[Killakobe81]

I give you points for trying Wekko ...you dont like Kobe so even though you give Gasol credit you do it to diminish Kobe's contributions. That is fine Kobe, will volume shoot his way in to the HOF, and another title. And you will come in here and whine that "it's because Gasol is so gifted" When true people with basketball smarts know that Kobe freed up Gasol to show his skills and Gasol has helped Kobe to showcase his greatness on the biggest stage again ...you will run to your PC and exclaim he needed 30 shots to score 40! Vince could do that! But Vince hasn't. Either way you slice it Lakers win. LOL!

[ElNono]

Ten pages for this shit? Give it up already.

[Killakobe81]

El nono stay out of this! LOL One last point Vince has Howard and Lebron Shaq so let's do what Kobe has done ...

[wekko368]

Mature.
So you think it's easy to take 30 shots in any game? Do you EVEN play basketball? How many games did AI , MJ, etc take 30 shots? Being a great scorer you will take shots Volume shots (as you call it)

The question you're asking shouldn't be "how many games did AI, MJ, etc take 30 shots?" It's "how many games did AI, MJ, etc take 30 shots and their team won?" Being a volume shooter implies inefficiency. Is scoring 30 points impressive when you take 30 shots?



but it puts pressure on the defense whether you make or miss them ...of course it helps to make them.

Absolutely wrong. The defensive game plan would be to allow the volume shooter (i.e. Iverson) to get his shots while taking his teammates out of the game.



I agree the Finals was not Kobe's most efficient work ...but you have to really "know" the game to see why he was MVP

Apparently, you also have to be biased.



...I'll give you an example. Despite his lack of scoring I still felt Duncan was the Finals vs. the Cavs because he anchored the defense and set the picks, rebounded and scored when called on and set up the opther guys ...it was his "presence" that freed up Parker ...but stats whore like yourself normally give it to Parker

Sorry, but you're wrong again. The MVP is generally the player that exploits his matchup the most. Both Duncan and Parker had advantageous mismatches against their counterparts, but Parker exploited his far more.

Btw, achoring defense, setting picks, and rebounding are all prerequisites for bigs. Even Gortat did it last year. You're making too much of it.



...I agree big man presence means a lot ...but As good as Gasol is his presence is not equal to Duncan's Kobe's is...because the opposing coach designs their defense to stop him

Really? Man-to-man defense was designed to stop Kobe?



...it wa sKobe fighting for loose balls and knocking down Howard in the clutch ...Kobe passing to Fisher for the OT 3 ...

And had they given the ball to Gasol more frequently, they might not have needed those plays.

To me, the Lakers were aware that Gasol was nearly unstoppable. On the other hand, it was imperative to Kobe that he "lead" the team to a championship. Logically, to exploit Gasol's mismatches, the Lakers should've had him shoot at least 20 shots a game. After all, he is much more efficient than Kobe. However, the Lakers were obviously the better team...so much so that they could allow Kobe to become a high volume shooter and still win. And that's what they did.

[wekko368]

I didnt watch it so it's not relevant.

Actually, it's irrelevant b/c it took place in a different league. You may be able to name a few players overseas who were able to adapt to the NBA game (or vice versa), but for every single player you name that could, I can probably list 5 that couldn't.

When Bonzi was in Houston, he could barely crack the rotation. He went to play in China and scored 50 pts (I think) in his first game.



Point is he made the playoffs and got swept in Mamphis at least two times that I saw ...

And in those series, how good were his teammates? If you're going to put it all on his shoulders, then you must feel his teammates were up to par and he let them down.

It's not like McGrady and Orlando where his teammates were good enough to allow the Magic to go up 3-1 against the Pistons.



Gasol is great we have ALREADY established that ...but without Kobe he was always coming up short Kobe needed him as well no one disagrees here.

Better phrasing would be "Without the Lakers, he was always coming up short". The Lakers roster (aside from Gasol/Kobe) was far superior to any Memphis roster Gasol had.



Point is Kobe is an all-time great Gasol an all-star HUGE difference.

It's a huge difference if we're talking about their respective careers. However, we're talking about a few playoff series so your point is entirely irrelevant.

[ElNono]

El nono stay out of this! LOL One last point Vince has Howard and Lebron Shaq so let's do what Kobe has done ...

LOL

http://cookingforbrevitt.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/emo_lawn.jpg

[ambchang]

First, I said COULD BE ... no one knows for sure. And when I say 2nd greatest to MJ that is for players since 1980 SINCE I DID NOT watch basketball BEFORE then I dont compare magic, Kobe MJ Duncan to players I have never sEEN myself NBA Classic games doesnt count because they ALWAYS show those guy's greatest games ...

I could be the greatest NBA player of all time if I start to play tomorrow. What does that mean even? The probability of that happening is close to zero, but it COULD happen. When you say that Kobe COULD be the 2nd greatest player of all time, I am assuming a high level of probability for your statement to actually mean something, but as pointed out, while not impossible, it’s highly improbable that Kobe would end up being the 2nd greatest player of all time.

And you didn’t qualify post 1980, at all. Even if you did, Duncan, Magic, Bird, Shaq, and Hakeem were all obviously better than Kobe.


I could also say duncan can pass Kareem or Hakeem IMHO i doubt it but how do I know how much game and winning Duncan has left he is the greatest PF (if you insist on keepin him there (in my book) 3rd best PF/C To kareem and hakeem but he is not retired yet ...Kobe can definitely pass all the 80 - present guy on that list except maybe MJ and Kareem ...

Duncan is a lot closer to Hakeem than Kobe is to the 2nd greatest player of all time. In fact, Duncan is arguably already better than Hakeem was in terms of team impact. Kobe has almost no chance of passing Magic, Duncan and Shaq.


Bird though great has already been passed and Kobe is closing in on Magic ...
Will he be my favorite player or the people's choice? probably not (i still favor Magic) ...too many haters. But he will have rings and stats to back that up so if you want to argue on either point ...Kobe since 1980 Only trails Magic, Kareem and MJ when you factor in both rings and stats ...Duncan/Shaq/Hakeem/Kobe are all in the same class at this point with titles rings and MVP's to back their case.

How do you figure Kobe > Bird? Based on the fact that Bird has 3 straight MVPs and Kobe only 1? Finals MVP? Bird being one of the best passers in the history of the game? Based on how they perform under pressure?

How has Bird, Duncan and Shaq been any less in terms of rings and stats? Why would Kobe take sole credit for a team accomplishment like rings? Especially when he was clearly “only” the 2nd best player on 3 of the 4 title teams? Why does Kobe not get penalized for missing more playoffs than Duncan, Magic and Bird combined when he gets credit for rings?