If you wanted to start a franchise, who would you pick?

[ambchang]

Also, as we know looking at Hakeem's PER is misleading when comparing him to a current player in his prime because Hakeem has many years of average or poor play after his prime to drag down career #'s. To accont for this, you'd have to look at Hakeem's PER as of 1995-1996, not his whole career.

But didn't you say earlier that Hakeem's dominance spans from 88 to 96? Why just those two years when we are comparing Hakeem's prime to Duncan's prime? If anything, that is comparing Hakeem's best two seasons to Duncan's best two seasons, which does nothing to say that one should pick one player over the other.
It's like saying a GM should pick Ewing over Kareem after comparing Ewing's stats from 89 to 91 with Kareem's stats over his whole career.

[ambchang]

That's not what I said.

I'm asking a question. How many times would Duncan have realistically won with a supporting cast on par with Houston's of the late 80's were he having to face Magic's teams 2 of the years and a really good Mavericks team one of the other years.

This doesn't make Hakeem better because he lost to better comp, but it minimizes the strength of any argument that Duncan is better because Hakeem's teams lost to teams which clearly had a lot more talent and were superior.

Put it this way: Give Duncan a weak to average supporting cast (let's say the Timberwolves cast of KG's career) and would the Twolves TEAM have won 55 games a year and got to the Finals and won les.

If the answer to this is no, then it's silly to say Duncan is a better player than KG solely because his TEAMS have done better in the playoffs.

Before anyone gets their panties in a wad, I am in no way saying KG is on par with Duncan. I would rather have TD easily, but it's also disingenuous to act as if it isn't an apples and oranges comparison in terms of using team success as a criteria to answer the question of who was a better player between the 2.

PS. Are you going to answer the Karl Malone question?

You continue to argue about Duncan's superior supporting cast, so what about 03?
Robinson in his last year with a terrible back.
Parker in his 2nd year.
Ginobili's rookie year, with a twisted ankle to boot.
Volatile Stephen Jackson.
Malik Rose
Bruce Bowen
Steve Smith
Steve Kerr
Kevin Willis
Claxton
Ferry
Devin Brown

This compared to (I picked the weaker of the two supporting casts Hakeem had).
Otis Thorpe (All star)
Vernon Maxwell
Kenny Smith (a guy who averaged 17.7 ppgs 3 years earlier)
Robert Horry
Mario Elie
Casell in his rookie year.
Scott Brooks
Carl Herrera
Larry Robinson
Matt Bullard

Neither of these casts were great, and they are very similar. Both teams won the championship, but Duncan had to knock off (in dominating fashion I might add) the 3 time champ to get there, while in 94, the leader of the 3 time champ was out playing baseball.

[thewatcher]

If Shaq and Kobe played against the 60s Celts, they would have 0 les, 0 individual awards (except for perhaps scoring le) and even fewer years together. Therefore, neither Kobe and Shaq are even decent basketball players and should be stripped of their les.

maybe, but that is not a fact. fact is that hakeem faced a much better compe on than duncan so duncan awards are DEVALUATED, so duncan would not have win in the time that hakeem played.

Now get lost. People who actually know a thing or two are debating (people who are making an attempt at civilized discourse, at least). The other Lakers fan here is a much better representation of an intelligent, reasoned fan, so undermining him with this kind of idiocy only makes him look good and you completely clueless.

whatever

[Ghost Writer]

Although I don't know if Duncan in his prime could ever beat Hakeem in his prime, one-on-one -- I still voted for Duncan.

Duncan has showed me more consistency and flexibility in his career than the Dream, who seemed to be unstoppable for 2-3 years, but sort've lacked a championship fire throughout most of his career.

[thewatcher]

so,,,

in value terms,,,

hakeem stats >> duncans stats

so imho, excluding duncans weak, devaluated awards,,,

hakeem >> duncan

[whottt]

Although I don't know if Duncan in his prime could ever beat Hakeem in his prime, one-on-one -- I still voted for Duncan.

Duncan has showed me more consistency and flexibility in his career than the Dream, who seemed to be unstoppable for 2-3 years, but sort've lacked a championship fire throughout most of his career.

Best GhostWriter post in history.

[Winery]

1985/86: Hakeem Olajuwon and Ralph Sampson continued to tower of the Western Conference as they led the Rockets to the Division le with a solid record of 51-31. Despite Guard John Lucas being suspended for the playoffs for failing a drug test the Rockets hit their stride in the playoffs sweeping the Sacramento Kings in 3 straight games. After splitting the first 4 games against the Denver Nuggets the Rockets blast their way on to the Western Conference Finals in 6 games for a match up with Los Angeles Lakers. With the Boston Celtics dominating in the East everyone anticipated a 3rd straight NBA Finals match up between the Lakers and Celtics. However, the Rockets would spoil the rematch by stunning the Lakers in 5 games, winning the 5th game on an awkward turnaround jumper by Ralph Sampson at the buzzer in Los Angeles. After being blown out by the Celtics in the first 2 games on the road the Rockets pulled out a nail bitter 106-104. to keep their Championship hopes alive. However, the Celtics would take a 3-1 series lead with a 3-point win in Game 4. After staving off elimination at home in Game 5, the Rockets are blown out 114-97 in Game 6 as the Boston Celtics completed a record breaking season in which they lost just 1 game at home on the way to their 16th Championship.

1986/87: After making it to the NBA Finals the Rockets self destructed as their 3 guards John Lucas, Lewis Lloyd, and Mitc Wiggins were suspended for substance abuse problems. With Ralph Sampson being limited to just 43 games Hakeem Olajuwon becomes the leader of the team averaging 23.4 ppg as the Rockets finished in 3rd place with a mediocre 42-40 record. In the playoffs the Rockets would blast past the Portland Trailblazers in 4 games before being knocked off by the Seattle Supersonics in 6 games.

1987/88: Hakeem Olajuwon would become the lone force in the middle of the Rockets as Ralph Sampson is traded early in the season along with Steve Harris to the Golden State Warriors for Eric "Sleepy" Floyd and Joe Barry Carroll after troubles with Coach Bill Fitch boiled over. Fitch had stated the trade would make the Rockets a better team then the one that went to the Finals 2 years earlier. The Rockets would go on to finish with a 46-36 record before crashing in the first round of the playoffs in 4 games against the Dallas Mavericks, as Coach Bill Fitch is fired and replaced by Don Chaney following the season.

1988/89: The Rockets continued to retool as they traded Joe Barry Carroll and Lester Connerto the New Jersey Nets for Tim McCormick and Frank Johnson. In addition they would deal Rodney McCray and Jim Petersen to the Sacramento Kings for Otis Thorpe. The Thorpe trade would pay dividends right away as he averaged 16.7ppg as the Rockets finished in 2nd place with a 45-37 record. However, the Rockets would fail in the playoffs again as they are beaten by the Seattle Supersonics in 4 games.

1989/90: The Rockets would sputter at the start of the season posting 12-18 records as they entered the New Year. However, the New Year would be a new start for the Rockets who battled their way back to .500 to make it into the playoffs as the 8th seed with a 41-41 record. However, in the playoffs it would be another quick exit as the Rockets are beaten by the Los Angeles Lakers in 4 games.

1990/91: Despite losing Hakeem Olajuwon for 25 games due to injury the Rockets show marked improvement finishing in 3rd place with a solid 52-30 record, as Kenny Smith provided a spark averaging 17.7 ppg. However despite a fully healthy team the Rockets would fail in the playoffs again as they are swept in 3 straight games by the Los Angeles Lakers.

1991/92: The Rockets would get off to a fast start winning 8 of their first 10 games. However, the Rockets would start to struggle and by February 21st were hovering at .500 with a 27-27 record when Coach Don Chaney is fired and replaced by Rudy Tomjanovich. Under Rudy T the Rockets seemed revitalized as they won 11 of their first 15 games. However, down the stretch the Rockets struggled losing 10 of their last 15 including 3 straight to close the season with a disappointing 42-40 record that saw them miss the playoff by one game, as dispute between Hakeem Olajuwon and Rockets management seemed to distract the entire team.

1992/93: The Rockets start the season with 2 straight losses facing the Seattle Supersonics in Japan. On the flight home the Rockets would finally resolve their problems with Hakeem Olajuwon. Now refocused and without distraction the Rockets were able to lift themselves to a division le with a solid 55-27 record, as Olajuwon had a career season with 26.1 ppg, as he won Defensive player of the Year honors with an incredible 4.17 blocks per game. In the playoffs the Rockets were pushed to the limit in the first round as they needed an 84-80 win at The Summit in Game 5 to knock off the Los Angeles Clippers. Despite winning the Midwest Division the Rockets would not have home court advantage in the 2nd round as they faced the Seattle Supersonics, because under the NBA playoff format home court is awarded to the team with the better record in the 2nd round something the Sonics achieved by a head-to-head tiebreaker. It would end up being key as the home team won all 7 games with Rockets hopes ending with a 123-110 overtime loss in Game 7 at Seattle.

1993/94: The Rockets lifted off into the stratosphere right away winning their first 15 games to set a NBA record for wins to start the season. After climbing to 22-1 the Rockets would naturally come back to earth a little bit as they finished in first place with a terrific 58-24 record, as Hakeem Olajuwon won the Defensive Player of the Year with 11.9 rebounds per game, while also claiming the MVP with 27.3 ppg. In the playoffs the Rockets would quickly fly past the Portland Trailblazers in 4 games. However, in the second round it appeared as if the Rockets were heading for disappointment again as they lost the first 2 games at home to the Phoenix Suns, blowing a 20-point lead in the 4th quarter of Game 2 after seeing an 18-point lead melt away in Game 1. After Rockets and Oilers playoff disappointments some one cracked that Houston was "Choke City." In Game 3 the Rockets appeared to be heading for a 4-game exit as they trailed at halftime by 9 points. However, Vernon Maxwell led the way with 31-second half points as the Rockets came roaring back to win 118-102. The Rockets would go on to grab Game 4 to even the series and Game 5 at home to take control. After losing Game 6 in Phoenix, Houston churned the choke moniker into clutch moniker by beating the Suns 104-94 to advance to the Western Finals. In the Western Finals the Rockets made the most of their new-found life by dominating the Utah Jazz in 5 games. In the NBA Finals the Rockets were matched up against the New York Knicks as Hakeem Olajuwon and Patrick Ewing met in a battle of premier centers. After splitting 2 physical battles in Houston the Rockets took a Game 3 as Sam Cassell hit a clutch 3-pointer in the final minutes. After losing the next 2, the Rockets faced elimination with Game 6 at The Summit. Trailing most of Game 6 the Rockets rallied to win Game 6 and force a decisive 7th game as a potential Game winning 3-point shot by John Starks was blocked by Olajuwon at the buzzer to win 86-84. In Game 7 the Rockets controlled from the start holding off every Knicks rally as Hakeem Olajuwon scored 25 points en route to winning NBA Finals MVP honors as the Rockets captured the NBA Championship with a 90-84 win turning Houston form "Choke City" to 'Clutch City."

1994/95: After winning the NBA le the Rockets again blasted off at the start of the season winning their first 9 games. However with increased compe ion in the West, management felt a change was needed to win the le again so they traded Otis Thorpe, who had been such a valuable inside force to the Portland Trailblazers for former "Phil Slamma Jamma" star Clyde Drexler. However, the trade appeared to have backfired on the Rockets as they play mediocre basketball in the second half posting a 17-18 record after the trade on the way to finishing in 3rd place with a 47-35 record. Making matters worse injuries to Carl Herrera, forced him to miss most of the season's second half, including the playoffs, and a frustrated Vernon Maxwell leaving the team due to lack of playing time left the Rockets without 2 key players heading into the postseason. In the playoffs the Rockets faced elimination right away, as they needed to win Game 4 at home just to set up a decisive 5th game on the road against the Utah Jazz. In Game 5 it appeared as if the Rockets Championship reign had run it course as they trailed by 12 points in the 3rd Quarter. However, behind 33 points from Hakeem Olajuwon the Rockets would advance with a 95-91 win. Facing he Phoenix Suns in the 2nd Round the Rockets appeared doomed again as they fell behind 3 games to 1. However the Rockets were not ready to give up as they won Game 5 in overtime on the clutch shooting of Robert Horry. After a solid 116-103 win in Game 6 at The Summit the Rockets overcame a 10-point deficit to bet the Suns 113-110 in Phoenix on a Game winning 3-point shot by Mario Ellie with 7.1 seconds left. After again rallying past the Phoenix Suns the Rockets, Championship dreams were alive and well as they faced the San Antonio Spurs in an all Texas Western Conference Finals. The Rockets continued their momentum by taking the first 2 games on the road. However, upon arriving back in Houston the Rockets would struggle as the Spurs won both games at The Summit to even the series at 2 games apiece. However, back in San Antonio for Game 5 the Rockets took control back by winning 111-90 as Hakeem Olajuwon scored 42 points. Olajuwon would again rise to the occasion by scoring 39 points and pulling down 17 rebounds as the Rockets made it back to the NBA Finals with a 100-95 win. In the NBA Finals the Rockets were again underdogs as they faced the Orlando Magic. In Game 1 in Orlando the Rockets rallied to force overtime on Kenny Smiths clutch 3-point shot, after Magic star Nick Anderson missed 2 free throws that would have iced the game. With the score tied at 118 late on overtime Hakeem Olajuwon tipped in a Clyde Drexler miss to deliver the Rockets a victory in Game 1. The Rockets would grab a 2-0 series lead as Olajuwon and Sam Cassell each topped 30 points in Game 2. As the series shifted to Houston the Magic crumbled as the Rockets completed the sweep with 2 impressive wins to capture their 2nd straight NBA Championship as Hakeem Olajuwon won his second straight Finals MVP award.

1995/96: After 2 straight NBA Championship the Rockets got new colors, uniforms, and a new logo which was actually unveiled aboard the Space Shuttle. Injuries would be an issue all year for the Rockets who finished in 3rd place again with a 48-34 record. In the playoffs the Rockets appeared ready for another run as they blasted past the Los Angels Lakers in 4 games. However, in the 2nd round the Rockets would run out of fuel as they were swept by the Seattle Supersonics in 4 straight games.

1996/97: After failing to win a 3rd straight Championship the Rockets took a big step towards returning to the top by acquiring Charles Barkley from the Phoenix Suns for Sam Cassell, Chucky Brown, Mark Bryant and Robert Horry. Together with Hakeem Olajuwon and Clyde Drexler the Rockets now had 3 of the 50 Greatest players on their team as they got off to a solid 6-0 start, on the way to finishing in 2nd place with a solid record of 57-25. In the playoffs the Rockets blasted off right away as they swept the Minnesota Timberwolves in 3 straight games. In the second round the Rockets jumped out to a 3-1 series lead over the Seattle Supersonics, but had to hold on to win in 7 games 96-91. In the Western Finals the Rockets found their backs to the wall right away as they dropped the first 2 games on the road to the Utah Jazz. However, upon arriving back at The Summit the Rockets rallied winning Game 3 by 8 points and tying the series in Game 4 on a dramatic a Game winning shot by Eddie Johnson at the buzzer. After losing Game 5 in Utah 96-91, the Rockets needed another clutch performance at home to force a 7th game. However, with the game tied at 100 in the waning second Jazz guard John Stockton would nail a 3-point shot at the buzzer to end the Rockets Championship hopes.

1997/98: The Rockets began to show their age and the wear and tear of long playoff runs as they played mediocre basketball all season on the way to finishing in 4th place with a 41-41 record. Despite being the 8th seed in the playoffs the Rockets still had to be considered a legitimate playoff threat as they jumped out a 2-1 series lead over the Utah Jazz. However, the Jazz would recover to blow the Rockets out in the final 2 games to take the series in 5 games. Following the season Clyde Drexler would retire to take over the head-coaching job at the University of Houston.

1998/99: To replace the retiring Clyde Drexler the Rockets would acquire Scottie Pippen from the Chicago Bulls, as the season was delayed by a 4-month lockout. Pippen would play solid basketball scoring 14.5 ppg as the Rockets finished in 3rd place with a 31-19 record. However in the playoffs the Rockets would make a quick exit as they are beaten by the Los Angeles Lakers in 4 games. Despite the solid season the Rockets would trade Pippen to the Portland Trailblazers for Walt Williams, Stacey Augmon, Kelvin Cato, Ed Gray, Carlos Rogers and Brian Shaw.

1999/00: Already announcing it would be his final season Charles Barkley suffered a knee injury in December. In addition the Rockets would lose Hakeem Olajuwon to a variety of injuries for half the season as they missed the playoffs for the first time in 8 years with a record of 34-48. However, not all was lost as Rookie Steve Francis who was acquired from the Vancouver Grizzlies in a3-team deal after refusing to play for the team that draft him split Rookie of the Year honors with Elton Brand of the Chicago Bulls with 18.0 ppg. In the final game of the season Charles Barkley would return not wanting to have his career ended by being carried off the court.



Easily Tim Duncan.

[thewatcher]

no word from timvp yet?. "silence implies consent" timvp

[bobbyjoe]

Wow, this thread has gone way off track. BobbyJoe, you've still not answered the central issue in this thread:

1. Championships: Duncan > Hakeem
2. Team winning %: Duncan >>> Hakeem
3. PER: Duncan > Hakeem (just to emphasize the earlier point that PER is the best measure to compare people across eras, as well as adjusting for minutes played)
4. Prime: Hakeem > Duncan
5. Awards: Duncan > Hakeem

Overall career: Duncan > Hakeem.

Let's not bring KG ( ) or the Mailman or DRob or anybody else into this thread. Let's stick to the main issue.

Uh, this was alll addressed in an earlier post. I'll go ahead and repost it. The first 2 items on your list are not individual achievements. They are team accomplishments of the San Antonio Spurs.

(PS Do you really think Duncan has 3 les if his first opponents are the 86 Celtics instead of the 99 Knicks in his first les appearance, honestly?)

They have limited value in a discussion like this becuase when you are making the decision to draft a Duncan or Hakeem, you are only making that choice, not choosing to bring Parker/Ginobili vs. Houston guards with you, Popovich with you, or the choice to play in the weaker era, etc.

We've already debunked the importance of PER, partiduclary when comparing the stats of a guy right in his prime vs. a guy who retired and has 5-6 years of lower level post prime play dragging down #'s. This is just silly to continue to compare. I guarantee you Duncan's career PER will start to go down when his game slows down, it happens to everyone.

If you look at PER, Bruce Bowen is probably the worst starting player in the NBA. It's a stat with a lot of flaws in it and in the context of these 2 players, will always underrate the clearly superior defensive player because it does not take altered shots and defensive disruption into account.

The same deal with awards. It's just not as meaningful to win all-nba awards (which is what I assume you are referring to) against the forwards of today's watered down NBA (given that 2 are selected for all first team and all first team D) as opposed to having to win them facing 3 of the top 10 C's of all time year in and year out and then face those guys in addition to them at the C position like Mourning and Mutombo for defensive honors. Apples and oranges.

I also don't see how Duncan clearly has more awards.

Hakeem had 2 defesnive players of the year to Duncan's 0. 2 Rebounding les to duncan's ? (I dont remember Tim ever winning one, but mabe I'm wrong). 3 years of leading the league in blocks to Duncan's? (zero)?

All time shot block leader is an individual award Hakeem owns. Hakeem had a quadrupble double and Tim didn't. I think both only had one MVP (because both were overlooked at times when they should have won it). What awards does Duncan have an edge on besides the All-NBA which we know is misleading?

(And finals MVP is partially a team award because you have to be on a team good enough to get to the Finals in order to have the chance to win it. Again, quality of compe ion comes into play here. Hakeem's 3 Finals app he was competing against Larry Bird, Patrick Ewing, Shaq O'Neal, Kevin McHale, to win the awards. Duncan's 3 he's competing against Latrell Sprewell, Jason Kidd, Chauncey Billups, Rasheed Wallace. Objectively, which is the easier field there?). Things always have to be looked at in context.

Hakeem had better career stats, both regular and postseason. More ppg, higher FG%, higher FT%, more blocks, more steals. The only area Tim edges is assists.

If you look only at rings without surrounding and extraneous factors, then you get stuff like

DRob = Wilt (each had 2 rings)
Billups>>> Nash or Stockton
etc.

Hakeem faced tougher compe ion and thrived against it.

Hakeem had more moves and defended better. No discussion of top defensive players in NBA history either excludes Hakeem Olajuwon or includes Tim Duncan.

The argument about rings is all about context. Duncan was drafted onto a squad which had consistently won 55-60 games every year before he got there (excluding 97 injury filled year). Hakeem on balance had weaker supporting casts than TD and didnt have the benefit of playing in today's watered down league where a guy like Mehmet Okur is arguably the best Center in the NBA (since Duncan is at PF and Shaq is on a deep decline). Expansion and the high school invasion have weakened the league from the 80s and 90s.

Duncan's first finals he faced the 8 seed Knicks of A Hou/Lat Spre. Hakeem's he got by Magic/Kareem (which is a better team than any Duncan has ever defeated or beaten) but lost to arguably the best team ever in Boston. If you want to only look at who got the ring, yes it's Tim. But Hakeem's accomplishment here was clearly more impressive when you factor in quality of compe ion.

Duncan would not have had near as many all-team NBA awards defense or overall playing Center in the 90's playing alongside Hakeem, DRob, Ewing, Shaq, Alonzo, and Mutombo all their primes. He's benefitted greatly from playing the forward position in terms of All NBA rankings so using those in this argument is weak and deceptive.

Duncan's an awesome talent. If starting a team with today's NBA players, I'd pick him first and not think twice about it.

I have him in my top 10 NBA players of all time. But no, unlike the homer talk you see here, he is just not better than guys like Larry Bird, Shaq O'Neal, or Hakeem Olajuwon (if you look at accomplishments to date since Duncan's career isn't over yet). He's in the tier of those guys but not ahead of them.

[thewatcher]

^^^

[bobbyjoe]

But didn't you say earlier that Hakeem's dominance spans from 88 to 96? Why just those two years when we are comparing Hakeem's prime to Duncan's prime? If anything, that is comparing Hakeem's best two seasons to Duncan's best two seasons, which does nothing to say that one should pick one player over the other.
It's like saying a GM should pick Ewing over Kareem after comparing Ewing's stats from 89 to 91 with Kareem's stats over his whole career.

His career PER as of 1996. As in all years from rookie year to 96. Not just the 2 year peak. That would give you a more appropriate comparison.

Comparing a guy's PER for his entire career when he has down years past his peak to drag down #'s vs. a guy like Duncan right in his prime is just misleading.

Your Ewing comparison, speaking of misleading, is the same. No GM would take Ewing at his peak over Kareem at his peak. That's where that analogy fails in the comparison of Hakeem/TD.

It's obvious in the case of Hakeem/TD that Hakeem had the higher peak. That's not the case at all in Ewing/Kareem. So to say Tim is better overall you have to believe Tim was that much more valuable than Hakeem in the non-peak years to make up for him not being as dominant in the peak.

[romain.star]

hakeem is wwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy to old now.......

[Warlord23]

Bobbyjoe, let me see if I can make a case for PER being an effective statistic for comparison across eras.

Say we divide the entire league of 30 teams into 2 leagues of 15.

League 1 has teams that tend more toward the run-and-gun style of play (Warriors, Suns, Nets, etc are part of League 1). League 2 has teams that tend to play more of a half-court game (Spurs, Pistons, Jazz, etc).

Now let's have different rules for the 2 leagues. League 1 has no hand-checking, ticky-tack foul-calling on the perimeter, more illegal defense calls if players are doubled, etc. League 2 has hand-checking, a more bruising style of play is permitted, a more collapsing defense is permitted, etc.

Now each league plays their respective season of 41 games apiece.

League 1's MVP is Baron Davis with 35 PPG on 56% shooting.
League 2's MVP is Tim Duncan with 26 PPG on 49% shooting.
So Baron Davis > Tim Duncan, right? Wrong. Different leagues, different rules. League 1 probably has an average of 115 points scored in every game at 50% shooting, given the absence of defense. However, only 90 PPG is scored in League 2 at 42% FGP.

Say if we calculate PERs, setting each league's average at 15, TD's PER comes out to 29.00, Davis' PER is 27.86. Now we are really comparing apples to apples.

I'm not really a stat-geek who uses stats to compare eveything. But if I had to use stats, I'd use PER more than PPG, FG%, etc across eras. so while Hakeem may have more PPG, Tim got his in an era where people didn't get as high a PPG as in Hakeem's era.

Also, like I said in an earlier post, even if you do throw out all stats out of the window, Duncan's superior success (rings, team winning %, awards) should put him above Hakeem. I know that the championship is a team award, but is driven by individuals. Don't tell me that Bill Russell with zero rings would occupy the same place in history that Russell with 11 rings does. Championships do matter, and even Hakeem made his name with his NBA Finals performances. In the 8 years post Michael Jordan, either a Shaq-led or Duncan-led team has won the Finals 7 times. It does count a lot. Lack of Finals dominance is what puts also-rans like Karl Malone and Barkley out of this discussion, not to mention Kevin Garnett who does not even belong on the same friggin discussion forum as Duncan and Hakeem.

And that brings me back to my original point, I can't see any single FACT (be it PER stats or rings or other parameters of team success) that puts Hakeem above Duncan. Duncan wins on all these facts. Every pro-Hakeem post in this thread uses conjecture over fact to attempt to prove his superiority. The facts support TD, and that is that.

[Warlord23]

And its not just about career PERs. Hakeem has only 2 seasons as part of the top 100 of all time. Duncan has 5. All the other greats have 5 or more. Hakeem is the odd man out with a mere 2. He peaked at the right time and got himself a couple of rings when Jordan was out. Before that he had decent stats (not top 100 worthy, mind you), but his leadership and teams stank to high heaven. He couldn't will his team to a deep playoff run even.

Duncan on the other hand took teams with a payroll half the size of deep teams like the Lakers, Blazers, Kings, Mavs and Suns, and took them into the second round every year he played, and willed them to 3 championships.

Not even close.

[thewatcher]

hakeem's mvp = 3 x duncan's mvp

[bobbyjoe]

And why in this era is the PPG and FG% is down?

Because the league is watered down for reasons of expansion, declining skill sets, high school players coming right out and not honing their games, etc. You can call it conjecture to state that guys in this era don't have the fundamentals of passing, teamwork, midrange shooting, and running a fastbreak like in previous eras but to people who watched both era's, the vast majority feel that way.

This goes back to the George Gervin question. Did Gervin score 30 ppg on 50% shooting because he was a tremendously skiled scorer or because the league supported higher ppg and higher FG% back then. To me, the answer to that is pretty self-evident to those who watched Ice play.

MJ didnt average 33 ppg on 50% shooting because the league was different. He did so because of his sick athleticism, jumper, skills, and footwork. Obviously if a league is composed of more talent as it was in the 80's/90's, there will be more scoring and higher FG%.

Regardless even if you throw all that stuff out, you seem to continually miss the point that comparing the career PER of a guy who's done playing and has 5-6 yrs of lower level post peak ball to reduce #'s to the PER of a guy right in the middle of his prime is just ridiculously misleading. If you find Hakeem's career PER as of his 96 season and compare it to Duncan's career PER as of now, that would be more relevant. But like I said, PER is an offensively biased measuring tool. PER will never tell you about how superior defensive disruptors like a Hakeem, Bowen, or Pippen can frustrate an opposing offensve out of its rhythm.

It's not conjecture to say Hakeem was DPOY twice and Duncan 0 times. Not conjecture to say he scored more, blocked more, had more steals, and shot higher FG% and FT%'s than Duncan/ Not conjecture to say he is the all time shotblock leader, led the league in that category several times, while Tim didn't. Those are absolute facts, as are the facts that when asked who was better, the 2 common teammates of both players answered Hakeem. Those are all facts, not conjecture or opinion.

I understand your comments about Baron Davis and while true, I dont see how they apply to this discussion because Hakeem's teams like Tim were slow it down halfcourt teams. And they didnt play 50 yrs apart like Rusell and Tim to where the level of athleticism was drastically different in the league. Not to mention, that as I've said, PER is offensively biased and Duncan is obviously way more valuable defensively than Baron, so that'd have to be considered too. In this case, as gifted as Duncan was defensively, Hakeem was just better.

I think it's also short-sighted to suggest that just because something is not 100% provable with facts, that it's not important or part of the discussion.

Can you PROVE that Robert Horry and Reggie Miller and Michael Jordan, etc were clutch players who were deadly with the ball in their hands late? No, you can't really do that. But it happened enough times to where the majority of intelligent basketball fan would concur that these players were remarkable in their ability to nail shots in clutch moments.

And if i started a discussion on some NBA forum as to who was more clutch Kobe Bryant or Michael Jordan, I'm sure there'd be someone like you saying I can't prove MJ was more clutch and that's it conjecture. But at the same time, it's simply true even if not factually provable.

[bobbyjoe]

And its not just about career PERs. Hakeem has only 2 seasons as part of the top 100 of all time. Duncan has 5. All the other greats have 5 or more. Hakeem is the odd man out with a mere 2. He peaked at the right time and got himself a couple of rings when Jordan was out. Before that he had decent stats (not top 100 worthy, mind you), but his leadership and teams stank to high heaven. He couldn't will his team to a deep playoff run even.

Duncan on the other hand took teams with a payroll half the size of deep teams like the Lakers, Blazers, Kings, Mavs and Suns, and took them into the second round every year he played, and willed them to 3 championships.

Not even close.

Ok, so when Hakeem in his 2nd NBA season took a team that was 2 yrs removed from a lottery to an NBA Finals apperance beating a team with HOF top 10 all time NBA players like Magic Johnson and Kareem Abdul Jabbar (not to mention James Worthy, Michael Cooper), his "leadership and team stank to high heaven and he couldnt will his team to a deep playoff run"

In just his 2nd year, Hakeem led a team with Sampson and a bunch of role players past Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Cooper. A team that was one of the best dynasties in league history.

The hits keep on coming.

Duncan never beat a team of MJ's caliber either, so that doesn't hold weight here. The Spurs had a losing record against Shaq-Kobe in the playoffs. Not conjecture, but fact.

[bdictjames]

Duncan

Dont ask.

[thewatcher]

homer.

dont answer.

[bobbyjoe]

And how many MVP's would Duncan have in a league with Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, and Magic Johnson in it? Those 3 won a combined 10 MVP awards during Hakeem's era. Be realistic.

Duncan having more MVP's than Hakeem would mean something in the context of this discussion if they were in the same era competing heads up for it. But that wasn't the case.

Because Nash has the same # of MVP's as Duncan, is he on par with him? You tell me.

[bobbyjoe]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PER_Sports

Looking at this here, Duncan has the higher career PER but Olajuwon has the better playoff PER and the higher regular season PER (though it's unclear as to how that was computed since Hakeem is retired).

That to me is what separated Olajuwon from Ewing and David Robinson anyway. Not the rings, but the ability to elevate postseason play. These 3 were always very close in terms of regular season awards, stats, etc but the postseason is what separated the 3.

This was the PER I was telling you about which wasn't formed by Hollinger, but someone else. If you have a link to the Hollinger PER's, I'd be curious to see how they ranked Duncan vs. Hakeem in terms of postseason PER.

[Warlord23]

As to your point about PPG and FG% in this era v/s the last one, there could be several factors. One of them could be the zone defense. Coaches and players in the 90s didn't have to plan for the zone. Teams with isolation-oriented superstars like Hakeem and Jordan ruled the roost. In today's league teams have to prepare for the zone as well, so iso play doesn't give as much dividends. While Hakeem could just take a pass in the block and go into his move without a second thought, Duncan might need to make the pass or a "hockey assist" to Kerr. Hakeem gets his PPG, Duncan gets his unquantified "effectiveness". PPG and FG% were indeed higher in the 90s than today. That is why Hakeem's PER is lower. I don't know how much more lucidly I can put this, but given the rules/defenses of today, Duncan is doing a better job than Hakeem did in his era.

Regarding defense, PER includes steals and blocks which Hakeem was proficient at. What it does not include are altered shots, effective doubling etc. Duncan never became DPOY because it is a media-voted award that has more hype than substance. The coaches in this league know the truth, and so Duncan has his 7-time All-Defensive 1st team selection to justify his position as the best defensive big in the post-Jordan era. Hakeem and Duncan are both elite defenders, regardless of what the media hype says. Are you telling me that Camby (1 DPOY, same as Jordan) belongs in the same class as Jordan/Payton/Hakeem? BS. Duncan is probably the only one from this era who qualifies to be part of this group. Duncan-led teams always lead the league in defensive numbers. That is irrespective of whether it is Elliott, Bowen, Manu, SJax or Finley playing the wings. That has to say something, as the constant factor is one: Duncan.

MJ v/s Kobe: I won't argue on clutchness, although it was recently brought about that Kobe's EFG% is among the lowest in the NBA in crunch time (last few minutes of a ballgame with teams apart by 10 points or less + overtimes). But for overall effectiveness, PER tells the story like it is. Jordan has astounding PER numbers which puts him in big man territory, the only perimeter player ever to have PER as high as that. Kobe is a long way away.

[Warlord23]

The PER you linked to does not have the 1 factor which makes the Hollinger PER suitable for comparison across eras: normalizing the league average PER to 15, and thus making it a "relative PER" to the rest of the league. That was the sole Reason Hollinger developed it, to help compare players across teams, eras and minutes played.

That is why in this other "PER", Magic Johnson ranks higher than Wilt and Shaq. Magic played in an era filled with high numbers across the board. Wilt and Shaq were ridiculously dominant and efficient compared to their peers. Which is why Magic is just out of the top 10 in the Hollinger PER.

[bobbyjoe]

Actually, you forgot a key constant factor: Gregg Popovich.

Look at a guy like JVG. Didnt Houston lead the league this year in FG% allowed, PPG allowed, etc. Guys like Popovich, JVG know how to coach great defense. JVG didnt have great individual defenders in NY or Houston, but his teams always ranked high defensively. And if someone says Yao Ming is a great defender because he's the lynchpin of a highly ranked defensive squad, that's just a weak argument (not saying this applies to Duncan, but that again you are giving one player all the credit for what is a team accomplishment).

Anyway, PER absolutely does not consider clutch play, which is a very important component in a players' overall value. I see from your comments you dont disagree that PER doesnt' include altered shots, quality team defense, etc. There's a uva lot more to D than just boards and steals. So just including these 2 doesnt tell the whole story.

Charles Barkley has a ridiculously higher PER, higher than Hakeem I believe per your link and yet the understated defensive value of PER is one of the reasons most would rank Hakeem the better player.

The comments about the Iso era are not really relevant here because both Hakeem and Duncan got the "hockey assists" and Hakeem was double teamed as much if not more than TD (double teaming Hakeem was a no brainer when the supporting casts were so weak in between the Sampson era and championship years). Teams don't really an employ a zone for a high % of the game because the shooting in the NBA is too good, especially on a team like San Antonio.

There was all this talk about how the zone would change the league but guys like Duncan and Shaq and Kobe, etc are just as effective and play the same way as before.

Regarding PER, I dont know how much more lucidly I can put this, but you can not fairly compare the career PER of a guy who's still playing and at his peak vs. a guy who retired and had several years on the backside to lower overall #'s. I believe the difference in PER from the link you showed me between Duncan and Hakeem careerwise is 1.5 pts. Is it unreasonable to suggest that Duncan's PER drops 1.5 pts between now and the end of his career after several years where he can't match the production of this year?

Adding to the PER argument, how valuable or relevant would it be to compare the PER of an NBA star playing in the East vs. a star playing in the West? Clearly, the East is a weaker conference and the star in the East plays a higher % of games against weaker compe ion so this tends to inflate his stats relative to his western superstar counterpart. You can't prove something like this, but to most astute bball fans it's just self evident that the East has lower quality and caliber basketball.

In addition, I showed you a link that showed Hakeem at a higher playoff PER than Duncan. Any comments or does postseason not matter?

[bobbyjoe]

The PER you linked to does not have the 1 factor which makes the Hollinger PER suitable for comparison across eras: normalizing the league average PER to 15, and thus making it a "relative PER" to the rest of the league. That was the sole Reason Hollinger developed it, to help compare players across teams, eras and minutes played.

That is why in this other "PER", Magic Johnson ranks higher than Wilt and Shaq. Magic played in an era filled with high numbers across the board. Wilt and Shaq were ridiculously dominant and efficient compared to their peers. Which is why Magic is just out of the top 10 in the Hollinger PER.

This is very debatable.

To me, any list which has David Robinson #3 all time, Charles Barkley #7 alltime, McGrady #15 alltime, and Bill Russell #97 has some serious issues.

The Thompson PER produces some results which are a lot more logical. Magic is much closer to #2 all time than he is #11. DRob much closer to #14 alltime than #3. Russell much closer to #4 all time than #97. Larry Bird sounds right at #6 alltime, but ridiculous at #18 all time.

The problem with normalizing the average player at 15.0 is that it doesn't factor quality of compe ion. If the caliber of comp declines from Era A to Era B, the same exact player X would have a higher PER in Era B as opposed to Era A.

In reality, both systems have some clear flaws. Hollinger had a good idea, but at the end of the day there's just no method to rate basketball players which entirely excludes subjective analysis.

I also find it hard to believe Duncan would rank higher than Hakeem in any playoff PER analysis, be it Hollinger, Thompson, or whomever. Where is that data?

The problem with saying that "player x dominated his era to a larger degree than player Y" is that it completely discounts quality of era.

Would Tom Brady's excellence as a QB stand out as much if he was playing QB 15 yrs ago with the likes of Montana, Young, Aikman, Marino, Elway, Moon, Kelly, etc? Or does he stand out more because of the real dearth of quality at the QB position. No stat or PER system can tell you this.


Were the Bulls of the 90's better than the Celtics of the 80's because they had 6 rings to 3? Or does the higher quality of compe ion in the 80's facing Boston make that question more tricky to answer?