How would a prime Olajuwon fare against a prime Duncan?

[hitmanyr2k]

I'm clearly talking about Sasha's defense limiting Manu in the playoff series. I'm not talking about Sasha's offensive output.


I'm using the metaphor that Sasha's defense got the better of Manu, such as Olajuwon's offense got the better of Robinson.

Not Sasha's overall offensive output got the better of Manu, such as Olajuwons offense got the better of Robinson.


I agree playoffs mean more than the regular season, but when the sample size is so small (6 games) in relation to the total amount of games they actually played (42) it's not fair to base Robinson vs. Olajuwon because of 6 games. Did Olajuwon's offense get the better of Robinson for 6 games, you bet it did. Just like it did to many other teams, during the 1994-1995 run when the top 25 player of all time was at his ultimate peak.

Wasn't Ginobili playing on one leg in that series? Cmon, you can't make that analogy. Robinson and Olajuwon were both healthy and in their primes and Olajuwon took Robinson to the woodshed. No comparison.

[jag]

This thread is too long. I'm very inclined to say Olajuwon, at least if we're comparing primes, but I'm not entirely sure. Cliff notes with the best arguments of both sides? # of the best posts from either side?

I read through it in about 20 min or so. It was an obvious troll thread but turned into a decent debate. Overall, I'd say Baseline Bum had the best posts in the entire thread. I guess for some reason i have a difficult time accepting the opinions of Rockets fans who are either 15 years old, Chinese, or Steve Francis era bandwagoners. Harlemheat also made a good point about Hakeem being slightly inflated in the minds of present day basketball fans. Fans watch highlights or classic games and fall in love with the flash and flair, similar to today...they forget that at the time, he was on a very level plane with Robinson and Shaq. To an extent, Robinson and especially shaq were considered better.

Hakeem was obviously great, and he was the best big man in the game for maybe 2 seasons, but people look at raw stats and think he was so much better than Duncan is now, or than Robinson or shaq. Its like looking at raw stats between Garnett and Duncan, it doesn't tell the whole story.

You have to be very specific if you want to look at Hakeem's prime, that's not the case with Duncan. Who would i take if i were building a team...1993-1995 Hakeem or 2000-2008 Duncan? Duncan. Who would i take for one playoff run? Hakeem. It's a stupid argument.

[MaNu4Tres]

I read through it in about 20 min or so. It was an obvious troll thread but turned into a decent debate. Overall, I'd say Baseline Bum had the best posts in the entire thread. I guess for some reason i have a difficult time accepting the opinions of Rockets fans who are either 15 years old, Chinese, or Steve Francis era bandwagoners. Harlemheat also made a good point about Hakeem being slightly inflated in the minds of present day basketball fans. Fans watch highlights or classic games and fall in love with the flash and flair, similar to today...they forget that at the time, he was on a very level plane with Robinson and Shaq. To an extent, Robinson and especially shaq were considered better.

Hakeem was obviously great, and he was the best big man in the game for maybe 2 seasons, but people look at raw stats and think he was so much better than Duncan is now, or than Robinson or shaq. Its like looking at raw stats between Garnett and Duncan, it doesn't tell the whole story.

You have to be very specific if you want to look at Hakeem's prime, that's not the case with Duncan. Who would i take if i were building a team...1993-1995 Hakeem or 2000-2008 Duncan? Duncan. Who would i take for one playoff run? Hakeem. It's a stupid argument.

Well said

[Shastafarian]

Well, he dominated Kareem in the 1986 WCF as a second-year player. And he was a monster in a losing cause against Boston's great front line in the Finals that year. Houston lost that series because the Celtics were a better team and because Ralph Sampson vanished off the face of the earth- not because of Hakeem.

Kareem was 38 for that series. He had been in decline since the 81/82 season.

[TD 21]

Olajuwon was a lot better than just "top 25 player of all time". He's definitely a top 15 player of all time and arguably a fringe top 10 player.

I know it's blasphemy to put any center not named Abdul-Jabbar above Russell and Chamberlain, but look at the era they played in and the (relatively) weak compe ion compared to today. Think of the minimal playoff games they had to win to cop the championship, the fact that they played mostly against players significantly smaller than them (particularly in Chamberlain's case).

I'm not saying I know for sure that Olajuwon, O'Neal and Duncan were better or that i'd put them above Russell and Chamberlain, but I wouldn't automatically dismiss it/rule it out like so many. It's not that outlandish to think that they were.

Even though I didn't see any of the three, knowing what I know about them and having a fairly good idea of how each played, strength/weaknesses, performance in the clutch, stats, historical accomplishments, etc., I'd say Abdul-Jabbar was probably the best center of all-time.

[Shastafarian]

Being tied for 8th seed to eventually get swept out by a pathetic Suns team that plays no defense is just as bad. Duncan will miss the playoffs soon enough.

He'll have never missed the playoffs in his prime Miss Cleo.

[Ghazi]

I hope the Spurs can get the 8 seed next year so the Mavs can sweep that ass

[monosylab1k]

I hope the Spurs can get the 8 seed next year so the Mavs can sweep that ass

brah with Charles Barkley Jr. there's no way the Spurs win less than 70 games next season.

[D-Wade #3]

I hope the Spurs can get the 8 seed next year so the Mavs can sweep that ass

[Shastafarian]

I hope the Spurs can get the 7 seed next year so the Mavs can sweep that ass

Dated April 28th, 2009.

[kingmalaki]

It seems like the question is asking who would win a 1-1 matchup, or if the two went head-to-head? I think it's safe to say if Hakeem could drop 40+ on Robinson, who I feel was a better defebder than Duncan, then Duncan really couldn't stop him. Amare was too quick for him in one playoff matchup and Hakeem was just as quick, bigger, with a jumper and a post game. The guy got 2 les going through Ewing, Robinson and Shaq. I don't think he would be bothered by facing Timmy.

This is not to say Timmy isn't great, but if you are asking can Hakeem get his on Timmy then I don't see why you wouldn't think so.

[kingmalaki]

I'm laughing at folks saying Hakeem couldn't get past, or to Jordan. Didn't Kobe send Duncan home a few times, the last time with Gasol? Didn't Nash send him home this year?

[kingmalaki]

They weren't the dominant force of his era and you know it. Stop playing games. If you disagree that Duncan was better, fine, but there's no denying this: He got past the other dominant force of his era two times, while Olajuwon never even got to the dominant force of his era.

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 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.

[xellos88330]

I can't figure out which one is better, but I would love to see it.

[sook]

I wasn't really deliberating on where he ranked all time when I posted previously, since I was dealing with another subject. I threw out a number that I was completely sure of (Top 25).

But since you now ask me where he ranks.


IMO Best Centers of All-Time:

1. Wilt Chamberlain
2. Abdul-Jabbar
3. Russel
4. Shaq
5. Olajuwon
6. Robinson
7. Moses Malone
8. George Mikan
9. Patrick Ewing
10. Bill Walton

Now if you ask me where I'd put Duncan in this list? I'd put him at number 4 with Shaq.

god you stupid little homer you...is that list for real?

You're telling me you place Shaq and Duncan above olajuwon?

If youre going to go off of career achievements you can make the case for paul pierce being a greater SF than Lebron.

Abdul Jabaar is THE GREATEST CENTER TO EVER PLAY THE GAME.

I hope you understand the notion, because you sound like a head with your little stat comparisons.

He is followed by Olajuwon, a better defensive/offensive combo however.

Now spurs fans can whine all they want about Duncan being a PF, but he's a C, and he follows right after with Shaq right below him. Then comes malone.


I feel bad and i think its unfair that I'm judging you because you never even got a chance to watch them play...which is out of your control. But lay off the crack pipe my friend.

[sook]

Hakeem got hot one series.

Saying regular season head to head match-ups doesn't matter is ridiculous.


It's like saying Sasha Vujacic is so much better than Manu Ginobili because in 2008 Vujacic got the better of Manu for 5 games.

Ignoring the regular season head to head matches is stupid and ignorant for any objective fan with an opinion. Especially considering they've only played 6 playoff games where the sample size is extremely small.

Hot for one series ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Excuse me while I take a in my sink.

[sook]

You said "Hakeem was good." Ummmmmmm ok.

You can praise Duncan without demonstrating such crazy bias against Hakeem. He was just "good???"

Duncan didn't guard Kobe.

Hakeem beat a non-fat Shaq. Made Shaq look like Betty White out there. But that's not what his girlfriend says.

Hakeem in his (short) prime was the greatest big man to play the game. Unstoppable, unguardable on offense and a complete defensive force on defense, from shot blocking to rebounding to intimidation to steals to switching with the ability to step out and defend the perimeter as well as any big man up to that point. Elite big men like KG and Ben Wallace and Kenyon Martin, who had the athleticism and quickness to step out on the perimeter to defend, didn't really exist much before the 90s. Big men were strong and stiff. Hakeem wasn't.

now jamstone should have PHD in basketball or something.

[Aggie Hoopsdouche]

Great post comparing their stats Shasta . Its a good idea to ignore playoff results when they were in their primes. Stuff like this is irrelevant. Everyone knows true fans judge players on their regular season stats not anything gay like how they did heads up in the playoffs.

[MaNu4Tres]

I read through it in about 20 min or so. It was an obvious troll thread but turned into a decent debate. Overall, I'd say Baseline Bum had the best posts in the entire thread. I guess for some reason i have a difficult time accepting the opinions of Rockets fans who are either 15 years old, Chinese, or Steve Francis era bandwagoners. ]Harlemheat also made a good point about Hakeem being slightly inflated in the minds of present day basketball fans. Fans watch highlights or classic games and fall in love with the flash and flair, similar to today...they forget that at the time, he was on a very level plane with Robinson and Shaq. To an extent, Robinson and especially shaq were considered better.

Hakeem was obviously great, and he was the best big man in the game for maybe 2 seasons, but people look at raw stats and think he was so much better than Duncan is now, or than Robinson or shaq. Its like looking at raw stats between Garnett and Duncan, it doesn't tell the whole story.

You have to be very specific if you want to look at Hakeem's prime, that's not the case with Duncan. Who would i take if i were building a team...1993-1995 Hakeem or 2000-2008 Duncan? Duncan. Who would i take for one playoff run? Hakeem. It's a stupid argument.

[Booharv]

Prime definitions:

"being at the best stage of development; "our manhood's prime vigor"- Robert Browning"

"the time of maturity when power and vigor are greatest"

"The period or phase of ideal or peak condition"

I don't know why people keep trying to drag the definition of prime out over a five or seven year period...actually wait I kinda do... But prime means you take the absolutely best version of a thing and compare it to the best version of another thing. You don't have them face off once a year for ten years (Hakeem would still win that imo). You have their two best versions face each other. Like 2003-05 Duncan versus 1993-1995 Hakeem. Or 1995 Hakeem versus 2003 Duncan if you want to narrow it further. Take them from their best seasons. For Tim statistically including the playoffs its 2003, and for Hakeem that's 1995 considering his playoff performance. That's a prime matchup. This thread has included about 5+ pages wasting time because of a misunderstanding of the definition of "prime".

If a guy hit his peak and kept it there for seven, eight, or ten years, that's remarkable but if you took him out of there at his absolute best part of that perios and he couldn't beat someone else who had a much shorter prime it counts for nothing in this context.

[Mr.Robinson]

You said "Hakeem was good." Ummmmmmm ok.

You can praise Duncan without demonstrating such crazy bias against Hakeem. He was just "good???"

Duncan didn't guard Kobe.

Hakeem beat a non-fat Shaq. Made Shaq look like Betty White out there. But that's not what his girlfriend says.

Hakeem in his (short) prime was the greatest big man to play the game. Unstoppable, unguardable on offense and a complete defensive force on defense, from shot blocking to rebounding to intimidation to steals to switching with the ability to step out and defend the perimeter as well as any big man up to that point. Elite big men like KG and Ben Wallace and Kenyon Martin, who had the athleticism and quickness to step out on the perimeter to defend, didn't really exist much before the 90s. Big men were strong and stiff. Hakeem wasn't.

I never said anything negative about hakeem. He was great. Is that better? I have him in my top 10. Duncan was better. Duncan was unguardable as well from 99 to 05. Hakeem's stats would eaily be matched by Tim if he had played against some of the stiffs Hakeem did. Yes, there were more stiffs than good centers in those days. Duncan played for under POP's system his whole career, that system isn't going to be stat friendly. Yet, Duncan's highs were 25/13/3 not in the same season but they compare to Hakeem's highs. Duncan is so underrated it's a ing crime. 4 rings and he still gets shafted. I say this not to hate on Hakeem but to praise Duncan. If it wasn't for him the Lakers could have won six in a row. Single ing handedly beat the Lakers. He was not to be stopped. Hakeem's 94 and 95 seasons were insane but the NBA wasn't what it was today. Duncan in 03 was a mother ing an.

[JamStone]

I never said anything negative about hakeem. He was great. Is that better? I have him in my top 10. Duncan was better. Duncan was unguardable as well from 99 to 05. Hakeem's stats would eaily be matched by Tim if he had played against some of the stiffs Hakeem did. Yes, there were more stiffs than good centers in those days. Duncan played for under POP's system his whole career, that system isn't going to be stat friendly. Yet, Duncan's highs were 25/13/3 not in the same season but they compare to Hakeem's highs. Duncan is so underrated it's a ing crime. 4 rings and he still gets shafted. I say this not to hate on Hakeem but to praise Duncan. If it wasn't for him the Lakers could have won six in a row. Single ing handedly beat the Lakers. He was not to be stopped. Hakeem's 94 and 95 seasons were insane but the NBA wasn't what it was today. Duncan in 03 was a mother ing an.

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. , 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.

[kingmalaki]

Duncan was unguardable from 99-05?

In 01 Grant/Horry held him to 48%, down from his reg season avg. SA lost that series.

In 02 Horry held him to 42%, down from his reg season avg. SA lost that series. Duncan was 11-23 in the final game.

In 04 Malone held him to 47%, down from his reg season avg. SA lost the series. Duncan was 7-18 in the final game.

In 05 the Wallace boys held him to 42%, down from his reg season avg. SA won the series. Thank God for Robert Horry!! Duncan was 10-27 in Game 7.

None of those guys are a harder matchup than Ewing/Oakley/Mason, Robinson or Shaq. Hakeem wasn't playng that poorly against them, since we are comparing dudes at their peaks. But those numbers from Duncan don't seem unstoppable to me.

[Mr.Robinson]

Duncan was unguardable from 99-05?

In 01 Grant/Horry held him to 48%, down from his reg season avg. SA lost that series.

In 02 Horry held him to 42%, down from his reg season avg. SA lost that series. Duncan was 11-23 in the final game.

In 04 Malone held him to 47%, down from his reg season avg. SA lost the series. Duncan was 7-18 in the final game.

In 05 the Wallace boys held him to 42%, down from his reg season avg. SA won the series. Thank God for Robert Horry!! Duncan was 10-27 in Game 7.

None of those guys are a harder matchup than Ewing/Oakley/Mason, Robinson or Shaq. Hakeem wasn't playng that poorly against them, since we are comparing dudes at their peaks. But those numbers from Duncan don't seem unstoppable to me.

In 04 the Spurs didn't show up to play in the last game after 0.4. In 01 and 02 the Spurs had a weak ass team. Duncan had several monster games in losing efforts. He shot a poor % and had tons of turnovers. It was a case of a player being the focus of the other teams D and trying to do it all. In 05 Duncan had poor % shooting wise because Sheed was still a great defender. Big Ben and McDyess were were a better combo than Mason, Oak and Ewing. Tim won the ring with his rebounding and D. He also had 25 points in game 7. Grind it out series and the guy still had 25 points in game 7.

[wekko368]

Big Ben and McDyess were were a better combo than Mason, Oak and Ewing.

Given the physical brand of defense that was allowed in the 90's, you are 100% wrong.