Reply With Quote
When has Duncan ever been surrounded by ?
Let's not get ahead of ourselves.
Homering blindly for Hakeem is no better than homering blindly for Duncan.
No big man would "destroy" prime Duncan. 3 peat Shaq couldn't do it. I agree that peak Hakeem would outplay Duncan, but he wouldn't dominate him.
Let's say each player had the exact same coach with the exact same role players. Hakeem would probably go 30-12-3 on 50+ shooting. And Duncan would probably 25ppg-12-2 with a similar shooting percentage. Both are equal passers in my opinion, so they both get the role players equally involved to the point where it's a wash.
At the end of the day, Hakeem is the difference, but doesn't destroy Duncan.
When has Duncan ever been surrounded by ?
Which years was Hakeem surrounded by ? I'd like specific years.
ok, not destroy but beat out duncan. prime dream > prime duncan
Ralph Sampson peeked with a 2nd year Hakeem Olajuwon....they went to the finals....then he was hurt.
Maxwell was a gunner and a complete head case, Smith was a career cast away, Robert Horry was a young player...and so was Cassell...not the players you remember them and Hakeem won a ring with Thorpe, so what's your point jackass.Do you really want me to pull up the caliber of players that Duncan played with?
Rocket fan is so full of when he talks about Duncan playing in a weaker era. After Kareem's retirement, most of the talent was in the Eastern Conference, and Houston never played Chicago anyways.Laugh all you want......you don't know about the talent Hakeem had to play with.
He came in and only his second year he went to the finals after beating one of the best teams in NBA history...then the wheels fell off.
LMAO at all these SA fans who actually try to act like Duncan didn't have better surrounding talent over the course of his career during a much weaker era.
Hakeem WAS THE BETTER PLAYER
Deny it all you want, but through some magical alternate universe if both players could enter the same draft....guess who G.M's would take first? Ill give you a hint, it wouldn't be Duncan....and that's no shot against Duncan.
91-92, 92-93, 93-94 (still won le)
90-91, going back into the late 80's
I never called Olajuwon "half decent". I'm just making a point that people always pull this with Duncan. Who the was he better than? And how did he do what he did if he really wasn't that great? That's the overriding sentiment I get from a lot of people.
Taking one over the other is one thing, but anyone pretending that Olajuwon would destroy Duncan is downright delusional. Nobody destroyed Duncan, not even prime O'Neal, who was probably the most dominant player in the history of the game. Not the best, but most dominant.
Hakeem, in his "prime", never played on a team that had less than four guys average double digit points.
So, he played with guys like David Robinson, Stephen Jackson, Steve Kerr, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli, should I go on?
Duncan, in his prime, has played on 7 teams where less than four guys averaged double digits in points.
Steve Kerr
Please do go on. You'll come up with similar quality to the guys Hakeem played with.
How about you compare after the "twin towers" years to the first NBA championship of Hakeem....and then compare that to the caliber of players that Duncan has been surrounded by pretty much HIS ENTIRE CAREER
Oh what's this....now we're talking about the quality of teams instead of the number of years Hakeem was at "prime form", because somebody must've actually looked up Hakeem's #s and realized his prime form didn't just last two years.
Again the biggest myth in sports..."Hakeem was only great for two seasons". Hakeem #s knock Duncan's in the dirt. At 33 Hakeem was averaging 27 ppg, 11 rpg, and 3bpg (BTW a statistical year that Duncan has never had at ANY age)...the same age Duncan played at last year when everybody said he was starting to show his age.
But, but, but...his prime and greatness only last 2 seasons.
Last edited by Tmac&Luther; 05-24-2010 at 09:49 PM.
7 > 0
If you don't remember, the guy was pretty ing clutchSteve Kerr
Please do go on. You'll come up with similar quality to the guys Hakeem played with.
Umm, what's 7>0
In one quarter of one game of his entire Spurs career.
Both players at age 33 per 36 minutes
Hakeem: 24.9 PPG 51.4% 10.1 RPG 2.7 BPG 3.3 APG
Duncan: 20.6 PPG 51.8% 11.6 RPG 1.7 BPG 3.6 APG
Hakeem was clearly far and away better
did it not help?
What the guy above said.. Vernon was a low percentage chucker.. ing Sleepy Floyd? He had two decent seasons.. Kenny smith was a ing role player.. Sam Cassell sure as wasn't Sam from the Bucks.. and Horry .. the damn rockets tried to freaking trade him.. the guy wasn't all world Bob at that point either. Thorpe was good I'll give you that though.
The nba had so much more talent and the league was so much tougher day in and day out.. anyone saying Olajuwon wasn't a better player in his prime is either a homer or just going off stats and never actually watched the games.
Oh
You really went "per" when comparing two all time great vet players
Pop's system. Where great scorers go to die. Says alot that Duncan could put his 23-25 a game with other players never really going wild and still have the success he's had. Sadly, Duncan's going to be one of those players bitten by revisionist history. I could see the arguments 20 years from now. "How is he a top player of all time when he's never averaged over 25 points a game!"
Give Duncan the triangle and he averages 25+ for his career.
And jesus stop ing leaving out steals like it isn't some type of important stat.. Hakeem is also the only player to retire in the top ten in blocks and steals.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
