Updated Kareem video. I really dont think he gets his due.

[Kblaze8855]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oro9W5C70g

Thanks to fatal who had a video I took like 4-5 clips from to make a point ill get to in a moment.......


We all know the accomplishments.

But im not sure most really appreciate how good he was. How unstoppable. How good a shot blocker he was.

Kareem played the way people our size tell themselves they would if they could be as big as a lot of the scrub centers are. You imagine how easy it would be if you could just get on your toes and be 6 inches from the rim...but still have your athletic ability. Be as quick as you are now.

And that aspect of Kareem seems almost lost. How quick/fast/athletic he was for his size. And he was a giant.

hes often left out of the best giant talks but really...he was at least 7'2'' but most say 7'3'' and when you watch old games the announcers call him 7'4''. And with his hair in his youth his figure was probably 7'7''. With long arms and hops and speed....he would be a nightmare to play.

http://i41.tinypic.com/1sb2ue.jpg

He would be at the top of the square on blocks and dunks so often its hard to even call it a highlight.

And in his later bucks and early laker days he was solid too. Not just tall. But tall and big. I cant imagine anyone today even trying to contain him. hes somewhere between 5 and 7 inches taller than Dwight. His wingspan is absurd. Hes not jumping ash igh but his highest touch is probably higher due to the size. Its like giving tweener forward(Jamison, young Sheed, or someone like that) mobility to a guy Mark Eatons size.

And he was skilled as hell. He doesnt often come up as the most skilled post players because people think he just took sky hooks. But he had hooks with both hands, fadeaways, finger rolls, up and unders, and runners and all. His footwork was immaculate. And he could pass his ass off.

Run the floor.

Rebound.

There is nothing he couldnt do. In any era past present or future I gotta believe that at his best...hes...probably the best or second best player in the NBA. Worst case....hes just arguably the best. At any point. Ever. People talk about next Shaqs and next Wilts and magics and all.

I think we might see another Magic before we see another Kareem. At his size being that mobile and skilled is just unfair.

That guy would just straight up own this league. They would have to sign over its rights and request permission to carry on business.

And I dont think he will ever be given the credit he should. Especially in the 80s. Magic overshadowed him looking back but he was still a finals MVP level player at what? 38?

Kareem was so good it puts you on the verge of hyperbole just trying to put it in words. And there are people who honestly get offended if you call him the GOAT.

I dont know that he is. But I dont think anyone really just played better than he did.

[RRR3]

2nd or 3rd best player ever IMO with a great case for being the GOAT. :rockon:

[Asukal]

I have Jordan as GOAT but Kareem does have a case. I'll have to watch more games he played in and maybe I'll understand him better, stats just don't tell the whole story. :cheers:

[Thorpesaurous]

I still argue that there's seven players you can't argue against being the greatest.
But on most days if someone forced me to pick one it would be Kareem. In part for his absolute lack of an adjustment period, and just rediculous length of time he was no less than dominant.

[Kblaze8855]

7? Usually i hear of 6. If you have 7 im guessing one is.....hakeem?

[Thorpesaurous]

7? Usually i hear of 6. If you have 7 im guessing one is.....hakeem?


Three centers, Three 80s/90s guys, and Oscar.

Although Oscar has sort of worked his way off my list. He's there mostly because he was my father's guy I think.

It's weird too, because they all sort of represent a different perspective of greatness. That's why they're a hard group to crack. Almost every player fits into one of their molds.

It's sort of why I've worked off of Oscar, because he's too Jordan-y without being Jordan.

[1987_Lakers]

I just watched your "**** Fundamentals" video, loved it.:oldlol:

[Kblaze8855]

Dont know how i forgot oscar. I wouldnt put him with that top 6 but understand those who do.


And the 2 best **** fundamentals were deleted by youtube. Bitches

[Fatal9]

nice video. i generally don't like 90% of mixes of kareem because they only include highlights from when he was a bald 40 year old, gives a wrong impression of his agility and athleticism for most of his earlier years. his passing also doesn't get enough credit, he was a great high post passer from games i've seen of him from '77-'80 (used more in this role i'm guessing in those years), obviously great at taking double teams, but I don't think that part of his game is appreciated enough because he scored really well in the context of the team (i've seen people on here claim he didn't which makes no sense).

i know you've probably seen enough '82-'85 Laker games, do you have an opinion on the importance of magic/kareem in those years? in general I think Kareem's impact on those teams gets underrated mainly because of how much better Magic became later on. he was "mr. set offense", their guy in the clutch, only guy on the team who'd get doubled and he'd create a lot of shots for perimeter guys and as old as he was still a major shot blocker who changed/blocked a lot of shots. in games Magic would miss, he'd still have the Lakers winning games most of the time, there was one game ('82 or '83) where he went into boston garden without magic and went off and won them the game. in a season like '82 for example, watching the games he should have been finals MVP. his playoff stats would have been greater had he not taken a step back because of how talented the team was (he might only score 20 points or something, but they'd be more valuable than your typical points because the only time he'd really take the ball and look to score is when the offense had nothing else going...basically taking a bad offensive possession and turning it into sure two points because of the sky hook), or if it's a blowout he'd generally play the least minutes because of his age so wouldn't really get to get his stats in those games. but people automatically assume Magic was clearly better/more valuable than him in those years when no one at the time did (neck and neck in MVP votes...KAJ would probably be ahead if he played more minutes, Pat Riley used to call him their leader/mvp, no one would really ever say that one was more valuable than the other).

[OldSchoolBBall]

I remember watching a Laker game from like 1983-'84 or so on ESPN Classic in the late 90's, and Kareem (nearing or in his mid-30's by then) posts up and does a Shaq like "Black Tornado" spin to the baseline for a dunk. I was FLOORED by how fast he was on the spin for a guy that big and that age. I remember saying "damn, no center today can move that fast, and none are as tall as him." His athleticism is DEFINITELY underrated. Must have been a beast of an athlete in his 20's, which I've seen much less of.

[Rose]

He's the only guy I know of that his skills are completely underrated. Yet he himself is overrated. I'm not gonna derail this thread with that because I'm with Simmons with him on Kareem.

But anyways, I feel like almost no one appreciates his ability to not only move in the post, but move out of and re-post. AND be able to use other players off of screens. Hell, he could pretty much use the post as another player, by how he could move around just in the lower post. Honestly him and Hakeem are really the only ones that were at least good at both of those things together, without having just sheer mass(Shaq). He had an array, and really a complete offensive repertoire of moves. Out of all the centers I've seen, only him Hakeem and Shaq have that. Not Ewing, not Zo, No one else. In all honesty, I think Kareem is the most fundamental player of all time. (I love ya Timmy but...the skyhook is better than your patented 15 foot bankshot)

[Round Mound]

I rank him 3rd in the All Time List after MJ and Wilt

[Kblaze8855]

Im not sure how one can overrate kareem. What did he not do? What did he not do multiple times? 6 mvps he would have been all nba first team 17 years in a row if he had 2 spots like guards and forwards. He made 10 finals and won 6 with 3 or 4 as the best plaer. He likely would have won dpoy. Led the league ij rebounds. Was a 35 15 5 player in his prime. What more could he do?

[Rose]

Im not sure how one can overrate kareem. What did he not do? What did he not do multiple times? 6 mvps he would have been all nba first team 17 years in a row if he had 2 spots like guards and forwards. He made 10 finals and won 6 with 3 or 4 as the best plaer. He likely would have won dpoy. Led the league ij rebounds. Was a 35 15 5 player in his prime. What more could he do?
Not dominant when the only other good player in the 70s was Dr J, who was in the opposite conference. And he also, only ever had teams win when he was with top 10 of all time guys. I mean Bird, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, all won without fellow top 10 guys.

Plus when he won with O and Magic both were top 5-ish players at the time. I don't think McHale, Pippen, Kobe, were top 5-ish for the first couple of C's/Bulls/Lakers championships. Kobe perhaps maybe in 2001. But that's definitely arguable. Pippen probably wasn't until 93. and McHale, was always a borderline top 10 guy, granted he played in the golden era but still.


He's kind of like LeBron, in terms of accomplishments and success. He had all the talent to be the undisputed best, but the mentality of a second fiddle.

[Vienceslav]

Well saying that he doesn

[Rose]

Although, like Fatal said. This was a great Kareem mix. Like most of your mixes you seem to pull rare clips out of nowhere. Or at least seldom seen ones.

[Kblaze8855]

With kareem, wilt, west, reed, cowens, hondo and thurmond types im not sure oscar was top 5 in the early 70s. And magic wasnt considered elite the first 2 rings. I dont think he was even an all star in 82 though he averaged a triple double. Kareem was the mvp in 1980 and a beast all playoffs. Magic top 5 as a rookie is at least shaky. Kareem arguably won 3 rings without a top 5 teammate. I know neither oscar or magic were all nba when kareem won his first 3 rings.

[Rose]

With kareem, wilt, west, reed, cowens, hondo and thurmond types im not sure oscar was top 5 in the early 70s. And magic wasnt considered elite the first 2 rings. I dont think he was even an all star in 82 though he averaged a triple double. Kareem was the mvp in 1980 and a beast all playoffs. Magic top 5 as a rookie is at least shaky. Kareem arguably won 3 rings without a top 5 teammate. I know neither oscar or magic were all nba when kareem won his first 3 rings.
If I'm not mistaken the in 1970 there was only one all NBA team. I may be wrong. for what it's worth wiki has it as only one team http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970%E2%80%9371_NBA_season

The only one I'm definitely willing to admit I may be wrong on his Magic's rookie year. But keep in mind he's also the only rookie to win Finals MVP. And we all know about him starting center. He also started that all star game

This also, sort of brings me to another reason why I feel Kareem is overrated. He let the second year Hakeem-led Rockets beat his Lakers. Which I think is more or less why the playoffs' first round expanded shortly there after to five games. Granted that could be because Magic missed 40 games and then came back, but given the fact Hakeem went to the Finals that year...I'm not 100% sure.

[Kblaze8855]

They had 2 all nba teams since the 50s. Im not sure oscar wasnt second team but i know he wasnt first. He wasnt first some of his last years on the kings. And kareem was the best player in the 80 finals by a mile. A mile. The finals mvp was won because he was hurt and magic stepped up. But kareem was on a rampage. People just rarely lookinto anything but that game 6.

[ThaSwagg3r]

KBlaze, does Kareem have a case for GOAT?

[Fatal9]

This also, sort of brings me to another reason why I feel Kareem is overrated. He let the second year Hakeem-led Rockets beat his Lakers. Which I think is more or less why the playoffs' first round expanded shortly there after to five games. Granted that could be because Magic missed 40 games and then came back, but given the fact Hakeem went to the Finals that year...I'm not 100% sure.
Though Hakeem's Rockets did beat the Lakers in '86...I don't know why that's a reason for KAJ being overrated...he was 39. Most players aren't even in the league by that point and he avereaged 27 ppg on 50% against two of the best/most athletic centers in the league 15+ years younger than him. And I'm guessing nothing is going to be held against Magic (and it really shouldn't, Rockets just played THAT well and matched up well).

Part of me thinks you are referring to Moses in '81 instead of Hakeem in '86 because that was the one where Lakers lost in game 3 and Magic missed half the season (Magic airballed potential series winning layup, shot 2/12 and bricked clutch FTs, KAJ played better than everyone on the floor that game...but I'm guessing Magic won't be blamed at all). But if you're that far off in the series/year you're referring to then maybe you need to look a bit deeper into his career.

[Rose]

Though Hakeem's Rockets did beat the Lakers in '86...I don't know why that's a reason for KAJ being overrated...he was 39. Most players aren't even in the league by that point and he avereaged 27 ppg on 50% against two of the best/most athletic centers in the league 15+ years younger than him. And I'm guessing nothing is going to be held against Magic (and it really shouldn't, Rockets just played THAT well and matched up well).

Part of me thinks you are referring to Moses in '81 instead of Hakeem in '86 because that was the one where Lakers lost in game 3 and Magic missed half the season (Magic airballed potential series winning layup, shot 2/12 and bricked clutch FTs, KAJ played better than everyone on the floor...but I'm guessing Magic won't be blamed at all). But if you're that far off in the series/year you're referring to then maybe you need to look a bit deeper into his career.
Yeah I meant the one where Magic airballed. And if you're the leader, you take the blame when your team loses. Like I said, I'm with Simmons on this one, dude massively underachieved. It's just I see the beauty in his game, and believe he would have been close to as good even if they hadn't had the rule change in college, unlike Simmons.

[Rose]

They had 2 all nba teams since the 50s. Im not sure oscar wasnt second team but i know he wasnt first. He wasnt first some of his last years on the kings. And kareem was the best player in the 80 finals by a mile. A mile. The finals mvp was won because he was hurt and magic stepped up. But kareem was on a rampage. People just rarely lookinto anything but that game 6.
I agree, Kareem was the best on that team. And was the best player in 1980 in general. BUT. I don't think we should underestimate just how good Magic was in general. I think Kareem deserved the MVP more than Magic, because Magic just played well in one game.

[Kblaze8855]

Of course he has a case. He might be the best hs college and nba player ever. Had we not held out of the 68 olympics he might be arguably the greatest at that too

[Rose]

I think he's undeniably the best high school(although Russell has a case I suppose) and almost undeniably the best collegiate player ever. I mean they changed the fricking rule book because he was too dominant.

[Kblaze8855]

Kareem won 6 mvps went to 10 finals and won 6. How is that being a massive under achiever? Maybe a tiny bit if you dont think his teams were good enough in the late 70s. But massive? One man went to a 6th of all finals in history and won 10 percent of them. Isnt it askinga bit much to want 8 to 10 rings?

[ThaSwagg3r]

Of course he has a case. He might be the best hs college and nba player ever. Had we not held out of the 68 olympics he might be arguably the greatest at that too
Where would you rank him of all-time then?

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

I am just curious since your rankings are usually unique.

[NugzHeat3]

Though Hakeem's Rockets did beat the Lakers in '86...I don't know why that's a reason for KAJ being overrated...he was 39. Most players aren't even in the league by that point and he avereaged 27 ppg on 50% against two of the best/most athletic centers in the league 15+ years younger than him. And I'm guessing nothing is going to be held against Magic (and it really shouldn't, Rockets just played THAT well and matched up well).

Part of me thinks you meant to say Moses in '81 instead of Hakeem (who was the MVP that year, not in his second year) because that was the one where Lakers lost in game 3 and Magic missed half the season (Magic airballed potential series winning layup, shot 2/12 and bricked clutch FTs, KAJ played better than everyone on the floor...but I'm guessing Magic won't be blamed at all).
Yeah I think that's what he meant since he's referring to the first round series + Magic's injury.

But either way blaming Kareem for that series is stupid considering he did his thing. He even outrebounded Moses. Although, I'll have to see the game to see who was matchup with who. I saw the highlights of game 1 I think and game 2 in its entirely.

The Lakers had Jim Chones and Landsberger guarding Moses while Willoughby and Paultz spent some time on Jabbar.

Moses and Kareem did guard each other for bits. Moses couldn't do a lot since he was giving up a lot of height but he still played solid defense contesting Jabbar's shots.

Kareem looked a bit slow for Moses though but I wouldn't blame him for the series. Moses had trouble with double teams; not a good passer although style of play certainly has something to do with it.

I generally hate when a player is blamed for a series or underachieving when its clearly beyond his control.

Can't blame Kareem for underachieving when he was there. I also doubt the Rockets win that series if its a best of 7, even best of 5.

Best of 3 is just asking for an upset.

[Pointguard]

I think he has a case for being 2nd in the GOAT argument.

The arguments against him is the before Magic and after Magic arguments are huge. It's like a tale of two cities.

One could be more impressed with others in the 70's despite Kareem being far better than other players.

Potential wasn't approached despite his great career.

He was agile, strong, smart, superskilled, athletic, had the weapon of all weapons, quick for size, a true big man, a big piece of NBA history and was part of the greatest offense ever.

[Fatal9]

Yeah I meant the one where Magic airballed. And if you're the leader, you take the blame when your team loses. Like I said, I'm with Simmons on this one, dude massively underachieved. It's just I see the beauty in his game, and believe he would have been close to as good even if they hadn't had the rule change in college, unlike Simmons.
Have you looked at his career year by year in detail? Something tells me no. Simmons for all the hate he had for Kareem put him no lower than 3rd (behind MJ/Russell), I agreed with him on most things too.

There are legit reasons out there to call Kareem or really any player overrated, but because he lost a freak 3 game series at the end of his prime with one of his teammates being largely responsible for the loss? Need a reason better than that (I'll give you better reasons if you want). Also 3 times in the 70s, the second leading scorer (and player) on his team got hurt during the playoffs when his teams were making a serious run at the title (Oscar in '72, Allen in '74 and Allen again in '77 along with other players too). We have Bulls fans crying and making excuses over Bulls not winning in '95 because they lost Horace Grant, but take away the second or even third best player/scorer from any of these guys (including MJ) who led their teams to championships...are they winning? He has his failures like anyone (you're going to if you are elite player for 15+ years), but lot of misunderstanding surrounding his career in the 70s too. People blame him for missing the playoffs for example in '75, not knowing it was because his team went 3-14 without him but when he actually played? They were on pace to challenge for top seed in the conference.

[winwin]

http://www.achievement.org/achievers/abd0/photos/abd0-002a.gif

-----------

http://blog.measurableadvancement.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/blacksportslegends1.jpg

In 1967, some of the nation's top black athletes came to Cleveland to support Muhammad Ali: Front row: Bill Russell, Ali, Jim Brown, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (formerly Lew Alcindor). Back row: Mayor Carl Stokes, Walter Beach, Bobby Mitchell, Sid Williams, Curtis McClinton, Willie Davis, Jim Shorter and John Wooten.

--------------

http://kareemabduljabbar.com/blog/images/kareem_ali.jpg

[eliteballer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRkcqiuqKxQ&feature=related&t=0m59s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRkcqiuqKxQ&feature=related&t=1m16s

[magnax1]

Kareem won 6 mvps went to 10 finals and won 6. How is that being a massive under achiever? Maybe a tiny bit if you dont think his teams were good enough in the late 70s. But massive? One man went to a 6th of all finals in history and won 10 percent of them. Isnt it askinga bit much to want 8 to 10 rings?
He only made two finals in the 70s though. You can give him a pass on some of those years, with the injuries to himself and some team mates, but overall? Not really any excuse. Especially in the late 70s, where he just didn't play as well as he could have. I don't really care that he didn't win, but what he did when he didn't win was often times far below what he showed he was capable of.

[Rose]

Have you looked at his career year by year in detail? Something tells me no. Simmons for all the hate he had for Kareem put him no lower than 3rd (behind MJ/Russell), I agreed with him on most things too.

There are legit reasons out there to call Kareem or really any player overrated, but because he lost a freak 3 game series at the end of his prime with one of his teammates being largely responsible for the loss? Need a reason better than that (I'll give you better reasons if you want). Also 3 times in the 70s, the second leading scorer (and player) on his team got hurt during the playoffs when his teams were making a serious run at the title (Oscar in '72, Allen in '74 and Allen again in '77 along with other players too). We have Bulls fans crying and making excuses over Bulls not winning in '95 because they lost Horace Grant, but take away the second or even third best player/scorer from any of these guys (including MJ) who led their teams to championships...are they winning? He has his failures like anyone (you're going to if you are elite player for 15+ years), but lot of misunderstanding surrounding his career in the 70s too. People blame him for missing the playoffs for example in '75, not knowing it was because his team went 3-14 without him but when he actually played? They were on pace to challenge for top seed in the conference.
No, I said that was another reason. I had more reasons when I started talking about it.

I've given the guy his props, I just feel he underachieved. I mean the 70s was easily the worst era in basketball history. And he(and also Dr J, to a lesser extent) walked away with how many titles? I see a guy like LeBron, lead his team past the Pistons(granted Boobie won game 6, but he didn't slack off either) Carried them to the ECF back to back years. With less talent than Kareem had.

[Kblaze8855]

Something tells me that if 6 rings and 10 finals doesnt please people they just arent gonna be pleased. Its an absurd level of success and nobody but russell did any more. And if all you fall short of is russell i cant say you should have done more.

[eliteballer]

[QUOTE]Erving quickly established himself as a force and gained a reputation for hard and ruthless dunking. He scored 27.3 points per game as a rookie, was selected to the All-ABA Second Team, made the ABA All-Rookie Team, and finished second to Artis Gilmore for the ABA Rookie of the Year Award. He led the Squires into the Eastern Division Finals, where they lost to the Rick Barry-led New York Nets.

[B]When he became eligible for the NBA draft in 1972, the Milwaukee Bucks picked him in the first round (12th overall). This move would have brought him together with Oscar Robertson and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Instead, the 6 feet 7 inches (2.01 m), 210-pound (95 kg) Erving signed a contract with the Atlanta Hawks before the 1972

[Kblaze8855]

Doc has a lot of almost epic situations. Its said his games with Pistol Pete in the preseason were among the most exciting ever. And when the Nets joined the NBA they offered Doc t othe Knicks in return for waiving the "invasion fee" they demanded but the Knicks said no. Would have been Doctor J, Earl Monroe, Mcadoo, and old Frazier.

[Pointguard]

Something tells me that if 6 rings and 10 finals doesnt please people they just arent gonna be pleased. Its an absurd level of success and nobody but russell did any more. And if all you fall short of is russell i cant say you should have done more.

I don't think his success was on the measure of Jordan's by any measuring stick. MJ was more thoroughly dominant - you couldn't beat him in the game, you couldn't win against him, his position was unquestionable. What Rick Barry did in the 70's was more impressive than what Kareem did. There's none of that going on in MJ's career. Except maybe one could put Magic in that prestigious position.

After '83 Kareem is on a boat where Magic is the engine, the captain, the decision maker and the guide. Kareem had an impressive year in '86 but it was Magic's team. Magic kept Kareem alert, anticipating and in the game. In '79 Kareem was very much the opposite and looked like he might retire in a few years.

[Legends66NBA7]

:ohwell:

Seriously ?! Did not know about that one. Would have been an epic trio, no question. I wonder if Kareem even stays longer or even retire in Milwaukee.

[Replay32]

Kareem Overrated? :wtf: Now I know why I stop coming to this site. Many people believe Kareem was the greatest basketball player of all time (although I don't believe you can have only 1 GOAT in a team game. GOAT should be separated by position).

IMO Kareem is the greatest center of all time. If you look at his whole body of work; High School, College, and the Pros, kareem's accomplishments and stats can't be denied.

If anything Kareem doesn't get enough praise on how great he truly was.

[Keith]

I don't think his success was on the measure of Jordan's by any measuring stick. MJ was more thoroughly dominant - you couldn't beat him in the game, you couldn't win against him, his position was unquestionable. What Rick Barry did in the 70's was more impressive than what Kareem did. There's none of that going on in MJ's career. Except maybe one could put Magic in that prestigious position.

After '83 Kareem is on a boat where Magic is the engine, the captain, the decision maker and the guide. Kareem had an impressive year in '86 but it was Magic's team. Magic kept Kareem alert, anticipating and in the game. In '79 Kareem was very much the opposite and looked like he might retire in a few years.

KAJ was unstoppable.
NCAA outlawed the dunk shot because of his dominance
most points (38,387)
Most blocks
6 MVP's
18 All star appearances
First and only player named NCAA Basketball Tournament's Most Outstanding Player three times

At the time of his retirement, Abdul-Jabbar was the NBA's all-time leader in points scored, games played, minutes played, field goals made, field goal attempts, blocked shots, defensive rebounds, and personal fouls.

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[PHILA]

he was a great high post passer from games i've seen of him from '77-'80

There was a 1980 Lakers vs. Bulls game on WiltatKansas old channel showing KAJ's beautiful passing abilities. Below we can see him & Big O toying with the Bullets. :applause:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzNMqC69qZc#t=19m51s

[jlauber]

I don't think his success was on the measure of Jordan's by any measuring stick. MJ was more thoroughly dominant - you couldn't beat him in the game, you couldn't win against him, his position was unquestionable. What Rick Barry did in the 70's was more impressive than what Kareem did. There's none of that going on in MJ's career. Except maybe one could put Magic in that prestigious position.

After '83 Kareem is on a boat where Magic is the engine, the captain, the decision maker and the guide. Kareem had an impressive year in '86 but it was Magic's team. Magic kept Kareem alert, anticipating and in the game. In '79 Kareem was very much the opposite and looked like he might retire in a few years.

I agree 100%. As great as Kareem was, I have long maintained that he could have been greater. His first ten seasons, while brilliant individually, were somewhat of a disappointment in terms of team success...in perhaps the weakest era of champions in NBA history.

Magic elevated Kareem's play in his last ten seasons.

Jordan, Russell, Magic, and perhaps Duncan...the greatest "winners" in NBA history.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Sometimes I think that Kareem was the greatest player ever. Almost every game I see of him from '80 or '81 and earlier is impressive and most after that as well. I think that his peak('77) was wasted and he did about everything he could and was pretty much a one man team. His '74 finals run seems like it was probably incredible, but he just fell short(and he was putting the team on his back by that point).

His 1980 playoff run as well as his finals series(should've won finals MVP) are also criminally underrated. Most of the games from that run are available and the entire finals series is. I recommend that everyone watches them.

Despite winning finals MVPs, he could've won 4 more. He was drafted by a 27 win expansion team and turned them into a 55 win contender, yet didn't win MVP that year. He won 60 games and seemed to be a superior player to Cowens in every way in '73, and Cowens was arguably not even the best player on his own team, yet Kareem didn't win MVP.

Then there's '79 when Moses didn't win any more games than Kareem, yet won MVP over him. Or '81, when I think he should have won again as he led the Lakers to a 28-17 record without Magic.

Jordan fans talk about the voters getting tired of voting for him, and that may be true to some extent in a year like '97. But it seems like the same could be said for Kareem, except in more different seasons.

It's too bad they had the mini-series in the 80's if you didn't have a good enough regular season record, otherwise, I have my doubts that they lose in '81. Many coaches and players hated those best of 3 series because they felt like it didn't really determine who the best team was. Think about how many more upsets there would have been had they kept that format.

[The Iron Fist]

He only made two finals in the 70s though. You can give him a pass on some of those years, with the injuries to himself and some team mates, but overall? Not really any excuse. Especially in the late 70s, where he just didn't play as well as he could have. I don't really care that he didn't win, but what he did when he didn't win was often times far below what he showed he was capable of.
By that token,

Jordan made no finals in the 80s.You can give him a pass on some of those years, with the injuries to himself and some team mates, but overall? Not really any excuse. Especially in the late 80s, where he just didn't play as well as he could have. I don't really care that he didn't win, but what he did when he didn't win was often times far below what he showed he was capable of.

Kareem - GOAT

[magnax1]

By that token,

Jordan made no finals in the 80s.You can give him a pass on some of those years, with the injuries to himself and some team mates, but overall? Not really any excuse. Especially in the late 80s, where he just didn't play as well as he could have. I don't really care that he didn't win, but what he did when he didn't win was often times far below what he showed he was capable of.

Kareem - GOAT
Jordan's excuse is obvious. His teams sucked until 90, and he did play as well of he was capable of, and also played far better in the playoffs then in the regular season. The two cases are not at all similar. Kareem's play in 73, 78 and 79 just weren't up to his standards, and he could've gone much further if he played as well as he was capable of. Especially in 79, considering how much better he played the next season.

[Fatal9]

Especially in 79, considering how much better he played the next season.

Really I mean...out of all the years you pick this one?

How was it Kareem's fault that his backcourt was defensively a sieve and got torched to the tune of 31 ppg by Gus Williams (DJ killed them too)? He averaged like 29/12/5/5 on 56% (probably well above 60+ TS% considering he averaged 64 TS% for the playoffs) in the series against the Sonics. The only game they won was the one where he made game clinching clutch FTs. Two of the games they lost came at the buzzer, one with Nixon missing shot at buzzer and the other with KAJ blocking Sikma's shot and it ending up in DJ's hands who made a buzzer shot to send it to OT. And the only reason they were playing the Sonics in the first place was because Kareem made a series winning shot in the do or die game vs. Nuggets in the previous series.

Adrian Dantley was getting benched in the series because of his defense (not surprising).


Lakers Can't Slow Williams

http://news.google.ca/newspapers?id=YGwyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=6LEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3702,4774916

In some games it looked like the Fourth of July the way the Laker guards were being lit up on defense.

"It looks like he's playing with no one in front of him," West said.

One significant change for LA: Don Ford is now starting at forward instead of Adrian Dantley, who s healthy again. Rea- son, according to West, is defense.


Next year, he averaged basically the same numbers against the Sonics and they dealt with them easily in 5 games. Difference? Finally had a guy in Cooper who could keep guys like Williams from scoring like MJ, Dantley was gone (addition by subtraction it seems for most teams) and they finally had a legit PF instead of Wilkes (and of course Magic).

[Kblaze8855]

I dont think its as simple as his numbers going up or down in the playoffs. His numbers went down in the playoffs the year he won his first ring. you could argue he had better numbers in 6 playoffs runs that ended in losses. he put up 35/17/4 and lost.29/18/5 and lost. 32/16/5 and lost. 35/18/4 and lost. You listed two seasons where he put up 27/14/4 and 29/13/5/4/1 on 52 and 58% shooting as not being good enough. he goes down putting up 32/12/3/3 and 29/16/8/6 and you say had he played to his potential they could have done more? Well why didnt they go any farther that year than when he had 5 40 point games in 10 and the 5 times he didnt drop 40 he had:

27/16/7
28/14/7/4
36/26
30/10/5
21/20/8/7
30/17/4

?

those are his only non 40 point games those playoffs. And he had 17, 18, 18, and 19 rebounds in the 40+ point games. 9 blocks in one of them.

They went out same round as he did in 79. but its as simple as Kareem not doing enough?

He played like god on earth and went out in the same round.

If ever there is reason to take a step back and look at why a team loses(beyond its star players ability) its when guys like Kareem, MJ, and Wilt lose while playing at the level they did. the worst playoff run of his 70s career would make him a first ballot hall of famer if he did anything like it on a regular basis during his career.

But we say he didnt do enough?

You go down putting up 37/25/8 I gotta look for a reason other than you just not stepping up. Not like he was going out quietly. He put up 26/13 in the worst elimination game of his pre 80s career.

Guy wins 6 rings, 6 MVPs, and makes 10 finals and gets hated on for not playing better in the playoffs when hes often performing at a level not normal even for other top 6 all time players just feels petty.

We really saying he should have been like 10 of 14 instead of 6 of 10?

At some point you just do all you can reasonably do. I dont think its reasonable to ask anyone to win more than 6 rings or make more than 10 finals. Not like he was a tag long guy in the 80s. he was 35 leading the playoffs in scoring and at 38 was dropping 30/17/8 one game and 36 and 29 to close out the celtics at age 38.

He really past the "What more do you want?" point I think.

complaining about the career success of a guy like Kareem is like saying if Gates really worked hard he could have had 100 billion isntead of 60. Its just kinda...___ to me. Very ___.

[jlauber]

I don't have a problem with those that claim Kareem as the GOAT. He has a solid case, especially over a 20 year career.

I personally believe he could have done more, but that is not saying he didn't do enough. Six MVPs and six rings along with several of the greatest individual seasons in NBA history made a pretty strong case.

IMHO, Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, and Kareem all have the strongest cases, and then Shaq, Duncan, and even Bird (I personally don't have Bird in that category, but many other's do.)

I can live with any of them being considered GOAT. Most today would pick MJ, and the majority of those in my generation would probably take Russell (if they didn't take MJ.)

But, back to OP...I watched Kareem from the mid-60's on, and he was as skilled as any player that has ever played the game.

[magnax1]

Really I mean...out of all the years you pick this one?

How was it Kareem's fault that his backcourt was defensively a sieve and got torched to the tune of 31 ppg by Gus Williams (DJ killed them too)? He averaged like 29/12/5/5 on 56% (probably well above 60+ TS% considering he averaged 64 TS% for the playoffs) in the series against the Sonics. The only game they won was the one where he made game clinching clutch FTs. Two of the games they lost came at the buzzer, one with Nixon missing shot at buzzer and the other with KAJ blocking Sikma's shot and it ending up in DJ's hands who made a buzzer shot to send it to OT. And the only reason they were playing the Sonics in the first place was because Kareem made a series winning shot in the do or die game vs. Nuggets in the previous series.

Adrian Dantley was getting benched in the series because of his defense (not surprising).


Lakers Can't Slow Williams

http://news.google.ca/newspapers?id=YGwyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=6LEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3702,4774916

In some games it looked like the Fourth of July the way the Laker guards were being lit up on defense.

"It looks like he's playing with no one in front of him," West said.

One significant change for LA: Don Ford is now starting at forward instead of Adrian Dantley, who s healthy again. Rea- son, according to West, is defense.


Next year, he averaged basically the same numbers against the Sonics and they dealt with them easily in 5 games. Difference? Finally had a guy in Cooper who could keep guys like Williams from scoring like MJ, Dantley was gone (addition by subtraction it seems for most teams) and they finally had a legit PF instead of Wilkes (and of course Magic).
79 Playoffs-
46 mpg
29-12-5
80 playoffs-
41 mpg
32-12-3
That was my point....
What you said has almost nothing to do with how Kareem played. You're bringing up his team mates, when I said Kareem's play was not as good as it could've been, and it obviously wasn't as he had a far better season the next year.
As for his team, it was talented, like it or not. It was basically the same team as the next year, except trading Dantley for Cooper and Magic. The only real big issue they had was Ron Boone was pretty god awful at that point. Jamaal Wilkes at PF was never really an issue, they played him at PF a ton the next year and the warriors won a championship with a worse version of him playing quite a lot of PF (at least in the finals, I haven't watched their whole playoff run) I'm not saying they were championship caliber, but you saying "out of all the years you could pick" Like they were God awful is revisionist history. They definitely could've done better if Kareem played as well as he did the next year.
As for Gus Williams, he played nearly that well in every round, and better in some. It's not like him going off was some uncommon occurrence.

[Kblaze8855]

You're bringing up his team mates, when I said Kareem's play was not as good as it could've been, and it obviously wasn't as he had a far better season the next year.

So pretty much...when he isnt the best hes ever been you feel he could have been better....and use that as a negative..no matter how well he actually played?

[Kblaze8855]

I should have fit this clip in somewhere:

http://www.blinkx.com/watch-video/kareem-abdul-jabbar-in-airplane/mqZAyr66wU1ctvv28Co6hw

30 years later people still saying he didnt do enough

[Jacks3]

:oldlol:

[jlip]

I should have fit this clip in somewhere:

http://www.blinkx.com/watch-video/kareem-abdul-jabbar-in-airplane/mqZAyr66wU1ctvv28Co6hw

30 years later people still saying he didnt do enough

CLASSIC!

[ThaRegul8r]

Simmons for all the hate he had for Kareem put him no lower than 3rd (behind MJ/Russell)

Personal feelings one has toward a player (negative or positive) should have no place when it comes to all-time rankings. If one is unable to put those aside and use some measure of objectivity, then one has no business speaking on the subject.

[magnax1]

So pretty much...when he isnt the best hes ever been you feel he could have been better....and use that as a negative..no matter how well he actually played?
1980 isn't the best he had ever been....

[Fatal9]

Jamaal Wilkes at PF was never really an issue, they played him at PF a ton the next year and the warriors won a championship with a worse version of him playing quite a lot of PF (at least in the finals, I haven't watched their whole playoff run) I'm not saying they were championship caliber, but you saying "out of all the years you could pick" Like they were God awful is revisionist history. They definitely could've done better if Kareem played as well as he did the next year.
It was never really an issue? If you're going to make these claims I expect you to know a little about the make up of the team. The weakness of the '78, '79 Laker teams was rebounding. In '79 they were ranked 20th out of 22, in '78 16th out of 22. And that's mainly because they had no one at PF (wish I could find an article I had about how Jerry West badly wanted one after the '78 playoffs), and at the same time those Seattle teams were known to have a big frontline. You can blame Kareem some for this too, even if he had solid rebounding seasons (#2 in the league behind Moses in '79). Wilkes/Dantley at PF? Not going to work, especially if you don't have guards who don't rebound either (like a Magic later on...I love Nixon, think he's underrated but he's literally one of the worst rebounding players ever). Anyone who has watched Dantley knows that he was a great offensive rebounder, but he never defensive rebounded (he would leak out as soon as the shot went up...didn't give a single *** about defensive boards). Perimeter defense and rebounding (due to no PF) were major issues with that team and they fixed them next season.

And Lakers had Haywood/Chones at the PF spot for all of regular season in '80 (then Chones mainly in playoffs because they told Haywood to gtfo).


I'm not saying they were championship caliber, but you saying "out of all the years you could pick" Like they were God awful is revisionist history. They definitely could've done better if Kareem played as well as he did the next year.
I didn't say they were god awful. I pointed out that "out of all the years you could pick", you picked a year where Kareem actually played really well in the playoffs as an example of him underperforming (29/13/5/4 on 58 FG%, 64 TS%...insane efficiency for that sort of volume). The team did have issues that kept them from winning however and Seattle exploited both their main weaknesses (as they were one of the best rebounding teams in the league and had great perimeter scorers who could go off).

As for Gus Williams, he played nearly that well in every round, and better in some. It's not like him going off was some uncommon occurrence.
He averaged 19 ppg in the regular season and less than 25 ppg for the rest of the playoff run...and him averaging 31 ppg for a 5 game series isn't an uncommon occurence? Most recaps from the series point out the bad Laker perimeter defense combined with Williams/DJ going off. In the article I linked, it says he matched his career high game and makes a joke of the Laker perimeter defense...and this wasn't an uncommon occurrence?


I don't even really care about criticism as long as it's fair. '73? Definitely fair. Couple of other years too. But you list '79 as him not playing up to standards when he not only averaged insane numbers (listed above), consistently played well game to game, had numerous clutch moments, hit the series winning shot in a do or die game...as a reason he is overrated?

[Kblaze8855]

I just dont understand the complaint. If he did better they could have done more...when they did exactly the same as when he was dropping 40/20 nightly?

If you lose people find something to complain about. He won it all doing 27/17 and lost doing 35/17 on much better shooting. Won doing 32/12 and lost a couple years earlier doing 35/18/4.

Looks to me like the age old case of just hating when someone loses no matter what.

Kareem did more heavy lifting than anyone in the 70s. Im not gonna act like he just needed to play better to go further when he was going out in the same round doing numbers Shaq would have to envy with the people who beat him rarely outplaying him.

About the only two times I can recall hearing Kareem just got outplayed were by Wilt in I wanna say 72 and then Nate. Two stories of you really getting worked...and its by wilt and Nate? And you more than held your own? Im not hating.

[magnax1]

It was never really an issue? If you're going to make these claims I expect you to know a little about the make up of the team. The weakness of the '78, '79 Laker teams was rebounding. In '79 they were ranked 20th out of 22, in '78 16th out of 22. And that's mainly because they had no one at PF, and at the same time those Seattle teams were known to have a big frontline. You can blame Kareem some for this too, even if he had solid rebounding seasons (#2 in the league behind Moses in '79). Wilkes/Dantley at PF? Not going to work, especially if you don't have guards who don't rebound either (like a Magic later on...I love Nixon, think he's underrated but he's literally one of the worst rebounding players ever). Anyone who has watched Dantley knows that he was a great offensive rebounder, but he never defensive rebounded (he would leak out as soon as the shot went up...didn't give a single *** about defensive boards). Perimeter defense and rebounding (due to no PF) were major issues with that team and they fixed them next season.
Rebounding was a weakness, but specifically Jamaal at PF wasn't. They played him at that position lots in the next season and got away with it. Chones himself was a pretty average rebounder anyway if I remember correctly. Or at least he looked that way in the playoffs in 80. Adding Magic at SF/PG was probably a bigger reason for their improvement in rebounding then moving Jamaal to SF for part of the game.


I didn't say they were god awful. I pointed out that "out of all the years you could pick", you picked a year where Kareem actually played really well in the playoffs as an example of him underperforming (29/13/5/4 on 58 FG%, 64 TS%...insane efficiency for that sort of volume). The team did have issues that kept them from winning however and Seattle exploited both their main weaknesses (as they were one of the best rebounding teams in the league and had great perimeter scorers who could go off).
He played really well, and that's great. He could've played better though, and I don't see how you can't hold that against him. Everything I've read said Kareem decided to give a full effort that next season, and ended up playing like the best player in the league again because of it. I don't hold his 81 year against him, because I don't think he could've done any better. It's not about his team, or him winning, so stop talking about it. I'm just saying it's disappointing that he showed he was capable of more in almost the exact same situation, but for whatever reason didn't play to that same level.


He averaged 19 ppg in the regular season and less than 25 ppg for the rest of the playoff run...and him averaging 31 ppg for a 5 game series isn't an uncommon occurence? Most recaps from the series point out the bad Laker perimeter defense combined with Williams/DJ going off. In the article I linked, it says he matched his career high game and makes a joke of the Laker perimeter defense...and this wasn't an uncommon occurrence?
He averaged 27 ppg in the playoffs, and played as well in the finals as he did against the Lakers, so obviously the Lakers series wasn't some sort of anomaly caused by atrocious Lakers D. He could go off for 30 ppg. I'm not even saying the Lakers perimeter D wasn't bad. It basically exactly the same the next year when they won the title though. Cooper could keep some guys contained better, but as a whole, it only improved slightly.


I don't even really care about criticism as long as it's fair. '73? Definitely fair. Couple of other years too. But you list '79 as him not playing up to standards when he not only averaged insane numbers (listed above), consistently played well game to game, had numerous clutch moments, hit the series winning shot in a do or die game...as a reason he is overrated?
I don't think I ever said he was over rated. I'd be fine with people putting him 2-4 all time. I don't think he has a good case over Jordan, but whatever. I don't think he's over rated though.

[Fatal9]

also...this putback dunk from that series I always though was insane (remember he's 32 here), lot like the one he had in game 7 vs. Warriors in '77:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4zx3OQMdVc&#t=4m56s

[The Iron Fist]

79 Playoffs-
46 mpg
29-12-5
80 playoffs-
41 mpg
32-12-3
That was my point....
What you said has almost nothing to do with how Kareem played. You're bringing up his team mates, when I said Kareem's play was not as good as it could've been, and it obviously wasn't as he had a far better season the next year.
As for his team, it was talented, like it or not. It was basically the same team as the next year, except trading Dantley for Cooper and Magic. The only real big issue they had was Ron Boone was pretty god awful at that point. Jamaal Wilkes at PF was never really an issue, they played him at PF a ton the next year and the warriors won a championship with a worse version of him playing quite a lot of PF (at least in the finals, I haven't watched their whole playoff run) I'm not saying they were championship caliber, but you saying "out of all the years you could pick" Like they were God awful is revisionist history. They definitely could've done better if Kareem played as well as he did the next year.
As for Gus Williams, he played nearly that well in every round, and better in some. It's not like him going off was some uncommon occurrence.

88-89 Bulls ECF
Cartwright
Corzine
Davis
Grant
Haley
Hodges
Jones
Nealy
Jordan
Paxson
Perdue
Pippen
Pressley
Sellers
Vincent
Wood


89-90 Bulls ECF
Armstrong
Cartwright
Davis
Grant
Haley
Hodges
Jordan
King
Lett
Nealy
Paxson
Purdue
Pippen
Sanders

90-91 Bulls champs
Armstrong
Cartwright
Grant
Hodges
Dopson
Jordan
King
Levingston
Paxson
Purdue
Pippen
Williams


Pretty much the same team for 3 straight years.



Jordan obviously didn't do enough with the first two teams listed.


But then again, thats based on you nitpicking about 3 ppg.

[IGOTGAME]

Yep, he is underrated. Here is a post from another board I post at around this time of year. Apparently, the guys that get it all think Hakeem was better than Kareem. Also, it is unknown whether Kareem could do his thing in the league now.


In my opinion Hakeem was a better Basketball Player then Kareem. I think numerous reasons put Hakeem ahead of Kareem.

When Kareem played in the 70's and during his haydays the average height of players in the NBA was about 6'6", 205 lbs. By the 90's the average height was between 6'7" and 6'8" 215+ lbs. That may not seem like a huge difference but it most definitely is. A 6'7" body takes up much more space then a 6'6" etc, especially when you consider wingspan. Kareem stood 7'2", 8" taller than the average player which is why his skyhook was so effective, no one could simply contest it. To me that is somewhat of a crutch, if someone only has to perform one move to score then their arsenal and skill as a basketball player is drastically limited. Kareem was also 225 lbs, very very skinny and frail compared to the players that played in the 90's and now a days. With bigger bodies comes a more physical game, that easy first step(arguably one of the most important things in basketball, the first step is what separates good from great) he had into the key would be drastically different with bigger bodies knocking him around, a smooth sky hook would not be nearly as easy to accomplish wish a 7'0" 285 lb muscular center putting a body on him. His durability would also come into question playing against bigger bodies and his first step would leave him faster, much like we see in today's game.

A common misconception is that Hakeem was 7'0", he even admits himself that he was 6'10". This only puts him 2.5 to 3" taller then the NBA average during his era. Hakeem HAD to develop more skills to score, rebound, block, defend than Kareem ever did simply out of necessity. Hakeem is a much more complete basketball player than Kareem was, Hakeem is the gold standard of what a basketball player should be, a completely unselfish player that was defensive minded. He just happened to be a center. He is 7th in steals all time, most people are impressed by this stat yet they don't consider it to be as important as it really is. A steal keeps your opponent off the board and gives your team an opportunity to put more points on the board. Potentially a steal offers you a huge point swing. Basketball is a game where one point is all it takes to win, 1-0 is a win. Defense wins games.

Also, Hakeem did block Kareem's skyhook standing 4 inches shorter with considerably less wingspan, imagine what players now a days that jump higher than Hakeem did. You guys point to a old Kareem schooling young Hakeem. Kareem had only played 7 years of basketball in his life when he was drafted number one overall, I would hope a guy with 30+ years of basketball experience would show up a guy who has played for 7 years. If you look at Hakeem's stats he didn't hit is prime years till he was in his 30's, way behind what most prime's are.

Anyways, in my opinion Hakeem is a much more complete basketball PLAYER, does he have 38K points, no. "Only" 27-28K, but his talent and skills make him a player that could play universally. That much is proven, whether Kareem would stand up in today's game is unknown, only speculation.

http://www.operationsports.com/forums/nba-2k/513146-hakeem-olajuwon-kareem-abdul-jabbar-10.html#post2042927115

[PHILA]

Hakeem is a much more complete basketball player than Kareem was:facepalm


whether Kareem would stand up in today's game is unknown, only speculation.
Is he also another "poor mans Bynum"? :facepalm

[IGOTGAME]

:facepalm


Is he also another "poor mans Bynum"? :facepalm

I am just floored by all of this. it is absurd.

[IGOTGAME]

is there video of Kareem's 46 point game against the Rockets in '86?

[Fatal9]

is there video of Kareem's 46 point game against the Rockets in '86?
no, but here's 40 pts vs. rookie Hakeem...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q5QEFLydLA


It doesn't really mean much, impressive to point out, but early in his career Hakeem was a shytty inexperienced post defender who gambled way too much. Great team defender the moment he entered the league because of his shot blocking but not that great in the post until later on. It doesn't say much about how they'd play against each other prime vs. prime, though I expect KAJ would give Hakeem more trouble than he would to Kareem considering KAJ had 4-5 inches on him (would be able to contest Hakeem's fadeaways really well).

KAJ had a better, more consistent career easily, but you can argue Hakeem's prime was as good as anyone, including Kareem.

[NugzHeat3]

is there video of Kareem's 46 point game against the Rockets in '86?

That game is a great example of Kareem's longevity but a few things to put that game in perspective.

- Kareem is single covered throughout (according to the recaps)

- Kareem has about 6 inches on Hakeem (6'10 vs 7'4) plus about 15 pounds and a stronger lower body.


He may not even be 6-10. His coach, Bill Fitch, once said he was really 6-9 1/2. "I'm 6-11," Olajuwon said. "I want to get that clear. I hear people are saying I'm 6-9, 6-10. I am 6-11." Said Riley: "I'd like to measure him. He looks like he plays 7-5. He seems to me to be about 6-10. I've seen him next to Kareem. Danny Schayes, Denver's 6-11 backup center, said: "I'd make him about 6-10." Whatever, Olajuwon concedes that he is less suited to defending against Abdul- Jabbar than his 7-4 teammate, Ralph Sampson. "Kareem has too much of a height advantage," Olajuwon says. "They say he's 7-2. I don't think he's 7-2. I've seen other players with him. I'd say he's 7-4.

- Due to the huge size difference, Hakeem is forced to gamble and overplay although I'm not sure if that's by design or because Hakeem chose to do so himself.


The Rockets opened with this failsafe strategy, an inventive approach to defense in which Olajuwon neither stayed behind his opposing pivot and leaned on him nor fronted him. Instead, he lurked in Abdul-Jabbar's shadow until the ball came toward him and then ran around him too late to intercept it. The legend then strolled to a stuff and the stuff of legends continued to accumulate.

In the post-mortem it was never made explicit why the Rockets continued to impale themselves with Olajuwon's intoxicated ploy. If anything was apparent, however, it was that he was supposed to have help.

Never did the guards sag back to lend comfort and never did Sampson bebop over from his onerous duty of guarding Kurt Rambis. It must be noted, though, that Sampson did a superlative job on Rambis, holding him to zero points, which is to say five below his season average. Never did Rambis threaten to break loose.

^That is just bad defense more than anything else. The Lakers were great at feeding the post too so all you had to do is give the ball down low. I'd like to watch the game though since recaps aren't always to the point.

In a way it reminds me of the time Jordan tried guarding Magic in the post in the 1991 finals; he was just forced to overplay because of the size difference and when he'd stick with him, Magic would spin baseline and either score or draw a foul.

[Pointguard]

Jordan fans talk about the voters getting tired of voting for him, and that may be true to some extent in a year like '97. But it seems like the same could be said for Kareem, except in more different seasons.

It's too bad they had the mini-series in the 80's if you didn't have a good enough regular season record, otherwise, I have my doubts that they lose in '81. Many coaches and players hated those best of 3 series because they felt like it didn't really determine who the best team was. Think about how many more upsets there would have been had they kept that format.
I think Kareem would have more years as best player than any other player if the voting was correct. But that's more of a statement of contemporaries. IMHO, any of the guys in the consensus top ten would definitely be in the same position.

[Pointguard]

I agree 100%. As great as Kareem was, I have long maintained that he could have been greater. His first ten seasons, while brilliant individually, were somewhat of a disappointment in terms of team success...in perhaps the weakest era of champions in NBA history.

Magic elevated Kareem's play in his last ten seasons.

Jordan, Russell, Magic, and perhaps Duncan...the greatest "winners" in NBA history.

Yeah, I was going to say those guys and Bird would have came out of the 70's in much better shape than Kareem in wins.

[millwad]

That game is a great example of Kareem's longevity but a few things to put that game in perspective.

- Kareem is single covered throughout (according to the recaps)

- Kareem has about 6 inches on Hakeem (6'10 vs 7'4) plus about 15 pounds and a stronger lower body.


It should also be mentioned that the one 40 point game Kareem had vs Hakeem was in Hakeem's rookie season. And Hakeem in his 2nd season as a pro toy'd the Lakers and Kareem and led his Rocket team to an easy 4-1 win in the WCF of the '86 playoffs. That team had 3 HOF:ers on it.

And even though I like Hakeem more as a player I still have Kareem as my number one center. I have Hakeem and Shaq tied for the 2nd place.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I think Kareem would have more years as best player than any other player if the voting was correct. But that's more of a statement of contemporaries. IMHO, any of the guys in the consensus top ten would definitely be in the same position.

I disagree, regardless of era, it's really rare for a player to be good enough for long enough to be the best player in 10+ seasons and deserve 9 or 10 MVP awards.


Yeah, I was going to say those guys and Bird would have came out of the 70's in much better shape than Kareem in wins.

It all depends on casts. Kareem wasn't exactly fortunate in that regard during the 70's.

But if you're going to talk about competition for Kareem...how about Duncan? Out of all of the top 10 players, he won his rings vs the worst competition.

'99 was obvious. Lakers had talent, but completely dysfunctional with all of that distractions that year. The Knicks also didn't have the talent or the size with Ewing out to give them a real run, and as amazing as that run was, they were the 8th seed and have to rank among the 5 worst finals teams in the past 30+ years.

'03 was also weak. They beat the Lakers, and that's an accomplishment considering they had two top players, but they also didn't have the best chemistry, only won 50 games and had a depleted cast around their stars. But even worse is that the 59 win Kings who many had as the favorite, lost their best player Chris Webber in game 2 of the WCSF and Dallas still barely beat them. But then once again an injury made things easier on the Spurs as Dirk went down with an injury in game 3 of the WCF. The Mavs were a 60 win team themselves, but lost their best player. And the Nets team they beat has to be at best, one of the 3 worst finals teams of the 2000's rivaled by only the '02 Nets and '07 cavs.

'05 at least saw them beat good teams in the finals and conference finals, but '07 was the weakest. The Mavs upset caused Utah to get farther, the '07 Cavs team was for my money the weakest finals team of the decade. And the Suns series was made easier for them by the suspension in game 5.

[NugzHeat3]

It should also be mentioned that the one 40 point game Kareem had vs Hakeem was in Hakeem's rookie season. And Hakeem in his 2nd season as a pro toy'd the Lakers and Kareem and led his Rocket team to an easy 4-1 win in the WCF of the '86 playoffs. That team had 3 HOF:ers on it.

And even though I like Hakeem more as a player I still have Kareem as my number one center. I have Hakeem and Shaq tied for the 2nd place.
Actually, you're wrong.

Kareem had a 40 point game against a rookie Hakeem and two 40+ point games (46, 43) against a sophomore Hakeem. His lowest total against the Rockets was 18 in Hakeem's sophomore year and he was guarded by Sampson that game along was occasional double teaming (according to the recaps).

Not that there's anything wrong with it. With the Rockets/Hakeem's startegy and Hakeem giving up a lot of size, its not hard to see why Kareem was able to score a lot.

You're right though. Hakeem dominated the Lakers in the playoffs but he didn't toy with KAJ. They were rarely matched up.

[Pointguard]

I disagree, regardless of era, it's really rare for a player to be good enough for long enough to be the best player in 10+ seasons and deserve 9 or 10 MVP awards.

You didn't have to be that good. All ten GOAT would have been the best players those years if they were healthy.



It all depends on casts. Kareem wasn't exactly fortunate in that regard during the 70's.

But if you're going to talk about competition for Kareem...how about Duncan? Out of all of the top 10 players, he won his rings vs the worst competition.

'03 was also weak. They beat the Lakers, and that's an accomplishment considering they had two top players, but they also didn't have the best chemistry, only won 50 games and had a depleted cast around their stars. But even worse is that the 59 win Kings who many had as the favorite, lost their best player Chris Webber in game 2 of the WCSF and Dallas still barely beat them. But then once again an injury made things easier on the Spurs as Dirk went down with an injury in game 3 of the WCF. The Mavs were a 60 win team themselves, but lost their best player. And the Nets team they beat has to be at best, one of the 3 worst finals teams of the 2000's rivaled by only the '02 Nets and '07 cavs.

'05 at least saw them beat good teams in the finals and conference finals, but '07 was the weakest. The Mavs upset caused Utah to get farther, the '07 Cavs team was for my money the weakest finals team of the decade. And the Suns series was made easier for them by the suspension in game 5.


Duncan won the most with the least more frequently than anybody else - that's his claim to fame and he could replicate that over and over. Shaq was on better teams at least half of those years. And if Shaq wasn't teamed up with Kobe, Duncan would have pulled off one those years as well. The guy won as much as Shaq, as a contemporary without the great sidekick Shaq had during Duncan's whole career. Amazing when you think about it.

[ShaqAttack3234]

You didn't have to be that good. All ten GOAT would have been the best players those years if they were healthy.

Not if you put their rookie years in place of Kareem's and follow their careers through their first 12 years. Most players simply aren't that good entering the league, and many others aren't that good 12 years in.


Duncan won the most with the least more frequently than anybody else - that's his claim to fame and he could replicate that over and over.

Except this stuff about Duncan winning as a 1 man team is just revisionist history. Back when Duncan was actually winning, his cast was considered very good. Especially from '05-'07.

And the point was that if competition in the 70's is held against Kareem, then why not against Duncan?


The guy won as much as Shaq, as a contemporary without the great sidekick Shaq had during Duncan's whole career. Amazing when you think about it.

Not sure what Shaq has to do with this, but the fact that Duncan won without the great sidekick isn't really notable. The fact that he won 4 titles is notable, but it's not like he didn't have good teams built around him that complemented his strengths, had great depth, played unselfishly and worked hard. And it's also not accurate to just say that better sidekick= better help. A cast is more than 1 player.

[eliteballer]

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o223/JTJTPhotos/NBA/KareemHakeem1_p011.jpg

6 inches, no.

[NugzHeat3]

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o223/JTJTPhotos/NBA/KareemHakeem1_p011.jpg

6 inches, no.
Well, Hakeem is 6'10 and several opponents have complained about Kareem being underlisted at 7'2 and actually being 7'4.

That picture is legit though and does disprove some of those accusations. But Kareem is slouching a bit in that photo FWIW. I'd say 4 is more like it.

[MiseryCityTexas]

I have Jordan as GOAT but Kareem does have a case. I'll have to watch more games he played in and maybe I'll understand him better, stats just don't tell the whole story. :cheers:

lol stats should tell the whole story. hes the nba's all time leading scorer.

[pete's montreux]

Doc has a lot of almost epic situations. Its said his games with Pistol Pete in the preseason were among the most exciting ever. And when the Nets joined the NBA they offered Doc t othe Knicks in return for waiving the "invasion fee" they demanded but the Knicks said no. Would have been Doctor J, Earl Monroe, Mcadoo, and old Frazier.

The official biography of Pete goes into great detail about the entire situation.

[Pointguard]

Not if you put their rookie years in place of Kareem's and follow their careers through their first 12 years. Most players simply aren't that good entering the league, and many others aren't that good 12 years in.
Duncan, Magic, Bird, Magic, Shaq, Hakeem, and Jordan were great players in their second year. And were great 10 years later. I thought Kareem played in '69 right? And I think they all would have won at least one more title on their own backs. Duncan, Magic, Jordan, Hakeem and I think that's underselling them.



Except this stuff about Duncan winning as a 1 man team is just revisionist history. Back when Duncan was actually winning, his cast was considered very good. Especially from '05-'07.

I never said he won as a one man team but I will say he won in years you didn't think his team would win - Duncan was kind of freaky with winning. More than anybody else, cept Russ, I would say he has a way with it. IMHO, If he was healthy as the season closed down last year, he would have won it then too. Not that he was playing great - he just has a knack at winning. He played opposite Shaq in his prime and when Kobe was going 100% on both sides of the floor.

I think the competition and great players of the '00s is much greater than the comp and great players the 70's without question. Duncan jumpstarted a franchise when Utah, Dallas, Lakers, Pheonix , Sacramento, Cavs, were great winning franchises year after year during the decade. And for the most part had solid organization from the Owner, GM down to trainers. Shaq, Kobe, Garnett, Dirk, Wade and Lebron were better than anybody that primed in the '70's outside of KAJ. Tmac, Nash and Iverson were arguably as good as Frazier who was easily the second best player and then its like Bob Lanier, Hayes, McAdoo, Barry? Duncan could have won MVP from his second year on every year and I don't see only one championship. Back then it was a pivot man's league. Magic, Bird and Jordan decentralized the league in the 80's

[IGOTGAME]

Well, Hakeem is 6'10 and several opponents have complained about Kareem being underlisted at 7'2 and actually being 7'4.

That picture is legit though and does disprove some of those accusations. But Kareem is slouching a bit in that photo FWIW. I'd say 4 is more like it.

wow, people using pics to prove height...hmm

[Pointguard]

The official biography of Pete goes into great detail about the entire situation.

You, Kblaze, care to share some more?

[NugzHeat3]

wow, people using pics to prove height...hmm
We don't have official measurements for either Hakeem or Kareem so we have to rely on pics though they do create an illusion at times.

Kareem was measured 7'1 and 3/8th of an inch without shoes in his UCLA days but several guys have complained about him being underlisted.

[QUOTE]

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan, Magic, Bird, Magic, Shaq, Hakeem, and Jordan were great players in their second year. And were great 10 years later. I thought Kareem played in '69 right? And I think they all would have won at least one more title on their own backs. Duncan, Magic, Jordan, Hakeem and I think that's underselling them.

Kareem's rookie year was the '69-'70 season.

None of the players you mentioned were Kareem's equal as a rookie. Only Bird was close, imo considering the turnaround Boston had.

Both Jordan and Magic missed more than half of their second years as well.

As far as their 12th year(last year I'd say Kareem was his best). Duncan had really fallen off by that point('09) and was no longer truly elite. Bird wasn't the same after his 9th season.


I think the competition and great players of the '00s is much greater than the comp and great players the 70's without question. Duncan jumpstarted a franchise when Utah, Dallas, Lakers, Pheonix , Sacramento, Cavs, were great winning franchises year after year during the decade. And for the most part had solid organization from the Owner, GM down to trainers. Shaq, Kobe, Garnett, Dirk, Wade and Lebron were better than anybody that primed in the '70's outside of KAJ. Tmac, Nash and Iverson were arguably as good as Frazier who was easily the second best player and then its like Bob Lanier, Hayes, McAdoo, Barry? Duncan could have won MVP from his second year on every year and I don't see only one championship. Back then it was a pivot man's league. Magic, Bird and Jordan decentralized the league in the 80's

I'm talking about competition as far as teams, which is more important when talking about titles. As I pointed out, competition if anything could be used as a weakness when talking about the teams the Spurs beat to win.

[millwad]

I also feel that Kareem gets too little credit and I used to be one of those who thought he was overrated and only a great winner due playing with all-time greats.

I was so wrong..:facepalm

Kareem had it all and he had amazing longevity, we're talking about a 7'4 guy who played to the age of 41 and he was damn solid even in the end of his career. The last time a guy was as tall as him and who still was a good and versatile player was Ralph Sampson... who managed to play great basketball for 3-4 years before his body totally broke down.

He is easily the greatest center of all-time in my book and he deserves more credit. Hell, I have even seen idiots spam about Kareem getting dominated by Wilt in '72 when in fact Kareem first averaged 40 points on Wilt during the regular season and then went on and outscored Wilt with 23 points a game on better FG% in the playoffs..

Even during his late years he was amazing and he had great scoring games vs Hakeem in '85 and '86, although Hakeem later that year toy'd the Lakers in the playoffs it would be stupid to forget how great and solid Wilt really was even during his last years!

[jlauber]

I also feel that Kareem gets too little credit and I used to be one of those who thought he was overrated and only a great winner due playing with all-time greats.

I was so wrong..:facepalm

Kareem had it all and he had amazing longevity, we're talking about a 7'4 guy who played to the age of 41 and he was damn solid even in the end of his career. The last time a guy was as tall as him and who still was a good and versatile player was Ralph Sampson... who managed to play great basketball for 3-4 years before his body totally broke down.

He is easily the greatest center of all-time in my book and he deserves more credit. Hell, I have even seen idiots spam about Kareem getting dominated by Wilt in '72 when in fact Kareem first averaged 40 points on Wilt during the regular season and then went on and outscored Wilt with 23 points a game on better FG% in the playoffs..

Even during his late years he was amazing and he had great scoring games vs Hakeem in '85 and '86, although Hakeem later that year toy'd the Lakers in the playoffs it would be stupid to forget how great and solid Wilt really was even during his last years!

You are the idiot. EVERYONE who watched the '72 WCF's claimed Wilt outplayed Kareem. Time Magzine even called it a DECISIVE victory. Why? Because Wilt reduced Kareem to throwing up wild prayers in the last four games of that series (three of them Laker wins), AND then crushed Kareem down the stretch in thge 4th quarter of the clinching game six win in MILWAUKEE. Even Kareem's coach acknowledged that WILT was the difference in that series.

And keep in mind that this was a PRIME Kareem, who averaged 35 ppg on 25 FGAs in the regular season, and yet, against the one-on-one defense of a 35 year old Wilt, he averaged 33 ppg on 34 FGAs per game. And Wilt was not only blocking the "sky-hook" repeatedly in that series, he was completely shutting down the lane on ALL Milwaukee shooters.

Now, in '85 and '86, a 37 and 38 year old Kareem, just OBLITERATED the one-on-defense of Hakeem. My god, 33ppg on .634 shooting (yes, .634 shooting.) Kareem shot .500 against Wilt in the '72 regular season, but only .457 against him in the WCF's. How about the '71 regular season against Wilt? .437 covering five games. How about against Wilt in their six H2H games in Chamberlain's LAST season ('73)? .450 (while Wilt shot a mind-numbing .737 against him.)

Even Nate Thurmond was a FAR better defender on a PRIME Kareem. Kareem's HIGH game against Nate was 34 points. In 50+ H2H games. In their THREE straight playoffs battles from '71 thru '73, Kareem averaged 28 ppg on .486, 22.8 ppg on .405, and 22.8 ppg on .428.

Shaq POUNDED Hakeem for 28 ppg on, get this, .595 shooting in the '95 Finals, all while outrebounding and outblocking Hakeem, who could only shoot .483 against him. That was a young Shaq. A couple of years later, Shaq just BLEW Hakeem away, outscoring him, 29 ppg to 13 ppg, and once again, light years ahead in FG%, at .516 to .426.

Two things we NEVER saw. One, a PRIME Kareem against Hakeem. And two, a PRIME Wilt against Kareem. We know that a PRIME Chamberlain crushed many of the same centers that Kareem would face (and most all, over-the-hill at the time), including Thurmond, Reed, and Bellamy, to a FAR greater extent than Kareem ever did.

As for Hakeem...he has become the most over-rated player on this forum. Again, ONE MVP (in a year in which MJ took off), ONE second place finish. TWO 4th place finishes in the MVP balloting. That was it. In EIGHTEEN seasons. He wasn't even considered a Top-TEN player in HALF of the seasons he played in his OWN era. On top of that, he played on EIGHT teams that were eliminated in the FIRST ROUND of the playoffs. Just downright embarrassing.

[Pointguard]

Kareem's rookie year was the '69-'70 season.

None of the players you mentioned were Kareem's equal as a rookie. Only Bird was close, imo considering the turnaround Boston had.

Both Jordan and Magic missed more than half of their second years as well.

As far as their 12th year(last year I'd say Kareem was his best). Duncan had really fallen off by that point('09) and was no longer truly elite. Bird wasn't the same after his 9th season.
Why do you keep bringing up the 12th year? And Kareem's rookie year? Didn't Reed win the MVP that year? I said the decade of the 70's or Before Magic.

True Bird would miss a year but that' doesn't take him out of contention for the three rings he got in a much harder era or possibly achieving 5 MVP's. Same with Magic. The MVPs competing vs Doc J, Moses M, Hakeem, Barkley, Hakeem, Gervin, Dantley, MJ, Magic and Bird themselves seem a bit more stated than Cowens, Walton, McAdoo, Reed. Jordan played great in the post season despite missing those games in his second year. Asking one more MVP would have been easy by his standards in the 70's. IMHO, he definitely would have been more franchise than Kareem those years.


I'm talking about competition as far as teams, which is more important when talking about titles. As I pointed out, competition if anything could be used as a weakness when talking about the teams the Spurs beat to win.
I said, "Utah, Dallas, Lakers, Pheonix , Sacramento, Cavs, were great winning franchises" that SA had to contend with. In the 70's anybody could win it every year.

[millwad]

You are the idiot. EVERYONE who watched the '72 WCF's claimed Wilt outplayed Kareem. Time Magzine even called it a DECISIVE victory. Why? Because Wilt reduced Kareem to throwing up wild prayers in the last four games of that series (three of them Laker wins), AND then crushed Kareem down the stretch in thge 4th quarter of the clinching game six win in MILWAUKEE. Even Kareem's coach acknowledged that WILT was the difference in that series.

Jbieber, you're pathetic. Wilt first got abused in the regular season in '72 and averaged 40 freaking points on Wilt and I've heard MANY say that Wilt was in his defensive prime that year. Nice "prime"...

And in the playoffs, you've only linked one freaking link where some random newspaper said that he "decisively" outplayed Kareem, you still don't know what "decisively" means..:facepalm

Wilt got ABUSED, freaking abused, outscored by 23 points a game and it doesn't end there, Kareem even shot with a better FG% and he averaged more assists as well. Get out of here you idiot..

Now go and find a quote of Kareem's coach when he said that Wilt dominated Kareem over the whole series.. haha..



Now, in '85 and '86, a 37 and 38 year old Kareem, just OBLITERATED the one-on-defense of Hakeem. My god, 33ppg on .634 shooting (yes, .634 shooting.) Kareem shot .500 against Wilt in the '72 regular season, but only .457 against him in the WCF's. How about the '71 regular season against Wilt? .437 covering five games. How about against Wilt in their six H2H games in Chamberlain's LAST season ('73)? .450 (while Wilt shot a mind-numbing .737 against him.)

Ehm, you do realize that you first of all mention Hakeem's rookie season and then in his second season he abused the Lakers and Kareem in the playoffs..:facepalm



Shaq POUNDED Hakeem for 28 ppg on, get this, .595 shooting in the '95 Finals, all while outrebounding and outblocking Hakeem, who could only shoot .483 against him. That was a young Shaq. A couple of years later, Shaq just BLEW Hakeem away, outscoring him, 29 ppg to 13 ppg, and once again, light years ahead in FG%, at .516 to .426.


Yeah, he just crushed Hakeem while getting swept and later saying that Hakeem dusted his butt.. And talking about everyone, go find one idiot who doresn't claim that Shaq got outplayed.. :facepalm

This only shows how pathetic you are, Shaq who got swept and outscored and outplayed by Hakeem was according to you pounding Hakeem, haha.. And at the same time Wilt "schooled" Kareem while getting outscored with 23 points a game..




As for Hakeem...he has become the most over-rated player on this forum. Again, ONE MVP (in a year in which MJ took off), ONE second place finish. TWO 4th place finishes in the MVP balloting. That was it. In EIGHTEEN seasons. He wasn't even considered a Top-TEN player in HALF of the seasons he played in his OWN era. On top of that, he played on EIGHT teams that were eliminated in the FIRST ROUND of the playoffs. Just downright embarrassing.

Still the guy won just as many rings as Wilt did while playing in a tougher era and won while he played with worse teammates. While Wilt won with HOF:ers Hakeem's first ring came when his second best scorer in the playoffs was Maxwell who averaged 13.8 points on 37% shooting.. Oh, and Wilt never even led a team in scoring in the playoffs while winning, and in '72 the guy was the fourth option on offense.. Haha..:facepalm

Now don't mess this thread up, you old fart. It's about Kareem..

[the_wise_one]

He's definitely the only Laker who didn't get his proper dues.
Every other Laker in history is overrated, including AIDS boy who stole all the glory from Kareem (despite riding his coattails - much like Kobe rode Shaq's).

The ONLY Laker who deserves to be considered GOAT.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Why do you keep bringing up the 12th year? And Kareem's rookie year? Didn't Reed win the MVP that year? I said the decade of the 70's or Before Magic.

After you said...."I think Kareem would have more years as best player than any other player if the voting was correct". I brought up '70-'81 because I think Kareem was probably the best player in his rookie season and deserved MVP that year and then once again in '81.


True Bird would miss a year but that' doesn't take him out of contention for the three rings he got in a much harder era or possibly achieving 5 MVP's. Same with Magic. The MVPs competing vs Doc J, Moses M, Hakeem, Barkley, Hakeem, Gervin, Dantley, MJ, Magic and Bird themselves seem a bit more stated than Cowens, Walton, McAdoo, Reed. Jordan played great in the post season despite missing those games in his second year. Asking one more MVP would have been easy by his standards in the 70's. IMHO, he definitely would have been more franchise than Kareem those years.

I don't know how good those players would've been in the 70's, but I do know that they didn't have 12 consecutive seasons comparable to Kareem's first 12.


I said, "Utah, Dallas, Lakers, Pheonix , Sacramento, Cavs, were great winning franchises" that SA had to contend with. In the 70's anybody could win it every year.

Cavs? The '07 Cavs were incredibly weak for a finals team and the '07 Jazz were weak for a WCF team. San Antonio didn't play Sacramento in the playoffs when Webber was there.

[eliteballer]

Kareem isnt 7-4, his lanky frame can make him appear taller than he is.

http://www.ice-dotcom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Kareem-Abdul-Jabbar-Wilt-Chamberlain-ICEDOTCOM.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.aolnews.com/media/2007/02/kareem-bynum-425.jpg

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/gallery/100602/GAL-10Jun02-4754/media/PHO-10Jun02-229049.jpg

[jlauber]

Kareem isnt 7-4, his lanky frame can make him appear taller than he is.

http://www.ice-dotcom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Kareem-Abdul-Jabbar-Wilt-Chamberlain-ICEDOTCOM.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.aolnews.com/media/2007/02/kareem-bynum-425.jpg

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/gallery/100602/GAL-10Jun02-4754/media/PHO-10Jun02-229049.jpg

Kareem would be at LEAST 7-3 using today's measurements, and Wilt would be very close to that.

[305Baller]

Thanks for the vid. Nice work.

[Pointguard]

After you said...."I think Kareem would have more years as best player than any other player if the voting was correct". I brought up '70-'81 because I think Kareem was probably the best player in his rookie season and deserved MVP that year and then once again in '81.

I don't know how good those players would've been in the 70's, but I do know that they didn't have 12 consecutive seasons comparable to Kareem's first 12.

I definitely think Jordan's first 12 were better, more impactful and more impressive and proved against far greater competition. Shaq is in the vincinity. Magic's first ten while very different was definitely as impactful - as there never was a guy that could make everybody around him energetic, aware and inspired. If Bird and Magic weren't in each other's way their impact would be in a different' league in comparison to Kareem first ten. But they don't have to be as good as Kareem in the first ten years as Kareem was usually much better than anybody else outside of a retiring Wilt. And that is all that needed for this point that they could have had the same amount of MVP's.

Guys like Thurmond and Wilt could really affect Kareem's game. Nobody else could guard him and nobody else really stands out in the 70's but Walt Frazier, Barry and Unseld and they were as impactful as Kareem if not more so. Its like DH who is considered dominant and the best now, but in the 90's he's second rate. Competition and rivals put a very different reality on things. DH doesn't look the same when Bynum is guarding him and I would like to see him guard DMC. All it takes is two unpolished guys and DH looks like a regular player - I see Kareem the same way. Jordan (Magic, Shaq,Barkley, Malone), Magic, Bird, Duncan (Shaq, Kobe Garnett, Dirk), Hakeem these guys had great guys opposite them way more than Kareem did those first 10 years and they won in much more impressive fashion. And if other great teams and players weren't in their way the separation between them and Kareem would be huge.

[Carbine]

Its like DH who is considered dominant and the best now, but in the 90's he's second rate.

That's not true at all. It's not like Dwight would lose his ability to rebound, play defense or lose his strength/ability to finish under the hoop.

Dwight would be considered an elite big man no matter what era he played in.

[Kblaze8855]

With Shaq, Hakeem, and Drob...nah. He wouldnt. He might be as good as Ewing was after he had slowed down. But he isnt those three. And I love Dwight.

[Carbine]

I think he's as good as DROB was when it comes to impacting wins and loses. Ewing too.

There's really nothing Dwight doesn't do nowadays from an elite big man perspective. He has all the traits of them....best rebounder in the league, defends the rim/patrols the paint at an all-time level, defends pick and rolls, scores down low at an extremely high rate....only thing he needs to improve upon dramatically is passing out of the double teams, and obviously free throws but that's not exactly a big man trait. Everything else is there for him.

If he improves upon his passing, he's right on par with prime Duncan, and I love and watched Duncan his whole career.

I believe in Dwight.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Nice vid. KAJ was deceptively strong..its hard for me to decide..I think in peakplay, Hakeem had that unreal 4-5 yr span where he played on a level I have never seen before or since whereas Jabbar had the longer more storied career/longevity.

[The Iron Fist]

I definitely think Jordan's first 12 were better, more impactful and more impressive and proved against far greater competition. Shaq is in the vincinity. Magic's first ten while very different was definitely as impactful - as there never was a guy that could make everybody around him energetic, aware and inspired. If Bird and Magic weren't in each other's way their impact would be in a different' league in comparison to Kareem first ten. But they don't have to be as good as Kareem in the first ten years as Kareem was usually much better than anybody else outside of a retiring Wilt. And that is all that needed for this point that they could have had the same amount of MVP's.

Guys like Thurmond and Wilt could really affect Kareem's game. Nobody else could guard him and nobody else really stands out in the 70's but Walt Frazier, Barry and Unseld and they were as impactful as Kareem if not more so. Its like DH who is considered dominant and the best now, but in the 90's he's second rate. Competition and rivals put a very different reality on things. DH doesn't look the same when Bynum is guarding him and I would like to see him guard DMC. All it takes is two unpolished guys and DH looks like a regular player - I see Kareem the same way. Jordan (Magic, Shaq,Barkley, Malone), Magic, Bird, Duncan (Shaq, Kobe Garnett, Dirk), Hakeem these guys had great guys opposite them way more than Kareem did those first 10 years and they won in much more impressive fashion. And if other great teams and players weren't in their way the separation between them and Kareem would be huge.
:roll:

Kareem led his team to a title in his second season. Won MVP 4 times in 7 years, and Jordan was better and had more impact against far greater competition? Do you realize how many HOFers Kareem played against? He played against 37 of the 50 best players, ever.

[Kblaze8855]

If he improves upon his passing, he's right on par with prime Duncan, and I love and watched Duncan his whole career.

Improving his passing wouldnt even put him on par with Ewing in his prime.

[dunksby]

Kareem = GOAT
Jordan ******gers are pathetic with their hate trying to discreit Kareem's accomplishments. If it was Jordan with 6 MVPs 18 All-Stars and most points scored nobody could dare challenge him without getting assassinated by his fanboys. Now one has to be careful not to hurt their feelings before posting a tribute video to the best.

[bwink23]

Kareem = GOAT
Jordan ******gers are pathetic with their hate trying to discreit Kareem's accomplishments. If it was Jordan with 6 MVPs 18 All-Stars and most points scored nobody could dare challenge him without getting assassinated by his fanboys. Now one has to be careful not to hurt their feelings before posting a tribute video to the best.


Jordan's overall impact on the NBA was greater than Kareem's, and his overall dominance was at a higher level.....Kareem is GOAT considering just basketball, but Jordan is the GOAT in the NBA...

[JellyBean]

Kareem never gets his due. But that is the nature of the beast. In about 15-20 years from now, people will be saying the same thing about Jordan and how he doesn't get his proper respect. It is the nature of the beast.

[Pointguard]

That was a good video, Kblaze. Loved the fast break, and the power move on D. Dawkins.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Great video. It does capture how fast, and agile for a man of his size. People do forget how well rounded his skills were and how athletic he was. He played until he was 42 a lot of people only saw the old Kareem. Plus the skyhook was so dominant it's really the only thing you think of when you remember Kareem. Prime Kareem was the GOAT in my opinion. His overall impact on a game was huge. He dominated and won at every level, multiple times.

And don't belive the hype, his competition was plenty good. Wilt, Cowens, Walton, Moses Malone, Hakeem, Ewing, Parish, Lanier, Elvin Hayes. In my opinion Simmons is mentally retarded and should change careers.

[Legends66NBA7]

In my opinion Simmons is mentally retarded and should change careers.

What did Simmons say ?

[Kobe 4 The Win]

What did Simmons say ?

Well for one he called him a ninny. That should show you the depth of his intellect. For the record, Simmons was born in Kareem's rookie year so he knows f**k-all about Kareem in his prime. He's a lot like most of ESPN's "experts". lol

[Carbine]

Improving his passing wouldnt even put him on par with Ewing in his prime.

Well that's just your opinion. It's not something you can justify saying though unless you make something up. Dwight has already led his team farther than Ewing ever did, Dwight is another level as a rebounder and impacts the defensive end of the floor as much as Ewing did (yes, rebounding is part of defense) and if we were to magically make him a better passer, he'd have that on Ewing too.

Ewing had more variety in the way he scored. That's about it. And a better FT shooter. I'm not sure he was actually a better offensive player though, because Dwight gets his. The only reason he's not averaging more points is because the Magic don't call plays for him that much. But when he gets the ball he goes to work. Dude barely gets 13 shots a game, and 1/4 of them are shots he takes cleaning up the garbage.

[Kblaze8855]

Well that's just your opinion. It's not something you can justify saying though unless you make something up.

I dont believe you know anything about pre injury Ewing.


Dwight has already led his team farther than Ewing ever did

Ewing was a Hakeem block of Starks from winning the 94 finals in 6 games. Though I guess you dont remember that and somehow never heard of the mid 90s either.


Dwight is another level as a rebounder and impacts the defensive end of the floor as much as Ewing did (yes, rebounding is part of defense) and if we were to magically make him a better passer, he'd have that on Ewing too.

You really just say if he were better at something he would be better than Ewing at it?


Ewing had more variety in the way he scored. That's about it. And a better FT shooter. I'm not sure he was actually a better offensive player though, because Dwight gets his.

You arent sure hes a better offensive player than Dwight because you dont know much about Patrick Ewing. Ignoring for now the large gap in offensive skill...ill just give you this said of Ewing after a 1990 GMsurvey had him as one of the players some GMs would take to start a team ifthey could take any single player:


That was before Ewing slowed down/got banged up and became mostly a jump shooter. Ewing was having a 29/11 season shooting 55% and blocking 4 shots a game. And it was taken in april? In the previous two months he had averaged 32/12 and 31/12 on 58 and 59% shooting. In April and march he had games of:

40/15
37/19/9 blocks
37/17 the game before that
37/21/6/5 two games before that

Which was 2 games after he had 51/18 and 41/12 in back to back games. He was having games of 44/22. And 44/24.

He was straight rampaging through the NBA.




The only reason he's not averaging more points is because the Magic don't call plays for him that much. But when he gets the ball he goes to work. Dude barely gets 13 shots a game, and 1/4 of them are shots he takes cleaning up the garbage.

The reason he doesnt get more shots is not insisting on it. He lets it happen as much as his teammates.

[Carbine]

I dont believe you know anything about pre injury Ewing.



Ewing was a Hakeem block of Starks from winning the 94 finals in 6 games. Though I guess you dont remember that and somehow never heard of the mid 90s either.

I actually forgot that finals appearance for Ewing. I mean I knew it happened, must've been his abysmal play that I forgot about him. My bad.



You really just say if he were better at something he would be better than Ewing at it?


Yeah, you said even if Dwight became a better passer, he wouldn't be on par with Prime Ewing, and I'm saying if we magically made Dwight a better passer than he currently is, he'd then have that advantage over Ewing, to go along with his others.



The reason he doesnt get more shots is not insisting on it. He lets it happen as much as his teammates.

It's the system. They run him off so many pick and rolls where he runs to the middle after setting the pick, and opens up the pass to the corner for threes or for the drive because the weak side defenders rotate over before he ever touches the ball.

I know what you're saying, but his PPG average of 20 isn't reflective of how good a scorer he is.

I've seen my fair share of Ewing games. I got like two of his college games, a bunch of his pre-90 games, all of his games vs the Bulls in the payoffs, few from his finals vs. rockets....few games from Ind series

Shit I bet if I wanted to I could go watch a dozen more Ewing games before he was injured if I wanted to, but I already know the type of player he was, so I don't need to for the purpose of getting to know him.

[Whoah10115]

Before saying anything on Kareem...Dwight would be an elite player in any era. The 90's just so happened to have 4 guys that, in their primes, are top 8 ever, along with Kareem, Russell, Wilt, and Walton...and yea, ahead of Moses (when looking at them at their best). Then there's a guy just outside the top 10 in Zo and a HOF player in Dikembe. But his anchoring ability is the best of the modern era, after Robinson.




On Kareem...he was always my favorite of the big 3, but I have a rough time with him. Before even analyzing the era he played, without looking at him winning "only one" title...I don't know. Russell is the best defender ever. The lynchpin to 11 titles and the reason why Wlilt had "only one" title in Philly. Wilt was ridiculously dominant. It's just hard to quantify sometimes.



But I don't see him as having any case for the best ever. He's not as good as Michael, in any way. And I really think it's ridiculous that he's being so regularly considered better than Magic...and he is, for most people it seems, the 2nd best ever...and I don't see how he can be.



But his game was terrific. I don't know who thought he wasn't skilled. A sky hook is a skill move. It's all touch. You don't hit that touch without it. His turns were great, his footwork was immaculate (good word). There's a reason he lasted so long, considering he was the slowest player you'll ever see for the last few years. He was a great shot blocker and a very good passer. Super intelligent and quick. He ran the floor really well.



But I've heard it be said that his toughness was underrated and I don't agree. I don't think his defense was regularly elite. He was lazy on the defensive end. Even before the mid 80's. He didn't like to switch over much. He's too individualistic. I don't think all of his beastliness translated into impact.



And that isn't to say he wasn't the most impactful of his time, but the things that Walton is so celebrated for, I couldn't celebrate him for.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

"He's not as good as Michael, in any way."

Soooo.......you are saying he's not a better rebounder than Jordan? He's not a better shot blocker than Jordan? So he doesn't shoot a high FG% than Jordan?

I understand that a shooting guard and a center is not an apples to apples comparison but I think to say that he's not as good as Michael in any way is nuts.

As one example in Kareem's first year with the Lakers he averaged

28 points per game
17 rebounds per game
5 assists per game
4 blocks per game

58% percent shooting. All the while being 7'2 plus and making it hard for opposing teams to get to the rim. I would take that over Michael Jordan on his best day.

[Pointguard]

:roll:

Kareem led his team to a title in his second season. Won MVP 4 times in 7 years, and Jordan was better and had more impact against far greater competition? Do you realize how many HOFers Kareem played against? He played against 37 of the 50 best players, ever.

In Jordan's second year he averaged 44ppg in the playoffs along with 6 rebounds and 5.5 assist against a great defensive team. Over the next 7 playoff runs only once did he not average higher than Kareems best playoff run after Kareem's first year. The 70's was the weakest era in the sport. The 80's were the toughest. Jordan was the best player, best winner, and the best competitor of his time. Rick Barry won as much as Kareem in the 70's and in more impressive fashion.

[Whoah10115]

"He's not as good as Michael, in any way."

Soooo.......you are saying he's not a better rebounder than Jordan? He's not a better shot blocker than Jordan? So he doesn't shoot a high FG% than Jordan?

I understand that a shooting guard and a center is not an apples to apples comparison but I think to say that he's not as good as Michael in any way is nuts.

As one example in Kareem's first year with the Lakers he averaged

28 points per game
17 rebounds per game
5 assists per game
4 blocks per game

58% percent shooting. All the while being 7'2 plus and making it hard for opposing teams to get to the rim. I would take that over Michael Jordan on his best day.




I didn't mean in every facet of the game, but no matter how you try to rank, there's no way you can rank Kareem ahead of Michael.

[Pointguard]

That's not true at all. It's not like Dwight would lose his ability to rebound, play defense or lose his strength/ability to finish under the hoop.

Dwight would be considered an elite big man no matter what era he played in.

DH beast on bad players - and then there is a fall off on decent defenders. And there are hardly any decent defenders now. Tyson Chandler is a good defender but he wasn't Hakeem, Dikembe, Mourning, D Rob or Shaq. I doubt that DH will average 14ppg and 12rebs a game against the Knicks this year. Chandler held DH to single digits in rebounds and points in 4 playoff games in 2010. Chandler held him to 8 points 10 rebounds in the first Knick game this year. Tyson is the only excellent center that defends now. DH was not getting rebounds either. Size and strength bothers DH, nevermind size, strength, quickness, ability, skills and athleticism. DH is just way more agile and quicker than the stiffs out there now who rarely have more than one strength.

DH's advantage with those guys of the 90's would be his quickness. But DH isn't skilled enough to take advantage of that quickness. So basically he would be outclassed in most qualities, skills and assets which is directly the opposit of his reality now.

Last year during an important game with the season closing down, Gundy didn't have DH guard rookie semi skilled Demarcus Cousins, despite Cousins going off for like 28points. DH, still managed to foul out of the game guarding Dalembert? And this was game was critical. DH couldn't defend the elite of that time and he was never an elite scorer. So no he wouldn't be elite.

[SpecialQue]

People don't have Kareem as GOAT because he didn't pretend to be all friendly and shit, doing underwear ads and movies with Bugs Bunny.

Kareem >>>>>>>>>> Jordan.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

I didn't mean in every facet of the game, but no matter how you try to rank, there's no way you can rank Kareem ahead of Michael.

Saying he's not as good as Michael in any way is a pretty clear cut statment. What does "in any way" mean to you?

There is a way to rank Kareem ahead of Jordan, and I do. It is a matter of OPINION. Jordan homers act like Jordan as the GOAT is a statement of indisputable fact and it's not. Kareem is equal in titles, ahead in MVPs, ahead in the all-time scoring record, he won and dominated at every level. Kareem was a 7'2 guy guarding the basket. Kareem did more in a game and he beat better teams than Jordan beat. For me, he was the greatest basketball player of all-time. If you disagree, fine. But please don't pretend that your opinion is the only valid one.

[Whoah10115]

Saying he's not as good as Michael in any way is a pretty clear cut statment. What does "in any way" mean to you?

There is a way to rank Kareem ahead of Jordan, and I do. It is a matter of OPINION. Jordan homers act like Jordan as the GOAT is a statement of indisputable fact and it's not. Kareem is equal in titles, ahead in MVPs, ahead in the all-time scoring record, he won and dominated at every level. Kareem was a 7'2 guy guarding the basket. Kareem did more in a game and he beat better teams than Jordan beat. For me, he was the greatest basketball player of all-time. If you disagree, fine. But please don't pretend that your opinion is the only valid one.



It's not about it being my opinion. I just don't see it. What better teams did he beat? He was the best player on the 1980 team, but Magic closing out Philadelphia was the turning. He was never the best player or 1st guy on the Lakers again. The 70's was a weaker era and he won once, so I don't see how he beat better teams than Jordan beat. That he was 7'2 is no difference to me. He wasn't consistently an elite defender because he was usually lazy on the switch. He'd literally man the middle or he'd deal with you in the post.


I think the younger Kareem was more badass and a better player. I don't think the full level of his performance translated into impact. And it's not because of the commercials he didn't do or how ornery and not-approachable he was. And I was always a fan. I think his talent and height compensated for for some of defensive apathy.



And I wasn't trying to come at you and attacking your point. I was just saying what I thought and I said that I couldn't understand. I didn't say everybody was wrong. And when I said "not in any way", I just don't get how people vote Kareem and list accomplishments as the reason. If you just think he was a better basketball player, in the purest of sense, then it's a different argument. Tho I admit I couldn't come close to really seeing how you could believe that, outside of his height and position on the court having an inherent dominance and placement.

[dunksby]

I didn't mean in every facet of the game, but no matter how you try to rank, there's no way you can rank Kareem ahead of Michael.
There are actually more reasons to rank him over Jordan as it is the other way, you should just stop looking only the other way.

[PTB Fan]

Arguably the greatest player in NBA History.

[Nero Tulip]

Kareem played the way people our size tell themselves they would if they could be as big as a lot of the scrub centers are. You imagine how easy it would be if you could just get on your toes and be 6 inches from the rim...but still have your athletic ability. Be as quick as you are now.



What is that supposed to mean? You realise post play is a lot more technical than perimeter play? He was just unbelievably gifted, regardless of his height.

Great vid, great music btw thanks.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

It's not about it being my opinion. I just don't see it. What better teams did he beat? He was the best player on the 1980 team, but Magic closing out Philadelphia was the turning. He was never the best player or 1st guy on the Lakers again. The 70's was a weaker era and he won once, so I don't see how he beat better teams than Jordan beat. That he was 7'2 is no difference to me. He wasn't consistently an elite defender because he was usually lazy on the switch. He'd literally man the middle or he'd deal with you in the post.


I think the younger Kareem was more badass and a better player. I don't think the full level of his performance translated into impact. And it's not because of the commercials he didn't do or how ornery and not-approachable he was. And I was always a fan. I think his talent and height compensated for for some of defensive apathy.



And I wasn't trying to come at you and attacking your point. I was just saying what I thought and I said that I couldn't understand. I didn't say everybody was wrong. And when I said "not in any way", I just don't get how people vote Kareem and list accomplishments as the reason. If you just think he was a better basketball player, in the purest of sense, then it's a different argument. Tho I admit I couldn't come close to really seeing how you could believe that, outside of his height and position on the court having an inherent dominance and placement.

I think you have a comprehension problem with your own posts. I am also concerned about your ability to watch and understand the game of basketball.

I question if you have ever watched Kareem play or looked at his stat lines. If you can't look at the stats of a prime Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and see the impact that it would have on a game then I can't help you. If you don't understand that the 80's Sixers with Celtics were two stacked team loaded with hall of famers then I can't help you. If you don't acknowledge that Kareem won the 1985 Finals MVP and was the number one scoring option on all 80's Laker teams until 1987, then I don't know what to tell you.

While Jordan has a strong case for the GOAT, I think the fact that you can't even comprehend how Jabbar stacks against him demonstrates either an overwhelming bias or an idiocy that is seldom seen even on ISH. That's fine. I'll just leave you with this. I think that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was better than Jordan in every sense. Talent, skill set, overall impact, longevity, accomplishments, you name it. This is just one man's well supported opinion.

[N0Skillz]

I rank him at 1 and MJ being his bitch.

[SpecialQue]

I think you have a comprehension problem with your own posts. I am also concerned about your ability to watch and understand the game of basketball.

I question if you have ever watched Kareem play or looked at his stat lines. If you can't look at the stats of a prime Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and see the impact that it would have on a game then I can't help you. If you don't understand that the 80's Sixers with Celtics were two stacked team loaded with hall of famers then I can't help you. If you don't acknowledge that Kareem won the 1985 Finals MVP and was the number one scoring option on all 80's Laker teams until 1987, then I don't know what to tell you.

While Jordan has a strong case for the GOAT, I think the fact that you can't even comprehend how Jabbar stacks against him demonstrates either an overwhelming bias or an idiocy that is seldom seen even on ISH. That's fine. I'll just leave you with this. I think that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was better than Jordan in every sense. Talent, skill set, overall impact, longevity, accomplishments, you name it. This is just one man's well supported opinion.

:rockon:

[hkfosho]

I rank him at 1 and MJ being his bitch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmaZXN2MtOA

[madmax]

Saying he's not as good as Michael in any way is a pretty clear cut statment. What does "in any way" mean to you?

There is a way to rank Kareem ahead of Jordan, and I do. It is a matter of OPINION. Jordan homers act like Jordan as the GOAT is a statement of indisputable fact and it's not. Kareem is equal in titles, ahead in MVPs, ahead in the all-time scoring record, he won and dominated at every level. Kareem was a 7'2 guy guarding the basket. Kareem did more in a game and he beat better teams than Jordan beat. For me, he was the greatest basketball player of all-time. If you disagree, fine. But please don't pretend that your opinion is the only valid one.

:applause:
One of those rare times when you just have to tip your hat off to Kobe fan...

[Carbine]

DH beast on bad players - and then there is a fall off on decent defenders. And there are hardly any decent defenders now. Tyson Chandler is a good defender but he wasn't Hakeem, Dikembe, Mourning, D Rob or Shaq. I doubt that DH will average 14ppg and 12rebs a game against the Knicks this year. Chandler held DH to single digits in rebounds and points in 4 playoff games in 2010. Chandler held him to 8 points 10 rebounds in the first Knick game this year. Tyson is the only excellent center that defends now. DH was not getting rebounds either. Size and strength bothers DH, nevermind size, strength, quickness, ability, skills and athleticism. DH is just way more agile and quicker than the stiffs out there now who rarely have more than one strength.

DH's advantage with those guys of the 90's would be his quickness. But DH isn't skilled enough to take advantage of that quickness. So basically he would be outclassed in most qualities, skills and assets which is directly the opposit of his reality now.

Last year during an important game with the season closing down, Gundy didn't have DH guard rookie semi skilled Demarcus Cousins, despite Cousins going off for like 28points. DH, still managed to foul out of the game guarding Dalembert? And this was game was critical. DH couldn't defend the elite of that time and he was never an elite scorer. So no he wouldn't be elite.

You look at it the way you want to loo at it - not subjectively.

I could, and in fact did post Dwights numbers when faced against Duncan/Shaq back when they were in or near their primes - and this was when Dwight was still very raw on offense. He more than held his own, in fact having stellar games individually.

That's two of the top 10 players of all time he went against and played very well. So now, because he struggled against one player, we're using that as the measuring stick for his success in the 90's? Come on. That's dumb.

Every player has one or two players they struggle with. Tyson Chandler is 7 foot tall with lanky arms, and great first hop. He could, and has, shut down Duncan before. Doesn't mean Duncan wouldn't be Duncan in the 90's.

[Whoah10115]

I think you have a comprehension problem with your own posts. I am also concerned about your ability to watch and understand the game of basketball.

I question if you have ever watched Kareem play or looked at his stat lines. If you can't look at the stats of a prime Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and see the impact that it would have on a game then I can't help you. If you don't understand that the 80's Sixers with Celtics were two stacked team loaded with hall of famers then I can't help you. If you don't acknowledge that Kareem won the 1985 Finals MVP and was the number one scoring option on all 80's Laker teams until 1987, then I don't know what to tell you.

While Jordan has a strong case for the GOAT, I think the fact that you can't even comprehend how Jabbar stacks against him demonstrates either an overwhelming bias or an idiocy that is seldom seen even on ISH. That's fine. I'll just leave you with this. I think that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was better than Jordan in every sense. Talent, skill set, overall impact, longevity, accomplishments, you name it. This is just one man's well supported opinion.




Well, I was having a discussion with you, so if you're going to concern yourself with my ability to comprehend or follow basketball, then maybe you should just have walked out of the discussion.

[B]

I think you have a comprehension problem with your own posts. I am also concerned about your ability to watch and understand the game of basketball.

I question if you have ever watched Kareem play or looked at his stat lines. If you can't look at the stats of a prime Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and see the impact that it would have on a game then I can't help you. If you don't understand that the 80's Sixers with Celtics were two stacked team loaded with hall of famers then I can't help you. If you don't acknowledge that Kareem won the 1985 Finals MVP and was the number one scoring option on all 80's Laker teams until 1987, then I don't know what to tell you.

While Jordan has a strong case for the GOAT, I think the fact that you can't even comprehend how Jabbar stacks against him demonstrates either an overwhelming bias or an idiocy that is seldom seen even on ISH. That's fine. I'll just leave you with this. I think that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was better than Jordan in every sense. Talent, skill set, overall impact, longevity, accomplishments, you name it. This is just one man's well supported opinion.This post rocks. Well said

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

The true GOAT

[Kblaze8855]

The idea that Dwight would be elite in any era is just laughable to me. And ive been a fan of him for years. I see it as a pretty simple matter....

If I drop him into a league with players he is inarguably inferior to..usually several of them...he isnt elite.

Hes elite right now. But if the league had Jordan, Shaq, and Hakeem...he just isnt.

What does the word elite mean if not on the top tier?

If Jordan and Hakeem are in the league he is in fact...not on that level. And its not like those are the only 2. just the 2 I dont think anyone can dispute. There is virtually nothing Dwight could do to be all NBA...even 3rd team...in 1994. Hes not beating out Drob on a 55+ win team doing 30/12/5 orwhatever it was. Hes not beating Shaq doing 30/12 on a 50 win team. Hes not beating out Ewing on a 58 or so win team that wasa jumper from a ring and probably did 25/11. And then we still have Hakeem to consider who was just...on a whole other level.

Dwight in his place wouldnt improve any team Zo was on while he had 2 kidneys. Well he missed very few games so in that way...perhaps. But hes no more effective.

When you arent a top 2-3 player at your position you are not an elite player league wide.

[Carbine]

The idea is that Dwight would be Dwight in any era.

He'd probably do better numbers than he currently does because of the rules back then that made it easier for big men to score vs now. He'd do 24/15 and his usual defensive impact. That's elite....and Dwight isn't an empty stat dude. His impact would reflect that 24/15.

And the game was more physical back then. Which helps Dwight because he's a physical player himself.

I don't think anyone is saying Dwight would be the best player in the league. His impact would warrant top 5 status though.

[Whoah10115]

The idea that Dwight would be elite in any era is just laughable to me. And ive been a fan of him for years. I see it as a pretty simple matter....

If I drop him into a league with players he is inarguably inferior to..usually several of them...he isnt elite.

Hes elite right now. But if the league had Jordan, Shaq, and Hakeem...he just isnt.

What does the word elite mean if not on the top tier?

If Jordan and Hakeem are in the league he is in fact...not on that level. And its not like those are the only 2. just the 2 I dont think anyone can dispute. There is virtually nothing Dwight could do to be all NBA...even 3rd team...in 1994. Hes not beating out Drob on a 55+ win team doing 30/12/5 orwhatever it was. Hes not beating Shaq doing 30/12 on a 50 win team. Hes not beating out Ewing on a 58 or so win team that wasa jumper from a ring and probably did 25/11. And then we still have Hakeem to consider who was just...on a whole other level.

Dwight in his place wouldnt improve any team Zo was on while he had 2 kidneys. Well he missed very few games so in that way...perhaps. But hes no more effective.

When you arent a top 2-3 player at your position you are not an elite player league wide.




Doesn't the era matter? If Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq were all in the same era as Kareem, Walton, Russell, Wilt, would Ewing not be elite? Hell, Ewing was 5th in MVP voting in 94 and 4th in 95 (deserving of both), he wasn't even on the All-NBA Teams either of those years. Would he not be elite?



If a position is stacked, then a position is stacked. Ewing was a top 10 player for a decade. If you look at players at their best, I'd take Patrick way before I'd take Moses. And 3 of the other 8 are all in his era. Even Moses was close to an all-star in the early 90's.




Dwight Howard is the best anchor I've seen since David Robinson, and I guess I'd have to say a better defender than Patrick Ewing, as he is the defense for Orlando.

[305Baller]

I rank him at 1 and MJ being his bitch.

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/kickinIt88/Pacino_slapped_gaycowboy.gif

[N0Skillz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmaZXN2MtOA


BOOKMARKED

[Kblaze8855]

The idea is that Dwight would be Dwight in any era.

But Dwight being Dwight would be overshadowed by better players being themselves.


He'd probably do better numbers than he currently does because of the rules back then that made it easier for big men to score vs now.

He might score more but it wouldnt be rules. It would bebecause 90s teams wouldnt shoot 800 threes with him on them.


He'd do 24/15 and his usual defensive impact. That's elite....and Dwight isn't an empty stat dude. His impact would reflect that 24/15.

24/15 and his defense isnt elite. No number makes you elite. Being on the top tier of players makes one elite. Dwight as he is now would not be even arguably the best player in the NBA at any point before....2005 or so. I dont mean in 1949 by the way. I mean when the league had roughly modern stars.

He is in the discussion when the best player in the league comes up. I dont think hes #1....but at times its worth asking. Nothing Dwight has ever done justifies asking if hes better than Hakeem...or Jordan..or Lakers/Magic Shaq...

You might think hes the equal of David Robinson. But no GM would trade Drob in his prime for Dwight. He isnt even nearly as highly regarded. You can talk about impact but....Dwight isnt doing anything with Drobs teams that he didnt. I suspect less. Getting past the Cavs doesnt mean hes getting past Hakeems back to back champs.

Drob was bigger than Dwight, more skilled, just as athletic(guy was 7'1'' 260 going coast to coast and doing mini eurostep dunks around Jordan), and not one speck worse on defense.

I was never even that impressed with Drob(relative to his praise) but hewas sure as hell better than Dwight Howard and even if he were not the league wouldnt see it that way. The entire league was in love with him. There is just no chance Dwight is considered the equal of the top players. And if he isnt...he isnt elite.


And the game was more physical back then. Which helps Dwight because he's a physical player himself.

Hes a physical player playing guys less capable of matching up with him than he would be then. Drop into 96...

Shaq
Drob
Hakeem
Ewing
Mutombo/Mcdyess(not sure who gets put on Dwight)
Zo
Antionio Davis/Dale davis/Smits
Webber(part time center at the time) or Gheorghe Muresan(not great...but considering the issues Dwight had with Yao id liketo see the matchup)
Sabonis(Just off size) with Dudley sharing time on Dwight(doesnt look it...but a great great man to man defender and good rebounder)

And its not like thats all the players of note. With guys like Roy Hibbert, Jamal Magloire, Antionio Davis, Dale Davis, Theo Ratliff, old Vlade, and Al Horford being allstars since the bigmen died off....im not sure half the starting centers in he mid 90s wouldnt be borderline all stars today. Dwight would be tested more often. Have to work harder.

How many centers are a legit threat to score 20 on a nightly basis right now? Dwight. Bynum(though hes not done it in a month). Cousins? Maybe. hes getting there. Hibbert? Been over 20 points 1 game in 35. Kaman perhaps? Marc Gasol? It wouldnt surprise anyone. But its not likely either. Hes been over 20 10 times in the last 2 years(118 games).

Dwight gets to coast far more than he could in the 90s. Really...how many centers right now pose more of a threat to score than Big country? How many centers right now do you think have had 5 30 point games in a month? Reeves did. And nobody even cared. Dude was 7'1'' 275-290. And would attack you. He was surely no Dwight Howard. But he would make Dwight work harder than he works 80% of the time now.

Its one reason its hard for me to say where Dwight ranks as a defender all time. When you play like 6 games a year where you are expected to be tested by your man(2 bynum...ill give Hibbert, Horford, and Marc Gasol partial credit)...its easier to play help D and defend the paint than if you play Drob 4 times, Hakeem 4 times, Shaq 2 times, Ewing 2 times, Zo 2times, Smits 2times, Sabonis 4 times and so on. Yes he guards some forwards now...but he would have to stick afew then as well(Webber...Coleman perhaps...little Malone..whoever). So im just leaving it out.

Far more players would require Dwights attention to contain an outburst. Noah is a good center. But if you dont defend him well hes not gonna give you 30. Chandler will cut to the basket especially with Lin. But you dont need a gameplan or to watch any film. Bogut can play. He can score. But in the last 3 years combined he has 3 less 20 point games than Rik Smits had in 1995 alone.

Dwight flat out doesnt need to worry about his opponent on offense and while hes one of my favorite players....its hard to look past that and give him full credit compared to guy who might need to play hard on and off the ball on D 5 times as often.


I don't think anyone is saying Dwight would be the best player in the league. His impact would warrant top 5 status though.

There are years he wouldnt be a top 5 bigman. A lot of them(Hes not better than 94 Shaq, Hakeem, Drob, Ewing, or Malone).

Not an issue of the past>the present. Its just...Dwights position was stacked. Sprewell wouldnt be as close to the best swingman now as he was in like 94 or 95.

Things change.

[305Baller]

To Kareem

:cheers: