PDA

View Full Version : Horry says Hakeem is better than Duncan and Shaq



JordansBulls
09-10-2009, 09:16 PM
Link (http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/sports/15822-big-shot-rob-shoots-straight-on-the-dream.html)




When asked who was the best center he ever played with, Horry, who played the middle for the Crimson Tide, didn’t bat an eyelash when he declared former Houston Rockets’ great Hakeem Olajuwon as the top slotman.

“He was so talented and could do so many different things. I’d put him on top and Tim [Duncan] and Shaquille [O’Neal] can trade places for second and third.”

Horry then paused, smiled, and made sure he was clear with his intentions, “Hey, Shaq and Tim...I love you guys, okay?”

Raph12
09-10-2009, 09:18 PM
I'd take Duncan over both of them

TannerOwnsDevin
09-10-2009, 09:28 PM
I'd take Duncan over both of them

lol

goku
09-10-2009, 09:38 PM
horry is right hakeem is better then them offensively and defensively

bagwell368
09-10-2009, 09:38 PM
Shaq like Chamberlain had one huge mark against them. Sucky foul shooting which renders them somewhat useless at the end of close games, a huge negative issue.

Duncan is a marvelous player - in fact is on my all time starting 5, but he's not a better Center then Hakeem.

To refresh those new to him. One of the 5 greatest low post players ever. A solid J from the 14-17' range.

A great defensive player (rebounds and by far the highest steals totals of any center, also has the all time lead in blocks - although they didn't count that in the time of Russell and Wilt - so he is probably 3rd) - he is second in all time Win Shares on D. Could dribble like a small forward. The most athletic center of all time IMO, and the most polished all around. Outplayed everyone in his time - Ewing, Robinson, etc.

If he had a player as great as Pippen around him, and a great coach (like Jackson), he'd be the one with the six rings, not Jordan. Some people will mention certain names, but if you check their age, injury status, etc. you will see, it was pretty much a bunch of scrubs and Hakeem, except one year, when he did win a ring.

PhillyZig33
09-10-2009, 09:44 PM
Hakeem is definitly better and more complete of a player.

BkOriginalOne
09-10-2009, 09:44 PM
Shaq makes them when they count... that's true.

madiaz3
09-10-2009, 09:47 PM
Shaq like Chamberlain had one huge mark against them. Sucky foul shooting which renders them somewhat useless at the end of close games, a huge negative issue.

Duncan is a marvelous player - in fact is on my all time starting 5, but he's not a better Center then Hakeem.

To refresh those new to him. One of the 5 greatest low post players ever. A solid J from the 14-17' range.

A great defensive player (rebounds and by far the highest steals totals of any center, also has the all time lead in blocks - although they didn't count that in the time of Russell and Wilt - so he is probably 3rd) - he is second in all time Win Shares on D. Could dribble like a small forward. The most athletic center of all time IMO, and the most polished all around. Outplayed everyone in his time - Ewing, Robinson, etc.

If he had a player as great as Pippen around him, and a great coach (like Jackson), he'd be the one with the six rings, not Jordan. Some people will mention certain names, but if you check their age, injury status, etc. you will see, it was pretty much a bunch of scrubs and Hakeem, except one year, when he did win a ring.

I can buy Russell but despite how big Wilt was I don't think he was outblocking Hakeem.

jd_azsportsfan
09-10-2009, 09:48 PM
I dont give a rats *** wat Horry thinks

asandhu23
09-10-2009, 09:49 PM
i agree with him

ThuglifeJ
09-10-2009, 09:50 PM
Diesel

NPH
09-10-2009, 09:54 PM
I dont give a rats *** wat Horry thinks

Why would you give someone a rats ***?

blazerman
09-10-2009, 09:55 PM
Olajuwon torched Shaq regularly and although Duncan is great Olajuwon would have abused him as well. Keep in mind Duncan is a pf first and ctr 2nd.

1st Olajuwon
2nd Duncan
3rd Shaq

Best defender- Olajuwon
Best Offensive player- Olajuwon

Duncan only played against an old but still productive Olajuwon!

RocketsRule
09-10-2009, 10:00 PM
Well, figuring he's played with all three (pretty much when they were all in their primes too), I'd say he has a pretty good perspective.

Chronz
09-10-2009, 10:00 PM
He once said Shaq was better because Dream only got him 2 rings.

Still Shaq, best offensive player by a mile.

lorenz00
09-10-2009, 10:08 PM
shaq baby Lol

_KB24_
09-10-2009, 10:14 PM
Shaq was the clear dominant player out of all three, while The Dream was a beast defensively, and Duncan was just flat out skilled.

1.Shaq
2.Hakeem
3.Duncan

bagwell368
09-10-2009, 10:15 PM
About 14 years ago Walton said Hakeem was the best center of all time. I don't think he really got the see anything before about 1967, but it would cover Malone, Jabbar, and that whole generation.

The other knock I have on Shaq, is that he can't run the break. A low post slow down player is going to get gassed against some of the running teams of the 80's for instance. I have him as a back-up on my team, but, I wouldn't start him over Hakeem - maybe if it was Malone he was going to face.

effen5
09-10-2009, 10:37 PM
hakeem

blazerman
09-10-2009, 10:46 PM
He once said Shaq was better because Dream only got him 2 rings.

Still Shaq, best offensive player by a mile.

Your outta your mind Chronz, Shaq has nothing but a power game and couldnt shoot outside 5 ft let alone a freethrow. Shaq's size allowed him to get position over anybody and his power game was effective but no way did he posses any of the tools Olajuwon had. Olajuwon displayed them against Shaq in the finals and just about everytime they played head to head.

I still remember Olajuwon faking left and going right on Shaq and before Shaq looked right Olajuwon had already scored. The broadcaster said "even stymie was amazed" and as Shaq jogged up the court he had this blank Stare like uh oh! He knew the brooms were coming and got even more flustered as the series went on because he was becoming the poster child for "getting whooped like a rented mule!

Shaq is a great alltime player but Hakeem could work him all day long!

blacknell
09-10-2009, 11:01 PM
shaq attack

still1ballin
09-10-2009, 11:12 PM
Shaq

ko8e24
09-10-2009, 11:16 PM
ya, idiot also said magic would beat his former team the lakers in the nba finals :rolleyes:

Jay22Redd
09-10-2009, 11:20 PM
Hakeem is better!!!

shooterone
09-10-2009, 11:28 PM
Out of the 3 I'd take Hakeem over Shaq, then Timmy D. All time my list goes;
1 Wilt
2 Hakeem
3 Russell
4 D. Robinson
5 Shaq
I don't like Duncan on this list because he's a pf as a centre there would be quite a few more names to toss out there before you got to Timmy.

IndiansFan337
09-10-2009, 11:31 PM
I think that Duncan is one of the most underrated superstars of all-time. He is probably a top 5 player in NBA history. And he's still going.

AK23
09-10-2009, 11:53 PM
I'd take Duncan over both of them

why,shaq and hakeem are already SO FAR past duncan

bbcmillionaire
09-10-2009, 11:56 PM
timmy is a pf and is still better

bbcmillionaire
09-10-2009, 11:56 PM
why,shaq and hakeem are already SO FAR past duncan

booooooo

Ebbs
09-11-2009, 12:02 AM
i would take shaq with Timmy D as a close second.

dodie53
09-11-2009, 12:04 AM
imo,
hakeem > shaq > duncan

_KB24_
09-11-2009, 12:06 AM
About 14 years ago Walton said Hakeem was the best center of all time. I don't think he really got the see anything before about 1967, but it would cover Malone, Jabbar, and that whole generation.

The other knock I have on Shaq, is that he can't run the break. A low post slow down player is going to get gassed against some of the running teams of the 80's for instance. I have him as a back-up on my team, but, I wouldn't start him over Hakeem - maybe if it was Malone he was going to face.

Shaq is probally one of the best at running a break for a guy that big and powerful....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FbzLQHgOUA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCJYT8M5rMg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVsWuHblBwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCvTmmj6QUo&feature=related

DCB/LAL
09-11-2009, 12:29 AM
Ok JB here's the problem I have with this thread someone had posted a thread about John Salley saying Kobe was "better than MJ" and it was immediately closed someone else posted Phil Jackson saying something similiar and it was moved because it belonged in a Laker forum why is this in the NBA Forum if those others couldn't???

_KB24_
09-11-2009, 12:31 AM
^^ Because this is not prasing a Laker. You know how fast this would have been moved if it said that Shaq was better than both...

PHX2daDEATH
09-11-2009, 12:58 AM
This is a no-brainer, Horry is right..Hakeem made Shaq look dumb in 95 finals..Duncan is PF but Hakeem is still better.. SOMETHING PONDER THOUGH

Does Hakeem get two rings if Jordan never retires? I know one thing 94 Bulls w/ Jordan vs 94 Rockets would of been a hell of a series.

JonnyBrav000
09-11-2009, 01:09 AM
Hakeem no doubt is better than Shaq... I remember he used to make Shaq look like fool head to head.

Hakeem has seasons he would average 5+ blocks a game... that's rediculous, plus he could shoot from the middle and finish on the inside, he could pass, steal, fade away, shoot free throws, could run up and down the court, rebound and had the intagebiles... I would say Hakeem is the 2nd best center of all time behind Russell, then comes Wilt and Kareem, then Shaq and then Duncan.

AsiandudePH
09-11-2009, 01:19 AM
Well, figuring he's played with all three (pretty much when they were all in their primes too), I'd say he has a pretty good perspective.

I agree. Good point.

thedfactor
09-11-2009, 02:02 AM
I would say Shaq is definitely 3rd. Then I would think about Tim and Hakeem, but give Tim the edge since he has 4 rings as the centerpiece and best player on his team. I'm a Mavs fan and i still feel confident in giving Duncan that honor followed closely by the Dream.

Chronz
09-11-2009, 02:19 AM
Hakeem no doubt is better than Shaq... I remember he used to make Shaq look like fool head to head.

Hakeem has seasons he would average 5+ blocks a game... that's rediculous, plus he could shoot from the middle and finish on the inside, he could pass, steal, fade away, shoot free throws, could run up and down the court, rebound and had the intagebiles... I would say Hakeem is the 2nd best center of all time behind Russell, then comes Wilt and Kareem, then Shaq and then Duncan.
Shaq was never made to look foolish. Atleast not as bad as Dream looked when Shaq entered his prime.

Chronz
09-11-2009, 02:23 AM
Your outta your mind Chronz, Shaq has nothing but a power game and couldnt shoot outside 5 ft let alone a freethrow. Shaq's size allowed him to get position over anybody and his power game was effective but no way did he posses any of the tools Olajuwon had. Olajuwon displayed them against Shaq in the finals and just about everytime they played head to head.

I still remember Olajuwon faking left and going right on Shaq and before Shaq looked right Olajuwon had already scored. The broadcaster said "even stymie was amazed" and as Shaq jogged up the court he had this blank Stare like uh oh! He knew the brooms were coming and got even more flustered as the series went on because he was becoming the poster child for "getting whooped like a rented mule!

Shaq is a great alltime player but Hakeem could work him all day long!
LOL fun read but abit over the top for my liking, Ive seen Dream with that face after Shaq crushes one down low. Shaq abused Dream for the majority of their careers, though its sad their primes never intertwined, the poster boy was Admiral even though it shouldve been Ewing and probably is among true NBA followers. And Shaq actually got better as the series wore on, Dream may have outplayed Shaq but he didnt school him, certainly not as profoundly as Shaq would do him in the coming years. Shaq vs Dream was my favorite matchup growing up, I saw it live once when Dream was on his last legs. Shaq's power is something to behold.

I couldnt care less how many moves you have, if the one move the other guy has in his arsenal is more effective than yours then whats the big deal? Ill take a Shaq dunk over a dream fadeaway any day of the week.

People like to downplay Shaq longevity not realizing hes last longer than most of his peers.

shep33
09-11-2009, 02:24 AM
completely agree with Horry. Hakeem in my opinion is the best center ever. Could you imagine how much better he would have been if he started playing basketball earlier. Started when he was 17 i think. Shaq always had a good swing man, and has never won a ring without one. Olajuwan had possibly one of the greatest seasons out of any nba player in history... defensive player of the year, MVP, Finals MVP. Guy could score on anyone, and shut down his oponent. Most skilled center ever.

Mavrix
09-11-2009, 02:27 AM
Hakeem is better.

Mavrix
09-11-2009, 02:30 AM
Shaq was better offensively and more dominant, but Hakeem the Dream was better defensively and an all around better player.

lakerssssssss
09-11-2009, 02:43 AM
completely agree

stawka
09-11-2009, 03:27 AM
To anyone saying "Dream made Shaq look foolish in '95", do you not know the game of basketball? Shaq was very raw and still not polished, much like Dwight now. I'm not going to check stats now, but i'm pretty sure Shaq had better FG%, RPG, APG, BPG... The only thing Hakeem had on Shaq was more PPG, but on a worse % - So tell me how he made Shaq look foolish?

Shaq was much more dominant in his prime, but Hakeem's prime lasted longer - that's all that needs to be said. We've been through this over and over again. Horry seems to change his mind much like Shaq when it comes to who his best teammates were.

Hakeem's defense was ridiculous, but Shaq's offense was insane back in the days. And please don't say "All Shaq had was power". Maybe in his first 3 seasons when all he did was bump, bump, dunk.. Because for a man his size, he had great footwork and an awesome inside game (dunks/hooks/fadeaways/turnarounds).

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 08:04 AM
Shaq is probally one of the best at running a break for a guy that big and powerful....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FbzLQHgOUA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCJYT8M5rMg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVsWuHblBwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCvTmmj6QUo&feature=related

yeah twice, then what?

Funny that you guys are getting all opinionated. I'm a Celts fan, and have no horse in this race. I've seen them all, and even saw Russell (last 2 years), and Hakeem > Shaq and Duncan is a great PF (my all time PF starter). All 3 are on my 12 man team, but Hakeem is jumping the tip off.

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 08:06 AM
This is a no-brainer, Horry is right..Hakeem made Shaq look dumb in 95 finals..Duncan is PF but Hakeem is still better.. SOMETHING PONDER THOUGH

Does Hakeem get two rings if Jordan never retires? I know one thing 94 Bulls w/ Jordan vs 94 Rockets would of been a hell of a series.

Probably only one.

Now ponder this: if Pippen is on Houston along with Jackson, how many rings does Hakeem have - I say 5, and Jordan has 1 or 2.

Ace33Bone
09-11-2009, 08:10 AM
Olajuwon torched Shaq regularly and although Duncan is great Olajuwon would have abused him as well. Keep in mind Duncan is a pf first and ctr 2nd.

1st Olajuwon
2nd Duncan
3rd Shaq

Best defender- Olajuwon
Best Offensive player- Olajuwon

Duncan only played against an old but still productive Olajuwon!

Hakeem torched a young unpolished Shaq... He was not able to do anything with Shaq once Shaq reached his prime... I will take an 2000-01 Shaq over Hakeem any day of the week. Shaq was a freak of nature u can't teach that athleticism at that size

Ace33Bone
09-11-2009, 08:11 AM
This is a no-brainer, Horry is right..Hakeem made Shaq look dumb in 95 finals..Duncan is PF but Hakeem is still better.. SOMETHING PONDER THOUGH

Does Hakeem get two rings if Jordan never retires? I know one thing 94 Bulls w/ Jordan vs 94 Rockets would of been a hell of a series.

If Jordan would not have retired Hakeem would have never got his ring point blank

Paris Bulls
09-11-2009, 08:50 AM
I'd take Duncan over both of them

Are you :crazy:? Nah you must be smoking crack. hakeem was like jordan as a center. he had a million offensive moves blocked every shot dudes put up. and shaq is the most dominate force in the history of the nba.

ny212
09-11-2009, 09:29 AM
idk i say the hakeem then shaq the duncan.....hakeem had good players on his team but were past their prime or didnt get into their prime or injured....shaq always had a all star with him penny, kobe, wade...duncan is just sooo fundamental sound....

knickfan4life
09-11-2009, 09:37 AM
I agree w/ Robert because defensively, I think simply by his stats, everyone would agree with me that he was superior to both Duncan and Shaq... now offensively people may say shaq is better, but Shaq is not better, because Dream was quicker than Shaq when Shaq JUST entered the league and when the Dream was OLD, yes, Shaq at that time was not fully developed and not the player he was in his Laker era, but Shaq can do one and only one thing on offense... and that is to score withing 5 feet of the basker... Dream could beat you off the dribble, hit a jump shot in ur mouth, post you up and fade away or post you up and spin on you for the jam... his footwork was a work of art... easily better than both Shaq and Duncan

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 10:17 AM
Instead of guessing, here is the head to head: http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01

They only had 20 meetings.

Clearly when Hakeem was in his prime, he put up better overall stats then Shaq head to head (D rate stats not really being available to check per game). In fact until the end of '99 (Hakeem's last good year was '96-'97) without a calculator in hand, Hakeem had him overall from what I see, if not in RPG and ASG (afraid of getting blocked or just better teammates? Certainly not because Shaq was a better passer).

Shaq flushed Hakeem in the 5 games in 2000 without a doubt - that's 25% of the meetings, and skews the overall total in Shaq's favor. Of course Hakeem turned 39 during that year, and it was his last with a meh 42-40 Toroto team.

I note that outside of his uptick to pretty good, but, not a superstar in '08-'09 the prior 4 years, Shaq was a marginal player in this league, and that he will not turn 39 until a year after this season is done. Since he has promised to retire after this season (again) we will never know how good or bad a 39 year old Shaq would be.. chances are it wouldn't be very good.

And BTW in 94-95 when Shaq was still learning his craft or so someone said (leading the league in points it should be noted - so he wasn't that much of a babe in the woods), he was in his 3rd year in the league. Hakeem was a star in his rookie season '84-'85 and stayed that way until '96-'97. He was a stiff in only the last 3 of his 18 seasons. Shaq has been not so hot/injured his last 5 of his 19 seasons. Bit longer on the peak for Hakeem.

Hawkeye15
09-11-2009, 10:39 AM
I am not going to disagree with him. I think they all have a case for being the best of the 3.

boms-4
09-11-2009, 10:42 AM
1.Hakeeem
2.Shaq
3.Duncan

Tom81
09-11-2009, 12:30 PM
Duncan

Sly Guy
09-11-2009, 12:38 PM
Shaq makes them when they count... that's true.

correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they all count for one, no matter what time is on the clock?

rabzouz 96
09-11-2009, 12:52 PM
LOL fun read but abit over the top for my liking, Ive seen Dream with that face after Shaq crushes one down low. Shaq abused Dream for the majority of their careers, though its sad their primes never intertwined, the poster boy was Admiral even though it shouldve been Ewing and probably is among true NBA followers. And Shaq actually got better as the series wore on, Dream may have outplayed Shaq but he didnt school him, certainly not as profoundly as Shaq would do him in the coming years. Shaq vs Dream was my favorite matchup growing up, I saw it live once when Dream was on his last legs. Shaq's power is something to behold.

I couldnt care less how many moves you have, if the one move the other guy has in his arsenal is more effective than yours then whats the big deal? Ill take a Shaq dunk over a dream fadeaway any day of the week.

People like to downplay Shaq longevity not realizing hes last longer than most of his peers.

good post, like most of the other struff you write, especially the bolded part.

SeoulBeatz
09-11-2009, 01:27 PM
after seeing all three play i would have to say hakeem was the most talented offensive player out of all of them.

hakeem has the best post moves out of all of em, and footwork and his defense was insane on top of that.

timmy got it done with his fundamentals but ask Duncan's idol David Robinson about how he feels about The Dream Shake..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW4uXlRGAF0

shaq was more physically dominant.

but Dream had pure talent.

but that isnt to say that the disparity between the three is much at all.

Pierzynski4Prez
09-11-2009, 01:34 PM
Shaq like Chamberlain had one huge mark against them. Sucky foul shooting which renders them somewhat useless at the end of close games, a huge negative issue.

Duncan is a marvelous player - in fact is on my all time starting 5, but he's not a better Center then Hakeem.

To refresh those new to him. One of the 5 greatest low post players ever. A solid J from the 14-17' range.

A great defensive player (rebounds and by far the highest steals totals of any center, also has the all time lead in blocks - although they didn't count that in the time of Russell and Wilt - so he is probably 3rd) - he is second in all time Win Shares on D. Could dribble like a small forward. The most athletic center of all time IMO, and the most polished all around. Outplayed everyone in his time - Ewing, Robinson, etc.

If he had a player as great as Pippen around him, and a great coach (like Jackson), he'd be the one with the six rings, not Jordan. Some people will mention certain names, but if you check their age, injury status, etc. you will see, it was pretty much a bunch of scrubs and Hakeem, except one year, when he did win a ring.

Oh, did you mean Clyde Drexler, or Rudy J. Come on, Hakeem had a good team too. Now you try to say he would've been better than MJ.

Pierzynski4Prez
09-11-2009, 01:35 PM
Probably only one.

Now ponder this: if Pippen is on Houston along with Jackson, how many rings does Hakeem have - I say 5, and Jordan has 1 or 2.

If Pippen goes to Houston, then Clyde comes to Chicago. MJ will still whoop Houston's ***.

JonnyBrav000
09-11-2009, 01:57 PM
completely agree with Horry. Hakeem in my opinion is the best center ever. Could you imagine how much better he would have been if he started playing basketball earlier. Started when he was 17 i think. Shaq always had a good swing man, and has never won a ring without one. Olajuwan had possibly one of the greatest seasons out of any nba player in history... defensive player of the year, MVP, Finals MVP. Guy could score on anyone, and shut down his oponent. Most skilled center ever.


I agree 100%... people always seem to forget that Shaq has always had a top player alongside him, wether equal or even better than him... Kobe and Shaq were equal... Penny and Shaq, equal if not, slight edge to Shaq and Wade was definately superior to Shaq when they played together, Wade won the finals, not the Heat haha... When Olajuwon was in his prime was was without a doubt the best player on his team and by far.

lakerboy
09-11-2009, 01:58 PM
1 Shaq
2 Duncan
3 Hakeen.

UnWantedTheory
09-11-2009, 02:02 PM
Duncan is a PF as stated several times and shouldered his teams to 4 championships. Hakeem has TWO rings with some help and Shaq has had Kobe and Wade. Argue all you want about who is better, but I would take Duncan and his FOUR rings. Also, Duncan is 33 and is still playing at a superstar level. This is a ridiculous debate.

UnWantedTheory
09-11-2009, 02:20 PM
Probably only one.

Now ponder this: if Pippen is on Houston along with Jackson, how many rings does Hakeem have - I say 5, and Jordan has 1 or 2.

Eh, No.

UnWantedTheory
09-11-2009, 02:29 PM
If Jordan would not have retired Hakeem would have never got his ring point blank

yeppers.

magichatnumber9
09-11-2009, 02:29 PM
As a Boston to show non bias i will have to agree. If you switch places and put Hakeem in that San Antonio lineup minus TD and have him coached by the great one. Hakeem would have more jewelry. I don't even want to talk about Shaq

UnWantedTheory
09-11-2009, 02:41 PM
I would say Shaq is definitely 3rd. Then I would think about Tim and Hakeem, but give Tim the edge since he has 4 rings as the centerpiece and best player on his team. I'm a Mavs fan and i still feel confident in giving Duncan that honor followed closely by the Dream.

Close to the way I feel.

PHX2daDEATH
09-11-2009, 03:51 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKir54uGiWA

I think Marv sums it up pretty clearly Olajuwon, YES!

TheGreenMonster
09-11-2009, 04:11 PM
DUNCAN IS THE GREATEST PF OF ALL TIME PERIOD. Shaq is a freak with the ultimate advantage in this game. He has also declined worse than the other 2.

J4KOP99
09-11-2009, 04:17 PM
He once said Shaq was better because Dream only got him 2 rings.

Still Shaq, best offensive player by a mile.

More dominant, yes. More complete,no.


Hakeem could do it all on both sides, shaq could not.


Shaq is without a doubt the most dominant player of all time though.

RaiderLakersA's
09-11-2009, 04:21 PM
Why would you give someone a rats ***?

And who goes around stockpiling rats ***** to hand out in the first place??? :D

Taimla
09-11-2009, 04:32 PM
Well... i would pick Shaq easly

Chronz
09-11-2009, 06:32 PM
yeah twice, then what?

Funny that you guys are getting all opinionated. I'm a Celts fan, and have no horse in this race. I've seen them all, and even saw Russell (last 2 years), and Hakeem > Shaq and Duncan is a great PF (my all time PF starter). All 3 are on my 12 man team, but Hakeem is jumping the tip off.

Your team would be better served with Shaq starting and Dream as his sidekick with Duncan giving either a rest.

phoenix_bladen
09-11-2009, 07:00 PM
i think hakeem had the better skills but shaq was more dominate

hakeem was very skillful

duncan has great fundamentals

Chronz
09-11-2009, 07:06 PM
More dominant, yes. More complete,no.
uMM I said BEST OFFENSIVE PLAYER.


Hakeem could do it all on both sides, shaq could not.
Then why did Dream choose not to show us? Or did he purposely miss all those fadeaways because dunking on people isnt what he likes.


Shaq is without a doubt the most dominant player of all time though.
Then how is he not better than a less dominant player?

theuuord
09-11-2009, 07:09 PM
Shaq was the most dominant, Hakeem was the most versatile/skilled, Duncan has been the most consistent.

Shaq wins this one.

Chronz
09-11-2009, 07:11 PM
after seeing all three play i would have to say hakeem was the most talented offensive player out of all of them.

hakeem has the best post moves out of all of em, and footwork and his defense was insane on top of that.

timmy got it done with his fundamentals but ask Duncan's idol David Robinson about how he feels about The Dream Shake..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW4uXlRGAF0

shaq was more physically dominant.

but Dream had pure talent.

but that isnt to say that the disparity between the three is much at all.
THANK GOD it wasnt a clip of Hakeem doing his up and under "dream shake".
Seriously that youtube link is the biggest red flag for me. That clip is soooo played out and overused half of our youth thinks Dream actually played like that his entire career.

Anyways, I never actually seen that entire series. I have the games I just cant commit, but from what Ive seen. The Rockets sent alot more help at D-Rob then the Spurs gave Robinson. Most likely because Dream had the teammates to make them pay, while doubling D-Rob often led for a bad jumper from Avery or someone.

Talent is so subjective. What constitutes talent? Ive asked before but couldnt find a decent answer.

zambo4president
09-11-2009, 07:13 PM
Ill take TD without any second thoughts.

Shady66
09-11-2009, 07:35 PM
I would say shaq due to his dominance on offense.

The dream is a very close 2nd

And timmy D is a PF and i dont think should be in this discussion.

JordansBulls
09-11-2009, 07:37 PM
Probably only one.

Now ponder this: if Pippen is on Houston along with Jackson, how many rings does Hakeem have - I say 5, and Jordan has 1 or 2.

Except Pippen became great due to MJ.



Pippen, unlike other Bulls who usually kept their distance from Jordan, tried to learn all he could from Jordan in practice. In turn, Jordan worked with Pippen on his moves, jump shot, and defense and taught him mental toughness.



Pippen relates on how his game improved - Link (http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/jordanhof_pippen_090910.html)


“He was very competitive, so he went at me and that helped me learn,” said Pippen. “You continue to compete against the very best every day, and you will get better, or you’ll be embarrassed.



Hakeem as a matter of fact had 2 other top 30 guys and didn't make it back to the finals and lost in round 1 with them twice. With Barkley and Drexler in 1998 and with Barkley and Pippen in 1999.

GCOOKIE7
09-11-2009, 07:42 PM
Shaq is the most dominant player or our generation... it's gotta be him.

AntiG
09-11-2009, 07:47 PM
Hakeem is the most talented and refined big man in NBA history. But Shaq was the most physically dominant (outside of Wilt who was a man amongst boys).

Chronz
09-11-2009, 07:47 PM
Instead of guessing, here is the head to head: http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01

They only had 20 meetings.

Clearly when Hakeem was in his prime, he put up better overall stats then Shaq head to head
You mean the exact same thing you could say about Shaq?


(D rate stats not really being available to check per game).
You sure bout that bro?


In fact until the end of '99 (Hakeem's last good year was '96-'97) without a calculator in hand, Hakeem had him overall from what I see, if not in RPG and ASG (afraid of getting blocked or just better teammates? Certainly not because Shaq was a better passer).

He wasnt a better passer than Dream, but hes been the better playmaker throughout most of his career. His scoring ability garners so much more defensive attention that it left his teammates more open opportunities, it took awhile for Dream to master the art of passing, Shaq has always had an innate ability to find cutters and spot up shooters. Obviously he got better as he grew as well, but he was never as bad as Dream was at the start.

But should prioritize the matchup #'s.

Eliminate Shaq's developing stages, and Dreams heavy decline phase. I dont agree with everyone excusing Shaq from getting outplayed by Dream in the Finals, he wasnt in his prime but he wasnt so far away from it at that point in time. In fact he was basically a superstar from year 2 (93-94), though Im still unaware of exactly how much having Penny helped his game but Im fine with the cutoff being as early as 22, he was a legit MVP contender then even though he struggled mightily against Indiana. Dream fell off the superstar tier after the 96 season. One year earlier than you mentioned, he had a good year but Shaq was really entering his prime in those days, so its even worse than comparing a (young) Shaq to a prime Dream, because its PRIME Shaq vs a 34 year old relying on the last bit of athletic ability he has, rather than an ahead of the curve 22 year old who could very easily abuse you.

You can still take alot out of those matchups, like Shaq playing Yao so well late into his 30's is very revealing about him as a player. But for sake of just keeping it closely relative, lets cut out the 97 season. Shaq destroys him like no other from then on, its when he started the whole the hardest beast I had left to slay but Ive finally done it thing.



I note that outside of his uptick to pretty good, but, not a superstar in '08-'09 the prior 4 years, Shaq was a marginal player in this league, and that he will not turn 39 until a year after this season is done. Since he has promised to retire after this season (again) we will never know how good or bad a 39 year old Shaq would be.. chances are it wouldn't be very good.

First of all, Shaq has never promised to retire, he has openly stated he wants 3 more years. Where have you been?


And BTW in 94-95 when Shaq was still learning his craft or so someone said (leading the league in points it should be noted - so he wasn't that much of a babe in the woods), he was in his 3rd year in the league.
Agreed but this......


Hakeem was a star in his rookie season '84-'85 and stayed that way until '96-'97.
Simply not true


He was a stiff in only the last 3 of his 18 seasons. Shaq has been not so hot/injured his last 5 of his 19 seasons. Bit longer on the peak for Hakeem.

LOL sure if you ignore the fact that Shaq was an MVP contender (should have won it over Nash) at 32 and winning a chip at the age when Dream was missing All-NBA teams. Dream had a bounce back season after that and actually made the 3rd team that lockout season, but Shaq already accomplished the same thing last year. Ill say its close in terms of how long theyve remained effective, but if Shaq replicates last years performance he'll have an extra year of dominance to go with the one extra year he had from entering the league sooner and be tied with Kareem for most All-NBA teams IIRC.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-11-2009, 08:07 PM
Shaq
Drob
Duncan
Hakeem

slack_justin
09-11-2009, 08:13 PM
i liked all of them but d-rob should be in this conversation. he didnt have any real help while hakeem had an awful lot. either way they are all great players it depends what your looking for. i think duncan just played the game so sound its rediculous cause he didnt really ever even jump.hakeem was very athletic mostly back to the basket moves but amazing D. shaq POWER no offensive skills really just POWER.... PERIOD . Robinson maybe the most athletic center ever also great D. just wish he couldve learned some dream shake moves :)

Chronz
09-11-2009, 08:18 PM
i liked all of them but d-rob should be in this conversation. he didnt have any real help while hakeem had an awful lot. either way they are all great players it depends what your looking for. i think duncan just played the game so sound its rediculous cause he didnt really ever even jump.hakeem was very athletic mostly back to the basket moves but amazing D. shaq POWER no offensive skills really just POWER.... PERIOD . Robinson maybe the most athletic center ever also great D. just wish he couldve learned some dream shake moves :)

Seriously, everyone complains about their players lack of support but try playing with D-Robs cast

rabzouz 96
09-11-2009, 08:24 PM
i liked all of them but d-rob should be in this conversation. he didnt have any real help while hakeem had an awful lot. either way they are all great players it depends what your looking for. i think duncan just played the game so sound its rediculous cause he didnt really ever even jump.hakeem was very athletic mostly back to the basket moves but amazing D. shaq POWER no offensive skills really just POWER.... PERIOD . Robinson maybe the most athletic center ever also great D. just wish he couldve learned some dream shake moves :)

im sorry but shaq had way more offensive skills than everybody gives him credit for. he is not just power but has a pretty good skillset. if you wanna look at just power, you should rather look at dwight howard, because he fits the description just power far more than shaq and there are worlds between those 2.

mrblisterdundee
09-11-2009, 08:30 PM
Shaq is the most dominant center ever. What is it with people trying to say that a smaller, lesser-dominant center that only won two championships was better than a bigger, greater-dominant center that has won four championship (and might get another)? It defies all logic.

Chronz
09-11-2009, 08:34 PM
im sorry but shaq had way more offensive skills than everybody gives him credit for. he is not just power but has a pretty good skillset. if you wanna look at just power, you should rather look at dwight howard, because he fits the description just power far more than shaq and there are worlds between those 2.

I usually dont respond to those who say Shaq only had 1 move, but I get the gist of their argument. He didnt have Dreams versatility, nor did he need it. He had the most unstoppable move of all, the Black Tornado, or as I call it, the CRUSHEM. A drop step with series of pumpfakes and by the time it was over, you were under the rim with the ball slapping you in the face.

MackSnackWrap
09-11-2009, 08:55 PM
Shaq IMO

rabzouz 96
09-11-2009, 08:56 PM
I usually dont respond to those who say Shaq only had 1 move, but I get the gist of their argument. He didnt have Dreams versatility, nor did he need it. He had the most unstoppable move of all, the Black Tornado, or as I call it, the CRUSHEM. A drop step with series of pumpfakes and by the time it was over, you were under the rim with the ball slapping you in the face.

i didnt say he had dreams versatility but he isnt just power, he had a pretty good offensive awareness and knew how to use his skills and body to get to the rim and finish off,what more do u need?

DreamShaker
09-11-2009, 09:06 PM
I think that Duncan is one of the most underrated superstars of all-time. He is probably a top 5 player in NBA history. And he's still going.

He was not as good as Hakeem...not close. Hakeem was a better defender...a much better post player...a better post-passer...Duncan did nothing better than Hakeem...he is stronger...but that is where it stops...

I can buy Shaq being better...but I personally would have to disagree...Shaq was more dominant in the post....but all around...Hakeem has him beat....but Tim Duncan....one of my all-time favorites....is not at Hakeem's level....

DreamShaker
09-11-2009, 09:15 PM
Shaq
Drob
Duncan
Hakeem

Dude really??

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 09:28 PM
Except Pippen became great due to MJ.




Pippen relates on how his game improved - Link (http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/jordanhof_pippen_090910.html)




Hakeem as a matter of fact had 2 other top 30 guys and didn't make it back to the finals and lost in round 1 with them twice. With Barkley and Drexler in 1998 and with Barkley and Pippen in 1999.

You tried this last year, and I shot you down then. Barkley and the aging Pippen were no factors whatever by the time they got to Houston. Drexler had one good year while Hakeem was still elite, and then they both slid.

In no way shape or form did Hakeem have anything like Pippen next to him. It's a total misreading of history (to protect your namesake's mythic status perhaps ?) to keep foisting this lie.

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 09:40 PM
If Pippen goes to Houston, then Clyde comes to Chicago. MJ will still whoop Houston's ***.

nonsense. Clyde had 8 years on Portland where he put up more Win Shares then his best year in Houston. He got to Houston when he was 32 and on the downslide.

Pippen's peak was '91-'97. Drexler's peak was '86-'92.

Hakeem's peak was '84-'95 and he got Drexler in '94-'95, so tell me again who would have done Hakeem more good, Drexler at the end of his peak, when Hakeem was at the end of his, or Pippen who peaked together?

So, do you just say **** as it occurs to you? Or did you expend any thought on it? Ouch pal.

Afridi786
09-11-2009, 09:43 PM
So tough to judge between the three...all really great.

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 09:51 PM
Your team would be better served with Shaq starting and Dream as his sidekick with Duncan giving either a rest.

I am going to run - a lot - Shaq cannot go up and down the floor. Shaq will also have to sit at the end of close games since he is such an inept foul shooter. A guy like that can only sit on the bench for me, and come in against other big centers to give my better players a blow.

My team has 3 PF's - Duncan, KG, McHale. Two great low post players, all great defenders. They can play a few minutes at C if needed. I mention that because of this: Anyone that says Duncan is a greater Center then Hakeem or Shaq is a fan boy or never saw the other two in their prime. It's a joke.

bagwell368
09-11-2009, 10:00 PM
Chronz said "You mean the exact same thing you could say about Shaq?"

What I said: Clearly when Hakeem was in his prime, he put up better overall stats then Shaq head to head

What I meant: Hakeem in his prime played against a young Shaq - but a Shaq that led the league in scoring - which is a much closer battle then the last 5 games between them when Hakeem was 38 - an age it appears Shaq is still two years away from. As for him playing 3 more years, I tend to doubt it - but you never know.

Overall good post Mr. Chronz.

boriquaabe
09-11-2009, 10:14 PM
I dont give a rats *** wat Horry thinks

Bro... he played with all three of them in their prime!!!!! Hakeem "the dream" number One out of those three...

Pierzynski4Prez
09-11-2009, 10:36 PM
nonsense. Clyde had 8 years on Portland where he put up more Win Shares then his best year in Houston. He got to Houston when he was 32 and on the downslide.

Pippen's peak was '91-'97. Drexler's peak was '86-'92.

Hakeem's peak was '84-'95 and he got Drexler in '94-'95, so tell me again who would have done Hakeem more good, Drexler at the end of his peak, when Hakeem was at the end of his, or Pippen who peaked together?

So, do you just say **** as it occurs to you? Or did you expend any thought on it? Ouch pal.

you're telling me ouch pal, but you are also trying to prove to everybody in here that Hakeem is better than Jordan.

It is you whom I must say ouch pal too. Really dude???? Hakeem >>Jordan??

fugitivo1985
09-11-2009, 10:47 PM
i hate to agree with horry...but i must say hakeem has a better over all game defensively and offensively than shaq or duncan..

Bleeds Blue
09-11-2009, 10:59 PM
i'd take 2000 and 2001 shaq over the others. besides those years hakeem would be my pick

SLY WILLIAMS
09-11-2009, 11:04 PM
Dude really??

Yes really. I'm a Knicks fan (so I dont have a dog in this fight) who actually rooted for Hakeem to beat the Spurs because I always root against the Spurs. :)

Their career player efficiency ratings (PER a good but not perfect stat) line up in that order as well. :)

Shaq-26.87 (#2 career)
Drob-26.18 (#4 career)
Dunc-25.05 (#7 career)
Hake-23.59 (#13 career)

Cash
09-11-2009, 11:06 PM
Hakeem Warrick is definitely better than Shaq or Duncan.

GspLAL
09-11-2009, 11:15 PM
Since when do you judge a player on how we got his wins/rings? Shaq didn't have as many post moves as Hakeem but he still won didn't he? Who cares how he did it, fact is whatever he's doing worked. With that said I still think Hakeem is better because of the defensive end.

jimm120
09-11-2009, 11:29 PM
Where is the EWING on this list??!?!

Ewing was obviously better than all 3.

Shaq was teh most dominant but not the best.

Duncan was boring and relied on a little kid's backboard to get shots in.

Hakeen was alright...but just so-so.


Ewing was the real deal. WTF. This Horry guy must be ******** or come form some dumb .....I'll stop there, so not to make Lakers fans annoyed by calling that / those teams dumb.

Ewing #1

AntiG
09-11-2009, 11:39 PM
Ewing was not better than Hakeem. Actually, Duncan nor Shaq either.

29$JerZ
09-11-2009, 11:50 PM
Where is the EWING on this list??!?!

Ewing was obviously better than all 3.

Shaq was teh most dominant but not the best.

Duncan was boring and relied on a little kid's backboard to get shots in.

Hakeen was alright...but just so-so.


Ewing was the real deal. WTF. This Horry guy must be ******** or come form some dumb .....I'll stop there, so not to make Lakers fans annoyed by calling that / those teams dumb.

Ewing #1

Ewing is a 2nd tier Center
Hakeem,Shaq,Duncan > Ewing

astrosmaniac
09-12-2009, 12:08 AM
I would say Shaq is definitely 3rd. Then I would think about Tim and Hakeem, but give Tim the edge since he has 4 rings as the centerpiece and best player on his team. I'm a Mavs fan and i still feel confident in giving Duncan that honor followed closely by the Dream.

duncan didnt have to play against jordan

Lone Maverick
09-12-2009, 12:12 AM
Why get so up in arms about someone's opinion? Its not like Horry is the be all end all of basketball centers. If you disagree so be it, but he's entitled to have it.

fresh prince
09-12-2009, 12:16 AM
Uh hThis is a no brainer..

Hakeem head and shoulders..The Most complete of the 3

astrosmaniac
09-12-2009, 12:16 AM
Oh, did you mean Clyde Drexler, or Rudy J. Come on, Hakeem had a good team too. Now you try to say he would've been better than MJ.

drexler was past his prime in houston (still a good player, not what he once was, and certainly not at pippens level at that point in his career)

also its Rudy T and while a great coach hes not phil jackson by any stretch of the imagination

astrosmaniac
09-12-2009, 12:20 AM
Duncan is a PF as stated several times and shouldered his teams to 4 championships. Hakeem has TWO rings with some help and Shaq has had Kobe and Wade. Argue all you want about who is better, but I would take Duncan and his FOUR rings. Also, Duncan is 33 and is still playing at a superstar level. This is a ridiculous debate.
yes but jordan had retired for a 2nd time before duncan even entered the league so you can't compare the # of rings. hakeem played at a superstar level till he was 36 or 37, thats even longer than duncan

astrosmaniac
09-12-2009, 12:26 AM
Except Pippen became great due to MJ.




Pippen relates on how his game improved - Link (http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/jordanhof_pippen_090910.html)




Hakeem as a matter of fact had 2 other top 30 guys and didn't make it back to the finals and lost in round 1 with them twice. With Barkley and Drexler in 1998 and with Barkley and Pippen in 1999.

barkley, drexler, and pippen were all on the downside of their career's at that point in time (as was hakeem in 1999 which is understandable since he entered the league in 84)

flea
09-12-2009, 12:28 AM
I think that Duncan is one of the most underrated superstars of all-time. He is probably a top 5 player in NBA history. And he's still going.
I'll 2nd this. Even basketball-heads underrate him consistently.

And obviously, I think he's the best of the 3. Hakeem makes it close though.

PLAYERS FAN
09-12-2009, 01:23 AM
Hakeem is the only superstar to win a title without a all-star side-kick! Pippen was a one time all-star before Jordan got his first title. Kobe was a two time all-star before Shaq got his first title. Horry is correct Hakeem is better than Duncan and Shaq.

b440bethea
09-12-2009, 01:47 AM
good call Horry, in my opinion Hakeem was better than both of those players. He could take over a game by himself and you knew he was going to deliver. And he was so humble it only added to his greatness. All three are great but Hakeem was the best, in my opinion. You know Horry was booed by Houston fans when drafter by them, who would have thought he would be come know as, Bid Shot Bob. He hit so many clutch shots for those rings it is insane. Love you Bob Horry, thanks for the memories.

b440bethea
09-12-2009, 01:51 AM
that is hilarious, and he dominated ewing at the pro level. Ewing might be a top 20 center, but know way shape of form he should ever be compared to
Hakeem, we were watching those games back then right?

Ansy
09-12-2009, 03:03 AM
Hakeem Warrick is definitely better than Shaq or Duncan.

But how would you compare those 3 to Kareem?

I'm talking about Kareem Rush, of course.

bagwell368
09-12-2009, 10:05 AM
Where is the EWING on this list??!?!

Ewing was obviously better than all 3.

Shaq was teh most dominant but not the best.

Duncan was boring and relied on a little kid's backboard to get shots in.

Hakeen was alright...but just so-so.


Ewing was the real deal. WTF. This Horry guy must be ******** or come form some dumb .....I'll stop there, so not to make Lakers fans annoyed by calling that / those teams dumb.

Ewing #1

Ewing was schooled by Hakeen so much and so long he should have gotten a PHD.

27 games: Hakeem averaged 2.7 points more a game (on .045 better FG%), 2.1 more RPG, 1.1 more assists per game, .8 more steals per game, .7 more blocks per game - yeah, I can see your point, only in FG% did Ewing top him.

Hakeem also blew Robinson off the court - esp. in Robinson's MVP season.

Robinson also outplayed Ewing head to head. So, umm yeah Ewing is the best - only for NYK fan boys.

bagwell368
09-12-2009, 10:10 AM
you're telling me ouch pal, but you are also trying to prove to everybody in here that Hakeem is better than Jordan.

It is you whom I must say ouch pal too. Really dude???? Hakeem >>Jordan??

Reading comprehension issues?

Hakkem + Pippen > Jordan + Cartright (or whomever else was the #2 on the Bulls in a given year other then Pippen

Jordan + Pippen > Hakeem and Reid or whomever was best on his team

What we do not know is if Hakeem + Drexler was better then Jordan + Pippen in the two years Jordan was away. I think not. But if Drexler was 6 years younger...? that's a tough call.

JordansBulls
09-12-2009, 10:13 AM
Reading comprehension issues?

Hakkem + Pippen > Jordan + Cartright (or whomever else was the #2 on the Bulls in a given year other then Pippen

Jordan + Pippen > Hakeem and Reid or whomever was best on his team

What we do not know is if Hakeem + Drexler was better then Jordan + Pippen in the two years Jordan was away. I think not. But if Drexler was 6 years younger...? that's a tough call.

Drexler actually led the Rockets in 1995 in the playoffs in win shares. Not only that but Hakeem had Barkley and Drexler and didn't win and then had Barkley and Pippen and didn't get out of round 1. You will say they all were old, however the Bulls were the oldest team in the league from 1996-1998 and in 1998 MJ was 35, Pippen 33 and Rodman 37. Enough of your excuses with this if Hakeem had Pippen crap. He had plenty of help.
Pippen playing with Hakeem from the get go doesn't turn into Scottie Pippen. He would be good, but he wouldn't had been as good as he became.

Pippen became great due to playing with Jordan, he even said so himself.

Source: GoogleBooks (http://books.google.com/books?id=aQ84ViBNkYwC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=Game+Michael+Jordan+broke+his+leg&source=web&ots=Y9Xtn3nomR&sig=6shSn2cklYKVP1kBaC6nI0A_oko&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA39,M1)




Pippen, unlike other Bulls who usually kept their distance from Jordan, tried to learn all he could from Jordan in practice. In turn, Jordan worked with Pippen on his moves, jump shot, and defense and taught him mental toughness.



Pippen relates on how his game improved - Link (http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/jordanhof_pippen_090910.html)



“He was very competitive, so he went at me and that helped me learn,” said Pippen. “You continue to compete against the very best every day, and you will get better, or you’ll be embarrassed.”


Now does Hakeem turn a player into a great player or does he need guys who are already great to help him? The later seems true. Sampson was already great before Hakeem came around and so was Drexler and Barkley.

69centers
09-12-2009, 10:15 AM
He once said Shaq was better because Dream only got him 2 rings.

Still Shaq, best offensive player by a mile.

I just love comments like this. OK, based on what?? Cause he was real strong and dunked harder? :pity:

69centers
09-12-2009, 10:25 AM
Hakeem is the only superstar to win a title without a all-star side-kick! Pippen was a one time all-star before Jordan got his first title. Kobe was a two time all-star before Shaq got his first title. Horry is correct Hakeem is better than Duncan and Shaq.

But he also lost a title in 1986 with an all star sidekick: Ralph Sampson. Those two centers ran into two more centers named Parish and Walton.

Pierzynski4Prez
09-12-2009, 10:30 AM
Drexler actually led the Rockets in 1995 in the playoffs in win shares. Not only that but Hakeem had Barkley and Drexler and didn't win and then had Barkley and Pippen and didn't get out of round 1. You will say they all were old, however the Bulls were the oldest team in the league from 1996-1998 and in 1998 MJ was 35, Pippen 33 and Rodman 37. Enough of your excuses with this if Hakeem had Pippen crap. He had plenty of help.
Pippen playing with Hakeem from the get go doesn't turn into Scottie Pippen. He would be good, but he wouldn't had been as good as he became.

Pippen became great due to playing with Jordan, he even said so himself.

Source: GoogleBooks (http://books.google.com/books?id=aQ84ViBNkYwC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=Game+Michael+Jordan+broke+his+leg&source=web&ots=Y9Xtn3nomR&sig=6shSn2cklYKVP1kBaC6nI0A_oko&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA39,M1)





Pippen relates on how his game improved - Link (http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/jordanhof_pippen_090910.html)





Now does Hakeem turn a player into a great player or does he need guys who are already great to help him? The later seems true. Sampson was already great before Hakeem came around and so was Drexler and Barkley.

Well put JB. I don't know what games these guys were watching during the 90s. If Hakeem was that good, he would have made more than 2 finals. They couldn't even beat the Sonics with Payton and Kemp in the 95-96 season. Hell, Rockets got swept by them if I recall that year too, 2nd round.

MikefromMars
09-12-2009, 10:42 AM
Duncan is a true PF. So they are better Centers, but Duncan's true position is PF; That is where he does his best work.

MrFastBreak
09-12-2009, 10:53 AM
Horry says Hakeem is better than Duncan and Shaq

What's wrong with that?

bagwell368
09-12-2009, 10:58 AM
Drexler actually led the Rockets in 1995 in the playoffs in win shares.

True, one year - at age 32, on the cusp of 33.


Not only that but Hakeem had Barkley and Drexler and didn't win and then had Barkley and Pippen and didn't get out of round 1. You will say they all were old, however the Bulls were the oldest team in the league from 1996-1998 and in 1998 MJ was 35, Pippen 33 and Rodman 37.

Old is one thing. Old and not so great is another. Barkley's 1st and best year with the Rockets was '96-'97 when he had his 11th best year. Drexler was about to turn 33 in '94-'95, and was 6 years past his peak. Basically the Rockets tried the Celtics KG/Allen routine but they failed, and it is hardly Hakeem's fault he was running out of juice, and added other guys, and IMO had a below average coach to boot.

Houston had the following players on the roster in '96-'97 born after 1969: Elmer Bennett, Othella Harrington, Randy Livingston, Sam Mack, Matt Maloney, Joe Stephens.

With 4 guys over 6 WS, and none over 9.5

In the same year the Bulls had: Jason Caffey, Dickey Simpkins, Matt Steigenga born after 1969.

With 5 guys with more then 6 WS (and 2 with more then 13). So despite what the averages were, both were vet teams.

In that year Jordan and Pippen were awesome and on top, and the Hakeem and his elderly gents were aging badly, led not so well. Great. And what about Hakeems long and broad peak before that, who was there?


Enough of your excuses with this if Hakeem had Pippen crap. He had plenty of help. Pippen playing with Hakeem from the get go doesn't turn into Scottie Pippen. He would be good, but he wouldn't had been as good as he became.

And I say he would have been a greater defensive player then he was with a great center behind him, and would have been called on for more O since he wasn't side by side with Mr. Win at Any Cost including being a hog (which he said last night at his induction speech).

Hakeem had a very weak roster to deal with outside of the generation of guys we have mentioned, he had Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Sleepy Floyd, Rodney McCray, and Ralph Sampson (not all at the same time). Not one of those guys, or the guys that came later were a match for Pippen, Horace Grant, Kukoc, or Rodman in their best years, not one. Secondary Bulls such as BJ Armstrong, Paxson, Harper match up pretty well w/ most of Hakeem's best teammates.

There is simply no way that Hakeem had as good a supporting cast as Jordan. ZERO, you can't prove it with numbers, all you can do is make claims and try and belittle my arguments - that's the best you have. Pity really, usually you are pretty reasonable, but when it comes to your namesake you are simply not objective.

jj24
09-12-2009, 12:40 PM
id take duncan over both

Chronz
09-12-2009, 12:42 PM
I am going to run - a lot - Shaq cannot go up and down the floor. Shaq will also have to sit at the end of close games since he is such an inept foul shooter. A guy like that can only sit on the bench for me, and come in against other big centers to give my better players a blow.

My team has 3 PF's - Duncan, KG, McHale. Two great low post players, all great defenders. They can play a few minutes at C if needed. I mention that because of this: Anyone that says Duncan is a greater Center then Hakeem or Shaq is a fan boy or never saw the other two in their prime. It's a joke.
Shaq ran the floor better than Timmy so why exactly are you sitting him? Its ok to sit Shaq when its foul shooting time its pretty much common sense, but you should probably sit Duncan as well and bring in whatever shooting big you have just for those small possessions at the end of games.

Duncan playing center is no more of a joke than D-Rob playing C.

Chronz
09-12-2009, 12:44 PM
I just love comments like this. OK, based on what?? Cause he was real strong and dunked harder? :pity:
Really I hate comments like yours, mine are based on FACTS....
Cus he always had a bigger positive influence on his teams offense. Or did Dream purposely miss all those shots because he was a better offensive player?

JordansBulls
09-12-2009, 01:20 PM
True, one year - at age 32, on the cusp of 33.



Old is one thing. Old and not so great is another. Barkley's 1st and best year with the Rockets was '96-'97 when he had his 11th best year. Drexler was about to turn 33 in '94-'95, and was 6 years past his peak. Basically the Rockets tried the Celtics KG/Allen routine but they failed, and it is hardly Hakeem's fault he was running out of juice, and added other guys, and IMO had a below average coach to boot.

Houston had the following players on the roster in '96-'97 born after 1969: Elmer Bennett, Othella Harrington, Randy Livingston, Sam Mack, Matt Maloney, Joe Stephens.

With 4 guys over 6 WS, and none over 9.5

In the same year the Bulls had: Jason Caffey, Dickey Simpkins, Matt Steigenga born after 1969.

With 5 guys with more then 6 WS (and 2 with more then 13). So despite what the averages were, both were vet teams.

In that year Jordan and Pippen were awesome and on top, and the Hakeem and his elderly gents were aging badly, led not so well. Great. And what about Hakeems long and broad peak before that, who was there?



And I say he would have been a greater defensive player then he was with a great center behind him, and would have been called on for more O since he wasn't side by side with Mr. Win at Any Cost including being a hog (which he said last night at his induction speech).

Hakeem had a very weak roster to deal with outside of the generation of guys we have mentioned, he had Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Sleepy Floyd, Rodney McCray, and Ralph Sampson (not all at the same time). Not one of those guys, or the guys that came later were a match for Pippen, Horace Grant, Kukoc, or Rodman in their best years, not one. Secondary Bulls such as BJ Armstrong, Paxson, Harper match up pretty well w/ most of Hakeem's best teammates.

There is simply no way that Hakeem had as good a supporting cast as Jordan. ZERO, you can't prove it with numbers, all you can do is make claims and try and belittle my arguments - that's the best you have. Pity really, usually you are pretty reasonable, but when it comes to your namesake you are simply not objective.


Hakeem didnt even have a 10 win share himself at times. In 1995 when they won it his win shares was 10.9. The lowest Win Share Jordan ever had on the Bulls was 13.6 and that was a rookie and that was still 2nd best in the league.

Hakeem not only had Drexler and Barkley but he had Horry, Elie, Cassell, Smith, Maxwell and Thorpe.

Thorpe made the allstar one year with Hakeem where they didn't even make the playoffs.

You don't have to overrate Hakeem and make him as good as MJ. Hakeem was considered the 2nd best player of the 90's, nothing wrong with that. He simply wasn't as good as MJ nor as productive period.

bagwell368
09-12-2009, 09:57 PM
Hakeem didnt even have a 10 win share himself at times. In 1995 when they won it his win shares was 10.9. The lowest Win Share Jordan ever had on the Bulls was 13.6 and that was a rookie and that was still 2nd best in the league.

Hakeem not only had Drexler and Barkley but he had Horry, Elie, Cassell, Smith, Maxwell and Thorpe.

Thorpe made the allstar one year with Hakeem where they didn't even make the playoffs.

You don't have to overrate Hakeem and make him as good as MJ. Hakeem was considered the 2nd best player of the 90's, nothing wrong with that. He simply wasn't as good as MJ nor as productive period.


The point I was making (in the three threads we have argued this point over) was if you split up the various flotsam and jetsam on both teams into roughly even groupings, along with coaching - and then had Hakeem + Pippen + jetsam on one team and Jordan and the flotsam on the other, that Jordan would have less rings, by 3-4 by my estimate. Obviously Jordan and Pippen (who probably had 5 or 6 years where he had more win shares then any Hakeem teammate) together was always going to thwart Hakeem, which is what they did.

What you are saying is that if Jordan had Thorpe or Maxwell or whatever Houston zombie you want to name, all of a sudden he becomes Pippen, and Pippen with Hakeem becomes some zombie.

Or by your measure: 2nd best player + what the 5th best does a lot better against #1 when #5 is missing replaced by #21.

DABEARS23
09-12-2009, 10:09 PM
Hakeem was a better player all around no doubt

69centers
09-13-2009, 12:01 AM
Really I hate comments like yours, mine are based on FACTS....
Cus he always had a bigger positive influence on his teams offense. Or did Dream purposely miss all those shots because he was a better offensive player?

Still don't see any facts you're talking about. Shaq only has a higher FG% than Hakeem because all he every did was throw his weight and elbows around under the basket, offensively foul everyone, take easy feeds under the basket after hanging in the paint for 4-5 seconds without getting a 3 second call, and then just dunk it on every possession. And people talk about how many dunks Howard usually has per game!! Go back and watch Shaq videos of how many dunks that guy would have per year.

Lakersfan2483
09-13-2009, 01:57 AM
Link (http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/sports/15822-big-shot-rob-shoots-straight-on-the-dream.html)

In his prime, Shaq was better than both Duncan and Hakeem.

ko8e24
09-13-2009, 02:15 AM
Still don't see any facts you're talking about. Shaq only has a higher FG% than Hakeem because all he every did was throw his weight and elbows around under the basket, offensively foul everyone, take easy feeds under the basket after hanging in the paint for 4-5 seconds without getting a 3 second call, and then just dunk it on every possession. And people talk about how many dunks Howard usually has per game!! Go back and watch Shaq videos of how many dunks that guy would have per year.



shaq actually did have some offensive moves. he had jump hooks from 6-8 ft, used the backboard well when he had to, knew when he had to use the backboard (him, kobe, and especially the greatest bankshooter tim duncan knew how to really use the glass), he had nice spin moves and could really get the feal of his opponents' bodies when he was posting up, shaq had a lot of alleyhoops from guys like kobe and especially brian shaw, shaq had one of the great hands and could catch the ball and finish AND 1. Not that many big guys could do what Shaq did. You talk about the dunks, but thats not all the did. Him being on the court physically, being one of the 10 guys, was just overwhelming for opponents. He's always had a high basketball IQ, rarely forced things down low, always hit the open man, knew had to attract and manipulate the double/triple teams that would result in him getting fouled by one of those two guys (when he would actually get hammered by both) or resulting in a guy wide open for the three like a b.shaw, d-fish, big shot rob, rick fox, and sometimes, even the young Kobe (although he was able to create his own shots like he has been his entire career). Shaq was a GREAT passer, dude led all centers in his 2000 MVP campaign at just under 4 assists a game (3.8) along with avg 13.6 RPG, 3 blocks, and just under 30 points a game (29.7PPG). He was that dominant, and it wasn't just by scoring via dunking.

theuuord
09-13-2009, 02:39 AM
Still don't see any facts you're talking about. Shaq only has a higher FG% than Hakeem because all he every did was throw his weight and elbows around under the basket, offensively foul everyone, take easy feeds under the basket after hanging in the paint for 4-5 seconds without getting a 3 second call, and then just dunk it on every possession. And people talk about how many dunks Howard usually has per game!! Go back and watch Shaq videos of how many dunks that guy would have per year.

Who cares how he did it? He could have blindfolded himself, sat on the ground under the basket, and thrown it in the air for all I care, as long as the ball ended up in the basket.
He was, in his prime, the most efficient offensive big man ever, and there's really no competition.

I'd rather have a bull in a china shop making dunks than a ballet dancer missing eight footers.

Chronz
09-13-2009, 02:43 AM
Still don't see any facts you're talking about. Shaq only has a higher FG% than Hakeem because all he every did was throw his weight and elbows around under the basket, offensively foul everyone, take easy feeds under the basket after hanging in the paint for 4-5 seconds without getting a 3 second call, and then just dunk it on every possession. And people talk about how many dunks Howard usually has per game!! Go back and watch Shaq videos of how many dunks that guy would have per year.

Yea thats why Shaq fouled out of every game of his career, and the NBA awarded more points for mid range jumpers before Shaq entered the league reducing his effectiveness. Dream was able to avoid traveling and turnovers at a much more effective rate than the brutish dumb Shaq.


Is that pretty much it?

bagwell368
09-13-2009, 08:09 AM
Who cares how he did it? He could have blindfolded himself, sat on the ground under the basket, and thrown it in the air for all I care, as long as the ball ended up in the basket.
He was, in his prime, the most efficient offensive big man ever, and there's really no competition.

I'd rather have a bull in a china shop making dunks than a ballet dancer missing eight footers.

Sure it matters. A guy with a more diversified offense presents more trouble for the D, and gets more "points" then a single dimensional player - even if that player is very dominant in that one area - read on.

Say you have a player holding the ball 19 feet from basket - if he can shoot, but not dribble well you get on his shirt. If can dribble you take a step off and go over his good dribble hand. If he can dribble both hands you play vanilla. And so forth and so on.

If you ask the people here who know what they are talking about to make a list of the 7 best low post players of all time, Shaq and Hakeem should both be on it. While Hakeem is clearly not one of the best mid range jump shooters of all time, he's good enough to pay attention to, not Shaq. While Hakeem isn't the best foul shooter, he's good enough that an automatic foul on him isn't called for at the end of games - not Shaq.

Nobody, not even rabid Shaq fans would place Shaq over Hakeem on defense.

That's why a less dominating (but still very good low post offensive player) who is easily the most all around skilled center of all time can be seen as better then Mr. Low Post, he simply beats him at too many things - while still putting up a pretty fine effort in Shaq's wheelhouse.

As for Duncan - if he played his whole career at Center he'd have been in a body cast for the past 4 years or so at this point. Fine player, great player, just a PF, not a Center. I think Cowens would have been much better and last a lot longer as a PF too.

MTar786
09-13-2009, 08:25 PM
shaq... hakeem.. man! tough call.. hakeems defense was one of the best i have EVER seen. but shaq.. his dominance was and will never be seen again. they are equally the best at wat they did. i really cant choose. as for duncan. he is the best pf of all time.. but he isnt as good as shaq or hakeem in their primes

theuuord
09-13-2009, 08:32 PM
Sure it matters. A guy with a more diversified offense presents more trouble for the D, and gets more "points" then a single dimensional player - even if that player is very dominant in that one area - read on.

Say you have a player holding the ball 19 feet from basket - if he can shoot, but not dribble well you get on his shirt. If can dribble you take a step off and go over his good dribble hand. If he can dribble both hands you play vanilla. And so forth and so on.

If you ask the people here who know what they are talking about to make a list of the 7 best low post players of all time, Shaq and Hakeem should both be on it. While Hakeem is clearly not one of the best mid range jump shooters of all time, he's good enough to pay attention to, not Shaq. While Hakeem isn't the best foul shooter, he's good enough that an automatic foul on him isn't called for at the end of games - not Shaq.

Nobody, not even rabid Shaq fans would place Shaq over Hakeem on defense.

That's why a less dominating (but still very good low post offensive player) who is easily the most all around skilled center of all time can be seen as better then Mr. Low Post, he simply beats him at too many things - while still putting up a pretty fine effort in Shaq's wheelhouse.

As for Duncan - if he played his whole career at Center he'd have been in a body cast for the past 4 years or so at this point. Fine player, great player, just a PF, not a Center. I think Cowens would have been much better and last a lot longer as a PF too.

I read on and found nothing that would answer this question:

all other things equal, would you take the guy who scored 30 points per game while shooting 60% on mostly dunks or layups, or the guy who scored 24 points per game with pretty post up moves, but only shooting 48%?

bagwell368
09-13-2009, 10:07 PM
I read on and found nothing that would answer this question:

all other things equal, would you take the guy who scored 30 points per game while shooting 60% on mostly dunks or layups, or the guy who scored 24 points per game with pretty post up moves, but only shooting 48%?

All thing being equal (and assuming both are centers, and the only center you have) you go with 30 PPG guy.

The point I was making is that even if Shaq is all time #1 low post guy (and there is some argument perhaps about that) that Hakeem might be #5 all time, and he has other offensive skills which stretch a defense in other ways. On top of that, Hakeem has better defensive skills (by a bigger advantage then Shaq has him in low post offense) which includes blocks and steals.

As for why I favor Hakeem: There are dozens and dozens of guys that have been elite scorers in the NBA. An all star game full of the best scorers is going to get torched against a team with some elite scorers and some good scorers that can play D at an elite level. So guys like KG, Duncan, Hakeem, McHale, MJ, Payton are appealing - at least to me. That type of team would pound a team made up of Jabbar, Dantley, Issel, Nash, English types.

rabzouz 96
09-14-2009, 12:56 PM
Sure it matters. A guy with a more diversified offense presents more trouble for the D, and gets more "points" then a single dimensional player - even if that player is very dominant in that one area - read on.

Say you have a player holding the ball 19 feet from basket - if he can shoot, but not dribble well you get on his shirt. If can dribble you take a step off and go over his good dribble hand. If he can dribble both hands you play vanilla. And so forth and so on.



obviously that wasnt the case,even if it sounds good in theory, maybe because shaq isnt all that one dimensional...

Chronz
09-14-2009, 01:03 PM
Yea why didnt that versatility translate into efficient production, all those post moves got Dream into trouble as well, he swears he never traveled but he was wrong ALOT throughout his career.

You have to understand the players ability to create that shot, and how efficient he was in doing so. Shaq was a better offensive player and its not even close to being debateable, same way Dream was a better defensive player. What gives Shaq the edge in my book is that his prime lasted longer, and he doesnt seem to be slowing down at this age, but hes also entering the age where Dream just fell apart.

Lakerfan In NY
09-14-2009, 01:25 PM
I know some of you are too young & only remember the "Championship Hakeem," but before the name change he was more a defensive force (although he could score). At the begin, you could even agrue that he wasn't the better offensive big man on his team(look up Ralph Sampson.) Before his championship, his team struggled to stay above 500. Regardless of how shaq got his points, he got them. Being "big" doesn't mean crap.. than Stanley Robert, Robert Taylor, Jerome James & eddy Curry should be dominate in the NBA. doing the same thing, but their not. No one player(ever) put together a total package of power,speed, finese (yes even finese), like shaq. As far as his only move is "dunking," what wrong w/ taking the highest % shot on the court. Name a better more unstoppable, demeaning move than that? You can keep your sweet jumpshot shooting, turn around jumpshot big man, if you want, give me a dominate, powerful, dunk on you every time & there nothing you can do about it center everytime.

Chronz
09-14-2009, 01:56 PM
So true, alot of people choose not to notice that his prime splits into 2 separate parts, an offensive prime and a defensive one. He was always a good 2 way player, but in terms of what made him a superstar it was his defense early and his offense later.

Had Dream picked basketball up sooner those 2 aspects may have interwined for longer than a few seasons and quite possibly have enjoyed the greatest prime ever, but it took awhile for his offensive game to match his D, and by then he was no longer the same defensive force.

People are combining his 2 primes into 1 dominant force, but thats simply not how his career unraveled. Shaq had the better career, and the longer prime.

Duncan is a distant 3rd compared to these 2

rabzouz 96
09-14-2009, 07:52 PM
I know some of you are too young & only remember the "Championship Hakeem," but before the name change he was more a defensive force (although he could score). At the begin, you could even agrue that he wasn't the better offensive big man on his team(look up Ralph Sampson.) Before his championship, his team struggled to stay above 500. Regardless of how shaq got his points, he got them. Being "big" doesn't mean crap.. than Stanley Robert, Robert Taylor, Jerome James & eddy Curry should be dominate in the NBA. doing the same thing, but their not. No one player(ever) put together a total package of power,speed, finese (yes even finese), like shaq. As far as his only move is "dunking," what wrong w/ taking the highest % shot on the court. Name a better more unstoppable, demeaning move than that? You can keep your sweet jumpshot shooting, turn around jumpshot big man, if you want, give me a dominate, powerful, dunk on you every time & there nothing you can do about it center everytime.
:up:

championships
09-14-2009, 08:07 PM
He was, More athletic than both and more post moves.
Probably better D too

bagwell368
09-14-2009, 10:26 PM
Yea why didnt that versatility translate into efficient production, all those post moves got Dream into trouble as well, he swears he never traveled but he was wrong ALOT throughout his career.

You have to understand the players ability to create that shot, and how efficient he was in doing so. Shaq was a better offensive player and its not even close to being debateable, same way Dream was a better defensive player. What gives Shaq the edge in my book is that his prime lasted longer, and he doesnt seem to be slowing down at this age, but hes also entering the age where Dream just fell apart.

Well since in fact you do not know what Shaq will do in the next couple of years, your assumption pretty much means you have a standing bias.

It is true that Shaq was a better offensive force then Hakeem, and the other way round on D.

It is also true that hack-a-Shaq was something Shaq could never escape, and what stat is there to downrate him for that? He's easy to use on a great team. Sit him down, and let McHale, Duncan, KG, and Hakeem do the job of getting big man points. What about when he is the man?

Oops sorry. Thankfully for him he mostly had a PG/wing player that could take the pressure off. How nice. But that's the luck of the draw, not Shaq's innate talent piling up those wins. Give him Robert Reid and Robert Horry and see what happens.... less wins, more hack a shaq, and lot more criticism from the media.

bagwell368
09-14-2009, 10:37 PM
I know some of you are too young & only remember the "Championship Hakeem," but before the name change he was more a defensive force (although he could score). At the begin, you could even agrue that he wasn't the better offensive big man on his team(look up Ralph Sampson.) Before his championship, his team struggled to stay above 500. Regardless of how shaq got his points, he got them. Being "big" doesn't mean crap.. than Stanley Robert, Robert Taylor, Jerome James & eddy Curry should be dominate in the NBA. doing the same thing, but their not. No one player(ever) put together a total package of power,speed, finese (yes even finese), like shaq. As far as his only move is "dunking," what wrong w/ taking the highest % shot on the court. Name a better more unstoppable, demeaning move than that? You can keep your sweet jumpshot shooting, turn around jumpshot big man, if you want, give me a dominate, powerful, dunk on you every time & there nothing you can do about it center everytime.

Sampson was a dog, a spineless and weak dog. Go look at Hakeem against the '85-'86 Celts, he was the only guy Houston had that could do anything, that was I believe Hakeem's second year. Ralphie had a couple of games of throwing up 18 footers, but, inside against McHale, Parish, and Walton - hahahahahhahahhhas.

It's a team game, Shaq didn't do much for his teams until he got rescued by the Lakers. One pretty big year, with Penny, and Hakeem and crew schooled them pretty well in the Finals. It was the one year Hakeem had a real grown up side kick, the year before when Hakeem also won the title he did it by himself, something Shaq cannot say.

Chronz
09-15-2009, 01:44 AM
Well since in fact you do not know what Shaq will do in the next couple of years, your assumption pretty much means you have a standing bias.
Where did you figure I was talking about what he could accomplish the next couple of years? I alluded to the possibility he ends up totally falling apart the way Dream did at the same age, in which case my point remains due to Shaq entering the league a year earlier.


It is true that Shaq was a better offensive force then Hakeem, and the other way round on D.
Yes


It is also true that hack-a-Shaq was something Shaq could never escape,
Its also true that Hack A Shaq never contributed to anything but the total stoppage of the game. When used in prolonged stretches it gave Shaqs team the advantage of setting their defense up every single possession. Alternatively on the offensive side Shaq making 50% of his fta was still more efficient than a Hakeem jumpshot. Thats neglecting to mention the detrimental impact it has on the rest of the opposing teams defense and helps his teammates game.

And if your talking about the final seconds of a game, as is well known, he makes em when they count. Obviously its a flawed statement that any fta is more valuable than another but he tended to rise to the occasion.


and what stat is there to downrate him for that?
Missed FT/A


He's easy to use on a great team. Sit him down, and let McHale, Duncan, KG, and Hakeem do the job of getting big man points. What about when he is the man?

Oops sorry.
Stop beating around the bush I have no idea what your saying. Shaq was brilliant in any role.


Thankfully for him he mostly had a PG/wing player that could take the pressure off. How nice. But that's the luck of the draw, not Shaq's innate talent piling up those wins. Give him Robert Reid and Robert Horry and see what happens.... less wins, more hack a shaq, and lot more criticism from the media.

Luck of the draw, not Shaqs innate talent? Then why do those very same players struggle without him, why do they never seem to contribute to their teams overall bottom end. How can a team with Shaq maintain a greater winning% than those alleged greater teammates?

Give Shaq in his PRIME, Dreams teammates in a league without MJ and we would see something greater.

Draco
09-15-2009, 02:17 AM
FWIW, every championship team Shaq was on had two players with PERs in the 20s. In comparison: the 1991/92 Rockets only had one player (Dream) who had a PER in the 20s, the Rockets 1992/93 team only had Dream in the 20s, and the Rockets championship 93/94 team only had Dream in the 20s. The Rockets 94/95 championship team had Drexler who had a PER in the 20s but by that time he and Dream were already 32 years old... and rest is history.. MJs history. :D

Lakerfan In NY
09-15-2009, 01:04 PM
Sampson was a dog, a spineless and weak dog. Go look at Hakeem against the '85-'86 Celts, he was the only guy Houston had that could do anything, that was I believe Hakeem's second year. Ralphie had a couple of games of throwing up 18 footers, but, inside against McHale, Parish, and Walton - hahahahahhahahhhas.

It's a team game, Shaq didn't do much for his teams until he got rescued by the Lakers. One pretty big year, with Penny, and Hakeem and crew schooled them pretty well in the Finals. It was the one year Hakeem had a real grown up side kick, the year before when Hakeem also won the title he did it by himself, something Shaq cannot say.

Hey.... is this about that punch he threw at one of the Celtics? Can't say I hate him for that.
Shaq put a new franchise on the map are you serious right now? It just so happen that they ran into the returning champions. & to say that hakeem did it by himself is truly silly w/ a team of Kenny the jet, sam i am, Big shot bob, Mad Max, OT, & Marie Elie, i can throw in M Bullard who was a light out shooter. Especially, if memory serve me correct, it was their young rookie PG & Maxwell that was making all the key shot down the stretch & one J Starks missing ALOT of shot to win them that title.

bagwell368
09-15-2009, 01:23 PM
Stop beating around the bush I have no idea what your saying. Shaq was brilliant in any role.

6 seconds left in the 7th game of the Finals. Shaq's team down two. Shaq with the ball 13 feet from the basket about 6 feet from the baseline on his left. '89-'90 Hakeem guarding him.

Shaq beats Hakeem, Hakeem clobbers him before the shot - ahhh Shaq at the line - career .528 - baring a rebounding issue chances are very strong, that Shaq's team just lost.

Other possibilities: Shaq puts up a shot - or - Shaq passes up the ball - or Shaq losses the handle. With Hakeem in his prime in front of him, its a steal, a deflection, a block, or at the foul line - very likely.

Off the top of my head these a guys that I would rather have in their time then Shaq in his. I was looking for high FT% (hence no Wilt, Thurmond, etc.), but didn't have time to scope them all out - perhaps 2 or 3 are unreasonable on second viewing.. but here they are:

McHale, Bird, Jabbar, Moses, Magic, MJ, Duncan, KG, LeBron, Cedric Maxwell, Erving, Karl, Cowens, Daugherty, Haywood

JordansBulls
09-15-2009, 03:21 PM
Sampson was a dog, a spineless and weak dog. Go look at Hakeem against the '85-'86 Celts, he was the only guy Houston had that could do anything, that was I believe Hakeem's second year. Ralphie had a couple of games of throwing up 18 footers, but, inside against McHale, Parish, and Walton - hahahahahhahahhhas.

It's a team game, Shaq didn't do much for his teams until he got rescued by the Lakers. One pretty big year, with Penny, and Hakeem and crew schooled them pretty well in the Finals. It was the one year Hakeem had a real grown up side kick, the year before when Hakeem also won the title he did it by himself, something Shaq cannot say.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_1986_finals.html

Very true, but then again Shaq in some finals was the only real support. Take a look at the 2000 finals.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2000_finals.html

GAWDtv
09-15-2009, 03:47 PM
I see it as

6 Duncan, at the center position, versus these two true Centers unfortunatly he loses but as a PF. D. Robinson/Howard should be inbetween here somewhere.
5 Russell, ya he got the rings but he was on the top team, with top coach and lesser competition.
4.Shaq Diesel, he the man in his time but the free throw prob. hurt him. Great feet for such a big man.
3.Wilt Chamberland, 100 Pt game, Avg 50 pts a game over 20 rep for multiple seasons.
2.Hakeem, all around, versitile, polished and profesional, if only their was no MJ.
1.Abdul Jabar, He was the top man on the top squad, lead the Showtime offense and the L in Pts.

Double_R
09-15-2009, 04:00 PM
They are all among the top players in NBA history... There will never be another Shaq though... Tim Duncan is the best power forward of all time(or atleast tied with Karl), and Hakeem was the guy picked 2 spots in front of Jordan jk

Chronz
09-15-2009, 07:39 PM
6 seconds left in the 7th game of the Finals. Shaq's team down two. Shaq with the ball 13 feet from the basket about 6 feet from the baseline on his left. '89-'90 Hakeem guarding him.

Shaq beats Hakeem, Hakeem clobbers him before the shot - ahhh Shaq at the line - career .528 - baring a rebounding issue chances are very strong, that Shaq's team just lost.
So your basing his superiority on a purely hypothetical scenario in which we get to play to Shaqs weaknesses? Why would you even try this tactic when the exact process can be applied to Hakeems weaknesses vs Shaq?

Game 5 of the NBA Finals, your teammates have all fouled out because you couldnt stop Shaq 1 on 1, both of their supporting casts have played eachother to a standstill, and though youve done admirably exploiting Shaq, youve found yourself outplayed and your teams lost because of it. Make no question about it, all things being equal the team with Shaq on it, is going to win. Such is the problem with having the lesser efficient force.


Other possibilities: Shaq puts up a shot - or - Shaq passes up the ball - or Shaq losses the handle. With Hakeem in his prime in front of him, its a steal, a deflection, a block, or at the foul line - very likely.

OK Hakeem in his prime defensively wouldnt have scored enough or effectively enough to even be in such a position against a Shaq led team with everything being equal, so unless your willing to admit to even be in this position it would require more help, your point is moot. If its Hakeem in his prime offensively then your going to need to send him more help against Shaq in his prime. Dream struggled enough against a lesser Shaq with alot of help, I can only imagine the horror of a primetime Shaq on Dream 1 on 1. Put it this way, as great as Hakeem was defensively, Mutombo was every bit his equal in the post. Shaq destroyed him 1 on 1.



Off the top of my head these a guys that I would rather have in their time then Shaq in his. I was looking for high FT% (hence no Wilt, Thurmond, etc.), but didn't have time to scope them all out - perhaps 2 or 3 are unreasonable on second viewing.. but here they are:

McHale, Bird, Jabbar, Moses, Magic, MJ, Duncan, KG, LeBron, Cedric Maxwell, Erving, Karl, Cowens, Daugherty, Haywood

So are you saying all of these guys > Wilt? You think Cedric Maxwell is a better player? Do you even know who he is?

If your simply talking about for a last possession Ill name you one center Id rather have than all of them in the history of the game. Yao Ming maybe Brad Miller

Shows you how irrelevant your point was doesnt it?

Chronz
09-15-2009, 07:46 PM
I see it as

6 Duncan, at the center position, versus these two true Centers unfortunatly he loses but as a PF. D. Robinson/Howard should be inbetween here somewhere.
3.Wilt Chamberland, 100 Pt game, Avg 50 pts a game over 20 rep for multiple seasons.
2.Hakeem, all around, versitile, polished and profesional, if only their was no MJ.

6 Duncan was a Center throughout his career, lets not pretend its some giant leap.
3 That tells me how little you know about him
2 Worst of all, EPIC FAIL

If there was no MJ? Dream would still be losing in the WESTERN CONFERENCE

bagwell368
09-15-2009, 08:52 PM
So are you saying all of these guys > Wilt? You think Cedric Maxwell is a better player? Do you even know who he is?

Wilt has the same issue as Shaq - bad foul shooting. Lots of centers have that problem, its not unique to Shaq.

Do I know who Cedric Maxwell is? Yes very well, do you? Seems not.

Let me set you straight:

I know Maxwell had a problem with dribbling, but not with foul shooting, and not with coming up with whack angles to shoot from. In 1980-1981 (I had seasons tickets, so I saw it up close) Cedric Maxwell won the Finals MVP and in the post season put up a .580 shooting percentage from the field, and an .818 from the stripe. There is not any year in Shaq's NBA playing career that he can equal that. There are two years he had .612 field shooting - sadly he matched that with .503 and .374 foul shooting respectively.

I prefer McHale even more, but Maxwell is a totally legitimate choice given the problem I put forth - might seem contrived - but after all you said your guy Shaq was a man for all seasons, did you not? Well he isn't.

BTW as an aside I had Shaq walk by me at the Hard Rock in Orlando in his second year. I was 6'8.5" 245 at the time, and he was just huge, a whole other size. Played against some 7 footers - but not like that.

Chronz
09-15-2009, 09:18 PM
Im waiting for it to all come together but your making it hard to understand. Please put me in my place by focusing on the actual debate (like the questions Im asking you) rather than the stuff you can google. Maxwell was a joke of a Finals MVP and did season passes really extend into the playoffs back then?

You do realize Cedric couldnt play Center nowadays. The position Shaq plays


There is not any year in Shaq's NBA playing career that he can equal that. There are two years he had .612 field shooting - sadly he matched that with .503 and .374 foul shooting respectively.
Usage and Efficiency, discover the relationship between the 2 then Ill be able to take your comments on what Shaq surpassed seriously.



I prefer McHale even more, but Maxwell is a totally legitimate choice given the problem I put forth - might seem contrived - but after all you said your guy Shaq was a man for all seasons, did you not? Well he isn't.
Yes because Brad Miller > Wilt, in a 1 possession game atleast we know he wont miss 1 ft. Thats obviously what makes an breaks a player, forget the other 99.8% of the game, lets focus on him being able to hit a free throw in a hypothetical situation with no real context surrounding it.

Talick
09-15-2009, 09:32 PM
I saw Hakeem Sunday...No lie.

JuiceDaddyNYY
09-15-2009, 09:41 PM
Hakeem swept Shaq out of the finals and based on pure skills, Olajuwon was better than both Duncan and Shaq. He could do it all. Not even close based on skills. Duncan has him in the intangibles but nothing else. Shaq was more explosive in his prime, but other than brute strength- Olajuwon has him in every category as well. For those that don't know, dust off a VHS tape and watch the Dream do work.

bagwell368
09-15-2009, 10:58 PM
You do realize Cedric couldnt play Center nowadays. The position Shaq plays

You do realize that Cedric never played Center. He was a 4, but was only effective from 12-13 feet in. Who said it had to be a Center? Duncan is part of the original question and he is a #4 in most people's opinions.

On a normal team in a normal league, Shaq is a hell of a weapon. No doubt. But it seems the washed and unwashed are with me and Horry on this one.

rabzouz 96
09-16-2009, 08:21 AM
You do realize that Cedric never played Center. He was a 4, but was only effective from 12-13 feet in. Who said it had to be a Center? Duncan is part of the original question and he is a #4 in most people's opinions.

On a normal team in a normal league, Shaq is a hell of a weapon. No doubt. But it seems the washed and unwashed are with me and Horry on this one.

maybe some are with you on the outcome, but definitly not with your weak argumentation shown here.

rathauneak
09-16-2009, 08:46 AM
I agree with Horry 100%

AirJordan23
09-16-2009, 06:31 PM
Olajuwon will ALWAYS be better than Duncan and Shaq. Horry stated the truth. He played with a prime shaq, prime hakeem and near prime Duncan. I don't see how one can't use his POINT OF VIEW as a legit argument. He played with all the 3, he would know much more than me or anyone else would ever know about them.

I only missed Shaq's rookie year as far as ACTUALLY WATCHING him play goes. And I'm pretty sure I know everything there is to know about the Dream. Now for the comparison. Going to look at both advantages/disadvantages of Dream/Shaq.

Shaq was an intimidating presence in the paint. There is not a single person that I've ever seen that guards the rim better than Shaq does. KJ does not have the BALLS to dunk on Shaq the way he did to Dream in game 4 of the '94 WCSF. Shaq was also more offensively dominant in the paint due to sheer size and strength. Shaq's ability to run the floor also gets underrated along with his footwork, skill and rebounding. Shaq had a real nice touch near the rim, great passer out of the low post and great at reading doubles. Also had some dominant rebounding seasons NEXT to Grant in 95 and 96. If he wasn't so offensively involved, his numbers could've been HIGHER. Statnerds won't know this.

Comparing their games, Shaq was more DOMINANT, bigger and stronger while Hakeem was much more agile, quicker, versatile and a better FT shooter. FT shooting was something that didn't allow Shaq to be a closer. Their passing was great. Hakeem wasn't a great passer until he was a part of Rudy T's system. Rudy made Hakeem a bit more of a focal point than he was in the late 80s. Shaq was a flashy passer in his Orlando days and all about style. Both were great but I'd say Shaq was a slightly better passer. Scoring is also going to Shaq but his efficiency is blown out of the proportion. When you factor in FT%, it's not a huge difference. Defense is definitely going to the Dream. He was a panther out there chasing down cats, stealing the ball and leading the break, having the ability to go for the block YET STILL recover in time, playing great post defense, denying position, guarding the pick and roll etc. Shaq was also an underrated defender but obviously not as good as Olajuwon.

Here's the thing that seperates Hakeem from Shaq as far as I'm concerned. Competition. I'm not knocking on Shaq because he destroyed his competition but whether he'd do that in Hakeem's years is the $ question. I think he would but there's no way to prove it. Shaq also didn't have competition like Olajuwon did. Look at Olajuwon's competition (PFs and Cs): Robinson, Barkley, malone, mourning, shaq, mutombo, ewing, tarpley etc. Compare this to shaq's competition and it's not that close. These are the players who Olajuwon made the all nba first team over: Moses in 1987, Ewing in 1988, 1989, 1993 and 1997, Robinson in 1994 and he SHOULD have made the first team over KAJ in 86. Compare that to the trash Shaq beat out, it's not that close. I'm not blaming Shaq for his time period, btw. He came into the league in 1992, he can't help it. Credit to Shaq for being named into the top 50 in 1996. Hakeem has some monstrous defensive seasons. 9 seasons of over 1.5 SPG and 3 BPG. A season where he recorded 4.6 BPG and 2.1 SPG.

Hakeem could also CARRY a team better. You ever see Shaq take one of the least TALENTED teams to the finals and win it all. Talkin 1994 here. Hakeem had one of the best UNITS in the league if not the best but they weren't very talented. They were clutch and hit big shots, played their role to perfection but not a lot of talent. Barkley called him the best player in the league back in 94. Hakeem was the stastical dream and could do everything on the court. Quadruple doubles, 5x5 etc show that. He had this rep of being selfish and lazy in the early 90s. But, anyone who closely followed Houston knew the TRASH Hakeem played with. Hakeem demanded a trade around 1991 and had some issues with the contract. Rockets suspended him and were terrible without him. They settled the issues later on.

Also, there's a myth that Olajuwon killed Shaq in the finals. He outplayed him but didn't kill him despite what Shaq suggests. That's utterly due to respect. Shaq called him the best center in the league in 1999. Yea, that aint no typo. Olajuwon/Shaq match up wasn't the deciding factor in 1995. The result of the games was decided by clutch shots by role players. It was about who was the better unit. Orlando might've been more talented but the Rockets played better as a unit. Magic didn't really hit any clutch shots save for that Dennis Scott 3 in OT of game 1. Anderson flatout choked in game 1 and was never the same again. Scott had some poor shooting nights. Shaw wasn't that spectacular either.

Games were mostly close except for game 2 where the Rockets had that huge lead at half time. Think Orlando came back led by Shaq and Penny and then Cassell and Dream closed it out. Game 1 was key in this series Jet came up big with his 3s but Orlando could've closed it out with the FTs. Game 3 was also pretty close. Ended up with the Horry 3. Game 4 was also close at the start of the 4th. Think it was tied but the Rockets' role players hit some big shots. Olajuwon even hit a 3 in Shaq's face in the last minute or so.

Statistically speaking, Shaq didn't get outplayed but when you watch the games he did. Hakeem was CLUTCH and made some big shots. Also TOs. Olajuwon averaged 2.75 TOs compared to Shaq's 5.25. That's a pretty big difference. If you're just comparing them when they were matched up, it's probably a tied. Shaq served up a couple of facials and didn't have any problem scoring on him. He'd power Hakeem out and score with a jumphook. Olajuwon brought O'Neal away from the basket and nailed the J in his face. They didn't really have problems scoring on each other. Shaq was more efficient, though. But, Hakeem still won.

I think the Dream will forever be the second greatest player I ever saw. I'm not much into the James hype. Who knows though. My interest in this garbage league is at an all time low anyway. So I don't think it's likely.

Chronz
09-16-2009, 07:04 PM
You do realize that Cedric never played Center. He was a 4, but was only effective from 12-13 feet in. Who said it had to be a Center? Duncan is part of the original question and he is a #4 in most people's opinions.
Common sense would tell you to add in a player capable of playing the position. Like Duncan thank you for proving my point...


On a normal team in a normal league, Shaq is a hell of a weapon. No doubt. But it seems the washed and unwashed are with me and Horry on this one.

Its ok Horry was with me a few years back, and no one here has really been able to make a debate out of it.

GAWDtv
09-16-2009, 07:39 PM
6 Duncan was a Center throughout his career, lets not pretend its some giant leap.
3 That tells me how little you know about him
2 Worst of all, EPIC FAIL

If there was no MJ? Dream would still be losing in the WESTERN CONFERENCE

These are called opinions for a reason, I know enough about you to see you don't have much of a life.

Yes he played the position but the other two are true centers in size. Put Duncan at the 4 with a center like the others and how much better would he have been? When he played with Robinson the towers where scary dangerous, just an opinion, no need to reply.

I'm not here to argue, read a question, and answer it, thats it. :facepalm:

Chronz
09-16-2009, 08:13 PM
I skipped the stuff about their games, and just got to the points you made.



Here's the thing that seperates Hakeem from Shaq as far as I'm concerned. Competition. I'm not knocking on Shaq because he destroyed his competition but whether he'd do that in Hakeem's years is the $ question. I think he would but there's no way to prove it. Shaq also didn't have competition like Olajuwon did. Look at Olajuwon's competition (PFs and Cs): Robinson, Barkley, malone, mourning, shaq, mutombo, ewing, tarpley etc. Compare this to shaq's competition and it's not that close. These are the players who Olajuwon made the all nba first team over: Moses in 1987, Ewing in 1988, 1989, 1993 and 1997, Robinson in 1994 and he SHOULD have made the first team over KAJ in 86. Compare that to the trash Shaq beat out, it's not that close. I'm not blaming Shaq for his time period, btw. He came into the league in 1992, he can't help it. Credit to Shaq for being named into the top 50 in 1996. Hakeem has some monstrous defensive seasons. 9 seasons of over 1.5 SPG and 3 BPG. A season where he recorded 4.6 BPG and 2.1 SPG.
Somewhat true but exactly how would it effect him, you say there is no way of knowing, but there are a few ways of trying to find out. Without that bit of context I dont really see the point your trying to make. Shaq dominated what was one of the leagues toughest defensive eras better equipped to defend against low post players (thats partly why there are so few of them left), what makes you think he wouldnt do so in an easier environment?

Also why are you mentioning players that both played against? Seems like double counting to me.




Hakeem could also CARRY a team better.
LOL no


You ever see Shaq take one of the least TALENTED teams to the finals and win it all.
You ever see Shaq miss the playoffs in his PRIME? How about letting his teams overall efficiency drop to really sad levels for an All-Time great bigman? Had Shaq been in a comparable league in the absolute peak of his career, he too wouldve won.


Talkin 1994 here. Hakeem had one of the best UNITS in the league if not the best but they weren't very talented. They were clutch and hit big shots, played their role to perfection but not a lot of talent. Barkley called him the best player in the league back in 94. Hakeem was the stastical dream and could do everything on the court. Quadruple doubles, 5x5 etc show that.
Agreed, the only team that couldve threatened them unexpectedly lost in the first round 2 years straight but in his prime hes comparable to just about everyone, the problem is he didnt sustain that prime or win enough during it to really be in Shaq's league or anyone else in the top 4 among Bigs. And of course he was the best player in 94, MJ was retired. Still Id be willing to wager he wins atleast 1 title if MJ never retired.

As for his stats, the career best in efficiency was the most impressive.


He had this rep of being selfish and lazy in the early 90s. But, anyone who closely followed Houston knew the TRASH Hakeem played with. Hakeem demanded a trade around 1991 and had some issues with the contract. Rockets suspended him and were terrible without him. They settled the issues later on.
Actually the talk of Dream being overrated surfaced when the team did so great without him. They were 17-13 with Dream, over the course of the next 26 games they went 15-11, and finished the season on a rampage. It wasnt until the following year when depending on who you believe, that Dream got "hurt" and showed management how crappy they would be without him.

Either way your point is sound. They were so wrong about Dream, but the fact that he had trash around him and didnt elevate his individual performance is sad.

In that time prior to winning a chip and entering his prime the Rockets only finished with a respectable offensive rating once, the year they made the Finals and Ralph was a dominant center. After that the team regularly finished below average offensively. The worst of it being in 1990 when they finished in the bottom 6 in offensive efficiency.

To put that in perspective, consider that a ROOKIE Shaq took what was essentially an expansion team and the worst 2-way team in the league brought them to a comparable level that Dream did and within a game of making the playoffs. You can downtalk Dreams teammates at that time but they were better than what Shaq had as a rook, and he led that team to higher levels.

Such was the problem with a younger Dream, he wasnt much of an offensive force, it took awhile for Dream to master the passing game but when he did, he was as good as anybody, its just a shame by then his defense was on the decline by then.


Also, there's a myth that Olajuwon killed Shaq in the finals. He outplayed him but didn't kill him despite what Shaq suggests. That's utterly due to respect. Shaq called him the best center in the league in 1999. Yea, that aint no typo.
It has to be, Shaq started talking about how he slayed Dream that year I believe. Link please



Statistically speaking, Shaq didn't get outplayed but when you watch the games he did. Hakeem was CLUTCH and made some big shots. Also TOs. Olajuwon averaged 2.75 TOs compared to Shaq's 5.25. That's a pretty big difference. If you're just comparing them when they were matched up, it's probably a tied. Shaq served up a couple of facials and didn't have any problem scoring on him. He'd power Hakeem out and score with a jumphook. Olajuwon brought O'Neal away from the basket and nailed the J in his face. They didn't really have problems scoring on each other. Shaq was more efficient, though. But, Hakeem still won.
Statistically Dream did better, he was more efficient when you consider the turnover disparity, he was also defending the paint against Shaq's teammates better.


I think the Dream will forever be the second greatest player I ever saw. I'm not much into the James hype. Who knows though. My interest in this garbage league is at an all time low anyway. So I don't think it's likely.
Bron at the same stage of his career was miles ahead of Dream, so just give him time. He too will soon enter his prime.

Chronz
09-16-2009, 08:18 PM
These are called opinions for a reason, I know enough about you to see you don't have much of a life.
Learn more about the way forums work, people will call you out for your flawed opinions, countering by saying they have no life only exposes how sad your is. And no you dont know jack about me.


Yes he played the position but the other two are true centers in size.
LMFAO I really didnt believe there was a way for to have made me think you were any less knowledgeable about the game. Turns out I gave you too much credit, Dream was smaller than Duncan, the only bigger part of Dreams body was his derriere. He was 6"10, Duncan is a legit 7FT with length and played at a higher weight class throughout most of his career.


Put Duncan at the 4 with a center like the others and how much better would he have been? When he played with Robinson the towers where scary dangerous, just an opinion, no need to reply.

Duncan had the best years of his career when D-Rob wasnt around. Just a fact, please do respond.. and Duncan was more of a Center than D-Rob was, Duncan just didnt want the responsibility of defending opposing centers every night.


I'm not here to argue, read a question, and answer it, thats it. :facepalm:

Heres a tip, next time you dont want my attention, try not insulting me in the process.

bagwell368
09-16-2009, 08:58 PM
Common sense would tell you to add in a player capable of playing the position. Like Duncan thank you for proving my point...


Not so fast slick. You made claims about Shaq. I provided an example that he wasn't the best at, or even in the top 8-10 at. It doesn't matter what position label the guy has, if he can provide the points in that situation more often then Shaq, then he is one of the guys that is better - regardless.

Also I made it clear I was talking about guys in their time.

Does this mean that McHale must not be a dominant low post player because he was a Forward? Or Duncan? What sort of a position is that? If Duncan is included in this post then any #4 that can navigate the low post is an option that can be explored.

So what's with the insults? To hide the fact you know nothing about Cedric Maxwell - his game, his position, his unique way of finding openings around the bucket? That is your lack, not mine.

Chronz
09-16-2009, 09:43 PM
Not so fast slick. You made claims about Shaq. I provided an example that he wasn't the best at, or even in the top 8-10 at.
At what? Your not very clear on what claims of mine your debunking . Thats why Ive asked you before. What is Shaq not even top 8-10 at? If its free throw shooting then I really am wasting my time, if its efficiency then Ill be glad to hear you out, and eventually explain the relationship between usage and efficiency.



It doesn't matter what position label the guy has, if he can provide the points in that situation more often then Shaq, then he is one of the guys that is better - regardless.
Of course it matters, if it was just about low post/paint skills then GP would be a good choice at the 5. Sadly defense and rebounding go a long way in determining your position. And in a thread regarding a certain position (Bigs who can play the 5) it means the WORLD.


Also I made it clear I was talking about guys in their time.
Whos time? Certainly not Shaqs time because by then Maxwell was out the league. If your talking about Dream, then the question must be asked, why are you isolating just his era? Why isolate ANY era?


Does this mean that McHale must not be a dominant low post player because he was a Forward?
I dont know why you would think that.


Or Duncan? What sort of a position is that?
You misunderstand my position. Duncan could play C, McHale never liked playing the position but he could get away with it. Cedric Maxwell, not a chance.


If Duncan is included in this post then any #4 that can navigate the low post is an option that can be explored.
Yes because Duncan is obviously a true PF who has NEVER played Center. :facepalm:


So what's with the insults?
Insults, which ones?


To hide the fact you know nothing about Cedric Maxwell - his game, his position, his unique way of finding openings around the bucket? That is your lack, not mine.

Not at all, moreso to expose the fact that you know very little about these players. Refer to your position of "well if Duncan can be explored so to can these guys who could NEVER get away with playing C"

Theres a reason Horry is comparing these bigmen without adding in the context that Duncan played alot of 4. Thats because hes talking strictly about BIGMEN. Maxwell wasnt big. He was a tweaner F who lacked the bulk to be adequately play the 5, especially during Shaq/Duncan time of dominance.

AirJordan23
09-17-2009, 07:13 AM
Somewhat true but exactly how would it effect him, you say there is no way of knowing, but there are a few ways of trying to find out. Without that bit of context I dont really see the point your trying to make. Shaq dominated what was one of the leagues toughest defensive eras better equipped to defend against low post players (thats partly why there are so few of them left), what makes you think he wouldnt do so in an easier environment?

Also why are you mentioning players that both played against? Seems like double counting to me.
I'm not saying Shaq wouldn't dominate. I'm just saying he didn't do it because he didn't get the chance. Not Shaq's fault because in his peak, there were hardly any quality centers left. I'm not holding that against shaq but Olajuwon went through those centers and outplayed them. Also, while you couldn't front players back in the 90s, teams still got away with illegal defense. 96 rockets/sonics wcsf is a perfect example of this. Sonics totally shut Dream down and denied him the ball. Shaq was a rule changer though, gotta give him props for that...

Shaq in the 1990s had the teams to win but he was an immature prick who was known for making silly TOs. People keep on underrating the impact Phil had on him. Shaq obviously took advantage of the lack of competition in 2000s but that's where the competition "point" comes from. Would Shaq have played at the level Olajuwon did while facing top notch competition in the playoffs? I think so but there's no way to prove it. It's basically hypothetical. Shaq and Hakeem both took advantage of their situations. One did it with no Jordan, the other when the league was getting worse year by year.

Also why are you mentioning players that both played against? Seems like double counting to me.
I probably had some typos in that post. My mistake.

LOL no
Shaq from 1994-2005 played on teams better than Olajuwon did in what are considered his bad years (1987-1992). Hell, Orlando in Shaq's rookie season wasn't that bad either. His impact on the team is overstated. That 20 win increase wasn't solely due to his presence. iirc, they had to deal with a lot of injuries in the previous season that landed them the #1 pick. I can guarantee you without checking the record, Orlando in 1991 didn't do as terrible as they did in 92. Anyway, to the point, Shaq never played on a team as terrible as Olajuwon's so why say he could carry a team better. I would've liked to seen him do it to those Laker teams in the late 90s and early 00s. And I know you're going to bring up their record without Kobe which was great (11-3 in 2001 iirc) but I would've liked to seen a bigger sample like the whole season.

Olajuwon's teams were terrible. Sampson had to deal with knee injuries and several Rockets players fell out of the map. They retired or were suspended due to doing coke. Hakeem still had some great performances. Had something like 47/25 in a double ot game against Seattle in 87...put up some monstrous stats. Rockets made the playoffs every year save for 1992 where hakeem was suspended for several games and had issues with the organization..Hakeem was accused of faking an injury and there were chemistry issues...Everyone knows what he did post-1992.

You ever see Shaq miss the playoffs in his PRIME? How about letting his teams overall efficiency drop to really sad levels for an All-Time great bigman? Had Shaq been in a comparable league in the absolute peak of his career, he too wouldve won.
Shaq in his prime had a better team around him. Your last point is pure speculation. I'm not much of a guy who deals with hypothetical situations. It's sad Hakeem's and Shaq's primes didn't match up and we never witnessed the duel.


Agreed, the only team that couldve threatened them unexpectedly lost in the first round 2 years straight but in his prime hes comparable to just about everyone, the problem is he didnt sustain that prime or win enough during it to really be in Shaq's league or anyone else in the top 4 among Bigs. And of course he was the best player in 94, MJ was retired. Still Id be willing to wager he wins atleast 1 title if MJ never retired.

As for his stats, the career best in efficiency was the most impressive.

This is actually true. Hakeem's prime only lasted from 1993-96. Part of it is due to Rudy T's system. Rudy had a substantial amount of impact on Olajuwon's game and the team around him. He and the team flourish and made several post season runs after that. The Rockets were actually robbed in game 7 of the 1993 WCSF against Seattle. A couple of terrible calls killed them and the game went to OT iirc. 1996, Hakeem was totally shut down due to the Sonics' illegal defense. I actually feel Hakeem would be ringless if Jordan didn't retire. I'm just speculating but I'm damn sure they didn't win in 1994. That doesn't happen, Grant most likely doesn't leave the Bulls. And despite the addition of Drexler, Rockets would've been overmatched despite all their tenacity and heart.

His efficiency isn't that impressive due to primarily being a jumpshooter. I'm not a big fan of jumpshooting bigs because it's an inefficient shot but Hakeem was an exception. And despite all that, there isn't a huge difference in Hakeem's and Shaq's efficiency once you factor in FT%. Hakeem wasn't a great FT shooter either but he was great when compared to O'Neal.


Actually the talk of Dream being overrated surfaced when the team did so great without him. They were 17-13 with Dream, over the course of the next 26 games they went 15-11, and finished the season on a rampage. It wasnt until the following year when depending on who you believe, that Dream got "hurt" and showed management how crappy they would be without him.
Actually, the Rockets without him were 16-10 which is a bigger insult to Olajuwon. Like you said, they went on like a 10 game winning streak when Olajuwon came back. Part of it had to do with Don Cheaney's brilliant coaching. He won COY iirc and played more of an uptempo game unleashing the Jets, Maxwell's and Sleepy's shooting ability. That was the time where Dream was considered selfish and a poor passer. He'd rather take a fadeaway over 2 defenders instead of trusting his team. In 92, rockets were like 2-10 without him or 3-9. Can't remember.


Either way your point is sound. They were so wrong about Dream, but the fact that he had trash around him and didnt elevate his individual performance is sad.
Define "elevate his individual performance." He had some great statistical seasons as far as I'm concerned. He wasn't as smart of a player though.



In that time prior to winning a chip and entering his prime the Rockets only finished with a respectable offensive rating once, the year they made the Finals and Ralph was a dominant center. After that the team regularly finished below average offensively. The worst of it being in 1990 when they finished in the bottom 6 in offensive efficiency.
Hakeem was still better than Sampson the year they made it to the finals. Ripped LA a new one and had some great games against the Celtics. Absolutely destroyed their frontline, mainly Parish. The only thing people remember from that playoff run is Sampson's gamewinner at the buzzer in game 5 while Olajuwon was ejected. What they don't remember is the huge egg Sampson laid in the finals while getting destroyed by McHale's textbook post moves. Sampson was the epitome of inconsistency and he was pretty TO prone as well. Sampson never reached his potential either. Wilt called him one of the biggest waste of talents ever. Heck, people don't even remember John Lucas left the team mid way into the season. I'm not into the offensive rating much because I don't pay a lot of attention to these type of stats even though they could be a good one but I think the reason it's so low is because Rockets were a pretty TO prone team so that's some wasted possessions. And I'm pretty sure that stat takes into account # of points scored/100 possessions. I might be incorrect so you can school me on this one. In the late 80s, you can't expect it to be high. Who's going to produce offensively? That's like expect last year's Heat to have a respectable offensive rating despite having Wade.


To put that in perspective, consider that a ROOKIE Shaq took what was essentially an expansion team and the worst 2-way team in the league brought them to a comparable level that Dream did and within a game of making the playoffs. You can downtalk Dreams teammates at that time but they were better than what Shaq had as a rook, and he led that team to higher levels.
I talked about this earlier. That team still had a 20 PPG scorer in Nick Andersen, great passer in Skiles, great shooter to stretch the floor in Scott and had some solid role players like Bowie, Donald Royal etc. They were terrible in 1992 due to injuries to their key players. In their 20 win improvement, Shaq was worth about 13 wins or so. And I'm not sure about Dream's team being better than Shaq's but I don't wanna go into it right now.


Such was the problem with a younger Dream, he wasnt much of an offensive force, it took awhile for Dream to master the passing game but when he did, he was as good as anybody, its just a shame by then his defense was on the decline by then.

True. Coming into the league he was more of a defensive player. He was feared more as a defensive player with his ability to guard the paint and block shots. His agile hands, defensive rebounding and reflexes were amazing.


It has to be, Shaq started talking about how he slayed Dream that year I believe. Link please
I'm sorry I don't have a link to show for it but I can guarantee you they talk about it in game 4 of the 1999 Laker/Rocket series. The game is up on YouTube in it's entirety. You can have a look at it or have my word for it which you probably won't. A Shaq fan even talks about Shaq calling Hakeem the best center in the league that year. Here's the post.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3487398&postcount=14


Statistically Dream did better, he was more efficient when you consider the turnover disparity, he was also defending the paint against Shaq's teammates better.
Yeah, the TOs were huge. Dream forced some steals and knocked the ball away. Shaq's transition defense was also pretty pathetic. I don't think anyone denies Olajuwon outplayed him but it's an insult to Shaq if one says he got killed. Despite what Shaq says.


Bron at the same stage of his career was miles ahead of Dream, so just give him time. He too will soon enter his prime.
Okay.

Anyhow, great points man. I wish there were more posters like you on this forum.

bagwell368
09-17-2009, 08:49 PM
What they don't remember is the huge egg Sampson laid in the finals while getting destroyed by McHale's textbook post moves. Sampson was the epitome of inconsistency and he was pretty TO prone as well. Sampson never reached his potential either. Wilt called him one of the biggest waste of talents ever.

Auerbach wanted to draft Sampson badly, and I believed tried to get him later as well. Red might have done something with him. I personally think he is one of the five biggest misses of all time. Others to nominate: Sam Bowie (at least he had an excuse), Marvin Barnes (talent galore, but), Larue Martin (stinky), Shawn Bradley (bust), Kwame, Darko, Pervis, Bias, Washburn. I ran out of adjectives.....

JordansBulls
09-17-2009, 09:39 PM
Pretty good debate going on here.

Chronz
09-17-2009, 09:43 PM
I'm not saying Shaq wouldn't dominate. I'm just saying he didn't do it because he didn't get the chance. Not Shaq's fault because in his peak, there were hardly any quality centers left. I'm not holding that against shaq but Olajuwon went through those centers and outplayed them. Also, while you couldn't front players back in the 90s, teams still got away with illegal defense. 96 rockets/sonics wcsf is a perfect example of this. Sonics totally shut Dream down and denied him the ball. Shaq was a rule changer though, gotta give him props for that...
Agreed, the good teams were always smart about hiding their zones, there are very few quirks that irk me more than when people exaggerate the impact zone defenses had on the league. Id have to disagree that Dream was totally shut down by illegal defense, IMO he would be the same guy in any era. He was contained by good defense, I dont have the series but I always remembered the Sonics having the necessary athletes to cover him and his shooters. Ill look into it, see if I can buy that series. Your knowledge of these circumstances are impressive to say the least, atleast if what your saying is true.



Shaq in the 1990s had the teams to win but he was an immature prick who was known for making silly TOs. People keep on underrating the impact Phil had on him. Shaq obviously took advantage of the lack of competition in 2000s but that's where the competition "point" comes from. Would Shaq have played at the level Olajuwon did while facing top notch competition in the playoffs? I think so but there's no way to prove it. It's basically hypothetical. Shaq and Hakeem both took advantage of their situations. One did it with no Jordan, the other when the league was getting worse year by year.
Shaq wasnt immature, Nick Van Exel was immature (You seem like a history buff so Im sure you know all about his antics, Shaq cant touch that), Eddie Jones was becoming notorious for his disappearing acts, and Shaq himself had not yet entered his prime. But what makes you think the league was really weaker when Shaq was winning titles? Shaq played against some of the best defensive frontlines in the history of the game, and could never be played 1 on 1. I dont see why his level of play would diminish in a league that if anything was easier to dominate for a bigman.



Shaq from 1994-2005 played on teams better than Olajuwon did in what are considered his bad years (1987-1992).
Depending on which years your talking about the reason his teams were better was because he himself was a better player. I dont like generalizations but I will say this, I could never envision Shaq at the same stage of his career as Dream, under any circumstance, miss the playoffs. He was simply too gifted offensively for his team not to be elite and enough of a force on defense that even a muddling rating defensively wouldnt have kept them out of the playoffs. I mean yea if you surround him with complete bums theres nothing he can do, but even expansion teams have some decent players, enough for guys like Dream and Shaq to work with in their prime.
Though technically Dream wasnt in his prime when he missed the playoffs but again thats why Shaq had the better career. His peak withstood the test of time



Hell, Orlando in Shaq's rookie season wasn't that bad either. His impact on the team is overstated. That 20 win increase wasn't solely due to his presence. iirc, they had to deal with a lot of injuries in the previous season that landed them the #1 pick. I can guarantee you without checking the record, Orlando in 1991 didn't do as terrible as they did in 92.
In what year did Dream have a worst ensemble cast than Shaq as a rook?

Birds impact on the Celtics was truly overstated, Ive never actually seen someone breakdown the impact Shaqs addition added to that team, but a jump that great never happens because of 1 player, Nick Anderson was improving, but aside from that there really isnt much of a difference between the 3 teams. Put it this way, in the modern era youd be hard pressed to find a player who had more to do with his teams overall turnaround than Shaq did that year, much less a 20 year old rookie having that kind of impact.



Anyway, to the point, Shaq never played on a team as terrible as Olajuwon's so why say he could carry a team better.
Because if Shaq at his worst could be so instrumental in such a turnaround, then I can only imagine how much greater that team wouldve been with Shaq in his prime. Find me a team with prime Shaq on it, that would miss the playoffs. For the majority of their careers, Shaq was that kind of player who could guarantee his teams contention, but also because I disagree about where you rank a rookie Shaq's teammates vs Dreams teammates in his bad years.



I would've liked to seen him do it to those Laker teams in the late 90s and early 00s. And I know you're going to bring up their record without Kobe which was great (11-3 in 2001 iirc) but I would've liked to seen a bigger sample like the whole season.
I like to study the trends of teams with players as efficient as Shaq offensively and the kind of support it took to make them good on that end, youll get an idea of just how little it takes to make it happen.

Supporting casts being equal, Shaq would make his team elite offensively and middle of the pack defensively, Dream would make his team elite defensively but was still helpless in preventing his team from being horrible offensively.

Again Dream in his prime wouldnt allow that, but if your not at that level at whatever age Dream was, then you cant realistically have a better career than Shaq. You can say in his prime he was comparable, thats totally justifiable.


But for your kind of comparison just look up Shaq's record without his stars throughout his career, and how those same players fared without Shaq.



Olajuwon's teams were terrible. Sampson had to deal with knee injuries and several Rockets players fell out of the map. They retired or were suspended due to doing coke. Hakeem still had some great performances. Had something like 47/25 in a double ot game against Seattle in 87...put up some monstrous stats. Rockets made the playoffs every year save for 1992 where hakeem was suspended for several games and had issues with the organization..Hakeem was accused of faking an injury and there were chemistry issues...Everyone knows what he did post-1992.
If Dreams teams were terrible then the squad Shaq had as a rookie was putrid. Even on 1 knee Sampson was a better player than any other Magic. **** Mcray was comparable to Nick Anderson. And of course he had some great performances, hes a great player at any stage, but the thing about pointing out individual games in place of his entire season is that they arent as telling or revealing of how a players statistical contributions impacted his teams overall effectiveness.



Shaq in his prime had a better team around him. Your last point is pure speculation. I'm not much of a guy who deals with hypothetical situations. It's sad Hakeem's and Shaq's primes didn't match up and we never witnessed the duel.
Truthfully Im not much of a guy who settles with we'll never know. The whole purpose of this thread is to create hypotheticals because its the only way to begin comparing players whos primes did not intertwine. Its one thing to say we could never know for sure, but to not even try is something Ill never understand. Ive studied the games trends for these very reasons, I like asking hypotheticals.

You yourself laid down a few by suggesting the league was weaker in Shaq's era than when Dream won a title. But how could you know that when the leagues were so far apart? Youve mustve come to some sort of conclusion about the quality of the players. Im not going to say your last point is pure speculation, Id much rather ask you how you came to that conclusion.



This is actually true. Hakeem's prime only lasted from 1993-96. Part of it is due to Rudy T's system. Rudy had a substantial amount of impact on Olajuwon's game and the team around him. He and the team flourish and made several post season runs after that. The Rockets were actually robbed in game 7 of the 1993 WCSF against Seattle. A couple of terrible calls killed them and the game went to OT iirc. 1996, Hakeem was totally shut down due to the Sonics' illegal defense. I actually feel Hakeem would be ringless if Jordan didn't retire. I'm just speculating but I'm damn sure they didn't win in 1994. That doesn't happen, Grant most likely doesn't leave the Bulls. And despite the addition of Drexler, Rockets would've been overmatched despite all their tenacity and heart.
I was assuming Grant still leaves even with a 4th ring. From what I remember he didnt like the way he was valued in Chicago. But if he stays then that 95 Finals could really go either way, without him I think we can both agree the Rockets win.


His efficiency isn't that impressive due to primarily being a jumpshooter. I'm not a big fan of jumpshooting bigs because it's an inefficient shot but Hakeem was an exception. And despite all that, there isn't a huge difference in Hakeem's and Shaq's efficiency once you factor in FT%. Hakeem wasn't a great FT shooter either but he was great when compared to O'Neal.
There is a significant difference between the 2.

Dreams skill curve (a way of accounting for the difference in efficiency in context with the players usage) was never even remotely close to Shaqs. The only time it was came in the 3 years leading up to his championship seasons where he accounted for as much as 29% of his teams individual possessions, with an efficiency rating a full 6PTS higher than league average. It still doesnt match Shaq, but when you add in the fact that he was the superior defender the gap between the 2 is nill. My point is only that Dream was only that kind of player for a few years, whereas Shaq was that kind of player for nearly double the duration.



Define "elevate his individual performance." He had some great statistical seasons as far as I'm concerned. He wasn't as smart of a player though.
Typically when players find themselves under circumstances where their teammates arent as capable as they were in years prior, the star takes it upon himself to carry more of the load. Glancing at the #'s we can see Dream did that. His usage rate continued to climb as his teams offense continued to get worse. The end result was that his efficiency suffered because of it.
While this is expected circumstance of having to carry more of the load, his inability to raise his game beyond what was expected is why hes not in Shaqs class at this stage in his career. Once the team got better Dream returned to the balance he displayed earlier in his career. Then after missing the playoffs we see a radical shift in Dreams offensive game, Dream was finally a part of an elite offensive team, only this time it was heavily influenced by his own contributions, when he started winning in the 90's he did so while sporting a Shaqian usage rate in the 30's to go with the passing brilliance previously unseen from him. Thats when he became a player who could guarantee a playoff birth no matter the situation, the kind of player I saw in Shaq for a longer duration of his career. Thats really all Ive been getting at.

When your teams offense improves its very easy to see why.


Hakeem was still better than Sampson the year they made it to the finals. Ripped LA a new one and had some great games against the Celtics. Absolutely destroyed their frontline, mainly Parish. The only thing people remember from that playoff run is Sampson's gamewinner at the buzzer in game 5 while Olajuwon was ejected. What they don't remember is the huge egg Sampson laid in the finals while getting destroyed by McHale's textbook post moves. Sampson was the epitome of inconsistency and he was pretty TO prone as well. Sampson never reached his potential either. Wilt called him one of the biggest waste of talents ever. Heck, people don't even remember John Lucas left the team mid way into the season. I'm not into the offensive rating much because I don't pay a lot of attention to these type of stats even though they could be a good one but I think the reason it's so low is because Rockets were a pretty TO prone team so that's some wasted possessions. And I'm pretty sure that stat takes into account # of points scored/100 possessions. I might be incorrect so you can school me on this one. In the late 80s, you can't expect it to be high. Who's going to produce offensively? That's like expect last year's Heat to have a respectable offensive rating despite having Wade.
All I remember was how good the Celtics double team schemes were. Bird especially, Ive never been a big fan of Bird and Ill admit I havent seen alot of his career, but in that series he really stood out defensively for me.

As for your D-Wade comparison, your absolutely right. I shouldve specified the importance of it coming from the center position because the relative strength of his position is weaker, having a center that can score separates his team more than having a a perimeter scorer. Its not Wade's fault Beasley and Jermaine were his 2nd options and horribly inefficient, but his presence cant be compared to that of Shaqs because the position he plays is more talented in the league. It takes a really special offensive swingman, or a really great PG to have the kind of impact that a bigman has. Think MJ levels of offensive rating.

As for their turnover disparity thats part of the reason why Shaq had more of an impact on his teams efficiency.




I talked about this earlier. That team still had a 20 PPG scorer in Nick Andersen, great passer in Skiles, great shooter to stretch the floor in Scott and had some solid role players like Bowie, Donald Royal etc. They were terrible in 1992 due to injuries to their key players. In their 20 win improvement, Shaq was worth about 13 wins or so. And I'm not sure about Dream's team being better than Shaq's but I don't wanna go into it right now.
That seems like a very reasonable amount, but really how much do you think they could have won if everyone stayed relatively healthy. I dont see them doing as well as the year prior. And when retrodicting a teams performance you have to account for the significant losses as well. Terry the cat was a key contributor who wasnt around when Shaq was. His loss for an entire seasons worth of games is more significant than Nick Anderson (really the only significant loss) missing a few more games when you consider he contributed more to his teams bottom line the year they won less games.



I'm sorry I don't have a link to show for it but I can guarantee you they talk about it in game 4 of the 1999 Laker/Rocket series. The game is up on YouTube in it's entirety. You can have a look at it or have my word for it which you probably won't. A Shaq fan even talks about Shaq calling Hakeem the best center in the league that year. Here's the post.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3487398&postcount=14
Ill see if I can scrummage it up, but I remember Shaq pretty much saying he was the best in the game by 99.


Yeah, the TOs were huge. Dream forced some steals and knocked the ball away. Shaq's transition defense was also pretty pathetic. I don't think anyone denies Olajuwon outplayed him but it's an insult to Shaq if one says he got killed. Despite what Shaq says.
Definitely, I plan on dusting off the old dvds and isolating every possession Hakeem and Shaq had that series just so people could stop with charade, schooling is reserved for what Dream did to Ewing. It should be a very lengthy thread so Ill pm you when I get around to finishing it. Definitely would like your take on the matter.


Anyhow, great points man. I wish there were more posters like you on this forum.
Ditto, I cant tell you how refreshing it is to partake in a debate this intense, and know the guy on the other end isnt taking offense to everything I say.

bagwell368
09-18-2009, 09:44 AM
Birds impact on the Celtics was truly overstated

This is getting off topic a bit, but how is Bird's impact overstated? The year before he got there they were 29-53 (2nd worst in the league). They did have a cast of negative characters such as Marvin Barnes, Curtis Rowe - and under performing players (no D) such as Bobby Knight, Bob McAdoo who were jettisoned. Only Maxwell stood out on that team, with flashes from Cowens and Tiny.

Then in Bird's rookie year the team zips to a 61-21 record (best in the league). Gerald Henderson was added as rookie, and was a back-up. Tiny, Robey, Ford, Carr, Cowens were still there (all played better). Chaney, Jo Jo were there, but were both aging. Maxwell played very well again - but more under control. But it was Bird and Fitch that was the driving force - take it form an eye witness.

79-80: offensive rating - 2nd; defensive rating 4th - year before:
78-79: offensive rating - 21st; defensive rating 19th

Birds contribution was pretty much even on both O and D. He wasn't the one foot in the paint passing lane hawk of later years most remember yet. He was active: 21.3 PPG, 4.5 APG, 10.4 RPG, 1.7 SPG, .836 from the line, .406 from 3 point line.

Later after McHale, Parish, and DJ joined the Celts, it was harder to tease out what he brought and what they brought in terms of the teams performance. But in this his rookie year at age 23, it is pretty easy to see he was one of the premier players of all time in the making, and he arrived w/o needing any time to get acclimated.

Chronz
09-18-2009, 05:58 PM
bag, I respect your stance. That is all

Verbal Christ
09-18-2009, 08:46 PM
shaq had the luxury of playing with premier wing players thus making his job easier by not being the sole focus, dream had drexler for a 1 1/2 years. its a wrap.

Chronz
09-18-2009, 09:34 PM
Whatever impact they had on Shaq, Shaq had more onto them. Shaq drew more defensive attention than pretty much anyone in the history of the game, and most certainly more than Dream so I dont see where your going with that one.

JordansBulls
09-19-2009, 04:40 PM
shaq had the luxury of playing with premier wing players thus making his job easier by not being the sole focus, dream had drexler for a 1 1/2 years. its a wrap.

He had Drexler from 1995-1998 and then Pippen in 1999.

bagwell368
09-19-2009, 11:53 PM
He had Drexler from 1995-1998 and then Pippen in 1999.

And at what rate?

Pippen had 11 years better then his one year in Houston by Win Shares. In fact he had six years with more then double the win shares he had at age 33 with Hakeem.

Drexler came to Houston for the last 3.5 years of his career - in 1995. Outside of '94-'95, 6 of Drexler's best 7 years all came in '91-'92 or before. He was 32.5 when he showed up in Houston was the best player Hakeem ever had to play with, and he was past his prime too.

I don't know why you keep bringing these guys up, if anything the make the point the Hakeem had nobody.

The last time, you brought up Barkley as well. He played his last 4 years in Houston. 10 of 16 best years happened before he got to Houston. He had his 11th, 13th, 15th, and 16th best years w/ Houston.

Sadly for Houston and Hakeem all three of these guys showed up about 5 years late. If they were all together around age 28 from 1990-1991 onward, I think its safe to say several of the Bulls titles are now in Houston. But they didn't.

Nobody can or should confuse the versions of those guys Hakeem played with, with the real thing.

topdog
09-20-2009, 12:33 AM
There's a reason he's called "The Dream."

Admittedly, Big Fundamental is a solid and efficient HOF on O and D, and the guy who gave him that title - the Big Blabbermouth once known a very long time ago as Shaquille O'Neal had guys in perpetual foul trouble and perhaps changed the game.

BUT Hakeem intimidated guys on defense and showed the kind of skilled touch too few of today's centers can even try to imitate.

Chronz
09-20-2009, 11:51 AM
There's a reason he's called "The Dream."
Yea because it rhymed with Hakeem

theuuord
09-20-2009, 12:16 PM
BUT Hakeem intimidated guys on defense

True. Shaq never intimidated anyone.

Aapox
09-20-2009, 12:19 PM
Shaq never intimidated anyone. Not with his defense. (Unless you count the fact that you're going at a ridiculously giant black man.)

theuuord
09-20-2009, 12:22 PM
Not with his defense. (Unless you count the fact that you're going at a ridiculously giant black man.)

When you're the most efficient offensive center ever and basically dominate the league single-handedly for three years, you're allowed to be only "above average" with your defense.

Draco
09-20-2009, 02:47 PM
shaq had the luxury of playing with premier wing players thus making his job easier by not being the sole focus, dream had drexler for a 1 1/2 years. Its a wrap.

+1