Duncan>Hakeem.

[mojorizen7]

If these two went one-on-one in their primes Hakeem would school Duncan more times than not. As far as comparing career achievments it gets more complicated than that IMO.

[GSH]

Well Duncan isn't really close to Hakeem with Defense. Hakeem is up there in all time steals and block shots.
And the reason we are still talking about Hakeem now is because he is the one who blocks John Starks 3 pointer to win game 6.
I agree, if Hakeem doesn't block that shot...the knicks win. Hakeem was a force on the defensive side.

Hakeem did destroy the Lakers in 86 averaging over 30 points for the season and he didn't do too bad against the Celtics that year. He averaged 28.5 for the series. They didn't contain Hakeem, Celtics just had the better team.

Gets down to that really, Hakeem was never really on that great of teams....I feel for Garnett the same way but he is on a good team this year.

One thing that kills me about those that judge players. You put the same talent around Kevin Garnett like that around a player like Duncan and he has just as many rings or at least as many opportunites to get the rings. We are talking about to very special players here.

You put Duncan on the Timberwolf teams Garnett was on and he doesn't sniff the finals. As great as Duncan is and he is great, you can't win if you have crap around you.

You could put Duncan on the ing Knicks, under Isiah Thomas, and they wouldn't bust out the way Garnett's T-Wolves did. I went to U of H the same years as Hakeem, so I am a HUGE Hakeem fan. Hakeem ruled the low post. And if it were a 1-on-1 low post contest, I think he would get the best of Tim. But Tim (and Pop) would never allow him to get locked up into that contest. There is a reason why Duncan is considered a PF, and Hakeem a C.

One difference between the two, that I haven't seen mentioned, is "the look". Hakeem was definitely capable of dominating a game, just like Tim. But there are nights when the Spurs are getting their asses kicked, and Tim gets "the look"... and I just say, "Oh, . Tim's not going to let them lose tonight."

Hakeem's skills allowed him to take over some games. But I've seen Tim take over games by sheer force of will. I know that's a totally subjective point of view. But it comes from someone who is more than happy to acknowledge the greatness of Hakeem Olajuwan. Tim is something special, even among the special players the league has seen.

[HarlemHeat37]

the difference between KG and Duncan for OUR team would make a difference..we played an in and out game, which is something we wouldn't have been able to play with Garnett..KG is a solid post player, but not elite..his main move is his fadeaway J, and he's always had the ability to take his defender off the dribble and finish with athleticism..

2003..Duncan 60% of his shot attempts were jumpers, 40% inside..Garnett 77% attempts were jumpers, 23% inside..

2004..Duncan 56% jumpers, 44% inside..Garnett 75% jumpers, 25% inside..

it's the same for every year..

Duncan and Garnett are VERY close in terms of ability, but you can't build the same team around both guys..so I don't believe the Spurs win the 2003 le if we were built around Garnett..

[gasolina]

Duncan has 6 les?

by 2010, yes.

[Galileo]

I'm getting tired of people claiming Hakeem was better on D than Duncan.

For his career, Hakeem averaged 84 blocks per 100 fouls in the playoffs.

Duncan?

90 blocks per 100 fouls.

The only reason Duncan blocks fewer shots is that he takes fewer chances to avoid foul trouble. Unlike Hakeem, Duncan very rarely ever has to sit down because of foul trouble.

career fouls per 48 minutes in playoffs:

Duncan 3.7
Hakeem 4.7

[Jason_Terry]

It's too bad Hakeem's teams didn't have the luxury of beating up on teams like the Nets, Cavs, and Knicks for rings.

If TD had to deal with the Laker/Celtics in the 80s, he'd be missing a few rings. , he probably wouldn't have even been able to get his team out of the West.

I'd take one Hakeem on my team over two Tim Duncans any day. He'd probably embarrass them both the way he did David Robinson in the playoffs if they played each other.

I loved one of D-robs quotes after the that series: "I though I did a pretty good job guarding him"

[mavs>spurs2]

I'm getting tired of people claiming Hakeem was better on D than Duncan.

For his career, Hakeem averaged 84 blocks per 100 fouls in the playoffs.

Duncan?

90 blocks per 100 fouls.

The only reason Duncan blocks fewer shots is that he takes fewer chances to avoid foul trouble. Unlike Hakeem, Duncan very rarely ever has to sit down because of foul trouble.

career fouls per 48 minutes in playoffs:

Duncan 3.7
Hakeem 4.7

America, eatin' my lunch from a single bowl in my parents basement, where I'm livin'. Happy Birthday, I'm forty-three.

Don't want to waste those precious calories...chewin'. Jesus come move my jaw for me, help me get my sloppy food down my throat.

[Jason_Terry]

Bill Cartwright >>>>>>> Tim Duncan.

He has more rings.

[cinemafusion]

the difference between KG and Duncan for OUR team would make a difference..we played an in and out game, which is something we wouldn't have been able to play with Garnett..KG is a solid post player, but not elite..his main move is his fadeaway J, and he's always had the ability to take his defender off the dribble and finish with athleticism..

2003..Duncan 60% of his shot attempts were jumpers, 40% inside..Garnett 77% attempts were jumpers, 23% inside..

2004..Duncan 56% jumpers, 44% inside..Garnett 75% jumpers, 25% inside..

it's the same for every year..

Duncan and Garnett are VERY close in terms of ability, but you can't build the same team around both guys..so I don't believe the Spurs win the 2003 le if we were built around Garnett..

sure the team would be built a little different but Garnett can carry a team. The team would be built a little different if Hakeem was on the team.

All I'm saying is Garnett hasn't had as many good teams to play on that gives him a chance at a le. He has a chance this year. Surrond him with good players and all of a sudden Garnett is on one of the best teams in the league, a celtics team that sucked last year.

Garnett on the 2003 team would have given the Spurs a chance at a le.

[cinemafusion]

You could put Duncan on the ing Knicks, under Isiah Thomas, and they wouldn't bust out the way Garnett's T-Wolves did. I went to U of H the same years as Hakeem, so I am a HUGE Hakeem fan. Hakeem ruled the low post. And if it were a 1-on-1 low post contest, I think he would get the best of Tim. But Tim (and Pop) would never allow him to get locked up into that contest. There is a reason why Duncan is considered a PF, and Hakeem a C.

One difference between the two, that I haven't seen mentioned, is "the look". Hakeem was definitely capable of dominating a game, just like Tim. But there are nights when the Spurs are getting their asses kicked, and Tim gets "the look"... and I just say, "Oh, . Tim's not going to let them lose tonight."

Hakeem's skills allowed him to take over some games. But I've seen Tim take over games by sheer force of will. I know that's a totally subjective point of view. But it comes from someone who is more than happy to acknowledge the greatness of Hakeem Olajuwan. Tim is something special, even among the special players the league has seen.

Sorry, Duncan would not have been able to help the knicks. They would win more games but they wouldn't have a prayer at going after a ring.

The look? Dream had that look always. Ask D-rob, Ewing, Shaq about the look. In 1987 Hakeem's team was wiped out when three of his players where kicked out for drug use and Sampson's knee was torn up.
Hakeem with crap around him did everything he could to beat the Sonics. I know you remember that since you grew up watching him, remember the 49 point game, but it takes more than one man.
Though Hakeem was basically a one man show in 1994.

I think Duncan is a special player and I have no problem with spurs fans thinking he is better then Hakeem.
On a national level though I think the edge is for Hakeem. It's close and it's subjective.
Same with lakers fans, they are going to say Shaq is better then Duncan. It's close and it's subjective.
And on a national level most would say Shaq is the best of the three. I don't buy that but that is how that most of the nation sees it.

[cinemafusion]

What happened to Duncan in game one? Is he hurt? 5 points, three rebounds?
Wow! Was out with my girlfriend and couldn't watch the game

[cly2tw]

Hakeem in his prime was better than Duncan in his. Duncan is quite lucky to be in a great program with Pop as the coach. Hakeem had no teammate that was nearly as good as Parker. Drexler was about the same as Manu. That team depended on Hakeem much more than this Spurs one on TD.

[Galileo]

With how well Duncan is playing this year, its time to revive this thread.

Duncan is going to be 1st team all-NBA this year for the 10th time, and he has a shot at another ring. If he gets the ring, he will probably pick up another Finals MVP as well.

I agree, Duncan > Hakeem.

4 > 2.

[DMX7]

I agree, Duncan > Hakeem.

4 > 2.

+1

[Loose Cannon]

This is as much of a "debate" as U of Texas vs. North Texas is a "football contest".

Not even close. Not an argument. Not debateable. At this point, it's just a concrete fact.

It's Duncan.

[Manufan909]

The ring arguement is pathetic it. It means Kerr is better than Dirk and Nash combined.

[Galileo]

We only need 32 more posts to break Spurstalk history and break the vaunted 1000 barrier!

[angelbelow]

The ring arguement is pathetic it. It means Kerr is better than Dirk and Nash combined.

trudat. hakeem is amazing and i think hes a better 1v1 player. we'll see, duncans career is far from over still.

[scanry]

The ring arguement is pathetic it. It means Kerr is better than Dirk and Nash combined.

It usually is, but in this case that is probably a good one to look at. We are looking at a player comparison who have combined 3 Regular season MVP's & 5 Finals MVP's.

[Killakobe81]

It usually is, but in this case that is probably a good one to look at. We are looking at a player comparison who have combined 3 Regular season MVP's & 5 Finals MVP's.

It's a close call ...but I give the edge to hakeem still and Shaq is 3rd ....
Hakeem abused your boy the MVP in the playoffs and ewing and Shaq in back 2 back Finals
Duncan dominated Malone and held his own with Shaq ....
When it comes to being clutch both are ...if Duncan wins another le ...id be more willing to give it to duncan but Hakeem at his best was the best big man i have seen (NBA fan since 1980)

[PuttPutt]

It's a close call ...but I give the edge to hakeem still and Shaq is 3rd ....
Hakeem abused your boy the MVP in the playoffs and ewing and Shaq in back 2 back Finals
Duncan dominated Malone and held his own with Shaq ....
When it comes to being clutch both are ...if Duncan wins another le ...id be more willing to give it to duncan but Hakeem at his best was the best big man i have seen (NBA fan since 1980)

I pretty much have to agree, but for me it's too close to call too. Both were & are extremely awesome players.

[mystargtr34]

This debate will go on for a long time. Its still close.

[DrHouse]

I'd rather have Hakeem in his prime. He was just a monster defensively.

[z0sa]

I'd rather have Hakeem in his prime. He was just a monster defensively.

I think if Tim wins another Finals MVP (very possible, though I'd guess Parker does it again first by the odds), Tim clearly wins this one. Actually, even if doesn't win Finals MVP. Why? Including being close or equal to Hakeem in just about every regard, Tim has had a much longer period of sustained dominance. I honestly think its Tim right now by some distance, but another Finals win would cement it and another Finals MVP would lay it in stone..

Hakeem's only Finals Wins were when Jordan was retired or under a different number than #23. Tim's Spurs swept a great Lakers team in 99 (though they of course didnt have PJ, doesn't change a damn thing still IMO), then knocked them off their threepeat touting pedastal in 03. Not only that, the Spurs defeated a tough, tough Detroit team who was looking for a repeat after beating the Lakers (aka supposedly the League's most dominant team again during 04) and came very close. If not for Tim's heroics in Game 7, there wouldn't be a 2005 Spurs banner hanging in the AT&T center today.

That was at least two times they took out the League's best on their way to a trophy, something Hakeem really didn't do since they hit their stride during Jordan's "inbetween" years, and Tim won all 3 of those Finals MVPs...

[Yorae]

Duncan is better....but man, dream shake is the shiznit, did drob somehow defended that move well?