Hakeem or Robinson

[Phenomanul]

But why is this written in stone for Spurs fans?

-All four (Jordan, Hakeem, David Robinson, and Kobe) are Hall of Fame players. That's not in question. Right there you already know they're all near a similar level.

I agree...

-Hakeem is probably a top 3 center of all time. David Robinson is probably somewhere in the bottom half of top 10 centers of all time.

That's the problem.... You may not think so but to me that is a serious undermining of David's talent and versatility. That type of ranking is always going to be subjective. To me the ranking of centers is more like:

1. Kareem Abdul Jabar (all-star on both ends of the court; long productive career due to partnering up with Magic on the downside of his career; efficient; deadly 'skyhook' made him unguardable; could level with Bruce Lee if only for a few seconds).
2. Wilt Chamberlain (all-star on both ends of the court; posted ridiculous, currently unattainable numbers - the fact that his teams could not get past Russell's Celtics is not his fault - he was always the better player).
3a. Hakeem Olojuwon (all-star on both ends of the court; best footwork out of the all the great centers; dominant when he wanted to be).
3b. David Robinson (all-star on both ends of the court; fastest center ever; versatile - could play the point; got to the FT line at will; best reliable jumper not named 'skyhook' for a center).
4. Bill Russell ("Mr. More Rings than Fingers" - was a defensive monster, but had limited offense; his teams' dominant streak had more to do with the total package of the team than the fact that he was unstoppable; for example Wilt could still get monster numbers against him even if Russell's team always won; played in an era with fewer teams, and where the league was cast in a lower profile than the other sports leagues).
5. Shaquille O'Neal (unstoppable within 6 feet of the bucket; lackadaisical at ude on defense and poor free-throw shooting drops him this low).

I won't bother with the rest.

P.S. Duncan is a Power Forward.

-Michael Jordan is the greatest shooting guard of all time. Kobe is probably in the top 5 if not top 3 greatest shooting guards of all time.

-Hakeem was the Finals MVP twice and the main reason for Houston's two les. David Robinson has two les but couldn't have won either without Tim Duncan.

See... that right there is the problem. Like most casual media-driven fans, your entire premise for considering Hakeem the greater player is based solely (or mainly) on the success of his teams' performances, while holding David entirely accountable for the demise of his.

Robinson was the Spurs. He carried them wherever they went. Hakeem, like Robinson was also the workhorse for the Rockets, but unlike Robinson he was blessed with an amazing set of shooters that literally won/swung playoff series for him. David, never had that luxury, and would not have won a championship with the teams that surrounded him unless he managed to post Wilt-like numbers... how can that be held against him?

That is the cause of frustration for Spurs [Robinson] fans.

-Jordan has 6 NBA Finals MVPs and the main reason for 6 NBA les. Kobe has three les but couldn't have won any of them without Shaq.

-The statistical numbers between Hakeem and David Robinson are negligible.

Rudy T. specifically altered his game plan for guarding Robinson in their 1995 series, based on the fact that Robinson had posted monster numbers against them during the regular season. He doubled or triple-teamed Robinson the entire series. He basically dared the Spurs' perimeter players to beat them. The Spurs' coaching staff could never free David up, as they didn't have the players to spread the floor and make the Rockets pay for double-teaming Robinson. To top it off when tried to implement a similar defensive strategy on Hakeem it backfired because the Rockets' perimeter players made them pay. The Spurs managed to win 2 games because of Robinson but lost the series in spite of his efforts. And yet the media threw him under the bus.

Conversely, two of the games in the series were essentially decided by key daggers. But no, it was the 'greatness of Hakeem' that got them past the Spurs - after all his 'dream-shake' on Robinson proved that he was the better player. To them that one play summed up the series. As if that were possible. In short, the series' deciding plays were overlooked in favor of focusing on a more inflammatory, albeit unfounded, headline - one that unfairly tarnished Robinson's legacy forever. NBA-nation ate it up....

-The statistical differences between Jordan and Kobe are more apparent but are a little bit skewed because of Kobe's first two seasons coming off the bench and playing shorter minutes. Kobe's stats per 36 minutes compare favorably with Jordan's stats per 36 minutes. The one obvious difference in field goal percentage. Otherwise, Kobe's numbers are actually pretty close to Jordan's and Kobe still has several more seasons to improve those numbers.

Now Hakeem and Robinson might be closer to equals than Jordan and Kobe. But, the analogy of the two is not really that far off base.

The supporting cast Kobe had this year was better than any Robinson ever had prior to Duncan's arrival.

Let me put it this way... if the 93-95 Rockets were led by David Robinson instead of Hakeem:

The Rockets would still be owners of back-to-back les. I am convinced of that

Funny thing is that this isn't a slight on Hakeem; this is a knock on David's teammates.

For that matter, when the Spurs lost against the Blazers in 1992 was it David's fault too? He posted monster numbers in that series. One boneheaded play made by a boneheaded player (Rod Strickland) cost the Spurs that series.

Just for the record, I haven't voted. Voting on such a thread when started by a Lakers Fan is demeaning in and of itself...

[bobbyjoe]

Robinson's numbers compare with the Dream. Kobes, not even close to MJ.

Regular season, yes.

Post season? Not even close.

Here is the breakdown for career postseason stats:

David Robinson: 18.1 PPG 10.6 RPG 48% FG 2.3 APG 2.3 BPG

Hakeem Olajuwon: 25.9 PPG 11.2 PPG 53% FG 3.2 APG 3.3 BPG

Saying Robinson is on par with Hakeem is as homeristic as a Wolves ban saying KG is on par with Duncan. Same argument, similar careers.

Olajuwon's game was tailor-made for post season success as he was a dominant big.

Robinson at no point in his career was dominant and his game which relied on cheap buckets was clearly inferior in the postseason when his stats consistently dipped from his regular season play each and every year because play was more physical and intense and the guy just had no reliable go to moves. Olajuwon was the opposite.

The Robinson-Olajuwon postseason spread is actually much wider than Kobe-MJ. Kobe does become a beast in the playoffs. David Robinson never did.

[JamStone]

Fair points. Don't completely agree with all of them from each of you, but definitely fair.

I did say the margin between Jordan and KObe is greater that the difference between Hakeem and David, but I don't feel it's the so much greater to nullify a justifiable comparison of the two pairs.

We're talking all four of those players "arguably" being top 20 players in the history of the league and "arguably" all four being top 8 players at their respective positions.

The gap between Michael and Kobe is larger. Kobe can still gain ground. He has a good 5-6 years to do so.

I'm not one to argue Kobe is close to Jordan. But, there are legitimate reasons to put him in the same category.

[bobbyjoe]

Hakeem is generally ranked somewhere from 4 to 6, with Chamberlain, Jabbar and Russell cementing the top 3 spots. Robinson is somewhere from 5 to 7.
At best, Hakeem is 4, and Robinson is 7.

Besides, there has been much more dominant centers in the league than shooting guards. In fact, no teams were supposed to win consistently without a strong center in the middle before Jordan arrived.



I would say the difference between 2 and zero, and 6 and zero is quite large, 300% difference in fact.




Robinson won 1 MVP, Hakeem won an MVP.
Jordan won 5 MVPs, Kobe won 1 MVP.

And not to diminish Kobe’s MVP, but in the year he won the MVP, Paul finished #2, Garnett #3. Compared that to Jordan’s era when he was going up against Barkley, Magic, Bird, Malone, Thomas, Ewing ….. it’s quite a difference.


If you want to go on about stats …
In Kobe’s first 12 seasons, he had more than 30points / 36 mins once, Jordan did it 5 times, of which 3 of them are better than Kobe’s career high.
In the same period, Kobe has >5 assists 4 times, with a high of 5.3, Jordan did it 7 times, with a high of 7.2.
Kobe never got more than 2 steals / 36 mpg in his career, Jordan did it every 10 out of his first 12 years, with a high of 3.
Kobe never got more than 1 block / 36 mpg in his career, Jordan did it 4 times, with a high of 1.7.
Kobe got 6 rebounds / 36 mpg once, Jordan did it 6 times, with a high of 7.2.
Kobe is significantly better at the 3, but this is an era in which the 3 is used much more effectively than the past. However, even though the totals are higher, the averages are about the same.
Jordan shot significantly better from the field, as you mentioned.
Kobe led the league in scoring twice.
Jordan did it 10 times.

Now compare Hakeem and Robinson:
Robinson led the league in blocks, rebounds and scoring once each.
Hakeem led the league in blocks 3 times, rebounds twice. And note that Robinson played half his career after he had a career-altering injury.

In his 7 pre-injury years, Robinson scored more than 25points per 36 minutes 3 times, with a high of 26.5, Hakeem, despite having a much longer injury free period, did it once.

Hakeem rebounded much better, with 5 seasons > 12 rpg in 36 minutes, and Robinson only twice, but Hakeem had a high of 13.4, while Robinson had a high of 12.5. Blocks were pretty even, and so were steals. FG% was basically a draw, and so were FT%, with Robinson slightly better at both.

In the years going head to head, Robinson won All-NBA 1st team 4 times, Hakeem did it 3 times (his fourth time was when Robinson was seriously injured and played only 6 games). Now ask yourself honestly, if Jordan and Kobe were going head to head in their prime, and there is only one all-nba team spots for the SG (as opposed to having two guard spots), how many times would Kobe finish ahead of Jordan?

Robinson is generally ranked from 5 to 7?

Homerism at it's worst.

Show me one single list outside of a Spurs fan site where David Robinson is ranked as the FIFTH best Center in NBA history (and thus ahead of either Hakeem or Shaq).

That's just BS and you know it.

Robinson is generally ranked 7-10.

[Phenomanul]

Regular season, yes.

Post season? Not even close.

Here is the breakdown for career postseason stats:

David Robinson: 18.1 PPG 10.6 RPG 48% FG 2.3 APG 2.3 BPG

Hakeem Olajuwon: 25.9 PPG 11.2 PPG 53% FG 3.2 APG 3.3 BPG

Saying Robinson is on par with Hakeem is as homeristic as a Wolves ban saying KG is on par with Duncan. Same argument, similar careers.

Olajuwon's game was tailor-made for post season success as he was a dominant big.

Robinson at no point in his career was dominant and his game which relied on cheap buckets was clearly inferior in the postseason when his stats consistently dipped from his regular season play each and every year because play was more physical and intense and the guy just had no reliable go to moves. Olajuwon was the opposite.

The Robinson-Olajuwon postseason spread is actually much wider than Kobe-MJ. Kobe does become a beast in the playoffs. David Robinson never did.

Nice try.... I see what you did there.

Split that up before Robinson's back injury. Robinson played half of his career on a bad back, fortunately for Spurs fans the latter half was after Duncan's arrival. Unfortunately for David's post-season stats, every extra year in the league caused them to dip even if he was winning championships.

How's this for comparison...

Robinson played a total of 70 post-season games after his back injury (almost all of them on the downside of his prime - while deferring to Duncan).
Pre-injury average of 24.03 ppg. Post-injury average of 13.54 ppg

In that same period Hakeem played in a total of 15 post season games (nine of which were on the downside of his prime).

All of which suggest your averages are purposely (or ignorantly - take your pick) skewed.

Also don't forget that the Admiral gave up two seasons to serve this country, seasons that would have statistically increased his averages based on his immediate impact as a 2-year-deferred rookie.

[Phenomanul]

Robinson is generally ranked from 5 to 7?

Homerism at it's worst.

Show me one single list outside of a Spurs fan site where David Robinson is ranked as the FIFTH best Center in NBA history (and thus ahead of either Hakeem or Shaq).

That's just BS and you know it.

Robinson is generally ranked 7-10.

You may call it homerism. I will choose to call you media sheeple.

Either way the argument is subjective.

surprise, surprise another Laker fan undermining David's legacy.

[baseline bum]

You knew this thread was going to bring out the Rocket fan bag who pretends to go for the Lakers.

[bobbyjoe]

Nice try.... I see what you did there.

Split that up before Robinson's back injury. Robinson played half of his career on a bad back, fortunately for Spurs fans the latter half was after Duncan's arrival. Unfortunately for David's post-season stats, every extra year in the league caused them to dip even if he was winning championships.

How's this for comparison...

Robinson played a total of 70 post-season games after his back injury (almost all of them on the downside of his prime - while deferring to Duncan).
Pre-injury average of 24.03 ppg. Post-injury average of 13.54 ppg

In that same period Hakeem played in a total of 15 post season games (nine of which were on the downside of his prime).

All of which suggest your averages are purposely (or ignorantly - take your pick) skewed.

Also don't forget that the Admiral gave up two seasons to serve this country, seasons that would have statistically increased his averages based on his immediate impact as a 2-year-deferred rookie.

Hakeem's prime is generally agreed to have ended in 1996 when he turned 34 years old. He played 30 postseason games after this point with much lower postseason #'s. So his #'s are also dragged down.

Bottom line is that you could completely throwout Robinson's postseason resume post-back injury and Hakeem's post decline and the #'s are still just not close. Robinson's FG% was always much less than his regular season FG% even in his prime years. Easy buckets gone in the postseason, more physical play, less success for Robinson.

Olajuwon was just a monster in the postseason every year throughout his career where David's #'s consistenly dipped from the regular season, and yes, even before his back injuries.

Given Robinson's trend of falling short in the playoffs and failing to step up each and every year of his career, much like Kevin Garnett or Chris Webber, I fail to see what difference the 2 years lost to the Navy would have made.

Would he have suddenly become clutch (which he was not throughout his career) and developed some actual go-to moves in the playoffs (which he never worked to do). That's just a reach.

Robinson is what he is. A good Center, but not even remotely in the discussion with guys like Olajuwon, Duncan, and O'Neal, the 3 truly elite bigs of the past 20-25 years. He's in the KG/Webber/Karl Malone 2nd tier...

Robinson was embarassed from 93-95 in the playoffs every year when he faced a contemporary elite big. First by Karl Malone (twice) and then by Olajuwon...And this was smack in his prime, before any back injury

[Galileo]

I agree...



That's the problem.... You may not think so but to me that is a serious undermining of David's talent and versatility. That type of ranking is always going to be subjective. To me the ranking of centers is more like:

1. Kareem Abdul Jabar (all-star on both ends of the court; long productive career due to partnering up with Magic on the downside of his career; efficient; deadly 'skyhook' made him unguardable; could level with Bruce Lee if only for a few seconds).
2. Wilt Chamberlain (all-star on both ends of the court; posted ridiculous, currently unattainable numbers - the fact that his teams could not get past Russell's Celtics is not his fault - he was always the better player).
3a. Hakeem Olojuwon (all-star on both ends of the court; best footwork out of the all the great centers; dominant when he wanted to be).
3b. David Robinson (all-star on both ends of the court; fastest center ever; versatile - could play the point; got to the FT line at will; best reliable jumper not named 'skyhook' for a center).
4. Bill Russell ("Mr. More Rings than Fingers" - was a defensive monster, but had limited offense; his teams' dominant streak had more to do with the total package of the team than the fact that he was unstoppable; for example Wilt could still get monster numbers against him even if Russell's team always won; played in an era with fewer teams, and where the league was cast in a lower profile than the other sports leagues).
5. Shaquille O'Neal (unstoppable within 6 feet of the bucket; lackadaisical at ude on defense and poor free-throw shooting drops him this low).

I won't bother with the rest.

P.S. Duncan is a Power Forward.




See... that right there is the problem. Like most casual media-driven fans, your entire premise for considering Hakeem the greater player is based solely (or mainly) on the success of his teams' performances, while holding David entirely accountable for the demise of his.

Robinson was the Spurs. He carried them wherever they went. Hakeem, like Robinson was also the workhorse for the Rockets, but unlike Robinson he was blessed with an amazing set of shooters that literally won/swung playoff series for him. David, never had that luxury, and would not have won a championship with the teams that surrounded him unless he managed to post Wilt-like numbers... how can that be held against him?

That is the cause of frustration for Spurs [Robinson] fans.



Rudy T. specifically altered his game plan for guarding Robinson in their 1995 series, based on the fact that Robinson had posted monster numbers against them during the regular season. He doubled or triple-teamed Robinson the entire series. He basically dared the Spurs' perimeter players to beat them. The Spurs' coaching staff could never free David up, as they didn't have the players to spread the floor and make the Rockets pay for double-teaming Robinson. To top it off when tried to implement a similar defensive strategy on Hakeem it backfired because the Rockets' perimeter players made them pay. The Spurs managed to win 2 games because of Robinson but lost the series in spite of his efforts. And yet the media threw him under the bus.

Conversely, two of the games in the series were essentially decided by key daggers. But no, it was the 'greatness of Hakeem' that got them past the Spurs - after all his 'dream-shake' on Robinson proved that he was the better player. To them that one play summed up the series. As if that were possible. In short, the series' deciding plays were overlooked in favor of focusing on a more inflammatory, albeit unfounded, headline - one that unfairly tarnished Robinson's legacy forever. NBA-nation ate it up....



The supporting cast Kobe had this year was better than any Robinson ever had prior to Duncan's arrival.

Let me put it this way... if the 93-95 Rockets were led by David Robinson instead of Hakeem:

The Rockets would still be owners of back-to-back les. I am convinced of that

Funny thing is that this isn't a slight on Hakeem; this is a knock on David's teammates.

For that matter, when the Spurs lost against the Blazers in 1992 was it David's fault too? He posted monster numbers in that series. One boneheaded play made by a boneheaded player (Rod Strickland) cost the Spurs that series.

Just for the record, I haven't voted. Voting on such a thread when started by a Lakers Fan is demeaning in and of itself...

Bill Russell was GREAT on offense. He moved without the ball, set picks, passed, and offensive rebounded great. He was like a smaller, quicker version of Tim Duncan on offense.

[bobbyjoe]

But why is this written in stone for Spurs fans?

-All four (Jordan, Hakeem, David Robinson, and Kobe) are Hall of Fame players. That's not in question. Right there you already know they're all near a similar level.

-Hakeem is probably a top 3 center of all time. David Robinson is probably somewhere in the bottom half of top 10 centers of all time.

-Michael Jordan is the greatest shooting guard of all time. Kobe is probably in the top 5 if not top 3 greatest shooting guards of all time.

-Hakeem was the Finals MVP twice and the main reason for Houston's two les. David Robinson has two les but couldn't have won either without Tim Duncan.

-Jordan has 6 NBA Finals MVPs and the main reason for 6 NBA les. Kobe has three les but couldn't have won any of them without Shaq.

-The statistical numbers between Hakeem and David Robinson are negligible.

-The statistical differences between Jordan and Kobe are more apparent but are a little bit skewed because of Kobe's first two seasons coming off the bench and playing shorter minutes. Kobe's stats per 36 minutes compare favorably with Jordan's stats per 36 minutes. The one obvious difference in field goal percentage. Otherwise, Kobe's numbers are actually pretty close to Jordan's and Kobe still has several more seasons to improve those numbers.


Now Hakeem and Robinson might be closer to equals than Jordan and Kobe. But, the analogy of the two is not really that far off base.

The gap between the FG% advantage MJ had on Kobe Bryant narrows considerably when you look at the fact that a much higher percentage of Bryant's Field Goal attempts are behind the arc.

You really need to look at adjusted FG% when you are comparing 2 players when there's a considerable difference in % of 3's attempted relative to overall FG's.

I think the comparison is very legit.

[Phenomanul]

The gap between the FG% advantage MJ had on Kobe Bryant narrows considerably when you look at the fact that a much higher percentage of Bryant's Field Goal attempts are behind the arc.

You really need to look at adjusted FG% when you are comparing 2 players when there's a considerable difference in % of 3's attempted relative to overall FG's.

I think the comparison is very legit.

And you've got the audacity to call me a homer?

Kobe isn't even the 2nd best SG; that honor would go to the Big O, Oscar Robertson.

And yes, the gap between MJ and Kobe is substantial.

The only reason they're even in the same sentence is because Kobe plays for a large market team; to deny that would be expose your naive understanding of how the media hype-machine affects the perception of players.

[ambchang]

Regular season, yes.

Post season? Not even close.

Here is the breakdown for career postseason stats:

David Robinson: 18.1 PPG 10.6 RPG 48% FG 2.3 APG 2.3 BPG

Hakeem Olajuwon: 25.9 PPG 11.2 PPG 53% FG 3.2 APG 3.3 BPG

Saying Robinson is on par with Hakeem is as homeristic as a Wolves ban saying KG is on par with Duncan. Same argument, similar careers.

Olajuwon's game was tailor-made for post season success as he was a dominant big.

Robinson at no point in his career was dominant and his game which relied on cheap buckets was clearly inferior in the postseason when his stats consistently dipped from his regular season play each and every year because play was more physical and intense and the guy just had no reliable go to moves. Olajuwon was the opposite.

The Robinson-Olajuwon postseason spread is actually much wider than Kobe-MJ. Kobe does become a beast in the playoffs. David Robinson never did.

Of course this totally neglected the fact that Robinson played the majority of his postseason games later on in his career, post-injury when Duncan was on board due to a largely subpar supporting cast.

In the first 7 seasons in the NBA, he played in the playoffs 6 season, with the only year he missed the playoffs due to an injury at the end of the 3rd season. Other than two seasons, there wasn't any significant dip in his scoring average. In fact, that season, he went from 29.8 to 25.3 in his MVP season due to aggressive double teams (I mean, you are going to double off Avery Johnson and let Rodman roam to double/triple Robinson too, wouldn't you?).

Interestingly, the two seasons he did worse in the playoffs was when Rodman was on board, coincidence? Doubltful.

In the seasons he actually got help, he shot 53.29%, 68.63% and 51.55% in the playoffs, while pretty much maintained his scoring average. In those years, he averaged 24.04 points in the playoffs, 11.75 rebounds, 3.11 blks and 1.26 stls, pretty much numbers that are in line with his regular season production.

To use Kevin Garnett vs. Duncan as an analogy must be some sort of joke. Duncan out performed Garnett in every single significant statistical category other than assists, FT% and 3PT shooting, and did it with less minutes.

Garnett's teams missed multiple playoffs, Robinson NEVER missed the playoffs (other than the season he played 6 games) despite having supporting cast that is comparably as bad as Garnett's.

On the other hand, Duncan missed zero playoffs, while Hakeem couldn't say the same.

The difference between Duncan and Garnett is much larger than that of Hakeem and Robinson when you want to talk about it from a statistical point of view.

However, I do agree that Robinson's game is not tailored to the playoffs, just that the reason is that he relied heavily on drawing the foul on drives, and playoffs don't make those calls as much. To say that he got points of cheap baskets suggests that you haven't been watching much of Robinson. You are talking about a guy who shot an insane amount of FTs, players who get garbage points does not do that. He also led the team in assists, and that suggests the offense runs through him.

And Kobe is a beast in the playoffs? In the 11 seasons he made the playoffs, he had a better FG% thrice, 3pt% 7 times, FT% twice, rebounds 4 times, assists 5 times, scoring 7 times. However, his net average over the years, he had a worse FG%, FT%, 3PT%, rebounding average, assists and scoring. In other words, all his major statistical categories (except steals, which I am too lazy to look up) went down. How do you figure he was a beast?

[ambchang]

Robinson is generally ranked from 5 to 7?

Homerism at it's worst.

Show me one single list outside of a Spurs fan site where David Robinson is ranked as the FIFTH best Center in NBA history (and thus ahead of either Hakeem or Shaq).

That's just BS and you know it.

Robinson is generally ranked 7-10.

Give me your list.

Other than Chamberlain, Russell, Jabbar, Hakeem and Shaq, it's between Moses Malone and Robinson. Who else would you put up there?

[ambchang]

Hakeem's prime is generally agreed to have ended in 1996 when he turned 34 years old. He played 30 postseason games after this point with much lower postseason #'s. So his #'s are also dragged down.

Bottom line is that you could completely throwout Robinson's postseason resume post-back injury and Hakeem's post decline and the #'s are still just not close. Robinson's FG% was always much less than his regular season FG% even in his prime years. Easy buckets gone in the postseason, more physical play, less success for Robinson.

Olajuwon was just a monster in the postseason every year throughout his career where David's #'s consistenly dipped from the regular season, and yes, even before his back injuries.

Given Robinson's trend of falling short in the playoffs and failing to step up each and every year of his career, much like Kevin Garnett or Chris Webber, I fail to see what difference the 2 years lost to the Navy would have made.

Would he have suddenly become clutch (which he was not throughout his career) and developed some actual go-to moves in the playoffs (which he never worked to do). That's just a reach.

Robinson is what he is. A good Center, but not even remotely in the discussion with guys like Olajuwon, Duncan, and O'Neal, the 3 truly elite bigs of the past 20-25 years. He's in the KG/Webber/Karl Malone 2nd tier...

Robinson was embarassed from 93-95 in the playoffs every year when he faced a contemporary elite big. First by Karl Malone (twice) and then by Olajuwon...And this was smack in his prime, before any back injury

Why don't you just look up the numbers first before you make these statements that you pass off as facts. I did, look them up. I agree Hakeem had better post season numbers, but to say that pre-injury Robinson and pre-decline Hakeem are not comparable is really reaching.

Pre-decilne Hakeem avearged:
27 ppg (pull up significantly by those two le runs, and curiously, when the NBA had shorter 3 pt lines, perhaps having shooters surround him helped afterall, huh?), 53% from the field, 72% from the line, 11.6 rebounds, 3.4 assists, 1.71 stls, 3.4 blocks.

[florige]

Yeah, even as a lurker I remember how ugly these polls involving Hakeem vs Robinson or Duncan would get.

[Phenomanul]

Hakeem's prime is generally agreed to have ended in 1996 when he turned 34 years old. He played 30 postseason games after this point with much lower postseason #'s. So his #'s are also dragged down.

Bottom line is that you could completely throwout Robinson's postseason resume post-back injury and Hakeem's post decline and the #'s are still just not close.

OK let's see:

Robinson Pre-Injury Playoff Averages:
Age 24-30

Games Played: 53
24.04 PPG
11.75 RPG
2.94 APG
3.11 BPG
1.26 SPG
2.89 TPG
39.32 MPG
48.85 FG%
66.67 FT%

Robinson Post-Injury Playoff Averages:
Age 32-37

Games Played: 70
13.54 PPG
9.69 RPG
1.77 APG
2.10 BPG
1.20 SPG
1.81 TPG
30.53 MPG
46.61 FG%
66.67 FT%

Olojuwon Pre-33 Playoff Averages:
Age 22-33

Games Played: 115
27.84 PPG
11.70 RPG
3.37 APG
3.55 BPG
1.70 SPG
3.08 TPG
41.05 MPG
52.95 FG%
71.57 FT%

I would be blind to suggest David's averages were better. But they are very similar. Statistically poignant is the fact that Olojuwon's best seasons were played out at the ages of 23, 31, & 32. You say Robinson's years in the Navy didn't hurt his averages? Well if it hadn't been for that commitment one could draw a parallelism between Robinson's career and Hakeem's, and based on that comparison Robinson's numbers at 23 (his hypothetical 2nd year in the league) would be as good as his numbers were at 25 - his actual 2nd year in the league (25.8 PPG, 13.5 RPG, 2.0 APG, 68.6 FG%, 86.8 FT%, 3.5 BPG). Those numbers would certainly help his overall post-season averages; you have used to guage David's post-season 'disappearance'.

For comparison Garnett, Kobe, and LeBron all entered the league as teens. By the time they were 22-24, they were posting monster/career numbers.

Not to be left out of the discussion is that fact that Olojuwon's two most complete post-seasons occurred during his prime at ages 30 and 31 (his two le runs). Due to his injury, David couldn't 'pad his post-season stats' by playing out those years of his prime - and when he did return at 32, Duncan had arrived as the Spurs' new/primary post weapon.

Robinson's FG% was always much less than his regular season FG% even in his prime years. Easy buckets gone in the postseason, more physical play, less success for Robinson.

Other teams just had to focus on Robinson to eliminate the Spurs; good teams mind you (otherwise they wouldn't be in the playoffs). Spurs shooters were never elite enough to keep the defense honest. As a result David's numbers suffered. Numbers and statistics have to be kept in the context of what actually took place on the court. Most fans don't have that insight, don't care, haven't been around long enough or simply don't understand the dynamics of the game's numbers to understand how significant that context is. They're lazy and depend on the media's perpective to develop their own perceptions of players.

A big knock on Shaq is that he has always had the luxury of playing with an elite All-NBA 1st-Team SG. It's substantially easier to score when your opponents can't focus their entire defensive game plan around you. Or when your All-star guard can get you easy buckets, and help shoulder the offensive load. It's also easier to score when refs allow you to bull-doze your way to the bucket (but that's another matter altogether - one I don't want to expound on more than I already have).

Olajuwon was just a monster in the postseason every year throughout his career where David's #'s consistenly dipped from the regular season, and yes, even before his back injuries.

David played in just 53 postseason games (in a span of 6 years).
He never had an elite guard as a teammate, or trust-worthy three-point shooters to help him out. If Jordan couldn't win playoff series before Pippen's arrival, despite posting otherworldly stats; did that make him any less great?

Robinson got his teams to the 2nd round of the playoffs or the WCF without a perennial all-star side kick. And though Olojuwon was a stud he still relied heavily on timely shots by Horry, Cassell, Elie, Kenny Smith and even Drexler during his run in '95 to help him win playoff series.

You would be delusional not to factor any of this into the argument; or just downright obtuse. Based on your history in this forum - I say it's the latter.

Given Robinson's trend of falling short in the playoffs and failing to step up each and every year of his career, much like Kevin Garnett or Chris Webber, I fail to see what difference the 2 years lost to the Navy would have made.

Would he have suddenly become clutch (which he was not throughout his career) and developed some actual go-to moves in the playoffs (which he never worked to do). That's just a reach.

Robinson dunked on folks - that was his 'go-to' move. A feat much harder to accomplish when teams have focused their entire game plan on clogging the lane and double teaming you. You made the argument that Robinson's and Olojuwon's post-season stats were radically different. When I pointed out that Robinson's career needed to be evaluated on a pre/post injury basis and that said numbers would reflect that he and Olojuwon were actually statistically similar you simply couldn't admit that your use of numbers was purposely spun to undermine David's game. Now you fail to understand a simple concept; that playing more games during one's prime can only help/rather than hurt your statistical averages. I'm not reaching for anything; I'm simply noting something that should be obvious were you actually able to analyze their careers objectively. Your love for Shaq, is handicapping your ability to give David the merit he deserves.

On the subject of comparing Robinson vs. Garnett; please... that is a weak argument. Robinson would have gotten the Wolves into the playoffs with several of Garnett's supporting casts.

Chris Webber is not even a center; and was never the defensive player Robinson or Olojuwon were. Did he ever lead the league in rebounding or blocks? Webber's one lone attribute where he was actually better than both Robinson or Olojuwon was the vision to set up his teammates; Webber's passing skills were superb. Just be glad the refs gave you the series in '02, otherwise you may not be as inclined to lambast Webber for his shortcommings.

Robinson is what he is. A good Center, but not even remotely in the discussion with guys like Olajuwon, Duncan, and O'Neal, the 3 truly elite bigs of the past 20-25 years. He's in the KG/Webber/Karl Malone 2nd tier...

O'Neal hurt his 'elite' status by not giving a damn about defense (outside of his le runs with the Lakers). Or by not caring enough to improve his woeful free-throw shooting to the point of becoming his team's liability in the clutch. See last year's Spurs/Suns series.

Robinson and Olojuwon carried teams all by themselves. Shaq has always had an all-star team mate, one that could create shots for him, and command defensive assignments of their own. Unlike Robinson's Spurs' Olojuwon's teams became elite because the clutchest set of 3pt bombers happenned to call you, "teammate" during a le run. The casual fan has always downplayed this factor.

Robinson was embarassed from 93-95 in the playoffs every year when he faced a contemporary elite big. First by Karl Malone (twice) and then by Olajuwon...And this was smack in his prime, before any back injury

Malone had an all-star PG in Stockton, and was surrounded by an excellent cast of 3pt shooters (Stockton himself was pretty clutch).

Like I said, casual fans (or bitter rival fans) will be obtuse on the matter when they want to be. Teams win championships. NBA series aren't decided by 1-on-1 match-ups.

[Phenomanul]

My original ranking has Olojuwon as 3a and Robinson as 3b. The only thing that separates them in my mind was that Olojuwon badly wanted to defeat his opponents while Robinson was too much of a professional when it came to the duties of his job to ever take him to a more dominant level.

The game of basketball never really empassioned Robinson early on in his career the way it did after he had teamed up with super-compe or Duncan, super-leader Elie and even a fearless rookie Manu.

The difference alone is driven by this frame of mind. As players, however both Olojuwon and Robinson were equally versatile.

[bobbyjoe]

Give me your list.

Other than Chamberlain, Russell, Jabbar, Hakeem and Shaq, it's between Moses Malone and Robinson. Who else would you put up there?

Maybe in your book it comes down to that. Don't forget Mikan and Walton.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailyd...reatestCenters

This is from an ESPN poll where 20 analysts were polled.

Not one out of 20 ranked Rob over Hakeem. Only 4 had Robinson over Moses Malone.

You initially suggested that Robinson is ranked anywhere from 5-7. That was the statement I have serious issue with, because it's a bigtime reach and inaccurate. To have Robinson as #5, you are saying he is better than one of the 5 you mentioned. No one is that crazy besides a true homer silver n blacker.

The fact that its' pretty clearly established who are the top 5 C's of alltime suggests that Robinson is simply not in the tier of this discussion. I have him at #7 after Walton.

Moses was a multi-MVP. He was an absolute force in the playoffs. I would easily take him over Robinson. He's generally very underrated in these discussions.

[bobbyjoe]

And you've got the audacity to call me a homer?

Kobe isn't even the 2nd best SG; that honor would go to the Big O, Oscar Robertson.

And yes, the gap between MJ and Kobe is substantial.

The only reason they're even in the same sentence is because Kobe plays for a large market team; to deny that would be expose your naive understanding of how the media hype-machine affects the perception of players.

I can't get over the irony here. You talk about Kobe's fame being due to hype in the context of a discussion of Kobe Bryant vs. Michael Jordan. Yeah, the media hype-machine never played up Jordan...

[bobbyjoe]

OK let's see:

Robinson Pre-Injury Playoff Averages:
Age 24-30

Games Played: 53
24.04 PPG
11.75 RPG
2.94 APG
3.11 BPG
1.26 SPG
2.89 TPG
39.32 MPG
48.85 FG%
66.67 FT%

Robinson Post-Injury Playoff Averages:
Age 32-37

Games Played: 70
13.54 PPG
9.69 RPG
1.77 APG
2.10 BPG
1.20 SPG
1.81 TPG
30.53 MPG
46.61 FG%
66.67 FT%

Olojuwon Pre-33 Playoff Averages:
Age 22-33

Games Played: 115
27.84 PPG
11.70 RPG
3.37 APG
3.55 BPG
1.70 SPG
3.08 TPG
41.05 MPG
52.95 FG%
71.57 FT%

I would be blind to suggest David's averages were better. But they are very similar. Statistically poignant is the fact that Olojuwon's best seasons were played out at the ages of 23, 31, & 32. You say Robinson's years in the Navy didn't hurt his averages? Well if it hadn't been for that commitment one could draw a parallelism between Robinson's career and Hakeem's, and based on that comparison Robinson's numbers at 23 (his hypothetical 2nd year in the league) would be as good as his numbers were at 25 - his actual 2nd year in the league (25.8 PPG, 13.5 RPG, 2.0 APG, 68.6 FG%, 86.8 FT%, 3.5 BPG). Those numbers would certainly help his overall post-season averages; you have used to guage David's post-season 'disappearance'.

For comparison Garnett, Kobe, and LeBron all entered the league as teens. By the time they were 22-24, they were posting monster/career numbers.

Not to be left out of the discussion is that fact that Olojuwon's two most complete post-seasons occurred during his prime at ages 30 and 31 (his two le runs). Due to his injury, David couldn't 'pad his post-season stats' by playing out those years of his prime - and when he did return at 32, Duncan had arrived as the Spurs' new/primary post weapon.



Other teams just had to focus on Robinson to eliminate the Spurs; good teams mind you (otherwise they wouldn't be in the playoffs). Spurs shooters were never elite enough to keep the defense honest. As a result David's numbers suffered. Numbers and statistics have to be kept in the context of what actually took place on the court. Most fans don't have that insight, don't care, haven't been around long enough or simply don't understand the dynamics of the game's numbers to understand how significant that context is. They're lazy and depend on the media's perpective to develop their own perceptions of players.

A big knock on Shaq is that he has always had the luxury of playing with an elite All-NBA 1st-Team SG. It's substantially easier to score when your opponents can't focus their entire defensive game plan around you. Or when your All-star guard can get you easy buckets, and help shoulder the offensive load. It's also easier to score when refs allow you to bull-doze your way to the bucket (but that's another matter altogether - one I don't want to expound on more than I already have).



David played in just 53 postseason games (in a span of 6 years).
He never had an elite guard as a teammate, or trust-worthy three-point shooters to help him out. If Jordan couldn't win playoff series before Pippen's arrival, despite posting otherworldly stats; did that make him any less great?

Robinson got his teams to the 2nd round of the playoffs or the WCF without a perennial all-star side kick. And though Olojuwon was a stud he still relied heavily on timely shots by Horry, Cassell, Elie, Kenny Smith and even Drexler during his run in '95 to help him win playoff series.

You would be delusional not to factor any of this into the argument; or just downright obtuse. Based on your history in this forum - I say it's the latter.



Robinson dunked on folks - that was his 'go-to' move. A feat much harder to accomplish when teams have focused their entire game plan on clogging the lane and double teaming you. You made the argument that Robinson's and Olojuwon's post-season stats were radically different. When I pointed out that Robinson's career needed to be evaluated on a pre/post injury basis and that said numbers would reflect that he and Olojuwon were actually statistically similar you simply couldn't admit that your use of numbers was purposely spun to undermine David's game. Now you fail to understand a simple concept; that playing more games during one's prime can only help/rather than hurt your statistical averages. I'm not reaching for anything; I'm simply noting something that should be obvious were you actually able to analyze their careers objectively. Your love for Shaq, is handicapping your ability to give David the merit he deserves.

On the subject of comparing Robinson vs. Garnett; please... that is a weak argument. Robinson would have gotten the Wolves into the playoffs with several of Garnett's supporting casts.

Chris Webber is not even a center; and was never the defensive player Robinson or Olojuwon were. Did he ever lead the league in rebounding or blocks? Webber's one lone attribute where he was actually better than both Robinson or Olojuwon was the vision to set up his teammates; Webber's passing skills were superb. Just be glad the refs gave you the series in '02, otherwise you may not be as inclined to lambast Webber for his shortcommings.



O'Neal hurt his 'elite' status by not giving a damn about defense (outside of his le runs with the Lakers). Or by not caring enough to improve his woeful free-throw shooting to the point of becoming his team's liability in the clutch. See last year's Spurs/Suns series.

Robinson and Olojuwon carried teams all by themselves. Shaq has always had an all-star team mate, one that could create shots for him, and command defensive assignments of their own. Unlike Robinson's Spurs' Olojuwon's teams became elite because the clutchest set of 3pt bombers happenned to call you, "teammate" during a le run. The casual fan has always downplayed this factor.



Malone had an all-star PG in Stockton, and was surrounded by an excellent cast of 3pt shooters (Stockton himself was pretty clutch).

Like I said, casual fans (or bitter rival fans) will be obtuse on the matter when they want to be. Teams win championships. NBA series aren't decided by 1-on-1 match-ups.

The problem with this argument is that David Robinson is not the only player in the history of the NBA to face double teams in the playoffs.

Great players like MJ, Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Shaq, etc were often on teams without great supporting casts just like David Robinson was. In those years, their so-so casts may have stood in the way of team success, but they were still dominant in defeat.

Robinson's #'s consistently declined in the playoffs from his regular season #'s.

You say that the #'s between hakeem and drob are close post-seasonwise, but the difference between 4% FG and 4 ppg is statistically significant, given that Robinson and Hakeem's #'s in the regular season were much, much closer, or even in favor of Robinson's in many cases. That just reinforces that come postseason time, one player's game was elevated and one took a step back.

Olajuwon's game was simply more suited to postseason success, which made him a more valuable player in May and June. You don't build championship teams around perimeter oriented face-up bigs like Robinson, Webber, and KG. You build them around dominant post players like Duncan, Shaq, Kareem, and Hakeem. Double teaming a post up big typically results in easier scoring opportunities for surrounding players. You swap Hakeem and Robinson and those guys like Smith, Elie, Horry, etc aren't getting as clean as looks. Much easier to play help D on a turn and face big when he beats his man off the dribble than against a post up big catching the ball 5 feet from the hoop when you have to collapse from the perimeter, opening up opportunities for guards.

Olajuwon also had a money turnaround baseline move which double teams were simply ineffective against. As quick as he was, if he wanted to catch the ball off a post entry pass and immediately turn to the baseline and launch a turnaround jumper (which was highly accurate) there was simply nothing a double team could do to stop it. It was just like Kareem's skyhook. As a defense, all you can do is hope for a miss. You seem to ignore this, but the fact of the matter of is Olajuwon wasn't double teamed less than Robinson. He was just much harder to take out of his game with a double due to an unstoppable turnaround move being one of the key staples of his game.

BTW, O'Neal did nothing to hurt his elite status. He wasn't on par defensively with some of the super elite bigs of all time, but his unbelievable dominance offensively distanced himself from all but 1-2 of the all time bigs (O'Neal is probably #3 all time amongst C's). It's a joke to suggest because of Penny and Kobe that teams were reluctant to double O'Neal.

No player in the modern era has been double/tripled more than O'Neal. When it comes to giving up a dunk or layin from 2 feet vs. taking your chances on a great player like Kobe beating you, 31 out of 31 opposing coaches took the logical approach and swarmed O'Neal. He was the tablesetter and clearly so.

Ranking Robinson over O'Neal is only something a true homer would do. No objective fan would ever suggest this.

If you want to argue that as great as O'Neal was, he could/should have been better if he were more committed to being in shape, that is fair. If you want to argue that he did less than Hakeem/Rob/etc to maximize his God-given potential, that is also fair. But to suggest that his shortcomings as a FT shooter and somewhat erratic play defensively were significant enough to place him below David Robinson, a career postseason underachiever, is asinine.

BTW, a dunk is not a go-to move, unless your name was Wilt or Shaq and you were so much bigger/stronger than your opponent, that you could consistently catch at the rim and stuff it home. Don't cite Robinson's quickness either because that can be countered by playing several feet off of him, daring him to shoot a decent, but not lethal midrange jumper.

Go to moves are jump hooks, Tim Duncan's bankshot, MJ or Hakeem fadeaways, Kareem's skyhook, etc. What was David Robinson's?

[bobbyjoe]

Of course this totally neglected the fact that Robinson played the majority of his postseason games later on in his career, post-injury when Duncan was on board due to a largely subpar supporting cast.

In the first 7 seasons in the NBA, he played in the playoffs 6 season, with the only year he missed the playoffs due to an injury at the end of the 3rd season. Other than two seasons, there wasn't any significant dip in his scoring average. In fact, that season, he went from 29.8 to 25.3 in his MVP season due to aggressive double teams (I mean, you are going to double off Avery Johnson and let Rodman roam to double/triple Robinson too, wouldn't you?).

Interestingly, the two seasons he did worse in the playoffs was when Rodman was on board, coincidence? Doubltful.

In the seasons he actually got help, he shot 53.29%, 68.63% and 51.55% in the playoffs, while pretty much maintained his scoring average. In those years, he averaged 24.04 points in the playoffs, 11.75 rebounds, 3.11 blks and 1.26 stls, pretty much numbers that are in line with his regular season production.

To use Kevin Garnett vs. Duncan as an analogy must be some sort of joke. Duncan out performed Garnett in every single significant statistical category other than assists, FT% and 3PT shooting, and did it with less minutes.

Garnett's teams missed multiple playoffs, Robinson NEVER missed the playoffs (other than the season he played 6 games) despite having supporting cast that is comparably as bad as Garnett's.

On the other hand, Duncan missed zero playoffs, while Hakeem couldn't say the same.

The difference between Duncan and Garnett is much larger than that of Hakeem and Robinson when you want to talk about it from a statistical point of view.

However, I do agree that Robinson's game is not tailored to the playoffs, just that the reason is that he relied heavily on drawing the foul on drives, and playoffs don't make those calls as much. To say that he got points of cheap baskets suggests that you haven't been watching much of Robinson. You are talking about a guy who shot an insane amount of FTs, players who get garbage points does not do that. He also led the team in assists, and that suggests the offense runs through him.

And Kobe is a beast in the playoffs? In the 11 seasons he made the playoffs, he had a better FG% thrice, 3pt% 7 times, FT% twice, rebounds 4 times, assists 5 times, scoring 7 times. However, his net average over the years, he had a worse FG%, FT%, 3PT%, rebounding average, assists and scoring. In other words, all his major statistical categories (except steals, which I am too lazy to look up) went down. How do you figure he was a beast?

Unreal that a Spurs fan of all people would question Kobe's prowess in the playoffs.

How many times does he have to rip your heart out in the postseason to prove that he's a playoff beast?

Kobe is 4-2 lifetime against the Spurs in the playoffs. One of the 2 losses came when he was a 19 yr old kid and Kurt friggin Rambis was his head coach.

Even in O'Neal's heyday, it's always been Kobe Bryant who just destroyed the Spurs in the playoffs (the Spurs actually contained O'Neal pretty well in all but 1 of these matchups in 2001). Just like this year.

And Robinson's game did rely on cheap buckets to a much higher degree than the elite bigmen in the history of the NBA. He frequently used his speed to beat guys downcourt and scored as well as any big ever has in transition in the regular season.

Problem for Robinson was, transition buckets are harder to come by in the postseason and so is getting to the FT line because more physical play is allowed. Anyone who watched Robinson knows that he relied a lot on getting FT's and transition hoops to impact the game. When these were mitigated thanks to the nature and dynamic of posteason play, so was his value to the Spurs.

His supporting casts aren't nearly as poor as you make them out to be. Sean Elliott was an all star caliber SF who Robinson palyed with most of his career. Rodman was a 5 time champion, probable HOF rebounding/defensive machine. Before him, Robinson had an all star caliber Terry mings for some time as well. You couldn't ask any big man for a better sidekick in the frontcourt to do all the dirty work. AJ was an underrated PG. Chuck Person and Dale Ellis were dead eye shooters.

The only real major weakness on the Spurs roster throughout DROb years was the lack of a quality 2 guard, esp one who could defend.

It's nothing personal against DRob. Great player. HOF player. Great person. But not the kind of guy you win les with as a #1 option due to never developing a post game. Guard's game in a Center's body and most great teams in NBA history have great bigmen as the foundation, excepting for MJ's Bulls. DRob's the quintessential ideal complementary player to a true #1 superstar. Much like Scottie Pippen was to MJ...

[Obstructed_View]

Unreal that a Spurs fan of all people would question Kobe's prowess in the playoffs.

How many times does he have to rip your heart out in the postseason to prove that he's a playoff beast?

Let me know when he does it once.

Back to the topic: I'm glad Hakeem had six good games against Robinson when it mattered to seal his legacy. It would have been unfortunate for him to be remembered as a guy who faked injury while refusing to play under the contract he signed.

[Galileo]

And you've got the audacity to call me a homer?

Kobe isn't even the 2nd best SG; that honor would go to the Big O, Oscar Robertson.

And yes, the gap between MJ and Kobe is substantial.

The only reason they're even in the same sentence is because Kobe plays for a large market team; to deny that would be expose your naive understanding of how the media hype-machine affects the perception of players.

Guards better than Kobe:

MJ
Magic
Bob Cousy
Jerry West
Oscar Robertson

Equal to as of now:

Sam Jones (10 NBA les in 12 years)

[Galileo]

Give me your list.

Other than Chamberlain, Russell, Jabbar, Hakeem and Shaq, it's between Moses Malone and Robinson. Who else would you put up there?

Top Centers:

1. Jabber
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. Chamberlain
5. Olajuwon
6. Moses & Mikan
8. D-Rob
9. Willis Reed
10. Bill Walton

[Phenomanul]

I'm done with this... Bobbyjoe's opinions while his. Continue to undermine the importance of teammates.

---- When a dunk is reclassified as perimeter play let me know.

---- Trying to convince me that playing along with an elite all-star does nothing for your game - as far as legacy defining accomplishments go; now that is asinine. Even Robinson benefited from being paired up with an all-time great in Duncan. Shaq has been paired with an elite all-NBA guard every year of his career. That is why statistically speaking Robinson had to do more for his teams to win than Shaq did - and why the IBM award, a method which measures this value, was awarded to him on several occasions.

---- Keep thinking that free-throw shooting is not an essential skill. That it ultimately didn't affect the heights Shaq could have attained. You are obtuse after all.


---- Clutch, series defining, championship-metal three point daggers are what they are. Hakeem, as great as he was, needed them. Shaq as great as he was needed them. Jordan as great as he was also needed them. Duncan as great as he is, needs them. Elite teams have perimeter players that can swing a series in their favor. The more you downplay their significance, the more your agenda is exposed. Robinson was a better player than Shaq before his injury. Dropping triple doubles on his fat @ss, and running him off the floor on multiple occasions. Unfortunately pre-injury Robinson never had a reliable, clutch or all-star level cast to keep teams from clogging the lane against him in the post-season. Shots that all the other championship caliber teams relied on to obtain their ultimate goal.