Duncan>Hakeem.

[Cry Havoc]

You didn't say the Rockets were accurate.

You said they were a great 3 point shooting team, then went on to say that they weren't accurate.

THOSE ARE CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS YOU ARE CHALLENGED IF YOU CANT SEE THAT

Not being ridiculously accurate does not equal sucking. I realize that your world is all whites and blacks. People talk about grey and you rant for 20 minutes about how light or dark it is. But that's ok. Keep on posting, at this point it's just hilarious.

[ambchang]

I also find it absolutely astounding why there were not any rebuttals to Rudy T's quote, where the coach himself said 3 pointers is a part of the system, where himself said this is a way they live, where all the players shoot some 3-pointers in practice.
I am positive he is integrating a part of the game where the Rockets were not good at as an integral part of their system. Gee, I wonder when will Popovich base the Spurs system around Duncan and Bowen shooting FTs, maybe then, the Spurs can finally win back-to-backs like the Rockets did.

[meta2007]

This should be discussed after Ducan retires.

[ambchang]

Why not throw in a quote from Hakeem himself for good measure, since kingmalaki and bobbyjoe are so fond of quoting Horry and Elie about whether Duncan or Hakeem is better, despite Horry was quoted after playing one year with Duncan, and Elie only two during Duncan's early years.

Link

Yes, I agree, but I think it was because of this team, the style of play. We're playing team basketball, aggressive defense, hitting more outside shots which opened the floor and gave me more room to operate inside. And also, we played with more experience after what we had done last year.

Oh my! This can't be true, Hakeem himself actually said the outside shots opening the game up for him? How is this possible? They were only an average shooting team, how can one of the greatest inside player benefit from an average shooting team?

[Indazone]

I mean, why base this argument on simple logic, when Rudy T himself stated that 3 pters were a big part of their game.

Rudy T is such a suckass coach, he intentionally asked his team to bomb away because they suck at it! Hakeem basically carried the team to those two les despite the poor supporting cast (I am not kidding, somebody actually stated this a few post back).

I been a Rocket follower for a long time...gotta agree with you on that one. But this is more evidence attributed to the greatness of Hakeem as he carried that team on his back.

[bobbyjoe]

It probably would have resembled an argument if I haven't already addressed the fact that the opposition had a choice of intentionally fouling others to put them at the line because it hurts the team Duncan/Shaq was on due to their inability to convert, and then get the ball back, and if I have never addressed the fact that Duncan and Shaq were way below league leading % (probably in the 30 to 40% range) rather than a measily 3%, but that is your choice.

LOL at your complete picture comment. I mean, up to this point, you were the one ignoring the fact that the Rockets based their offense on 3 pt shooters around Hakeem, you were the one ignoring the fact that they lead the league in 3 pt shot and created a new breed of teams that utilizes an almost unstoppable inside-out offense, I was the one noting that the Rockets led the league in 3PM with a % that was only 3% less than the league leading team.

I am sure you were looking at the whole picture. So what cons utes as a great shooting team?

As usual, you are being intentionally deceptive with the "only 3% less than the league leading team".

They were probably the same "only 3%" from being the least accurate team.

If a guy is averaging 4 blocks a game, it is true he is "only 1 block per game" higher than a guy averaging 3 blocks a game. However, it's also true and more relevant that he averages 33% more blocks (4 divided by 3) than the guy averaging 3 blocks a game.

Everything is relative.

The "only 3%" is misleading since the entire range of 3 pt shooting from the worst team to the best team was probably 6 or 7%.

I mean according to your logic every NFL team Marty Schottenheimer coached would by definition be the best running team in the league simply by virtue of the fact they tried the most.

As for your Allen Iverson comments, Iverson is by NBA standards a below average shooter. That's simply a fact. What he is is a great scorer. A guy who no matter where he is can create a shot attempt and get to the foul line.

There's a clear difference between being a great scorer (Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson, etc) and a great shooter (Ray Allen, Brent Barry, etc).

Iverson wouldnt be in or win many shooting contests.

[bobbyjoe]

#1: Somebody, though not use, did use the term suckass to describe the Rocket's 3 point shooting. But that guy is a clown and can be ignored.
#2: Based on your definition, Iverson is not a great scorer, neither was Larry Bird or Michael Jordan, they were merely converting at slightly below 50% in their careers. In fact, in 1986, Bird was only 1.5% above league average and 14% off the league leader.

It's pretty incredulous you've gone a long tirade requesting for you not to be misquoted and then you completely misapply the points I've been trying to make.

First off, I dont know who said the Rockets 3 point shooting was suckass.

My definition had to with a "great shooter" and not a "great scorer".
You can absolutely not be a "Great shooter" and shoot a lower % than a standard benchmark for whatever league you are in.

However, you can be a "great scorer" and still have a low %. See Kobe, Allen Iverson, Tracy McGrady. You're completely twisting things by implying the definition of great shooting extends to "great scorer"

Besides Kenny Smith, the Rockets didnt have any great shooters. Smith was amongst the league's best as evidenced by his multiple trips to the 3 pt shooting contest.

You did notice in the 3 point contest btw that it's not the person who attempts the most 3's, but the one who makes them, that wins right?

Besides Smith, you had a bunch of guys like Maxwell, Elie, Cassell, and Horry who weren't great shooters but were unbelievably clutch. But were they great shooters? No. Not individually, and not collectively either.

The fact that Houston had several guys who could shoot at a respectable % did help spread the floor for Olajuwon, no doubt. But to say they were a great shooting team when they were 14th and 15th %wise in a 28 team league is not true.

[bobbyjoe]

Why not throw in a quote from Hakeem himself for good measure, since kingmalaki and bobbyjoe are so fond of quoting Horry and Elie about whether Duncan or Hakeem is better, despite Horry was quoted after playing one year with Duncan, and Elie only two during Duncan's early years.

Link



Oh my! This can't be true, Hakeem himself actually said the outside shots opening the game up for him? How is this possible? They were only an average shooting team, how can one of the greatest inside player benefit from an average shooting team?

You do realize this quote is about one Finals series right? Not about an entire season or consecutive number or seasons.

I dont think anyone denies that Houston had some playoff series here and there, esp in 94 and 95, where they shot lights out from 3.

But the discussion is about years and careers, not one series, which is what the quote you pulled was in regards to.

[Phenomanul]

It's pretty obvious Olajuwon was extensively double teamed that series, given that he averaged 5.5 assists a game that series, nearly double his career average.

You're missing the point of the defensive strategy...

The point about being double teamed is not whether the opposing team throws one at you or not - that was never in question. At some point in every game most forwards or centers will face a double team of some kind. It's whether you have to fight through them to score - all dependent on whether or not the shooters are making their shots to open up the inside game for the pivots.

Once San Antonio's shooters failed to find any consistency whatsoever in that series Robinson's options dwindled, and the pressure to overcome his double and triple teams fell squarely on his shoulders. Hakeem knew that the moment anyone lagged off of one of his teammates that he could still rely on them. That kept SA's defense guessing and relieved Hakeem from having to force things whenever he was doubled. Oviously, this gave Houston's offense a significant advantage over San Antonio's.

Robinson's demise in that series was greatly exaggerated in light of this strategy. It's a shame that the casual fan will throw that one 'Dream Shake' highlight out as reason to suggest that Olajuwon dominated Robinson. I remember a game in Robinson's rookie year where he blocked 4 consecutive shot attempts by Olajuwon - all on the same trip down the floor no less. Since no Youtube clip of that event exists however, history has all but forgotten that Robinson was just as versatile as 'The Dream'.... I'm glad someone started putting some of Robinson's pre-injury highlights on Youtube. Robinson was the fastest seven footer I've ever seen - with or without the ball.

In recap, Houston beat San Antonio... So although Olajuwon played out of his mind; he did not singlehandedly destroy Robinson or the Spurs - i.e. the Rockets beat the Spurs... And again, Rodman's crazy implosion vastly helped the Rockets accomplish that feat.

[bobbyjoe]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Olajuwon did dominate Robinson.

I do agree with you that it's a shame Robinson receives so much scrutiny for that series but not for the reason you suggest (shooters, double teams, etc). That series was more about Olajuwon playing ridiculous than Robinson playing poorly. DRob was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and the way Hakeem was playing, no one would have stopped him.

However, one key thing I think u are ignoring about the double teams is the individual styles of the 2 players.

DRob's pet move was the face up at the wing or baseline and take a slower Center off the dribble to get to the hoop. Moves like this are pretty easy to double team by clogging the paint.

However, Hakeem's petmove was to receive the ball from the post-entry passer, spin to the baseline and launch a fadeaway. This is a shot that double teaming is simply useless against and I suspect that is one of the reasons Hakeem developed it. If the guy guarding the post-entry passer drops down as soon as the ball is dumped inside, Hakeem was so quick and tall that the double teamer just doesn't affect his shot.

This go to move is one of the key things that separated Olajuwon from Robinson careerwise. Having a go-to move like that is just invaluable and sets the table to get your outside shooters wide open looks.

And while I hear your point about the Youtube highligts (I'm sure you're sick of seeing them), the playoffs and the regular season are just too different.

I do remember in Akeem's early years DRob gave him a LOT of trouble. In fact, it seemed both gave each other trouble and neither would have good offensive games against the other for a long time.

However, in 93 when Hakeem entered his 4 yr peak of all-world, top 5 of all time time of play, he was just too much for DRob.

[bobbyjoe]

You're missing the point of the defensive strategy...

The point about being double teamed is not whether the opposing team throws one at you or not - that was never in question. At some point in every game most forwards or centers will face a double team of some kind. It's whether you have to fight through them to score - all dependent on whether or not the shooters are making their shots to open up the inside game for the pivots.

Once San Antonio's shooters failed to find any consistency whatsoever in that series Robinson's options dwindled, and the pressure to overcome his double and triple teams fell squarely on his shoulders. Hakeem knew that the moment anyone lagged off of one of his teammates that he could still rely on them. That kept SA's defense guessing and relieved Hakeem from having to force things whenever he was doubled. Oviously, this gave Houston's offense a significant advantage over San Antonio's.

Robinson's demise in that series was greatly exaggerated in light of this strategy. It's a shame that the casual fan will throw that one 'Dream Shake' highlight out as reason to suggest that Olajuwon dominated Robinson. I remember a game in Robinson's rookie year where he blocked 4 consecutive shot attempts by Olajuwon - all on the same trip down the floor no less. Since no Youtube clip of that event exists however, history has all but forgotten that Robinson was just as versatile as 'The Dream'.... I'm glad someone started putting some of Robinson's pre-injury highlights on Youtube. Robinson was the fast seven footer I've ever seen - with or without the ball.

in recap, Houston beat San Antonio... So although Olajuwon played out of his mind; he did not singlehandedly destroy Robinson or the Spurs - i.e. the Rockets beat the Spurs... And again, Rodman's crazy implosion vastly helped the Rockets accomplish that feat.

Let me ask you a question.

Supposing David Robinson and Tim Duncan had been reversed (i.e. it's Duncan drafted in 89 and DRob in 97), how many les do you think David Robinson would have won with the exact same cir stances, teammates, and compe ion that Duncan was surrounded with from 97-now.

I'm not looking to flame here, just looking for an honest opinion from a fan who loved both players...

[Phenomanul]

Let me ask you a question.

Supposing David Robinson and Tim Duncan had been reversed (i.e. it's Duncan drafted in 89 and DRob in 97), how many les do you think David Robinson would have won with the exact same cir stances, teammates, and compe ion that Duncan was surrounded with from 97-now.

I'm not looking to flame here, just looking for an honest opinion from a fan who loved both players...

It's hard to tell.... I don't know if it can be answered.

Robinson was more athletic and explosive than Duncan (a combination of Garnett's and Amare's best abilities). But Duncan has always had more of an inner drive. I believe it is that facet which has propelled him past his opposition and ever so slightly separated him from David...

Truth be told Robinson did more than his fair share to take that series against Houston to 6 games. Who knows what Duncan would have achieved under the same scenario.

Oddly enough both are very humble, and neither heavily sought the limelight.

Fortunately for Duncan however, he lives in a world where everyone can literally see him play... and winning never hurts your cause. Like I mentioned on an earlier post; a disproportionate number of people who discredit Robinson never even saw his game prior to his injuries.

[Phenomanul]

Conversely, I believe D'Rob would have bested Shaq at his prime.... even during Shaq's suppossed 'most dominant ever' years.

[TheAuthority]

Decide for yourselves then

Hakeem Olajuwan

[edit] Accolades
2x NBA champion (1994, '95)
2x NBA Finals MVP (1994, '95)
1x NBA MVP (1994)
2x Defensive Player of Year (1993, '94)
6x All-NBA First Team (1987, '88, '89, '93, '94, '97)
3x All-NBA Second Team ('86, '90, '96)
3x All-NBA Third Team (1991, '95, '99)
5x All-Defensive First Team ('87, '88, '90, '93, '94)
12x All-Star
Olympic gold medalist (1996)
Named one of the 50 Greatest Players in NBA History (1996).
Only player in NBA history to have won MVP, Finals MVP and Defensive Player of the Year awards in the same season (1994).[21]
One of the 4 players in NBA history to have ever recorded a quadruple-double.[3]
Olajuwon also won the rebounding and blocked shots les in 1989-90, becoming the third player ever (after Abdul-Jabbar and Bill Walton) to lead the league in both categories during the same season.[29]
All-time leader in blocked shots. (note: the NBA did not keep statistics for blocked shots until the 1973-74 season)
Olajuwon is also in the top ten in blocks, scoring, rebounding, and steals. He is the only player in NBA history placed in the top ten for all four categories.
All-time NBA Playoffs leader in total blocks with 472 and blocks per game with 3.3 per game.[44][45]
Olajuwon ranks 7th all-time in steals and is by far the highest ranked center. (note that steals were not recorded until the 1973-74 season)[46]
In 1989, Olajuwon had 282 blocks and 218 steals, becoming the only NBA player to record over 200 blocks and 200 steals in a season. [18]
Olajuwon is one of few players to record more than 200 blocks and 100 steals in a season. As the all-time leader in this feat, he did it for 11 seasons (consecutively from the 1985-86 season to the 1995-96 season). The next closest is David Robinson, who did it for 7 seasons.[47][48]

Tim Duncan
In his career, the two-time MVP (2002, 2003), four-time NBA champion (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007) and three-time NBA Finals MVP (1999, 2003, 2005) Duncan has collected a number of individual and team honours. As a college player, he was named ACC Male Athlete of the Year, won the John R. Wooden Award and was named Naismith College Player of the Year (all 1997).[7] In his debut year in the NBA (1998), he was voted Rookie of the Year and elected into the All-NBA Rookie Team, made the first of nine NBA All-Star Teams (eight First Team nominations), ten All-NBA Teams (nine First Team nominations), and ten All-Defensive Teams (seven First Team nominations).[3] With these impressive performances, Duncan is one of only four players to receive All-NBA First Team honors in each of his first eight seasons (1998-2005), along with Hall of Famers Bob Pet (ten seasons), Larry Bird (nine seasons), and Oscar Robertson (nine seasons), and is notably the only player in NBA history to receive All-NBA and All-Defensive honors in his first nine seasons (1998-2006).[36]

Duncan was also named by the Association for Professional Basketball Research as one of "100 Greatest Professional Basketball Players of The 20th Century", being the youngest player on that list.[37] In the 2001-02 season, he won the IBM Player Award[38] and The Sporting News (TSN) MVP Award,[39] becoming the third player to ever win the NBA MVP, IBM Player and TSN Player Awards in the same season. In 2003, Duncan was ranked 55th by Slam Magazine in their list of the "Top 75 NBA players of All Time". On February 18, 2006, he was named one of the Next 10 Greatest Players on the tenth anniversary of the release of the NBA's 50th Anniversary All-Time Team by the TNT broadcasting crew.[40]

So basically what this says is Duncan has more of everything that matters. les, MVPs, Finals MVPs.

[ambchang]

As usual, you are being intentionally deceptive with the "only 3% less than the league leading team".

They were probably the same "only 3%" from being the least accurate team.

If a guy is averaging 4 blocks a game, it is true he is "only 1 block per game" higher than a guy averaging 3 blocks a game. However, it's also true and more relevant that he averages 33% more blocks (4 divided by 3) than the guy averaging 3 blocks a game.

Everything is relative.

The "only 3%" is misleading since the entire range of 3 pt shooting from the worst team to the best team was probably 6 or 7%.

So given the narrow band of deviation, is 3pt % really that important in the scheme of things? The Rockets shot 1757 3 pters that year, if they were to make it at the rate of the top shooting team that year (the Hornets) of 39.7%, the Rockets would score a whopping 1.9 more points a game, when they were scoring 103.5 points a game for the season, I am sure that would give you ulcers.

Besides, we are talking about a 3% difference between 36% and 39%, that is hardly a 1/3 difference now is it? I am not comfortable with doing percentages of percentage difference, but that is a 1/12 difference.

On the other hand, they were 10.6% above the team with the 2nd most 3PM, and 43.5% over league average. You want relative numbers? Here you go, tell me now relatively average they were at 3 pt shooting.

I mean according to your logic every NFL team Marty Schottenheimer coached would by definition be the best running team in the league simply by virtue of the fact they tried the most.

I am not familiar with football.

As for your Allen Iverson comments, Iverson is by NBA standards a below average shooter. That's simply a fact. What he is is a great scorer. A guy who no matter where he is can create a shot attempt and get to the foul line.

There's a clear difference between being a great scorer (Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson, etc) and a great shooter (Ray Allen, Brent Barry, etc).

Iverson wouldnt be in or win many shooting contests.

Yeah, but he is not an efficient scorer, so by your definition, he would not be a great scorer because he is not efficient at it.

[ambchang]

It's pretty incredulous you've gone a long tirade requesting for you not to be misquoted and then you completely misapply the points I've been trying to make.

First off, I dont know who said the Rockets 3 point shooting was suckass.

My definition had to with a "great shooter" and not a "great scorer".
You can absolutely not be a "Great shooter" and shoot a lower % than a standard benchmark for whatever league you are in.

However, you can be a "great scorer" and still have a low %. See Kobe, Allen Iverson, Tracy McGrady. You're completely twisting things by implying the definition of great shooting extends to "great scorer"

Besides Kenny Smith, the Rockets didnt have any great shooters. Smith was amongst the league's best as evidenced by his multiple trips to the 3 pt shooting contest.

You did notice in the 3 point contest btw that it's not the person who attempts the most 3's, but the one who makes them, that wins right?

Besides Smith, you had a bunch of guys like Maxwell, Elie, Cassell, and Horry who weren't great shooters but were unbelievably clutch. But were they great shooters? No. Not individually, and not collectively either.

The fact that Houston had several guys who could shoot at a respectable % did help spread the floor for Olajuwon, no doubt. But to say they were a great shooting team when they were 14th and 15th %wise in a 28 team league is not true.

The next time any team shoot three pointers the way they shoot it in a 3 pt contest to determine a winner, please let me know.

So you are saying that Hakeem relied on an average shooting team? He said it.

[ambchang]

You do realize this quote is about one Finals series right? Not about an entire season or consecutive number or seasons.

I dont think anyone denies that Houston had some playoff series here and there, esp in 94 and 95, where they shot lights out from 3.

But the discussion is about years and careers, not one series, which is what the quote you pulled was in regards to.

Only problem was that Hakeem was referring to the whole playoffs, not just that one series. See the sentence above:

Asked whether the playoffs represented the best basketball of his career, Olajuwon typically turned the focus away from himself and onto his team.

[Galileo]

The Horry factor

Don't forget that the Robert Horry Duncan has is an old, low scoring dude who can hit a clutch three once in a while and play credible defense.

For Akeem, Horry played like an NBA All-star in the '95 Finals, and continued that into 1996, until he was slowed by an injury that he never fully recovered from.

[polandprzem]

Tim is top 3 greatest leaders in history of the NBA.

Specific dominance is a quiet one and stable one. Who needs a high peek, when you can win on and on again. Tim was always giving his team a chance to win a le he was always a contender. Hakeem wasn't no matter the fact about teammates.

Btw amchang killed everybody with those articles about treys.
Plain and simple watch the Houston to see how much they depended on 3 pointers. Plus Duncan in more active on offense. (prove me wrong)

When you want disscuss about history. Akwnowledge it first. Take a big picture and take a look from different angels.
Can't compare eras by stats the players were making.

Stats are almost always lieing and everybody should know it.
F the stats cause they won't tell you how the game is played.

[Galileo]

We all know that when players go from bad teams to good teams, their scoring average goes down.

Duncan's teams won 58 games per season

Hakeem's teams won 48 games per season

So if you adjust, using Galileo's ratio, you get:

Duncan 20 points per game = Hakeem 24.2 points per game

Duncan 25 points per game = Hakeem 30.2 points per game

[Demo Dick Marcinko]

[QUOTE=polandprzem]

Tim is top 3 greatest leaders in history of the NBA.

I'd put him top 5, but definitely ahead of Hakeem. No slight on Dream. He was huge.

Specific dominance is a quiet one and stable one. Who needs a high peek, when you can win on and on again. Tim was always giving his team a chance to win a le he was always a contender. Hakeem wasn't no matter the fact about teammates.

Ever since Tim first came into the league, and this was including his rookie season and even at times during the Laker 3peat, but I've always felt that the Spurs were in it. They have never gone into a finals series where I've felt that they Spurs weren't destined to win it all. That's what having the Big Fundamental play on your team does.

Btw amchang killed everybody with those articles about treys.
Plain and simple watch the Houston to see how much they depended on 3 pointers. Plus Duncan in more active on offense. (prove me wrong)

Both Chuck Norris and Bill Brasky now officially check under their beds looking for amchang.

When you want disscuss about history. Akwnowledge it first. Take a big picture and take a look from different angels.
Can't compare eras by stats the players were making.

That would be the second greatest trick ever pulled.

Stats are almost always lieing and everybody should know it.
F the stats cause they won't tell you how the game is played.

I agree stats can deceive. They can be skillfully and convincingly twisted, manipulated and distorted to suit an argument. We all know the drill.
Take 4 (& counting) > 2 and twist it any way you want and in the end you still have 4 (& countin) > 2. I'm more then happy that I've gotten a chance to be part of the Tim Duncan experience and I and probably 99.5% of Spurs fans wouldn't trade him for any other big man in recent history.

I'm out, and thus I won't be posting any more on the greatest thread never known.

[Demo Dick Marcinko]

We all know that when players go from bad teams to good teams, their scoring average goes down.

Duncan's teams won 58 games per season

Hakeem's teams won 48 games per season

So if you adjust, using Galileo's ratio, you get:

Duncan 20 points per game = Hakeem 24.2 points per game

Duncan 25 points per game = Hakeem 30.2 points per game

Meant to tell you earlier, you brought some great info to this thread, nice job.

[Galileo]

Meant to tell you earlier, you brought some great info to this thread, nice job.

Thank you.

It was my lucky break because I have watched almost every televised game that Hakeem and Duncan played in, in their primes, as they have been my favorite players.

[Galileo]

Duncan's assendancy....

Each of Duncan's 4 les moved him up a major notch in the pantheon of all time greats:

# 1 - Duncan had just turned 23, and literally dominated during the end of season and playoffs. The Spurs started that season 6-8, but finished 31-5 in the regular season + 15-2 in the playoffs, for a finish of 46-7, one of the best of all time. [maybe the best over the last 53 games of an NBA champ, can anyone find better?]

# 2 - The Spurs, with Duncan & role players, overcame the 3 time champion Shaq/Kobe/Jackson Lakers. Duncan almost had a quadruple double in the Finals. He held Kenyon Martin to something like 3-22 from the floor in the last game.

# 3 - Tim won it all without David Robinson.

# 4 - Tim won it all without David Robinson again.

# 5 - Tim proves he can win back to back?

[bobbyjoe]

http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-h...vs-duncan.html

http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-h...em-duncan.html

This is for AmbChang who dismissed the other general nba fan forum threads because he thought people were just voting and not giving solid reasons or arguments.

The opinions of both the pro-Duncan and pro-Hakeem in this thread are pretty well presented and compelling, regardless of which side you lean towards.