How would a prime Olajuwon fare against a prime Duncan?

[wekko368]

- Kevin Garnett
- Shaq
- Rasheed Wallace
- Chris Webber
- Antonio McDyess
- Alonzo Mourning
- Hakeem Olajuwon
- Charles Barkley
- Shawn Kemp
- Karl Malone
- Dikembe Mutombo
- Patrick Ewing (had a more productive year even if he got injured right before the playoffs)
- Tom Gugliotta (yes he had a better year)
- Divac (yes he had a better year)
- Rik Smits (yes he had a better year)

First, let's keep in mind that in 1999, Robinson averaged 16 ppg on 51% shooting and had 10 rebounds per game. Secondly, since Robinson is a center, I'm only going to address the players that played center (at at least pf/c).

This precludes Gugliotta, Malone, Kemp, Barkley, McDyess, and Webber.

From your list, I think Robinson (16 ppg; 51%; 10 rpg) was better than:

Rasheed Wallace - 13 ppg; 51% fg; 5 rpg
Patrick Ewing - 17 ppg; 44% fg; 10 rpg
Rik Smits - 15 ppg; 49% fg; 5.6 rpg

And Robinson's numbers (percentages/rebounds ) were close enough to Olajuwon, Divac, and Mutombo that you couldnt say one was clearly better than the other.

So that means that Garnett, Shaq, Mourning, and Duncan were clearly better than Robinson, and since Olajuwon/Mutombo/Divac were similar, then its safe to say that Robinson was at least a top 8 PF/C and a top 6 C.

A top 6 center isn't a role player.

[EricD]

:lol

Rocket fans saying Duncan wasn't as an all around player like Hakeem.

Some opinions proving Duncan's dominance and versatility(all around skill) from Non-biased Rocket fans:

"He is probably the best player to ever play the position the way he plays it," said Utah coach Jerry Sloan, who coached Jazz great Karl Malone.

"I think all around, there's never been a big forward quite like him," said Hall of Fame coach and analyst Jack Ramsay. "Bob Pettit was a great scorer and rebounder. Karl Malone was a more powerful player, but they didn't have the versatility Tim does. Kevin McHale was probably the best low-post, back-to-the-basket big forward, and he was a good defender, but he, too, couldn't do the things Duncan can do."

"He's pretty unique in how he plays," Pettit said. "He can play with his back to the basket or facing it. I spent 95%-97% of the time facing the basket. He's pretty versatile as a player. It also seems that he's stepped it up in the playoffs."


"In my 20 years in the NBA, Duncan is the best big to play the game," says former Houston Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy. " O'Neal always had the benefit of a dominant perimeter player, from [Penny] Hardaway to [Kobe] Bryant to [Dwyane] Wade. Duncan has had very good players, but he's never had that dominant player, so that's why I give him the edge."



Page 1: Simmons on Duncan

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/070509

Quotes from Page 1: "Helplessly, we've watched him carry the Spurs to three titles, a number that could have been five if not for Derek Fisher's miracle shot in 2004 and Manu Ginobili's stupid foul of Dirk Nowitzki last season."

Page 2: Simmons on Duncan

http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?name=simmons&entryDate=20070514

Quotes from Page 2:

"For his entire prime, Duncan has been one of the top-three most untradeable players in the league.

You know why? Because he gives you a fantastic chance to win the championship every year, that's why. Maybe Karl Malone was better in '97 and '98, maybe Shaq exceeded him in '00 and '01, maybe KG matched him in '04 and Nowitzki matched him in '06 ... but overall, Duncan always seems to keep his teams in the hunt.

Here are San Antonio's numbers during his 10-year career: 559-239 during the regular season, 82-49 in the playoffs, three championships. Since the ABA/NBA merger, only four stars have been that consistently successful for a 10-year span: Bird, Magic, MJ and Shaq ... although I hesitate to put Shaq on that level because he's had six different teams get swept over the course of his career. But that's the list. Superstars like Kareem (nine playoff wins TOTAL in the four seasons before Magic arrived), David Robinson (never made a Finals before Duncan arrived), Hakeem Olajuwon (wildly unsuccessful for most of his prime), Patrick Ewing (played in only one Finals in his prime), Charles Barkley (ditto) and Karl Malone (played in four conference finals, never won a title) couldn't match Duncan's winning consistency over a 10-year period. "

Duncan's achievements: Bolded are the categories Duncan has over Olajuwon

# 4× NBA Champion (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007)
# 3× NBA Finals MVP (1999, 2003, 2005)
# 2× NBA Most Valuable Player (2002–2003)
# NBA Rookie of the Year (1998)
# 12× NBA All-Star (1998, 2000–2010)
# 9× All-NBA First Team (1998–2005, 2007)
# 3× All-NBA Second Team (2006, 2008–2009)
# All-NBA Third Team (2010)
# 8× All-Defensive First Team (1999–2003, 2005, 2007–2008)
# 5× All-Defensive Second Team (1998, 2004, 2006, 2009–2010)
# NBA All-Rookie First Team (1998)
# NBA All-Star Game MVP (2000)(Only irrelevant award)


Hakeem Olajuwon's achievements:( Bolded are the categories he has over Duncan)
# 2× NBA Champion (1994, 1995)
# NBA MVP (1994)
# 12× All-Star (1985-1990, 1992-1997)
# 2× Finals MVP (1994-1995)
# 2× NBA Defensive Player of the Year (1993-1994)
# 6× All-NBA First Team Selection (1987-1989, 1993-1994, 1997)
# 3× All-NBA Second Team Selection (1986, 1990, 1996)
# 3× All-NBA Third Team Selection (1991, 1995, 1999)
# 5× NBA All-Defensive First Team Selection (1987-1988, 1990, 1993-1994)
# 4× NBA All-Defensive Second Team Selection (1985, 1991, 1996-1997)


:lol

It's also hilarious how Rocket fans point out how much Olajuwon was superior over Duncan on the defensive end, when Duncan has won 13 total NBA ALL Defensive Team(9 first team) to Olajuwon's 9 (5 first team) and Duncan still has at least 2 years left.

[The Franchise]

Of course you don't... because it wouldn't help your argument............

Did you not read the rest of the post? It has nothing to do with helping my argument. The Spurs won not just Tim so, as I said before, that has as much to do with your teammates as you. Place Hakeem in Duncan's place and I think your team would actually have more titles. Give him the supporting cast Duncan had and Hakeem would be a basketball god. :lol

[EricD]

But that's where your argument falls apart. Don't you see that?

[Shastafarian]

Go back and re-read all the posts about quality of teammates. I don't feel like posting all that shit again.

[The Franchise]

Go google Duncan vs Olajuwan and tell me it's just me.

[MaNu4Tres]

Go back and re-read all the posts about quality of teammates. I don't feel like posting all that shit again.

Shastafarian

That's what this has become.

You see any progress?

I don't

It's a waste of time and a stupid discussion to begin with.

[Shastafarian]

hakeem is flashier but duncan is just as effective
An entire thread boiled down in one semi-sentence...

[DesignatedT]

Did you not read the rest of the post? It has nothing to do with helping my argument. The Spurs won not just Tim so, as I said before, that has as much to do with your teammates as you. Place Hakeem in Duncan's place and I think your team would actually have more titles. Give him the supporting cast Duncan had and Hakeem would be a basketball god. :lol

Thats a weak argument. Enough with the hypothetical bullshit. Duncan has 4. Olajuwon has 2. Duncan has more achievements in almost every single category there is.

Not all these excuses. "Well Olajuwon would have won more with that cast or Olajuwon played against better opponents." Go preach on clutch fans with that weak shit. making excuses... all this has been.

[Phenomanul]

Nobody has yet to factor this in... but Duncan's reign at the top of the league (top 1-3 players) spanned nearly 9 years... the same can't be said for Olajuwon...

[MaNu4Tres]

Nobody has yet to factor this in... but Duncan's reign at the top of the league (top 1-3 players) spanned nearly 9 years... the same can't be said for Olajuwon...








Page 2: Simmons on Duncan

http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?name=simmons&entryDate=20070514

Quotes from Page 2:

"For his entire prime, Duncan has been one of the top-three most untradeable players in the league.

You know why? Because he gives you a fantastic chance to win the championship every year, that's why. Maybe Karl Malone was better in '97 and '98, maybe Shaq exceeded him in '00 and '01, maybe KG matched him in '04 and Nowitzki matched him in '06 ... but overall, Duncan always seems to keep his teams in the hunt.

Here are San Antonio's numbers during his 10-year career: 559-239 during the regular season, 82-49 in the playoffs, three championships. Since the ABA/NBA merger, only four stars have been that consistently successful for a 10-year span: Bird, Magic, MJ and Shaq ... although I hesitate to put Shaq on that level because he's had six different teams get swept over the course of his career. But that's the list. Superstars like Kareem (nine playoff wins TOTAL in the four seasons before Magic arrived), David Robinson (never made a Finals before Duncan arrived), Hakeem Olajuwon (wildly unsuccessful for most of his prime), Patrick Ewing (played in only one Finals in his prime), Charles Barkley (ditto) and Karl Malone (played in four conference finals, never won a title) couldn't match Duncan's winning consistency over a 10-year period. "

[Mr.Robinson]

Did you not read the rest of the post? It has nothing to do with helping my argument. The Spurs won not just Tim so, as I said before, that has as much to do with your teammates as you. Place Hakeem in Duncan's place and I think your team would actually have more titles. Give him the supporting cast Duncan had and Hakeem would be a basketball god. :lol
Put Tim Duncan in the 94 and 95 Rockets and he wins those rings as well. He would have demolished Ewing and Robinson.

[noob cake]

Nobody has yet to factor this in... but Duncan's reign at the top of the league (top 1-3 players) spanned nearly 9 years... the same can't be said for Olajuwon...

Ming, Dwight, Pau, Bosh, Jefferson? aka scrubs in the 90's

[Mr.Robinson]

Ming, Dwight, Pau, Bosh, Jefferson? aka scrubs in the 90's

Troll. If Kevin Willis was able to pull down 15 boards a game in one season in the 90's Dwight might have gotten 20. Come on. AKA scrubs...LOL

[sook]

:lol

Rocket fans saying Duncan wasn't as an all around player like Hakeem.

Some opinions proving Duncan's dominance and versatility(all around skill) from Non-biased Rocket fans:

"He is probably the best player to ever play the position the way he plays it," said Utah coach Jerry Sloan, who coached Jazz great Karl Malone.

"I think all around, there's never been a big forward quite like him," said Hall of Fame coach and analyst Jack Ramsay. "Bob Pettit was a great scorer and rebounder. Karl Malone was a more powerful player, but they didn't have the versatility Tim does. Kevin McHale was probably the best low-post, back-to-the-basket big forward, and he was a good defender, but he, too, couldn't do the things Duncan can do."

"He's pretty unique in how he plays," Pettit said. "He can play with his back to the basket or facing it. I spent 95%-97% of the time facing the basket. He's pretty versatile as a player. It also seems that he's stepped it up in the playoffs."


"In my 20 years in the NBA, Duncan is the best big to play the game," says former Houston Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy. " O'Neal always had the benefit of a dominant perimeter player, from [Penny] Hardaway to [Kobe] Bryant to [Dwyane] Wade. Duncan has had very good players, but he's never had that dominant player, so that's why I give him the edge."



Page 1: Simmons on Duncan

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/070509

Quotes from Page 1: "Helplessly, we've watched him carry the Spurs to three titles, a number that could have been five if not for Derek Fisher's miracle shot in 2004 and Manu Ginobili's stupid foul of Dirk Nowitzki last season."

Page 2: Simmons on Duncan

http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?name=simmons&entryDate=20070514

Quotes from Page 2:

"For his entire prime, Duncan has been one of the top-three most untradeable players in the league.

You know why? Because he gives you a fantastic chance to win the championship every year, that's why. Maybe Karl Malone was better in '97 and '98, maybe Shaq exceeded him in '00 and '01, maybe KG matched him in '04 and Nowitzki matched him in '06 ... but overall, Duncan always seems to keep his teams in the hunt.

Here are San Antonio's numbers during his 10-year career: 559-239 during the regular season, 82-49 in the playoffs, three championships. Since the ABA/NBA merger, only four stars have been that consistently successful for a 10-year span: Bird, Magic, MJ and Shaq ... although I hesitate to put Shaq on that level because he's had six different teams get swept over the course of his career. But that's the list. Superstars like Kareem (nine playoff wins TOTAL in the four seasons before Magic arrived), David Robinson (never made a Finals before Duncan arrived), Hakeem Olajuwon (wildly unsuccessful for most of his prime), Patrick Ewing (played in only one Finals in his prime), Charles Barkley (ditto) and Karl Malone (played in four conference finals, never won a title) couldn't match Duncan's winning consistency over a 10-year period. "

Duncan's achievements: Bolded are the categories Duncan has over Olajuwon

# 4× NBA Champion (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007)
# 3× NBA Finals MVP (1999, 2003, 2005)
# 2× NBA Most Valuable Player (2002–2003)
# NBA Rookie of the Year (1998)
# 12× NBA All-Star (1998, 2000–2010)
# 9× All-NBA First Team (1998–2005, 2007)
# 3× All-NBA Second Team (2006, 2008–2009)
# All-NBA Third Team (2010)
# 8× All-Defensive First Team (1999–2003, 2005, 2007–2008)
# 5× All-Defensive Second Team (1998, 2004, 2006, 2009–2010)
# NBA All-Rookie First Team (1998)
# NBA All-Star Game MVP (2000)(Only irrelevant award)


Hakeem Olajuwon's achievements:( Bolded are the categories he has over Duncan)
# 2× NBA Champion (1994, 1995)
# NBA MVP (1994)
# 12× All-Star (1985-1990, 1992-1997)
# 2× Finals MVP (1994-1995)
# 2× NBA Defensive Player of the Year (1993-1994)
# 6× All-NBA First Team Selection (1987-1989, 1993-1994, 1997)
# 3× All-NBA Second Team Selection (1986, 1990, 1996)
# 3× All-NBA Third Team Selection (1991, 1995, 1999)
# 5× NBA All-Defensive First Team Selection (1987-1988, 1990, 1993-1994)
# 4× NBA All-Defensive Second Team Selection (1985, 1991, 1996-1997)


:lol

It's also hilarious how Rocket fans point out how much Olajuwon was superior over Duncan on the defensive end, when Duncan has won 13 total NBA ALL Defensive Team(9 first team) to Olajuwon's 9 (5 first team) and Duncan still has at least 2 years left.

i don't understand how you are even remotely trying to justify duncan being a better defensive player.

Sorry but your making yourself out as an extreme ass clown.
TD is great, but don't make the mistake of calling him better than the best two way player ever, especially on the defensive end.

Career achievements are just a smokescreen you are using. Duncan played in a cupcake era compared to the 80s and early 90s

[Mr.Robinson]

i don't understand how you are even remotely trying to justify duncan being a better defensive player.

Sorry but your making yourself out as an extreme ass clown.
TD is great, but don't make the mistake of calling him better than the best two way player ever, especially on the defensive end.

Career achievements are just a smokescreen you are using. Duncan played in a cupcake era compared to the 80s and early 90s

It works both ways with eras. Duncan would do it all in the 80's and 90's just like Hakeem. Not like Tim was soft.

[wekko368]

It works both ways with eras. Duncan would do it all in the 80's and 90's just like Hakeem. Not like Tim was soft.

Actually, it doesn't work both ways. Its a safe assumption that accomplishments achieved in a more difficult era can be replicated in an easier era.

However, you cannot assume that accomplishments made in an easier era can be replicated in a more difficult era.

Does anything think Wilt can score 100 pts in a modern day game?

[The Franchise]

Put Tim Duncan in the 94 and 95 Rockets and he wins those rings as well. He would have demolished Ewing and Robinson.

:wow :lmao I know you aren't that bad off!

[TampaDude]

i don't understand how you are even remotely trying to justify duncan being a better defensive player.

Sorry but your making yourself out as an extreme ass clown.
TD is great, but don't make the mistake of calling him better than the best two way player ever, especially on the defensive end.

Career achievements are just a smokescreen you are using. Duncan played in a cupcake era compared to the 80s and early 90s

http://cdn.nahright.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/umad.jpg

[djohn2oo8]

Put Tim Duncan in the 94 and 95 Rockets and he wins those rings as well. He would have demolished Ewing and Robinson.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y202/egregious_girl/gifs/movies/1236863398_sam-jackson-funny-face.gif

[djohn2oo8]

So some Spurfans are going on accomplishments to why Duncan is actually close to Hakeem. Well, since Horry has 7 rings, than he must be better than MJ

[Mr.Robinson]

So some Spurfans are going on accomplishments to why Duncan is actually close to Hakeem. Well, since Horry has 7 rings, than he must be better than MJ

Jordan won 6 as the number one option.
Jabbar won 4
Duncan 4.
Who has more than Duncan as the man?
Shaq had 3.
Magic had 2.
Bird had 3.

[djohn2oo8]

Jordan won 6 as the number one option.
Jabbar won 4
Duncan 4.
Who has more than Duncan as the man?
Shaq had 3.
Magic had 2.
Bird had 3.

Those are different eras that you're comparing. Put Duncan in the 80's-90's and see how many he gets as the main man, not saying that he is not a great player, but there was FAR better competition then than now

[kingmalaki]

In 01 Duncan averaged 23 and 12. In 02 he had like 29 and 17 or so. I believe that's abuse. In 04 despite being able to guard Duncan one on one at times Malone had help because the Lakers were allowed to clog the paint because the Spurs were shooting somethng like 20% from the 3 point line in that series. Duncan still had 21 and 12 in that series. Anything else?

Why are you omitting the FG%'s (which I already listed btw), which all declined from the regular season?

[kingmalaki]

:lol

Robinson from 1999-2003 painfully regressed due to an 89 year old back. He was half the player then and was simply a role player.

Yet he was the one always holding Shaq and other top pivots, and not that Timmy guy. So if you are touting the teams defensive performance, then it's silly not to include the guy responsible for stopping folks.

And Simmons isn't really an expert on the game of basketball, as to where quoting him really means anything.

[kingmalaki]

Nobody has yet to factor this in... but Duncan's reign at the top of the league (top 1-3 players) spanned nearly 9 years... the same can't be said for Olajuwon...

Of course not, as Duncan didn't enter the league with Magic, Bird and Jordan. Duncan isn't considered to be better than any of those guys either.

[Tmac&Luther]

My god, do Spurs fans actually believe that Tim Duncan is/was a better defender than Hakeem Olajuwon. :lol

Is that really the case that they're trying to make.

I want to hear from the honest Spurs fans that watched Hakeem play in his prime...do y'all honestly think that Duncan was a better defender than the all time shot blocker and a player who could guard multiple positions on the floor and averaged more than twice the amount of steals than Duncan?

Serious question...this should really expose the homers.

[Mr.Robinson]

My god, do Spurs fans actually believe that Tim Duncan is/was a better defender than Hakeem Olajuwon. :lol

Is that really the case that they're trying to make.

I want to hear from the honest Spurs fans that watched Hakeem play in his prime...do y'all honestly think that Duncan was a better defender than the all time shot blocker and a player who could guard multiple positions on the floor and averaged more than twice the amount of steals than Duncan?

Serious question...this should really expose the homers.

Guess I'm a homer. If Duncan is good enough for Bill Rusell he's good enough for me.

[Tmac&Luther]

Guess I'm a homer. If Duncan is good enough for Bill Rusell he's good enough for me.

:lol Wow, what a ground breaking argument.

Hakeem Olajuwon is the NBA's alltime shot blocker....is top 7 in steals all time (the highest ranking among centers) and is the only player in history to make the Top 10 in blocks, steals, rebounds, and scoring....but let's not let facts get in the way of a shitty argument, please continue. :lmao

[DesignatedT]

Duncans defense his whole career has been extremely underrated. Olajuwon was the superior athlete which makes him the popular choice amongst people (just like some saying robinson over duncan or just a few years back when people were claiming garnett over duncan) At the end of the day Olajuwon was probably the better defender but Duncan is not that far off. He might not have the fancy weak side blocks or send the ball in the stands defense but his 1 on 1 defense during his career has been the best I have seen(this season was the first time i saw it starting to decline noticeably). Fact still remains that Duncan is better and has been more consistent over his entire career than Olajuwon was. Duncan is superior at all the intangibles that makes great players great. He is the better leader, 1 of the most clutch players of all time and the overall better player and the accomplishments prove it..

Now go ahead and continue with your 21 pages of "But Duncans cast was better" or "This era sucks" bullshit because that's all you got.

[Tmac&Luther]

Duncans defense his whole career has been extremely underrated. Olajuwon was the superior athlete which makes him the popular choice amongst people (just like some saying robinson over duncan or just a few years back when people were claiming garnett over duncan) At the end of the day Olajuwon was probably the better defender but Duncan is not that far off. He might not have the fancy weak side blocks or send the ball in the stands defense but his 1 on 1 defense during his career has been the best I have seen(this season was the first time i saw it starting to decline noticeably). Fact still remains that Duncan is better and has been more consistent over his entire career than Olajuwon was. Duncan is superior at all the intangibles that makes a great player great. He is the better leader, 1 of the most clutch players of all time and the overall better player and the accomplishments prove it..

Now go ahead and continue with your "But Duncan's cast was better" or "This era sucks" bullshit because that's all you got.


:lmao LMAO....FALSE.

Hakeem was still putting up prime #s at the age that Duncan is now (but I guess in fantasy land, that makes Duncan the more "consistent player". And we will use the "better supporting cast" argument, because it's the truth. :lol team accomplishments is the ONLY thing Spurs fans have to fall back on. 4 > 2 bitches :lmao Yeah, like Duncan would be a 4 time champion, back in the hey day of the late 80's and early 90's.

[Mr.Robinson]

I
:lmao LMAO....FALSE.

Hakeem was still putting up prime #s at the age that Duncan is now (but I guess in fantasy land, that makes Duncan the more "consistent player". And we will use the "better supporting cast" argument, because it's the truth. :lol team accomplishments is the ONLY thing Spurs fans have to fall back on. 4 > 2 bitches :lmao Yeah, like Duncan would be a 4 time champion, back in the hey day of the late 80's and early 90's.

The 94 and 95 Rockets wouldn't win a ring in the 2000's. They wouldn't beat the Lakers 3 peat team. Wouldn't beat the Spurs 03, 05, 07 Spurs. Detroit would beat them too. Hakeem was great but Duncan greater. 4 rings don't lie.

[Tmac&Luther]

I

The 94 and 95 Rockets wouldn't win a ring in the 2000's. They wouldn't beat the Lakers 3 peat team. Wouldn't beat the Spurs 03, 05, 07 Spurs. Detroit would beat them too. Hakeem was great but Duncan greater. 4 rings don't lie.

:lmao You're on straight crack.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NC1z6-XAGj0/SYTNqqYGSBI/AAAAAAAABw0/tRdMQ8c99JY/s400/rockso_013109.jpg
Sshh... I DO COCAAAAINE!!!

:lol

[J_Paco]

:lmao LMAO....FALSE.

Hakeem was still putting up prime #s at the age that Duncan is now (but I guess in fantasy land, that makes Duncan the more "consistent player". And we will use the "better supporting cast" argument, because it's the truth. :lol team accomplishments is the ONLY thing Spurs fans have to fall back on. 4 > 2 bitches :lmao Yeah, like Duncan would be a 4 time champion, back in the hey day of the late 80's and early 90's.

What does that last part have to do with anything? I could easily say that Hakeem wouldn't have shit if Jordan didn't retire or if he had played in the 60's. Ya'll can use all the hypothetical arguments you want, but the fact remains that Duncan and Hakeem have similar (average career) numbers and Duncan has accomplished more. Hakeem probably did have a higher peak, not by very much though, but Duncan accomplished more and will have the greater legacy.


Of course not, as Duncan didn't enter the league with Magic, Bird and Jordan. Duncan isn't considered to be better than any of those guys either.

Actually, whether you Rocket fans like it or not, Duncan is probably closer to those individuals than Hakeem is. Timmy actually has impacted his era just as strongly as Jordan, Bird and Johnson did their own. Hakeem's legacy will be that he was a elite/dominant player, but he needed to the greatest player of his generation to "retire" to win 2 titles. Duncan has the benefit of having beaten, and been beat, by three other great players of his/the next generation in Shaq, Kobe and LeBron (obviously, LeBron leads the next gen.).

:lobt2::lobt2::lobt2::lobt2: > :lobt::lobt:

[wekko368]

but Duncan accomplished more and will have the greater legacy.

Duncan will have the greater legacy simply b/c of the "greatest pf" tag, but I think Olajuwon will be remembered as a more complete player due to his defensive accomplishments.



Actually, whether you Rocket fans like it or not, Duncan is probably closer to those individuals than Hakeem is.

Not according to Michael Jordan and Mario Elie.



Hakeem's legacy will be that he was a elite/dominant player, but he needed to the greatest player of his generation to "retire" to win 2 titles.

This is indeed how he will probably be remembered by the ignorant masses. But the reason we visit these forums is because we hope to engage with knowledgeable fans (i.e. not part of the ignorant masses).

Jordan's Bulls had a tough time handling dominant, athletic centers. From 1991-1993, the Rockets record against the Bulls was 5-1. In fact, during that same time frame, the Spurs' record against the Bulls was also 5-1.

I'm convinced that if Jordan did face Olajuwon in the Finals, the Rockets would've prevailed. Therefore, playing baseball was one of the best things he could've done for his legacy.

And btw, Jordan did play in the 1995 playoffs. They lost to a Magic team that the Rockets swept.

[sook]

I

The 94 and 95 Rockets wouldn't win a ring in the 2000's. They wouldn't beat the Lakers 3 peat team. Wouldn't beat the Spurs 03, 05, 07 Spurs. Detroit would beat them too. Hakeem was great but Duncan greater. 4 rings don't lie.

youre right, he wouldn't be able to beat a fatass shaq even though he swept the athletic one :lol:lol

[sook]

Besides, the Greatest PF ever is the stupidest thing I could ever think of.

Duncan is a Center! Hakeem is more of a PF than he is :lol

[kingmalaki]

Actually, whether you Rocket fans like it or not, Duncan is probably closer to those individuals than Hakeem is. Timmy actually has impacted his era just as strongly as Jordan, Bird and Johnson did their own. Hakeem's legacy will be that he was a elite/dominant player, but he needed to the greatest player of his generation to "retire" to win 2 titles. Duncan has the benefit of having beaten, and been beat, by three other great players of his/the next generation in Shaq, Kobe and LeBron (obviously, LeBron leads the next gen.).

:lobt2::lobt2::lobt2::lobt2: > :lobt::lobt:

Actually he probably isn't. And he hasn't impacted his era as much as either of those players. He didn't save basketball like Magic and Larry. He wasn't in the Finals over a span of 4 straight years like Larry. He didn't win 3 MVPs in a row like Larry. He didn't get to the Finals 8 times, or repeat like Magic. He doesn't have a winning record against his main comp like Magic (2-1 vs Bird, while Shaq/Kobe have sent Duncan home 4 times). He didn't dominate his era like Jordan, winnng 6. He never even repeated. So I can't say he has impacted his era like those guys, and the point you are trying to make is silly regardless because his main comp for dominating his era (Shaq/Kobe) are all considered less than Bird, Magic or Jordan. Duncan should just be happy that he was born later, lol.

Either way, the OP asked if Dream could get his on Duncan. You guys keep trying to twist his question into a career comparison. Can you not read?? Can you list the elite bigs Duncan has actually shut down? He had Robinson save him from Shaq until 2004, and he didn't stop him then. Amare lit him. Dirk lit him. He wasn't stopping Gasol in 08. Yet Hakeem couldn't get his?

[EricD]

You rocket fans are treating this debate like there's such a significant drop off between the two players.

Sorry, but that simply is not the case. These two players all around games are more identical than any set of big men to ever play the game.

It's that close and it's stupid to spend hours arguing over the issue because it's that close.

Spend your time better, this obviously isn't getting anywhere.

[EricD]

The reason why I'm pointing out rocket fans and not Spurs fans is because they are rebutting Duncan's stature by starting arguments with ignorant and immature expressions as such :lmao over and over again.

Like it's so wrong for a person to think a 2 time MVP, 3 Time Final MVP, 4 rings, 9 time ALL NBA First team, 8 time ALL NBA Defensive First team, 12 time all start has a slight edge on the player that has lead the Rockets to 2 championships and 1 MVP.

Get real Red Rowdies. The difference between the two players in their prime is so minuscule it could go either way and I wouldn't have a problem with the opinion.

[wekko368]

Sorry, but that simply is not the case. These two players all around games are more identical than any set of big men to ever play the game.


Identical?

Olajuwon was more athletic, more explosive, faster, and had better footwork.

[wekko368]

Get real Red Rowdies. The difference between the two players in their prime is so minuscule it could go either way and I wouldn't have a problem with the opinion.

The difference is great enough that every Rockets fan would take a prime Olajuwon over prime Duncan, and so would a number of Spurs fans.

[jacobdrj]

Wish I could have seen Dream play. Anyone who can eat Shaq/Robinson for breakfast in their prime had to be something special...

[EricD]

Identical?

Olajuwon was more athletic, more explosive, faster, and had better footwork.


We are talking about Duncan from 1998-2003 Duncan vs. 1993-1995 Olajuwon.

Not Duncan from 2008-2010 vs. 1993- 1995 Olajuwon.

Both were the best post players in their era, Duncan was the best defender of his era of the big men and Olajuwon was one of the best in his, and both had the best footwork of their era. And both could also shoot from the outside and had the best all around game out of any big men in their era. So many similarities.

And Duncan was a lot closer athletically than you are implying. You are getting 08'-2010 Duncan confused with Prime Duncan 1998-2003. The two were very close athletically when were are talking about their primes.

Here's a video of some of Duncan's younger years in case you never really watched.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uN9FQ3RGjX8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uN9FQ3RGjX8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[wekko368]

We are talking about Duncan from 1998-2003 Duncan vs. 1993-1995 Olajuwon.

Not Duncan from 2008-2010 vs. 1993- 1995 Olajuwon.

Both were the best post players in their era, Duncan was the best defender of his era of the big men and Olajuwon was one of the best in his, and both had the best footwork of their era. And both could also shoot from the outside and had the best all around game out of any big men in their era. So many similarities.

And Duncan was a lot closer athletically than you are implying. You are getting 08'-2010 Duncan confused with Prime Duncan 1998-2003. The two were very close athletically when were are talking about their primes.



Yes. I was referring to the prime Duncan earlier. Prime Duncan may have been the best of his era, but his era was MUCH weaker than Olajuwon's era. And prime Olajuwon is still noticeably more athletic than prime Duncan.

Let's not forget that prime Olajuwon could chase down a guard from halfcourt on a breakaway layup and block him.

I hate to use quotes to support my opinions, but I'm going to reference that interview with Mario Elie that I alluded to earlier. Keep in mind that Elie played with both a prime Duncan and prime Olajuwon.



Friedman: "Is the difference between Olajuwon and Duncan the athleticism?"

Elie: "Exactly. I just think that 'Dream' was more athletic, had a better game on the box and was a better shot blocker.

[kingmalaki]

Prime Duncan was not the best post player of his era, while he was in his prime. That was Shaq. If Duncan surpassed him it was once his decline hit (around 2005). Duncan was better defensively but Shaq was much better offensively, and Duncan couldn't even match up with him anyway. You applaud him as a defender and he was great defensively, but when he matched up against bigs that could actually score he wasn't stopping them. Shaq, Dirk, Amare....no sir no way. If the question is would Dream beast him you really don't have a leg to stand on.

[ChrisRichards]

Wish I could have seen Dream play. Anyone who can eat Shaq/Robinson for breakfast in their prime had to be something special...
Olajuwon in those two championship years was really special. His combination of speed, footwork and soft hands for a guy with his size and length was surreal.

[Cry Havoc]

In their primes, I'd take Hakeem.

I might take Olajuwon over any player in NBA history when he was in his prime, with the potential sole exception of Jordan (the other potentially being Wilt, but that's a special case).

He was unstoppable. Totally destroyed anyone he played. Yes, Duncan would get his, but Hakeem was the best Center the league had ever seen in the modern era when he was at his peak. He was a guy with defensive skills of a 5 and the moves of a guard.

Duncan has the arguable advantages in passing, IQ, and help-side defense. He'd definitely push Hakeem to his limit, that goes without saying. But Duncan has almost always been less about 1 vs 1 matchups and more about contributing to the team dynamic.

On even teams, I'd say Hakeem's in 7. However, Duncan has been a top defender for longer than the Dream, who depended more on his athleticism to play well than positioning and intelligence.

[cheguevara]

Well Hakeem was a beast. but only for a few years.

Duncan was dominant for longer.

[Mr.Robinson]

Yes. I was referring to the prime Duncan earlier. Prime Duncan may have been the best of his era, but his era was MUCH weaker than Olajuwon's era. And prime Olajuwon is still noticeably more athletic than prime Duncan.

Let's not forget that prime Olajuwon could chase down a guard from halfcourt on a breakaway layup and block him.

I hate to use quotes to support my opinions, but I'm going to reference that interview with Mario Elie that I alluded to earlier. Keep in mind that Elie played with both a prime Duncan and prime Olajuwon.
Duncan could chase people down. He could also run a fast break at times. Can we stop the weak era crap already. Hakeem played in the 80's and 90's that era was weak. So many slow and stiff players back then. Yes there's was many superstars but also many guys who wouldn't have a job in today's league. Players are more skilled now. They are more athletic, stronger, faster. I laugh at nostalgic fools.

[jacobdrj]

In their primes, I'd take Hakeem.

I might take Olajuwon over any player in NBA history when he was in his prime, with the potential sole exception of Jordan (the other potentially being Wilt, but that's a special case).

He was unstoppable. Totally destroyed anyone he played. Yes, Duncan would get his, but Hakeem was the best Center the league had ever seen in the modern era when he was at his peak. He was a guy with defensive skills of a 5 and the moves of a guard.

Duncan has the arguable advantages in passing, IQ, and help-side defense. He'd definitely push Hakeem to his limit, that goes without saying. But Duncan has almost always been less about 1 vs 1 matchups and more about contributing to the team dynamic.

On even teams, I'd say Hakeem's in 7. However, Duncan has been a top defender for longer than the Dream, who depended more on his athleticism to play well than positioning and intelligence.

In fairness, IIRC, Dream made the Finals once in the 80's too. Perhaps with a more stacked team than he had in the championship years of 94-95 (Ralph Sampson), but that parallels quite nicely with Duncan's relationship with Robinson.

[blink]

Trying to tell Duncan lovers that Dream > Duncan is like trying to tell Kobe nut huggers that Jordan > Kobe. Though the gap is smaller in the former than the latter

[baseline bum]

Trying to tell Duncan lovers that Dream > Duncan is like trying to tell Kobe nut huggers that Jordan > Kobe. Though the gap is smaller in the former than the latter

You're kidding me, right? '95 Rocket fan comes and shits on everything Duncan has done his entire career like the most virulent Kobe fans on this board.

[wekko368]

Duncan could chase people down.

Could Duncan chase down a guard on a fast break layup and block his shot at the rim?


Can we stop the weak era crap already. Hakeem played in the 80's and 90's that era was weak. So many slow and stiff players back then. Players are more skilled now. They are more athletic, stronger, faster. I laugh at nostalgic fools.

Absolutely wrong. Players are indeed more athletic, stronger, and faster, but that comes at the expense of their skills. For example, let's look at Dwight Howard, the best center in the current league, and compare him to the centers from 1995. He would clearly be athletically superior to all centers except for Robinson, Olajuwon, and Shaq, but he would be considered unskilled.

In fact, I'd say that Olajuwon, Robinson, Ewing, Shaq, Mourning, and maybe Divac were more skilled than Dwight Howard (with Mutombo being on par with Howard).

Seriously, the most skilled center in the league, Yao Ming, is the definition of a slow/stiff center, but when he's healthy, he's the best center in the league.

Some of the players who began their primes in the late 80's/early 90's finished their careers in the early 2000's. That's a testament to their skill. That meant that after their athleticism declined, their skill level was high enough to still allow them to be contributors.

If Duncan's era was so skilled and athletic, how could a 40 year old Michael Jordan average 20 ppg?

[Pero]

If Duncan's era was so skilled and athletic, how could a 40 year old Michael Jordan average 20 ppg?

Jordan is just the best player ever. Following your logic, a better question would be how could Hakeem average only 7pts at 39? :lol

[Tmac&Luther]

Well Hakeem was a beast. but only for a few years.

Duncan was dominant for longer.

:lol Seriously where the fuck does this myth come from? It's absolutely laughable.

PLEASE POINT TO WHERE HAKEEM WAS ONLY A BEAST FOR A FEW YEARS!

Hell how about you even show where Duncan was dominant for longer. You do realize "The Dream" was still having prime seasons at the age that Duncan is now. :lmao

[Tmac&Luther]

Players are more skilled now. They are more athletic, stronger, faster. I laugh at nostalgic fools.

:lmao No way in HEELLL! are players more skilled now.

You obviously don't know what "skill" means. Players are more athletic, but guess what.....Stromile Swift was one of the most athletic players in the league. What he lacked was any skill what so ever.

Hakeem's era was LOADED with skilled players....players that had something like I don't know....footwork and post moves, as well as players that had mid range game/ jumpers, and they had much greater basketball IQs overall as well.

Today's league and Duncan's era was one of the worst low basketball IQ eras of alltime. (There's a reason why he got the nickname "The big fundelmental", he was one of the few players that had throw back skills) When a guy like Luis Scola can come into the league and display footwork that's better than the vast majority of the players in the league today and a hell of alot better than players that are considered "elite big men", then something is obviously wrong with the NBA's "skill level".

Dude seriously, the more I read your posts, the more I'm convinced that you either didn't watch the NBA back in the day or were too young to remember it. The "skill level" in today's league is severely lacking or just watered down due to expansion....either way it sucks. There's a reason why Stern wanted to force kids to go to college and it wasn't just because he was worried about kids missing out on the "college experience"...his product was being hurt. They should just go ahead and make a 3 year post graduation minimum and get it over with.

[wekko368]

Jordan is just the best player ever. Following your logic, a better question would be how could Hakeem average only 7pts at 39? :lol

I'm impressed that a player at the age of 39 was good enough to play 20 mpg on an nba team (even if it was the lowly Raptors).

[Tmac&Luther]

We are talking about Duncan from 1998-2003 Duncan vs. 1993-1995 Olajuwon.

Not Duncan from 2008-2010 vs. 1993- 1995 Olajuwon.

Both were the best post players in their era, Duncan was the best defender of his era of the big men and Olajuwon was one of the best in his, and both had the best footwork of their era. And both could also shoot from the outside and had the best all around game out of any big men in their era. So many similarities.

And Duncan was a lot closer athletically than you are implying. You are getting 08'-2010 Duncan confused with Prime Duncan 1998-2003. The two were very close athletically when were are talking about their primes.

Here's a video of some of Duncan's younger years in case you never really watched.

Umm, you do realize that 1993-1995 Olajuwon was pretty much the same exact age as the 08-10 Duncan. Olajuwon blew Duncan away in the athleticism department...at the age of 33 he makes a 33 year old Duncan look like the current Shaq you see today (but Olajuwon was only great for a couple of seasons :lol)....Olajuwon was even more explosive as a 20 something year old....you know the age that you want us to compare a 32 year old player to. :rolleyes

Sorry, but Duncan's athleticism doesn't compare to Olajuwon's..

[kingmalaki]

I'm laughing very loud at someone saying players today are more skilled. Do even 1/3 of the players in the league today have a mid-range game? Since we are comparing two elite big men, the best big man in the league today has 0 post game and can't even abuse 1-1 coverage because he has few skills. Yet players today are more skilled? Child please.

[Aggie Hoopsdouche]

:lol Seriously where the fuck does this myth come from? It's absolutely laughable.

PLEASE POINT TO WHERE HAKEEM WAS ONLY A BEAST FOR A FEW YEARS!

Hell how about you even show where Duncan was dominant for longer. You do realize "The Dream" was still having prime seasons at the age that Duncan is now. :lmao

He must have missed those Lakers quotes from after the 1986 WCF from earlier in this thread, but who reads stuff before posting? I now I know I don't. I just act belligerent and call everybody rook and noob. Really, its the best strategy out there. Also, when you have a losing argument as we Spurs fans have here just turn it into an endurance test and keep on posting, posting, and posting.

[mavs>spurs2]

I'm laughing very loud at someone saying players today are more skilled. Do even 1/3 of the players in the league today have a mid-range game? Since we are comparing two elite big men, the best big man in the league today has 0 post game and can't even abuse 1-1 coverage because he has few skills. Yet players today are more skilled? Child please.

agreed, a guy like gasol, who although a good player, is the undisputed hands down best post player in the league today. the 2nd best big man, dwight howard, barely even has 1 move, an ugly running jump hook. and you hit it on the head about players not having a mid range game. if anything, fundamentals are much worse today due to today's players growing up trying to imitate yesterday's generation with all the flashy dunks and pretty fadeaways and failing miserably.

[blink]

You're kidding me, right? '95 Rocket fan comes and shits on everything Duncan has done his entire career like the most virulent Kobe fans on this board.

uh no, rockets fans are not shitting on duncan. most posts that says dream > duncan MAKE IT A POINT to say that it doesnt mean duncan sucks ass or his accomplishments mean nothing. buncha butt hurt spurs fans i say.

[Booharv]

uh no, rockets fans are not shitting on duncan. most posts that says dream > duncan MAKE IT A POINT to say that it doesnt mean duncan sucks ass or his accomplishments mean nothing. buncha butt hurt spurs fans i say.

I don't blame you for not reading through the whole thread, but there's been about 7-10 Spurs fans who said Hakeem was better in his prime (myself included). I even went through the effort to make a case for Hakeem as weird as that felt. Its just that some Spurs fans won't let it go, and are filibustering the shit out of this thread.

[djohn2oo8]

Its just that some Spurs fans won't let it go, and are filibustering the shit out of this thread.

This

[Mr.Robinson]

uh no, rockets fans are not shitting on duncan. most posts that says dream > duncan MAKE IT A POINT to say that it doesnt mean duncan sucks ass or his accomplishments mean nothing. buncha butt hurt spurs fans i say.

Rockets fans are still stuck on the Dream. Get over it. He won a couple of rings when the dominant force of his era left. Duncan won a couple when the dominant force of his era was still around. Not only that, but beat him. Hakeem was more athletic and that was that. He also played in a weak ass era. Duncan would make all those stiffs look really bad. Duncan had it all.

[blink]

Rockets fans are still stuck on the Dream. Get over it. He won a couple of rings when the dominant force of his era left. Duncan won a couple when the dominant force of his era was still around. Not only that, but beat him. Hakeem was more athletic and that was that. He also played in a weak ass era. Duncan would make all those stiffs look really bad. Duncan had it all.

http://i49.tinypic.com/2eywd1x.gif

[djohn2oo8]

Rockets fans are still stuck on the Dream. Get over it. He won a couple of rings when the dominant force of his era left. Duncan won a couple when the dominant force of his era was still around. Not only that, but beat him. Hakeem was more athletic and that was that. He also played in a weak ass era. Duncan would make all those stiffs look really bad. Duncan had it all.

Weaksauce :lmao:lmao:lmao

[TD 21]

You are really reaching in so many ways, but I'll play along.

Duncan only got past the dominant force once...in 2003, and that was a hell of an accomplishment for him. Kobe wasn't "Kobe" in 1999, when the Spurs beat LA. Phil Jackson wasn't there either. He lost to them 3 more times (01, 02, 04) and lost to Kobe again in 08. Are you bragging on a losing record to those guys, with one of the wins coming when Kobe was a pup? Really now?

Additionally, the dominant force of the 80's was Magic Johnson, not Jordan. Hakeem got his Rockets past the Lakers (who went to the Finals 8 times in the 80's) in 1986. Jordan also played in 95, and got ousted by Orlando, the team Hakeem swept. If you are arguing that Shaq was the dominant force that Duncan got past (as opposed to Shaq & Kobe), then Hakeem swept him in 95.

Get a solid argument please. :lol:lol

How am I reaching? Jordan was the dominant force of the 90s; Olajuwon never got to, let alone beat, Jordan. O'Neal/Bryant were the other dominant force of the 00s; Duncan beat them twice. This is fact; not opinion.

So Duncan doesn't get credit for beating O'Neal/Bryant in '99 because Bryant was still a "pup", but Olajuwon get's credit for beating O'Neal in '95; as if O'Neal wasn't a "pup"? Both Bryant and O'Neal were in their third seasons at the time both of these occurred, but only one has significance because it suits your argument? You just lost all credibility.

[baseline bum]

How am I reaching? Jordan was the dominant force of the 90s; Olajuwon never got to, let alone beat, Jordan. O'Neal/Bryant were the other dominant force of the 00s; Duncan beat them twice. This is fact; not opinion.

So Duncan doesn't get credit for beating O'Neal/Bryant in '99 because Bryant was still a "pup", but Olajuwon get's credit for beating O'Neal in '95; as if O'Neal wasn't a "pup"? Both Bryant and O'Neal were in their third seasons at the time both of these occurred, but only one has significance because it suits your argument? You just lost all credibility.


I get really sick of hearing Rocket fan bitch about how weak Olajuwon's supporting casts were and how that excuses everything in the early 90s and then have him go on and disrespect Duncan for not being able to beat one of the great dynasties in NBA history with a starting lineup featuring Terry Porter on his last legs, Antonio Daniels 6'4" ass trying to guard Kobe, Danny Ferry, and a way past his prime Robinson in 01. And then in 02, a rookie Tony Parker who couldn't finish at the rim, a Steve Smith who had regressed to the point of worthlessness in the 2 years since he was a decent weapon for Portland, Bruce Bowen, and Mark Bryant for 2 games / a David Robinson who could barely walk the final 3.

[wekko368]

How am I reaching? Jordan was the dominant force of the 90s; Olajuwon never got to, let alone beat, Jordan. O'Neal/Bryant were the other dominant force of the 00s; Duncan beat them twice. This is fact; not opinion.

If you take this approach, you have to factor in the fact that the Spurs and Lakers played in the same conference which made it much easier to meet in the playoffs.

And the corollary is, Olajuwon was the best center of the 90's, and Jordan never had to go through him to win any titles. Does that cheapen Jordan's titles? According to your "dominant force" theory, it should.

Additionally, it's not like everyone assumes the Bulls would've beaten the Rockets. The Rockets crushed them in the season series from 91-93 and Jordan has even gone on record saying the Rockets would've been the most difficult matchup.

Also, Jordan did play in the 1995 playoffs....pretty well too.



So Duncan doesn't get credit for beating O'Neal/Bryant in '99 because Bryant was still a "pup", but Olajuwon get's credit for beating O'Neal in '95; as if O'Neal wasn't a "pup"? Both Bryant and O'Neal were in their third seasons at the time both of these occurred, but only one has significance because it suits your argument? You just lost all credibility.

Don't want to be mean, but you look foolish when you say that. Maybe it would be ok if you had an airtight argument, but you don't.

There's a big difference between a 3 year NBA pro who spent 3 years in college and started 100% of his NBA games and another 3 year NBA pro who skipped college and started 29% of his NBA games.

[wekko368]

I get really sick of hearing Rocket fan bitch about how weak Olajuwon's supporting casts were and how that excuses everything in the early 90s and then have him go on and disrespect Duncan for not being able to beat one of the great dynasties in NBA history with a starting lineup featuring Terry Porter on his last legs, Antonio Daniels 6'4" ass trying to guard Kobe, Danny Ferry, and a way past his prime Robinson in 01.

On a per minute basis, that "way past his prime Robinson" averaged more rebounds, steals, and blocks than Duncan in the playoffs. And he shot a similar fg%.

[TD 21]

If you take this approach, you have to factor in the fact that the Spurs and Lakers played in the same conference which made it much easier to meet in the playoffs.

And the corollary is, Olajuwon was the best center of the 90's, and Jordan never had to go through him to win any titles. Does that cheapen Jordan's titles? According to your "dominant force" theory, it should.

Additionally, it's not like everyone assumes the Bulls would've beaten the Rockets. The Rockets crushed them in the season series from 91-93 and Jordan has even gone on record saying the Rockets would've been the most difficult matchup.

Also, Jordan did play in the 1995 playoffs....pretty well too.



Don't want to be mean, but you look foolish when you say that. Maybe it would be ok if you had an airtight argument, but you don't.

There's a big difference between a 3 year NBA pro who spent 3 years in college and started 100% of his NBA games and another 3 year NBA pro who skipped college and started 29% of his NBA games.

I never said this approach was a bullet proof argument, but it flies in the face of all those who claim Duncan played in a weak era and act like he always had it easy.

I'm aware of the parts I put in bold, but it doesn't change what I said.

I get that O'Neal had more experience than Bryant (don't think that fact was lost on me), but the point is kingmalaki comes off as a fool saying Bryant was a "pup" in '99 while neglecting to mention the fact that so too was O'Neal in '95, particularly in comparison to where Olajuwon was at then. If he's going to act like Duncan didn't beat a prime Bryant in '99 (Duncan wasn't in his prime then, either), then be sure to mention that Olajuwon didn't beat a prime O'Neal in '95, either.

[Kill_Bill_Pana]

Of course Duncan is a great player. One of the best. Olajuwon was much better though for me.

[wekko368]

I never said this approach was a bullet proof argument, but it flies in the face of all those who claim Duncan played in a weak era and act like he always had it easy.

I'm aware of the parts I put in bold, but it doesn't change what I said.

You may have been aware of the bolded parts, but if you don't incorporate them into your arguments, then you might as well be unaware of them.


I get that O'Neal had more experience than Bryant (don't think that fact was lost on me), but the point is kingmalaki comes off as a fool saying Bryant was a "pup" in '99 while neglecting to mention the fact that so too was O'Neal in '95, particularly in comparison to where Olajuwon was at then.

No, you don't get it.

It's not totally about experience. It's more about the realization of potential. In 1999, Kobe was far from the player he would eventually become. His statistics corroborate this. In 1999, his PER and his win shares were 18.9 and 5.2. In 2003, his PER was 26.2 and his WS was 14.9.

That's a huge improvement.


If he's going to act like Duncan didn't beat a prime Bryant in '99 (Duncan wasn't in his prime then, either), then be sure to mention that Olajuwon didn't beat a prime O'Neal in '95, either.

In case you're wondering, Shaq's PER and WS in 1995 were 28.6 and 14. In 2003, they were 29.5 and 13.2.

Therefore, an argument can be made that Olajuwon DID beat Shaq in his prime.

[Kill_Bill_Pana]

"In my 20 years in the NBA, Duncan is the best big to play the game," says former Houston Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy. " O'Neal always had the benefit of a dominant perimeter player, from [Penny] Hardaway to [Kobe] Bryant to [Dwyane] Wade. Duncan has had very good players, but he's never had that dominant player, so that's why I give him the edge."


"Since the ABA/NBA merger, only four stars have been that consistently successful for a 10-year span: Bird, Magic, MJ and Shaq ... although I hesitate to put Shaq on that level because he's had six different teams get swept over the course of his career. But that's the list. Superstars like Kareem (nine playoff wins TOTAL in the four seasons before Magic arrived), David Robinson (never made a Finals before Duncan arrived), Hakeem Olajuwon (wildly unsuccessful for most of his prime), Patrick Ewing (played in only one Finals in his prime), Charles Barkley (ditto) and Karl Malone (played in four conference finals, never won a title) couldn't match Duncan's winning consistency over a 10-year period. " - Bill Simmons


According to JVG Luther Head, Rafer Alston, John Lucas III are all better than Kill Bill Spanoulis.

I am sorry but the opinions of JVG on how good one player is compare to another cannot be taken seriously. This comments about Duncan is better than Hakeem and Shaq is more proof of this.

[Kill_Bill_Pana]

For all those saying Duncan is better than Olajuwon, then you're saying that Duncan is better than the Admiral, David Robinson. The League MVP picked over Hakeem. From which Hakeem was really pissed off for being slighted and proceeded in the next matchup between DRob and Hakeem, to completely dismantal the Admiral.

I don't think Duncan is even better than a prime David Robinson.

hW4uXlRGAF0

Duncan is better than Robinson. Robinson was too soft.

[Kill_Bill_Pana]

Jordan won 6 as the number one option.
Jabbar won 4
Duncan 4.
Who has more than Duncan as the man?
Shaq had 3.
Magic had 2.
Bird had 3.

This is wrong. Spurs number 1 option in 2005 playoffs was Manu and in 2007 playoffs was Parker. This does not discredit Duncan but what you say is just not true.

Duncan 2 championships as number 1 option and not 4.

[MaNu4Tres]

This is wrong. Spurs number 1 option in 2005 playoffs was Manu and in 2007 playoffs was Parker. This does not discredit Duncan but what you say is just not true.

Duncan 2 championships as number 1 option and not 4.

No you are wrong.

2005 Playoffs- http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/stats?team=sas&seasonYear=2005&season=3&sort=pts&order=true&avg=pg&split=0

2007 Playoffs - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/stats?team=sas&seasonYear=2007&season=3&sort=pts&order=true&avg=pg&split=0

Parker just exploded in a couple games offensively in the 2007 Finals. Duncan still was the leader and foundation on both ends throughout the playoffs.

[Mr.Robinson]

This is wrong. Spurs number 1 option in 2005 playoffs was Manu and in 2007 playoffs was Parker. This does not discredit Duncan but what you say is just not true.

Duncan 2 championships as number 1 option and not 4.

LOL Please go.

[kingmalaki]

How am I reaching? Jordan was the dominant force of the 90s; Olajuwon never got to, let alone beat, Jordan. O'Neal/Bryant were the other dominant force of the 00s; Duncan beat them twice. This is fact; not opinion.

So Duncan doesn't get credit for beating O'Neal/Bryant in '99 because Bryant was still a "pup", but Olajuwon get's credit for beating O'Neal in '95; as if O'Neal wasn't a "pup"? Both Bryant and O'Neal were in their third seasons at the time both of these occurred, but only one has significance because it suits your argument? You just lost all credibility.

You are reaching because your argument boils down to "Hakeem didn't beat Jordan". Duncan didn't either, and the 99 title opened up because MJ retired. The dominant force that he has a losing record against don't top Jordan either. Arguing about dominant forces makes no sense if the forces aren't equal. Is winning the heavyweight title today have the same impact as winning it when Tyson or Ali were around?

It's also dumb because the dominant force of the 90s was a peak Shaq, peak Kobe and PHIL JACKSON. Are you arguing Kobe was that great in 99? As great as Shaq in 95? Now they all were there in 03 when Duncan finally got through, to offset the other 3 times they beat him.

It's also dumb because if you are using a dominant force argument, then Hakeem did beat the dominant force of the 80s, Magic and LA. Magic and his team are also considered better than the dominant force Duncan beat.

So yes a silly argument in all ways.

[Mr.Robinson]

You are reaching because your argument boils down to "Hakeem didn't beat Jordan". Duncan didn't either, and the 99 title opened up because MJ retired. The dominant force that he has a losing record against don't top Jordan either. Arguing about dominant forces makes no sense if the forces aren't equal. Is winning the heavyweight title today have the same impact as winning it when Tyson or Ali were around?

It's also dumb because the dominant force of the 90s was a peak Shaq, peak Kobe and PHIL JACKSON. Are you arguing Kobe was that great in 99? As great as Shaq in 95? Now they all were there in 03 when Duncan finally got through, to offset the other 3 times they beat him.

It's also dumb because if you are using a dominant force argument, then Hakeem did beat the dominant force of the 80s, Magic and LA. Magic and his team are also considered better than the dominant force Duncan beat.

So yes a silly argument in all ways.
The lakers were good in 86 but it was the first season with a different core. Wilkes was gone and McAdoo was too.
Nostalgia is a motherfucker.

[hitmanyr2k]

:lmao No way in HEELLL! are players more skilled now.

You obviously don't know what "skill" means. Players are more athletic, but guess what.....Stromile Swift was one of the most athletic players in the league. What he lacked was any skill what so ever.

Hakeem's era was LOADED with skilled players....players that had something like I don't know....footwork and post moves, as well as players that had mid range game/ jumpers, and they had much greater basketball IQs overall as well.

Today's league and Duncan's era was one of the worst low basketball IQ eras of alltime. (There's a reason why he got the nickname "The big fundelmental", he was one of the few players that had throw back skills) When a guy like Luis Scola can come into the league and display footwork that's better than the vast majority of the players in the league today and a hell of alot better than players that are considered "elite big men", then something is obviously wrong with the NBA's "skill level".

Dude seriously, the more I read your posts, the more I'm convinced that you either didn't watch the NBA back in the day or were too young to remember it. The "skill level" in today's league is severely lacking or just watered down due to expansion....either way it sucks. There's a reason why Stern wanted to force kids to go to college and it wasn't just because he was worried about kids missing out on the "college experience"...his product was being hurt. They should just go ahead and make a 3 year post graduation minimum and get it over with.

100% truth :lol

[wekko368]

The lakers were good in 86 but it was the first season with a different core. Wilkes was gone and McAdoo was too.

Different core? Wilkes and McAdoo were their 5th and 8th leading scorers in 1985, and both came off the bench. Neither were what I'd consider to be a crucial loss.

You're really going with a "different core" argument? Really?

[Mr.Robinson]

Different core? Wilkes and McAdoo were their 5th and 8th leading scorers in 1985, and both came off the bench. Neither were what I'd consider to be a crucial loss.

You're really going with a "different core" argument? Really?

Just pointing it out. Rockets beating the 86 lakers<Spurs beating the three time defending Lakers.

[Mr.Robinson]

I get really sick of hearing Rocket fan bitch about how weak Olajuwon's supporting casts were and how that excuses everything in the early 90s and then have him go on and disrespect Duncan for not being able to beat one of the great dynasties in NBA history with a starting lineup featuring Terry Porter on his last legs, Antonio Daniels 6'4" ass trying to guard Kobe, Danny Ferry, and a way past his prime Robinson in 01. And then in 02, a rookie Tony Parker who couldn't finish at the rim, a Steve Smith who had regressed to the point of worthlessness in the 2 years since he was a decent weapon for Portland, Bruce Bowen, and Mark Bryant for 2 games / a David Robinson who could barely walk the final 3.
They're bias as hell. The whole Hakeem dominated Robinson in the 95 series is garbage too. I don't think they watched the series. They forget the Rockets hacked the shit out of Robinson. A nice player like Robinson will play like shit when he is getting abused. He won't retaliate or anything. That threw Robinson out of his game. Hakeem was in foul trouble all series long. Jones would just go in there to hack. Horry was fouling. They doubled DROB a lot. Hakeem was mainly played by DROB. When Rodman was on Hakeem he didn't even try. DROB had no help and he wilted under pressure. Despite playing like shit he still got to the line at will. Hakeem was better than Robinson because of this. The will to play when the shit gets rough. Robinson was too nice for that.
Now to Duncan. Hakeem doesn't have this advantage over Duncan. When shit got tough Duncan got tougher.
Stats will favor Hakeem because of pace. Hakeem's teams in the 80's would average 112+ practically every year. The pace was way faster. More points, rebounds, blocks, steals. So stop bringing up stats.

[djohn2oo8]

They're bias as hell. The whole Hakeem dominated Robinson in the 95 series is garbage too. I don't think they watched the series. They forget the Rockets hacked the shit out of Robinson. A nice player like Robinson will play like shit when he is getting abused. He won't retaliate or anything. That threw Robinson out of his game. Hakeem was in foul trouble all series long. Jones would just go in there to hack. Horry was fouling. They doubled DROB a lot. Hakeem was mainly played by DROB. When Rodman was on Hakeem he didn't even try. DROB had no help and he wilted under pressure. Despite playing like shit he still got to the line at will. Hakeem was better than Robinson because of this. The will to play when the shit gets rough. Robinson was too nice for that.
Now to Duncan. Hakeem doesn't have this advantage over Duncan. When shit got tough Duncan got tougher.
Stats will favor Hakeem because of pace. Hakeem's teams in the 80's would average 112+ practically every year. The pace was way faster. More points, rebounds, blocks, steals. So stop bringing up stats.

Ok, I can't tell if you're joking or not, but look in the mirror bro...The Rockets hacked the shit out of Robinson? :lmao Get tha fuck out of here!!!

[wekko368]

Just pointing it out. Rockets beating the 86 lakers<Spurs beating the three time defending Lakers.

That Lakers team won the title in 1985, 1987, and 1988; they had the 2nd best record in the league in 1986.

In my opinion, the Spurs/Rockets victories were on par with each other.

[Mr.Robinson]

Ok, I can't tell if you're joking or not, but look in the mirror bro...The Rockets hacked the shit out of Robinson? :lmao Get tha fuck out of here!!!

They played very physical with him.

[djohn2oo8]

They played very physical with him.

:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Booharv]

Everyone keeps pointing out the common battles they had versus Shaq. Most of the Spurs fans are leaving out one crucial detail (probably because its crippling to their case) Duncan and Shaq never guarded each other from 1999 to 2004. Robinson always guarded Shaq and vice versa. Even in 2004 Malone guarded Duncan. The only time I can remember Shaq guarding Duncan was game 6 of the 2003 WCSF from the third quarter to the end of the game. Olajuwon went heads up with Ewing, Shaq, and Robinson and dominated them all in 1994-95.

[Mr.Robinson]

:lmao:lmao:lmao

Laugh all you want but Robinson was bothered by it. Main reason he just crumbled under pressure. He had turnovers when nobody was near him. He played scared and the Rockets being physical did it. Did you watch the series?

[Mr.Robinson]

Everyone keeps pointing out the common battles they had versus Shaq. Most of the Spurs fans are leaving out one crucial detail (probably because its crippling to their case) Duncan and Shaq never guarded each other from 1999 to 2004. Robinson always guarded Shaq and vice versa. Even in 2004 Malone guarded Duncan. The only time I can remember Shaq guarding Duncan was game 6 of the 2003 WCSF from the third quarter to the end of the game. Olajuwon went heads up with Ewing, Shaq, and Robinson and dominated them all in 1994-95.
Shaq wass guarded by Duncan a lot. Robinson and Rose guarded him most of the time. Hakeem never dominated Shaq.

[djohn2oo8]

Shaq wass guarded by Duncan a lot. Robinson and Rose guarded him most of the time. Hakeem never dominated Shaq.

9hRoMOAirnU

[Booharv]

Shaq wass guarded by Duncan a lot. Robinson and Rose guarded him most of the time. Hakeem never dominated Shaq.

Duncan only guarded Shaq when Robinson was in foul trouble or on a switch. Even when Robinson got in foul trouble, like you said Rose, but also Kevin Willis or Will Perdue guarded Shaq. Rarely Duncan because of the worry of foul trouble. Its not the same, and Hakeem outscored Shaq in every game of the Finals and it got progressively worse as it went on. He scored 30+ in every game of that Sweep. Even fucking Shaq admits Hakeem kicked his ass.

[Booharv]

"If I can't beat you, I'll be a man and say I can't beat you. I'm not going to [cry about it] ... I'm the first guy to say that somebody is better than me. I was the first guy to say Hakeem Olajuwon beat me in the [1995] NBA finals. He killed me. He dominated me. I didn't go, 'Oh, he's traveling. They had experience. Wah-wah-wah.' I'm a man. Hakeem Olajuwon dusted my butt."

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/nbafinals/performance.html

Shaq states that after that series was one of the only two times in his life he's cried, the other being after the death of his grandmother. Shaq didn't play bad, but he was outclassed.

[MaNu4Tres]

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/nbafinals/performance.html

Shaq states that after that series was one of the only two times in his life he's cried, the other being after the death of his grandmother. Shaq didn't play bad, but he was outclassed.


You fail to realize, Shaq of 1995 wasn't close to as dominant as Shaq of 1998-2003. That's a fact jack..

So to imply Shaq of 95'= Shaq during the time Duncan had to go through him 5 times isn't comparable.

[Mr.Robinson]

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/nbafinals/performance.html

Shaq states that after that series was one of the only two times in his life he's cried, the other being after the death of his grandmother. Shaq didn't play bad, but he was outclassed.

He cried after the Spurs stopped the three peat. He left with a towel on his face. He didn't talk to reporters either. He will never admit to crying against the Spurs with Robinson and Duncan. He hated DROB he respected Hakeem.

[Mr.Robinson]

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/nbafinals/performance.html

Shaq states that after that series was one of the only two times in his life he's cried, the other being after the death of his grandmother. Shaq didn't play bad, but he was outclassed.

Shaq 98-04>Shaq of 95

[Booharv]

You fail to realize, Shaq of 1995 wasn't close to as dominant as Shaq of 1998-2003. That's a fact jack..

So to imply Shaq of 95'= Shaq during the time Duncan had to go through him 5 times isn't comparable.

Statistically he was nearly identical if you look at the PER and other numbers (scoring, rebounding, shot blocking) he was a better rebounder and shot blocker when he was younger. His rookie year was his best season as a rebounder and shot blocker. I would argue he got better teammates and played in an awful era for center compared to when he was young. He was slightly better but not enough to make up for the dropoff in competition.

Besides if Shaq was too slow to guard Hakeem when he was young, what makes think adding 40 lbs is going to help?

[djohn2oo8]

You fail to realize, Shaq of 1995 wasn't close to as dominant as Shaq of 1998-2003. That's a fact jack..



So to imply Shaq of 95'= Shaq during the time Duncan had to go through him 5 times isn't comparable.

Butthurt?


Shaq 98-04>Shaq of 95

You're an idiot

[Booharv]

Plus as was stated earlier Duncan and Shaq did not guard each other except in very rare circumstances. Its an apples and oranges comparison.

[kingmalaki]

Shaq 98-04>Shaq of 95

Then we should give that Robinson guy a lot of props, considering he was the one holding him and not that guy named Duncan. What dominant big has Duncan trumped in the postseason? He never held Shaq from 99-03. Shaq beat him in 04. Dirk beat him in 06. Lost to Gasol in 08. Lost to Amare this year. I guess he did catch Dirk and Amare on the way to his 3rd and 4th titles, and he did get past the Wallace boys in 05, although he was horrible offensively that series. I'm not sure if he could get past Ewing, Robinson and Shaq while having to battle them on both ends. Care to give an example?

[Mr.Robinson]

Then we should give that Robinson guy a lot of props, considering he was the one holding him and not that guy named Duncan. What dominant big has Duncan trumped in the postseason? He never held Shaq from 99-03. Shaq beat him in 04. Dirk beat him in 06. Lost to Gasol in 08. Lost to Amare this year. I guess he did catch Dirk and Amare on the way to his 3rd and 4th titles, and he did get past the Wallace boys in 05, although he was horrible offensively that series. I'm not sure if he could get past Ewing, Robinson and Shaq while having to battle them on both ends. Care to give an example?
The fact that you Rockets fans think Duncan isn't better than Robinson makes you guys look stupid. Duncan>Hakeem

[kingmalaki]

The fact that you Rockets fans think Duncan isn't better than Robinson makes you guys look stupid. Duncan>Hakeem

The inability to read makes folks look stupid. Did I say Robinson was better than Duncan? But Robinson was the one holding Shaq from 99-04. What big has Duncan dominated in the postseason, on both sides of the court?

[Mr.Robinson]

Then we should give that Robinson guy a lot of props, considering he was the one holding him and not that guy named Duncan. What dominant big has Duncan trumped in the postseason? He never held Shaq from 99-03. Shaq beat him in 04. Dirk beat him in 06. Lost to Gasol in 08. Lost to Amare this year. I guess he did catch Dirk and Amare on the way to his 3rd and 4th titles, and he did get past the Wallace boys in 05, although he was horrible offensively that series. I'm not sure if he could get past Ewing, Robinson and Shaq while having to battle them on both ends. Care to give an example?
He shot terrible in the Detroit series. He had 26/19 and 24/17 against that frontline. He also had 25 in game 7 and did stuff the stats don't show. Like get his team going in the 3rd. He willed them to victory.

[elbamba]

If we take Duncan where he is at today and then look at where the Dream was at from a total games played Duncan has a 1147 to 1085 advantage.

This includes a 170 to 107 playoff advantage to Duncan. Almost 3/4 of a season longer in playoff games. It is no wonder the man is wearing down.

Of course wearing down for Tim is posting 19 and 10.

[Mr.Robinson]

That's nice...Olajuwon actually had two quadruple doubles...one which was taken away from him.

Also in that video I failed to see the raw athleticism and overall skill that Olajuwan played with his entire career, especially when Hakeem was able to play like that until the ages of 33 and 34. Hakeem was a better shot blocker, better on the ball defender/stealer and better overall offensive player than Duncan ever was. But Duncan was able to play on better teams during a non big man era so hence...."THE ARGUMENT".

Question....if Duncan and Olajuwon were able to come out and enter the same draft even knowing what they know now, which player do you think G.M's everywhere would take first?

Answer....Olajuwon
False. Hakeem had 17 and 13 and 5 blocks in his last year playing college ball. Duncan had 17 and 13 and 4 in his soph season. He finished with 20 and 14 and 3 his senior year. Duncan was ready after his soph season. Many people wanted him in the nba after his soph season. They were so similar in getting the job done. Hakeem was faster more athletic. Duncan was more patient and just as effective. I think Duncan was a little better. His passing and ability to make his team better was just better. Hakeem looked great playing in that era. I just think Duncan would have been better than him even in that era. I have a feeling Duncan would have had Moses rebounding numbers in that era. He was more of a banger than Hakeem. Duncan worked the paint harder. Hakeem was amazing. Duncan might not have been as flashy but got shit done one way or another. Duncan didn't have the jumping and running ability Hakeem had but he had more bball IQ.

[FkLA]

A prime Dream is the best center of all-time. He'd come out on top, Duncan would make it competitive though.

[Ignignokt]

I'm sorry, but the rockets team of the 90's would be smoking mad laker pole if they met the lakers in the 2000-03 area.

NO way does an undersized jumpshooter and garbage point Forward and a kevin johnson who is a shittier parker even win one game on the Lakers in that era.

At the time, Harper, Fisher, Fox and Kobe would outmuscle the Drexler, cassell, Smith, Maxwell backcourt. Shaq would give the dream a pink sock, Shaq in the 2000's would outmuscle hakeem, he was a different beast. not to mention that Horry was wiser and just as lethal than the Houston Horry.


This whole era shit is ridiculous.

Mutumbo was like a 7'2 Dwight Howard with far less O skills and better shotblocking.

Kevin Garnett > Ewing, Malone.

2000 Shaq would obliterate any Center fag minus DRob in that heralded 90's era.

[Mr.Robinson]

A prime Dream is the best center of all-time. He'd come out on top, Duncan would make it competitive though.

Duncan would get his. Hakeem would not get Duncan jumping with his fakes. Duncan was twice the defender Robinson was. Twice the player as well. DROB was a bit robotic. Hakeem is a bit overrated because of that DROB series.

[Aggie Hoopsdouche]

You tell em idiotknight!! Hakeem wasn't as good as C-Webb even. No way his team could challenge the Lakers like that stupendous team built around C-Webb, some floppers, and a couple of massively unclutch three point bombers!

[Aggie Hoopsdouche]

I'm sorry, but the rockets team of the 90's would be smoking mad laker pole if they met the lakers in the 2000-03 area.

NO way does an undersized jumpshooter and garbage point Forward and a kevin johnson who is a shittier parker even win one game on the Lakers in that era.

At the time, Harper, Fisher, Fox and Kobe would outmuscle the Drexler, cassell, Smith, Maxwell backcourt. Shaq would give the dream a pink sock, Shaq in the 2000's would outmuscle hakeem, he was a different beast. not to mention that Horry was wiser and just as lethal than the Houston Horry.


This whole era shit is ridiculous.

Mutumbo was like a 7'2 Dwight Howard with far less O skills and better shotblocking.

Kevin Garnett > Ewing, Malone.

2000 Shaq would obliterate any Center fag minus DRob in that heralded 90's era.

I know just because Ewing was a way better shotblocker and a way better go to guy means nothing!! Screw that Ewing averaged 28.6 ppg on 55% shooting to go along with 10.9 rebounds and 4.0 blocks in his prime and that that comically dwarfs KG's best season. Especially in scoring and shotblocking. Annnnyyyyythhhhhhhiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnngg is Poooooooooooooooooooosssssssssssssssiiiiiiiiiiiiii iibbblllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllle!!!!!

[Aggie Hoopsdouche]

Oh, I forgot to call someone rook.


Then we should give that Robinson guy a lot of props, considering he was the one holding him and not that guy named Duncan. What dominant big has Duncan trumped in the postseason? He never held Shaq from 99-03. Shaq beat him in 04. Dirk beat him in 06. Lost to Gasol in 08. Lost to Amare this year. I guess he did catch Dirk and Amare on the way to his 3rd and 4th titles, and he did get past the Wallace boys in 05, although he was horrible offensively that series. I'm not sure if he could get past Ewing, Robinson and Shaq while having to battle them on both ends. Care to give an example?

Get a clue rook, every time Duncan lost he had less help. That's the only reason he would ever lose to anybody. That and his coach sucks.

[kingmalaki]

Oh, I forgot to call someone rook.



Get a clue rook, every time Duncan lost he had less help. That's the only reason he would ever lose to anybody. That and his coach sucks.

Every time he had less help he lost...kinda like Hakeem for most of his career (less help)?

[lefty]

Olajuwon would be the shit out of every big man not named Olajuwon.

[Killakobe81]

Duncan would get his. Hakeem would not get Duncan jumping with his fakes. Duncan was twice the defender Robinson was. Twice the player as well. DROB was a bit robotic. Hakeem is a bit overrated because of that DROB series.

IDK about that ....

[21_Blessings]

Olajuwon would be the shit out of every big man not named Olajuwon.

Prime Kareem would score at will. I love Hakeem but he was undersized for a center and his freak athleticism/coordination made up for it. But he's not touching prime Kareem's sky hook.

[lefty]

Prime Kareem would score at will. I love Hakeem but he was undersized for a center and his freak athleticism/coordination made up for it. But he's not touching prime Kareem's sky hook.
Hakeem blocked Kareem 's sky hook several times

(true story)

[21_Blessings]

Not in his prime.

lol @ blocking a 38 year old

[21_Blessings]

lol @ comparing 38-40 year old Kareem's quickness to his 6 time MVP self

[lefty]

Kareem was great, but even if both Cap and Dream went vs each other in their prime, Hakeem would still beat the shit out of Kareem

[lefty]

right right..because kareem's offense was just sooo predicated on athleticism :lol

i'm sure the 38 year old version jumped a couple of inches less high on his sky hook than the 28 year old version
And this.

[21_Blessings]

Kareem was great, but even if both Cap and Dream went vs each other in their prime, Hakeem would still beat the shit out of Kareem

So you're admitting that you never watched prime Kareem play and that you're a dumbass? Great.

[DOMINATOR]

So you're admitting that you never watched prime Kareem play and that you're a dumbass? Great.

keep acting like you saw kareem in his prime.

[lefty]

So you're admitting that you never watched prime Kareem play and that you're a dumbass? Great.
I have

I don't know if you have NBA TV or the internet in Pakistan, or if your Purple and Gold glasses have a special anti-truth firewall, but it's possible to watch prime Kareem in 2010

[21_Blessings]

So you're a complete and utter retarded dumbass. Cool. :tu

No Hakeem would not shit on prime Kareem. But both prime Hakeem/Kareem would shit all over Duncan. That one, history knows for sure.

[21_Blessings]

:lmao 32-34 year old Duncan getting shit on by Pau Gasol

[21_Blessings]

Oh snap. Duncan is only 33? :lol

[lefty]

So you're a complete and utter retarded dumbass. Cool. :tu

No Hakeem would not shit on prime Kareem. But both prime Hakeem/Kareem would shit all over Duncan. That one, history knows for sure.
I agree

[21_Blessings]

I wonder if Pop would have called Pau the most skilled big man in the league if Kareem and the Dream played in this era.

[lefty]

I wonder if Pop would have called Pau the most skilled big man in the league if Kareem and the Dream played in this era.
Maybe he would have called him the most skilled PF

In today's NBA, big men are hybrid

Back in the days, it was C and PF (although Hakeem was versatile enough to play at both positions)

[21_Blessings]

No Duncan is not a hybrid. He's a center.

Pau actually plays some power forward these days. Duncan doesn't. Bonner at center :lol

[lefty]

No Duncan is not a hybrid. He's a center.

Pau actually plays some power forward these days. Duncan doesn't. Bonner at center :lol
He is a PF who has been forced to play C and PF after Robinson left

[21_Blessings]

He's a center just like he was in college forced to start at PF because Robinson was on the team.

Duncan has always played like a center. Because that is what he is.

[lefty]

He's a center just like he was in college forced to start at PF because Robinson was on the team.

Duncan has always played like a center. Because that is what he is.
Wow

Lulwhat?

[Mr.Robinson]

Hakeem blocked Kareem 's sky hook several times

(true story)

So did Karl Malone. Who cares?

[Mr.Robinson]

So you're a complete and utter retarded dumbass. Cool. :tu

No Hakeem would not shit on prime Kareem. But both prime Hakeem/Kareem would shit all over Duncan. That one, history knows for sure.

Idiot. Just like the most dominant center of all time did, right?

[Tmac&Luther]

Prime Kareem would score at will. I love Hakeem but he was undersized for a center and his freak athleticism/coordination made up for it. But he's not touching prime Kareem's sky hook.

So the most prolific shot blocker in NBA history has no shot at blocking Kareem's sky hook...even in his prime? Riiigghhtt :rolleyes Hakeem had a ridiculous vertical in his prime...if he timed it right (like he did soo many times to become the NBA's all time shot blocker), guess what...he can block that shot.

I'm not saying he'd block Kareem's every attempt or even "shit on him" (because the all time greats don't get shit on in their prime...just like Olajuwon wouldn't get "shit on" in his prime), be he did have the ability to block that shot.

[clutchcityin210]

I got something to say on this one.....

I grew up in Houston and watched the Rockets play daily when Dream was in his prime. I have lived in San Antonio, and watch the Spurs play daily, when Duncan was in his prime. They are both legit first ballot Hall of Fame players.

To put the numbers into perspective, Duncan is a Center, dominating the PF position. He get his numbers against the likes of Chuck Hayes and Michael Beasley.

Hakeem was a PF, dominating the Center position against much bigger players. Duncan, Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, Kareem, Parish... all bigger than Hakeem.

Dream would win this matchup on quickness and atheleticism alone. He had the quickness and range of a SF, and hops like Dwight Howard! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKS_9FpBLhM) I'm not making this up! Everyone immediately thinks of the Dream Shake and fadeaway as Hakeem's only move. He often went to the rack with bad intentions. On defense, Duncan blocks shots at their highest point. Dream swatted shots to half court or into the stands!

Stats? Hakeem Olajuwon is the only player in NBA history to post 2 quadruple doubles! Also, he is the ONLY player in NBA history at any position to be top ten all time in 3 major statistical categories! (8th all time in steals, yes steals as a center, 8th all time in scoring, and 1st all time in blocks). He is 11th all time in rebounds, and based on his career average, he would be 10th had he played just 1 more game.

Hakeem could go through, over, or around any 7-footer. One of the most unstoppable big men ever. In a hypothetical matchup, dream would stick Duncan on defense. Pop wouldn't think of putting Duncan on Dream, because he would foul out.

Not to sound biased, but Duncan vs Dream is NO comparison. Duncan vs Yao, Duncan wins hands down!

[Double-Up]

would olajuwon shred duncan into pieces?

No doubt he would.

[clutchcityin210]

That's funny because in this mix, he has a ton of nasty, sick, sick blocks on kareem

uBrEsNS9zKg

Dream Shake aside.... Hakeem was a SICK shot blocker! More intimidating than Dwight Howard! Dikembe Mutombo with ball handling skills, footwork, hops, and a jumper!

[DaDakota]

Hakeem may be the most creative low post player in history, man I miss watching that guy.

DD

[daslicer]

Just saw Olaujuwon lose to a bunch of Joes on the show Joes vs Pros. Even though he is old you can see by watching that game how much he did rely on his athletic ability to score on guys because during the game he got stripped a bunch of times since he couldn't move fast enough to avoid it. One thing that was funny to watch was seeing him post up Mcnabb, Owens, and Gates. None of those guys could check him in the paint. Another thing I observed is Olaujuwon relied heavily on this athletic ability to play defense because during the game he could not block any of those 3 guys his timing was always way off. I think if you have a 40 year old Duncan vs those guys they lose mainly because Tim's game is not way off of what it used to be since he doesn't rely heavily on athleticism like Dream did. I know that was off subject just wanted to bring that up.

[Zelophehad]

Just saw Olaujuwon lose to a bunch of Joes on the show Joes vs Pros. Even though he is old you can see by watching that game how much he did rely on his athletic ability to score on guys because during the game he got stripped a bunch of times since he couldn't move fast enough to avoid it. One thing that was funny to watch was seeing him post up Mcnabb, Owens, and Gates. None of those guys could check him in the paint. Another thing I observed is Olaujuwon relied heavily on this athletic ability to play defense because during the game he could not block any of those 3 guys his timing was always way off. I think if you have a 40 year old Duncan vs those guys they lose mainly because Tim's game is not way off of what it used to be since he doesn't rely heavily on athleticism like Dream did. I know that was off subject just wanted to bring that up.

Great observations. :tu

50 year old Hakeem loses to 50 year old Duncan. When they start the senior tour I'll keep this in mind for gambling purposes.

[clutchcityin210]

tim duncan wouldnt get exposed on that dreamshake bs like other players, duncan rarely jumps for blocks anyway
That's fine. if he wouldn't fall for the fakes Dream would just cross over, go around him, and dunk on the entire city of san Antonio. Duncan "Better" jump.

[clutchcityin210]

Would it be a stretch to say a prime Duncan would be the best defender of the guys Hakeem faced? Tim would also be able to pull the Dream away from the paint with his range. Duncan probably has the best range and overall offensive skillset of the legends Hakeem faced against as well.

((((LOL))))) Pull him away from the paint and then what? Hakeem is arguably the best perimeter defender amond centers in NBA history. He has more career steals than any SF, SG, or C in NBA history. He ranks 8th all time among players at ANY position, guards included. I have seen him step out on the pick and roll and absolutely pick point guards clean.

Duncan has better range and overall offensive skillset than any of the legends Hakeem faced? Hakeem had better range and overall offensive skill set than any of these legends too. Hakeem had better range and a better overall offensive skillset than Duncan too. I can see Dream stopping Duncan on the perimeter, maybe not so much so on the block because Duncan is bigger/wider. Dream had the lateral quickness to stay with Duncan on the perimeter. Duncan can post up quicker players like Garnett and Amare, and he can go around bigger players like Yao and dwight howard. Imagine Garnet in Dright Howards body though.

What would be more interesting would be Duncan trying to guard Dream on the perimeter. DRobinson was BY FAR a quicker and better perimeter defender than Duncan. It wouldn't end well.

[Koolaid_Man]

Nice try, faggot. Hakeem is closer to 50 playing against guys that are still great athletes. I'll put it like this. Amare looks like the greatest PF in the league when he plays Duncan. Hakeem would wipe his ass with Duncan on both ends. You guys already saw what he did to a prime DRob, and it would be no different. And stop with this bullshit like Hakeem only had two stellar years. The guy was a beast from the start of his rookie season. No sense of making this debate, because we all know that Duncan would have allowed Bonner to guard Hakeem. He's a power forward, remember.


Too bad these numnuts didn't get to see Hakeem play...the guy was the Michelangelo of Bigmen...Duncan shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Hakeem...it would have been a slaughter....It's no surprise that MJ picked --> Hakeem along with himself, Magic, Bird, Pippen, as his all-time team. It's no surprise that Kobe went to Hakeem to learn post moves.....Hakeem was probably the most polished offensive big man to ever play the game. He had the best, or second best, post game out of any player the NBA has seen. He was as agile as a guard and could step outside of the paint and shoot jumpers like a guard.... The Dream Shake is legendary. So many post moves. Hooks with both hands, turnaround jumpers, up and unders, spins etc... You name a post move and Dream could pull it off with ease. Pretty much every move was with such grace and skill. He did all of this offensively and was still a defensive beast being the NBA's all time leading shot blocker.

Check out this vid...I've never seen any one player get his ass beat this bad...this was by far the best play-off performance I've seen. Duncan is just lucky his name isn't Robinson the results would have been the same: hW4uXlRGAF0

[Booharv]

Too bad these numnuts didn't get to see Hakeem play...the guy was the Michelangelo of Bigmen...Duncan shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Hakeem...it would have been a slaughter....It's no surprise that MJ picked --> Hakeem along with himself, Magic, Bird, Pippen, as his all-time team. It's no surprise that Kobe went to Hakeem to learn post moves.....Hakeem was probably the most polished offensive big man to ever play the game. He had the best, or second best, post game out of any player the NBA has seen. He was as agile as a guard and could step outside of the paint and shoot jumpers like a guard.... The Dream Shake is legendary. So many post moves. Hooks with both hands, turnaround jumpers, up and unders, spins etc... You name a post move and Dream could pull it off with ease. Pretty much every move was with such grace and skill. He did all of this offensively and was still a defensive beast being the NBA's all time leading shot blocker.

Check out this vid...I've never seen any one player get his ass beat this bad...this was by far the best play-off performance I've seen. Duncan is just lucky his name isn't Robinson the results would have been the same: hW4uXlRGAF0

Goddamn you're shitty. Read through the thread, that video has been posted like 9 times and the arguments you're making have been made like 400 times over.

[midnightpulp]

Goddamn you're shitty. Read through the thread, that video has been posted like 9 times and the arguments you're making have been made like 400 times over.

It's Koolaid_Man.

I have to commend him somewhat on this post, however. He did manage to get through it without one homosexual reference or symbolic gesture.

That's rare for him, since he always seems to have dick on his mind.

[Koolaid_Man]

Goddamn you're shitty. Read through the thread, that video has been posted like 9 times and the arguments you're making have been made like 400 times over.



I assume that's your real profile pic....so here it goes....Listen up fat boy...it's obvious your a loser...so instead of belaboring what a pussy u truly are and hiding behind a competent poster act by calling my post shitty why dont you do what you do best and just honestly communicate to the board how I hurt your feelings because I said Timmy wasn't worth shit as it pertains to Dream...Listen fat boy Timmy is done...his glory days are over everything else is just to keep you numnuts in a perpetual state of heartbreak...and guess what...I FUCKING LOVE EVERY MINUTE OF YOUR SUFFERING!!! :toast

[21_Dickings]

I assume that's your real profile pic....so here it goes....Listen up fat boy...it's obvious your a loser...so instead of belaboring what a pussy u truly are and hiding behind a competent poster act by calling my post shitty why dont you do what you do best and just honestly communicate to the board how I hurt your feelings because I said Timmy wasn't worth shit as it pertains to Dream...Listen fat boy Timmy is done...his glory days are over everything else is just to keep you numnuts in a perpetual state of heartbreak...and guess what...I FUCKING LOVE EVERY MINUTE OF YOUR SUFFERING!!! :toast

Lame.

[PublicOption]

TD :lobt::lobt::lobt::lobt:

the dream :lobt::lobt:


:nope

[Killakobe81]

shred? i think that is disrespecting Duncan and overrating hakeem...

BUT I do think Hakeem in his prime is better than duncan.

But duncan's ability to raise his game in the playoffs means he will not get dominated the way David did vs. hakeem.

I respect Duncan THAT much even though i think prime Olajawon is better than every big man i have seen with my own eyes EXCEPT Kareem ...

[Killakobe81]

Nice try, faggot. Hakeem is closer to 50 playing against guys that are still great athletes. I'll put it like this. Amare looks like the greatest PF in the league when he plays Duncan. Hakeem would wipe his ass with Duncan on both ends. You guys already saw what he did to a prime DRob, and it would be no different. And stop with this bullshit like Hakeem only had two stellar years. The guy was a beast from the start of his rookie season. No sense of making this debate, because we all know that Duncan would have allowed Bonner to guard Hakeem. He's a power forward, remember.

a bit harsh, Luva but this ...was funny!

[Killakobe81]

95 Hakeem The Dream could be considered the greatest basketball player of all time. In the playoffs, he went through the league's top 4 players (Malone, Barkley, Robinson, and Shaq) in one playoff run, putting up ridiculous numbers.

I've never seen a player as good as 95 Hakeem. Not 3 peat Shaq, first 3 peat Jordan, or 03 Duncan.

It's no insult to Duncan to claim that he would get outclassed by 95 Hakeem. He outclassed everyone.

Great post agree with every word thoughthe jordan part is debateable (and im no jordan lover, but still)

But I agree those 2 years was as impressive as any player of the modern era ...

with my own eyes I would place:

1. Kareem
2. hakeem
3. Duncan
4. Shaq
5. Ewing
6. David

Duncan being 3rd on that list is impressive all in itself ..

and LOL the folks talking about dirk, amare Cwebb in the same sentence when discussing the merits of defense and ALL NBA defense first team nods ...LMAO

[Booharv]

I assume that's your real profile pic....so here it goes....Listen up fat boy...it's obvious your a loser...

Nah, that's Brian Windhorst the Cavs beat writer.


so instead of belaboring what a pussy u truly are and hiding behind a competent poster act by calling my post shitty

Your post was shitty though, sorry had tbh.


why dont you do what you do best and just honestly communicate to the board how I hurt your feelings because I said Timmy wasn't worth shit as it pertains to Dream

I've been arguing that Hakeem is better than Duncan this entire thread. Which you would know if you read the thread.


his glory days are over everything else is just to keep you numnuts in a perpetual state of heartbreak...and guess what...I FUCKING LOVE EVERY MINUTE OF YOUR SUFFERING!!! :toast

allcaps makes for a fitting conclusion to another of your shitty posts.

[TinTin]

Nah, that's Brian Windhorst the Cavs beat writer.



Your post was shitty though, sorry had tbh.



I've been arguing that Hakeem is better than Duncan this entire thread. Which you would know if you read the thread.



allcaps makes for a fitting conclusion to another of your shitty posts.

:lmao jizzed on

[ogait]

To put the numbers into perspective, Duncan is a Center, dominating the PF position. He get his numbers against the likes of Chuck Hayes and Michael Beasley.

Hakeem was a PF, dominating the Center position against much bigger players. Duncan, Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, Kareem, Parish... all bigger than Hakeem.



Ok I'm not arguing one way or the other on who would win this matchup, but this isn't a very compelling argument.
So basicly you are saying that Hakeem was better because because he was a center and Duncan as a taller power forward didn't have enough competition in his position.
Oh well, If only all the teams who faced Duncan had remembered to have is starting center defending him, he wouldn't even had a single tittle by now.

Anyway I'm not a big fan of this fantasy match ups between players from different eras, maybe you just meant that Big men in the 90's were better than now.




Not to sound biased, but Duncan vs Dream is NO comparison. Duncan vs Yao, Duncan wins hands down!



Plz Duncan vs Hakeem is a much bigger debate than Duncan vs Yao. Only thing Yao can do better is shoot FT's.

[Killakobe81]

You mean like Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, a non-fat Shaquille O'Neal, and Alonzo Mourning? Late 80s to mid 90s actually had maybe the best group of quality centers at the same time in NBA history. As a group, I don't think there was another era that had a better collection of quality centers at the same time. Even had an old Kareem and old Moses for a couple years in the mid 80s. Hell, look at now and the current NBA's best center has no post game.

And moreover, the first few seasons of Tim's NBA career was spent with David Robinson. While David wasn't the same player as he was earlier in his career, he still afforded Tim to not have to defend the opposing team's best big man, or at the very least share in that duty. And you look at the other elite big men in the league during the last 10 or so years and you have hybrid PF/C like KG and Dirk who are perimeter oriented big men. You can't say at all with any certainty that Duncan would dominated the same way Hakeem did in his prime.

Sometimes I hate these debates because it ends up with arguments that makes it seem you have to discredit one player for the sake of praising the other. Yes, I believe Hakeem in his prime was better than Tim in his prime. But I don't want it to come across that I think Tim isn't great. Tim Duncan is the greatest power forward to ever play the game. Despite my own personal opinion that at least half of his career he was actually a center, it doesn't mean I don't think he is an all time great. Both Tim and Hakeem are top 10 players in the history of the game in my opinion. It's also just my opinion that Hakeem was better. I know many disagree.

But don't tell me if someone posted that "Tim Duncan was good" you wouldn't call them out for that. You can't just call Hakeem "good." So yes, "great" is better.

Best post in this whole thread and on a topic that KEEPS coming up ...

duncan is the best PF ever but a notch below hakeem as a big man ...but it's close and DEFINITELY debatable ...

Better question is 2003 Duncan vs. 2000 shaq ...I think edge goes to SHAQ ..

BUT I am one of the guys in here who prefers duncan at his best over Shaq ...but in 2000 Shaq was ALMOST as dominant as Hakeem was in 95-96

IMHO shaq's prime ..2000 plust the 2001 2002 and 2004 NBA finals was shorter than Hakeem's ...

[cesare borgia]

Hakeem would have destroy Duncan. David Robinson was a better defensive player than Duncan.

[ambchang]

Coming from a Spurs fan, Hakeem would beat Duncan 1 on 1.

Duncan is more of a team player than Hakeem though, his ability to see the court was better than Hakeem's, Duncan would do the little things like setting a screen, or sliding over on defense with positioning, blocking out so that his teammates can grab a rebound. Not saying that Hakeem doesn't do those things, but he never did it to a degree that Duncan did it.

It's no coincidence that Hakeem's teams in the late 80's weren't any good. Yes, management sucked, but Hakeem's teams were routinely mid 40-wins team for most of his career, until he had Tomjonavich surrounding him with prolific 3 pt shooters.

Duncan on the other hand, won a championship with Avery Johnson, one of the worst 3pt shooting PG in the modern game. He won a championship with totally different supporting casts and a different set of styles.

Duncan is more versatile in his approach to team game, but Hakeem was way more athletic and skilled than Duncan, both offensively and defensively.

[lefty]

Olajuwon would beat the shit out of Duncan

[TE]

For all these pages to have gone on and for all you dumbasses to make fools of yourselves into believing your assertions and predictions actually matter (a special F-U, and a have a nice day for all you Laker Duncan haters), I can't just begin to laugh.


These players played in two totally different eras. Duncan did play against Olajuwan in a regular season exhibition game but that can't help this debate anymore than what you idiots predict on your personal biasness.



Get a clue, both players were absolutely dominant in their eras...JUST ABSOLUTELY, you cannot simply compare these two magnificent players anymore than comparing Kobe and Jordan once more.

[Greg Oden]

I know the real answer, but my bias won't let me openly say it so I'll create a loophole.


I fixed it for you. Saved a lot of unnecessary keystrokes tbh.

[mystargtr34]

Coming from a Spurs fan, Hakeem would beat Duncan 1 on 1.

Duncan is more of a team player than Hakeem though, his ability to see the court was better than Hakeem's, Duncan would do the little things like setting a screen, or sliding over on defense with positioning, blocking out so that his teammates can grab a rebound. Not saying that Hakeem doesn't do those things, but he never did it to a degree that Duncan did it.

It's no coincidence that Hakeem's teams in the late 80's weren't any good. Yes, management sucked, but Hakeem's teams were routinely mid 40-wins team for most of his career, until he had Tomjonavich surrounding him with prolific 3 pt shooters.

Duncan on the other hand, won a championship with Avery Johnson, one of the worst 3pt shooting PG in the modern game. He won a championship with totally different supporting casts and a different set of styles.

Duncan is more versatile in his approach to team game, but Hakeem was way more athletic and skilled than Duncan, both offensively and defensively.

Pretty good post. Not only would Hakeem beat Duncan 1 v 1... i would put my money on David Robinson doing the same... and Shaq... and maybe even Kevin Garnett.

[hitmantb]

2003 Duncan > 1995 Hakeem.

Took a worse team than the 95 rockets over Shaq/Kobe Lakers.

People really forgot how bad Spurs was as a team, if you take away a championship team's best player, that was the worst championship team in the history of the NBA.

[LkrFan]

Dream would DESTROY Duncan - just ask Shaq, Ewing, Parish, Mailman, and D Robinson (ALL HOF bigs). He was cat-quick. He was agile. He had more post moves than prime Lurch. He was strong too.

All joking to the side, Duncan is 1st ballot, but prime Dream would have done him dirty. Real dirty.

[LkrFan]

2003 Duncan > 1995 Hakeem.

Took a worse team than the 95 rockets over Shaq/Kobe Lakers.

People really forgot how bad Spurs was as a team, if you take away a championship team's best player, that was the worst championship team in the history of the NBA.

1) Shaq was 485lbs in 2003
2) 1995 Rockets were one of the weakest champions I've ever seen.

[spurraider21]

2) 1995 Rockets were one of the weakest champions I've ever seen.
if only they had duncan instead of dream :downspin:

[LkrFan]

if only they had duncan instead of dream :downspin:

:lol

[baseline bum]

Dream would DESTROY Duncan - just ask Shaq, Ewing, Parish, Mailman, and D Robinson (ALL HOF bigs). He was cat-quick. He was agile. He had more post moves than prime Lurch. He was strong too.

All joking to the side, Duncan is 1st ballot, but prime Dream would have done him dirty. Real dirty.

LeBron over Kobe would be worse though.

[baseline bum]

2) 1995 Rockets were one of the weakest champions I've ever seen.

LOL, what? They went through a 62 win team, a 60 win team, a 59 win team, and a 57 win team. The 1994 team was nothing special but Drexler made the 1995 team a juggernaut. No one else has had a title run that difficult. Not even close.

[LkrFan]

LeBron over Kobe would be worse though.

Prime Kobe? Please. He couldn't stop him. Hell, even MJ says he couldn't check Kobe because Kobe "stole all of his moves." Kobe is the greatest one on one player in NBA history.

[baseline bum]

Prime Kobe? Please. He couldn't stop him. Hell, even MJ says he couldn't check Kobe because Kobe "stole all of his moves." Kobe is the greatest one on one player in NBA history.

You gotta lay off the micheladas so early in the day Ramon.

[benefactor]

Dream at his peak was the best big man ever to pick up a basketball.

[LkrFan]

LOL, what? They went through a 62 win team, a 60 win team, a 59 win team, and a 57 win team. The 1994 team was nothing special but Drexler made the 1995 team a juggernaut. No one else has had a title run that difficult. Not even close.

They won when Jordan was playing baseball.

[LkrFan]

You gotta lay off the micheladas so early in the day Ramon.:lol - who was better - MJ? Maybe, but Kobe has more range on his jumper.

[LkrFan]

Dream at his peak was the best big man ever to pick up a basketball.

Truth.com

[baseline bum]

They won when Jordan was playing baseball.

In 1994. Not their fault Jordan turned the ball over twice to blow the series in Orlando in 1995.

[ambchang]

Hakeem won't be able to dominate like he did in today's game.

He was swarmed to death in the 96 sonics, a team that employed a semi zone.

A full blown zone, which was illegal back in the day but legal now, will limit Hakeem. This also explains why we don't have domjnant bigs anymore. The inside is just too crowded for an inside dominated offense, tipping the advantage to the defense.

[RD2191]

Who knows, tbh. I hope people remember that Duncan's injury in the early 2000s limited his athleticism immediately. For as great as duncan has been he could of been even better. Now that's insane.

http://m.espn.go.com/nba/story?storyId=7950573&src=desktop&rand=ref~%7B%22ref%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googl e.com%2F%22%7D

[RD2191]

Hard to recall the prime of Hakeem, all that's left are memories of his humiliating play at the end.

Tim Duncan, take heed, old man.
:lolduncan is goat.

[TDfan2007]

:lol people acting like Duncan wasn't one of the best one one on one players in NBA history for a big. From 1999-2007 (especially 99-04) most of the Spurs' offense was predicated on the fact that nobody could guard Timmy one on one. 4down is simply a high post isolation play, and the spurs won 4 championships with that as their bread and butter.

I would've loved to see prime Duncan vs. Prime Hakeem, and I'm not sure who'd come out on top. Matchup for the ages, tbh.

[Jenks]

I wonder how a prime Olajuwon would fare against a prime Robinson? My guess is Robinson would score a lot more than the 24ppg he dropped on Hakeem +2 in 95.

http://giant.gfycat.com/RecklessJadedGrunion.gif

Dat 1 on 1

[hater]

They won when Jordan was playing baseball.

:lol

[ambchang]

I wonder how a prime Olajuwon would fare against a prime Robinson? My guess is Robinson would score a lot more than the 24ppg he dropped on Hakeem +2 in 95.

http://giant.gfycat.com/RecklessJadedGrunion.gif

Dat 1 on 1

:cry Robinson was outplayed by Hakeem and Hakeem alone.
:cry the Rockets won the series because they had to guard offensive juggernaut Dennis Rodman and sharp shooters Vinny Del Negro and Avery Johnson.

For those are were too young, Del Negro was a worse starting SG than he was a coach.

[TDfan2007]

:cry Robinson was outplayed by Hakeem and Hakeem alone.
:cry the Rockets won the series because they had to guard offensive juggernaut Dennis Rodman and sharp shooters Vinny Del Negro and Avery Johnson.

For those are were too young, Del Negro was a worse starting SG than he was a coach.

I was 4 1/2 when that series happened, so everything I know is from youtube/reading about it. From what I saw it looked like David couldn't guard Hakeem (Hakeem gave David the Ibaka treatment and just pump-faked him to death), but we never really got to see much of David going right at Hakeem on the other end. The Rockets clearly had the more talented team on paper and the fact that those Spurs were a top seed is a testament to David's greatness.

I also find it funny that nobody seems to remember Hakeem's 10+ years of playoff failures, but David gets the "choker" label. Strange...

IMO Hakeem was a better player than David, especially for in the postseason, but that series tends to be overblown. If I recall their regular season numbers roll out slightly in David's favor. Hakeem just went nuts for that whole playoffs and nobody could stop him, even a GOAT defender like David.

[ambchang]

I was 4 1/2 when that series happened, so everything I know is from youtube/reading about it. From what I saw it looked like David couldn't guard Hakeem (Hakeem gave David the Ibaka treatment and just pump-faked him to death), but we never really got to see much of David going right at Hakeem on the other end. The Rockets clearly had the more talented team on paper and the fact that those Spurs were a top seed is a testament to David's greatness.

I also find it funny that nobody seems to remember Hakeem's 10+ years of playoff failures, but David gets the "choker" label. Strange...

IMO Hakeem was a better player than David, especially for in the postseason, but that series tends to be overblown. If I recall their regular season numbers roll out slightly in David's favor. Hakeem just went nuts for that whole playoffs and nobody could stop him, even a GOAT defender like David.

Hakeem has always been a dominant individual player, and Robinson is just easier to guard in the postseason because he had Avery Johnson as his point guard, a guy who made ONE SINGLE THREE POINTER in his entire playoff career, and a guy known as Vinny Del Negro as his SG. The opposition just collapsed on Robinson during every single post season run, and it works, because they know his guards can't shoot at all. The guys who can shoot are slower than dirt (Chuck Person, Dale Ellis) when they were playing for the Spurs, not to mention that the opposition didn't have to leave them at all because they can double off of Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro all damn game. Elliott was really the only guy who can be semi-reliable in the post season, and even he choked two FTs in Game 1.

Robinson would be great in today's NBA.

[Killakobe81]

Hakeem has always been a dominant individual player, and Robinson is just easier to guard in the postseason because he had Avery Johnson as his point guard, a guy who made ONE SINGLE THREE POINTER in his entire playoff career, and a guy known as Vinny Del Negro as his SG. The opposition just collapsed on Robinson during every single post season run, and it works, because they know his guards can't shoot at all. The guys who can shoot are slower than dirt (Chuck Person, Dale Ellis) when they were playing for the Spurs, not to mention that the opposition didn't have to leave them at all because they can double off of Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro all damn game. Elliott was really the only guy who can be semi-reliable in the post season, and even he choked two FTs in Game 1.

Robinson would be great in today's NBA.

those guards were bad ... but I think people overestimate and underestimate things to fit their narrative. Not picking on you Amb we are all guilty of this, we are human.

I do agree that David would be the love child poster-boy for anlytic nerds he was Lebron before James without the vision, tbh. Athletic freak chiseled frame even some of the same mental foibles. I give Lebron the edge of course. But David would excell in this NBA due to rule changes and the dearth of big men. He woul be miles better than a healthy Dwight ...

[Budkin]

Damn that would be fun to watch.

[TDfan2007]

Hakeem has always been a dominant individual player, and Robinson is just easier to guard in the postseason because he had Avery Johnson as his point guard, a guy who made ONE SINGLE THREE POINTER in his entire playoff career, and a guy known as Vinny Del Negro as his SG. The opposition just collapsed on Robinson during every single post season run, and it works, because they know his guards can't shoot at all. The guys who can shoot are slower than dirt (Chuck Person, Dale Ellis) when they were playing for the Spurs, not to mention that the opposition didn't have to leave them at all because they can double off of Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro all damn game. Elliott was really the only guy who can be semi-reliable in the post season, and even he choked two FTs in Game 1.

Robinson would be great in today's NBA.

I don't think it's that simple. I think David's style of play had something to do with it too. It's always harder to have playoff success with a jump shooting big, as apposed to a low post big who can draw the defense in further and give his shooters more room. Timmy had a similar team of slow-footed shooters and a PG with no range (rookie/soph Tony), and he gave the 3-peat Lakers everything they could handle, outplaying Shaq in the process.

IIRC, the Spurs didn't have a competent SG in the Robinson/Duncan years until Derek Anderson in 2001, but he ended up getting injured in the playoffs then signing with Portland...

[TDfan2007]

Another note on that 95 series: it definitely didn't help David that he played alongside a psycho version of Rodman, who you literally didn't have to defend outside of 5 feet, and who constantly left Horry open for 3 (Horry hit 6 3s in game 6 IIRC).

[Robz4000]

Tough call. Dream was an absolute beast at his peak, but Duncan was no slouch either. I think it'd be pretty even, maybe give a slight edge to Dream because Duncan's peak was limited by his knee.

[ambchang]

I don't think it's that simple. I think David's style of play had something to do with it too. It's always harder to have playoff success with a jump shooting big, as apposed to a low post big who can draw the defense in further and give his shooters more room. Timmy had a similar team of slow-footed shooters and a PG with no range (rookie/soph Tony), and he gave the 3-peat Lakers everything they could handle, outplaying Shaq in the process.

IIRC, the Spurs didn't have a competent SG in the Robinson/Duncan years until Derek Anderson in 2001, but he ended up getting injured in the playoffs then signing with Portland...

Every year the Spurs rang they had shooters.
03 Jackson and Kerr were shooting lights out in certain games. Obviously duncan was a huge part of it.

And robinson wawa driving big. He led the league in dunks multiple years before shaq showed up.

[JamStone]

Hakeem won't be able to dominate like he did in today's game.

He was swarmed to death in the 96 sonics, a team that employed a semi zone.

A full blown zone, which was illegal back in the day but legal now, will limit Hakeem. This also explains why we don't have domjnant bigs anymore. The inside is just too crowded for an inside dominated offense, tipping the advantage to the defense.

This is a bad take, imo. A zone can be effective against anyone if that one player doesn't have good enough teammates around him. The effectiveness of a zone depends greatly on the balance of the opposing team's offense. Teams could double Shaq, plus shade two other defenders on him, but if Shaq has another good offensive teammate like Kobe plus three point shooters, the zone breaks down. Same thing can be said of a guy like LeBron. Put LeBron on a shit team and he gets doubled and tripled with the defensive bigs sunk in the paint all the time, he'll struggle and his team won't have much success. Surround him with another guy who can create like Wade when it essentially becomes 4-on-3 and guys who can hit open jumpers, it's a different story. It compromises the defense and how much the off ball defenders can help and collapse. It opens up holes in the defense. There's not one individual player in the history of the NBA who can destroy a zone if he doesn't have good enough teammates. Not Hakeem, not Duncan, not Shaq, not LeBron, not Mike, not Magic or Bird, not Wilt. In that vein, it's not that Hakeem couldn't dominate in today's game because more team's implement the zone. It depends how good his (or any player's) teammates are to give him more true one-on-one iso situations.

And regardless, you can't really use the 96 Sonics as a great example because of one horrible game by Hakeem. Yes, the Sonics swept the Rockets that post season. And yes, Hakeem struggled in game 1 and was not efficient in game 2. But after that game 1, he still averaged 22 points on over 50% shooting. If that's struggling, the standard to which he is held is crazy. Look at the following 1997 playoffs, same Seattle team assuming they were still using zone on Hakeem. Hakeem again averaged about 22 points on over 50% shooting, only this time the Rockets won the series. If you're going to contend 1 or 2 bad playoff games by Hakeem suggests he would struggle in today's game, I think it's more than reaching. He adjusted as that 1996 series went along. The Rockets just lost. He had no issue with that "semi zone" in 1997 against the Sonics. It's a real reach.

And others in this thread have also talked about Duncan not biting on Hakeem's pump fakes. But Hakeem wasn't only the "dream shake." He wasn't a one trick pony on offense. He could power step. He had a fade-away. He had a baby hook. He also had a regular midrange jumper. In fact, perhaps other than Karl Malone and before Dirk came along, Hakeem had one of the best midrange jumpers of any big in the league. He wasn't just the dream shake. That wasn't his only weapon.

For a couple of years in those mid 1990s in his prime, Hakeem was the greatest and most complete big man to ever play the game. Ever.

[benefactor]

^the goods

[cantthinkofanything]

For a couple of years in those mid 1990s in his prime, Hakeem was the greatest and most complete big man to ever play the game. Ever.

yeah. as much as I'd like to pick TD, I don't think it's even close. Hakeem could do everything that Tim did and then some. With more physicality. I don't know what the stats say but anyone who actually watched Hakeem play would also have to pick him if they're being objective.

[ambchang]

This is a bad take, imo. A zone can be effective against anyone if that one player doesn't have good enough teammates around him. The effectiveness of a zone depends greatly on the balance of the opposing team's offense. Teams could double Shaq, plus shade two other defenders on him, but if Shaq has another good offensive teammate like Kobe plus three point shooters, the zone breaks down. Same thing can be said of a guy like LeBron. Put LeBron on a shit team and he gets doubled and tripled with the defensive bigs sunk in the paint all the time, he'll struggle and his team won't have much success. Surround him with another guy who can create like Wade when it essentially becomes 4-on-3 and guys who can hit open jumpers, it's a different story. It compromises the defense and how much the off ball defenders can help and collapse. It opens up holes in the defense. There's not one individual player in the history of the NBA who can destroy a zone if he doesn't have good enough teammates. Not Hakeem, not Duncan, not Shaq, not LeBron, not Mike, not Magic or Bird, not Wilt. In that vein, it's not that Hakeem couldn't dominate in today's game because more team's implement the zone. It depends how good his (or any player's) teammates are to give him more true one-on-one iso situations.

And regardless, you can't really use the 96 Sonics as a great example because of one horrible game by Hakeem. Yes, the Sonics swept the Rockets that post season. And yes, Hakeem struggled in game 1 and was not efficient in game 2. But after that game 1, he still averaged 22 points on over 50% shooting. If that's struggling, the standard to which he is held is crazy. Look at the following 1997 playoffs, same Seattle team assuming they were still using zone on Hakeem. Hakeem again averaged about 22 points on over 50% shooting, only this time the Rockets won the series. If you're going to contend 1 or 2 bad playoff games by Hakeem suggests he would struggle in today's game, I think it's more than reaching. He adjusted as that 1996 series went along. The Rockets just lost. He had no issue with that "semi zone" in 1997 against the Sonics. It's a real reach.

And others in this thread have also talked about Duncan not biting on Hakeem's pump fakes. But Hakeem wasn't only the "dream shake." He wasn't a one trick pony on offense. He could power step. He had a fade-away. He had a baby hook. He also had a regular midrange jumper. In fact, perhaps other than Karl Malone and before Dirk came along, Hakeem had one of the best midrange jumpers of any big in the league. He wasn't just the dream shake. That wasn't his only weapon.

For a couple of years in those mid 1990s in his prime, Hakeem was the greatest and most complete big man to ever play the game. Ever.

Having great teammates will help you win? Great take! And guess what? That's the entire point of my post! Robinson struggles mightily in the playoffs when he had Avery Johnson as his PG. Look at how he did when he had Rod Strickland as his point.

And no, Hakeem didn't just have one bad game vs. the Sonics, he had an entire subpar series in a clean four game sweep. 3-6 for 9 points in Game 1, 8-21 for 17 points in Game 2, 7-12 for 24 points in Game 3 and 11-19 for 26 points in Game 4. He only had one average game, one slightly below average game, one bad game, and one horrible game in the series.

The next season, he average 21.7 ppg vs. the Sonics, which is lower than both his season and playoff averages. And yes, the point of the zone is to force the ball out of his hands, and it took seven games + a newly added Charles Barkley to win. To note, Barkley relieved a lot of pressure on Hakeem. Barkley definitely stopped the ball, and had to force the ball out of Hakeem at times, but he was another point of attack for the Rockets.

[wekko368]

And no, Hakeem didn't just have one bad game vs. the Sonics, he had an entire subpar series in a clean four game sweep. 3-6 for 9 points in Game 1, 8-21 for 17 points in Game 2, 7-12 for 24 points in Game 3 and 11-19 for 26 points in Game 4. He only had one average game, one slightly below average game, one bad game, and one horrible game in the series.


Game 3: 24 pts (7-12 shooting; 10-11 ft), 13 rbs, 9 ast, 2 stl, 3 blk, 7 turnovers.
Game 4: 26 pts (11-19 shooting, 4-8 ft), 6 rbs, 3 ast, 1 st, 4 turnovers.

"Average" and "slightly below average" game?

:lol:lol:lol

[ambchang]

Game 3: 24 pts (7-12 shooting; 10-11 ft), 13 rbs, 9 ast, 2 stl, 3 blk, 7 turnovers.
Game 4: 26 pts (11-19 shooting, 4-8 ft), 6 rbs, 3 ast, 1 st, 4 turnovers.

"Average" and "slightly below average" game?

:lol:lol:lol

Hakeem averaged 26.9 points on 20.8 shots, 11 rebs, 3.6 assists, 1.6 stls, 2.9 blks, and 3.4 TOVs a game that season, so yes, they were average and slightly below average.

[wekko368]

Hakeem averaged 26.9 points on 20.8 shots, 11 rebs, 3.6 assists, 1.6 stls, 2.9 blks, and 3.4 TOVs a game that season, so yes, they were average and slightly below average.

Interesting take. By that logic, in your opinion, would it be fair to say that all of Tim Duncan's games in the 2005 finals were either "average", "slightly below average", or "bad"? Keep in mind that during the regular season, he averaged 33.4 mpg, and in the finals, he averaged 40.7 so you'll have to adjust your expectations.

[sook]

And no, Hakeem didn't just have one bad game vs. the Sonics, he had an entire subpar series in a clean four game sweep. 3-6 for 9 points in Game 1, 8-21 for 17 points in Game 2, 7-12 for 24 points in Game 3 and 11-19 for 26 points in Game 4. He only had one average game, one slightly below average game, one bad game, and one horrible game in the series.



http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view6/4651935/westbrook-face-o.gif

[Horse]

yeah. as much as I'd like to pick TD, I don't think it's even close. Hakeem could do everything that Tim did and then some. With more physicality. I don't know what the stats say but anyone who actually watched Hakeem play would also have to pick him if they're being objective.

You people forget hakeem only had two really dominant yrs, outside of that David dominated him so Timmy would certainy hold his own.

[cantthinkofanything]

You people forget hakeem only had two really dominant yrs, outside of that David dominated him so Timmy would certainy hold his own.

I didn't say he wouldn't hold his own. But I think it's clear that prime Hakeem > prime Duncan.

[Arcadian]

Tough call. Dream was an absolute beast at his peak, but Duncan was no slouch either. I think it'd be pretty even, maybe give a slight edge to Dream because Duncan's peak was limited by his knee.

Hakeem's peak was limited by age. He was already past his physical peak in the back-to-back title runs, whereas Tim won his back-to-back MVPs in his mid 20s. I'll take 25-yo Duncan over 33-yo Hakeem, easily.


yeah. as much as I'd like to pick TD, I don't think it's even close. Hakeem could do everything that Tim did and then some. With more physicality. I don't know what the stats say but anyone who actually watched Hakeem play would also have to pick him if they're being objective.

No, Duncan was a better passer and playmaker. Not just out of the post but on the break and after the rebound. He's the master of the full-court pass to start a break. He always wanted to be a point forward.

[cantthinkofanything]

Hakeem's peak was limited by age. He was already past his physical peak in the back-to-back title runs, whereas Tim won his back-to-back MVPs in his mid 20s. I'll take 25-yo Duncan over 33-yo Hakeem, easily.



No, Duncan was a better passer and playmaker. Not just out of the post but on the break and after the rebound. He's the master of the full-court pass to start a break. He always wanted to be a point forward.


Those are good points. Especially about the disconnect between HO's prime physical ability and prime bball playing. As to the second, we don't know if Olajuwon would have been the same kind of passer as TD if he'd been placed in that system. Olajuwon had point guard skills (for a big man) as well. I can't remember what it was...some kind of one on one competition. But Hakeem had great ball handling ability. Not that it translates into passing but just saying that a system goes a long way to defining the end result of a player. It's been a long time but I'm pretty sure I remember Olajuwon making some slick behind the back passes to cutters.

Plus, since TD has spent most of his career playing without a PG, many of the playmaking duties fell on his shoulders.

[wekko368]

Hakeem's peak was limited by age. He was already past his physical peak in the back-to-back title runs, whereas Tim won his back-to-back MVPs in his mid 20s. I'll take 25-yo Duncan over 33-yo Hakeem, easily.

That's an incredibly disingenuous statement. Why are you specifying a 33 year old Olajuwon? That was the 1996-97 season. When people talk about Olajuwon's absolute peak, they're talking about the 93-94 and 94-95 seasons where he was 30 and 31 years old.

Also, it's incorrect to base a player's athleticism entirely on his age. Even though he was past his physical peak, a 30 year old Olajuwon was still physically superior to a 25 year old Duncan. Mario Elie played with both a 23 year-old Duncan as well as peak Olajuwon, and regarding Duncan/Olajuwon, here's what he said:


I just think that 'Dream' was more athletic, had a better game on the box and was a better shot blocker. Tim is a great defender. He gets his arms up and he blocks a couple shots, but 'Dream' was an amazing shot blocker. Like you said, he had great hands. He was always hitting the ball away from guys.

[ambchang]

Interesting take. By that logic, in your opinion, would it be fair to say that all of Tim Duncan's games in the 2005 finals were either "average", "slightly below average", or "bad"? Keep in mind that during the regular season, he averaged 33.4 mpg, and in the finals, he averaged 40.7 so you'll have to adjust your expectations.

He averaged 20.3 and 11.1 in the regular season, but 20.9 and 14.1 in the series, with FG% below his norm. Most of his games were slightly below average to slightly above average in that series, with one bad game and one good game (coincidentally the choke job in Game 5 that was saved by Horry).

Yeah, he didn't go nuclear on the best defensive front court in the league at that time (possibly all time), but still played average ball, delivering the championships because *gasp* he had teammates who could nail open jumpers, just like Hakeem had during his championship run. What a freaking coincidence eh?

Anyways, no, Duncan didn't perform above average in all his series, because if he did, he would have better averages. It's just how math works, and how it was taught when I was grade 4 learning averages.

[JamStone]

Having great teammates will help you win? Great take! And guess what? That's the entire point of my post! Robinson struggles mightily in the playoffs when he had Avery Johnson as his PG. Look at how he did when he had Rod Strickland as his point.

No it wasn't.


Hakeem won't be able to dominate like he did in today's game.

He was swarmed to death in the 96 sonics, a team that employed a semi zone.

A full blown zone, which was illegal back in the day but legal now, will limit Hakeem. This also explains why we don't have domjnant bigs anymore. The inside is just too crowded for an inside dominated offense, tipping the advantage to the defense.

Your post spoke nothing, suggested nothing about needing great teammates to help you win. That wasn't the point of your post, let alone the ENTIRE point of your post. Your point was that Hakeem wouldn't be able to dominate the way he did in an era where teams used more zone. That's the reason why I responded in the first place. To what level Hakeem would have or could have dominated offensively in today's NBA would depend greatly on how good the rest of his teammates were, whether having another dominant scorer or having a good number of outside shooters. Teams started using zones or defensive schemes like zones to try to slow down Shaq. He still put up dominant numbers because he had another great scorer and the Lakers surrounded him and Kobe with shooters. Same goes with the Spurs approach to build around Duncan as well, particularly adding more shooters.

This was not the entire point of your post. Read it again.



And no, Hakeem didn't just have one bad game vs. the Sonics, he had an entire subpar series in a clean four game sweep. 3-6 for 9 points in Game 1, 8-21 for 17 points in Game 2, 7-12 for 24 points in Game 3 and 11-19 for 26 points in Game 4. He only had one average game, one slightly below average game, one bad game, and one horrible game in the series.

If a player scores 24-26 points on 58% shooting from the field, it's not average, let alone below average. That's a good scoring game, arguably great. You can't compare it to his regular season averages because his regular season averages are NOT "average." His regular season averages were elite. If Jordan averaged 33 points on 50% during the regular season and he scores 28 points on 11-for-17 shooting from the field in a playoff game, you're not going to say that was a below average game for Jordan. Same with every other player. 20+ points on over 50% from the field is never an average performance. That was a ridiculous attempt to support your "average," "below average" comments. Ridiculous.



The next season, he average 21.7 ppg vs. the Sonics, which is lower than both his season and playoff averages. And yes, the point of the zone is to force the ball out of his hands, and it took seven games + a newly added Charles Barkley to win. To note, Barkley relieved a lot of pressure on Hakeem. Barkley definitely stopped the ball, and had to force the ball out of Hakeem at times, but he was another point of attack for the Rockets.

Hakeem's 1996-97 Regular season: 23.2 PPG, 9.2 RPG, 51.0% FG
Hakeem's 1997 Seattle series: 21.7 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 57.8% FG

Why would averaging a point and a half fewer points mean he was performing below average in that 1997 Seattle series? Are you being serious? Really serious? Hakeem put up a couple 30 point games in that series. And the two low scoring outputs he had, he still shot over 50% from the field, and he took fewer shots because his teammates went berzerk from three point range in those games, both wins by the way. Your logic is beyond absurd on this topic. Are you really going to try to suggest that if a player doesn't hit his scoring average from the regular season, no matter what else he does on the court, regardless of his field goal efficiency, it's a below average performance? Is that really what you want to argue?

Come on, man.

[JamStone]

You people forget hakeem only had two really dominant yrs, outside of that David dominated him so Timmy would certainy hold his own.

Simply not true. Go back to their yearly head-to-heads from 1989 through to 1996. David didn't dominate Hakeem. The Spurs dominated the Rockets. But individually, David did not dominate Hakeem. Hakeem generally scored more. David generally was more efficient from the field. Both rebounded well. In fact, year by year, through that 7 year stretch, they were basically even statistically, with a couple seasons where Hakeem really outscored David. But David did not dominate Hakeem outside those two years. That's a complete fallacy.

[ambchang]

No it wasn't.

Your post spoke nothing, suggested nothing about needing great teammates to help you win. That wasn't the point of your post, let alone the ENTIRE point of your post. Your point was that Hakeem wouldn't be able to dominate the way he did in an era where teams used more zone. That's the reason why I responded in the first place. To what level Hakeem would have or could have dominated offensively in today's NBA would depend greatly on how good the rest of his teammates were, whether having another dominant scorer or having a good number of outside shooters. Teams started using zones or defensive schemes like zones to try to slow down Shaq. He still put up dominant numbers because he had another great scorer and the Lakers surrounded him and Kobe with shooters. Same goes with the Spurs approach to build around Duncan as well, particularly adding more shooters.

This was not the entire point of your post. Read it again.

Zones neutralize the effectiveness of big men and forces them to utilize their teammates to win. This is how the NBA is played today, and explains why there aren't any dominant classic bigs in the game like they did in the 90s anymore, which means Hakeem would not be able to put those numbers up that he did in the mid 90s.

So yes, it was the entire point of my post, if a little cryptic.

And no, it's not to lessen the accomplishments of Hakeem. Gee you guys are sensitive.


If a player scores 24-26 points on 58% shooting from the field, it's not average, let alone below average. That's a good scoring game, arguably great. You can't compare it to his regular season averages because his regular season averages are NOT "average." His regular season averages were elite. If Jordan averaged 33 points on 50% during the regular season and he scores 28 points on 11-for-17 shooting from the field in a playoff game, you're not going to say that was a below average game for Jordan. Same with every other player. 20+ points on over 50% from the field is never an average performance. That was a ridiculous attempt to support your "average," "below average" comments. Ridiculous.

Average means his average, not the average of the league, because, newsflash, Hakeem is one of the best big in league history and even his horrible games are above average for other big men.

Robinson put up 22 and whatever in the 95 series, but I am not calling that an all-star series. He had a subpar series, he had a massively subpar series, just like Hakeem had in the 96 series vs. the Sonics.


Hakeem's 1996-97 Regular season: 23.2 PPG, 9.2 RPG, 51.0% FG
Hakeem's 1997 Seattle series: 21.7 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 57.8% FG

Why would averaging a point and a half fewer points mean he was performing below average in that 1997 Seattle series? Are you being serious? Really serious? Hakeem put up a couple 30 point games in that series. And the two low scoring outputs he had, he still shot over 50% from the field, and he took fewer shots because his teammates went berzerk from three point range in those games, both wins by the way. Your logic is beyond absurd on this topic. Are you really going to try to suggest that if a player doesn't hit his scoring average from the regular season, no matter what else he does on the court, regardless of his field goal efficiency, it's a below average performance? Is that really what you want to argue?

Come on, man.

Hey, thanks for ignoring the point about having Barkley and how it opened up the game and make it tougher to zone in on Hakeem.

[wekko368]

He averaged 20.3 and 11.1 in the regular season, but 20.9 and 14.1 in the series, with FG% below his norm. Most of his games were slightly below average to slightly above average in that series, with one bad game and one good game (coincidentally the choke job in Game 5 that was saved by Horry).

...

Anyways, no, Duncan didn't perform above average in all his series, because if he did, he would have better averages. It's just how math works, and how it was taught when I was grade 4 learning averages.

Why are you ignoring the number of minutes played? There's a reason I specifically brought it up.

In the regular season, Duncan averaged 20.3 ppg/11.1 rpg in 33.4 mpg.

In the finals, he averaged 20.9 ppg and 14.1 rpg in 40.7 minutes.

You can't just ignore his increased usage. This isn't 4th grade math.

In order to properly apply your logic, you'd have adjust his expected production based on his increased usage and compare it to his regular season stats. And if you do that, then you'd be forced to admit that all of his games were either "average", "slightly below average", or "bad". And if your logic leads you to that conclusion, then there's clearly a flaw in your logic.

[sook]

No it wasn't.



Your post spoke nothing, suggested nothing about needing great teammates to help you win. That wasn't the point of your post, let alone the ENTIRE point of your post. Your point was that Hakeem wouldn't be able to dominate the way he did in an era where teams used more zone. That's the reason why I responded in the first place. To what level Hakeem would have or could have dominated offensively in today's NBA would depend greatly on how good the rest of his teammates were, whether having another dominant scorer or having a good number of outside shooters. Teams started using zones or defensive schemes like zones to try to slow down Shaq. He still put up dominant numbers because he had another great scorer and the Lakers surrounded him and Kobe with shooters. Same goes with the Spurs approach to build around Duncan as well, particularly adding more shooters.

This was not the entire point of your post. Read it again.




If a player scores 24-26 points on 58% shooting from the field, it's not average, let alone below average. That's a good scoring game, arguably great. You can't compare it to his regular season averages because his regular season averages are NOT "average." His regular season averages were elite. If Jordan averaged 33 points on 50% during the regular season and he scores 28 points on 11-for-17 shooting from the field in a playoff game, you're not going to say that was a below average game for Jordan. Same with every other player. 20+ points on over 50% from the field is never an average performance. That was a ridiculous attempt to support your "average," "below average" comments. Ridiculous.




Hakeem's 1996-97 Regular season: 23.2 PPG, 9.2 RPG, 51.0% FG
Hakeem's 1997 Seattle series: 21.7 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 57.8% FG

Why would averaging a point and a half fewer points mean he was performing below average in that 1997 Seattle series? Are you being serious? Really serious? Hakeem put up a couple 30 point games in that series. And the two low scoring outputs he had, he still shot over 50% from the field, and he took fewer shots because his teammates went berzerk from three point range in those games, both wins by the way. Your logic is beyond absurd on this topic. Are you really going to try to suggest that if a player doesn't hit his scoring average from the regular season, no matter what else he does on the court, regardless of his field goal efficiency, it's a below average performance? Is that really what you want to argue?

Come on, man.

Damn, when did 08-10' JamStone come back? Couldn't agree more, Amb's poiint is absurd, which is why taking the time out to reply to it deserves a lot of props.

[ambchang]

Why are you ignoring the number of minutes played? There's a reason I specifically brought it up.

In the regular season, Duncan averaged 20.3 ppg/11.1 rpg in 33.4 mpg.

In the finals, he averaged 20.9 ppg and 14.1 rpg in 40.7 minutes.

You can't just ignore his increased usage. This isn't 4th grade math.

In order to properly apply your logic, you'd have adjust his expected production based on his increased usage and compare it to his regular season stats. And if you do that, then you'd be forced to admit that all of his games were either "average", "slightly below average", or "bad". And if your logic leads you to that conclusion, then there's clearly a flaw in your logic.

Because:
a) Using that logic, Duncan's expected production would be 24.7/13.5, and doesn't change the rest of my post.
b) I explicitly said he only had an average series, including a bad game, a couple of average games, and one good game in the paragraph you deleted. Point still stands
c) No, I don't have to say Duncan have above average series every series, because like I said, that would give Duncan higher averages
d) I didn't do that for Hakeem why would I do that for Duncan? But since you insisted, Hakeem averaged 26.9/10.9 in 38.8 minutes, he played 42.75 minutes in the sonics series, he should have averaged somewhere around 29.6/12 a game, but he only 18.3/9.8 in that series. I suppose the zone limited him more than I thought. Thanks for the insight.

[ambchang]

Damn, when did 08-10' JamStone come back? Couldn't agree more, Amb's poiint is absurd, which is why taking the time out to reply to it deserves a lot of props.

08-10 Jamstone likes to argue that a person can maintain an average by exceeding the average in every single series? That's some higher math I haven't learned.

Please point the way.

[ambchang]

You know what, sook, weebo, and JamStone, you guys win.

Hakeem had way above average series in every single series he played in. In fact, every single game he played in his career was above his career average.

Scratch that, he did one better, every single game he played against was better than his career highs in every single category.

You thought his career highs were 52 points, 25 rebounds, 12 assists, 8 steals, and 12 blocks? No, he exceeded those numbers in every single game.

And since he exceeded those numbers EVERY. SINGLE. GAME, it became his new average.

And since now this is his average, he exceeded that once again and got better numbers every single game than those numbers, and then he got a higher average, and .......

It goes on and on and on, until Hakeem was so ridiculously good, he shattered the basics of math.

You thought he was 6'10"? No, he's taller than that, because 6'10" was his average adult height. He grew taller because Hakeem cannot be confined by averages.

You thought his nickname was "The Dream"? No, that's too average a nickname, he's above that, and he's known as someone that words cannot describe him. Simply uttering his nickname will cause your tongues to burst in flames and your below average children to be cursed forever.

Happy?

[wekko368]

Because:
a) Using that logic, Duncan's expected production would be 24.7/13.5, and doesn't change the rest of my post.
b) I explicitly said he only had an average series, including a bad game, a couple of average games, and one good game in the paragraph you deleted. Point still stands
No, your point fails. You said Game 5 was a "good" game. However, he played 48 minutes that game. Based on his season averages, if he were to have an "average" game for that many minutes, he would've needed to score 29 pts, grab 16 rebounds, get 4 assists, and block 4 shots. He ended up with 26 pts (11-24 shooting; 4-11 fts), 19 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 blocks. By your logic, that's arguably a "slightly below average" game.

My point is that your logic is full of holes.

[Cloud786]

Hakeem has always been a dominant individual player, and Robinson is just easier to guard in the postseason because he had Avery Johnson as his point guard, a guy who made ONE SINGLE THREE POINTER in his entire playoff career, and a guy known as Vinny Del Negro as his SG. The opposition just collapsed on Robinson during every single post season run, and it works, because they know his guards can't shoot at all. The guys who can shoot are slower than dirt (Chuck Person, Dale Ellis) when they were playing for the Spurs, not to mention that the opposition didn't have to leave them at all because they can double off of Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro all damn game. Elliott was really the only guy who can be semi-reliable in the post season, and even he choked two FTs in Game 1.

Robinson would be great in today's NBA.

Not saying that Avery could spread the floor, but he showed up for the most part in that series. He averaged 16.2 ppg on 54% shooting and 7.5 asts. Elliott averaged 17 and 5 on 46% shooting so Robinson did have some help during that series.

[sook]

08-10 Jamstone likes to argue that a person can maintain an average by exceeding the average in every single series? That's some higher math I haven't learned.

Please point the way.
It goes back to what you define as average, below average, etc.., and if we're going by what every "sane" individual believes it to be, what you said was absolutely absurd . To make it worse, you tried to justify it.

Seriously though, wtf man? :lol

I remember you making some very intelligent posts in the past, one of the few people I take the time out to properly read. That was like koolaid man taking over your computer and having the runs all over the keyboard. I was actually about to type everything out, but it would basically be re-iterating what Jam said.

Also, I think you may be misunderstanding his post on a fundamental level.

[ambchang]

No, your point fails. You said Game 5 was a "good" game. However, he played 48 minutes that game. Based on his season averages, if he were to have an "average" game for that many minutes, he would've needed to score 29 pts, grab 16 rebounds, get 4 assists, and block 4 shots. He ended up with 26 pts (11-24 shooting; 4-11 fts), 19 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 blocks. By your logic, that's arguably a "slightly below average" game.

My point is that your logic is full of holes.

Thanks for removing all of my other points. I stayed consistent with my methodology, and didn't take into account minutes originally. You want me to take them into account? Sure, but the overall point still stands that Duncan had an average series. That is the point.

And while I know you worship at the alter of Hakeem and everything associated with Hakeem is righteous and good, please don't start telling me what my point is, OK? I tend to know what point I was originally making, if you want to argue another point, feel free to do so, please don't force it upon me.

If you want to, then sure, Duncan had below average games in his entire career.

Hakeem will annihilate Duncan and eat his children if they meet head to head.

In fact, Duncan will fail so badly if his prime was in the 90s, he wouldn't even make it to the local YMCA league.

You happy now?

My logic isn't full of holes, my logic is that Hakeem had a subpar series vs. the Sonics because he put up below average numbers, and Duncan had an average series vs. the Pistons because he put up average numbers. If you want me to point out below average series for Duncan, I would. I am not blind to the fact that players have below average series because that's what players do, they perform above average sometimes, average sometimes and below average sometimes, even my favourite players do.

[ambchang]

Not saying that Avery could spread the floor, but he showed up for the most part in that series. He averaged 16.2 ppg on 54% shooting and 7.5 asts. Elliott averaged 17 and 5 on 46% shooting so Robinson did have some help during that series.

Because the Rockets was leaving Avery Johnson open throughout the entire series. Sure he had an above average series, but his production came at the expense of team spacing and ultimately, success.

[ambchang]

It goes back to what you define as average, below average, etc.., and if we're going by what every "sane" individual believes it to be, what you said was absolutely absurd . To make it worse, you tried to justify it.

Seriously though, wtf man? :lol

I remember you making some very intelligent posts in the past, one of the few people I take the time out to properly read. That was like koolaid man taking over your computer and having the runs all over the keyboard. I was actually about to type everything out, but it would basically be re-iterating what Jam said.

Also, I think you may be misunderstanding his post on a fundamental level.

I think you may be misunderstanding my post on a fundamental level.

My post said Hakeem would not put up the averages he put up if he played in today's game if he played in today's game because of zone defense, and the Sonics series is an indication of that. He put up below average statistics, ie. statistics he didn't put up in the 90s.

Then all these Hakeem fanbois flocks in and try to claim that Hakeem is above averages, and it just boggles my mind.

What is wrong with saying Hakeem had below average games. What average do you think I would be referring to when I am talking about Hakeem not averaging the same numbers as he would in today's game when compared to his prime in the 90s? Jim McIlvaine's?

[JamStone]

No sense in going point by point since it appears you're prepared to die on a hill of a terrible argument. I'll just point out why it's terrible.

In your initial posts to me, you focused primarily on Hakeem's scoring in that 1996 Seattle series to determine what was an "average," "below average," etc. Subsequently, you've tried to amend the argument by suggesting "average to him." It still doesn't make sense. A player doesn't have to hit his regular season scoring average to have an "average" performance in a game. But that's what you're suggesting. A player can be short of his regular season scoring average and still have a good or great game.

To help illustrate this, let's use this example:

Player X averages 25 points in the regular season.

In a playoff game, that player goes 10-for-10 from the field, 3-for-3 from the free throw line for 23 points.

A perfect, pristine shooting game. Your logic dictates that this particular playoff scoring performance is "slightly below average" because it falls 2 points short of his regular season average. That is exactly what your argument has been. And it sounds ridiculous. The only way he could have an "average" scoring performance is to hit that regular season average of 25 points.

It's a terrible argument.

[ambchang]

No sense in going point by point since it appears you're prepared to die on a hill of a terrible argument. I'll just point out why it's terrible.

In your initial posts to me, you focused primarily on Hakeem's scoring in that 1996 Seattle series to determine what was an "average," "below average," etc. Subsequently, you've tried to amend the argument by suggesting "average to him." It still doesn't make sense. A player doesn't have to hit his regular season scoring average to have an "average" performance in a game. But that's what you're suggesting. A player can be short of his regular season scoring average and still have a good or great game.

To help illustrate this, let's use this example:

Player X averages 25 points in the regular season.

In a playoff game, that player goes 10-for-10 from the field, 3-for-3 from the free throw line for 23 points.

A perfect, pristine shooting game. Your logic dictates that this particular playoff scoring performance is "slightly below average" because it falls 2 points short of his regular season average. That is exactly what your argument has been. And it sounds ridiculous. The only way he could have an "average" scoring performance is to hit that regular season average of 25 points.

It's a terrible argument.

Of course it was average to him, I said he would not put up the stats in today's game because of the zone, and the 96 Sonics series was evidence.

No where did I ever say anywhere close to Hakeem being a below average player, you and a few Rockets fans was over zealous in protecting Hakeem and jumped to conclusions without clarifying my statements.

And did Hakeem go 10-10 and 3-3 from the field?

Oh wait, he average 18/10 on 48% shooting, so he definitely played below average in that series.

The next year he went 21.7 and 12 vs. the Sonics, being denied the ball the series because of the Sonics zone, not to mention it was tougher for the SOnics to zone because they had to attend to Barkley now.

Please don't come up with hypotheticals when we are talking about actual numbers, OK?

As much as you want to, Hakeem didn't ride in on a unicorn that game and looked like Aragon that series. He didn't go invisible after donning a ring and fought gargoyles on his way to victory.

[wekko368]

Of course it was average to him, I said he would not put up the stats in today's game because of the zone, and the 96 Sonics series was evidence.

That's not persuasive evidence. You have to consider how a team is built. In 1996, do you know who had the 2nd highest rebounding average on the Rockets' roster? Drexler at 7.2 rpg. The starting PF, Chucky Brown, averaged 5.4 rpg. In 1997, the Rockets added Charles Barkley and Kevin Willis and beat the Sonics in the playoffs.

If Olajuwon were playing today, I think his stats would be significantly better. If Yao Ming could average 20ppg/10rpg, there's no telling what Olajuwon would do, especially since he'd be facing weaker competition.

[ambchang]

That's not persuasive evidence. You have to consider how a team is built. In 1996, do you know who had the 2nd highest rebounding average on the Rockets' roster? Drexler at 7.2 rpg. The starting PF, Chucky Brown, averaged 5.4 rpg. In 1997, the Rockets added Charles Barkley and Kevin Willis and beat the Sonics in the playoffs.

If Olajuwon were playing today, I think his stats would be significantly better. If Yao Ming could average 20ppg/10rpg, there's no telling what Olajuwon would do, especially since he'd be facing weaker competition.

And do you know who the second leading rebounder on that 1995 squad was? That year where Hakeem destroyed the league to championship?

And do you know what Hakeem averaged with Barkley and Willis next to him? Significantly less.

Thanks for proving my point and contradicting your own.

Oh, and if not for injuries, Yao could have been one of the great offensive centers in the league. But then he was so good on offense because it was so big, which led to his injuries (and slowness which affected his defense), so it's a catch 22.


EDIT: Of course it's not persuasive evidence. Hakeem defies the laws of mathematics, he NEVER had a below average series, EVER.

You know why Hakeem actually went to Toronto? Because Niagara falls was actually running low on water, so Hakeem went to Toronto and took a piss, and the falls are now grander than ever.

[wekko368]

And do you know who the second leading rebounder on that 1995 squad was? That year where Hakeem destroyed the league to championship?

Basketball is about matchups. The Rockets needed more size to beat Seattle. Also, in 1995, Olajuwon was at the top of his game, playing arguably the best basketball the league has ever seen. There was a sizable drop off from 1995 Olajuwon and 1997 Olajuwon.


And do you know what Hakeem averaged with Barkley and Willis next to him? Significantly less.

Thanks for proving my point and contradicting your own.

How exactly did that prove your point and disprove mine?


Oh, and if not for injuries, Yao could have been one of the great offensive centers in the league. But then he was so good on offense because it was so big, which led to his injuries (and slowness which affected his defense), so it's a catch 22.

I guess Yao wasn't a good example. Let's look at Dwight Howard. For a while, he was a consistent 20/10 guy, and his offensive repertoire is abysmal. If he could average 20/10, why is it so hard to believe that Olajuwon would put up significantly better stats? In your response, be sure to factor in their respective skill-sets.

[LkrFan]

I mean, I watched Amare take wet shits on Duncan. Plenty of times. And y'all farmers think he can check prime Dream? :lmao

[Jenks]

Not saying that Avery could spread the floor, but he showed up for the most part in that series. He averaged 16.2 ppg on 54% shooting and 7.5 asts. Elliott averaged 17 and 5 on 46% shooting so Robinson did have some help during that series.
Elliott single handedly choked away game 1 and in retrospect the series.
That's like saying Ewing got help from Starks the previous year.

[TDfan2007]

I mean, I watched Amare take wet shits on Duncan. Plenty of times. And y'all farmers think he can check prime Dream? :lmao

Most of Amare's points in that series came off the pnr. Also, in that 05 series Timmy was hobbled with 2 bad ankles. His mobility was limited, which makes guarding a guy like Amare a nightmare.

Furthermore, Amare at his peak was far more explosive than Hakeem, but didn't have half of Hakeem's post moves/footwork. Apples to oranges comparison.

[dbreiden83080]

His 94/95 rockets VS any of Duncan's title squads.

Spurs win..

[dbreiden83080]

I mean, I watched Amare take wet shits on Duncan. Plenty of times. And y'all farmers think he can check prime Dream? :lmao

Nobody could check Hakeem in his prime and he is not checking 2003 Timmy either.. Who's team would win is more relevant? Not many would pick Dreams teams over Timmy's..

[LkrFan]

Most of Amare's points in that series came off the pnr. Also, in that 05 series Timmy was hobbled with 2 bad ankles. His mobility was limited, which makes guarding a guy like Amare a nightmare.

Furthermore, Amare at his peak was far more explosive than Hakeem, but didn't have half of Hakeem's post moves/footwork. Apples to oranges comparison.
Have you ever seen prime Dream? Ask the Admiral about that mufucka! Amare ain't got shit on him. Like I said, he'd DESTROY Duncan. Not even trolling son.

[LkrFan]

Nobody could check Hakeem in his prime and he is not checking 2003 Timmy either.. Who's team would win is more relevant? Not many would pick Dreams teams over Timmy's..

Dream is probably the greatest defensive center of all time. Surely he could check Duncan - without a double team either. He was a monster. Real talk.

[LkrFan]

Hey djohn2oo8 you see all this bullshit these farmers posting about Dream? Unfucking believable. Here's prime Dream's hitlist:

Ewing (HOF)
Shaq (HOF)
Daughtery (career cut short - would make HOF)
Parish (HOF)
Robins:loln (HOF)
Mailman (HOF)
Barkley (HOF)

I'm sure I'm missing a few more HOFers he had the pleasure of shitting on. :lol Simply put, if Magic had Dream, he's sitting on 9+ rangs. These farmers are severely underrating your boy. SMH

[Cry Havoc]

No sense in going point by point since it appears you're prepared to die on a hill of a terrible argument. I'll just point out why it's terrible.

In your initial posts to me, you focused primarily on Hakeem's scoring in that 1996 Seattle series to determine what was an "average," "below average," etc. Subsequently, you've tried to amend the argument by suggesting "average to him." It still doesn't make sense. A player doesn't have to hit his regular season scoring average to have an "average" performance in a game. But that's what you're suggesting. A player can be short of his regular season scoring average and still have a good or great game.

To help illustrate this, let's use this example:

Player X averages 25 points in the regular season.

In a playoff game, that player goes 10-for-10 from the field, 3-for-3 from the free throw line for 23 points.

A perfect, pristine shooting game. Your logic dictates that this particular playoff scoring performance is "slightly below average" because it falls 2 points short of his regular season average. That is exactly what your argument has been. And it sounds ridiculous. The only way he could have an "average" scoring performance is to hit that regular season average of 25 points.

It's a terrible argument.

It's really not that terrible. Different sport, but I remember when teams were playing the Kurt Warner led Rams and would "hold" them to 38-42 points and consider that a good game. Now, by any other measure, that's a terrible defensive game, yet because the Rams routinely scored into the 50s it was considered a good performance, or at the very least, acceptable.

Shaq in his prime could have averaged 22 and 10 for a series which would be phenomenal by any modern big man standard, but teams would have been elated to hold him to that if it came on average or slightly below shooting. Obviously a 20-10 series by just about any metric is great, but when you can play against one of the best ever (arguably the best ever, as I think Hakeem is drastically underrated) and have him not completely decimate your team for at least one or two games, you walk away happy.

[TDfan2007]

I think that this thread has been massively derailed, so back to the actual topic...


Offense: Even

The two are just about even on this end. Any advantage Hakeem would have on the block (which would be minimal, since we're talking about 2 of the 3 best post players ever) would be neutralized by Timmy's slight advantage in the high post/faceup game. Both guys had it all and are probably 2 of the best one-on-one bigs in league history. In their primes both guys won championships in simplistic systems predicated on the fact that nobody could defend them in the low post/high post.

Defense: Advantage: Hakeem

This is the side of the ball that separates the two in terms of pure one on one IMO. Prime Timmy was one of the greatest team defenders in NBA history, and a fantastic one on one defender. However, Prime Olajuwan was arguably the best big man defender in NBA history...period. He had amazing hands, great timing, and the footspeed/coordination to stay in front of faceup players as well. Hakeem wasn't as good of a team defender as Timmy, but that doesn't factor into one-on-one play.

Conclusion: One on one I'd have to give the slight advantage to the Dream. Timmy would hold his own, but if these guys played 10 games, I'd expect Dream to come out on top in at least 6 of those games. Tbh it's too bad we never got to see a matchup like this. I miss watching HOF level bigs go at each other. I was too young to see David vs. Hakeem live in the 90s, but I'll never forget how fun it was to watch Duncan and KG go at it.

[djohn2oo8]

Hey djohn2oo8 you see all this bullshit these farmers posting about Dream? Unfucking believable. Here's prime Dream's hitlist:

Ewing (HOF)
Shaq (HOF)
Daughtery (career cut short - would make HOF)
Parish (HOF)
Robins:loln (HOF)
Mailman (HOF)
Barkley (HOF)

I'm sure I'm missing a few more HOFers he had the pleasure of shitting on. :lol Simply put, if Magic had Dream, he's sitting on 9+ rangs. These farmers are severely underrating your boy. SMH

I've posted before about it before, stats and etc. Jamstone summed it up perfectly. You have non homer spurfans like Bene, Baseline and others who know how good Dream was. It's the others who say he only had two prime years are the ones who don't bother to look at his stats.

[LkrFan]

I've posted before about it before, stats and etc. Jamstone summed it up perfectly. You have non homer spurfans like Bene, Baseline and others who know how good Dream was. It's the others who say he only had two prime years are the ones who don't bother to look at his stats.

:tu

[TDfan2007]

Have you ever seen prime Dream? Ask the Admiral about that mufucka! Amare ain't got shit on him. Like I said, he'd DESTROY Duncan. Not even trolling son.

:lol Robinson admitted to not being able to defend a ROOKIE Tim Duncan. Prime Timmy was even better. GTFO. Timmy is the only PF that Barkley will admit is better than him. KG, one of the greatest defensive players in history, has repeatedly said that Timmy was his toughest cover. Your boy Magic, who played against Hakeem, said that he'd never seen a big man with Timmy's footwork (this was during the 03 series against LA). NOBODY would destroy prime Duncan. I do agree that Dream would fare better in a straight one on one, but it's closer than you might think.

[TDfan2007]

I've posted before about it before, stats and etc. Jamstone summed it up perfectly. You have non homer spurfans like Bene, Baseline and others who know how good Dream was. It's the others who say he only had two prime years are the ones who don't bother to look at his stats.

Hakeem came into the league as an almost complete product. His numbers and impact were amazing right out of the box, much like Duncan's. Again, I never saw Hakeem play in person, but based on taped games and the numbers, I'd say his true prime was from 92-96.

[dbreiden83080]

Dream is probably the greatest defensive center of all time. Surely he could check Duncan - without a double team either. He was a monster. Real talk.

7 game series.. No Duncan gets his..

[Brunodf]

Dream is probably the greatest defensive center of all time. Surely he could check Duncan - without a double team either. He was a monster. Real talk.
Right. And somehow he had only 2 great seasons during his entire career.

But 5/10 tbh, solid effort but you could've tried harder to make this believable

[Malik Hairston]

:lol missing the playoffs in your prime
:lol pedophile
:lol Raptors

[pgardn]

Dream is probably the greatest defensive center of all time. Surely he could check Duncan - without a double team either. He was a monster. Real talk.

No Fkn way. Absolutely no way Hakeem covers prime Duncan 1 on 1.
Duncan gets body into him preventing the quick jump.
Duncan is soooo much longer, once he has him planted it's an easy basket.
Duncan pumps, body, and myriad of inside shots keep Hakeem grounded. Absolutely no doubt in my mind.

And lastly, the Rockets would never have been stupid enough to try it, they tried to win. The above would assure them a loss. Everyone doubled prime Duncan, and if they did not, they got spanked.

And that is the end of the discussion. I thank you.

[ezau]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR6AgYWdoBQ

Prime Duncan went toe-to-toe against prime Shaq plenty of times and won many of those. I have no doubt in mind that Duncan can be as successful against prime Hakeem.

[wekko368]

Prime Duncan went toe-to-toe against prime Shaq plenty of times and won many of those. I have no doubt in mind that Duncan can be as successful against prime Hakeem.

Did you even watch the video you posted? I watched the first 5 minutes. It featured Duncan 13 times. And in those 13 times, he was guarded by Robert Horry (10), Devean George (1), and Medvedenko (2). Not once was he guarded by Shaq. And conversely, he didn't guard Shaq. David Robinson did.

[RsxPiimp]

'Dream was the better scorer and shot-blocker. Duncan is still the better passer and rebounder. Both have successfully anchored teams with comparatively weak talent (for a championship team) that were based around chemistry and timely contributions all around working in tandem with a dominant interior player.

It's Dream, in my mind, but by no means is this an easy decision or large gap. Both have their merits; Duncan's generally been able to play a low-key game and then step it up as necessary, so while his stats haven't been quite as gaudy, his effectiveness is there nonetheless.



I was lucky enough to actually watch Olajuwon during his prime. In the playoffs, Olajuwon was one of the few players in history that can literally shut you down and score on you OTOE :lol




One of my favorite stories of Olajuwon this was from Mario Ellie:


I played with but 'Dream,' just his performance in pressure situations—when David Robinson got the '95 MVP, 'Dream' told me, 'Mario, he’s borrowing my trophy.' When I heard that I said, 'Somebody’s in trouble tonight.' That guy put on a performance—under that pressure against the MVP and we have no home court advantage—and 'Dream' just dominated that position. It reminded me of when Jordan dominated Clyde when they were comparing the two guards. They were comparing two centers and 'Dream' just totally—I don’t want to say embarrassed—but he really embarrassed him, he dominated him—(series averages of) 35 (points), 13 (rebounds), 5 assists, 4 blocks. Those are amazing numbers for a center."

[ezau]

Did you even watch the video you posted? I watched the first 5 minutes. It featured Duncan 13 times. And in those 13 times, he was guarded by Robert Horry (10), Devean George (1), and Medvedenko (2). Not once was he guarded by Shaq. And conversely, he didn't guard Shaq. David Robinson did.

Duncan: 5
OlajuRaptor: 2

An African center, with basically a four-year prime who won two titles when Jordan left the league:lol, should never be compared to Duncan. The only other big who is better career and talent-wise is Kareem. Which reminds me, the Rockets' last championship was 20 freaking years ago. Stay hungry, sons. :lol