Duncan>Hakeem.

[bobbyjoe]

Of course the 3pt shot was an element of the Spurs' Championships... it wasn't the key element though. DEFENSE has always been the Spurs' 'bread and butter' in the Poppovich era... not a prolific inside/outside game.



Olajuwon averaged 35 ppg against David's 24.... David however, had to score most of his points against double and triple teams. And unfortunately for Robinson, no one on his team ever stepped up to help him shoulder the burden. Olajuwon despite his superhuman efforts still relied on game winning jumpers from his teammates to win the series. That was the difference.




Duncan never missed the playoffs... and only lost to eventual conference champions (Stockton & Malone Jazz his rookie year, Shaq & Kobe Lakers from '01 to '02 and '04, Dirk's Mavs in '06) Other than that Duncan has always triumphed over his opposition.

Not counting his twilight seasons in Toronto, Olajuwan missed the playoffs once, and was eliminated twice in the first round. Duncan has yet to do either.

Draw your own conclusions.



It does apply to the Spurs... I never said it didn't.

I'm just trying to point out that using volume stats to imply that Houston had average 3pt shooting teams was lame. They had awesome 3 point shooters just based on the fact that they made them when it mattered most - during playoff games.

BTW the Spurs swept Portland in 1999... had Elliott missed his three, the Spurs still win that series. And Kerr's 3pt barage was against Dallas in the Conf. Finals (not the Finals).




'01 Loss of Derek Anderson for the entire series against LA was crucial

'02 Lack of swingmen to take pressure off of Duncan, Robinson's back injury were the key factors of defeat.

'04 Hedo Turkoglu's and Horry's brickfest against LA. and the infamous 0.4 were the key factors of defeat.



We let go of Hedo, lost Stephen Jackson to FA and picked up Brent Barry.....

I think that the emergence of SuperManu in '05 was more important than anything in the line above. He was an unstoppable force in those playoffs, and had he not been hurt for Game 3 & 4, he could have legitimately taken the Finals MVP that year.

Putting any sort of relevance on the year Olajuwon's team missed the playoffs is just being purposely misleading.

1) It's a sample size of 1 year out of his 18 year career
2) It's already been noted that the team was 2-10 without Olajuwon that year he missed the playoffs and 40-30 with Olajuwon, which put them on a pace for a low playoff seed.
3) Duncan hasn't ever played on a cast that poor.

Show me a Spurs team that went 2-10 when Duncan wasn't in the lineup. All that season that Hakeem missed the playoffs shows is how weak his surrounding cast was. 2-10 proprates to a 13-69 record over 82 games. You can throw out all the stats about the stud Otis Thorrpe and all world Kenny Smith, but the bottomline is without Olajuwon, that team was a joke.

You make some good points about how "clutch" the Rockets shooting was. This is a fair point, unlike Chang's assertion that the Rockets had "great 3 point shooters" which has been brutally exposed. They clearly weren't great, but they were very clutch.

You can not be a "great" 3 point shooter and shoot below the league average at it.

Shaquille O'Neal wasn't a Great Free throw shooter just because he made and attempted amongst the most Free Thrrows in the NBA year in and year out.

Duncan's line has basically been the same as Hakeem as you show. In the years without some sort of legitimate outside shooting threats to complement his game, the Spurs were knocked out of the playoffs. And when they had the guns, they won it all. Chang's theory was that Hakeem was different from Duncan in that he needed "Great 3 point shooters" to win. That's been epxosed; all great big men need that outside shooting threat to make teams pay for double and triple teams. That is not exclusive to Hakeem.

Chang also conveniently ignores that the 86 Rockets which got to the Finals and beat the Showtime Lakers were not a prolific 3 point shooting team. The makeup of that team was completely different than the le teams, so the argument that Hakeem only succeeded in an inside-outside offense is false.

[Galileo]

Based on your comment's that Duncan > Jordan, no one will ever take you seriously again.

Duncan wasn't close to Jordan and he wasn't close to Hakeem defensively.

After 10 years in the NBA, I have already shown that Duncan has accomplished more than any other player in NBA history, including Jordan.

If you remember, had a poll been taken after the '95 season, you would have had few takers that Jordan was the greatest, although he was in the conversation.

Most people still selected either Russell, Chamberlain, Jabber, Magic or Bird, with Olajuwon and Jordan in the conversation.

But Jordan then went out and won three more rings.

So lets give Tim a chance.

If Tim wins THREE MORE RINGS, you will not think what I am saying is foolish.

2008 will be a pivotal year, because Duncan needs to prove he can win back to back les.

[bobbyjoe]

Jordan still was considered #1, even after 1995.

Regardless of if Duncan wins 4, 5, or 10 rings he just never dominates a game to the extent that MJ did. And MJ's clutch factor was off the charts.

Russell has more rings than MJ and few if any rate him over MJ. Most knowledgable basketball fans when ranking players dont only look at the # of rings and rank the players in descending order. That's a very sophmoric approach.

[bobbyjoe]

I have maintained from the start that the Rockets have had great shooters, and were a great 3 pt shooting team, I haven't changed that at all.
It was you and kingmalaki who imposes your definition of what a great 3 pt shooting team is into my arguments. You have been changing my arguments for me, and forcing me to admit that I was wrong in an argument that you thought I meant from the get go.

Well, no, I never said the Rockets were particularly accurate, it was your interpretation.

This was my first post in this thread regarding 3 pt shooting from the Rockets:

Post 411



And this was your response

Post 413



Clearly from the get go, you interpreted me saying the rockets shooter bombing away as some indication of their accuracy, but that was never my intention, and I never understood why you would think that.

In fact, upon review, YOU were the one who said Hakeem's shooters sucked ass using %s, when they were, at worst, average. Perhaps it was you who was spinning the whole time.

Later on, bobbyjoe even put in quotation marks about something I never said and tried to attribute this to me:



Given the amount of 3pters made by Maxwell, it is pretty clear that he opened up the offense for the Rockets (I originally said he opened up the floor for Drexler), but it was his inability to fully digest my post before posting that led to him intrepreting what I said and thought I said Maxwell's shooting was accurate, or that he opened up the floor for Hakeem.

Up till now, the 3 of you had no ability to quote me on saying either, and is trying to twist my wording around into saying something you two felt I said through your own misinterpretation.

If the two of you does not like to read my post but still like to respond to them, it is up to you, but please do not try to twist my word around and say I said something I never said, and try to show that things I never said to be incorrect and attribute the error to me.

So Maxwell opened up the court for a guy he played all of about 15 games with?!?

LOL. Maxwell quit on the Rockets in the playoffs of 1995. He was injured for most of the 2nd half of the season in 1995 after the Clyde Drexler trade. After 95, he never played for the Rockets or with Clyde as a teammate again.

I've got to hand it to you, I never thought I'd hear something crazier than "the rockets were a great 3 pt shooting team, but hey i never said they were accurate at it". Now Maxwell opened up the floor for a guy he hardly ever was a teammate with in his entire career?

[ambchang]

You make some good points about how "clutch" the Rockets shooting was. This is a fair point, unlike Chang's assertion that the Rockets had "great 3 point shooters" which has been brutally exposed. They clearly weren't great, but they were very clutch.

Hmmm ... still continuing to misinterpret what I said and continue to say I meant things you think I meant?

You can not be a "great" 3 point shooter and shoot below the league average at it.

Shaquille O'Neal wasn't a Great Free throw shooter just because he made and attempted amongst the most Free Thrrows in the NBA year in and year out.

Next time an opponent fouls people so that they are forced to shoot and miss 3 pters as a defensive mechanism, you let me know.
Oh wait, the Lakers did that to the Spurs in 04, and it worked.

Duncan's line has basically been the same as Hakeem as you show. In the years without some sort of legitimate outside shooting threats to complement his game, the Spurs were knocked out of the playoffs. And when they had the guns, they won it all. Chang's theory was that Hakeem was different from Duncan in that he needed "Great 3 point shooters" to win. That's been epxosed; all great big men need that outside shooting threat to make teams pay for double and triple teams. That is not exclusive to Hakeem.

Chang also conveniently ignores that the 86 Rockets which got to the Finals and beat the Showtime Lakers were not a prolific 3 point shooting team. The makeup of that team was completely different than the le teams, so the argument that Hakeem only succeeded in an inside-outside offense is false.

So as the 86 Rocket's team never won the championship, I don't see how that team was so massively successful. Yes, I acknowledged that it was an accomplishment in beating the Lakers that year, but why was it a success when they couldn't win it all?

And how were the Rockets not surrounded Hakeem with great 3 point shooters in 94 and 95? All 4 players around Hakeem could shoot and make 3s.

[ambchang]

So Maxwell opened up the court for a guy he played all of about 15 games with?!?

LOL. Maxwell quit on the Rockets in the playoffs of 1995. He was injured for most of the 2nd half of the season in 1995 after the Clyde Drexler trade. After 95, he never played for the Rockets or with Clyde as a teammate again.

I've got to hand it to you, I never thought I'd hear something crazier than "the rockets were a great 3 pt shooting team, but hey i never said they were accurate at it". Now Maxwell opened up the floor for a guy he hardly ever was a teammate with in his entire career?

It was about as crazy as you stating how Hakeem resurrected Drexler's by pointing to Drexler's FG% for 35 games in 95, and ignored all the other games he played in Houston since then.

BTW, Drexler soht 43.3%, 44.2%, and 42.7% with Houston from 96 to 98, but you HAD to look into the 35 games he played in 95. Oh wait, I remember now, it was because he was injured and broken down exactly in the summer of 95, despite missing significant chunks of time in 93 and 94 with the Blazers. I am sure this has nothing to do with a hot streak Drexler encountered and realizing that this was his last chance for the le.

[Galileo]

[QUOTE=bobbyjoe]

Jordan still was considered #1, even after 1995.

QUOTE]

That's a load of bull .

Jordan sucked in the '95 playoffs, and was clearly inferior to Olajuwon & Barkley in the '93 regular season.

Here is a comparison of Jordan, as of '95, to Russell, Chamberlain, Jabber, Bird, and Magic:

Rings:

Jordan 3
Russell 11
Chamberlain 2
Jabber 6
Bird 3
Magic 5

MVPs

Jordan 3
Russell 5
Chamberlain 4
Jabber 6
Bird 3
Magic 3

1st Team, All-NBA

Jordan 7
Russell 3
Chamberlain 7
Jabber 9
Bird 9
Magic 9

Final's MVP

Jordan 3
Russell 0
Chamberlain 1
Jabber 2
Bird 2
Magic 3

Jordan is a guard, not a big man. Everyone knows big men dominate the NBA.

Jordan never even swept an NBA Finals.

He had a top 30 alltime teammate for his three les (Pippen).

When Jordan retired, the Bulls won TWO LESS GAMES. That's it. TWO games. From 57 to 55.

How do you explain that?

Even seen what happened to the Spurs when David Robinson went down with an injury? The Spurs won about 30 less games, not 2.

Besides, Jordan wasn't even the first pick in the NBA draft. Sam Bowie was drafted ahead of him.

Jordan didn't win jack for 6 years.

Jordan never won a thing without Pippen.

or Jackson.

If it hadn't been for Phil Jackson, Jordan wouldn't have won anything.

Please get off the crack pipe.

[ambchang]

Also found this was what I posted:

And then the next few years he shot 43, 44 and 42. Was that because of Hakeem too?
And let's see, if you have a big man givingyou open looks, wouldn't you shoot much much better from 3s? Then why did Drexler shot the same that year before and afterhis trade from Portland? Perhaps another way to look at it was because he had Smith and Maxwell spreading the floor for to open up the driving lanes for him, when Drexler, throughout his career, was known as a penetrating guard, huh?

Hmm, so I actually said Maxwell and Smith, instead of just Maxwell, and the next 3 years, Drexler's FG% sucked ... let's see what happened. Maxwell was out of Houston, and Smith started sucking. Hakeem was still dominating, but why wasn't Drexler's efficiency similar to the 2nd half of 95?

This just in, Manu Ginobili is a better shooter than Kobe Bryant, just check out their FG% and 3P% the last 3 seasons. Shocking!

[bobbyjoe]

Hmmm ... still continuing to misinterpret what I said and continue to say I meant things you think I meant?



Next time an opponent fouls people so that they are forced to shoot and miss 3 pters as a defensive mechanism, you let me know.
Oh wait, the Lakers did that to the Spurs in 04, and it worked.



So as the 86 Rocket's team never won the championship, I don't see how that team was so massively successful. Yes, I acknowledged that it was an accomplishment in beating the Lakers that year, but why was it a success when they couldn't win it all?

And how were the Rockets not surrounded Hakeem with great 3 point shooters in 94 and 95? All 4 players around Hakeem could shoot and make 3s.

The 94 Rockets had great 3 point shooters at all 4 spots?

LOL.

Yeah, Otis Thorpe was a great 3 pt shooter. I think he made 2 his entire career.

Maxwell was a terrific 3 point shooter. So terrific he shot under 30% that season.

The team shot 33% from the arc that year. Is that great?

The 94 Rockets had 1 very good 3 point shooter in K. Smith. The rest were average at best.

If Duncan ever beat a team as good as the 86 Lakers, you'd have him as the Best Athlete Ever. So what if they didnt win the le? They played teh 86 Celtics with Bird/Mchale, one of the best NBA teams ever. That still doesnt diminish beating a great playoff opponent, one greater than Duncan's Spurs have ever defeated.

How many times do you want to shoot yourself in the foot with the crap that you can be a great 3 point shooter, while not even shooting the league average it?

You are basically saying that you can be great and incompetent at something at the same time.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../NBA_1994.html

In 93-94, the Rockets did not have one player in the top 5 in 3 point makes or in 3 point %. Maxwell sure enough was up there in ATTEMPTS at 403 but nowhere to be found at the top of the makes category.

Horry shot 32.4% that yr from the arc and Sam Cassell was at 29.8%.

Of course I guess since David Robinson and Shaq led the NBA that year in Free throws made, I guess they were both "great free throw shooters" even though their % was average at best.

[bobbyjoe]

Far and number one in MAKES, not ATTEMPTS. I am beginning to wonder whether you actually read what is written, or you are just intentionally avoiding all the points to make your arguments legit.
If you are the opposition, and you KNOW that any one of the other 4 players can make a 3 at an average of 33 to 36%, and that they will shoot a 3 when left open, would you give that up to double team a big man down low who shoots 50%, the expected value is pretty much the same. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

And yes, before the number of injuries, Ralph Sampson was a HoF caliber center. He was a constant 21/11 guy who can pass and shoot from the outside. He was a 7'4" Chris Webber/Kevin Garnett hybrid. He was an all-star the 1st four years, All-star MVP and All-NBA 2nd team in his 2nd year.

Tim Duncan had one season with a center who averaged 20/10, Hakeem had two, with another 19/10.

As for Manu being Spurs playoffs MVP, I really didn't know that they had such a thing, honest.

As for beating the Lakers being some kind of triumph. I already stated in the previous post that Hakeem needed 3pt shooters or a HoF caliber centre next to him to be successful, and yes, Ralph Sampson was a HoF caliber centre before his string of injuries. Besides, not like the Rockets won the le that year.

BTW, in this post you clearly stated your opinion that the Rockets led the league by far in "MAKES, not ATTEMPTS"

No one twisted your words. You were the one who suggested the Rockets led the league in made 3's, but not attempts and that has proven to be completely false.

[bobbyjoe]

[QUOTE=Galileo]

Jordan still was considered #1, even after 1995.

QUOTE]

That's a load of bull .

Jordan sucked in the '95 playoffs, and was clearly inferior to Olajuwon & Barkley in the '93 regular season.

Here is a comparison of Jordan, as of '95, to Russell, Chamberlain, Jabber, Bird, and Magic:

Rings:

Jordan 3
Russell 11
Chamberlain 2
Jabber 6
Bird 3
Magic 5

MVPs

Jordan 3
Russell 5
Chamberlain 4
Jabber 6
Bird 3
Magic 3

1st Team, All-NBA

Jordan 7
Russell 3
Chamberlain 7
Jabber 9
Bird 9
Magic 9

Final's MVP

Jordan 3
Russell 0
Chamberlain 1
Jabber 2
Bird 2
Magic 3

Jordan is a guard, not a big man. Everyone knows big men dominate the NBA.

Jordan never even swept an NBA Finals.

He had a top 30 alltime teammate for his three les (Pippen).

When Jordan retired, the Bulls won TWO LESS GAMES. That's it. TWO games. From 57 to 55.

How do you explain that?

Even seen what happened to the Spurs when David Robinson went down with an injury? The Spurs won about 30 less games, not 2.

Besides, Jordan wasn't even the first pick in the NBA draft. Sam Bowie was drafted ahead of him.

Jordan didn't win jack for 6 years.

Jordan never won a thing without Pippen.

or Jackson.

If it hadn't been for Phil Jackson, Jordan wouldn't have won anything.

Please get off the crack pipe.

Jordan "sucked" in the 95 playoffs? He played as well in that playoff as any player in them not named Hakeem. Dude averaged 33 ppg.

Pretty convenient that you dont point out the Bulls record in 1995 before MJ returned and only point out the 94 record when Pippen had an MVP caliber season.

What freaking difference does it make if Jordan won the NBA finals 4-0 or 4-3?

Jordan didnt have the benefit of playing a team as pathetic as the 2007 Cavs in the Finals if that's what you are getting at.

What he did do in the Finals though is beat a team with Karl Malone on it back to back years, something Duncan never managed to do (0-2 against the mailman in the playoffs lifetime).

[ambchang]

The 94 Rockets had great 3 point shooters at all 4 spots?

LOL.

Yeah, Otis Thorpe was a great 3 pt shooter. I think he made 2 his entire career.

Maxwell was a terrific 3 point shooter. So terrific he shot under 30% that season.

The team shot 33% from the arc that year. Is that great?

The 94 Rockets had 1 very good 3 point shooter in K. Smith. The rest were average at best.

If Duncan ever beat a team as good as the 86 Lakers, you'd have him as the Best Athlete Ever. So what if they didnt win the le? They played teh 86 Celtics with Bird/Mchale, one of the best NBA teams ever. That still doesnt diminish beating a great playoff opponent, one greater than Duncan's Spurs have ever defeated.

How many times do you want to shoot yourself in the foot with the crap that you can be a great 3 point shooter, while not even shooting the league average it?

You are basically saying that you can be great and incompetent at something at the same time.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../NBA_1994.html

In 93-94, the Rockets did not have one player in the top 5 in 3 point makes or in 3 point %. Maxwell sure enough was up there in ATTEMPTS at 403 but nowhere to be found at the top of the makes category.

Horry shot 32.4% that yr from the arc and Sam Cassell was at 29.8%.

Of course I guess since David Robinson and Shaq led the NBA that year in Free throws made, I guess they were both "great free throw shooters" even though their % was average at best.

If you didn't think that the Rockets were a fantastic 3 pt shooting team, then that is your problem. I find it shocking that a person who has been watching basketball as long as you has not realized that the Rockets started a trend of building successful teams with an offense built around a dominant center and a bunch of 3 point shooters. The formula has since been improved by the Spurs and the Lakers in terms of effectiveness and efficiencies with players like Kobe, or Parker and Manu over Drexler.

Yes, I made a mistake in 94, they surrounded Hakeem with 3 players who could bomb the crap out of opposing teams, and were still #1 in makes.

And I will repeat this probably for the 4th time, as an individual player, I will pick Hakeem over Duncan any day of the week, he was a better defender and has a much more well-rounded offensive repertoire, but as a team player, I will pick Duncan, because he has demonstrated that he can win with drastically different teams, something that Hakeem has failed to do (and no, losing in the finals is not success).

And of course, I have said it before that if a team ever left the Rockets wide open for 3s so that they have a better chance to win, then you have a case about the Shaq comment. In fact, Robinson was a great FT shooter, he went to the line a lot by creating contact, and put in a decent clip. I can say the same thing about Karl and Moses Malone. It was a great part of their offense.

[ambchang]

BTW, in this post you clearly stated your opinion that the Rockets led the league by far in "MAKES, not ATTEMPTS"

No one twisted your words. You were the one who suggested the Rockets led the league in made 3's, but not attempts and that has proven to be completely false.

Gee, read the previous post in it's full context instead of nitpicking parts out.
You responded to my post about Rockets leading the league in makes by saying that they jacked up a lot of shots does not translate into them being particularly good at it, my above comment was saying that I said the Rockets were #1 in makes, and not that I said the Rockets were #1 in attempts.
This is different from how you interpret it as me saying the Rockets were #1 in 3 pters made, but not #1 in attempts.

Far and number one in MAKES, not ATTEMPTS. I am beginning to wonder whether you actually read what is written, or you are just intentionally avoiding all the points to make your arguments legit.

It was quite clear in the bolded part that I was referring to my post talking about makes, but not talking about attempts, but due to your infatuation about finding bits and pieces of a post, misinterpreting them, creating a strawman argument, then blowing it down to claim victory, you can't seem to see whole posts.

Do you want to continue putting words in somebody else's mouth now?

[Galileo]

Jordan "sucked" in the 95 playoffs? He played as well in that playoff as any player in them not named Hakeem. Dude averaged 33 ppg.

Pretty convenient that you dont point out the Bulls record in 1995 before MJ returned and only point out the 94 record when Pippen had an MVP caliber season.

What freaking difference does it make if Jordan won the NBA finals 4-0 or 4-3?

Jordan didnt have the benefit of playing a team as pathetic as the 2007 Cavs in the Finals if that's what you are getting at.

What he did do in the Finals though is beat a team with Karl Malone on it back to back years, something Duncan never managed to do (0-2 against the mailman in the playoffs lifetime).

Shaq was more dominating in the '00 - '02 playoffs, than Jordan in '91 - '93.

Jabber was more dominating in '71 than maybe anyone in history.

He took an expansion team to the NBA Finals, went 12-1 throught he playoffs, and swept the Finals without even one close game.

Moses Malone was more dominating in '83 than any season Jordan ever had.

Bill Russell had the most dominating game of all time, with 30 points and 44 rebounds in game 7 of the 1962 Finals.

And I have not even started with Wilt Chamberlain who average 50 points and 25 rebounds in 1962.

You are enthralled with scoring.

Magic was so dominating that he basically handed the all-star game MVP to Tom Chambers one year, and handed the Finals MVP to James Worthy another year.

Worthy disappeared after Magic retired.

The only claim Jordan had to the best of all time in '95 was by 'dominating' for three years.

[Phenomanul]

What he did do in the Finals though is beat a team with Karl Malone on it back to back years, something Duncan never managed to do (0-2 against the mailman in the playoffs lifetime).

Loosing to a heavily experienced Malone in his Rookie year is hardly a thing to feel bad about.

But I would add that loosing to Malone and 3 other HOF teammates hardly cons utes a nick to Duncan's reputation. He made the clutchest basket of his career in that series only to see it stripped of worth after Derek Fisher's physics defying shot went in.

The true measure of comparison is that Duncan went 2-3 against a Shaq & Kobe tandem. Saying that Duncan went 0-2 against Malone in the playoffs, while technically true is a bit misleading.

[kingmalaki]

Of course the 3pt shot was an element of the Spurs' Championships... it wasn't the key element though. DEFENSE has always been the Spurs' 'bread and butter' in the Poppovich era... not a prolific inside/outside game.

So you are saying hitting 3 pointers was the key element to the Rocket’s les, and not Hakeem dominating on both ends of the court, and having the ability to putplay HOF centers? I will not debate this with you. Either way his original implication that Dream only won when surrounded by great 3 point shooters was way off, and as factually inaccurate as it get’s.

Olajuwon averaged 35 ppg against David's 24.... David however, had to score most of his points against double and triple teams. And unfortunately for Robinson, no one on his team ever stepped up to help him shoulder the burden. Olajuwon despite his superhuman efforts still relied on game winning jumpers from his teammates to win the series. That was the difference.

I have the tapes from that series as well and Dream was also double-teamed (how else do the Rockets perimeter threats get so many open looks)? This premise that David was doubled and Hakeem wasn’t is quite false. I agree that the Rockets role players stepped up more than the Spurs role players.

I'm just trying to point out that using volume stats to imply that Houston had average 3pt shooting teams was lame. They had awesome 3 point shooters just based on the fact that they made them when it mattered most - during playoff games.

BTW the Spurs swept Portland in 1999... had Elliott missed his three, the Spurs still win that series. And Kerr's 3pt barage was against Dallas in the Conf. Finals (not the Finals).

Either way, the Spurs still won when Duncan was surrounded by 3 point shooters just as good as the ones that surrounded Hakeem, using whatever method you like (clutchness, 3 point %). Just because the Rockets launched more did not make them better at converting. That’s why his original implication made no sense….

As far as the rest of your post, I have spent like 15 pages going back and forth between who was better and won’t say anything that hasn’t already been said. Just clearing up completely false statements at the moment….

[kingmalaki]

ambchang

Dude, your analysis is quite flawed. You are basically saying that the Rockets were great at shooting the three because they were a league leader in makes and attempts. Now note, this is not what you were implying at first (you are backtracking), but let’s just roll with it.

Using that same logic, do you conclude that Corey Maggettee is a great FT shooter? He is a forward, and for forwards he had the 4th most FT attempts last season (633) and the most makes (519). He scored 17 pts a game, and 7 of those came from FT’s (about a 42% clip off his offense was from the FT line). He made 82% of his FT’s. Is he a great FT shooter, at 82%?

Do you conclude that Lebron James is a great FT shooter? He is a forward, and for forwards he had the most FT attempts last season and the 3rd most makes. He scored 27 pts a game, and 7 of those came from FT’s (about a 26% clip off his offense was from the FT line). He made 70% of his FT’s. Is he a great FT shooter, at 70%?

Is someone a great FT shooter at 87%? Kobe shot 87% last season, when he was #1 in the league in makes and attempts? Oh, and he is clutch too!!!! Is he a great ft shooter?

See how flawed your argument is?

[ambchang]

I would say Corey Maggette is a great FT shooter, it was an integral part of his offense, gets his man into foul trouble, and coverts it at a reasonable rate.
Kobe would be the same, great FT shooter, no doubt.
I would say James is a very good FT shooter, for someone to consistently go to the line and making his team pay, afterall, him going to the FT line yields 1.4 expected points, far more than a FT, which gives about 1.

But then again, these are individuals, would you say the Bulls were a great 3pt shooting team last year? The were, afterall, 2nd in the league. Were they a better 3pt shooting team than GS, despite making 280 more but a few % points higher.

And no, I never implied the Rockets were accurate, you kept saying that I was backtracking, but continued not be able to quote me. To me, this is a low form of argument. I don't know how you can say that I implied the Rockets were accurate, when in the 3rd or 4th post I had regarding 3's, I flat out said I never said they were accurate, but they were great, and when the 1st post I went out and said the Rockets can bomb away from 3 pt land. Where is the implication that I said they were accurate? Is flat out saying that I never said they were accurate implying that they were accurate? Which world do you live in?

Also, was Lebron James 3% point off the league leader, like what the Rockets were in 95? Or was he an astounding 3.4% off, like they were in 94? You know, I figured if 3% is what separates an excellent % from an average/suckass %, 0.4% could be quite significant.

BTW, so is Manu a better shooter than Kobe? He did get better FG% and 3P% than Kobe the last 3 seasons.

[Phenomanul]

So you are saying hitting 3 pointers was the key element to the Rocket’s les, and not Hakeem dominating on both ends of the court, and having the ability to putplay HOF centers? I will not debate this with you. Either way his original implication that Dream only won when surrounded by great 3 point shooters was way off, and as factually inaccurate as it get’s.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only wrote what was stated... don't extrapolate my statements.

I have the tapes from that series as well and Dream was also double-teamed (how else do the Rockets perimeter threats get so many open looks)? This premise that David was doubled and Hakeem wasn’t is quite false. I agree that the Rockets role players stepped up more than the Spurs role players.

To the point where they were hitting game winning jumpers.

BTW it was noted who was double-teaming, and playing completely out of character. Ummm that would be Rodman. His antics cost us that series, considering that the Spurs had dominated Houston during the Regular season that year...

12/10/94 SAS..108..at..HOU..96
12/23/94 SAS...98......HOU...96
01/13/95 SAS..100..at..HOU..103
01/26/95 SAS..103......HOU..100
02/21/95 SAS...98..at..HOU...97
03/05/95 SAS..124......HOU..103

and the year after for that matter.

12/23/95 SAS..110......HOU...95
01/09/96 SAS...88..at..HOU...82
02/15/96 SAS..108..at..HOU..112
02/18/96 SAS...93......HOU...79

to the tune of 8-2....

The only anomaly then (in the playoff series that took place between those two seasons) was the disappearance of the Spurs' role players and the emergence of Houston's.

Either way, the Spurs still won when Duncan was surrounded by 3 point shooters just as good as the ones that surrounded Hakeem, using whatever method you like (clutchness, 3 point %). Just because the Rockets launched more did not make them better at converting. That’s why his original implication made no sense….

As far as the rest of your post, I have spent like 15 pages going back and forth between who was better and won’t say anything that hasn’t already been said. Just clearing up completely false statements at the moment….

Nice to know your objectivity is around to catch em' all.

[Galileo]

ambchang

Dude, your analysis is quite flawed. You are basically saying that the Rockets were great at shooting the three because they were a league leader in makes and attempts. Now note, this is not what you were implying at first (you are backtracking), but let’s just roll with it.

Using that same logic, do you conclude that Corey Maggettee is a great FT shooter? He is a forward, and for forwards he had the 4th most FT attempts last season (633) and the most makes (519). He scored 17 pts a game, and 7 of those came from FT’s (about a 42% clip off his offense was from the FT line). He made 82% of his FT’s. Is he a great FT shooter, at 82%?

Do you conclude that Lebron James is a great FT shooter? He is a forward, and for forwards he had the most FT attempts last season and the 3rd most makes. He scored 27 pts a game, and 7 of those came from FT’s (about a 26% clip off his offense was from the FT line). He made 70% of his FT’s. Is he a great FT shooter, at 70%?

Is someone a great FT shooter at 87%? Kobe shot 87% last season, when he was #1 in the league in makes and attempts? Oh, and he is clutch too!!!! Is he a great ft shooter?

See how flawed your argument is?

free throws are different from threes because you EARN a free throw attempt.

Anyone can throw up a three.

And here is a dirty little secret....

Any FT% better than 50% is a plus, because going 2-4 from the line is no different than going 1-2 from the floor.

Plus, even if you go 2-4 from the line, you just drew 2 fouls, whereas if you go 1-2 from the floor, you didn't draw any fouls.

Which brings me to another Hakeem vs Duncan moment....

Duncan

regular season career

free throw attempts per 40 minutes = 8.0

free throws made per 40 minutes = 5.4

FT% = 68%

playoffs

FTA per 40 minutes = 8.86

FT per 40 minutes = 6.18

FT% = 70%

[note that Duncan raises his game more in the playoffs, than Olajuwon]

Olajuwon

regular season career

FTA per 40 minutes = 6.9

FT per 40 minutes = 4.9

FT% = 71%

playoffs

FTA per 40 minutes = 7.19

FT per 40 minutes = 5.17

FT% = 72%

Duncan draws more fouls than Olajuwon, makes more free throws than Olajuwon, and only shoots free throws at 2 to 3% less than Olajuwon.

Over the course of Duncan's career, here is how many more free throws Duncan would have made had he shot at The Dream's percentage:

regular season; 167 free throws over ten years, 16.7 points per season, or 0.2 points per game.

[remember, Duncan makes 0.5 more free throws per game than Olajuwon]

playoffs; 25 free throws over 9 years, 2.7 points per season, or 0.2 points per game.

[remember, Duncan make 1.01 more free throws per game than Olajuwon]

It looks like the Spurs fans are keener than Rockets fans!

[ambchang]

So you are saying hitting 3 pointers was the key element to the Rocket’s les, and not Hakeem dominating on both ends of the court, and having the ability to putplay HOF centers? I will not debate this with you. Either way his original implication that Dream only won when surrounded by great 3 point shooters was way off, and as factually inaccurate as it get’s.

For someone who takes so much pride in putting down others and saying others were illogical, you sure did find a way to show us how your logic works.
Just because the Rockets were great with shooting 3s doesn't mean that Hakeem wasn't great in the middle. It was said numerous times throughout this thread that the 3 pt making abilities of the Rockets were enhanced by the presence of Hakeem in the middle, and I have went on a number of times how the Rocket's offense was inside-out (ie: not outside-in). But it is a fact that Hakeem works best and benefitted with having great 3 pt shooters around him because it opens up the middle for him to operate. It is that simple. For a fan of the Rockets, you sure didn't know how your team benefitted from the 3 pt barrages.
If I say Warren Buffet made so much money because he works hard, it doesn't mean I am saying he is a dumbass idiot, you got that?

Either way, the Spurs still won when Duncan was surrounded by 3 point shooters just as good as the ones that surrounded Hakeem, using whatever method you like (clutchness, 3 point %). Just because the Rockets launched more did not make them better at converting. That’s why his original implication made no sense….

Once again, in 99, the Spurs were ranked 25/29 in the league in 3 pt %, while the Rockets in 94 and 95 were 15th and 14th. The % are the same, but the era certainly wasn't. So it is OK to compare hard exact numbers when it comes to 3pt%, but not when it is about les won. Gotcha.

As far as the rest of your post, I have spent like 15 pages going back and forth between who was better and won’t say anything that hasn’t already been said. Just clearing up completely false statements at the moment….

Such as you claiming different era whenever it suits you, but completely ignoring it when it refutes your points.

[ambchang]

Found something interesting from Wikipedia.
Link

Coaching at udes

... The 1995 Houston Rockets won the NBA le utilizing a three-point centered, "inside-out" strategy, where any double team of Hakeem Olajuwon would result in a three point attempt.

[ambchang]

There's more:
Link

In Game Six, Olajuwon had a team-high 30 points as Houston shot three-pointers on Phoenix all night to force Game Seven with a 116-103 win.

In the same article:

The Magic fought back to take a three-point lead with a little over a minute left in the game. An Olajuwon turnover should have spelled doom for the Rockets, but they fouled the right Orlando player. Magic guard Nick Anderson missed four straight free throws with 10.5 seconds left in the game to give the Rockets a chance. With 1.6 seconds left, Rockets guard Kenny Smith faked the Magic's Anfernee Hardaway out of his way and calmly sank his Finals-record seventh three-pointer to tie the game at 110.

[ambchang]

More about Rocket's prowess at the 3 point line:

Link

His ability to answer the Magic after it had made a run to get back into Game 2 was demoralizing to Orlando. First, the Magic had to contend with Kenny Smith's 5 3-pointers in the third quarter of Game 1. Tonight, it was Cassell's 16 points in the second quarter and clutch baskets in the second half.

Even Hardaway was dumbfounded.

"What can you do?" the Magic point guard said. "Kenny doesn't have a good night, Sam comes in and turns it on. Seems like you can't keep both down."

Cassell ran the floor and the offense with such precision that the Magic was discombobulated after his wild second-quarter barrage. He made layups off the wrong foot, fallaway 10-footers over O'Neal and then poured in some malicious 3-pointers for good measure.

Orlando had moved within 14 points of the Rockets at 85-71 in the third quarter when Cassell caught fire again.

[ambchang]

Will this ever end?

Link

led "Rockets tie series with 3-point barrage"