Hakeem vs Duncan Part 2

[ambchang]

you really can't read, can you.

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

I feel sorry for illiterates.

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

[Blake]

He doesn't.

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

opinion.

[Blake]

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

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

nice obsessed meltdown you had on my profile page btw

you're a focking idiot.

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

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

2 MVPs>1MVP is anything but nitpicking

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

Agreed. and also that Duncan>Hakeem

you are a focking idiot

[Blake]

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

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

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

great argument.

[Blake]

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

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

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

[ambchang]

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

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

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

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

That's why I said "might". Looks to me from everything I've read that Wallace can legitimately be called the better defender.
I haven't really researched it much so I'd be willing to listen to an argument if someone gives something legitimate other than "I watched him on TV" or "he played in an era that is better than today"

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

[Bob Lanier]

opinion.

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

[Blake]

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

huh? I agree. McAdoo>Barkley.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

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

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

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

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

great logic.

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

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

why are there so many illiterates in this thread?

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

What separates them is wins, championships and MVP trophies.

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

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

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

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

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

[mavs>spurs2]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[The Franchise]

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

[Blake]

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

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

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

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

yeah, you said he was "the greatest"

great argument.

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

so you are going back to the TV argument.

great.

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

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

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

comparing physical attributes is a fail.

It has nothing to do with accomplishments.

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

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

making him a sure top 50 greatest players lock.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

hooked on phonics.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And let's see if you can read this:

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

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

YOU are a FOCKING idiot.

[Blake]

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

really?

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

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

[The Franchise]

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

[The Franchise]

really?

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

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

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

[mavs>spurs2]

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

Some things I'd like to point out:

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

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

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

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

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

[mavs>spurs2]

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

This is gold

[Blake]

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

the maggot likes your post

[ambchang]

huh? I agree. McAdoo>Barkley.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

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

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

you said it is stupid to say that player A is better than player B because he has more MVPs....
but then you say Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted......
great logic.

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

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

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

and either you can't read what you wrote or you have a short memory.
why are there so many illiterates in this thread?
Duncan and Hakeem played similar positions and had similar stats across the board.
What separates them is wins, championships and MVP trophies.

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

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

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

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

Wallace guarded 1s and 2s?

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

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

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

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

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

Such as what?

[VBM]

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

[Blake]

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

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

You're not very good at this.

Some things I'd like to point out:

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

you finally made a good, solid point.

congratulations.

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

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

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

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

I still say Ben > Hakeem.

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

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

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

I made that clear long ago.

Thanks for establising your illiteracy.

No one is going by 15 year old memories,

you are.

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

now youre grasping at straws

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

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

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

you've done a fine job.

One ring, got!

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

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

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

you are a focking idiot.

Duncan>Hakeem

[mavs>spurs2]

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

[Blake]

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

ok.

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

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

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

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

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

Is that based on your opinions?

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

You're not very good at this either.

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

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

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

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

Wallace guarded 1s and 2s?

Yes he did.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Such as what?

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

Good lord.

[ambchang]

ok.
So now you are saying you didn't say that you like Duncan over Hakeem because Hakeem "pouted"
I clearly read that. Obviously you didn't clearly read your own post.

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

you said it is stupid to say that player A is better than player B because he has more MVPs....
but then you say Duncan is better because Hakeem pouted......
great logic.

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

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

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

no, it's a fact that Duncan and Hakeem have similar stats and that Duncan has more MVPs.
You're not very good at this either.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What was the point of this?

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

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

If I knew, I wouldn't be asking you for it.
Good lord.

Since when have you asked me for it?

[sook]

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

[sook]

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