Hakeem is not a top10 Player [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

millwad

08-23-2011, 01:00 PM

I know he was a great player but I don't think his career is good enough to put him in the top10. Explain to me how he's a top10 player when he lost in the first or second round of playoffs pretty much his whole career.

He only has 4 decent playoff runs. 2 of them resulted in Rockets winning a 'ship thanks to Jordan. If Jordan didn't retire, I'm pretty sure Hakeem would en up without a ring. Other 2 were with pretty stacked teams.

I don't see how he can be ranked higher than players like Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Dr. J. Maybe even Moses Malone?

Discuss.

First of all, which years did you wish that Hakeem should have taken his team further than what he did in the playoffs? Hakeem had some extremely bad supporting casts after he led the Rockets to the '86 finals and he had years being wasted alongside crappy players.

Even during the first title-run he had less help than most all-stars did when they won. Hakeem in '94 won without an all-star on his team and the 2nd best scorer of that team was Vernon Maxwell who averaged 13.8 points per game on 37% shooting.

Hakeem had more than 4 decent playoff-runs, if you don't think so, please name the 4 seasons you're thinking about. Hakeem is also the center who in the playoffs averaged most points per game, he was no choker, he raised his game when the playoffs started..

Michael Jordan's retirement ended in '95 and he played half of the season, his team got schooled by Orlando in the playoffs, the same Orlando Hakeem and Rockets swept in the finals. Regarding '94, no one knows how it would have ended but it's a fact that Hakeem is the only NBA superstar who didn't have a loosing record vs MJ..

Regarding Shaq, I have Shaq and Hakeem on the same place on my top 10 list and I wouldn't bother if anyone picked Shaq over Hakeem, you can't go wrong with any of them.

Duncan, no, in my eyes Hakeem had more game than Duncan and played in a tougher era as well. Dr J? Are you for real.. Moses is one of the most underrated player in my eyes but still he was no Hakeem.

Miller for 3

08-23-2011, 01:04 PM

millwad

08-23-2011, 01:09 PM

Hakeem lost to Robert Parish in 1986 and then went 8 years without another finals appearance. All those fancy moves like the "dream walk" and he still averaged only 20 per game.

If I'm an NBA big man I'd emulate an actual scoring machine like Kareem or Shaq. Hakeem will only get you traveling violations

Lost to Robert Parish? Are you an idiot? Hakeem outplayed Parish and it was McHale and Bird who both averaged more than 24 points per game during that series.

Hakeem in the 1986 finals averaged 24.7 points, 11.8 rebounds, 3.2 blocks, 2.3 steals and 1.8 assists per game.

Parish in the 1986 finals averaged 12.7 points, 6.8 rebounds, 1.7 blocks, 0.5 steals and 1 assists per game.

Hakeem didn't loose against Robert Parish, he outplayed him big time. He lost to a team with 5 Hall of Famers.

And regarding scoring machine, Hakeem is the center in the NBA with the highest scoring average in the playoffs..

Kblaze8855

08-23-2011, 01:09 PM

Hakeem lost to Robert Parish in 1986 and then went 8 years without another finals appearance. All those fancy moves like the "dream walk" and he still averaged only 20 per game.

He dropped to 21and 22 a game twice after his rookie season. And in his lowest season he put up 21/14 4 blocks and 2 steals. So its not like he wasnt producing. He put up 23-24 a game in the 4 years before those 2 and 26-28 a game in the 4 years after them.

Not that his offense alone is why he was as great as he was.

If I'm an NBA big man I'd emulate an actual scoring machine like Kareem or Shaq. Hakeem will only get you traveling violations

How would you plan to emulate either unless you were 7'1'' 350 or 7'3'' with long arms like Kareem? You cant realy emulate either of them. Hakeem was 6'10''. Just skilled as hell and quick. Average athletic bigman has a better chance of using elements of his game than theirs.

get these NETS

08-23-2011, 01:12 PM

to OP

between winning a ring with Oscar and Magic showing up in L.A.....what kind of playoff success did KAJ have?

GS1905

08-23-2011, 01:32 PM

First of all, which years did you wish that Hakeem should have taken his team further than what he did in the playoffs? Hakeem had some extremely bad supporting casts after he led the Rockets to the '86 finals and he had years being wasted alongside crappy players.

Even during the first title-run he had less help than most all-stars did when they won. Hakeem in '94 won without an all-star on his team and the 2nd best scorer of that team was Vernon Maxwell who averaged 13.8 points per game on 37% shooting.

Hakeem had more than 4 decent playoff-runs, if you don't think so, please name the 4 seasons you're thinking about. Hakeem is also the center who in the playoffs averaged most points per game, he was no choker, he raised his game when the playoffs started..

Michael Jordan's retirement ended in '95 and he played half of the season, his team got schooled by Orlando in the playoffs, the same Orlando Hakeem and Rockets swept in the finals. Regarding '94, no one knows how it would have ended but it's a fact that Hakeem is the only NBA superstar who didn't have a loosing record vs MJ..

Regarding Shaq, I have Shaq and Hakeem on the same place on my top 10 list and I wouldn't bother if anyone picked Shaq over Hakeem, you can't go wrong with any of them.

Duncan, no, in my eyes Hakeem had more game than Duncan and played in a tougher era as well. Dr J? Are you for real.. Moses is one of the most underrated player in my eyes but still he was no Hakeem.

His supporting cast wasn't as good as other superstars but it wasn't that bad. He had guys like Thorpe, Floyd, Smith, Maxwell, etc. They are no stars but they were good role players.

For which years that I wished Hakeem would take them further..
1)1990 playoffs where they lost to the Lakers 3-1 and Hakeem only averaged 18.5 points(and his FG was only 44%) which was the 4th best in his team.
2)1989 playoffs where they again lost 3-1 to Seattle. That year both Thorpe and Floyd had decent series against the Sonics.
3)1996 playoffs getting swept by the Sonics. No need to explain any further I'm thinking..

Yes, only 4 decent playoff runs. These are 86, 94, 95, and 97. He either lost in the first round or 2nd round(Semi-finals) the rest of his career.

IGOTGAME

08-23-2011, 01:33 PM

Hakeem is a great player and arguably top ten. But he is often overrated on this board.

GS1905

08-23-2011, 01:40 PM

to OP

between winning a ring with Oscar and Magic showing up in L.A.....what kind of playoff success did KAJ have?

I made the same point in some Kareem thread so I totally agree with your point. I also said I don't really give him that much credit for his first ring because that 70's was probably the weakest era that I've seen.

BUT Kareem > Hakeem because
1)Better scorer.
2)Longevity
3)Achieved more even tho that has a lot to do with Magic.

winwin

08-23-2011, 01:43 PM

http://image.wetpaint.com/image/1/3ytzdCRgLolhz8ObuYzaLw581260/GW270H15930

Sarcastic

08-23-2011, 01:50 PM

Hakeem is a great player and arguably top ten. But he is often overrated on this board.

Basically about the best way to say it. You would think that a top 10 player would be regarded as a top 3 player for most of his prime, but Hakeem really wasn't. Jordan, Magic, and usually Barkley were almost always ranked higher.

GS1905

08-23-2011, 01:53 PM

Basically about the best way to say it. You would think that a top 10 player would be regarded as a top 3 player for most of his prime, but Hakeem really wasn't. Jordan, Magic, and usually Barkley were almost always ranked higher.

Agreed. This is not a knock on Hakeem. He was indeed a great player but he gets overrated a lot.

Joey Zaza

08-23-2011, 01:58 PM

Basically about the best way to say it. You would think that a top 10 player would be regarded as a top 3 player for most of his prime, but Hakeem really wasn't. Jordan, Magic, and usually Barkley were almost always ranked higher.

After he won the title in '95 Bob Costas called him the best player on the planet.

Kblaze8855

08-23-2011, 02:23 PM

People were calling him the best player in 96 too. The possible Hakeem/Jordan finals was getting talked about a lot.

ThaSwagg3r

08-23-2011, 02:26 PM

Hakeem is a great player and arguably top ten. But he is often overrated on this board.
Give me 10 guys arguably better. I can give you 9 but not 10.

OT: I wouldn't be surprised if Dwyane Wade ends up getting the Hakeem treatment when Wade reaches the twilight of his career or when he retires. Hakeem pretty much never got his dues when he was playing but he seems to always get it and probably gets too much of it now a days. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Wade ends up being treated by the public the same. They'll be like "damn, this guy was really good after all, too bad we were spotlighting that choking loser LeBron all this time."

Wade is pretty much the Hakeem Olajuwon of this era while LeBron is pretty much the David Robinson of this era.

IGOTGAME

08-23-2011, 02:28 PM

Give me 10 guys arguably better. I can give you 9 but not 10.

OT: I wouldn't be surprised if Dwyane Wade ends up getting the Hakeem treatment when Wade reaches the twilight of his career or when he retires. Hakeem pretty much never got his dues when he was playing but he seems to always get it and probably gets too much of it now a days. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Wade ends up being treated by the public the same. They'll be like "damn, this guy was really good after all, too bad we were spotlighting that choking loser LeBron all this time."

in no order

Wilt
Russel
Kareem
Shaq
Duncan

Magic
MJ
Kobe
Bird
Kobe

here are 10 players who can be argued to be better...some may include Oscar as as well

Butters

08-23-2011, 02:30 PM

but it's a fact that Hakeem is the only NBA superstar who didn't have a loosing record vs MJ..

Larry Bird sais hi.

ThaSwagg3r

08-23-2011, 02:32 PM

in no order

Wilt
Russel
Kareem
Shaq
Duncan

Magic
MJ
Kobe
Bird
Kobe

here are 10 players who can be argued to be better...some may include Oscar as as well
:oldlol: You understand you have Kobe twice right?

Not to mention it is arguable that Hakeem was better than Kobe was. I actually do have Kobe ahead of Hakeem in my all-time list, but Hakeem has a pretty good argument himself especially if you have a high value in peak play and impact on the court.

Oscar has no argument over Hakeem, none.

wally_world

08-23-2011, 02:33 PM

http://image.wetpaint.com/image/1/3ytzdCRgLolhz8ObuYzaLw581260/GW270H15930

*insert troll face* :lol

IGOTGAME

08-23-2011, 02:34 PM

:oldlol: You understand you have Kobe twice right?

Not to mention it is arguable that Hakeem was better than Kobe was. I actually do have Kobe ahead of Hakeem in my all-time list, but Hakeem has a pretty good argument himself especially if you have a high value in peak play and impact on the court.

Oscar has no argument over Hakeem, none.

that was a mistake, I think I had Oscar there first but removed him.

gengiskhan

08-23-2011, 02:58 PM

Fact 1: Hakeem owned & Butt raped every HOF centers (Parish, Ewing, D'Rob) including Shaq in Marquee match ups ('95 Finals sweep)

Fact 2: In 1994, Hakeem "The Dream" delivered the single best NBA Season ever by a player in NBA History including GOAT Michael Jordan. A clean Sweep (NBA Reg Sea MVP + NBA Finals MVP + NBA DPOY)

Fact 3: Hakeem has "true" "Legit" (unlike Kobe's & Shaq's) back-2-back Finals MVPs beating Marquee arch-rival at Center Position (Ewing in '94; O'Neal in '95)

Fact 4: Hakeem the one of 3 centers ever to win Back-2-Back DPOY titles. (Lazy Shaq got ZERO)

Fact 5: Hakeem is "underrated" & often "overlooked" because he did not play for NBAs winningest franchises like Lakers & Celtics & unlike Shaq ditching Magic franchise, he stayed truly loyal to Rockets franchise & never demanded a trade & now is the face of that franchise. A respect well deserved & well earned like GOAT MJ with Bulls.

Fact 6: Only Reason why Hakeem Lost "Rookie of the Year" honor because he was drafted the same year as GOAT who had even better Rookie season than Hakeem with Bulls. (compare this to rookie kobe.:roll: )

Fact 7: Nobody in the NBA History "inside the paint" has better hand-eye coordination & foot work than Hakeem (Not Kareem, not Shaq, not Charles, not wilt no one)

Fact 8: Hakeem had the misfortune of playing the same era as Michael Jordan's Bulls dynasty, Bird's era & Magic's Laker's era. If Hakeem played in Shaq's '99-'04 Era, Hakeem could've easily had 5 consequitive Finals MVPs & 3 Reg Sea MVPs with no one to challenge him at center position in Finals (an easy finals MVPs Shaq accumulated)

Fact 9: Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard, Lebron James are Hakeem's loyal students & take lessons from Hakeem because All 3 knows, Hakeem is clearly better baller than they could ever be..

Fact 10: No center in the NBA History has been so completely dominant offensively, defensively, efficiency, outside, mid-range, inside the paint, block shots, steals, superb passer from the post etc etc. than Hakeem. "The Dream" maybe the most complete center NBA has ever produced without single weakness.

Hakeem "the Dream" Olayjuwon is NOT just Top 10 GOATs

Hakeem " The Dream" Olayjuwon is GUARANTEED Top 8 GOATs to ever play the game. above duncan, above shaq & clearly above that overrated kobe.

rmt

08-23-2011, 03:10 PM

in no order

Wilt
Russel
Kareem
Shaq
Duncan

Magic
MJ
Kobe
Bird
Kobe

here are 10 players who can be argued to be better...some may include Oscar as as well

You listed Kobe twice.

OP twists things to suit his purpose. In the Duncan/Barkley/Malone thread, he discounts career achievements, rings, stats, consistency and looks at (offensive) peak/competition. In this thread, he's claiming that Hakeem's career is not top 10 because of lack of consistency in playoff runs but ignores the competition. How about looking at everything when evaluating players - instead of cherry-picking?

Skill-wise, he's certainly up there - an elite offensive and defensive force. Competition - he was in an era playing against great big men. He won 2 rings with relatively weak casts (compared to the other top 10) putting up dominating playoff performances.

If he'd been as fortunate as Kobe is with team mates, maybe he would have won 5 rings too. Certainly I would pick Hakeem over Kobe to start a franchise. It's only because of the sheer weight of Kobe's career, that I have him at #9 and Hakeem at #10 - not because he's a better player (peak or impact).

GS1905

08-23-2011, 03:19 PM

You listed Kobe twice.

OP twists things to suit his purpose. In the Duncan/Barkley/Malone thread, he discounts career achievements, rings, stats, consistency and looks at (offensive) peak/competition. In this thread, he's claiming that Hakeem's career is not top 10 because of lack of consistency in playoff runs but ignores the competition. How about looking at everything when evaluating players - instead of cherry-picking?

Skill-wise, he's certainly up there - an elite offensive and defensive force. Competition - he was in an era playing against great big men. He won 2 rings with relatively weak casts (compared to the other top 10) putting up dominating playoff performances.

If he'd been as fortunate as Kobe is with team mates, maybe he would have won 5 rings too. Certainly I would pick Hakeem over Kobe to start a franchise. It's only because of the sheer weight of Kobe's career, that I have him at #9 and Hakeem at #10 - not because he's a better player (peak or impact).

Look, you're either stupid or you can't read. In that thread I said Duncan is
the GOAT PF in terms of achievements. I was just talking about their individual performances in that thread you idiot.:facepalm

And in this thread I didn't say anything about Hakeem's skills or his individual performance. This thread is about his career which doesn't really belong in the top10. I would pick Hakeem over Kobe if I was starting a franchise but that's not the question here, is it?

Idiot.:facepalm

BlackJoker23

08-23-2011, 03:22 PM

op still a ******* retard, duncan still the goat pf

kizut1659

08-23-2011, 03:26 PM

He is on right on the edge of top 10, but I do think he gets overrated on these boards when people claim he is better than Shaq or Kobe. The bottom line is that he had 3 truly great seasons from 1992 to 1995, which is not quite enough to put him on their level. In 1994, the Rockets barely beat the Knicks with already declining Ewing, who barely beat Indiana and Jordanless Chicago. In 1995, the Rockets would have lost if Phoenix would not have chocked. Hackeem played great but i cannot say he outplayed 23-year old Shaq - it was pretty even i think. In 1999, prime Shaq destroyed him (and yes, i recognize Hackeem was past his prime then).

Joey Zaza

08-23-2011, 03:41 PM

Just to address a few minor points (and just so everyone knows, Hakeem is at least as good as Shaq/Duncan and definitely better than Kobe)

In 1994, the Rockets barely beat the Knicks with already declining Ewing,

Nothing declining abou tthat Ewing. That was prime Ewing at his very very best (which turns out was nowhere even in the same ball-park as Hakeem)

In 1995, the Rockets would have lost if Phoenix would not have chocked.

This can be said about EVERY title--MJ wouldn't have win in '93 had C.Smith not choked, Dirk would not have won this year had LBJ and LAL not choked, and LAL wouldn't have won last year had Kendrick stayed healthy, and Bos wouldn't have won two years back if Bynym was healthy...give me a title and I'll give you the excuse.

Hackeem played great but i cannot say he outplayed 23-year old Shaq - it was pretty even i think.

Even except that Hakeem outscored him and scored 30pts+ in every game (nice D) and also that Hakeem swept Shaq in pretty embarassing fashion. But otherwise, totally even.

GS1905

08-23-2011, 03:47 PM

(and just so everyone knows, Hakeem is at least as good as Shaq/Duncan and definitely better than Kobe)

Individual performance wise? Yes.
Career wise? No.

Joey Zaza

08-23-2011, 04:03 PM

Individual performance wise? Yes.
Career wise? No.

Shaq has 1 MVP, Kobe 1 MVP, Hakeem 1 MVP.
Shaq has 3 Finals MVP, Kobe has 2, Hakeem has 2
Shaq has 0 DPOY, Kobe has 0 DPOY, Hakeem has 2 DPOY

Hakeem played in the golden era for Centers. Shaq played in the golden era for pfs. Kobe played in a dead era for sg's.

gengiskhan

08-23-2011, 04:20 PM

Individual performance wise? Yes.
Career wise? No.

WTF do you mean career wise?

Kobe won 1 MVP in 15 seasons. so much for career.

Hakeem atleast got 1 MVP & 2 DPOY in 12 season.

Individually & Career wise. Hakeem >>>>> Kobe.

ThaSwagg3r

08-23-2011, 04:29 PM

Shaq has 1 MVP, Kobe 1 MVP, Hakeem 1 MVP.
Shaq has 3 Finals MVP, Kobe has 2, Hakeem has 2
Shaq has 0 DPOY, Kobe has 0 DPOY, Hakeem has 2 DPOY

Hakeem played in the golden era for Centers. Shaq played in the golden era for pfs. Kobe played in a dead era for sg's.
Not true. Kobe just dominated every SG that existed except Wade because he never really went up to him head to head in the post-season.

Kobe's competition at SG in the 2000s.

Tracy McGrady
Allen Iverson
Vince Carter
Dwyane Wade
Ray Allen
Michael Redd
Rip Hamilton
Brandon Roy
Joe Johnson
Manu Ginobili

MJ played in a weaker competition of SG than Kobe did. I think you could very well argue that Kobe actually played in the golden era of shooting guards. Do you know any eras that had better SGs than those?

Here are the top 10 SGs of all-time, IMO in no order

Jordan - mid 80s/90s
Kobe - 2000s
West - 70s
Wade - 2000s
Gervin - 70s/80s
Drexler - mid 80s/90s
Iverson - 2000s
Ray Allen - 2000s
Dumars - 80s/90s
Sam Jones/Hal Greer - 50s/60s.

And then you could argue guys like Earl Monroe, Tracy McGrady, Vince Carter, Manu Ginobili, Pistol Pete, etc. .

You have more 2000s players than any other player in that list.

Da_Realist

08-23-2011, 04:38 PM

He's better than everyone I saw play except Jordan and possibly Bird and Magic.

AirTupac

08-23-2011, 04:40 PM

http://image.wetpaint.com/image/1/3ytzdCRgLolhz8ObuYzaLw581260/GW270H15930
http://image.wetpaint.com/image/1/3ytzdCRgLolhz8ObuYzaLw581260/GW270H15930

Awful thread, awful poster.

Joey Zaza

08-23-2011, 05:02 PM

Not true. Kobe just dominated every SG that existed except Wade because he never really went up to him head to head in the post-season.

Kobe's competition at SG in the 2000s.

Tracy McGrady
Allen Iverson
Vince Carter
Dwyane Wade
Ray Allen
Michael Redd
Rip Hamilton
Brandon Roy
Joe Johnson
Manu Ginobili

MJ played in a weaker competition of SG than Kobe did. I think you could very well argue that Kobe actually played in the golden era of shooting guards. Do you know any eras that had better SGs than those?

Yeah - MJ played v. Drex, Richmond, Miller who are > Redd, Hamilton, JJ, Manu, Carter.

Carter, T-Mac, and Roy couldda been better but attitude and injuries have made them couldda beens.

..and none of the guys listed were better than D.Rob or Ewing (well Wade > Ewing).

ThaSwagg3r

08-23-2011, 05:05 PM

Yeah - MJ played v. Drex, Richmond, Miller who are > Redd, Hamilton, JJ, Manu, Carter.

Carter, T-Mac, and Roy couldda been better but attitude and injuries have made them couldda beens.

..and none of the guys listed were better than D.Rob or Ewing (well Wade > Ewing).
Kobe didn't necessarily play in a weak era of players either. Regardless, you said Kobe played in a dead era of shooting guards which is false. The shooting guard position is very weak now a days (2011) but it wasn't weak at all during the 2000s; It was actually very strong and productive. The SG position was probably the 2nd most productive position in the 2000s. The PF position was the only one more productive and deeper.

Fatal9

08-23-2011, 05:05 PM

Even though this thread is dumb, anyone posting long cat picture needs to be fuking banned.

Joey Zaza

08-23-2011, 05:38 PM

Even though this thread is dumb, anyone posting long cat picture needs to be fuking banned.

cosign!

Big#50

08-23-2011, 05:39 PM

millwad

08-23-2011, 06:13 PM

Larry Bird sais hi.

After Larry retired MJ won 4 championships, I meant during MJ's prime..

kizut1659

08-23-2011, 07:47 PM

Just to address a few minor points (and just so everyone knows, Hakeem is at least as good as Shaq/Duncan and definitely better than Kobe)

Nothing declining abou tthat Ewing. That was prime Ewing at his very very best (which turns out was nowhere even in the same ball-park as Hakeem)

This can be said about EVERY title--MJ wouldn't have win in '93 had C.Smith not choked, Dirk would not have won this year had LBJ and LAL not choked, and LAL wouldn't have won last year had Kendrick stayed healthy, and Bos wouldn't have won two years back if Bynym was healthy...give me a title and I'll give you the excuse.

Even except that Hakeem outscored him and scored 30pts+ in every game (nice D) and also that Hakeem swept Shaq in pretty embarassing fashion. But otherwise, totally even.

Few points - i don't have time to respond to all of them. Ewing WAS declining in 1994 -compare 29 ppg on 55% in 1990 with 24.5 ppg. on 50% in 1994. In the playoffs in 1994, he averaged mere 22 ppg on .437% against the likes not only of Olajuwan, but Rick Smits and Luc Longley. At any rate, noone in 1993-1994 thought he was as good as Hackeem, Robinson, or 2nd year Shaq.

1995 Finals - scoring is not everything - otherwise Allen Iverson would be top 15 GOAT. I call 33 ppg on 48% vs. 28 ppg on 57% when you are being slightly outrebounded and outassisted pretty much a draw. Houston swept Orlando because Houston's supporting cast played better and because Nick Anderson blew game 1.

Hackeem being better than Kobe is almost as silly of an argument as Kobe being as good as Jordan (not quite but still). Kobe has more rings, more finals appearances, more 50+ win teams, more 1st team selections, more points, more playoff points, and it seems like even a longer prime (Hackeem was no longer top 10 in the league by 1997-1998). Careerwise, its really not that close.

millwad

08-23-2011, 08:02 PM

Few points - i don't have time to respond to all of them. Ewing WAS declining in 1994 -compare 29 ppg on 55% in 1990 with 24.5 ppg. on 50% in 1994. In the playoffs in 1994, he averaged mere 22 ppg on .437% against the likes not only of Olajuwan, but Rick Smits and Luc Longley. At any rate, noone in 1993-1994 thought he was as good as Hackeem, Robinson, or 2nd year Shaq.

Yes, since stats are everything?
And honestly, you probably don't know enough about Olajuwon to start with so you shouldn't make silly statements about crap you don't know.

It's a good start to actually spell the guys name right, his name is not HACKEEM OLAJUWAN..

1995 Finals - scoring is not everything - otherwise Allen Iverson would be top 15 GOAT. I call 33 ppg on 48% vs. 28 ppg on 57% when you are being slightly outrebounded and outassisted pretty much a draw. Houston swept Orlando because Houston's supporting cast played better and because Nick Anderson blew game 1.

Ehm, you just wrote that that Ewing was out of his prime and the only reference you made was the fact that he scored less.. And regarding Houston's supporting cast playing better, Hakeem was everything for that team. Every single possession went through his hands and his supporting cast was nothing but mediocre without Hakeem.

Rockets without Hakeem from '92-'96 won 7 games and lost 27 games which makes them a .20 % team without Hakeem.

kizut1659

08-23-2011, 08:15 PM

Yes, since stats are everything?
And honestly, you probably don't know enough about Olajuwon to start with so you shouldn't make silly statements about crap you don't know.

It's a good start to actually spell the guys name right, his name is not HACKEEM OLAJUWAN..

Ehm, you just wrote that that Ewing was out of his prime and the only reference you made was the fact that he scored less.. And regarding Houston's supporting cast playing better, Hakeem was everything for that team. Every single possession went through his hands and his supporting cast was nothing but mediocre without Hakeem.

Rockets without Hakeem from '92-'96 won 7 games and lost 27 games which makes them a .20 % team without Hakeem.

What I meant is that scoring is not everything because shooting percentage is also very important - hence the Iversen example. I am sorry, when someone scores less AND shoots a worse percentage, he is clearly declining. You have not even adressed Ewing's subpar playoff series in 1994 BEFORE the finals.

I do not disagree that Rockets were a mediocre team without Hakeem (I would appreciate though a link to these games). His supporting cast, however, has played very well in 1995 playoffs - from Drexler, to Horry, to Ellie (with huge 3s against Phoenix and monster finals against Orlando). By contrast, Orlando's 2 key players - Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott - played badly in the finals. Please note that while the Rockets swept Orlando, the games were very very close so this proved to be the difference more than anything. I am not saying that Hakeem was not great - only that he did not truly outperform Shaq in 1995 the same way he did Robinson the same year or Ewing the year before.

Round Mound

08-23-2011, 08:22 PM

Yes he is :rolleyes: :facepalm

Jacks3

08-23-2011, 08:24 PM

S Kobe played in a dead era for sg's.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

millwad

08-23-2011, 08:34 PM

What I meant is that scoring is not everything because shooting percentage is also very important - hence the Iversen example. I am sorry, when someone scores less AND shoots a worse percentage, he is clearly declining. You have not even adressed Ewing's subpar playoff series in 1994 BEFORE the finals.

I do not disagree that Rockets were a mediocre team without Hakeem (I would appreciate though a link to these games). His supporting cast, however, has played very well in 1995 playoffs - from Drexler, to Horry, to Ellie (with huge 3s against Phoenix and monster finals against Orlando). By contrast, Orlando's 2 key players - Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott - played badly in the finals. Please note that while the Rockets swept Orlando, the games were very very close so this proved to be the difference more than anything. I am not saying that Hakeem was not great - only that he did not truly outperform Shaq in 1995 the same way he did Robinson the same year or Ewing the year before.

Bravo, you spelled Hakeem's name right this time. Even though you clearly show that you don't know crap about Hakeem since you even can't spell his name I will give you a reply.

Regarding the link to the games, all his games and boxscore from the 90's can be find on www.basketball-reference.com.

There are plenty of cases were players have scored less on slightly worse % but still played better and to diminish Ewing's accomplishments in '94 is pretty lame since that's the only time he lead his team to the finals. Instead of just checking the stats, watch the games and learn something, and please, learn the players names as well.

His supporting cast in 1995 was nothing to brag about, sure Clyde came on board but they had to trade their starting PF Otis Thorpe to get him and Carl Herrera who was supposed to take over the starting PF role got injured and pretty much missed the whole playoffs. They had to put Horry as their starting PF and Mario Elie got really much playing time.

They also lost their 2nd best scorer of the previous season, the nutcase Maxwell. So in all the Rockets lost Otis Thorpe, Carl Herrera and Maxwell. Their back up center was Charles Jones and their back up PF was Chucky Brown and Pete Chilcutt and their starting SF was the former CBA player Mario Elie. And we shouldn't forget that Kenny Smith got dominated by every single player he faced in the playoffs both in 94 and 95..

Hakeem was everything to that team and every possession went through his hands because he opened the floor so much, almost every single clutch shot during those back-to-backs by his teammates somehow involved with Hakeem passing them the ball for the wide open shot.

Remove Hakeem and Shaq from their respective teams in 1995 and you still have a Orlando Magic with Penny Hardaway, Nick Anderson, Dennis Scott and Horace Grant. The Rockets without Hakeem would have a team with Kenny Smith, Clyde Drexler, Mario Elie and Robert Horry.. Hakeem not only raised his game, he made the game so easier for his teammates..

rmt

08-23-2011, 11:42 PM

Hackeem being better than Kobe is almost as silly of an argument as Kobe being as good as Jordan (not quite but still). Kobe has more rings, more finals appearances, more 50+ win teams, more 1st team selections, more points, more playoff points, and it seems like even a longer prime (Hackeem was no longer top 10 in the league by 1997-1998). Careerwise, its really not that close.

I think Hakeem is better than Kobe. Certainly in the areas of impact and peak play - Kobe has nowhere near the defensive impact as one of the best defensive big men ever. Hakeem has carried relatively weak (compared to other greats) cast to 2 championships with dominating playoff performances.

What Kobe has had and what Hakeem lacked is Shaq and the best front line in the league - resulting in more rings, more finals appearances, more 50+ win teams. It's the sheer weight of Kobe's career that might have him higher on a top 10 list - not that he's a better player than Hakeem.

MiseryCityTexas

08-23-2011, 11:56 PM

Mr. I'm So Rad

08-24-2011, 02:42 AM

I think Hakeem is better than Kobe. Certainly in the areas of impact and peak play - Kobe has nowhere near the defensive impact as one of the best defensive big men ever. Hakeem has carried relatively weak (compared to other greats) cast to 2 championships with dominating playoff performances.

What Kobe has had and what Hakeem lacked is Shaq and the best front line in the league - resulting in more rings, more finals appearances, more 50+ win teams. It's the sheer weight of Kobe's career that might have him higher on a top 10 list - not that he's a better player than Hakeem.

I don't get the whole impact argument.

How do you measure it? Because 1 player has better players his impact is less? Hakeem was putting up gaudy stats and still getting bounced in the 1st round. It wasn't until he got some more help that he won. They may not have been the same caliber as others' players teams on paper, but they still contributed. Same with Kobe, same with Jordan, etc. Jordan was putting up all time great stats and still having sub .500 records and getting thrashed in the playoffs. Did that mean he had no impact? Same with Kobe from '05-'07.

People say "x player had more impact than y player" but they use winning as the measuring stick but that is a team thing. Players can put up great stats all they want but they won't win until they have a competent enough team to win. It's been the story for all of the all time greats.

But let's not act like Kobe plays with the most unstoppable team ever. He is the biggest reason why the Lakers are able to be such a good team. Of course Gasol is a major part of that as well, as are the other teammates. But people act like Gasol and Bynum are the greatest big man tandem in history or something and Kobe is just along for the ride lol. Bynum can't even stay healthy consistently.

Big#50

08-24-2011, 02:53 AM

You know the rockets with hakeem knocked the showtime lakers out of the play-offs before right? The GOAT Jordan even feels that Hakeem was better than Shaq. So that's saying something right there.
KAJ is the GOAT. Jordan's opinion is not the gospel btw.

Big#50

08-24-2011, 03:00 AM

Jacks3

08-24-2011, 03:21 AM

:oldlol: ^

Kobe is a phenomenal play-maker/passer (easily better than Hakeem) and one of the best man defenders ever. He's also one of the best re-bounding SG's in history. lol @ "not much else".

jlauber

08-24-2011, 04:23 AM

Hakeem is a BORDERLINE Top-10 player...at BEST. And he VASTLY over-rated here on this forum. Gotta love the revisonist history, too. How in the hell can a player who played EIGHTEEN good, but NEVER great, seasons, be somehow considered any more than somewhere around TENTH all-time? And by GREAT, I mean a stand-out season. Where are his 30 ppg seasons? 15 rpg seasons? .540+ FG% seasons? NEVER an extraordinary season.

True, he had TWO brilliant post-season runs. And even one of those was over-rated. In his 93-94 season, he took a 58-24 team to a title, by outplaying Ewing, whose 57-25 Knicks had no more surrounding talent than he had. And the FACT was, it came in a year in which MJ took the season off, and even without him, the Bulls still went 55-27, and narrowly lost to that SAME Knick team...that same N.Y. team that took Olajuwon"s Rockets to the absolute limit, in a close game seven loss. How can any rational human being honestly believe that the Rockets would have beaten a Jordan-led team in '94?

And I get a kick out of Dickwad claiming that Hakeem had a winning record against MJ. Yep... 11-10. None in the post-season. And MJ averaged 31.5 ppg to Hakeem's 21.7 ppg in those games. And, BTW, does Dickwad ever bring up the fact that David Robinson had a 30-12 career regular season mark against Hakeem? And that "anticipated" dream matchup between MJ and Hakeem in the 95-96 post-season? What happened? Hakeem put up an 18.3 ppg, 9.8 rpg, .475 series against the Sonics in a SWEEPING second round loss (which was FURTHER than he normally took his team's BTW.)

I'll give Hakeem his due in the 94-95 POST-SEASON. He took an under-achieving team, that acquired HOFer Drexler at mid-season, to a title. He badly outplayed Robinson, who, as I mentioned earlier, probably got the better of Hakeem over the course of their 42 other H2H games (at worst it was a dead-even draw statistically.) And, while he hung 32 ppg on a young Shaq in the Finals, he shot .483 in the process, while all Shaq did was averaged 28 ppg on .595 shooting against him (while outrebounding Hakeem and blocking more shots.)

The REALITY was this: Hakeem never came close to a scoring title (even when MJ was out for two seasons, he was still considerably behind Robinson in '94 and Shaq in '95.) He won TWO rebounding titles (with a high season of 14.0 rpg.) And even his rebounding needs some context. When he was paired with Barkley later (and both were the same age), Barkley outrebounded him by FOUR per GAME.

He won THREE blocked shot titles (and he was not even the best shot-blocker of HIS era..Eaton easily was.) He was, at BEST, an ordinary passer. Here again, those that claim that Houston's offense ran thru Hakeem... well, if it did, he sure didn't let anyone else have the ball. He had a CAREER 2.5 apg average. His BEST season was only 3.6 apg. And while he was good shooter, he never came close to a FG% title. His BEST season came in his ROOKIE year, in which he shot .538...which was no surprise, since it came in the 84-85 season, a year in which the NBA collectively shot .491 (and the ENTIRE Lakers TEAM outshot Hakeem, at .545 to that .538 mark.) In his highest scoring season, at 27.8 ppg, he shot .517, in a league that shot .466. Again, good, but hardly extraordinary.

No doubt he was a great defender. But, for the umpteenth time, a 37 and 38 year old Kareem scored AT WILL against him. Dickwad will point to Hakeem outplaying Jabbar in the '86 WCF's, which he did (although Kareem still hung games of 33 and 31 on the Rockets.) Quite an achievement. A 23 year old outplaying a 38 year old. And while it was a stunning upset of the Lakers THAT post-season, Dickwad never brings up MAGIC carrying his Laker teams in '90 and '91, to 3-1 and 3-0 blowouts over Hakeem's Rockets...and withOUT Kareem. In any case, Kareem hung THREE 40+ point games on Hakeem, and in their five H2H games in that '86 regular season, Kareem averaged 33.0 ppg on a mind-numbing .634 FG% (including one game of 46 points, on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.) In fact, Kareem, from ages 38 thru 41, shot an almost unbelievable .599 against Hakeem-led teams.

And while a PRIME Hakeem edged a YOUNG Shaq in the '95 Finals, a PRIME Shaq came back to obliterate a clearly declining Hakeem in the '99 playoffs (outscoring him, per game, 29 ppg to 13 ppg, and outshooting him, .516 to .426.)

How about his TEAM accomplishments? In EIGHTEEN seasons, he took FIVE teams to 50+ wins. His BEST record was 58-24. Not even ONE 60+ win season! He took 15 teams to the playoffs in 18 seasons. Only FOUR ever made it as far as the Conference Finals, and only THREE made it to the Finals. He had FOUR teams lose to lower seeds. And the biggest "black-eye"? EIGHT of his teams went down in flames in the FIRST ROUND.

Once again, how about a dose of REALITY? In his EIGHTEEN seasons, Hakeem won exactly ONE MVP award. And even that was questionable, since MJ took that season off. After that, Olajuwon came in second, ONE time. And, as other's have already pointed out, he came in 4th, on TWO more occassions. Thinks about that... in EIGHTEEN seasons, Hakeem was considered a Top-4 player...FOUR times. In FACT, in those 18 seasons, he only finished in the Top-TEN, a TOTAL of NINE times. So, he was not even considered a TOP-TEN player in HALF of his career. And yet, some posters here have him in their Top-FIVE????

The more I study his overall career, the more inclined I am to rank even Moses ahead of him. Moses clearly was more dominant in his best regular seasons, and he holds a 3-1 edge in MVPs. 31.1 ppg season. 17.6 rpg season. Even a .540 regular season. Hakeem was better in the post-season, but Hakeem played 1238 regular season games, and only 145 playoff games. Are we going to rank him ahead of certain players based on slightly over 10% of his career games (145 playoff games out of a TOTAL of 1383)?

And even Oscar, who was a 30-10-10 player in his first FIVE seasons...COMBINED...had as much TEAM success. He was a major contributor on teams that went 66-16 (a world champion BTW), 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23. He also won an MVP award in the mid-60's...in leagues where it was Russell and Wilt dominating every year.

You could argue West, as well. West played on one title team, and went to NINE Finals...all while averaging nearly 30 ppg in his post-season career.

Even in the Top-10...Kobe has played on FIVE title teams, with as many MVPs and FMVPs (and some staggering scoring numbers...even in the post-season.) And Bird was a better regular season performer (albeit, considerably worse in the post-season) with THREE MVPs, TWO FMVPs, and THREE rings.

In all honesty...Hakeem could be ranked anywhere from 8th to 13th. He CLEARLY has no case over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan.

gengiskhan

08-24-2011, 04:39 AM

:oldlol: ^

Kobe is a phenomenal play-maker/passer (easily better than Hakeem) and one of the best man defenders ever. He's also one of the best re-bounding SG's in history. lol @ "not much else".

dumb faaak

Kobe even failed to have an MVP Sweep (reg sea MVP + Finals MVP) in single season in last 15 seasons despite playing in sissy watered down era without many all time greats competition.

Hakeem not just had MVP Sweep in 1994 but also won DPOY. Its best season any player including MJ ever had in NBA History

& Hakeem did all this in Golden Era of NBA Centers unlike Shaq's dominance when NBA quality slipped post '99 lockout & no real centers playing.

hakeem is top 8 easily above Shaq & "overrated" kobe is not even legit Top 12.

faaaaking kobe'tard moron. :oldlol:

All Net

08-24-2011, 04:56 AM

You sure have made some really odd threads lately OP

millwad

08-24-2011, 05:47 AM

Hakeem is a BORDERLINE Top-10 player...at BEST. And he VASTLY over-rated here on this forum. Gotta love the revisonist history, too. How in the hell can a player who played EIGHTEEN good, but NEVER great, seasons, be somehow considered any more than somewhere around TENTH all-time? .....

Haha, Jbieber.. Breath.
Never great seasons? You are just too stupid, you're talking about the same guy who in 1994 won the MVP, Defensive player of the year and Finals MVP. If that's not great, then nothing is.

Standout? You mean like Wilt? Scoring 50 points per game but still not doing crap in the playoffs until all the all-star came around? It's not about stats, it's about how you play. And if you wanna talk stats, Hakeem is the center with the highest scoring average in the playoffs..

True, he had TWO brilliant post-season runs. And even one of those was over-rated. In his 93-94 season, he took a 58-24 team to a title, by outplaying Ewing, whose 57-25 Knicks had no more surrounding talent than he had. And the FACT was, it came in a year in which MJ took the season off, and even without him, the Bulls still went 55-27, and narrowly lost to that SAME Knick team...that same N.Y. team that took Olajuwon"s Rockets to the absolute limit, in a close game seven loss. ...

Wanna talk overrated, go check Wilt Chamberlain who won a ring while being the teams 4th best scorer in '72.. Hakeem was in fact the only NBA superstar with a winning record vs MJ.

And I get a kick out of Dickwad claiming that Hakeem had a winning record against MJ. Yep... 11-10. None in the post-season. And MJ averaged 31.5 ppg to Hakeem's 21.7 ppg in those games. And, BTW, does Dickwad ever bring up the fact that David Robinson had a 30-12 career regular season mark against Hakeem? And that "anticipated" dream matchup between MJ and Hakeem in the 95-96 post-season? What happened?...

How the hell is Hakeem supposed to play vs MJ in the playoffs when MJ wasn't in the finals the 3 times Hakeem was and that Hakeem wasn't around the 6 times MJ was.

And you talking about scoring? You know that you're comparing a centers scoring to a SG's? Hakeem did so much more than scoring and obviously he did it good since he's the only NBA superstar without a loosing record vs MJ and he did it with some really bad teams.

And regarding the 95-96 season, are you for real? First of all, Hakeem was 33 years old by then and the Rockets that season had major problems with injuries. Drexler missed 30 games and wasn't as good as he used to be, Cassell missed 20 games, Elie almost missed 40 games, Horry missed 11 games, Hakeem himself missed 10 games, Kenny Smith missed 14 games. It was a really injury-plagued team with major holes inthe roster.

I'll give Hakeem his due in the 94-95 POST-SEASON. He took an under-achieving team, that acquired HOFer Drexler at mid-season, to a title. He badly outplayed Robinson, who, as I mentioned earlier, probably got the better of Hakeem over the course of their 42 other H2H games (at worst it was a dead-even draw statistically.) ..)

Oh, you failed to mention that the Rockets that year beat two 60+ win teams and the Phoenix Suns with 59 wins and finally the same Orlando Magic who crushed the Bulls feat. Jordan.

Oh, and I find it funny that you don't think that Hakeem outplayed Shaq when he was the reason for the sweep when you at the same time think that Kareem didn't outplay Wilt big time when he outscored Wilt by 23 points per game, outassisted him and shot with a higher FG%. You're a clown.

The REALITY was this: Hakeem never came close to a scoring title (even when MJ was out for two seasons, he was still considerably behind Robinson in '94 and Shaq in '95.) ...

So now you have to have scoring titles to be considered great? In that case, remove Russell from the top 10 list, he was a terrible scorer. While you're at it, remove Magic from the list, remove Duncan from the list, remove Bird from the list, remove Oscar from the list (he didn't play the full season)..

Hakeem was 34 years old when he was paired with Barkley and it should be said that Barkley was one of the greatest rebounders by allt-time.

He won THREE blocked shot titles (and he was not even the best shot-blocker of HIS era..Eaton easily was.) He was, at BEST, an ordinary passer. Here again, those that claim that Houston's offense ran thru Hakeem... well, if it did, he sure didn't let anyone else have the ball. He had a CAREER 2.5 apg average. His BEST season was only 3.6 apg. And while he was good shooter, he never came close to a FG% title...

Eaton was a great shotblocker but it should be said that Hakeem wasn't all about blocks, he is the only center in the top 8 when it comes to steals, the second best who had his steals recorded was Robinson and he's around 40 or something. He had most blocks recorded by all-time, don't be pathetic, Jbieber.

And Eaton never even recorded more than 3 blocks per game after the 89 season and by that time Hakeem had only played for 5 seasons so Eaton was not the best shotblocker of Hakeem's era, an era is not 5 years.

No doubt he was a great defender. But, for the umpteenth time, a 37 and 38 year old Kareem scored AT WILL against him. Dickwad will point to Hakeem outplaying Jabbar in the '86 WCF's, which he did (although Kareem still hung games of 33 and 31 on the Rockets.) Quite an achievement. A 23 year old outplaying a 38 year old. And while it was a stunning upset of the Lakers THAT post-season, Dickwad never brings up MAGIC carrying his Laker teams in '90 and '91, to 3-1 and 3-0 blowouts over Hakeem's Rockets...and withOUT Kareem. In any case, Kareem hung THREE 40+ point games on Hakeem, and in their five H2H games in that '86 regular season, Kareem averaged 33.0 ppg on a mind-numbing .634 FG% (including one game of 46 points, on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.) In fact, Kareem, from ages 38 thru 41, shot an almost unbelievable .599 against Hakeem-led teams.

You always mention one game where Kareem scored tons of points on Hakeem, which occured during Hakeem's second season as a pro where he was no where close to his defensive prime. The other games you talk about it was Sampson who guarded Kareem and yes, Hakeem destroyed the Lakers and the Kareem big time the same year so get out of here..

In that case I guess Russell sucked as a defender as well since Wilt scored 50 points or more 8 times on prime Russell and in that case Wilt himself sucks as well since Kareem averaged 40 points on his ass during the '72 season where Wilt was so so praised for his games when he lead the Lakers as their 4th best scorer...

And what has Magic's success vs the Rockets to with anything? Have you even checked out how terrible the Rockets roster was those years? Magic was a PG, Hakeem was a center, idiot.

And while a PRIME Hakeem edged a YOUNG Shaq in the '95 Finals, a PRIME Shaq came back to obliterate a clearly declining Hakeem in the '99 playoffs (outscoring him, per game, 29 ppg to 13 ppg, and outshooting him, .516 to .426.)

Oh, a 36 year old Hakeem vs prime Shaq, are you for real? In that case, prime Kareem averaged 40 points on Wilt's ass vs a 35 year old Wilt in the 72 season..

How about his TEAM accomplishments? In EIGHTEEN seasons, he took FIVE teams to 50+ wins. His BEST record was 58-24. Not even ONE 60+ win season! He took 15 teams to the playoffs in 18 seasons. Only FOUR ever made it as far as the Conference Finals, and only THREE made it to the Finals...

Have you checked out how bad some of his rosters were? You always whine about how bad rosters Wilt played for but still Wilt played tons of all-stars and HOF:ers during the years he won. In fact, the '72 Lakers were so stacked and talented that Wilt only was the 4th best scorer on the team. Hakeem never even had an all-star when he won. As far as I know, Hakeem won just as many titles as Wilt and he did it with worse teammates and he had a much greater role for his teams that won than Wilt had. Prime Wilt only one one title and that came when he played with two HOF:ers..

Once again, how about a dose of REALITY? In his EIGHTEEN seasons, Hakeem won exactly ONE MVP award. And even that was questionable, since MJ took that season off. After that, Olajuwon came in second, ONE time. And, as other's have already pointed out, he came in 4th, on TWO more occassions. Thinks about that... in EIGHTEEN seasons, Hakeem was considered a Top-4 player...FOUR times...

Shaq won 1 MVP, Kobe has 1 MVP, Oscar has 1 MVP, Jerry West never won an MVP. And Hakeem clearly showed who was the best player in the '94 season when he put on a show and became the first player to win MVP, DPOY and Finals MVP and the season after that he crushed the MVP David Robinson.

And even Oscar, who was a 30-10-10 player in his first FIVE seasons...COMBINED...had as much TEAM success. He was a major contributor on teams that went 66-16 (a world champion BTW), 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23. He also won an MVP award in the mid-60's...in leagues where it was Russell and Wilt dominating every year.

How can Osbar have as much team success when he only won 1 ring with him not even being the best player on his own team, you idiot.

You could argue West, as well. West played on one title team, and went to NINE Finals...all while averaging nearly 30 ppg in his post-season career.

Yes, especially since West didn't even win an MVP to start with, moron.

jlauber

08-24-2011, 09:59 AM

Dickwad,

So YOU want to bring WILT into this discussion??? Because there is not ONE area, in which Hakeem was a better player. Even in FT shooting, where Chamberlain MADE a TON more FTs (and in FOUR less seasons.)

RECORDS, ACCOLADES, TEAM SUCCESS...Chamberlain was LIGHT-YEARS ahead of Hakeem.

I don't have time this morning, but I will later on. Go ahead and give me your moronic arguments on how Hakeem was even remotely on the other side of the Pacific Ocean in comparison to Chamberlain...

I look forward to it.

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 10:15 AM

. How in the hell can a player who played EIGHTEEN good, but NEVER great, seasons, be somehow considered any more than somewhere around TENTH all-time? And by GREAT, I mean a stand-out season.

Dwight Howard was the best center in the league this past season and has been the best center for a few years. No one can dispute that. This past year he was 2nd in MVP voting. Lets see how Hakeem's not-so-great years stack up with what has been a career year from the far-and-away best center in the league:

Dwight:
.593fg% .596ft% 14.1rpg 1.4apg 1.4spg 2.4bpg 22.9ppg

Hakeem's career stats, year-by-year:

.538fg% .613ft% 11.9rpg 1.4apg 1.2spg 2.7bpg 20.6ppg (not as good)
.526fg% .645ft% 11.5rpg 2.0apg 2.0spg 3.4bpg 23.5ppg (better)
.508fg% .702ft% 11.4rpg 2.9apg 1.9spg 3.4bpg 23.4ppg (better)
.514fg% .695ft% 12.1rpg 2.1apg 2.1spg 2.7bpg 22.8ppg (close)
.508fg% .696ft% 13.5rpg 1.8apg 2.6spg 3.4bpg 24.8ppg (better)
.501fg% .713ft% 14.0rpg 2.9apg 2.1spg 4.6bpg 24.3ppg (much better)
.508fg% .769ft% 13.8rpg 2.3apg 2.2spg 3.9bpg 21.2ppg (better)
.502fg% .766ft% 12.1rpg 2.2apg 1.8spg 4.3bpg 21.6ppg (better)
.529fg% .779ft% 13.0rpg 3.5apg 1.8spg 4.2bpg 26.1ppg (OMG better)
.528fg% .716ft% 11.9rpg 3.6apg 1.6spg 3.7bpg 27.3ppg (much better)
.517fg% .756ft% 10.8rpg 3.5apg 1.8spg 3.4bpg 27.8ppg (better)
.514fg% .724ft% 10.9rpg 3.6apg 1.6spg 2.9bpg 26.9ppg (better)
.510fg% .787ft% 9.2 rpg 3.0apg 1.5spg 2.2bpg 23.2ppg (close)
.483fg% .755ft% 9.8 rpg 3.0apg 1.8spg 2.0bpg 16.4ppg (not as good)
.514fg% .717ft% 9.6 rpg 1.8apg 1.6spg 2.5bpg 18.9ppg (not as good)
.458fg% .616ft% 6.2 rpg 1.4apg 1.6spg 1.7bpg 10.3ppg (not as good)
.498fg% .621ft% 7.4 rpg 1.2apg 1.2spg 1.5bpg 11.9ppg (not as good)
.464fg% .560ft% 6.0 rpg 1.1apg 1.2spg 1.5bpg 7.0ppg (not as good)

Hakeem had 10 seasons where he would have been the BEST CENTER IN THE CURRENT LEAGUE. Better than the guy who was second in MVP voting (cannot realistically compare him to Rose-whose stats didn't tel lthe sary anyway). There are another 2 seasons in there where we'd have been arguing about it.

Never GREAT? Look at those block numbers...he blocked more than 2.5 per game (Dwight had 2.4 this year) for 12 straight seasons. He beat Dwight's career best (2.9) for 10 yrs. At Center he had 3 apg or more for 7 straight seasons (making him the best passing big man in the current league for 7 years) .

He tied or bested kobe's career stls average (1.5) for 15 straight seasons. His worst shooting season is better than Kobe's career fg%.

Plus, since scoring is so important, he outscored Dwight's current season 9times (almost a decades worth - making him the best scoring center in the current league for almost a decade) and he bested Kobe's career scoring average (25ppg) 4 times.

In sum, Hakeem was awsome.

guy

08-24-2011, 10:54 AM

G.O.A.T

08-24-2011, 11:18 AM

Are people only putting Shaq and Duncan ahead of Hakeem cause of rings? I think Shaq is better, but Duncan is worse. But not cause of rings. If you put 1985-2002 Hakeem in place of Shaq from 1993-2010 or 1985-1998 in place of Duncan from 1998-2011 on there teams, he wins 4 rings as well.

Thanks for your opinion, but that's not a valid point. It's completely subjective and I don't think most people would agree. Shaq and Duncan were both great players for longer than Hakeem was. That's a fact. Duncan and Shaq made 9 all-NBA first teams, Hakeem made six. Duncan and Shaq finished in the top 3 of the MVP vote five times, Hakeem twice. Those are facts. Duncan and Shaq four titles and won titles with completely different rosters in their later years than they had around them in their early years. Hakeem won with the same core twice, only it was bolstered with the addition of Drexler the second time around.

There is a clear an obvious gap between Duncan and Shaq and Hakeem in terms of what they achieved in their careers.

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 11:37 AM

Thanks for your opinion, but that's not a valid point. It's completely subjective and I don't think most people would agree. Shaq and Duncan were both great players for longer than Hakeem was. That's a fact. Duncan and Shaq made 9 all-NBA first teams, Hakeem made six. Duncan and Shaq finished in the top 3 of the MVP vote five times, Hakeem twice. Those are facts. Duncan and Shaq four titles and won titles with completely different rosters in their later years than they had around them in their early years. Hakeem won with the same core twice, only it was bolstered with the addition of Drexler the second time around.

There is a clear an obvious gap between Duncan and Shaq and Hakeem in terms of what they achieved in their careers.

I'm not going ot post all the stats, but TD and Hakeems stats are really really close. Both on the 20+ range for most of the careers with a few 25+ seasons. both great shot blockers and very solid rebounders (alot of 10-11, very few 13) who shot a decent % (.500+) but not a crazy one (.550+).

Practically indecipherable, so if you want to use accolades, its fair to pick Duncan...if you want to use blks+stls (though I'd rate them even defensively) you'd go Hakeem.

Shaq is different because he is a substantially better scorer (more 25+) with a substantially better fg% but much worse ft%. He was a substantially worse defender. The numbers and watching bare that out.

Depending on how you value these things is how you'd rate them, but you cannot say that any is substantially, objectively better than the others.

guy

08-24-2011, 11:52 AM

Thanks for your opinion, but that's not a valid point. It's completely subjective and I don't think most people would agree. Shaq and Duncan were both great players for longer than Hakeem was. That's a fact. Duncan and Shaq made 9 all-NBA first teams, Hakeem made six. Duncan and Shaq finished in the top 3 of the MVP vote five times, Hakeem twice. Those are facts. Duncan and Shaq four titles and won titles with completely different rosters in their later years than they had around them in their early years. Hakeem won with the same core twice, only it was bolstered with the addition of Drexler the second time around.

There is a clear an obvious gap between Duncan and Shaq and Hakeem in terms of what they achieved in their careers.

The All-NBA first teams don't mean much. Hakeem played in one of the most competitive eras for centers while Shaq played in very arguably the worst. It was to the point that Shaq was winning in years where played less then 70 games. He even won in 06 playing only 59 games and wasn't even averaging a double-double and was only playing on a 52 win team. And Duncan is a forward, which has 2 spots every year vs. 1 for centers. Its not really a fair comparison.

Winning with different cores doesn't mean much to me when his teams weren't any better, if better at all, then Shaq or Duncan's teams. Hakeem has never played with anyone as good as Kobe or Wade in those years.

I still do think Shaq is better, not Duncan though. If all we did was go by achievements, then these lists should be pretty concrete. Achievements do have alot to do with circumstances.

jlip

08-24-2011, 12:35 PM

He's no higher than 8 and no lower than 13 depending on my argument that day.

GS1905

08-24-2011, 12:38 PM

He's no higher than 8 and no lower than 13 depending on my argument that day.

My top10 includes these players in no order

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Kareem, Russell, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Dr. J.

I rank Hakeem at #11 atm.

Of course this is career wise. I would take Hakeem before some of those players if I was starting a franchise.

pauk

08-24-2011, 12:39 PM

yes he is

Pointguard

08-24-2011, 12:42 PM

The All-NBA first teams don't mean much. Hakeem played in one of the most competitive eras for centers while Shaq played in very arguably the worst. It was to the point that Shaq was winning in years where played less then 70 games. He even won in 06 playing only 59 games and wasn't even averaging a double-double and was only playing on a 52 win team. And Duncan is a forward, which has 2 spots every year vs. 1 for centers. Its not really a fair comparison.

Winning with different cores doesn't mean much to me when his teams weren't any better, if better at all, then Shaq or Duncan's teams. Hakeem has never played with anyone as good as Kobe or Wade in those years.

I still do think Shaq is better, not Duncan though. If all we did was go by achievements, then these lists should be pretty concrete. Achievements do have alot to do with circumstances.

Great argument!

G.O.A.T

08-24-2011, 01:15 PM

Depending on how you value these things is how you'd rate them, but you cannot say that any is substantially, objectively better than the others.

There is a clear an obvious gap between Duncan and Shaq and Hakeem in terms of what they achieved in their careers.

Achievements do have alot to do with circumstances.

Stats don't?

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 01:19 PM

Stats don't?

Stats do not really separate Hakeem, Shaq, and Duncan. You can add value to different stats to pull them apart, but they are all real close based on stats.

The one thing that is refelcted in the stats, but isn't really, is defense. By the defensive numbers (which are sort of BS) Hakeem > Duncan > (slightly) Shaq but I think the numbers are a bit misleading. Its more like Hakeem=Duncan >>> Shaq.

Mr. I'm So Rad

08-24-2011, 02:12 PM

Hakeem impacts the game with his offense and defense. He demands a double team. He changes offensive game plans from other teams. His presence alone makes an impact. He intimidates players from going in the lane. No lay ups or kickouts because of it. Which means no open threes. He alters shots even if he doesn't block them.
A player like Kobe impacts the game with his scoring and not much else. Do you see why someone would say Hakeem has more impact?

That's the problem, you are trying to simplify scoring as one facet of impact and it encompasses a lot of other things.

Kobe being a threat to score not only makes the other team have to adjust for him, but his teammates as well. Having to put so much attention on him makes things easier for his teammates, which is why guys like Gasol, Bynum and Odom are able to get Offensive Rebounds when Kobe isos. Most of the time, the other team's best player will guard Kobe. Having a guy drain 20 ft fadeaways or fake you out with nice footwork is discouraging as well. If you played ball you would know that having a guy hitting shots in your face is demoralizing as well.

When he puts his mind to it, he can shut down the other team's best perimeter player as well. That stagnates the other team's offense and forces someone else who isn't a playmaker to make things happen. Of course he can't impact the game on defense as he isn't a big like Hakeem, but for a perimeter player he can.

Kobe himself is also a dynamic playmaker and can penetrate to give guys like Gasol or Bynum open looks by dishing to them down low. Even if he doesn't get a direct assist lots of times he gets "hockey" assists. His overall impact is grossly understated. Just look at 2008. Bynum only played what? 35 games? and they only had Gasol for 27 games. Before they even got him they were winning the West with guys like Fisher, Walton, Radmonovic and Vujacic.

I'm not trying to turn this into a Kobe vs Hakeem thread, but I'm just trying to state my case as far as impact is concerned.

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 02:24 PM

Never before has a 25-5-4 player with piss poor percentages and mediocre defensive numbers receive so much attention.

guy

08-24-2011, 02:28 PM

Stats don't?

Circumstances don't have nearly as much of an impact on stats as it does accolades. Regardless of a player's circumstances, his numbers will fluctuate between something like a 3-4 ppg/1-2 rpg/1-2 apg range. Thats not as big of a deal. On the other hand, even a slight difference in teammates and competition can have an impact on championships/MVPs/all-nba teams/etc. I know certain players make there teammates better and alot of times they attract better players to come play with them, but I don't think thats really an issue here. Hakeem just got dealt a worse hand. I don't think Hakeem accomplishes any less then Shaq or Duncan if they switched paths, and I don't think Shaq or Duncan accomplishes any more then Hakeem.

Mr. I'm So Rad

08-24-2011, 02:32 PM

Never before has a 25-5-4 player with piss poor percentages and mediocre defensive numbers receive so much attention.

:confusedshrug:

Who said anything about Monta?

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 02:38 PM

Who said anything about Monta?

Monta's defensive numbers are better than Kobe's but the statistical comparison is correct.

Its just this blah blah blah about Kobe all over the board and in very thread. Dude is 25-5-4, with 1.5 spg and shot like garbage (YES, HE SHOOTS A GARBAGE %). Its great stats but to compare to a Kareem, Shaq, duncan all who have monstrous defensive numbers, great scoring numbers, big rebounding numbers to go with amazing asst numbers (for big men) its just WELL TITLES AND A MVP SO HE'S GREAT...

Its 25-5-4. Its just not that special.

gengiskhan

08-24-2011, 02:46 PM

Monta's defensive numbers are better than Kobe's but the statistical comparison is correct.

Its just this blah blah blah about Kobe all over the board and in very thread. Dude is 25-5-4, with 1.5 spg and shot like garbage (YES, HE SHOOTS A GARBAGE %). Its great stats but to compare to a Kareem, Shaq, duncan all who have monstrous defensive numbers, great scoring numbers, big rebounding numbers to go with amazing asst numbers (for big men) its just WELL TITLES AND A MVP SO HE'S GREAT...

Its 25-5-4. Its just not that special.

one needs to remember.

this kobe stat is bound to go downhill. As he will loose 33rd yr in lockout. 34 yrs old kobe in 2012 cannot maintain 25-5-4 without shot jocking, ball hogging. His mins will be limited & He can easily become 21-22 ppg playewr. If he extends his career unnecessarily another 3 yrs at 22 ppg, He's ave will drop faster than niagra falls.

Kobe might become 23.5 - 4 - 3.7 by 36 years of age. which is totally pedistrian.

G.O.A.T

08-24-2011, 02:51 PM

Its 25-5-4. Its just not that special.

Not that I care but when you try to misrepresent a guy like that, it's pretty easy to see you have an agenda. Kobe has averaged above 25 points, above 5 rebounds and above 4 assists for 11 consecutive seasons.

Just saying. Even his career numbers with his teen years factored in round to higher totals than 25-5-4.

Mr. I'm So Rad

08-24-2011, 02:53 PM

GS1905

08-24-2011, 02:54 PM

Not that I care but when you try to misrepresent a guy like that, it's pretty easy to see you have an agenda. Kobe has averaged above 25 points, above 5 rebounds and above 4 assists for 11 consecutive seasons.

Just saying. Even his career numbers with his teen years factored in round to higher totals than 25-5-4.

His career stats atm :

25.3 pts / 5.3 reb/ 4.7 ast on 45% FG%

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 03:08 PM

His career stats atm :

25.3 pts / 5.3 reb/ 4.7 ast on 45% FG%

Yes 25.3 5.3 4.7 on 45% fg%

sorry for trolling by posting the dudes stats

That's his career #'s. The teen years hurt a little, but he was at 20-5-4 (rounded up for you guys -- you are welcome) in his thrid year. Over a 15 yr career, two tough yrs don't make that big an impact.

25.3-5.3-4.7 on poor shooting is who he is.

25-5-5 (rounded up for you) is not worth getting so worked up about. Players do it every year. its nice, its where you want an All-Star SG to be, but its not worth the all the lauding people give him.

25-5-5. Wade-LBJ were better than that this year. Monta was right there. Durant-Melo were similiar (fewer assts (like 2) more bds). Amare was similiar but a tough comparison by position. That's 6 guys.

Find me 6 guys this year who out-produced Hakeem-Shaq-Duncan career numbers through age 33.

rmt

08-24-2011, 03:50 PM

I don't get the whole impact argument.

How do you measure it? Because 1 player has better players his impact is less? Hakeem was putting up gaudy stats and still getting bounced in the 1st round. It wasn't until he got some more help that he won. They may not have been the same caliber as others' players teams on paper, but they still contributed. Same with Kobe, same with Jordan, etc. Jordan was putting up all time great stats and still having sub .500 records and getting thrashed in the playoffs. Did that mean he had no impact? Same with Kobe from '05-'07.

People say "x player had more impact than y player" but they use winning as the measuring stick but that is a team thing. Players can put up great stats all they want but they won't win until they have a competent enough team to win. It's been the story for all of the all time greats.

Look at Shaq/Kobe. Didn't Shaq have more impact than Kobe during the 3-peat? Wasn't it Shaq that the teams game-planned/worried about? Well, it was even more so (impact-wise) for Hakeem and his team since he didn't have anywhere near the quality of teammate as Kobe.

Some of the reasons why people would rank Kobe higher than Hakeem are more rings, more Finals, more 50+-win teams - team-dependent. Kobe, even at his peak in the mid '00s, didn't have the impact that Hakeem had at his peak - winning MVP, DPOY, Finals MVP. That's why no matter how many rings Kobe wins, some people will still say that Hakeem was a better player than Kobe.

Last year LA won the title and this year the (basically) same team got swept. Was the reason why they won the impact of Kobe? What was the reason they got swept - the shitty/crappy play of Gasol - not any impact or lack of impact from Kobe.

But let's not act like Kobe plays with the most unstoppable team ever. He is the biggest reason why the Lakers are able to be such a good team. Of course Gasol is a major part of that as well, as are the other teammates. But people act like Gasol and Bynum are the greatest big man tandem in history or something and Kobe is just along for the ride lol. Bynum can't even stay healthy consistently.

They aren't the greatest big man tandem in history - just in the league today (which is all that they need since they're not playing against history but the dismal quality of big men today). Which team has even 1 much less 2 seven footers with the quality of post game that LA has? Every team in the league would trade their big men for LA's.

chazzy

08-24-2011, 03:58 PM

Monta's defensive numbers are better than Kobe's but the statistical comparison is correct.

Its 25-5-4. Its just not that special.
If you're gonna summarize Kobe's career like that, then Shaq is a 23.7/10.9 player. Good but not all time great. I don't get what all the hoopla is about :confusedshrug: those are prime Bosh numbers!

millwad

08-24-2011, 04:02 PM

Thanks for your opinion, but that's not a valid point. It's completely subjective and I don't think most people would agree. Shaq and Duncan were both great players for longer than Hakeem was. That's a fact. Duncan and Shaq made 9 all-NBA first teams, Hakeem made six. Duncan and Shaq finished in the top 3 of the MVP vote five times, Hakeem twice. Those are facts. Duncan and Shaq four titles and won titles with completely different rosters in their later years than they had around them in their early years. Hakeem won with the same core twice, only it was bolstered with the addition of Drexler the second time around.

There is a clear an obvious gap between Duncan and Shaq and Hakeem in terms of what they achieved in their careers.

Which is not fair to bring up, Shaq in his prime had really bad competition when it came to center opponents, just terrible.

And I guess that Duncan wouldn't have 9 all-NBA first teams either if he played when Hakeem played since he'd have to compete with Barkley and Malone for the all-NBA nomination.

And then you have to remember the fact that Hakeem didn't even have an all-star on his team when he won it all. Both Duncan and Shaq had better teammates and in their prime they didn't play in the same league as MJ.

So what that Hakeem won with basically the same core? That core was worse than the one's Shaq and Duncan had so that's a silly point.

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 04:07 PM

If you're gonna summarize Kobe's career like that, then Shaq is a 23.7/10.9 player. Good but not all time great. I don't get what all the hoopla is about :confusedshrug: those are prime Bosh numbers!

23/10 on f-ing 58% shooting and 2.5apg, and 2.3 bpg (his average right around where the DPOY was this year)

Bosh, on the other hand, broke 23.7ppg once in his career, but is really a 20ppg guy, on 9.2/2.1 (so exactly the same --except not as good), 1.1 bpg (or half) and 49% shooting (or much much much worse).

and lets also take into account that Shaq's career averages take 5 post-prime, decline years. Bosh's numbers don't reflect his natural decline.

..and how should I sum up Kobe...does it need to be all caps and overreaction OMG THAT'S THE BEST 25PPG I'VE EVER SEEN...SO MANY TITLES AND THE SINGLE MVP BUT THE BEST MVP EVER!!!!!!!!

chazzy

08-24-2011, 04:13 PM

23/10 on f-ing 58% shooting and 2.5apg, and 2.3 bpg (his average right around where the DPOY was this year)

Bosh, on the other hand, broke 23.7ppg once in his career, but is really a 20ppg guy, on 9.2/2.1 (so exactly the same --except not as good), 1.1 bpg (or half) and 49% shooting (or much much much worse).

and lets also take into account that Shaq's career averages take 5 post-prime, decline years. Bosh's numbers don't reflect his natural decline.

..and how should I sum up Kobe...does it need to be all caps and overreaction OMG THAT'S THE BEST 25PPG I'VE EVER SEEN...SO MANY TITLES AND THE SINGLE MVP BUT THE BEST MVP EVER!!!!!!!!
I didn't expect you to actually break down Bosh's numbers like that, I was joking. The point is, Shaq's career stats don't nearly represent him as a player because of several decline/down years, much like Kobe's numbers are a little skewed by his pre-prime teenage years. Career stats for guys with great longevity mask what they did in their prime/peak years and don't give credit to their numerous great playoff runs.

guy

08-24-2011, 04:17 PM

If you're gonna summarize Kobe's career like that, then Shaq is a 23.7/10.9 player. Good but not all time great. I don't get what all the hoopla is about :confusedshrug: those are prime Bosh numbers!

24/11/3 on 58% for a 19-year career is actually pretty ridiculous and IMO much more impressive then Kobe's 25/5/5 on 45% over 15 years and I do think Kobe will play as long as Shaq did and that statistical gap will only widen.

Da_Realist

08-24-2011, 04:19 PM

Which is not fair to bring up, Shaq in his prime had really bad competition when it came to center opponents, just terrible.

And I guess that Duncan wouldn't have 9 all-NBA first teams either if he played when Hakeem played since he'd have to compete with Barkley and Malone for the all-NBA nomination.

And then you have to remember the fact that Hakeem didn't even have an all-star on his team when he won it all. Both Duncan and Shaq had better teammates and in their prime they didn't play in the same league as MJ.

So what that Hakeem won with basically the same core? That core was worse than the one's Shaq and Duncan had so that's a silly point.

And he also had to play Magic's Lakers and Bird's Celtics.

Ikill

08-24-2011, 04:27 PM

Yes 25.3 5.3 4.7 on 45% fg%

sorry for trolling by posting the dudes stats

That's his career #'s. The teen years hurt a little, but he was at 20-5-4 (rounded up for you guys -- you are welcome) in his thrid year. Over a 15 yr career, two tough yrs don't make that big an impact.

25.3-5.3-4.7 on poor shooting is who he is.

25-5-5 (rounded up for you) is not worth getting so worked up about. Players do it every year. its nice, its where you want an All-Star SG to be, but its not worth the all the lauding people give him.

25-5-5. Wade-LBJ were better than that this year. Monta was right there. Durant-Melo were similiar (fewer assts (like 2) more bds). Amare was similiar but a tough comparison by position. That's 6 guys.

Find me 6 guys this year who out-produced Hakeem-Shaq-Duncan career numbers through age 33.
At age 33 Kobes played 15 years. How many players after 15 years were good as Kobe after 15 years.

Mr. I'm So Rad

08-24-2011, 04:29 PM

Look at Shaq/Kobe. Didn't Shaq have more impact than Kobe during the 3-peat? Wasn't it Shaq that the teams game-planned/worried about? Well, it was even more so (impact-wise) for Hakeem and his team since he didn't have anywhere near the quality of teammate as Kobe.

Of course teams game planned for Shaq. But you think they said, "Oh well Kobe doesn't matter. He's just there." Dude was putting up 28/6/5 in '01, 25/5/5 in '02 and 30/7/6 in '03. You mean to tell me that a guy like that isn't planned for? It was just pick your poison with the Kobe/Shaq Lakers. You could try and stop one, but the other would go off. Sort of like the Miami Heat now. You can only stop 1.

Some of the reasons why people would rank Kobe higher than Hakeem are more rings, more Finals, more 50+-win teams - team-dependent. Kobe, even at his peak in the mid '00s, didn't have the impact that Hakeem had at his peak - winning MVP, DPOY, Finals MVP. That's why no matter how many rings Kobe wins, some people will still say that Hakeem was a better player than Kobe.

Ok Kobe didn't win rings but that was due to his cast not being up to par, same with Hakeem early in his career. Hakeem was putting up great numbers but it wasn't until his cast became at least somewhat competent enough that he started winning and his impact was recognized. Before that, he was getting ousted in the playoffs every. Just like Kobe did in '06 and '07 and just like MJ did early in his career. To me, taking a cast of Odom, Vujacic, Mihm, Smush, Turiaf and Walton to the playoffs and taking a 60 win Suns team to 7 games shows a lot of impact. That team today would be a bottom feeder and would have been one back then if not for Kobe. He was also a big MVP candidate that year.

Last year LA won the title and this year the (basically) same team got swept. Was the reason why they won the impact of Kobe? What was the reason they got swept - the shitty/crappy play of Gasol - not any impact or lack of impact from Kobe.

One series is not a very good measure. Kobe played below his standards as well. If Gasol's impact was so great he would have won a playoff game in Memphis. And give credit to the Mavs, they played out of their minds that series. Barea, Terry and even Peja were killing the Lakers. The Mavs were on a mission last season. Hell, last season the Magic won a playoff game against the Hawks with Dwight playing very little. The Bulls won over 50 games without Jordan. Does that mean he had less impact? Of course not.

They aren't the greatest big man tandem in history - just in the league today (which is all that they need since they're not playing against history but the dismal quality of big men today). Which team has even 1 much less 2 seven footers with the quality of post game that LA has? Every team in the league would trade their big men for LA's.

Gasol is a great post player of course and a good passer. But there are other teams with two capable post players. Look at Memphis with both Z-Bo and Gasol down low. Dallas has Dirk, who can score in the post or on the perimeter and Chandler who is a great defender as well as Haywood (even though he was injured).

I'm not saying having 2 big guys down there isn't an advantage. I would be lying if I said it wasn't. But it hasn't really been able to be used to the fullest because of Bynum's injuries. Also, the Lakers lack some advantages that other teams have. For example, L.A. has no other legit perimeter scorer/playmaker outside of Kobe. A team like Miami lacks post players, but they by far have the best perimeter tandem in the league with LeBron and Wade. Or OKC. They don't have a legit post player but they have a Top 10 PG in Westbrook and arguably the 2nd best SF in the league in Durant. You don't always need a dominant post player to win. That's why the Bulls were so successful even though they didn't have one. Having 2 Top 10 perimeter players on 1 team can be just as effective as having 1 Top 10 perimeter player and 1 Top 10 post player.

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 04:31 PM

I didn't expect you to actually break down Bosh's numbers like that, I was joking. The point is, Shaq's career stats don't nearly represent him as a player because of several decline/down years, much like Kobe's numbers are a little skewed by his pre-prime teenage years. Career stats for guys with great longevity mask what they did in their prime/peak years and don't give credit to their numerous great playoff runs.

Kobe's 25-5-5 on poor shooting is what he is. He had three outrageous scoring years and the two teen years (a third where he avergaed 20) but otherwise its 9 years of scoring between 22 and 28 ppg, 4.7 to 6.0 apg and 5.1 to 6.3rpg. That's him.

So are those three great scoring years (and really only the 35.4 year is truly outrageous - the 30/31.6ppg years are great but we have guys in that range pretty regularly) the source of all the hubub?

Is that it? One outrageous scoring year, 2 great scoring years surrounded by 25-5-5 on poor shooting with average stls?

This has everyone so excited?

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 04:34 PM

At age 33 Kobes played 15 years. How many players after 15 years were good as Kobe after 15 years.

How many people started playing in HS? This is a relatively new phenomenon.

How many players were playing on the low end of their carrer averages at age 33...I'd say barring injury, about all.

Jacks3

08-24-2011, 04:37 PM

Kobe's 25-5-5 on poor shooting is what he is. He had three outrageous scoring years and the two teen years (a third where he avergaed 20) but otherwise its 9 years of scoring between 22 and 28 ppg, 4.7 to 6.0 apg and 5.1 to 6.3rpg. That's him.

So are those three great scoring years (and really only the 35.4 year is truly outrageous - the 30/31.6ppg years are great but we have guys in that range pretty regularly) the source of all the hubub?

Is that it? One outrageous scoring year, 2 great scoring years surrounded by 25-5-5 on poor shooting with average stls?

This has everyone so excited?
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

What a moron.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Jacks3

08-24-2011, 04:39 PM

Never before has a 25-5-4 player with piss poor percentages and mediocre defensive numbers receive so much attention.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

BlackJoker23

08-24-2011, 04:39 PM

joey zaza who's more overrated marion or kobe?

Jacks3

08-24-2011, 04:43 PM

Last year LA won the title and this year the (basically) same team got swept. Was the reason why they won the impact of Kobe? What was the reason they got swept - the shitty/crappy play of Gasol - not any impact or lack of impact from Kobe.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Kobe's decline had a much bigger impact than Pau's. Are you kidding me?

****ing idiot.

They aren't the greatest big man tandem in history - just in the league today (which is all that they need since they're not playing against history but the dismal quality of big men today). Which team has even 1 much less 2 seven footers with the quality of post game that LA has? Every team in the league would trade their big men for LA's.
Yeah, Bynum was so great from 08-10 with his 7/5 averages. And Odom is a role-player. GTFO. :roll:

Big164

08-24-2011, 04:46 PM

Fatal9

08-24-2011, 04:50 PM

In his prime ('93-'95), there isn't a player you can say was clearly better. And he was still beasting in other years. Personally I'd take him over Shaq and Duncan because he comes without their flaws.

'85 - improves lottery team to the playoffs, Rockets go from one of the worst defenses in the league to 4th best (though he was a lousy post defender early on in his career imo).

'86 - improves Rockets to 51 wins (would have been more if he didn't miss 14 games). The only time anyone took down the 80s Lakers in a 7 game series before they got to the finals. Averaged 31 ppg on 52 FG%, 58 TS% in that series, and lots of blocks and rebounds (missing some boxscores). Played well against what was probably the greatest team ever in the '86 Celtics while most of his team shrank particularly Sampson. The guy showed by just his second year he could take down all-time great teams, lead his team to the finals when given a proper cast.

'87 - The promising team around him begins to fall apart. Mitchell Wiggins and Lewis Lloyd got suspended for doing coke, Sampson played only half the season and was limited even when he was on the court. Sampson and him played for the first time in almost 3 months when the playoffs started. What he did in these playoffs was very underrated IMO, 29/11/3/4 on 66 TS% (!) over 10 games (in under 39 mpg). Upset the Blazers in the first round, only game they lost in that series was the one where he got in foul trouble and the Rockets got outscored 27-12 in the quarter. Then came the Sonics (who came off beating the 55 win Mavs team), he played/shot well in every game. His ONLY bad game was game 4 where he was limited to 27 minutes due to foul trouble. Ellis was on fire and then Chambers came on late, Rockets were outgunned. In the elimination game he had 49/26/5/6 on 19/33 shooting, including scoring 17 of the last 25 points for the Rockets.

'88 - He put up the highest PER ever in the playoffs albeit only over 4 games. I've only seen two games from the series, and can't begin to comment on how poorly the guards shot (Sleepy played well in game 2, that's it, his other three games were horrific). Hakeem put up 34/14, 41/26, 35/12 and in the elimination game 40/15 @ 57 FG% (64 TS%) for the series. These numbers are nuts. Lost to the same team that took LA to 7 games in the next round.

His career did hit bit of lull under Don Chaney, which IMO is the biggest reason his career didn't turn out even greater than it was. The chuckers on the team got too much control of the offense, ball ran through Hakeem way less until Rudy T came in and then we saw Hakeem's talent truly shine from '93-'97. His prime stretch from '93-'95 is one of the five greatest primes for me, comparable to just about anyone. Any time the playoffs rolled around, he almost always brought his A game.

In his prime he was literally the perfect player to build around. Monster defender who guaranteed you a top defense in the league, 30 points a night, great decision making and passing ability that the ENTIRE offense was built around (no one on Houston was good at creating their own shot, they depended so much Hakeem's presence), unstoppable one on one scoring against any one (most double teamed big I've seen after Shaq), high bball IQ and quick decision making (this is what made him go to the next level in '93, his decision making became amazing, most centers don't act quick enough), not a liability in crunch time like many other centers, ability to outplay anyone put in front of him and an absolute ASSASSIN in big games (MJ like nerves and killer instinct, the man would just not go away).

The reason why many people think so highly of him because at his peak, he left you nothing to criticize because he did everything, won every big game, performed HUGE on the biggest stage, faced stiff competition and outplayed everyone. Did it like MJ did from

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 04:52 PM

joey zaza who's more overrated marion or kobe?

Marion, coming off a stretch where he was correctly rated as washed up, has skyrocketed back to his old overrated self during the finals where people could say "You know who is doing an underrated job on LBJ---Shawn Marion"

But you cannot be more overrated than Kobe. I mean he is great and a HOF'er and all. 25-5-5 for 15 yrs of service, with the one outrageous scoring season and the MVP is all really terriffic...but on this board he is the basis for comparison for all things and somehoe he's always better.

but look at this thread...I post his actual numbers (within fractions) and I'm trolling and misrepresenting him. He is so great, even his stats underrate him. when he scored 25 it was more like 30 because, I don't know, he caused foul trouble or something. His assists seem normal, average but he gets more hockey assists because he draws so much attention.and he defends the best player when he wants to set his mind to it.

Its like all this extra credit given to him...yet every All-Star draws attention and foul trouble and hockey assists too and defends their position.

BlackJoker23

08-24-2011, 04:55 PM

Marion, coming off a stretch where he was correctly rated as washed up, has skyrocketed back to his old overrated self during the finals where people could say "You know who is doing an underrated job on LBJ---Shawn Marion"

But you cannot be more overrated than Kobe. I mean he is great and a HOF'er and all. 25-5-5 for 15 yrs of service, with the one outrageous scoring season and the MVP is all really terriffic...but on this board he is the basis for comparison for all things and somehoe he's always better.

but look at this thread...I post his actual numbers (within fractions) and I'm trolling and misrepresenting him. He is so great, even his stats underrate him. when he scored 25 it was more like 30 because, I don't know, he caused foul trouble or something. His assists seem normal, average but he gets more hockey assists because he draws so much attention.and he defends the best player when he wants to set his mind to it.

Its like all this extra credit given to him...yet every All-Star draws attention and foul trouble and hockey assists too and defends their position.
i was just taking a shot at you cause i miss your marion rants. :oldlol:

TennesseeFan

08-24-2011, 04:58 PM

Is this dude serious?

millwad

08-24-2011, 05:33 PM

Haha, Fatal, you just shut down all the haters and ignorant people. Great post!

Joey Zaza

08-24-2011, 05:55 PM

Fatal... Great post!

co-sign

TAC602

08-24-2011, 06:19 PM

[QUOTE=Fatal9]In his prime ('93-'95), there isn't a player you can say was clearly better. And he was still beasting in other years. Personally I'd take him over Shaq and Duncan because he comes without their flaws.

'85 - improves lottery team to the playoffs, Rockets go from one of the worst defenses in the league to 4th best (though he was a lousy post defender early on in his career imo).

'86 - improves Rockets to 51 wins (would have been more if he didn't miss 14 games). The only time anyone took down the 80s Lakers in a 7 game series before they got to the finals. Averaged 31 ppg on 52 FG%, 58 TS% in that series, and lots of blocks and rebounds (missing some boxscores). Played well against what was probably the greatest team ever in the '86 Celtics while most of his team shrank particularly Sampson. The guy showed by just his second year he could take down all-time great teams, lead his team to the finals when given a proper cast.

'87 - The promising team around him begins to fall apart. Mitchell Wiggins and Lewis Lloyd got suspended for doing coke, Sampson played only half the season and was limited even when he was on the court. Sampson and him played for the first time in almost 3 months when the playoffs started. What he did in these playoffs was very underrated IMO, 29/11/3/4 on 66 TS% (!) over 10 games (in under 39 mpg). Upset the Blazers in the first round, only game they lost in that series was the one where he got in foul trouble and the Rockets got outscored 27-12 in the quarter. Then came the Sonics (who came off beating the 55 win Mavs team), he played/shot well in every game. His ONLY bad game was game 4 where he was limited to 27 minutes due to foul trouble. Ellis was on fire and then Chambers came on late, Rockets were outgunned. In the elimination game he had 49/26/5/6 on 19/33 shooting, including scoring 17 of the last 25 points for the Rockets.

'88 - He put up the highest PER ever in the playoffs albeit only over 4 games. I've only seen two games from the series, and can't begin to comment on how poorly the guards shot (Sleepy played well in game 2, that's it, his other three games were horrific). Hakeem put up 34/14, 41/26, 35/12 and in the elimination game 40/15 @ 57 FG% (64 TS%) for the series. These numbers are nuts. Lost to the same team that took LA to 7 games in the next round.

His career did hit bit of lull under Don Chaney, which IMO is the biggest reason his career didn't turn out even greater than it was. The chuckers on the team got too much control of the offense, ball ran through Hakeem way less until Rudy T came in and then we saw Hakeem's talent truly shine from '93-'97. His prime stretch from '93-'95 is one of the five greatest primes for me, comparable to just about anyone. Any time the playoffs rolled around, he almost always brought his A game.

In his prime he was literally the perfect player to build around. Monster defender who guaranteed you a top defense in the league, 30 points a night, great decision making and passing ability that the ENTIRE offense was built around (no one on Houston was good at creating their own shot, they depended so much Hakeem's presence), unstoppable one on one scoring against any one (most double teamed big I've seen after Shaq), high bball IQ and quick decision making (this is what made him go to the next level in '93, his decision making became amazing, most centers don't act quick enough), not a liability in crunch time like many other centers, ability to outplay anyone put in front of him and an absolute ASSASSIN in big games (MJ like nerves and killer instinct, the man would just not go away).

The reason why many people think so highly of him because at his peak, he left you nothing to criticize because he did everything, won every big game, performed HUGE on the biggest stage, faced stiff competition and outplayed everyone. Did it like MJ did from

Euroleague

08-24-2011, 06:46 PM

Hakeem was unbelievably good. He was amazing, incredible.........he is easily a top 10 all time NBA player.

jlauber

08-25-2011, 01:43 AM

He's no higher than 8 and no lower than 13 depending on my argument that day.

Another COMMON SENSE post. And I agree 100%.

:cheers:

Jacks3

08-25-2011, 02:50 AM

Jacks3

08-25-2011, 02:51 AM

But you cannot be more overrated than Kobe. I mean he is great and a HOF'er and all. 25-5-5 for 15 yrs of service, with the one outrageous scoring season and the MVP is all really terriffic...but on this board he is the basis for comparison for all things and somehoe he's always better.

but look at this thread...I post his actual numbers (within fractions) and I'm trolling and misrepresenting him.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

millwad

08-25-2011, 06:56 AM

Another COMMON SENSE post. And I agree 100%.

:cheers:

Haha, you're the same moron who thinks that Thurmond was better than Hakeem..

gengiskhan

08-25-2011, 07:14 AM

Kobe from 01-10: 29/6/5/2/56% TS
3-yr peak(06-08): 32/6/6/2/57% TS
Peak: 35/5/5/2/56% TS

Some of his seasons:
35/5/5/2/56%
32/6/5/2/58%
30/7/6/2/1/55%
29/6/6/55%
28/6/6/56%
28/6/5/2/58%

damb faaaaaak.

Thats only great enough to get Kobe into Top 15 GOATs. Other 14 GOATs had better & more dominant stats then this.

Big O averaged a triple double for first 6 years. :bowdown:

Nobody is arguing on Kobe's all time greatness.

While Hakeem swept MVP & added DPOY in same yr.

Kobe failed to even have an MVP sweep in 15 seasons despite playing on winningest franchise like Lakers. Drexler & Dominique will have same success as kobe had they played for 15 years with Lakers.

Hakeem just superior to Kobe in every way.

deal with it & get off Kobe's nuts.

jlauber

08-25-2011, 09:42 AM

Haha, you're the same moron who thinks that Thurmond was better than Hakeem..

While there was no question that Nate was a better defender and rebounder, I have Hakeem anywhere from 8th to 13th. Thurmond is probably somewhere in my top-30.

Hakeem has absolutely NO CASE over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan. NONE. All were greater winners. All had more accolades. Most were more statistically dominant.

The REAL question would be...

is Hakeem's 18 season CAREER, in which he was regarded as a TOP-10 player in only HALF of it, and only a TOP-4 player, FOUR times, with only ONE MVP...

greater than Moses', Oscars, West's, Pettits', Bird's, and Kobe's?

kuniva_dAMiGhTy

08-25-2011, 09:51 AM

Hakeem has absolutely NO CASE over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan. NONE.

Such an awful post.

jlauber

08-25-2011, 10:04 AM

Such an awful post.

Go ahead then...let's read your arguments explaining why Hakeem's career was better than Russell's, MJ's, Magic's, Wilt's, Kareem's, Shaq's, and Duncan's?

Once again...statistical accomplishments; individual accolades; and WINNING (and not just titles, but overall team records)...Hakeem is CLEARLY well behind all of them.

G.O.A.T

08-25-2011, 10:09 AM

Such an awful post.

He's right. What is his case? Those guys all reached just as high as a level as Hakeem and stayed there longer. They all won more and achieved more individually. It's obvious.

kuniva_dAMiGhTy

08-25-2011, 10:12 AM

jlauber

08-25-2011, 10:27 AM

millwad

08-25-2011, 10:34 AM

Go ahead then...let's read your arguments explaining why Hakeem's career was better than Russell's, MJ's, Magic's, Wilt's, Kareem's, Shaq's, and Duncan's?

Once again...statistical accomplishments; individual accolades; and WINNING (and not just titles, but overall team records)...Hakeem is CLEARLY well behind all of them.

You need to go back 1 page and read Fatal's post, you seriously need to if you want to get a picture of Hakeem's situation.

And haha, you still have no feeling for overall records and obviously you don't know how crappy teammates Hakeem had. You always spam about how bad teammates Wilt had but still he never won crap without all-stars and HOF:ers by his side, heck, he was not even the top scorer during playoffs the seasons he won, he was the 4th best scorer in the '72 season.. And Wilt only won 1 ring during his prime and wasn't even close to be the best center when he won the 2nd time. Hakeem's title runs in terms of greatness are way more impressive than Wilt's and it's not even close.

In terms of statistical accomplishments, Hakeem is number 1 in recorded blocks, 8th in steals (he's the only center in the top 10, the 2nd best center is David robinson and he's around 40th), 9th in points, 11th in rebounds. He's also the center with the highest points per game average among all the centers. Just based on stats he's definitely up there with the greatest all-time, only an idiot like you would claim anything else.

Individual accolades, 1 MVP, 2 DPOY's, 2 Finals MVP's, 12 all-star nominations, 6 ALL-NBA first teams, 3 ALL-NBA second teams, 3 ALL-NBA third teams, 5 ALL-defensive first team, 4 ALL-defensive second team.

I have Hakeem and Shaq on the same place on the all-time ranking but Duncan is below Hakeem, so is definitely Wilt and Russell. Put Duncan in Hakeem's situation and let him face Malone and Barkley during their primes and his individual accolades wouldn't look so pretty.. Wilt and Russell are high on most lists because Russell won crazy much and Wilt put up crazy stats but obviously, in terms of skills they are behind Hakeem.

millwad

08-25-2011, 10:51 AM

And I am going to nip this in the bud before some moron brings it up...

Russell was a GOOD offensive player (VERY GOOD if you include his passing.) He had a couple of seasons at 18-19 ppg, on team's in which he was more of a faciltator. And his 44% career FG% is very deceptive, as well, since he was outshooting the league average in many of those seasons. BUT, how about his post-season play? He had a title-clinching game six game of 30 points and 38 rebounds. He had perhaps the greatest game seven ever in the Finals, with a 30-40 game. He had two 30-30 games in the '62 ECF's against Chamberlain. His '65 Finals performance was one for the ages... 18 ppg, 29 rpg, and get this... a .702 FG% (yes...FG%!.) Then, the very next season, in the Finals, he LED Boston in scoring at 23.6 ppg.

Russell averaged 18 points per game twice under his career, how the hell could he have had "a couple of season at 18-19" when he even didn't average 19 points to start with in any season.

Russell was a good offensive player in terms of passing but he was a bad scorer. You're talking about a freaking center, why the hell do you compare him too the league average in FG% when it's widely known that centers and big guys in general are those who shoot with the highest FG%. It's not an excuse that others also had bad FG%, they were more unskilled which led them to have worse FG%. He was also a terrible FT-shooter, not as bad as Wilt though.

And yeah, in the playoffs he even shot worse. He averaged 16 points on 43% shooting which is just pathetic. During 13 playoff-runs he only had one season where he made more than 50% of his shots and in the regular season he never had even one season where he made 47% or more of his shots.

And I am always fascinated by the Chamberlain-detractors, who claim that he "declined" in the post-season. Perhaps the fact that Wilt faced Russell in some 49 post-season games, or nearly ONE-THIRD of them, might have had something to do with that PERCEPTION? The "anti-Wilt" clan will rip Chamberlain, but you seldom see them acknowledge Russell's greatness. In fact, most of these uneducated posters rip Wilt for being a "loser" in the post-season...and then turn around and diminish Russell because he played with STACKED rosters. And, while Russell did indeed play with HOF-laden rosters, he also WON with them. What more could he do (well, I guess he could have gone 13-13 instead of "only" 11-13)?

Yeah, and Wilt always played with the worst scrubs, right? And buhu, you rip Hakeem for not winning more when the guy played in the same era as the showtime Lakers, 80's Lakers, 90's Pistons and then the Bulls and when Hakeem finally won he did it with worse teammates than Wilt and his runs were greater than Wilt's who never even was the leading scorer for any of his teams that won it all. In fact, he was the 4th best scorer for his Lakers during his last title run..

jlauber

08-26-2011, 01:31 AM

You need to go back 1 page and read Fatal's post, you seriously need to if you want to get a picture of Hakeem's situation.

And haha, you still have no feeling for overall records and obviously you don't know how crappy teammates Hakeem had. You always spam about how bad teammates Wilt had but still he never won crap without all-stars and HOF:ers by his side, heck, he was not even the top scorer during playoffs the seasons he won, he was the 4th best scorer in the '72 season.. And Wilt only won 1 ring during his prime and wasn't even close to be the best center when he won the 2nd time. Hakeem's title runs in terms of greatness are way more impressive than Wilt's and it's not even close.

In terms of statistical accomplishments, Hakeem is number 1 in recorded blocks, 8th in steals (he's the only center in the top 10, the 2nd best center is David robinson and he's around 40th), 9th in points, 11th in rebounds. He's also the center with the highest points per game average among all the centers. Just based on stats he's definitely up there with the greatest all-time, only an idiot like you would claim anything else.

Individual accolades, 1 MVP, 2 DPOY's, 2 Finals MVP's, 12 all-star nominations, 6 ALL-NBA first teams, 3 ALL-NBA second teams, 3 ALL-NBA third teams, 5 ALL-defensive first team, 4 ALL-defensive second team.

I have Hakeem and Shaq on the same place on the all-time ranking but Duncan is below Hakeem, so is definitely Wilt and Russell. Put Duncan in Hakeem's situation and let him face Malone and Barkley during their primes and his individual accolades wouldn't look so pretty.. Wilt and Russell are high on most lists because Russell won crazy much and Wilt put up crazy stats but obviously, in terms of skills they are behind Hakeem.

Dickwad, you have no clue do you? You can't even make ONE valid argument without contradicting yourself...

Fatal9 makes the comment that from '93-'95 Hakeem went 9-1 in elimination games? Great...how about the REST of his post-season career? The SAME Hakeem whose team's lost to lower seeds FOUR times? And the SAME Hakeem whose team's lost EIGHT times in the FIRST ROUND??

And I am sick-and-tired of reading about YOUR take on Wilt's rosters. Even when Chamberlain had DECENT rosters, he ALWAYS faced SUPERIOR ones. His teams were facing anywhere from FOUR to NINE HOFers. Meanwhile, Hakeem gets credit as some kind of miracle worker in '94 by beating Ewing's 57-25 roster that had NO MORE TALENT than Hakeem's 58-24 Rockets.

Chamberlain wasn't CLOSE to being the best center in '72??? Maybe you had better do some serious research before you make a complete FOOL of ytourself. The man finished THIRD in the MVP balloting behind Kareem and teammate West. AND then proceeded to OUTPLAY Kareem in the WCF's. Not MY opinion, mind you, BUT, virtually EVERYONE who witnessed that series...including the MILWAUKEE press, the MILWAUKEE COACH, the MILWAUKEE players, and I am reasonably convinced, the majority of the MILWAUKEE fans (who, BTW, gave Chamberlain a STANDING OVATION as he left the floor at the end of the '71 WCF's, when he battled a PRIME Kareem to a virtual statistical stand-off...at age 34, and only a year removed from majore knee surgery.) Time Magazine went so far as to claim that the 35 year-old Wilt DECISIVELY out played the PRIME Kareem!

And I love the consistency in your posts...

You get on Chamberlain for averaging 50 ppg in one season...and then rag on him for only being the 4th highest scorer in the post-season of another (and BTW, he WON the FINALS MVP that post-season.)

Then, you have the audacity (stupidity is a much more accurate analogy) to rank Hakeem over Chamberlain, and then citing Hakeem's statistical accomplishments in the same post. Wow, Hakeem's statistical awards took a couple of sentences. How about Chamberlain's?

jlauber

08-26-2011, 01:37 AM

BTW, this link "only" has 72 of Chamberlain's some 130 records...

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

[QUOTE]NBA scoring recordsSee also: List of National Basketball Association top individual scoring season averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association top rookie scoring averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association players with most points in a game
See also: List of individual National Basketball Association scoring leaders by season

NBA Record - Most Points Per Game in a season (50.4 in the 1961-62)
Chamberlain also holds the next two highest with 44.8 in 1962-63 and 38.4 in 1960-61.

NBA Record - Most Points in a season (4,029 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next highest with 3,586 in 1960-61

NBA Record - Most Points Scored in a Game (100 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)

NBA Record - Most Points Scored in a Half (59 in the 2nd half vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)

NBA Record - Most 50 Point Games in a season (45 times in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 30 in 1962-63. No other player has had more than 10. Only Michael Jordan (39 including playoffs) and Kobe Bryant (25 including playoffs) have more than 20 in their careers.

NBA Record - Most 40 Point Games in a season (63 times in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next most with 52 in 1962-63. Michael Jordan holds third with 37 in 1986-87.

NBA Record - Most Consecutive Seasons Leading League in Points Per Game (7)
Record shared with Michael Jordan.

NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 60 Point Games (32 times)
Kobe Bryant is in second place with 5.

NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 50 Point Games (118 times)
Michael Jordan is in second place with 31.

NBA Record - Most Career Regular Season 40 Point Games (271 times)[21]
Michael Jordan is in second place with 173.

NBA Record - Most Consecutive 50 Point Games (7 times from December 16, 1961-December 29, 1961)
Chamberlain also holds the next three longest with 6 in 1962, 5 in 1961, and 5 in 1962

NBA Record - Most Consecutive 40 Point Games (14 times from December 8, 1961-December 30, 1961 and also 14 times from January 11, 1962-February 1, 1962)
Chamberlain also has the next most with 10 from November 9, 1962 through November 25, 1962

NBA Record - Most Consecutive 30 Point Games (65 from November 4, 1961-February 22, 1962)

Chamberlain holds the next two longest streaks with 31 in 1962 and 25 in 1960.

NBA Record - Most Consecutive 20 Point Games (126 from October 19, 1961-January 19, 1963)

Chamberlain holds the next most with 92 from February 26, 1963 through March 18, 1964.

NBA Record - Most points per game by a rookie (37.6 in 1959-60)

NBA Record - Most points by a rookie (2,707 in 1959-60)

NBA Record - Most points by a rookie in a game (58 on January 25, 1960 and 58 on February 21, 1960)

NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 20,000 Points (499 achieved in 1966)
Michael Jordan, at 620 games, took the second fewest games.

NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 25,000 Points (691, achieved on February 23, 1968 against the Detroit Pistons)
Michael Jordan, at 782 games, took the second fewest games.

NBA Record - Fewest Games Played to Reach 30,000 Points (941, achieved on February 16, 1972 against the Phoenix Suns).

NBA Record - Most consecutive seasons leading the league in field goals made (7 from 1959-60 through 1965-66)
Shared with Michael Jordan

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a season (1,597 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next three spots with 1,463 in 1962-63, 1,251 in 1960-61, and 1,204 in 1963-64

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a season (3,159 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain holds the next four highest with 2,770, 2,457, 2,311, and 2,298.

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a Game (36 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next highest with 31, and is tied (with Rick Barry) at third with 30

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Game (63 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Chamberlain holds the next two most with 62 and 60.

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Made in a Half (22 in the 2nd half vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Half (37 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962 (2nd half)

NBA Record - Most Field Goals Attempted in a Quarter (21 in the 4th quarter vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)

NBA Record - Most Free Throws Made in a Game (28 vs. the New York Knicks on March 2, 1962)
Record shared with Adrian Dantley

NBA Record - Most seasons leading the NBA in free throw attempts (9)

NBA Record - Most consecutive seasons leading the NBA in free throw attempts (6 from 1959-60 through 1964-65)

NBA Record - Most Free Throws Attempted in a season (1,363 in 1961-62)
Chamberlain also holds the next four spots with 1,113, 1,054, 1,016, and 991.

NBA Record - Most Free Throws Attempted in a Game (34 vs. the St. Louis Hawks on February 22, 1962)
Chamberlain also holds second place with 32 on March 2, 1962.

NBA Playoff Record - Most points by a rookie in a game (53 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 14, 1960)
Pulled down a rookie playoff record 35 rebounds in the same game.

Chamberlain also scored 50 as a rookie against the Boston Celtics on March 22, 1960.

NBA Playoff Record - Most field goals in a seven game series (113 vs. the St. Louis Hawks in 1964)

NBA Playoff Record - Most field goals in a game (24 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 14, 1960)
Record shared with John Havlicek and Michael Jordan

NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a game (48 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 22, 1962)
Record shared with Rick Barry

NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a half (25 vs. the Syracuse Nationals on March 22, 1962)
Record shared with Elgin Baylor and Michael Jordan

NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a three game series (104 vs. the Syracuse Nationals in 1960)

NBA Playoff Record - Most field goal attempts in a five game series (159 vs. the Syracuse Nationals in 1962)

NBA All-Star Game Record - Points in a game (42 in 1962)

NBA All-Star Game Record - Field goals in a game (17 in 1962)
Record shared with Michael Jordan and Kevin Garnett

NBA All-Star Game Record - Field goals in a half (10 in 1962)

NBA All-Star Game Record - Free throw attempts in a game (16 in 1962)
Chamberlain also holds the second most attempts in an All-Star Game with 15 in 1960.

[edit] Other selected scoring facts2nd highest career scoring average (30.06)

jlauber

08-26-2011, 01:41 AM

Continuing...

[QUOTE]NBA rebounding recordsSee also: List of National Basketball Association top individual rebounding season averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association top rookie rebounding averages
See also: List of National Basketball Association players with most rebounds in a game

NBA Record - Career Total Rebounds (23,924)

NBA Record - Career Rebounds Per Game (22.9)

NBA Record - Most seasons leading the league in rebounds (11)

NBA Record - Most seasons with 1,000 or more rebounds (13)

NBA Record - Rebounds Per Game in a season (27.2)
Chamberlain also holds the next two highest averages with 27.0 in 1959-60 and 25.7 in 1961-62)

Chamberlain and Bill Russell occupy the top 18 spots on this list (9 each).

NBA Record - Total Rebounds in a season (2,149 in 1960-1961)
Chamberlain also holds the next six highest totals.

NBA Record - Rebounds in a game (55, Philadelphia Warriors vs. Boston Celtics, November 24, 1960)

Besides Bill Russell (11 times, including 3 playoff games, max of 51) only two players, Nate Thurmond (42) and Jerry Lucas (40) have ever gotten at least 40.
NBA Record - Most rebounds per game by a rookie in a season (27.0)

NBA Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a season (1941)

NBA Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a game (45 on February 6, 1960)
Chamberlain, as a rookie, also grabbed 43 rebounds in one game, 42 in two others, and 40 in another.

NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a playoff game (41 against the Boston Celtics, on April 5, 1967).
Game 3 victory in the Eastern Division finals.

NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a half (26 against the San Francisco Warriors on April 16, 1967)
Also an NBA Finals record.

NBA Playoff Record - Highest rebounding average in a playoff series (32.0 in a five game series against the Boston Celtics in 1967).

NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 5-game playoff series (160 against the Boston Celtics in 1967).

NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 6-game playoff series (171 against the San Francisco Warriors in 1967).
Also an NBA Finals record for a 6-game series.

NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds in a 7-game playoff series (220 against the Boston Celtics in 1965).

NBA Playoff Record - Most rebounds by a rookie in a game (35 against the Boston Celtics on March 22, 1960)
Scored a then-playoff record 53 points (still a rookie record) in the same game (a game 5 victory).

NBA All-Star Game Record - Most career rebounds in the NBA All-Star game (197).

NBA All-Star Game Record - Most rebounds in a half (16 in 1960).
Record shared with Bob Pettit
[edit] Other selected rebound facts2nd most consecutive seasons with 1,000+ rebounds (10)

jlauber

08-26-2011, 01:45 AM

Continuing...

[QUOTE]NBA versatility recordNBA Record - Most consecutive triple-doubles (9) (March 8-20, 1968)
[edit] Other selected versatility factsOnly player in NBA history to record a double-triple-double (20+ points, 20+ rebounds, 20+ assists in a game)
On February 2, 1968 against the Detroit Pistons, he logged 22 points, 25 rebounds and 21 assists.[22]

Only player in NBA history to record a quadruple double-double (meaning two of either 40 points, 40 rebounds, or 40 assists in a single game) (A feat he performed 5 times).

On November 4, 1959, Chamberlain, in his third game in the NBA, scored 41 points and grabbed a then-rookie record 40 rebounds against the Syracuse Nationals.

On January 15, 1960, Chamberlain, as a rookie, scored 44 points and grabbed 42 rebounds against the Boston Celtics.

On January 25, 1960, Chamberlain, as a rookie, scored an NBA rookie record 58 points and grabbed 42 rebounds against the Detroit Pistons.

On February 6, 1960, Chamberlain, as a rookie, scored 44 points and grabbed an NBA rookie record 45 rebounds against the Detroit Pistons.

On December 8, 1961, Chamberlain scored a then-record 78 points and collected 43 rebounds against the Los Angeles Lakers.

After critics called him a one-dimensional (or even selfish) player, Chamberlain led the league in total assists the next season, 1967

jlauber

08-26-2011, 01:56 AM

Dickwad...

In terms of statistical accomplishments, Hakeem is number 1 in recorded blocks, 8th in steals (he's the only center in the top 10, the 2nd best center is David robinson and he's around 40th), 9th in points, 11th in rebounds. He's also the center with the highest points per game average among all the centers. Just based on stats he's definitely up there with the greatest all-time, only an idiot like you would claim anything else.

How about this you idiot?

Assist titles? Chamberlain is the ONLY center to ever LEAD the league in assists, AND, he came in THIRD in another season.

Scoring titles?

Chamberlain holds a 7-0 edge over Hakeem, and had Wilt wanted to, it could very well have been TEN. Not only that, but Chamberlain has the FOUR highest scoring seasons, AND, he averaged nearly 40 ppg over the course of his first SEVEN seasons...COMBINED!

FG% titles?

Chamberlain holds a 9-0 margin over Hakeem. Not only that, but Chamberlain has the TOP-TWO seasons all-time, as well as THREE of the TOP-5...all accomplished in leagues that shot FAR worse than Hakeem's era.

Rebounding titles?

Hakeem barely won two titles in EIGHTEEN seasons, while Chamberlain was not only winning ELEVEN in his 14 seasons, he was winning some of them by nearly FIVE per game.

But I am not done yet, either?

Chamberlain LED the NBA in scoring AND rebounding in the SAME season, FIVE times.

Chamberlain LED the NBA in scoring and FG%, in the SAME season, FOUR times.

Chamberlain LED the NBA in rebounding and FG%, in the SAME season, EIGHT times.

And it gets even better...

Chamberlain LED the NBA in scoring, rebounding, and FG%, in the SAME season, THREE times. My god, the man even LED the NBA in rebounding, FG%, AND assists, in the SAME season one time.

And, for those that attempt to rip Wilt as some kind of "stats-padder", Chamberlain LED the NBA in scoring (33.5 ppg), rebounding (24.6 rpg), FG% (.540...in a league that shot .433), and with 5.2 apg...AND, on a TEAM that had the BEST RECORD in the league. How many times did Hakeem do that? Oh wait...Hakeem NEVER even played on a team that had the BEST RECORD in the league!

And we don't have Wilt's OFFICIAL blocked shots, either. We do KNOW that HOF statistician Harvey Pollack is on record as claiming that Chamberlain had SEASONS of 10+ bpg. We also have a RECORDED game in 1968 in which Chamberlain blocked 23 shots in a nationally televised game. We also have a RECORDED playoff game in which Wilt put up a 24-32-13-12 game...and against Russell, no less.

jlauber

08-26-2011, 02:08 AM

Dickwad,

Individual accolades, 1 MVP, 2 DPOY's, 2 Finals MVP's, 12 all-star nominations, 6 ALL-NBA first teams, 3 ALL-NBA second teams, 3 ALL-NBA third teams, 5 ALL-defensive first team, 4 ALL-defensive second team.

Hakeem won ONE MVP award. He finished second, ONCE. He finished in the top-4, two more times. He was in the top-10 NINE times...in EIGHTEEN seasons.

How about Wilt?

FOUR MVPs. He came in second TWO more times. Third one more time. 4th two more times. Overall, Chamberlain was a top-10 player in ELEVEN of his 14 seasons, and top-5 in TEN.

Chamberlaain certainly would have won TWO Finals MVPs had the award existed in '67.

He had 13 All-Star nominations in his 14 seasons, and the ONLY one he did not was because he was injured in.

SEVEN First-team nominations (while playing TEN seasons in the Russell era, and another FOUR in the Kareem era.) Add TWO more second teams, as well.

And the NBA did not recognize all-defensive teams until Wilt's 10th season. Despite that, he was voted First-Team all-defense in his LAST two seasons, and had the award existed in the 60's, he would probably have won another couple more in '67 and '68. Not only that, but once again, there was no DPOY back then, but he probably would have won it in '72, as well as '67 and '68, and perhaps in '73.

jlauber

08-26-2011, 02:13 AM

Dickwad...

I have Hakeem and Shaq on the same place on the all-time ranking but Duncan is below Hakeem, so is definitely Wilt and Russell. Put Duncan in Hakeem's situation and let him face Malone and Barkley during their primes and his individual accolades wouldn't look so pretty.. Wilt and Russell are high on most lists because Russell won crazy much and Wilt put up crazy stats but obviously, in terms of skills they are behind Hakeem.

SKILLS? How about DOMINATION? Hakeem was NEVER the dominant force that EITHER Russell or Chamberlain were. And while he might have had more "skills" than either (and I don't believe he was any more skilled than an early Wilt BTW), he was nowhere near the dominant force that players like Chamberlain and Shaq were on the offensive end, nor anywhere near the defensive presence that Russell was (or Wilt, either.) And Kareem was MORE skilled AND more dominant offensively.

Wilt was CONSIDERABLY taller, had a CONSIDERABLY longer wing-span, was CONSIDERABLY stronger, was CONSIDERABLY faster, and was able to leap CONSIDERABLY higher. In fact, Wilt was a CONSIDERABLY better ATHLETE than Hakeem.

In terms of rebounding? Hakeem is WAY below Chamberlain and Russell. He was not even the best rebounder on his OWN team one season (being horribly outrebounded by a Barkley who was essentially the same exact age.)

Russell averaged 18 points per game twice under his career, how the hell could he have had "a couple of season at 18-19" when he even didn't average 19 points to start with in any season.

What a goofball...Russell had a SEASON of 18.9 ppg (and another of 18.2 ppg.) Are you trying to dispute my contention based on .1 decimal point. What an ass!

jlauber

08-26-2011, 02:33 AM

Dickwad...

Standout? You mean like Wilt? Scoring 50 points per game but still not doing crap in the playoffs until all the all-star came around? It's not about stats, it's about how you play. And if you wanna talk stats, Hakeem is the center with the highest scoring average in the playoffs..

Another nonsensical post...

Chamberlain not "doing crap" in the playoffs in his 50 ppg season? He averaged 35 ppg and 27 rpg. Not only that, but he took what was the same basic last place roster he inherited when he joined that team, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 60-20 Celtics and their SEVEN HOFers. Not only that, but Chamberlain's teammates collectively shot .354 (yes .354) in the playoffs that season. Now you explain to me how that happened? BTW, in a game five, of a best-of-five series in the first round, all Chamberlain did was put up a 56-35 game.

As for Hakeem's post-season scoring edge...

A PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain had FOUR entire post-seasons of 33.2 ppg, 34.7 ppg, 35.0 ppg, and 37.0 ppg. Last time I checked, Hakeem had TWO (37.5 ppg and 33.0 ppg.)

Chamberlain also had THREE post-season series of 37 ppg, 37 ppg, and 38.6 ppg. And he had FOUR of 30+ against Russell alone, including one of 30 ppg and 31 rpg (which covered seven games BTW.)

Wilt had produced FOUR 50+ point games in the post-season. How many did Hakeem have?

Chamberlain AVERAGED 33 ppg, 27 rpg, and .510 shooting in his first SIX post-seasons...COMBINED! And, one can only wonder what those numbers would look like had his cast of clowns been a little better in his 62-63 season, in which he missed the playoffs, when he averaged 44.8 ppg on .528 shooting (in a league that shot .441...and BTW, his teammates collectively shot .412.)

How about these numbers? Wilt averaged 29.3 ppg, 26.6 rpg, 4.8 apg, .518, and probably blocked 7-8 bpg, in his first EIGHT post-seasons...COMBINED!

How many 30+ ppg, 25+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had THREE. How many 30+ ppg, 20 rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had FOUR. How many 25+ ppg, 25 rpg+ post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had FIVE. How many 25+ ppg, 20+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had SIX. And how many 20+ ppg, 20+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had NINE.

How many 30 rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had one. How many 29+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had two. How many 27+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had THREE. How many 24.7+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had EIGHT. And how many 20+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had THIRTEEN...and in EVERY post-season in which he played....including a 22.5 rpg average over the course of 17 games in his LAST post-season.

How many post-seasons did Hakeem average 6.5 apg? Chamberlain had TWO, including one at 9.2 (in a post-season in which he had TWO "triple-double" playoff series.)

Furthermore, Chamberlain had a seven-game Finals, and playing on one leg, in which he averaged 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and shot .625...including an elimination game six of 45 points, on 20-27 shooting, with 27 rebounds. In the '67 first round playoffs, all Chamberlain did was average 28 ppg, 26.5 rpg, 11.0 apg, and shot .612. In the '64 Finals, and against Russell, Chamberlain averaged 29 ppg and 27 rpg.

jlauber

08-26-2011, 02:42 AM

TEAM success?

Chamberlain played on TWELVE teams that advanced as far as the Conference Finals. Hakeem... FOUR.

Wilt went to SIX Finals. Hakeem...THREE.

Chamberlain played on FOUR teams that had the BEST RECORD in the league. Hakeem...ZERO.

Wilt played on FOUR teams that won 60+ games. Hakeem...ZERO. Hakeem's BEST team record was 58-24, while Wilt had TWO teams go 68-13 and 69-13 (including 33 straight wins.)

Wilt played on ONE team that was eliminated in the first round. Hakeem... EIGHT!

And BTW, for those that TRY to disparage Wilt as some kind of a "cancer" with his team's...

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

The following season was a low point for the Rockets during Olajuwon's tenure. They finished 42–40,[14] and missed the playoffs for the first time in Olajuwon's career. He missed two weeks early in the season due to an accelerated heart beat.[23] Despite his usual strong numbers, he could not lift his team out of mediocrity. Since making the Finals in 1986, the Rockets had made the playoffs five times, but their record in those playoff series was 1–5 and they were eliminated in the first round four times. Following the season, Olajuwon requested a trade in part because of his bad contract; his salary was considerably low for a top center, and his contract specifically forbade re-negotiation.[24] He also expressed displeasure with the organization's efforts to surround him with quality players. He felt the Rockets had cut corners at every turn, and were more concerned with the bottom line than winning.[25] Management had also infuriated Olajuwon during the season when they accused of him of faking a hamstring injury because of his unhappiness over his contract situation.[26] His agent cited his differences with the organization as being "irreconcilable",[27] and Olajuwon publicly insulted owner Charlie Thomas and the team's front office.[24][28] With the 1992–93 season approaching, a reporter for the Houston Chronicle said that Olajuwon being dealt was "as close to a sure thing as there is."[29

How about WIN SHARES?

Chamberlain LED the NBA in WIN-SHARES in EIGHT seasons. How about Hakeem? ZERO. Wilt also had SIX seasons of 20+ WS's, with a HIGH of 25.0. Hakeem's HIGH season was 15.8. BTW, in Wilt's 62-63 season, when he played with the worst roster in NBA history, he was responsible for 20.9 WS's, on a 31-49 team...or he was DIRECTLY responsible for 67% of his team's wins. I have nerver taken the time to look that up, but I am pretty confident that no other player in NBA history has been directly responsible for 67% of their team's wins. Oh, and again BTW, in Hakeem's "greatest" season, in 94-94, he had a 14.3 WS, and in the next season, 94-95, he was at 10.7.

THAT should give you an even better indication as to who was more dominant in their careers. Of course, virtually EVERY stat, whether core, or advanced, CONVINCINGLY PROVES who the more dominant player was.

jlauber

08-26-2011, 02:46 AM

Now Dickwad...give me your reasons on just exactly how Hakeem had a better career than Chamberlain...

poido123

08-26-2011, 04:41 AM

Now Dickwad...give me your reasons on just exactly how Hakeem had a better career than Chamberlain...

We all know you like to slurp any laker player, but the thing id like to add to this is that its difficult to compare players of totally different eras, Wilt was also a complete ballhog, and played nearly the 48 minutes. He also played in a reduced size league, and there were only a few decent teams. He also was an athletic freak, which back then was a huge advantage, as Hakeem's athletic competition was more prevelant, and Hakeem dealt with stronger competition as a whole..

Wilt was dominant because of his size and limited competition at his position, that's the way I see it, Hakeem was a more gifted player, more skilled, and dealt with stronger competition, so for the dominant stats you could argue in favour of Wilt, you could also argue that Hakeem would do the same stats, if not better, back in those days...Not saying Wilt's play and dominance wasn't remarkable, but there's more to it, than just looking at the boxscore...

The overating of Wilt continues..And just a shaq reference, I'd consider shaq above Wilt on the all time list too, similar to wilt he used his size and power to dominate the league, but again Shaq did this in a stronger more all round athletic league, dominated playoffs on the big stage with more teams in the league, but this is my opinion...

If you want to bring up Wilt's assist stats, well when your playing nearly 48 minutes every game, and you have the ball in your hands 90% of the game, well assists will fall into your lap...Another flawed logic.

Soothing Layup

08-26-2011, 04:49 AM

jlauber

08-26-2011, 04:54 AM

Wilt played in a league with 8 teams.

Hakeem 30.

EXACTLY. Chamberlain faced HOF-laden and All-Star laden rosters that had MULTIPLE players who were capable of 20+ ppg seasons. Even the 7th and 8th players were usually quality players. Meanwhile, Hakeem played in diluted leagues, with only a few quality centers, and whom he faced far less frequently that the 10+ games EACH that Chamberlain routinely faced his HOF counterparts at the center position. Just another great post.

millwad

08-26-2011, 05:55 AM

Dickwad, you have no clue do you? You can't even make ONE valid argument without contradicting yourself...

Fatal9 makes the comment that from '93-'95 Hakeem went 9-1 in elimination games? Great...how about the REST of his post-season career? The SAME Hakeem whose team's lost to lower seeds FOUR times? And the SAME Hakeem whose team's lost EIGHT times in the FIRST ROUND??

And I am sick-and-tired of reading about YOUR take on Wilt's rosters. Even when Chamberlain had DECENT rosters, he ALWAYS faced SUPERIOR ones. His teams were facing anywhere from FOUR to NINE HOFers. Meanwhile, Hakeem gets credit as some kind of miracle worker in '94 by beating Ewing's 57-25 roster that had NO MORE TALENT than Hakeem's 58-24 Rockets.

Chamberlain wasn't CLOSE to being the best center in '72??? Maybe you had better do some serious research before you make a complete FOOL of ytourself. The man finished THIRD in the MVP balloting behind Kareem and teammate West. AND then proceeded to OUTPLAY Kareem in the WCF's. Not MY opinion, mind you, BUT, virtually EVERYONE who witnessed that series...including the MILWAUKEE press, the MILWAUKEE COACH, the MILWAUKEE players, and I am reasonably convinced, the majority of the MILWAUKEE fans (who, BTW, gave Chamberlain a STANDING OVATION as he left the floor at the end of the '71 WCF's, when he battled a PRIME Kareem to a virtual statistical stand-off...at age 34, and only a year removed from majore knee surgery.) Time Magazine went so far as to claim that the 35 year-old Wilt DECISIVELY out played the PRIME Kareem!

And I love the consistency in your posts...

You get on Chamberlain for averaging 50 ppg in one season...and then rag on him for only being the 4th highest scorer in the post-season of another (and BTW, he WON the FINALS MVP that post-season.)

Then, you have the audacity (stupidity is a much more accurate analogy) to rank Hakeem over Chamberlain, and then citing Hakeem's statistical accomplishments in the same post. Wow, Hakeem's statistical awards took a couple of sentences. How about Chamberlain's?

Jbieber, your stupidity is unbelievable, you have no sense for anything at all when it comes to basketball but stats. Loosing 8 times in the first round is not something odd when you play with players you do, heck, Wilt couldn't either carry his bad teams and he even had a 31-49 season and in all he had 3 seasons where he didn't made it through the first round and lets not forget that Hakeem had worse teammates by far during his career than what Wilt did and that Hakeem played 4 years longer than Wilt.

And still, you should learn the meaning of the word " DECISIVELY " because you are making a fool out of yourself. He got Kareem in the last game but in all he was outplayed by far, getting outscored by 23 points per game on better FG % while having more assists and also shooting freethrows twice as good as Wilt in the series is not equal to Wilt "schooling" Kareem, it's the other way around. And especially considering the fact that Kareem absolutely crushed Wilt in the regular season that year when he averaged 40 points per game on 51% shooting over 5 games on Wilt's ass. And no, Wilt was 4th in the MVP rankings, not third, why you gotta lie to make your crap sound better? This is not the first time you put up untrue numbers a la "Russell had a couple of seasons where he averaged 18-19 points" when in fact the guy never even averaged 19 points to start with.

Sure as hell I whine about Wilt being the 4th best scorer of his team when he finally won a second time. He wasn't even the best player of his own team, Jerry West ended up higher on the MVP-rankings and while Wilt won Finals MVP which was nice it's still not like he's the only player who won FMVP while not being considered the best player of his own team, a la Tony Parker and Maxwell.

In fact, he never led any of his teams in the playoffs when it came to scoring, being the 2nd best and 4th best scorer of the championteam is not equal to what Hakeem did, sorry, it's just not. Statpadding while loosing is not cool, Jbieber. Hakeem's runs were greater for sure.

millwad

08-26-2011, 06:19 AM

EXACTLY. Chamberlain faced HOF-laden and All-Star laden rosters that had MULTIPLE players who were capable of 20+ ppg seasons. Even the 7th and 8th players were usually quality players. Meanwhile, Hakeem played in diluted leagues, with only a few quality centers, and whom he faced far less frequently that the 10+ games EACH that Chamberlain routinely faced his HOF counterparts at the center position. Just another great post.

Haha, few quality centers.. It's funny because if you check the most common TOP 10 all-time center list, then Hakeem faced 6 of the best centers of all-time. While Wilt only faced two in the top 10, Kareem (Hakeem faced him as well) and Bill Russell. It's funny that the "few quality centers"-league Hakeem played in had greater centers than the era Wilt played in.. You're digging your own grave.

And no the 7th and 8th players weren't usually quality players in Wilt's era, they were just as bad, some of Russell's teams, sure. But not the average team. The reason why Wilt's era had fewer teams was that the players weren't as skilled as later era's.

If you don't agree on that, then you're a joke, if you'd only have 8 teams in today's era you'd have absolutely sick teams.

millwad

08-26-2011, 09:43 AM

TEAM success?

Chamberlain played on TWELVE teams that advanced as far as the Conference Finals. Hakeem... FOUR.

Wilt played in a league with 8 teams, idiot. In the playoffs you basically only had to win the first series to be in the conference finals in Wilt's era, idiot.

Wilt went to SIX Finals. Hakeem...THREE.

Wilt played in an era with 8 teams, less playoff series to reach the finals. Wilt won as many finals as Hakeem and Hakeem had greater runs the years he won, Wilt was 2nd and 4th best scorer on his teams that won.

Chamberlain played on FOUR teams that had the BEST RECORD in the league. Hakeem...ZERO.

Wilt played in a league with 8 teams and with better players, idiot.

Wilt played on FOUR teams that won 60+ games. Hakeem...ZERO. Hakeem's BEST team record was 58-24, while Wilt had TWO teams go 68-13 and 69-13 (including 33 straight wins.)

Oh, and you fail to mention that the year Wilt won 68 games was in '67. That same year he had three players by his side who averaged more than 18 points per game. And two of those three, Chet Walker and Hal Greer were all-stars that same year.

So in all Wilt that year had 3 players who averaged more than 18 points per game and Hal Greer and Cunningham are now HOF:ers and two of those 3 guys were all-star that same year.

Now compare that to Hakeem's 1994 season where his team won 58 games. That year his team had zero all-stars if you don't count Hakeem and the teams 2nd best scorer was Maxwell who averaged 13.8 points in the playoffs on 37% shooting. In the regular season Otis Thorpe was the 2nd best scorer on the team with 14 points per game.

And don't even let me get started about the '72 season where Wilt was the 4th best scorer...

millwad

08-26-2011, 10:02 AM

Dickwad...

SKILLS? How about DOMINATION? Hakeem was NEVER the dominant force that EITHER Russell or Chamberlain were. And while he might have had more "skills" than either (and I don't believe he was any more skilled than an early Wilt BTW), he was nowhere near the dominant force that players like Chamberlain and Shaq were on the offensive end, nor anywhere near the defensive presence that Russell was (or Wilt, either.) And Kareem was MORE skilled AND more dominant offensively.

As far as I care, the last time I checked Hakeem is the center with the highest point per game average in the playoffs, ever. Wilt dropped with 8 points in the playoffs and Russell shot with a 43% FG average during his playoff-career.

And Wilt Chamberlain did his amazing damage regarding scoring in the regular season but in the playoffs he wasn't the same scorer. Hakeem averaged more than 4 points more per game than Wilt in the playoffs and he did it with better FG%. Last time I checked Russell let Wilt score 50+ points on him 8 times and Kareem had a season average of 40 points on 50% shooting on Wilt the same year Wilt won with the Lakers. Sure, bring up Kareem's one game where he scored tons of points on Olajuwon, in his second season where he was not close to his defensive prime and we all know what Hakeem did to Kareem later that year.

Wilt was CONSIDERABLY taller, had a CONSIDERABLY longer wing-span, was CONSIDERABLY stronger, was CONSIDERABLY faster, and was able to leap CONSIDERABLY higher. In fact, Wilt was a CONSIDERABLY better ATHLETE than Hakeem.

And was a considerably less skilled player than Hakeem.

In terms of rebounding? Hakeem is WAY below Chamberlain and Russell. He was not even the best rebounder on his OWN team one season (being horribly outrebounded by a Barkley who was essentially the same exact age.)

That still wasn't prime Hakeem and Charles Barkley is one of the greatest rebounders by all-time. And still, Hakeem being the 2nd best rebounder on that Rocket team is still not as bad as Wilt being the 4th "best" scorer on that '72 Laker team.

And again, rebounds back then can't be compared with Hakeem's era. We're talking about the same joke-era where Baylor had a season where he averaged 19.8 rebounds per game, haha, and Baylor was 6-5 and a SF..

What a goofball...Russell had a SEASON of 18.9 ppg (and another of 18.2 ppg.) Are you trying to dispute my contention based on .1 decimal point. What an ass!

When you say, "Russell had a couple of seasons where he averaged 18-19 points" you play with words and you know it. You make it sound better than it really was, the dude did not average 19 points (0.1 is still 0.1) and when you write a couple it can easily be mistaken for more than two seasons.. And both of those seasons he had crappy FG%.

millwad

08-26-2011, 10:09 AM

Dickwad...

Another nonsensical post...

Chamberlain not "doing crap" in the playoffs in his 50 ppg season? He averaged 35 ppg and 27 rpg. Not only that, but he took what was the same basic last place roster he inherited when he joined that team, to a game seven, two-point loss against the 60-20 Celtics and their SEVEN HOFers. Not only that, but Chamberlain's teammates collectively shot .354 (yes .354) in the playoffs that season. Now you explain to me how that happened? BTW, in a game five, of a best-of-five series in the first round, all Chamberlain did was put up a 56-35 game.

As for Hakeem's post-season scoring edge...

A PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain had FOUR entire post-seasons of 33.2 ppg, 34.7 ppg, 35.0 ppg, and 37.0 ppg. Last time I checked, Hakeem had TWO (37.5 ppg and 33.0 ppg.)

Chamberlain also had THREE post-season series of 37 ppg, 37 ppg, and 38.6 ppg. And he had FOUR of 30+ against Russell alone, including one of 30 ppg and 31 rpg (which covered seven games BTW.)

Wilt had produced FOUR 50+ point games in the post-season. How many did Hakeem have?

Chamberlain AVERAGED 33 ppg, 27 rpg, and .510 shooting in his first SIX post-seasons...COMBINED! And, one can only wonder what those numbers would look like had his cast of clowns been a little better in his 62-63 season, in which he missed the playoffs, when he averaged 44.8 ppg on .528 shooting (in a league that shot .441...and BTW, his teammates collectively shot .412.)

How about these numbers? Wilt averaged 29.3 ppg, 26.6 rpg, 4.8 apg, .518, and probably blocked 7-8 bpg, in his first EIGHT post-seasons...COMBINED!

How many 30+ ppg, 25+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had THREE. How many 30+ ppg, 20 rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had FOUR. How many 25+ ppg, 25 rpg+ post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had FIVE. How many 25+ ppg, 20+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had SIX. And how many 20+ ppg, 20+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had NINE.

How many 30 rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had one. How many 29+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had two. How many 27+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had THREE. How many 24.7+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Chamberlain had EIGHT. And how many 20+ rpg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Wilt had THIRTEEN...and in EVERY post-season in which he played....including a 22.5 rpg average over the course of 17 games in his LAST post-season.

How many post-seasons did Hakeem average 6.5 apg? Chamberlain had TWO, including one at 9.2 (in a post-season in which he had TWO "triple-double" playoff series.)

Furthermore, Chamberlain had a seven-game Finals, and playing on one leg, in which he averaged 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and shot .625...including an elimination game six of 45 points, on 20-27 shooting, with 27 rebounds. In the '67 first round playoffs, all Chamberlain did was average 28 ppg, 26.5 rpg, 11.0 apg, and shot .612. In the '64 Finals, and against Russell, Chamberlain averaged 29 ppg and 27 rpg.

How many championships did Wilt win and how many did Hakeem win?

The right answer is 2 *DING DING DING*:cheers:

And Hakeem's boths runs were far greater than Wilt's. Wilt never even led a team in scoring in the playoffs when he finally won with the help of HOF:ers and all-stars. And not only didn't he lead, he was the 4th "best" scorer" of the '72 team and in '67, Hal Greer took over the scoring and averaged 27 ppg during the playoffs.

tontoz

08-26-2011, 10:11 AM

jlauber

08-26-2011, 10:13 AM

Jbieber, your stupidity is unbelievable, you have no sense for anything at all when it comes to basketball but stats. Loosing 8 times in the first round is not something odd when you play with players you do, heck, Wilt couldn't either carry his bad teams and he even had a 31-49 season and in all he had 3 seasons where he didn't made it through the first round and lets not forget that Hakeem had worse teammates by far during his career than what Wilt did and that Hakeem played 4 years longer than Wilt.

And still, you should learn the meaning of the word " DECISIVELY " because you are making a fool out of yourself. He got Kareem in the last game but in all he was outplayed by far, getting outscored by 23 points per game on better FG % while having more assists and also shooting freethrows twice as good as Wilt in the series is not equal to Wilt "schooling" Kareem, it's the other way around. And especially considering the fact that Kareem absolutely crushed Wilt in the regular season that year when he averaged 40 points per game on 51% shooting over 5 games on Wilt's ass. And no, Wilt was 4th in the MVP rankings, not third, why you gotta lie to make your crap sound better? This is not the first time you put up untrue numbers a la "Russell had a couple of seasons where he averaged 18-19 points" when in fact the guy never even averaged 19 points to start with.

Sure as hell I whine about Wilt being the 4th best scorer of his team when he finally won a second time. He wasn't even the best player of his own team, Jerry West ended up higher on the MVP-rankings and while Wilt won Finals MVP which was nice it's still not like he's the only player who won FMVP while not being considered the best player of his own team, a la Tony Parker and Maxwell.

In fact, he never led any of his teams in the playoffs when it came to scoring, being the 2nd best and 4th best scorer of the championteam is not equal to what Hakeem did, sorry, it's just not. Statpadding while loosing is not cool, Jbieber. Hakeem's runs were greater for sure.

I have DESTROYED every single feeble effort at ANY argument you can make for Hakeem being even a SHELL of a player that Wilt was...but I thought I would AGAIN point out your blatant LIES in the above post.

Chamberlain finished THIRD in the '72 MVP balloting, not FOURTH (you once again attempt to disparage his legacy.) Secondly, Wilt's TEAMs didn't make it thru the first round in ONE of his PLAYOFF seasons. If you are going to count his '63 season, when his putrid teammates were so bad that even the MONUMENTAL season that Wilt had was not enough to get them there...then we can add THREE more seasons to Hakeem's total of EIGHT first round spankings...now giving him a TOTAL of ELEVEN then in his career. Imagine that...18 seasons, and knocked out in the FIRST ROUND in ELEVEN of them.

"Stats-padding" while "loosing" (losing)? Yep, TWO seasons, in 14, which he did not play on a winning team. BUT, in one, all he did was LEAD the league in FIFTEEN of the entire total of 22 statistical categories, including WIN SHARES. He played 47.6 mpg, and SINGLE-HANDEDLY kept his team in nearly EVERY game (they only had a -2.1 ppg differential and lost 35 games by single digits.) Here was Wilt scoring 44.8 ppp, grabbing 24.3 rpg, and not only leading the league in FG%, but setting a then-record mark of .528. His 31.8 PER is THE all-time record. Oh, and BTW, he then took that same cast of clowns to a 48-32 record the very next year, and a trip to the Finals.

That takes care of ONE of his "loosing" seasons, but how about the other? Well, he was traded in mid-season, to a team that had been 34-46 the season before, and took them to a 40-40 record. THEN, he carried them to a 3-1 romp over the 48-32 Royals. THEN he carried them to a game seven, ONE-POINT loss against the 62-18 Celtics, at the PEAK of their DYNASTY. And in the process, all he did was average 30 ppg and 31 rpg in that seven game series...including a game seven of 30 points, on 12-15 shooting, with 32 rebounds.

As for the '72 WCF's...yes Chamberlain was considered as having DECISIVELY outplayed the 11 year younger Kareem (and doing so on a surgically repaired knee.) Kareem's .457 FG% was bad enough (in a year in which he shot .574), but it was a HORRIBLE .414 over the course of the last FOUR pivotal games of that series. And Wilt was knocking the "unblockable" sky-hook all over the gym in that series. We KNOW he had 15 blocks of Kareem's shots in just three of those games...and he probably had well over 20 in the entire series. And here again...that was a WAY PAST prime Chamberlain, and playing against a Kareem in his GREATEST statistical season. Even the year before, in what was arguably Wilt's WORST season, and covering 10 H2H games (five in the regular season, and five in the post-season), Wilt matched Kareem point-for-point, shot-for-shot, and rebound-for-rebound. My god, in Wilt's LAST season, the two went H2H in six regular season games, and while Kareem outscored Wilt per game, 29.5 to 11.0, Chamberlain outshot Jabbar by a mind-blowing .737 to .450 margin...which even included one game in which he outscored Kareem, 24-21, while outshooting him, 10-14 to 10-27. One can only wonder what a PRIME Chamberlain would have unloaded on Kareem?

And as for Wilt being the "second best" scorer in that '67 team. First of all, he was their LEADING scorer in the regular season. Secondly, he had their post-season HIGH game of 41 points. Thirdly, he was by FAR, their most CLUTCH scorer (putting up HUGE games in the clinching wins over Russell's and Thurmond's teams.) He also averaged 29.1 rpg and 9.2 apg, while outshooting Greer .579 to .429 in the post-season. Included in that post-season were a 28 ppg, 26.5 rpg, 11.0 apg, .612 series against the Royals; a 21.6 ppg, 32.0 rpg, 10.0 apg, and .556 series against Russell and the 60-21 Celtics; and a 17.5 ppg, 28.5 rpg, .560 Finals against Nate's Warriors. BTW, in addition to outscoring and outrebounding both Russell and Thurmond, he held them to .358 and .343 shooting respectively.

Once again...maybe you should take the time to RESEARCH before you make a complete FOOL out of yourself with your asinine posts.

Hakeem has NO CASE over Wilt...and as I have pointed out, he was barely a BORDERLINE Top-10 player (IF that.)

jlauber

08-26-2011, 10:26 AM

How many championships did Wilt win and how many did Hakeem win?

The right answer is 2 *DING DING DING*:cheers:

And Hakeem's boths runs were far greater than Wilt's. Wilt never even led a team in scoring in the playoffs when he finally won with the help of HOF:ers and all-stars. And not only didn't he lead, he was the 4th "best" scorer" of the '72 team and in '67, Hal Greer took over the scoring and averaged 27 ppg during the playoffs.

Yes they each had two rings. However, Wilt's came in 14 seasons, as compared to Hakeem's EIGHTEEN seasons. BUT, how about the fact that Chamberlain at least got his team's to SIX Finals, as compared to Hakeem's THREE. Or that Wilt took his team's to TWELVE Conference Finals, as compared to Hakeem's FOUR. Or that Wilt managed to get his team's past the first round in 11 of his 13 post-seasons, while Hakeem took his team down in flames in EIGHT of his fifteen post-seasons. AND, Chamberlain took FOUR teams to game seven's against the greatest Dynasty in major professional team sports, and lost them by scores of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.

Here again...a MONUMENTAL difference...

millwad

08-26-2011, 10:29 AM

I have DESTROYED every single feeble effort at ANY argument you can make for Hakeem being even a SHELL of a player that Wilt was...but I thought I would AGAIN point out your blatant LIES in the above post.

You haven't destroyed anything or anyone at all, the funny thing is that in the last discussion we had other posters even stated that you were the one getting destroyed.

And all you do is copy and paste. You single-handedly made Wilt unpopular on this site, you're not doing anyone a favour with your lunatic behaviour and obsession.

"Stats-padding" while "loosing" (losing)? Yep, TWO seasons, in 14, which he did not play on a winning team. BUT, in one, all he did was LEAD the league in FIFTEEN of the entire total of 22 statistical categories, including WIN SHARES. He played 47.6 mpg, and SINGLE-HANDEDLY kept his team in nearly EVERY game (they only had a -2.1 ppg differential and lost 35 games by single digits.) Here was Wilt scoring 44.8 ppp, grabbing 24.3 rpg, and not only leading the league in FG%, but setting a then-record mark of .528. His 31.8 PER is THE all-time record. Oh, and BTW, he then took that same cast of clowns to a 48-32 record the very next year, and a trip to the Finals.

And still only winning two titles while not even being the leading scorer of the team. All the spamming about his amazing stats doesn't help when he in fact lost.

As for the '72 WCF's...yes Chamberlain was considered as having outplayed the 11 year younger Kareem (and doing so on a surgically repaired knee.) Kareem's .457 FG% was bad enough (in a year in which he shot .574), but it was a HORRIBLE .414 over the course of the last FOUR pivotal games of that series. And Wilt was knocking the "unblockable" sky-hook all over the gym in that series. We KNOW he had 15 blocks of Kareem's shots in just three of those games...and he probably had well over 20 in the entire series. And here again...that was a WAY PAST prime Chamberlain, and playing against a Kareem in his GREATEST statistical season. Even the year before, in what was arguably Wilt's WORST season, and covering 10 H2H games (five in the regular season, and five in the post-season), Wilt matched Kareem point-for-point, shot-for-shot, and rebound-for-rebound. My god, in Wilt's LAST season, the two went H2H in six regular season games, and while Kareem outscored Wilt per game, 29.5 to 11.0, Chamberlain outshot Jabbar by a mind-blowing .737 to .450 margin...which even included one game in which he outscored Kareem, 24-21, while outshooting him, 10-14 to 10-27. One can only wonder what a PRIME Chamberlain would have unloaded on Kareem?

Still, you need to learn what " DECISIVELY" means. I have told you now a thousand times that it means that he had a better game in the last game of the series, what about the other games Kareem crushed him?

And again you bring up Kareem's FG% against Wilt in the playoffs of '72 but why is it that you always forget to mention the fact that he even shot better than Wilt during that series while averaging 23 points more per game, haha..

And as for Wilt being the "second best" scorer in that '67 team. First of all, he was their LEADING scorer in the regular season. Secondly, he had their post-season HIGH game of 41 points. Thirdly, he was by FAR, their most CLUTCH scorer (putting up HUGE games in the clinching wins over Russell's and Thurmond's teams.) He also averaged 29.1 rpg and 9.2 apg, while outshooting Greer .579 to .429 in the post-season. Included in that post-season were a 28 ppg, 26.5 rpg, 11.0 apg, .612 series against the Royals; a 21.6 ppg, 32.0 rpg, 10.0 apg, and .556 series against Russell and the 60-21 Celtics; and a 17.5 ppg, 28.5 rpg, .560 Finals against Nate's Warriors. BTW, in addition to outscoring and outrebounding both Russell and Thurmond, he held them to .358 and .343 shooting respectively.

Yeah, Wilt was always an amazing scorer in the regular season but he always dropped in the playoffs, the guy averaged 8 points less in the playoffs than the regular season as an average... Wow, did he outscore Russell? Damn, what an amazing accomplishment..

And a center is supposed to have better FG% than a guard, now you know that.

Once again...maybe you should take the time to RESEARCH before you make a complete FOOL out of yourself with your asinine posts.

Hakeem has NO CASE over Wilt...and as I have pointed out, he was barely a BORDERLINE Top-10 player (IF that.)

You always write about competition but it's a fact that Wilt only faced 2 of the top 10 center while Hakeem faced 6 of the 10 greatest centers ever. Hakeem won just as many titles as Wilt and his runs are definitely greater than Wilt's, no doubt. Now go and be Wilt's buttyboy and watch his stats from the '72 season where he was the fourth "best" scorer of the team while getting abused by Kareem.