Shaq on 95 Finals

[dunkman]

You're a re

Sure an re must think everyone is a re , but keep in mind it's not really like that . . .

[djohn2oo8]

He looked great when he made that long fadeaway jumper, but he missed them often. He made 1.28 points out of every field goal attempt. And that was in time when defensive schemes were less elaborate. Contemporary bigs like Robinson (1.46), Malone (1.41), Barkley (1.52) and even Ewing (1.29) were more efficient.

Duncan is 1.32 and Shaq 1.47, however defense was more elaborate in their playtime.

In '95 Hakeem had Drexler still in his prime also various clutch players like Horry, Cassell and Elie.

In '94 Hakeem was without Drexler but it's not so big deal for Duncan though, he also made something similar in '03 and against much better compe ion.

Hakeem was a better defender/rebounder and a better scorer.

In 1994, he won Defensive Player of the Year and was 3rd in the league in scoring. Meaning he was the best defender in the league and at worst the 3rd best offensive player in the league. In the playoffs he went through Malone's Jazz, Barkley's Suns and Ewings Knicks with no other all-star teammates to win a le. So your notion that Duncan had better compe ion is FALSE

In 1995 he went through Malone, Barkley, Shaq, and Robinson, without having home court in any round. Those 2 post seasons combined, he averaged around 30, 12, 4 and 4.

[dunkman]

I don't think I've ever heard such a re ed statement.

Hakeem had 12 seasons of at least 20 and 10, missing the 13th by less than a rebound, compared to Duncan's 9 such seasons. And Hakeem shot over 50% from the field his first 13 seasons.

The notion that Hakeem had a few excellent seasons and barely anything else is a re ed myth, especially from spurfans.

Some time from now somebody will compare Duncan's and KG's stats and will say KG was a better player. However, KG often played in trash time padding his stats, he didn't dominate inside, he didn't command so much defensive attention, and he couldn't guard very strong players.

Slightly over 50% FG% from the field is a disgrace without made FT's, that alone doesn't say enough.

[Greg Oden]

What the does all those things that pertain to KG have to do with Hakeem? Hakeem obviously did dominate inside, commanded defensive attention, and guard strong players. So what's your point?

Slightly over 50% FG% from the field is a disgrace without made FT's, that alone doesn't say enough.

So what does that say about the seasons Duncan's FG% was < 50? Kareems career FT % was also higher

[dunkman]

Hakeem was a better defender/rebounder and a better scorer.

In 1994, he won Defensive Player of the Year and was 3rd in the league in scoring. Meaning he was the best defender in the league and at worst the 3rd best offensive player in the league. In the playoffs he went through Malone's Jazz, Barkley's Suns and Ewings Knicks with no other all-star teammates to win a le. So your notion that Duncan had better compe ion is FALSE

In 1995 he went through Malone, Barkley, Shaq, and Robinson, without having home court in any round. Those 2 post seasons combined, he averaged around 30, 12, 4 and 4.

Anyone who saw Duncan play knew he could drop 30, 40 or even 50 on anyone between 1999 and 2004. But that's not how the Spurs play, Pop wanted him to move the ball and share the field goal attempts. In the end, the Spurs won more than the Rockets.

Hakeem was in his prime during his two championship runs. Great runs, but Duncan is also considered to be better than Malone, Barkley, Ewing and Robinson.

While they didn't guard one another very often, Duncan played better than Shaq various times in the playoffs (sometimes Shaq played better too). Now, Duncan always faced Shaq in his prime.

Hakeem played against Shaq when he was 22 and had dismal 1 point per shot efficiency while Shaq scored in similar numbers in far less FGA's.

Prime Shaq, prime Kobe and Phil Jackson was better than anything Hakeem ever faced, and Duncan was too the only all-star of the 02/03 team.

[djohn2oo8]

Anyone who saw Duncan play knew he could drop 30, 40 or even 50 on anyone between 1999 and 2004. But that's not how the Spurs play, Pop wanted him to move the ball and share the field goal attempts. In the end, the Spurs won more than the Rockets.

Hakeem was in his prime during his two championship runs. Great runs, but Duncan is also considered to be better than Malone, Barkley, Ewing and Robinson.

While they didn't guard one another very often, Duncan played better than Shaq various times in the playoffs (sometimes Shaq played better too). Now, Duncan always faced Shaq in his prime.

Hakeem played against Shaq when he was 22 and had dismal 1 point per shot efficiency while Shaq scored in similar numbers in far less FGA's.

Prime Shaq, prime Kobe and Phil Jackson was better than anything Hakeem ever faced, and Duncan was too the only all-star of the 02/03 team.

You're contradicting yourself. If Duncan was more dominate than Hakeem, than that's not a reason that he wouldn't be more dominant. It's because he wasn't. Hakeem was just more dominant on offense and defense. Hakeem is the only center to rank among top 10 players in steals, and is the all time shot block leader.

2. Shaq averaged around 28 a game in the finals, so it wasn't like Hakeem didn't face a prime Shaq. PLUS, Shaq was in shape then.

3. Really? So that Lakers team was better than the Showtime Lakers in the 80's or the 80's Celtics that Hakeem had dealt with? Outside of Shaq (Who was not in shape that season due to the toe surgery) and Kobe, that Lakers team was strapped of depth

Oh and Hakeem's prime wasn't just two years. He put up like 20 and 10 for 12 years, 25 and 10 for 4 years, while Duncan did it for 9. So longevitywise, Hakeem was still beasting at Duncan's age right now

[Proxy]

Hakeem was a better defender/rebounder and a better scorer.

In 1994, he won Defensive Player of the Year and was 3rd in the league in scoring. Meaning he was the best defender in the league and at worst the 3rd best offensive player in the league. In the playoffs he went through Malone's Jazz, Barkley's Suns and Ewings Knicks with no other all-star teammates to win a le. So your notion that Duncan had better compe ion is FALSE

In 1995 he went through Malone, Barkley, Shaq, and Robinson, without having home court in any round. Those 2 post seasons combined, he averaged around 30, 12, 4 and 4.

The compe ion level is a matter of opinion. None of the teams Hakeem went through were even close to the level of the LA 3-peat team. The '95 Rockets would not have beat Prime Shaq and Kobe. Duncan did, and without a second all-star as well.

All 3 players have their own specific skill set.
Hakeem gives you stellar defense
Shaq gives you a dominating presence on both ends
Duncan gives you the longevity, and a secondary PG role at the post
... while all 3 give you 20 and 10 each night in HOF fashion.

Saying one of the three is more skilled than the other isn't a valid argument, since they all have different skill sets. While Hakeem has the better footwork of the three, Duncan is better fundamentally, and Shaq is more powerful. You can't knock TD and Shaq down just because their games weren't as aesthetically pleasing as the Dream's was.

due to the longevity and collected accolades of TD and Shaq, they deserve to be ranked higher than Hakeem. It really shouldn't be an argument unless you're a homer for Houston.

[djohn2oo8]

The compe ion level is a matter of opinion. None of the teams Hakeem went through were even close to the level of the LA 3-peat team. The '95 Rockets would not have beat Prime Shaq and Kobe. Duncan did, and without a second all-star as well.

All 3 players have their own specific skill set.
Hakeem gives you stellar defense
Shaq gives you a dominating presence on both ends
Duncan gives you the longevity, and a secondary PG role at the post
... while all 3 give you 20 and 10 each night in HOF fashion.

Saying one of the three is more skilled than the other isn't a valid argument, since they all have different skill sets. While Hakeem has the better footwork of the three, Duncan is better fundamentally, and Shaq is more powerful. You can't knock TD and Shaq down just because their games weren't as aesthetically pleasing as the Dream's was.

due to the longevity and collected accolades of TD and Shaq, they deserve to be ranked higher than Hakeem. It really shouldn't be an argument unless you're a homer for Houston.

Ranking Duncan higher than Hakeem because of rings is ignoring the fact that Hakeem was the better player. Horry has 7 rings, so we can rank him ahead of Duncan too right? Hakeem was the better two way player, covered alot more ground on defense, and performed better under pressure.

[Proxy]

Oh and Hakeem's prime wasn't just two years. He put up like 20 and 10 for 12 years, 25 and 10 for 4 years, while Duncan did it for 9. So longevitywise, Hakeem was still beasting at Duncan's age right now

For 9? how do you justify that?

Duncan has 13 (9 1st, 3 2nd, 1 3rd) all NBA appearances
to the Dream's 12 (6 1st, 3 2nd, 3 3rd)

Duncan even has 13 all Defense appearances to Hakeem's 9.

While Hakeem has the DMVPs, lets not forget TDs 2 MVPs and 4 rings.... so if you want to argue longevity, then you're a fool

[Proxy]

Ranking Duncan higher than Hakeem because of rings is ignoring the fact that Hakeem was the better player. Horry has 7 rings, so we can rank him ahead of Duncan too right? Hakeem was the better two way player, covered alot more ground on defense, and performed better under pressure.

it isn't just rings. It's All-NBA appearances and MVP awards too.

Shut the up with the Horry argument too. That's weak.

[Proxy]

And what proof do you have that Hakeem performed better under pressure? They're all the same in that regard. That's why they're all hall of famers. Every post you make just exposes you for the homer that you are.

[djohn2oo8]

it isn't just rings. It's All-NBA appearances and MVP awards too.

Shut the up with the Horry argument too. That's weak.

Which rely on voting and aren't an exact science. Proof - Kobe again on the all nba first team defense to which Kobe has been on since 05. Two different eras. Hakeem came in during the showtime Lakers and the Bird Celtics, that's a big difference

[djohn2oo8]

For 9? how do you justify that?

Duncan has 13 (9 1st, 3 2nd, 1 3rd) all NBA appearances
to the Dream's 12 (6 1st, 3 2nd, 3 3rd)

Duncan even has 13 all Defense appearances to Hakeem's 9.

While Hakeem has the DMVPs, lets not forget TDs 2 MVPs and 4 rings.... so if you want to argue longevity, then you're a fool

That's why Hakeem still was putting up 23 and 9 at 34.

[Capt Bringdown]

Hakeem's 94/95 performances were the best big-man play I've ever seen in the playoffs. As great as Duncan has been, he's never produced an awesome display of basketball such as we witnessed in Hakeem's utter destruction of David Robinson.

[Proxy]

That's why Hakeem still was putting up 23 and 9 at 34.

If you're going to keep ignoring the entirety of my posts, then I'll stop wasting my time with you.

The all-nba appearances show that TD has been better quality and quan y wise... I won't deny the fact that Hakeem put on arguably, the greatest big man display of all time in 95, but one season doesn't make a legend. If it did, then we would have the Reignman in the hall of fame.