Hakeem Olajuwon vs. Kobe Bryant

[Lebron23]

Who's the better franchise player?

[Derivative]

hakeem olajuwon by far

[Status Quo]

I'd honestly prefer The Dream, not only was he one of the best post players of all time. Arguably the greatest. But also a defensive anchor that you could build your team around.

[StateOfMind12]

I'm not sure but one thing I am sure of is that I would take both of those two over LeBron.

[Flagrant 2]

I'm not sure but one thing I am sure of is that I would take both of those two over LeBron.
This

[bwink23]

Kobe's replaceable...you'd be hard-pressed replacing Olajuwon.

[Lebron23]

1994 and 1995 Hakeem >>> 2009 and 2010 Kobe. Hakeem won an NBA title with a weak supporting casts in 1994.

[Jotaro Durant]

hakeem olajuwon by far
this dream never asked out for better situation cause he wasnt b,itchmade

[Cali Syndicate]

Hakeem

[lbj23clutch]

I'm not sure but one thing I am sure of is that I would take both of those two over LeBron.
I would too, but was it even necessary to bring up LeBron?

To answer the question I'd take Hakeem, because of his defensive presence and skillset and if he were in the league today he would easily be the best center in the game. Centers these days are a joke, so the competition would be too easy for him.

[lbj23clutch]

Plus a franchise center in today's league is very rare. Dwight and maybe Bynum are the only centers you can build around.

[Jasper]

A guy that carried his team vs a guy that was carried

[Jasper]

I'm not sure but one thing I am sure of is that I would take both of those two over LeBron.
I'd take MJ over all three :pimp:

[Lebron23]

Prime Hakeem is also a top 5 best defender in NBA history. He's one of the league leaders in steals and blocks per game.

[magnax1]

I think something that's forgotten about Hakeem is how ball dominant he was. He completely controlled the offense on his championship teams, and didn't play that well with other all stars other then Drexler.
That doesn't mean he was better then Kobe, I don't really think he was (Peak vs Peak, Kobe might be, but not career wise) but it's something that people forget about Hakeem. He isn't exactly the ideal player to build a dominant offense around.

[1987_Lakers]

I love it how when people talk about Hakeem they just mention his '94 & '95 seasons & completely ignore the rest of his career. Anyways, to start a franchise I will probably choose Hakeem, but I have Kobe ranked higher in my all-time list.

[StateOfMind12]

I love it how when people talk about Hakeem they just mention his '94 & '95 seasons & completely ignore the rest of his career. Anyways, to start a franchise I will probably choose Hakeem, but I have Kobe ranked higher in my all-time list.
What is your top 10 in your all-time list? I'm pretty curious to see. I have Kobe ranked 8th or 9th.

[TheBigVeto]

hakeem olajuwon by far

This.

[Cali Syndicate]

Plus a franchise center in today's league is very rare. Dwight and maybe Bynum are the only centers you can build around.

Marc Gasol's progression as an all around center is looking quite dapper.

[dyna]

Hakeem..

[ralph_i_el]

hakeem

he was a defensive anchor and post players are more valuable than perimeter players

[June1026]

The Dream ofc, Hakeem is only capable of winning games, he is incapable of contributing for them losing.

[Lebron23]

Hakeem has a higher basketball IQ, a better fundamental player, a better team leader, and a more likeable person than Kobe.

Prime Hakeem = Best player in the NBA.

[tontoz]

I think something that's forgotten about Hakeem is how ball dominant he was. He completely controlled the offense on his championship teams, and didn't play that well with other all stars other then Drexler.That doesn't mean he was better then Kobe, I don't really think he was (Peak vs Peak, Kobe might be, but not career wise) but it's something that people forget about Hakeem. He isn't exactly the ideal player to build a dominant offense around.


What other stars did he play with? I don't remember him actually playing with any other star that was actually in their prime. Barkley was past his prime when he played in Houston, in his 13th year.

[1987_Lakers]

What is your top 10 in your all-time list? I'm pretty curious to see. I have Kobe ranked 8th or 9th.

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Russell
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Chamberlain
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Kobe
10. Hakeem

[magnax1]

What other stars did he play with? I don't remember him actually playing with any other star that was actually in their prime. Barkley was past his prime when he played in Houston, in his 13th year.
Past his peak, but still an all star, and he basically ended up spotting up on more then half the possessions on that team. Once Tomjanavich got there and started running almost exclusively through Hakeem you saw the rest of the teams production dip pretty dramatically too (Otis Thorpe being the prime example, who was an all star. Kenny and Vernon also had their production drop) It was the right thing to do, but it does say something about Hakeem.

[lbj23clutch]

Marc Gasol's progression as an all around center is looking quite dapper.
Yes but can he be a CLEAR franchise player that you can completely build a team around and hope for a championship run? He'd be an excellent 2nd option for a team with a superstar, but he wouldn't be the guy you'd center a whole franchise around.

[305Baller]

hakeem

[tontoz]

Past his peak, but still an all star, and he basically ended up spotting up on more then half the possessions on that team. Once Tomjanavich got there and started running almost exclusively through Hakeem you saw the rest of the teams production dip pretty dramatically too (Otis Thorpe being the prime example, who was an all star. Kenny and Vernon also had their production drop) It was the right thing to do, but it does say something about Hakeem.


Thorpe made one All-Star game his entire career. he had one 20 pt season before going to Houston, then averaged 17 for 4 straight years. It isn't like that is a big falloff.

The Dream was just a beast. He played for 18 years and had career averages of 22/11 with 3 blocks.

[Heavincent]

Kobe's replaceable...you'd be hard-pressed replacing Olajuwon.

Top 10 players all-time (like Kobe) are NOT replaceable.

[magnax1]

Thorpe made one All-Star game his entire career. he had one 20 pt season before going to Houston, then averaged 17 for 4 straight years. It isn't like that is a big falloff.

I don't really think how many all star teams he made is relevant. He was a good player, that suffered from the way Hakeem played under Rudy T. That was also reversed immediately when he was traded to Portland. Vernon Maxwell also saw a similar drop off.

[305Baller]

Thorpe was Kurt Thomas-like.

[tontoz]

I don't really think how many all star teams he made is relevant. He was a good player, that suffered from the way Hakeem played under Rudy T. That was also reversed immediately when he was traded to Portland. Vernon Maxwell also saw a similar drop off.


LOL Thorpe didn't do crap after he left Houston. Maxwell had his highest scoring years in Houston. Maxwell wasn't doing crap with the Spurs before he got traded. His scoring went up immediately with Houston.

Your memory sucks.

[Round Mound]

Another Joke Question? :facepalm Hakeem by far

Better Scorer (Higher FG% on High PPG, see play-Offs too)
Better Rebounder
More Skilled "Compared to Position"
Much Better Defender
Superior 1 on 1 Defense
Superior Help Defense
Superior Floor Defense

Passing, FT Shooting and Far Range shooting might be the only things Kobe was Better at, maybe not even passing

[Duncan21formvp]

Who's the better franchise player?
Hakeem easily. Hakeem took a franchise that never won anything to multiple titles. Kobe had to go to a franchise that was known for winning in order to win (24 finals and 11 titles before Kobe ever arrived)

[Anaximandro1]

Hakeem Olajuwon by far

[NumberSix]

Is this a friggin' joke?

How retarded would you have to be to pick Kobe? He's good, but he ain't in Hakeem's league.

[Xiao Yao You]

Hakeem and Akeem>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kobe

[jlauber]

Hakeem and Bird are way over-rated on this forum.

The reality...

8. Kobe
9. Bird
10. Hakeem or Moses


How anyone can rank Hakeem in their top-5 is a complete joke, and he was a borderline top-10 player all-time. How do I know this? Hakeem won ONE MVP, in a season in which MJ took a vacation. He had ONE other season, as the SECOND best player in the eyes of the MVP voters. And he had TWO more seasons as a Top-4 player. The man was not even a top-TEN player in nearly HALF of his 18 season career. And yet some consider him a top-FIVE player...ALL-TIME?????

The reality was, Hakeem outplayed Ewing in a seven game series, and in which his 58-24 Rockets (Hakeem's BEST record BTW) beat Ewing's 56-26 Knicks in that seven game series. His other claim to fame was badly outplaying Robinson in the '95 playoffs (in four of their six games.) That was IT. He was outplayed by a young Shaq (whose teammates shrunk, while Hakeem's elevated their play) in the '95 Finals.

The rest of his career, Hakeem played on 45-50 win teams (only FOUR teams that even won 50 games, and NONE that won 60.) And, how can anyone ignore this FACT...Hakeem anchored EIGHT teams that were BLOWN AWAY in the FIRST ROUND. Yes, EIGHT of his 15 playoff teams not only lost in the FIRST ROUND, they were crushed in ALL of them.

And, of course, no one mentions a more prime Shaq just abusing Hakeem. Or a 38 and 39 year old Kareem, in TEN STRAIGHT games, averaging 31.8 ppg on .630 shooting against Hakeem. Or a 38-42 year old Kareem outscoring a 23-26 year old Hakeem in their 23 H2H games, and outshooting him by a staggering .610 to .512 margin. And PLEASE, don't give me Hakeem's '86 WCF's against the 39 year old Kareem's Lakers. The Rockets coach finally accepted the fact that Hakeem was helpless in guarding Kareem, and not only had Sampson guarding the 39 year old Kareem, he had Hakeem helping him do so. And, a much more prime Hakeem still only barely outscored, outshot, and outrebounded the VERY OLD Kareem in that series.

I get a kick out of those that call Hakeem a great defensive center, too. A young Shaq not only averaged 28 ppg against him, but on a sensational .595 FG%. And a more prime Shaq averaged 29 ppg on him a couple of years later (while holding Hakeem to 13 ppg on .426 shooting.) And once again, a 38 and 39 year old Kareem was routinely dumping 30+ point games, with THREE of over 40+, and ALL on mind-boggling FG%'s.

Even Robinson, who gets ripped for playing poorly against Hakeem in their 6 game playoff series, pretty much was, at the very least, the equal of Hakeem in their remaining 42 H2H games (with Robinson's team winning 30 of them.)

Nor do the Hakeem-worshipers EVER mention that in their CAREER H2H's, BOTH in the regular season, AND post-season, Shaq wasthe MUCH more DOMINANT player.

Great shot-blocker? Again, Hakeem was not even the best shot-blocker of HIS era. "Cement Shoes" Eaton was EASILY a better shot-blocker.

Scoring? How many scoring titles did Hakeem win in his career? In fact, in how many was even CLOSE to winning a scoring title?

FG%? Hakeem was nothing more than ordinary in that regard, for a center, in HIS era. His highest FG% season was .534. BUT, that came in his ROOKIE season, in an NBA which had the HIGHEST FG% in it's HISTORY! There were 30-52 teams shooting .504 back then, and the entire Laker team shot .548 that season.

Rebounding? Hakeem barely won TWO rebounding titles, and again, in 18 seasons. In fact, when he was paired up with an equally aged 6-6 Charles Barkley, Barkley POUNDED his teammate on the glass by over FOUR per GAME.


And BTW, Hakeem shot .500, .483 and .483 in his three Finals. And again, in 15 post-seasons, and in 18 total seasons.

As for Bird. He carried SEVEN teams with HCA down in flames, and generally shot poorly in nearly all of them. He had post-seasons of .450, .444, .427, .422, and even .408, and in leagues that generally shot about .485 on average. In his five Finals he shot .488, .484, .449, .445, and even .419. He wasn't even the best player on HIS team in one of three titles in those Finals. And overall, in his five Finals, he wasn't even the second best player on the floor (or perhaps even the third best player) in three of them. In his best statistical season, in 87-88, he crumbled horribly against the Pistons, shooting .351 in that series.

Kobe had his share of holes too, but FIVE rings in SEVEN Finals, as well as scoring titles, and even spectacular scoring games. And his career, overall, is better than either Bird's, or Hakeem's.

[LEFT4DEAD]

Hakeem- top 10 lock
Bryant- 11-15
Hakeem easily, without thinking twice

[iDefend5]

This is a closer argument than most people think.

[blablabla]

kobe

[Haymaker]

He was outplayed by a young Shaq (whose teammates shrunk, while Hakeem's elevated their play) in the '95 Finals.

:roll: :lol :oldlol: :facepalm

[ShaqAttack3234]

Nothing against Kobe, but Hakeem was just a better player. Hakeem is probably the best player of the past 25-30 years other than Jordan, imo. He could carry your offense in the post, create looks for the shooters with his passing out of double teams, play effectively 15-20 feet from the basket if necessary by facing up and shooting or driving, and his defense was unbelievable. Whether it was defending screen/rolls, blocking shots or even later, his post defense. He was the best defensive player of the past 30 years, imo. His ability late in games offensively was rivaled only by Kareem among centers, and very few have had the ability to raise their play so consistently in big games, and this started even early in Hakeem's career(see '86-'88 playoffs).

I go back and forth on some players, but while both Hakeem and Kobe are the best of the best, I really can't see a convincing argument to make me change my mind on this one. It's clear enough to me.


Past his peak, but still an all star, and he basically ended up spotting up on more then half the possessions on that team. Once Tomjanavich got there and started running almost exclusively through Hakeem you saw the rest of the teams production dip pretty dramatically too (Otis Thorpe being the prime example, who was an all star. Kenny and Vernon also had their production drop) It was the right thing to do, but it does say something about Hakeem.

Aside from Drexler and Barkley, you can throw Sampson in there for his first 2 years at least. But Hakeem did have the least help of any top 10 player for most of his prime or near-prime years, imo.

Either way, I don't think the other player's production dropping says much at all because as you said, going through Hakeem more was the right thing to do. The other players were put in the proper roles for them to win. Of course more shots for Hakeem will mean less shots for the others.

I'm not sure how many other players could've been as successful with everything going through them as much as Hakeem during those years which was pretty much Hakeem in the post and then space the floor with the other 4, and he got those shooters great looks.

Horry had by far his best seasons alongside Hakeem and Drexler played his best basketball since '92 after being traded to Houston in '95.

Granted, having an offense revolve around you that much should put numbers in perspective, but I don't think numbers should be the primary factor when judging a player of Hakeem's caliber.


Hakeem and Bird are way over-rated on this forum.

The reality...

8. Kobe
9. Bird
10. Hakeem or Moses

:oldlol: No. Hakeem is underrated if anything, and Bird is rated correctly(not on your list, but on most lists, you severely underrate him).

Hakeem was a significantly better player than Moses. Better scorer, much much better passer whose teammates benefited from him more and vastly superior defensive player. The only thing Moses did better was rebound, Hakeem was clearly better at everything else.

And to top it off, Hakeem won twice as many rings(with much less help) and was generally a much more impressive playoff performer.

Moses has no argument over Hakeem.



How anyone can rank Hakeem in their top-5 is a complete joke, and he was a borderline top-10 player all-time. How do I know this? Hakeem won ONE MVP, in a season in which MJ took a vacation. He had ONE other season, as the SECOND best player in the eyes of the MVP voters. And he had TWO more seasons as a Top-4 player. The man was not even a top-TEN player in nearly HALF of his 18 season career. And yet some consider him a top-FIVE player...ALL-TIME?????

MVP voting does not define best players. Funny how you rip it when it hurts Wilt, but cling to it here. Hakeem was quite clearly a top 10 player every season from '86-'97. If you disagree, then try naming 10 better players in some of those seasons. Only 1 you can make a case for is '91 and only because Hakeem missed a lot of games that year. And even so, there weren't 10 players who were better players than him at that time.


That was IT. He was outplayed by a young Shaq (whose teammates shrunk, while Hakeem's elevated their play) in the '95 Finals.

Shaq didn't outplay Hakeem in the '95 finals. :oldlol: What the hell are you talking about? Hakeem outplayed Shaq. Shaq held his own, but Hakeem clearly outplayed Shaq in games 2 and 4 and was generally better in the critical moments while Shaq only outplayed Hakeem in game 1.


I get a kick out of those that call Hakeem a great defensive center, too.

So you're denying that Hakeem was a great defensive player now? :wtf:

[lbj23clutch]

Hakeem and Bird are way over-rated on this forum.

The reality...

8. Kobe
9. Bird
10. Hakeem or Moses


How anyone can rank Hakeem in their top-5 is a complete joke, and he was a borderline top-10 player all-time. How do I know this? Hakeem won ONE MVP, in a season in which MJ took a vacation. He had ONE other season, as the SECOND best player in the eyes of the MVP voters. And he had TWO more seasons as a Top-4 player. The man was not even a top-TEN player in nearly HALF of his 18 season career. And yet some consider him a top-FIVE player...ALL-TIME?????

The reality was, Hakeem outplayed Ewing in a seven game series, and in which his 58-24 Rockets (Hakeem's BEST record BTW) beat Ewing's 56-26 Knicks in that seven game series. His other claim to fame was badly outplaying Robinson in the '95 playoffs (in four of their six games.) That was IT. He was outplayed by a young Shaq (whose teammates shrunk, while Hakeem's elevated their play) in the '95 Finals.

The rest of his career, Hakeem played on 45-50 win teams (only FOUR teams that even won 50 games, and NONE that won 60.) And, how can anyone ignore this FACT...Hakeem anchored EIGHT teams that were BLOWN AWAY in the FIRST ROUND. Yes, EIGHT of his 15 playoff teams not only lost in the FIRST ROUND, they were crushed in ALL of them.

And, of course, no one mentions a more prime Shaq just abusing Hakeem. Or a 38 and 39 year old Kareem, in TEN STRAIGHT games, averaging 31.8 ppg on .630 shooting against Hakeem. Or a 38-42 year old Kareem outscoring a 23-26 year old Hakeem in their 23 H2H games, and outshooting him by a staggering .610 to .512 margin. And PLEASE, don't give me Hakeem's '86 WCF's against the 39 year old Kareem's Lakers. The Rockets coach finally accepted the fact that Hakeem was helpless in guarding Kareem, and not only had Sampson guarding the 39 year old Kareem, he had Hakeem helping him do so. And, a much more prime Hakeem still only barely outscored, outshot, and outrebounded the VERY OLD Kareem in that series.

I get a kick out of those that call Hakeem a great defensive center, too. A young Shaq not only averaged 28 ppg against him, but on a sensational .595 FG%. And a more prime Shaq averaged 29 ppg on him a couple of years later (while holding Hakeem to 13 ppg on .426 shooting.) And once again, a 38 and 39 year old Kareem was routinely dumping 30+ point games, with THREE of over 40+, and ALL on mind-boggling FG%'s.

Even Robinson, who gets ripped for playing poorly against Hakeem in their 6 game playoff series, pretty much was, at the very least, the equal of Hakeem in their remaining 42 H2H games (with Robinson's team winning 30 of them.)

Nor do the Hakeem-worshipers EVER mention that in their CAREER H2H's, BOTH in the regular season, AND post-season, Shaq wasthe MUCH more DOMINANT player.

Great shot-blocker? Again, Hakeem was not even the best shot-blocker of HIS era. "Cement Shoes" Eaton was EASILY a better shot-blocker.

Scoring? How many scoring titles did Hakeem win in his career? In fact, in how many was even CLOSE to winning a scoring title?

FG%? Hakeem was nothing more than ordinary in that regard, for a center, in HIS era. His highest FG% season was .534. BUT, that came in his ROOKIE season, in an NBA which had the HIGHEST FG% in it's HISTORY! There were 30-52 teams shooting .504 back then, and the entire Laker team shot .548 that season.

Rebounding? Hakeem barely won TWO rebounding titles, and again, in 18 seasons. In fact, when he was paired up with an equally aged 6-6 Charles Barkley, Barkley POUNDED his teammate on the glass by over FOUR per GAME.


And BTW, Hakeem shot .500, .483 and .483 in his three Finals. And again, in 15 post-seasons, and in 18 total seasons.

As for Bird. He carried SEVEN teams with HCA down in flames, and generally shot poorly in nearly all of them. He had post-seasons of .450, .444, .427, .422, and even .408, and in leagues that generally shot about .485 on average. In his five Finals he shot .488, .484, .449, .445, and even .419. He wasn't even the best player on HIS team in one of three titles in those Finals. And overall, in his five Finals, he wasn't even the second best player on the floor (or perhaps even the third best player) in three of them. In his best statistical season, in 87-88, he crumbled horribly against the Pistons, shooting .351 in that series.

Kobe had his share of holes too, but FIVE rings in SEVEN Finals, as well as scoring titles, and even spectacular scoring games. And his career, overall, is better than either Bird's, or Hakeem's.
You mad because Hakeem was a more talented big man then Kareem? Kareem is no doubt greater(part of it due to less competition of centers during his era and also MUCH better teammates), but one on one I'd put my money on Hakeem. You also gotta remember, Hakeem played in the golden age of the center position, so his competition was much tougher. This is a guy who dominated the likes of David Robinson, Shaq and Ewing in a playoff series. Give him Magic and Showtime's Lakers and I guarantee you the number of accolades would be similar if he played in the same era as Kareem.


Don't get me wrong Kareem is definitely the greater player, some might even argue the GOAT. Personally I got him at number 2 behind MJ.

[KevinNYC]

Nothing against Kobe, but Hakeem was just a better player. Hakeem is probably the best player of the past 25-30 years other than Jordan, imo.


30 years ago was 1982. You have him above Magic and Bird?....It sounds like you don't

[lbj23clutch]

30 years ago was 1982. You have him above Magic and Bird?....It sounds like you don't
Ignoring all accolades. Just in terms of a basketball standpoint(on court play and production) then yes he's arguably better then both those guys.

[bdreason]

I have Hakeem ranked 7th all-time and Kobe ranked 10th all-time, even though Kobe has 3 more rings.

[bdreason]

Hakeem and Jordan are the best two players I've ever seen play in their prime. I saw the ends of Magic and Birds careers, but I was young. If I had to rank the 4 for franchise it would probably be Jordan > Magic > Bird > Hakeem.

[magnax1]

LOL Thorpe didn't do crap after he left Houston. Maxwell had his highest scoring years in Houston. Maxwell wasn't doing crap with the Spurs before he got traded. His scoring went up immediately with Houston.

Your memory sucks.
You don't even need a memory to know what I said is true. You can just look it up. Thorpe equaled his Houston Production in Portland in considerably fewer minutes (and per 36 equaled his production pre Rudy T) and Vernon Maxwell went from a 17 ppg scorer to 13 ppg scorer with Rudy T, and then when he left Houston immediately went back up to 16 ppg.
The way everything ran through Hakeem on every play when Rudy T was there turned everyone into spotup shooters and not much else. That really should be taken into account, because it's extremely difficult to turn a team like that into a top tier offense.

[magnax1]

But Hakeem did have the least help of any top 10 player for most of his prime or near-prime years, imo.
Moses didn't have as much help for the most part, and there are quite a few guys who are arguably top 15 that had a similar amount of, or considerably less help.


Either way, I don't think the other player's production dropping says much at all because as you said, going through Hakeem more was the right thing to do. The other players were put in the proper roles for them to win. Of course more shots for Hakeem will mean less shots for the others.
Just because it's really the only way things could function doesn't mean it should be praised. Hakeem took the ball out of the hands of good players. I value someone who doesn't take anything away from the rest of the team, and Hakeem just doesn't fit that description at all.


I'm not sure how many other players could've been as successful with everything going through them as much as Hakeem during those years which was pretty much Hakeem in the post and then space the floor with the other 4, and he got those shooters great looks.

Horry had by far his best seasons alongside Hakeem and Drexler played his best basketball since '92 after being traded to Houston in '95.

Granted, having an offense revolve around you that much should put numbers in perspective, but I don't think numbers should be the primary factor when judging a player of Hakeem's caliber.
It's probably true that there aren't a lot of players that could have been as successful in Hakeem's situation, but on the other end I don't think Hakeem could have been successful in a lot of other situations with players that really needed the ball to score. For example, I doubt you could drop him on the 83 sixers like Moses and have them end up being one of the best teams ever. Hakeem was lucky he got Drexler, because they were really perfect for eachother. Drexler struggled as a first option half court scorer, but excelled in the spotup/fastbreak/off the ball offensive role he was stuck with in Houston.
Either way, I'd take Hakeem's total career over Kobe's, but I'd probably take Kobe's 06 and 07 season over Hakeem's best.

[millwad]

He was outplayed by a young Shaq (whose teammates shrunk, while Hakeem's elevated their play) in the '95 Finals.

Haha, this is why you get ridiculed on ISH..:facepalm



The rest of his career, Hakeem played on 45-50 win teams (only FOUR teams that even won 50 games, and NONE that won 60.) And, how can anyone ignore this FACT...Hakeem anchored EIGHT teams that were BLOWN AWAY in the FIRST ROUND. Yes, EIGHT of his 15 playoff teams not only lost in the FIRST ROUND, they were crushed in ALL of them.

What years do you think that he should have made it further in the playoffs and what years should his teams won more games?




I get a kick out of those that call Hakeem a great defensive center, too.


Hahaha....:facepalm





Great shot-blocker? Again, Hakeem was not even the best shot-blocker of HIS era. "Cement Shoes" Eaton was EASILY a better shot-blocker.

Hakeem was a terrible shot blocker, right?




Scoring? How many scoring titles did Hakeem win in his career? In fact, in how many was even CLOSE to winning a scoring title?

Hakeem has the highest point per game average in the playoffs for any center, way ahead of Wilt.. :bowdown:

When guy's like Wilt put the scoring on the shoulders of his teammates, Hakeem actually raised his scoring along with his FG%.




FG%? Hakeem was nothing more than ordinary in that regard, for a center, in HIS era.

And still his FG% in the playoffs was higher than Wilt Chamberlain's and we always hear you praise Wilt for his FG%...

[ShaqAttack3234]

30 years ago was 1982. You have him above Magic and Bird?....It sounds like you don't

Yes, I think he was better than both. I use to have Bird over Hakeem, though.


Moses didn't have as much help for the most part, and there are quite a few guys who are arguably top 15 that had a similar amount of, or considerably less help.

Moses wasn't top 10, though. Arguably top 15.

Moses had some weak teams with Houston(particularly '82, imo), but he had some good players on some of those teams, particularly Calvin Murphy. Not really worse than a lot of Hakeem's teams.

But Moses played on incredibly talented Sixer teams, much more talented than teams Hakeem played on(and I'd say more talented even considering the era). And they definitely underachieved in '84, and Moses was considered a disappointment that year, their '85 team was also very talented.


Just because it's really the only way things could function doesn't mean it should be praised. Hakeem took the ball out of the hands of good players. I value someone who doesn't take anything away from the rest of the team, and Hakeem just doesn't fit that description at all.

Hakeem was a considerably more effective offensive player than anyone he played with during his prime, so it's right that he should have more shots and touches.

You're not going to have many teams where everyone maximizes their individual ability. It's just not realistic. And it should absolutely be praised because the results speak for themselves. With him winning a couple of titles during those years, I could care less if he was taking the ball out of good players hands, he was a better player and they won. I could understand where you're coming from more if they weren't successful.

In reality, I think Hakeem was underutilized offensively for much of his career and played in some poor offenses. Look at how horrible the '90 Rockets offense looked for example. And whenever those 80's and early 90's Rocket teams slowed down in the playoffs, Hakeem was usually up to about 30 ppg because they often surrounded him with streaky chuckers and generally players less effective at creating for themselves in the half court.

You mentioned Vernon Maxwell before, but Mad Max had horrible shot selection and was inconsistent. He could go off on a great shooting streak or he could shoot you out of a game. I'm much more comfortable with the ball in Hakeem's hands than Mad Max, and limiting at least some of Maxwell's shots to more open looks that come from Hakeem's double teams.


It's probably true that there aren't a lot of players that could have been as successful in Hakeem's situation, but on the other end I don't think Hakeem could have been successful in a lot of other situations with players that really needed the ball to score. For example, I doubt you could drop him on the 83 sixers like Moses and have them end up being one of the best teams ever. Hakeem was lucky he got Drexler, because they were really perfect for eachother. Drexler struggled as a first option half court scorer, but excelled in the spotup/fastbreak/off the ball offensive role he was stuck with in Houston.

Well, that's your opinion, but I disagree completely with the exception of the part where Drexler was perfect for the '95 Rockets because I've also said that Drexler was more suited to being a 2nd option or a 1st option on a loaded team with balance like the early 90's Blazers.

I think prime Hakeem would've done great on the '83 Sixers. After all, they were a great team and championship contender even without Moses. Olajuwon was also a much better and more willing passer than Moses so I don't see him taking away from them. Moses as great as he was(and he was the best player in the league for a season or 2), was as big of a black hole as any all-time great I've seen, and wasn't really a guy who made his teammates better, imo.

The '83 Sixers had a really good transition game and that combo of Moses in the half court or the transition game down. I see no reason why Hakeem couldn't have done that. After all, the '91 Rockets had a long winning streak and a really strong stretch with Hakeem scoring well under 20 ppg and not really being the featured guy offensively.


Either way, I'd take Hakeem's total career over Kobe's, but I'd probably take Kobe's 06 and 07 season over Hakeem's best.

Wow, this surprised me. Usually people choose the opposite. I have Hakeem for prime, peak and career. Though I hardly differentiate between prime and career as I judge a player almost exclusively on how good they were in their prime or near their prime.

[tontoz]

You don't even need a memory to know what I said is true. You can just look it up. Thorpe equaled his Houston Production in Portland in considerably fewer minutes (and per 36 equaled his production pre Rudy T) and Vernon Maxwell went from a 17 ppg scorer to 13 ppg scorer with Rudy T, and then when he left Houston immediately went back up to 16 ppg.
The way everything ran through Hakeem on every play when Rudy T was there turned everyone into spotup shooters and not much else. That really should be taken into account, because it's extremely difficult to turn a team like that into a top tier offense.




Maxwell was averaging 7 ppg with the Spurs they year he got traded to Houston. His best scoring years were with Hakeem. He never averaged 17 with any other team. He had ONE season over 13 ppg without Hakeem.

Thorpe never even averaged 15 after he left Houston.

The idea that Hakeem hurt the production of other players is nonsense.

[tontoz]

Hakeem was first team All-NBA Defense 5 times, 2nd team 4 times. And this was in the same era with Shaq, DRob and Ewing.

[Bigsmoke]

I think something that's forgotten about Hakeem is how ball dominant he was. He completely controlled the offense on his championship teams, and didn't play that well with other all stars other then Drexler.
That doesn't mean he was better then Kobe, I don't really think he was (Peak vs Peak, Kobe might be, but not career wise) but it's something that people forget about Hakeem. He isn't exactly the ideal player to build a dominant offense around.

Hakeem went to the Finals with an All Star sidekick in his second season didnt he?

[Bigsmoke]

to answer the question.

Hakeem was the better player but Kobe might be higher in the ALL TIME GREATEST if he keeps this up.

[Sarcastic]

Ignoring all accolades. Just in terms of a basketball standpoint(on court play and production) then yes he's arguably better then both those guys.

:oldlol: No way in hell is he better than Magic and Bird.

[Carbine]

Hakeem's teams were gone in the first round or didn't even make the playoffs in five straight years, when Hakeem was 25 years old through 30.

We're not talking about over the hill Hakeem here, we're talking physical prime.

Obviously him not winning titles those 5 years is perfectly ok, but when you're a GREAT player like that, you have to take a lot of heat for winning a combined THREE playoff games in 5 years of your physical prime.

That's absurd for someone of his caliber.

[Bigsmoke]

Hakeem's teams were gone in the first round or didn't even make the playoffs in five straight years, when Hakeem was 25 years old through 30.

We're not talking about over the hill Hakeem here, we're talking physical prime.

Obviously him not winning titles those 5 years is perfectly ok, but when you're a GREAT player like that, you have to take a lot of heat for winning a combined THREE playoff games in 5 years of your physical prime.

That's absurd for someone of his caliber.

Kobe failed to get out the first round 3 times in a row :confusedshrug:

and he couldnt win a championship with Shaq destroying Ben Wallace in the Finals.

[AlphaWolf24]

Kobe failed to get out the first round 3 times in a row :confusedshrug:

and he couldnt win a championship with Shaq destroying Ben Wallace in the Finals.


read that and laughed.....


Shaq got Merked by Wallace and Shed in that Finals...they totally outhustled him and took his soul...he never recovered after that.

[Bigsmoke]

read that and laughed.....


Shaq got Merked by Wallace and Shed in that Finals...they totally outhustled him and took his soul...he never recovered after that.

lol they only controlled in game 3.

[Smoke117]

Hakeem easily. He's the greatest defensive player over the last 30 years and one of the best first option scorers ever. Kobe can't compete with that.

[gengiskhan]

Hakeem, by a mile

any given decade

any given age

-impact without the ball in his hand
-impact defensively
-impact inside the paint

& GOAT footwork ever inside the paint.

[magnax1]

Moses wasn't top 10, though. Arguably top 15.
He's the tenth best to me.


Moses had some weak teams with Houston(particularly '82, imo), but he had some good players on some of those teams, particularly Calvin Murphy. Not really worse than a lot of Hakeem's teams.
Just depends on the year really, but either way, Moses had some teams comparable, and probably worse compared to Hakeem. Especially if you take into account the rest of the teams in the league.


But Moses played on incredibly talented Sixer teams, much more talented than teams Hakeem played on(and I'd say more talented even considering the era). And they definitely underachieved in '84, and Moses was considered a disappointment that year, their '85 team was also very talented.
You can't really blame Moses for declining in 84 lol. They did underachieve a tiny bit, but losing against the Nets isn't nearly as bad as it looks when you consider Michael Ray was out for much of the season (presumably from his drug problem?) and looked pretty good in that series.



Hakeem was a considerably more effective offensive player than anyone he played with during his prime, so it's right that he should have more shots and touches.
Having the shots isn't a problem, but the way he dominated the offense is


You're not going to have many teams where everyone maximizes their individual ability. It's just not realistic.
I disagree. I think that's a big difference between a lot of the great players. Lebron and Hakeem especially are players who have struggled to play with playing with other great players (though Lebron looks much better this season)


And it should absolutely be praised because the results speak for themselves. With him winning a couple of titles during those years I could care less if he was taking the ball out of good players hands, he was a better player and they won. I could understand where you're coming from more if they weren't successful.
But there were seasons where they weren't successful because of it. You point out Moses in 84, but Hakeem's team in 97 underachieved much more, and mostly because Hakeem struggled to play with other players who needed the ball. People remember Barkley being added, but Kevin Willis who was still a very good starter, and Eddie Johnson who was not what he once was, but still a good scorer off the bench was added too. That team was pretty stacked, and lost to a team that in terms of talent really shouldn't have beaten them. The problem was that the offense was compromised of Hakeem isoing, and not moving the ball while Barkley was spotted up in the corner, and the Jazz were the complete opposite.
I also think it's worth pointing out Moses played very well with Barkley, even though they were a bit redundant in skillset.
99 they underachieved quite a bit too, and Pippen complained about playing with Hakeem and Barkley. Though you can't blame that team as much on Hakeem, as the whole team was just kind of ill conceived, and he wasn't an ideal first option at that point.


In reality, I think Hakeem was underutilized offensively for much of his career and played in some poor offenses. Look at how horrible the '90 Rockets offense looked for example. And whenever those 80's and early 90's Rocket teams slowed down in the playoffs, Hakeem was usually up to about 30 ppg because they often surrounded him with streaky chuckers and generally players less effective at creating for themselves in the half court.
I pretty much agree. Rudy T did a really job trying to build an offense around Hakeem that utilized his talents during the championship runs.


You mentioned Vernon Maxwell before, but Mad Max had horrible shot selection and was inconsistent. He could go off on a great shooting streak or he could shoot you out of a game. I'm much more comfortable with the ball in Hakeem's hands than Mad Max, and limiting at least some of Maxwell's shots to more open looks that come from Hakeem's double teams.
I'd agree if Maxwell improved his efficiency when Hakeem took control of the offense, but he really didn't. There's no doubt he was streaky though.



Well, that's your opinion, but I disagree completely with the exception of the part where Drexler was perfect for the '95 Rockets because I've also said that Drexler was more suited to being a 2nd option or a 1st option on a loaded team with balance like the early 90's Blazers.
Well I wouldn't really want him as a first option on any team, but I pretty much agree.


I think prime Hakeem would've done great on the '83 Sixers. After all, they were a great team and championship contender even without Moses. Olajuwon was also a much better and more willing passer than Moses so I don't see him taking away from them. Moses as great as he was(and he was the best player in the league for a season or 2), was as big of a black hole as any all-time great I've seen, and wasn't really a guy who made his teammates better, imo.
Moses didn't need a lot of possessions to get his 25 points though. He got a ton of them just from drop offs down low, offensive rebounds, and other ways to score off the ball. Hakeem needed the ball every time down the floor to get 25, and I can't see that being nearly as productive of an offense with Dr. J and Toney there.




Wow, this surprised me. Usually people choose the opposite. I have Hakeem for prime, peak and career. Though I hardly differentiate between prime and career as I judge a player almost exclusively on how good they were in their prime or near their prime.
I'm pretty big fan of Kobe in his best couples season, but much less so during the rest of his career. 06-09 is really the only time I thought he really got everything right. 06, and 07 especially since I could already see a big decline in athleticism in the next 2 years. He had that ability to get others involved that he really didn't have after that, and he could score probably as well as anyone but Jordan and maybe Shaq in the halfcourt in the past 30 or so. I think the overall comparison to Jordan is a bit ludicrous, but just in terms of scoring I wouldn't say he's far off.
The rest of his career though, he just reminds me of another guy like Melo, Dominique, or other great scorers that really didn't completely grasp the team concept, though he definitely has an IQ far above those guys, and was a much better defender. I mean, a comparison the Melo isn't a bad thing, but he isn't an ideal player to build a champion around.

[BlackJoker23]

kobe easily

[Lebron23]

kobe easily

http://cache.blippitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/crazy-kobe-bryant-fan.gif

[ShaqAttack3234]

He's the tenth best to me.

Well, there's somebody in my top 10 that you rank considerably worse than I do then. :lol Though I can see Moses in that 11-15 range, wouldn't have him as high as 11th myself, but that's a different discussion.


Just depends on the year really, but either way, Moses had some teams comparable, and probably worse compared to Hakeem. Especially if you take into account the rest of the teams in the league.

Era is a factor, but don't forget that Hakeem played part of his career in the 80's too and even by the early 90's, his teams were considerably less talented than the top teams of the West such as Portland, LA, San Antonio, Phoenix ect.


You can't really blame Moses for declining in 84 lol. They did underachieve a tiny bit, but losing against the Nets isn't nearly as bad as it looks when you consider Michael Ray was out for much of the season (presumably from his drug problem?) and looked pretty good in that series.

I can blame him, the Sixers were considerably more talented and favored and underachieved all year coming off their unbelievable '83 season. Philly's owner called Moses out that season for being out of shape and not playing as hard.

That team should've been right back in the mix for an NBA championship, they had more talent than any team in the East, imo.


Having the shots isn't a problem, but the way he dominated the offense is

I simply don't see this as a problem considering the results.


I disagree. I think that's a big difference between a lot of the great players. Lebron and Hakeem especially are players who have struggled to play with playing with other great players (though Lebron looks much better this season)

I don't see Hakeem as struggling to play with great players. He just didn't play with many. Obviously it worked with Drexler and it was working with Sampson when he was good.


But there were seasons where they weren't successful because of it. You point out Moses in 84, but Hakeem's team in 97 underachieved much more, and mostly because Hakeem struggled to play with other players who needed the ball. People remember Barkley being added, but Kevin Willis who was still a very good starter, and Eddie Johnson who was not what he once was, but still a good scorer off the bench was added too. That team was pretty stacked, and lost to a team that in terms of talent really shouldn't have beaten them. The problem was that the offense was compromised of Hakeem isoing, and not moving the ball while Barkley was spotted up in the corner, and the Jazz were the complete opposite.
I also think it's worth pointing out Moses played very well with Barkley, even though they were a bit redundant in skillset.
99 they underachieved quite a bit too, and Pippen complained about playing with Hakeem and Barkley. Though you can't blame that team as much on Hakeem, as the whole team was just kind of ill conceived, and he wasn't an ideal first option at that point.

Hakeem wasn't the problem with the '97 Rockets to me, I thought he was great. As a young, ignorant fan, I thought Houston was going to win a title with that big 3, but comparing them to a team like Utah, they had less talent, but had a better run offense than almost any other team, and fit together much better than Houston.

It's important to remember that Hakeem wasn't quite the player he was, and Barkley had been declining for years despite still being good. Malone on the other hand was as pretty much as good as ever in '97 and Stockton had arguably the series of his life vs Houston that season.

As far as Barkley and Moses, well Barkley was young and pretty raw when he played with Moses, but as long as we're talking about a player being held back, look at what Charles did in the '86 playoffs without Moses for what it's worth.


Moses didn't need a lot of possessions to get his 25 points though. He got a ton of them just from drop offs down low, offensive rebounds, and other ways to score off the ball. Hakeem needed the ball every time down the floor to get 25, and I can't see that being nearly as productive of an offense with Dr. J and Toney there.

Well, the offense probably wouldn't revolve around him as much as it did under Rudy T if he had that type of offensive talent around him.

Moses did get those garbage baskets, but at the same time, if he got the ball in the post, he'd hold it even when doubled and go to the drop step and fadeaway pretty much every time. If Hakeem was doubled and couldn't spin away quickly for the baseline fadeaway or spin, he'd find his teammates. That's a huge difference for me when comparing the players.


I'm pretty big fan of Kobe in his best couples season, but much less so during the rest of his career. 06-09 is really the only time I thought he really got everything right. 06, and 07 especially since I could already see a big decline in athleticism in the next 2 years. He had that ability to get others involved that he really didn't have after that, and he could score probably as well as anyone but Jordan and maybe Shaq in the halfcourt in the past 30 or so. I think the overall comparison to Jordan is a bit ludicrous, but just in terms of scoring I wouldn't say he's far off.
The rest of his career though, he just reminds me of another guy like Melo, Dominique, or other great scorers that really didn't completely grasp the team concept, though he definitely has an IQ far above those guys, and was a much better defender. I mean, a comparison the Melo isn't a bad thing, but he isn't an ideal player to build a champion around.

Well, I didn't see any decline in athleticism from '07 to '08, he looked more athletic to me in '08 than '07 after dropping 20 pounds. I saw more of a decline in '09, but far more noticeably from '10-present. I disagree on your assessment of the rest of his career, though.

He was a pretty clear level above Melo and Nique by '01 to me. He had his flaws, in particular his approach in the first half of the '01 season, perhaps shooting too much in the '03 Spurs series and definitely shot selection in the '04 season, and trying to shoot his way out of slumps too much notably midseason in '10 when he was injured and at times this season. And at times a tendency to go 1 on 1 too often, particularly in his early career.

But his play in the 2001 playoffs was among the best I've seen from an all around standpoint and among his best as far as playing in the flow of the offense and facilitating. His 2002 season was very solid throughout, his play was off the charts from those 35/40 point streaks on in '03 and his mix of athleticism and skill wasn't far from it's peak. And aside from that stretch in '10, he was phenomenal during the first 2 months killing guys in the post and was great in the playoffs after getting his knee drained late in the OKC series. And even in 2000, he was among the most talented scorers and arguably the best perimeter defender in the league.

He was a top 5 player every season from '01-'10 with the exception of probably '05, and he's still arguably been top 5 the past 2 seasons. He was the best player from '06-'08, top 2-3 in '01, '09 and '10 and top 3 in '02.

That's pretty remarkable. I'd agree that he didn't always put it all together from a team standpoint and all around standpoint as '01 playoffs and '08, his entire prime/career probably ranks higher to me than his peak.

[Round Mound]

Hakeem was dominant in various aspects of the game Kobe hasn`t ever been dominant at almost anything but scoring (that is with a lower FG% than any Superstar)

[Clifton]

to start a franchise I will probably choose Hakeem, but I have Kobe ranked higher in my all-time list.
Maybe you should re-think your all-time list, then. If you'd rather have player X than player Y on your team, doesn't that make player X better?

I think this is a question worth asking. I'm actually excited at the comparison. Here are the 2 best players who can't be the best of all-time. If you said Jordan, Kareem, Russell, Bird, Magic, Wilt, or Shaq was the best player of all-time, nobody would think you were crazy. Russ and Shaq might be a bit of a stretch but an argument could be made and it'd be respectable. But Kobe and Hakeem? Absolutely not, you'd get laughed outta the room. Yet Kobe and Hakeem are each, in their own way, clearly head and shoulders above anyone but those 7 in NBA history. Who you gonna put over Kobe? Oscar? Who you gonna put over Hakeem? Duncan? in both cases it just don't feel right. These two guys, it seems to me, are their own tier.

And the fact that it seems to me obvious that you'd rather have Hakeem on your team than Kobe says a lot about the game of basketball - probably more than it says about Kobe or Hakeem. It says that defense and the center position are more valuable than expert assassin perimeter play. It says that 5 blocks > 35 points. Hakeem did the stuff that's less sportscenter-friendly. But it just wouldn't feel right taking Kobe over him, would it? Kobe to prime Pierce or Wade isn't so great a drop; Hakeem to anyone playing center today is.

Edit: on second thought I think Duncan might be on this little tier or above it. His sober intangible impact on his teammates is a big factor. He's like a really good father, or something. You just see people flourishing under him. Hakeem vs. Duncan I'd like to see argued out by people who know Hakeem better.

[bwink23]

Anyone who would pick Kobe over Hakeem for their team is not interested in having a team at all. They are more interested in Kobe's ball sack, hairy or not. :no:

[Aussie Dunker]

Prime Hakeem is also a top 5 best defender in NBA history. He's one of the league leaders in steals and blocks per game.

Prime Dream was in my opinion the BEST defender of all time. I know it is debatable (Bill and MJ say hello), but he is at worst top 3 all time. He could not only defende every single position, but he could defend every single position at an elite level. Man defense A++, help defense A++, shot blocking A++, rebounding A++, stealing A++..... :bowdown:

All of this while arguably having the best offensive post game of all time (Mchale a close second)....

And also all of this, while causing no controversy, ever, and being not only the model teamate, but the model NBA player....

You build around this guy, no question...

[Lebron23]

read that and laughed.....


Shaq got Merked by Wallace and Shed in that Finals...they totally outhustled him and took his soul...he never recovered after that.


You are really an idiot. Shaq was the best player in that series. It was not his fault his sidekick played selfish basketball, and took some ill advised shots in the Finals.

Watch the 2004 NBA Finals with your eyes wide open.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=2004+NBA+Finals&oq=2004+NBA+Finals&aq=f&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_sm=12&gs_upl=1407l4296l0l5706l15l13l0l0l0l0l473l2040l7.3 .1.1.1l13l0

Detroit Pistons played together as a "team" that why they defeated the Lakers "Big Four" in the NBA Finals. Karl Malone should have joined the Spurs in the off season.

Shaquille O'Neal

26.6 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 1.6 apg, 0.4 spg, 0.4 bpg, 63.1 FG%

Kobe Bryant

22.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.6 bpg, 38.1 FG%

[Meticode]

Hakeem and Bird are way over-rated on this forum.

The reality...

8. Kobe
9. Bird
10. Hakeem or Moses


How anyone can rank Hakeem in their top-5 is a complete joke, and he was a borderline top-10 player all-time. How do I know this? Hakeem won ONE MVP, in a season in which MJ took a vacation. He had ONE other season, as the SECOND best player in the eyes of the MVP voters. And he had TWO more seasons as a Top-4 player. The man was not even a top-TEN player in nearly HALF of his 18 season career. And yet some consider him a top-FIVE player...ALL-TIME?????

The reality was, Hakeem outplayed Ewing in a seven game series, and in which his 58-24 Rockets (Hakeem's BEST record BTW) beat Ewing's 56-26 Knicks in that seven game series. His other claim to fame was badly outplaying Robinson in the '95 playoffs (in four of their six games.) That was IT. He was outplayed by a young Shaq (whose teammates shrunk, while Hakeem's elevated their play) in the '95 Finals.

The rest of his career, Hakeem played on 45-50 win teams (only FOUR teams that even won 50 games, and NONE that won 60.) And, how can anyone ignore this FACT...Hakeem anchored EIGHT teams that were BLOWN AWAY in the FIRST ROUND. Yes, EIGHT of his 15 playoff teams not only lost in the FIRST ROUND, they were crushed in ALL of them.

And, of course, no one mentions a more prime Shaq just abusing Hakeem. Or a 38 and 39 year old Kareem, in TEN STRAIGHT games, averaging 31.8 ppg on .630 shooting against Hakeem. Or a 38-42 year old Kareem outscoring a 23-26 year old Hakeem in their 23 H2H games, and outshooting him by a staggering .610 to .512 margin. And PLEASE, don't give me Hakeem's '86 WCF's against the 39 year old Kareem's Lakers. The Rockets coach finally accepted the fact that Hakeem was helpless in guarding Kareem, and not only had Sampson guarding the 39 year old Kareem, he had Hakeem helping him do so. And, a much more prime Hakeem still only barely outscored, outshot, and outrebounded the VERY OLD Kareem in that series.

I get a kick out of those that call Hakeem a great defensive center, too. A young Shaq not only averaged 28 ppg against him, but on a sensational .595 FG%. And a more prime Shaq averaged 29 ppg on him a couple of years later (while holding Hakeem to 13 ppg on .426 shooting.) And once again, a 38 and 39 year old Kareem was routinely dumping 30+ point games, with THREE of over 40+, and ALL on mind-boggling FG%'s.

Even Robinson, who gets ripped for playing poorly against Hakeem in their 6 game playoff series, pretty much was, at the very least, the equal of Hakeem in their remaining 42 H2H games (with Robinson's team winning 30 of them.)

Nor do the Hakeem-worshipers EVER mention that in their CAREER H2H's, BOTH in the regular season, AND post-season, Shaq wasthe MUCH more DOMINANT player.

Great shot-blocker? Again, Hakeem was not even the best shot-blocker of HIS era. "Cement Shoes" Eaton was EASILY a better shot-blocker.

Scoring? How many scoring titles did Hakeem win in his career? In fact, in how many was even CLOSE to winning a scoring title?

FG%? Hakeem was nothing more than ordinary in that regard, for a center, in HIS era. His highest FG% season was .534. BUT, that came in his ROOKIE season, in an NBA which had the HIGHEST FG% in it's HISTORY! There were 30-52 teams shooting .504 back then, and the entire Laker team shot .548 that season.

Rebounding? Hakeem barely won TWO rebounding titles, and again, in 18 seasons. In fact, when he was paired up with an equally aged 6-6 Charles Barkley, Barkley POUNDED his teammate on the glass by over FOUR per GAME.


And BTW, Hakeem shot .500, .483 and .483 in his three Finals. And again, in 15 post-seasons, and in 18 total seasons.

As for Bird. He carried SEVEN teams with HCA down in flames, and generally shot poorly in nearly all of them. He had post-seasons of .450, .444, .427, .422, and even .408, and in leagues that generally shot about .485 on average. In his five Finals he shot .488, .484, .449, .445, and even .419. He wasn't even the best player on HIS team in one of three titles in those Finals. And overall, in his five Finals, he wasn't even the second best player on the floor (or perhaps even the third best player) in three of them. In his best statistical season, in 87-88, he crumbled horribly against the Pistons, shooting .351 in that series.

Kobe had his share of holes too, but FIVE rings in SEVEN Finals, as well as scoring titles, and even spectacular scoring games. And his career, overall, is better than either Bird's, or Hakeem's.
I respect your opinion, but personally to me at least Kobe has to win one more ring to surpass Bird, but then again I'm probably one of those people who overrate him as you said.

[ThaRegul8r]

Prime Dream was in my opinion the BEST defender of all time. I know it is debatable (Bill and MJ say hello), but he is at worst top 3 all time. He could not only defende every single position, but he could defend every single position at an elite level. Man defense A++, help defense A++, shot blocking A++, rebounding A++, stealing A++..... :bowdown:

All of this while arguably having the best offensive post game of all time (Mchale a close second)....

And also all of this, while causing no controversy, ever, and being not only the model teamate, but the model NBA player....

:facepalm

In what is rapidly becoming a familiar refrain for me, lately, this statement only reveals that you haven't been watching basketball very long, and certainly haven't followed Hakeem his entire career, or else you'd know about this:


BEFORE HE WAS THE most gracious icon, before he came to embody the purest competitive spirit, Hakeem Olajuwon was a Net. Not in name, but in manner. Olajuwon nearly ruined the Houston Rockets with insurgent conduct, then did something rebel Nets never do: he grew up.

The Rockets arrived at the Meadowlands last night a two-time defending champion because Olajuwon finally put team ahead of self in 1993, when he initiated a drive to become the world's best player. The transformation took shape after a foul dispute with management over cold cash and phony injuries. Olajuwon was suspended by the Rockets for insubordination in '92, was nearly dealt to the Clippers that summer, then planted the seeds of a two-peat during a trip to Japan, when he convinced owner Charlie Thomas to keep him with a lavish new contract.

Though owners and coaches would change, Olajuwon completed his rise from obscure Nigerian goalie to acclaimed NBA center. He found religion, passed to teammates, won titles and forged a marketable image with talk of peace. Now road crowds appreciate him the way they did last night, when he scored 36 points in a 98-89 victory.

While the Nets remain married to their turbulent experience Willis Reed, God bless him, is expected to meet with Darryl Dawkins today Olajuwon has removed himself from a past straight out of the Jersey marshes.

Early in his career, Olajuwon was held as a remarkable talent who didn't get it. He punched Billy Paultz as a rookie to lose a playoff series to Utah, then was ejected from games in two of his three succeeding rounds. Hours before the deciding game of yet another series, he demanded management grant him 12 first-class tickets so two family members could travel between Los Angeles and Houston over the summer. He regularly ripped Sleepy Floyd and Rodney McCray in the papers.

Olajuwon forever pressed the Rockets to acquire new blood, from Norm Nixon to Kenny Smith. A year after the Smith deal was made, the Dream was unhappy with him.

The business community was unhappy with Olajuwon. He burned sponsors by showing at events late, or not at all. He changed agents with the seasons, sometimes stiffing them on commissions. When endorsements dried up, Olajuwon wanted the Rockets to make up the difference. After one of those requests was rejected, Olajuwon went down with a hamstring injury the team said he feigned. Olajuwon denied it and called Thomas a "coward." The Rockets suspended their star and explored a trade.

"I definitely thought I was going to be leaving," said Olajuwon, who was negotiating his third day of fasting for the Muslim holy period of Ramadan. "Every day I was rumored to be going somewhere new. I just left for the summer and told our owner to do what he had to do."

Having failed to find an equal-value package, the Rockets kept Olajuwon. When they gave him more money, they feared he would grow more disruptive, the way Derrick Coleman would after receiving his $30 million guarantee. But people who know Olajuwon say the public dispute with the Rockets changed him for the better. They said he realized his name was sullied, that he needed to alter his game and attitude.

"At the time, he was completely irresponsible and maybe one of the more selfish human beings you could meet," said one of those people. "But going through what he did with the Rockets made him mature. And then his commitment to his faith was the best thing that happened to him."

Hakeem was my favorite center of the '90s, but unlike some people (not saying you're one of them, I'm just talking in general), my liking a player does not stop me from being objective or cause me to put blinders on to that player's flaws. Such is the action of stans and fanboys.

[Shepseskaf]

The debates in this thread highlight how difficult it is to rate current great players compared to those of previous eras. To me, there has to be a ceiling for a current player in terms of how high they can rise in the all-time top 10 list.

In my view, Kobe is a borderline top 10 player, no matter what he does for the rest of his career. As many have pointed out, Hakeem would be the one chosen first between the two, and having watched both throughout their careers, I would say that Hakeem was the better player and more deserving of a higher all-time ranking.

[jlauber]

ShaqAttack3234[/B]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jlauber
Hakeem and Bird are way over-rated on this forum.

The reality...

8. Kobe
9. Bird
10. Hakeem or Moses


No. Hakeem is underrated if anything, and Bird is rated correctly(not on your list, but on most lists, you severely underrate him).

Hakeem was a significantly better player than Moses. Better scorer, much much better passer whose teammates benefited from him more and vastly superior defensive player. The only thing Moses did better was rebound, Hakeem was clearly better at everything else.

And to top it off, Hakeem won twice as many rings(with much less help) and was generally a much more impressive playoff performer.

Moses has no argument over Hakeem


Bird and Hakeem have ZERO cases over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan. Absolutely NONE. That is not even debateable.

Hakeem SIGNIFICANTLY better than Moses???:roll: :roll: :roll:

Moses DOMINATED for several years. IF Bird gets some kind of credit for his three MVP's, then Moses gets the same credit for his. For three years, Moses was the best player on the planet. By FAR a better rebounder (he was winning rebounding titles by as many as FIVE per game.) Offensively, a prime Moses BATTERED opposing teams much like a PRIME Shaq did.

He SHREDDED a much more prime Kareem, than any other player ever did, as well. A 38 and 39 year old Kareem, guarded EXCLUSIVELY by Hakeem, just DESTROYED Hakeem. And the "Hakeem-worshipers" always claim that Hakeem outplayed Kareem in the '86 WCF's. Great, a 23 year old Hakeem, SLIGHTLY outscored, outrebounded, and outshot a 39 year old Kareem, and BTW, it was SAMPSON who was doing the bulk of the defensive work on Kareem.

Of course, that was quite often the story for Kareem, who had many post-season drops. But, who could blame a 39 year old Kareem for being outscored 31-27, outrebounded, 11-6, and outshot, .520 to .500, by a much more prime Hakeem? The real question would have to be, what would a 23 year old Kareem, at his absolute PEAK, have leveled Hakeem with? A 38-39 year old Kareem could average 32 ppg on an unbelievable .630 in TEN STRAIGHT GAMES, against a 22-23 year old Hakeem, AND, overall, in their 23 H2H's (and when they basically guarded each other), a 38-41 year old Kareem outscored a 23-26 year old Hakeem, per game, 23-22 ppg, and outshot him by a mind-boggling .610 to .512 margin. Just what the hell would a PRIME Kareem have torched ANY version of Hakeem with? 40-50 ppg on .600 shooting would have been the norm.

Now, just how dominant was Moses? A 21-23 year old battled a 29-31 old Kareem to a virtual scoring standstill. In Kareem's 79-80 season, in which he won the MVP, Malone crushed him by a 30-20 ppg margin. And from that point on, it was a one-sided rout in their H2H's, including their post-season H2H's. And, I have no doubt that the rebounding margins were DRAMATICALLY in favor of Moses in those H2H's. By the '83 Finals, Moses was outrebounding by TEN per GAME! Even later in Kareem's career, when he was bombarding Hakeem with 30-40+ point games, and on .600-.700 shooting, a declining Moses was outscoring and outrebounding Kareem in those same seasons. And, at his peak Moses was hanging games of 37, 37, 38, and 39 on Kareem.

So, a PRIME Moses was UNSTOPPABLE. He was capable of 31 ppg SEASONS, and 18 rpg SEASONS. A prime Hakeem NEVER approached either.



MVP voting does not define best players. Funny how you rip it when it hurts Wilt, but cling to it here. Hakeem was quite clearly a top 10 player every season from '86-'97. If you disagree, then try naming 10 better players in some of those seasons. Only 1 you can make a case for is '91 and only because Hakeem missed a lot of games that year. And even so, there weren't 10 players who were better players than him at that time

A PEAK Hakeem, from '93 thru '96, went 2, 1, 5, and 4 in the MVP balloting. And the year in which he won it, Jordan did not play. Now, that was a PEAK Hakeem...averaging a THIRD place in MVP balloting. And in the cherry-picked seasons you provided, ignoring SIX of his seasons, he averaged a FIFTH in the voting. And don't give me his "competition" argument, either. Magic was able to win THREE MVPs in the MJ era, as well as against players like Bird, Moses, Kareem, and Hakeem, himself.

So, it is pure NONSENSE to rank Hakeem in ANYONE's top-5, based on the fact that a PEAK Hakeem was around the FIFTH best player of HIS era.

Here again, the Hakeem-worshipers are basically ranking Hakeem on TWO playoffs runs. And even those runs are over-rated. In his '94 run, his 58-24 Rockets beat a 56-26 Knicks team in a close seven game Finals. And here again, had MJ played that season, and on a Bulls team that went 55-27 without him (not to mention losing a close seventh game against the Knicks in the playoffs), the odds are pretty strong that Hakeem would not have won a ring. And, Hakeem played well in the '95 post-season, but he had as much talent on that roster (with HOFer Drexler) as any other team in the post-season. Which brings me to this...


Shaq didn't outplay Hakeem in the '95 finals. What the hell are you talking about? Hakeem outplayed Shaq. Shaq held his own, but Hakeem clearly outplayed Shaq in games 2 and 4 and was generally better in the critical moments while Shaq only outplayed Hakeem in game 1.



I watched that entire series, and worst case scenerio, Hakeem and Shaq battled to a draw. Shaq was the better player in game one, and in two and three, it was a draw. Hakeem, with a ton of help from his bench in game two, outplayed Shaq in the first half. Shaq pounded him in the 2nd half. And don't give me this crap that it it was too little, too late. I get so sick-and-tired of those that claim some kind of a "win" when one player contains another for PORTIONS of a game. The greats play every minute.

The reality was, that Shaq averaged 6.3 apg in that series....which was deceptive. His teammates were shooting wide-open bricks. Hakeem's teammates badly outshot Shaq's from the field, the arc, and killed them at the line. Had Shaq's teammates even played a normal series, they would have won the title.

And, for a "defensive stopper" to allow 28 ppg, on get this... .595 shooting...is a JOKE. Meanwhile, Hakeem was shot-jacking the entire series (taking nearly 30 shots a game, and only shooting .483 in the process.) He BARELY outscored a Shaq who took nearly HALF as many shots from the floor. And Shaq outrebounded, outassisted (and it should have been considerably more) and even outblocked Hakeem in that series.

And, of course, you could also take a look at their H2H's in their ENTIRE careers...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01

A PRIME Hakeem slightly outplayed a ROOKIE Shaq in two games. After that, Hakeem was outplayed in the VAST majority of them, and in some, by HUGE margins.

Of course, the Hakeem-lovers will never acknowledge that FACT.


So you're denying that Hakeem was a great defensive player now?

He was very over-rated. I have seen some on this forum claiming him as the greatest defensive player of all-time. And yet, players like Robinson were outshooting him by margins of .488 to .441 in 42 H2H's. Or Shaq with a CAREER FG% of .544 (while holding Hakeem to a career .447) against him. And in TEN of their 26 H2H's, Shaq shot .600 or better.

And the biggest "black-eye"...Kareem. An OLD Kareem, who scored, and shot BETTER, against Hakeem, than he did the REST of the NBA. And a 38-39 year old Kareem, and guarded by Hakeem in the bulk of their 23 H2H's, just OBLITERATED Hakeem. It was downright embarrassing. 32 ppg on .630 shooting. The scoring was bad enough (especially by a 39 year old), but to allow such an unfathomable FG% was just laughable.

[jlauber]

Continuing...

The REALITY was, Hakeem was a career 5th-10th best player in HIS era. A peak Hakeem was barely a top-3. And that was over a VERY SHORT span. Hell, how many people rank McAdoo very high on their lists? And yet, a PEAK McAdoo, from '74 thru '76, and including the playoffs, was the BEST player in the league. Even Bird's best seasons were only over a 4-5 year span, and yet, there are those that attempt to rank him over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan...ALL of whom had much better CAREERS. And Bird's BEST seasons never came close to the DOMINANT seasons of Wilt, MJ, Shaq and Kareem (who, despite his many post-season meltdowns, was still a FAR greater post-season player than Bird.)

So, there is virtually no CRITERIA that exists, that would place Hakeem any greater than 8th, all-time. And, even that is very debateable. Was his CAREER better than Bird's or Kobe's. I certainly can't see it. He had a higher PEAK in the POST-SEASON, but it was only in a couple of post-seasons.

The rest of Hakeem's resume reads like this:

He was the anchor on teams that were BLOWN AWAY in the FIRST ROUND, EIGHT times, which is MILES worse than any other all-time "great." The great Hakeem had a TOTAL of FOUR seasons of 50+ wins, with a HIGH of 58. His team's never even had the best record in the league, and that includes playing with both Barkley and Drexler at the same time (and in watered down leagues BTW.)

In his EIGHTEEN seasons, he was NEVER a scoring leader, nor did he ever challenge for a scoring title, either. He never had ONE 28 ppg season in his career. My god, how many players have had 30+ single seasons in NBA history? And Shaq, who took far less shots, had two seasons of nearly 30 ppg. Hakeem was NEVER even CLOSE to being a leader in FG% efficiency. In fact, he was AVERAGE, as a center, in his career in terms of FG%. Keep in mind, that for nearly half of his career, he played in the defenseless 80's, where entire LEAGUES were shooting nearly 50%. And, he won TWO rebounding titles in 18 seasons (and barely won those.) So, he was not even a truly GREAT rebounder (like Russell, Rodman, Moses, and Chamberlain.) In fact, when he was paired up with an equally as old 6-6 Barkley, Charles just slaughtered him on the glass (by as many as 4+ per game.) And while he won THREE shot-blocking titles, he was nowhere near the best shot-blocker of HIS era (Eaton was easily a much greater shot-blocker.)

Once again, the Hakeem-worshipers are claiming that TWO playoff runs (and in one MJ did not play), are enough to somehow make him a top-5 player....which is completely RIDICULOUS. And in his 15 post-seasons, he played against a HOF starting center in 35 games. 35 damn games. And in six of those, he faced a 39 year old Kareem. He did easily outplay Ewing in their ONE H2H series, and he did wallop Robinson (a notorious flop in his post-seasons BTW),in FOUR of six playoff H2H's, but in his other 42 H2H games against Robinson, it was a virtual draw.

Hakeem did a lot of things well, but was not GREAT in any. He was NOT a great scorer. He was not much better than an ordinary shooter. He was a good, but not great rebounder. And he was nothing more than a very good defensive player (and over-rated.)

[Smoke117]

Jlauber you are plain and simply an idiot. Hakeem Olajuwon's defensive prowess does not come from him being some "defensive stopper"...hell the reason why big men are the anchors are not because of one on one defense but because of how they protect the paint and how they are involved in the team defense as a whole and how much they affect their team defense. Guys like Russell, Walton, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan, Garnett, etc were so so dominant not because of of one on one defense, but because of of how they protected the paint and Only a moron would start a franchise with Kobe Bryant over Hakeem Olajuwon and only a bigger moron would actually try to an prove it by writing all that garbage you wrote.

[KevinNYC]

:facepalm

In what is rapidly becoming a familiar refrain for me, lately, this statement only reveals that you haven't been watching basketball very long, and certainly haven't followed Hakeem his entire career, or else you'd know about this:

Knowledge drop about Hakeem. Did not know that back story.

[jlauber]

Jlauber you are plain and simply an idiot. Hakeem Olajuwon's defensive prowess does not come from him being some "defensive stopper"...hell the reason why big men are the anchors are not because of one on one defense but because of how they protect the paint and how they are involved in the team defense as a whole and how much they affect their team defense. Guys like Russell, Walton, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan, Garnett, etc were so so dominant not because of of one on one defense, but because of of how they protected the paint and Only a moron would start a franchise with Kobe Bryant over Hakeem Olajuwon and only a bigger moron would actually try to an prove it by writing all that garbage you wrote.

Take a look at the all-time Defensive Ratings seasons...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/def_rtg_season.html

Hmmm...we FINALLY see Hakeem surface in the 63RD Spot!

That was his greatest defensive rating season. And that stat was not available in the 60's, when Russell and Wilt were shutting down the entire league, either.

Of course, let's compare the Defensive Win Shares...which DOES include Russell and Wilt...

Hakeem does fair considerably better in that category, but is still miles behind Russell and Wilt. (And, BTW, I notice that you did NOT include Chamberlain, who was nearly invinceable in the the mid-60 to late 60's, and who was holding Kareem to a 100+ point under his normal FG%'s LATE in his career.)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/dws_season.html


Once again, the morons here who somehow believe Hakeem was even REMOTELY in the class of players like Russell and Wilt are laughable.


And don't get me started on Wilt vs. Hakeem. A PRIME Chamberlain absolutely DOMINATED EVERYBODY in the NBA, and by LIGHT YEARS. Hakeem's career, both regular season, AND, post-season, PALES in comparison to the domination that Wilt leveled on his peers. And a PRIME Wilt was no worse than the second greatest playoff performer of all-time...especially if you take into account his OVERWHELMING play against his opposing centers.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Bird and Hakeem have ZERO cases over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan. Absolutely NONE. That is not even debateable.


Championships
Bird - 3
Wilt - 2

[jlauber]

Jlauber you are plain and simply an idiot. Hakeem Olajuwon's defensive prowess does not come from him being some "defensive stopper"...hell the reason why big men are the anchors are not because of one on one defense but because of how they protect the paint and how they are involved in the team defense as a whole and how much they affect their team defense. Guys like Russell, Walton, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan, Garnett, etc were so so dominant not because of of one on one defense, but because of of how they protected the paint and Only a moron would start a franchise with Kobe Bryant over Hakeem Olajuwon and only a bigger moron would actually try to an prove it by writing all that garbage you wrote.

As for the Kobe-Hakeem argument...Kobe CARRIED his teams, even the Shaq-led teams, in the WCF's, year-after-year...AND in his H2H's with Duncan in the post-season, Kobe was CLEARLY the better player.

I do admit that the Kobe, Bird, Hakeem, AND, Moses arguments are all CLOSE. They ALL rank anywhere from 8th to 11th all-time. None of them have a case for a higher ranking though.

[Deuce Bigalow]

As for the Kobe-Hakeem argument...Kobe CARRIED his teams, even the Shaq-led teams, in the WCF's, year-after-year...AND in his H2H's with Duncan in the post-season, Kobe was CLEARLY the better player.

I do admit that the Kobe, Bird, Hakeem, AND, Moses arguments are all CLOSE. They ALL rank anywhere from 8th to 11th all-time. None of them have a case for a higher ranking though.
That's why I don't understand why some people rank Duncan higher than Kobe. That plus the last couple of years have Kobe rated higher than Duncan imo

[jlauber]

Championships
Bird - 3 in a strong era
Wilt - 2 in a weak era

Bird with 3 rings on STACKED teams his ENTIRE CAREER. Wilt with 2 rings, and playing with PUTRID rosters for HALF of his career, and then, ALWAYS facing HOF-LADEN teams in the post-season. How many times did a Bird-led team beat teams' with FIVE to SEVEN HOFers on them? Wilt accomnplished that feat (and in fact, he led his team's to CRUSHING routs of those teams.) Not only that, but Wilt took crappy rosters to within a TOTAL of THREE points, in two game seven's, of winning two more rings (and against Celtic teams that went 60-20 and 62-18, and were LOADED with HOFers.)

Furthermore, Wilt NEVER had the SEVERAL "flop jobs" that Bird had in his post-seasons.

[dee-rose]

Hakeem. Nothing against Kobe, but there were really no huge holes in Hakeem's game.

Good passer, one of the best defenders of all time, most blocked shots of all time, could score at will under pressure b/c he had one of the best post-games ever. Didn't give up too much height, had great quickness for a C. One of the smartest players ever.

Unless you wanna hate on a C for not shooting three's, there's not much missing in her all-around game.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Hakeem might of been the better overall player but Kobe has had a better career.

6. O'Neal
7. Bryant
8. Duncan
9. Chamberlain
10. Olajuwon

[jlauber]

Hakeem. Nothing against Kobe, but there were really no huge holes in Hakeem's game.

Good passer, one of the best defenders of all time, most blocked shots of all time, could score at will under pressure b/c he had one of the best post-games ever. Didn't give up too much height, had great quickness for a C. One of the smartest players ever.

Unless you wanna hate on a C for not shooting three's, there's not much missing in her all-around game.

Hakeem was a great player who was very good at many aspects, but was clearly not an elite player in any category.

As for best shot-blocker...only because of two reasons. One, longevity. And two, Wilt and Russell's numbers were never officially recorded (although there is strong evidence of a 35 year old Wilt averaging 7-8 bpg in his 71-72 season, and even 6 bpg in his last season, and at age 36.)

Mark Eaton was a much better shot-blocker IN the Hakeem-era, as well.

And, yes, Hakeem gave up a lot of height (although height is somewhat over-rated.) He was no more than 6-10. And, in his career H2H's against Shaq and Kareem, he was clearly outplayed. And Kareem was a shell of what he was in his prime.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Hakeem was a great player who was very good at many aspects, but was clearly not an elite player in any category.

As for best shot-blocker...only because of two reasons. One, longevity. And two, Wilt and Russell's numbers were never officially recorded (although there is strong evidence of a 35 year old Wilt averaging 7-8 bpg in his 71-72 season, and even 6 bpg in his last season, and at age 36.)

Mark Eaton was a much better shot-blocker IN the Hakeem-era, as well.

And, yes, Hakeem gave up a lot of height (although height is somewhat over-rated.) He was no more than 6-10. And, in his career H2H's against Shaq and Kareem, he was clearly outplayed. And Kareem was a shell of what he was in his prime.
Yeah that is why he is only regarded as one of the best defenders of all-time :rolleyes:

[jlauber]

Hakeem might of been the better overall player but Kobe has had a better career.

6. O'Neal
7. Bryant
8. Duncan
9. Chamberlain
10. Olajuwon


Give me your complete list, and then give me your CRITERIA in which you rank Wilt NINTH. I want complete stats, including how playersperformed against their peers, and their H2H's against other opposing players in the post-season, and particularly, in "must-win" games.


None of this...well, he was better because he was better nonsense.

[dee-rose]

Hakeem was a great player who was very good at many aspects, but was clearly not an elite player in any category.

As for best shot-blocker...only because of two reasons. One, longevity. And two, Wilt and Russell's numbers were never officially recorded (although there is strong evidence of a 35 year old Wilt averaging 7-8 bpg in his 71-72 season, and even 6 bpg in his last season, and at age 36.)

Mark Eaton was a much better shot-blocker IN the Hakeem-era, as well.

And, yes, Hakeem gave up a lot of height (although height is somewhat over-rated.) He was no more than 6-10. And, in his career H2H's against Shaq and Kareem, he was clearly outplayed. And Kareem was a shell of what he was in his prime.
First of all, you need to stop saying that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the playoffs. They were head-to-head in most games, till the fourth quarter when Hakeem took over... almost every single time.

Second, Mark Eaton... really?

[jlauber]

Yeah that is why he is only regarded as one of the best defenders of all-time :rolleyes:

I posted his BEST seasons in terms of Defensive Rating, and in terms of Defensive Win Shares...

[jlauber]

First of all, you need to stop saying that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the playoffs. They were head-to-head in most games, till the fourth quarter when Hakeem took over... almost every single time.

Second, Mark Eaton... really?

The Shaq-Hakeem Finals were, at worst, a DRAW. I watched the entire series. Hakeem's TEAMMATES badly outplayed Shaq's, in every category.

Second, yes, Mark Eaton, playing in the 80's was CLEARLY better than Hakeem was. Not even close. Eaton has the "official" season record, too, although the overwhelming evidence points to Wilt and Russell having WAY more blocked shots. Hell, the "official" record for blocked shots in a game in Elmore Smith's 17, and yet, we KNOW that Wilt blocked 23 shots in a nationally televised game in 1968 (and had a recorded 20 blocks in another game in which he scored 34 points and had 33 rebounds ...and even Harvey Pollack lost count in one game in which Wilt had already had 25.)

[Horatio33]

Seen as you like stats so much Jlauber, here is one. Hakeem is top ten in blocks and steals in NBA history. At his best he was causing about five turnovers a game.

Your problem is you can't stand any centre that has a case for top ten all time as it is a threat to Wilt. Insecurity rules your brain.

You mentioned Hakeems poor team records. Look at the teammates he had. Either over the hill stars, guys sidetracked by drugs. Or guys that should have been great but never made it. (Sampson) Wilt played with multiple hofers, played with West AND Baylor for years but only won two titles. The best two players Hakeem played with we're Sampson (injured and traded before prime) and Drexler (past prime.) but Hakeem didn't do enough.

You also say Hakeem only won when MJ was retired. Well when Russell retired Wilt played with West for three more years. Only won one more title. His main competition was gone. A man won eleven titles gone, still couldn't get over the hump. Yes he was injured in the season, but made it back for the playoffs. Willis Reed was injured in game five, came out game seven, nailed two jumpers over Wilt, chamberlain was a non factor in the game, against a man on one leg and DeBusshere who was six eight. Where was the dominance?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Give me your complete list, and then give me your CRITERIA in which you rank Wilt NINTH. I want complete stats, including how playersperformed against their peers, and their H2H's against other opposing players in the post-season, and particularly, in "must-win" games.


None of this...well, he was better because he was better nonsense.
1. Jordan - 6 rings, 6 fmvps, 5 mvps, 10 scoring titles #1 PPG in RS and PO
2. Johnson - GOAT PG, 5 rings, 3 finals mvps, #1 APG in RS and PO, near triple double championship runs
3. Abdul-Jabbar - GOAT C, 6 rings, 6 mvps, 2 finals mvps, #1 career points, #2 career playoff points
4. Russell - 11 rings, GOAT winner
5. Bird - 3 rings, 3 mvps, 2 finals mvps, near triple double championship runs
6. O'Neal - 4 rings, 3 finals mvps, one of the best Finals performers
7. Bryant - 5 rings, 2 finals mvps, mvp, top 5 in RS and PO points, longevity, might make 10th 1st team this year
8. Duncan - 4 rings, 3 finals mvps, 2 mvps, 9 1st teams
9. Chamberlain - 2 rings, 4 mvps, 90+ records
10. Olajuwon - 2 rings, 2 finals mvps, dpoy, #1 career blocks

A combination of everything matters in my rankings. Peak, prime, longevity, accomplishments. Winning is most important.

[Deuce Bigalow]

I posted his BEST seasons in terms of Defensive Rating, and in terms of Defensive Win Shares...
winshares - garbage

[jlauber]

Seen as you like stats so much Jlauber, here is one. Hakeem is top ten in blocks and steals in NBA history. At his best he was causing about five turnovers a game.

Your problem is you can't stand any centre that has a case for top ten all time as it is a threat to Wilt. Insecurity rules your brain.

You mentioned Hakeems poor team records. Look at the teammates he had. Either over the hill stars, guys sidetracked by drugs. Or guys that should have been great but never made it. (Sampson) Wilt played with multiple hofers, played with West AND Baylor for years but only won two titles. The best two players Hakeem played with we're Sampson (injured and traded before prime) and Drexler (past prime.) but Hakeem didn't do enough.

You also say Hakeem only won when MJ was retired. Well when Russell retired Wilt played with West for three more years. Only won one more title. His main competition was gone. A man won eleven titles gone, still couldn't get over the hump. Yes he was injured in the season, but made it back for the playoffs. Willis Reed was injured in game five, came out game seven, nailed two jumpers over Wilt, chamberlain was a non factor in the game, against a man on one leg and DeBusshere who was six eight. Where was the dominance?

Gotta love it. Hakeem is allowed exuse-after-excuse. He was young when a 39 year old Kareem wad rountinely scoring 40+ points against him, and on staggering FG%'s. He was old when Shaq just murdered him the '99 playoffs. His teammates were rotten when he couldn't even win 50 games, and they were old when he couldn't win with HOFers.

Chamberlain not only faced teams with more HOFers EVERY season in his post-season career, he generally did so when HIS teammates played WORSE than they did in the regular season.

And Baylor? PLEASE. The man was shell by the time Wilt arrived...and here again, he played WORSE (WAY worse) in the post-season. Oh, and he and Wilt only played ONE FULL season in the league together (and only TWO post-seasons, and Baylor was AWFUL in both.)

As for Reed? How about the fact that Wilt outscored Reed in that first half, 11-4, outshot Reed, 5-10 to 2-5, and outrebounded him, 12-3? Or that, Wilt's TEAMMATES, including West, were just horribly outplayed. Oh, and BTW, Chamberlain, himself, was only FOUR MONTHS removed from MAJOR KNEE SURGERY, and was NOWHERE near 100%. Don't take my word for it, though. Watch game seven of the '70 Finals, and then watch game five of the '72 Finals. And older Wilt was MUCH more mobile (and leaping MUCH higher.)

[jlauber]

1. Jordan - 6 rings, 6 fmvps, 5 mvps, 10 scoring titles #1 PPG in RS and PO
2. Johnson - GOAT PG, 5 rings, 3 finals mvps, #1 APG in RS and PO, near triple double championship runs
3. Abdul-Jabbar - GOAT C, 6 rings, 6 mvps, 2 finals mvps, #1 career points, #2 career playoff points
4. Russell - 11 rings, GOAT winner
5. Bird - 3 rings, 3 mvps, 2 finals mvps, near triple double championship runs6. O'Neal - 4 rings, 3 finals mvps, one of the best Finals performers
7. Bryant - 5 rings, 2 finals mvps, mvp, top 5 in RS and PO points, longevity, might make 10th 1st team this year
8. Duncan - 4 rings, 3 finals mvps, 2 mvps, 9 1st teams
9. Chamberlain - 2 rings, 4 mvps, 90+ records
10. Olajuwon - 2 rings, 2 finals mvps, dpoy, #1 career blocks

A combination of everything matters in my rankings. Peak, prime, longevity, accomplishments. Winning is most important.

Wilt would clearly have won 2 FMVPs. He also had an entire post-season, of 21.7 ppg, 29.1 rpg, 9.2 apg (along with a .579 FG%),m and in which he reduced Russell and Thurmond to ashes.

And, he was a TOTAL of NINE points, in FOUR game seven's, of winning FOUR more rings. No other player can make that claim. Even in their game seven losses, none of them were nearly that close.

And, Wilt DOMINATED his opposing players in EVERY post-season, and was even MORE dominant in his "must-win" games...

How about this...


If you were to poll the posters on this site, as to who were more "big game" players in their careers, I suspect that the majority would claim that Larry Bird, or Kareem, were considerably more "clutch." And I'm not talking about taking the last shot, but in terms of overall play in a BIG GAME.

I have already covered Wilt's post-season play many times, but here we go again. First of all, let's quickly dispense with this crap that Wilt "wilted" in his post-season play.

The "Simmonites" always point to Wilt's scoring drop in the post-season as the "evidence" that Wilt did indeed "flop" in his post-season play. You can look the numbers up for yourself, but Wilt's regular season scoring average was 30.1 ppg, and his post-season scoring was at 22.5 ppg.

BUT, there were many factors at play here. One, and it is seldom mentioned, is that Wilt basically had his "scoring" seasons in the first half of his career. Look it up for yourself, but in his career, he averaged 39 ppg in his first seven seasons, and then 20 ppg in his last seven seasons. Not only that, but in Wilt's 62-63 season, he averaged 44.8 ppg on .528 shooting...BUT, his teammates were so awful, that his team didn't make the playoffs. That was his second greatest scoring season of his career.

The result? In his first seven seasons, and covering six post-seasons, he played in 52 of his 160 post-season games. And the main reason for that? The Celtic Dynasty. He met the Celtics in the second round of the playoffs in '60, '62, '64 (the Finals, but he only had one playoff series before that), '65, '66 (it was the second round, but they had a first round bye), '67, and '68.

Then, let's give credit where credit is due. Bill Russell. For instance, everyone here knows that Wilt averaged 50.4 ppg on .506 shooting in the '62 regular season. Then, they look at his playoff scoring... 35.0 ppg on .467 shooting, and immediately jump up and say "see!" But, here were the facts. Wilt faced Russell 10 times in the regular season (Russell missed two other games, so I won't post Wilt's average in those two games), and in them, Chamberlain averaged 39.7 ppg on .471 shooting. In the ECF's, Wilt averaged 33.6 ppg on .468 shooting. A drop to be sure, but not a HUGE drop. And, BTW, in the playoffs, scoring and shooting dropped across the board.

In any case, in Wilt's "scoring" seasons, his team played 52 playoff games...and 30 of them were against the Celtics.

STILL, here were Wilt's numbers in his first six post-seasons (covering his first seven seasons...again, he didn't get an opportunity to play in the playoffs in '63):

32.8 ppg, 26.3 rpg, .505 shooting (in league's that shot .426 in that time frame.)

In those six post-seasons, Wilt had entire post-seasons of 28.0 ppg, 29.3 ppg, 33.2 ppg, 34.7 ppg, 35.0 ppg, and 37.0 ppg. He also had playoff series of 37.0 ppg, 37.0 ppg, 38.6 ppg (on .559 shooting BTW), and 38.7 ppg. He also had FOUR 30+ ppg playoff series just against Russell, including a seven game series of 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

He had FOUR 50+ point games in those six post-seasons, too, including THREE in "must-win" elimination games (and one of them, a 50-35 game against Russell.) He also had FOUR 40-30 games just against Russell.

If you include Wilt's '67 playoff run, in which his team won the title, and went 11-4 in the process, here are Wilt's numbers in his first seven post-seasons:

67 games. 30.4 ppg. 27.0 rpg. .515 FG% (in league's that shot .428). 4.5 apg.

Think about that...he AVERAGED 30-27-5 .515 COMBINED, in his first 67 post-season games.

Go thru Wilt's '68 playoff's, and the numbers look like this:

80 games. 29.3 ppg. 26.6 rpg. 4.8 apg. .518 FG% (again, in league's that shot .430.)

In HALF of his post-season career, he AVERAGED a 29-27-5 .518 game. Now, give me a list of the NBA players who averaged that in ONE series. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find very many single GAMES, in all of the NBA's playoff HISTORY which would match what Wilt put up in HALF of his 160 post-season games....COMBINED.

Now, the pundits will jump in, and say, "OK, we know he could put up stats, but how did he play in the game's that REALLY MATTERED? Surely you will find that Wilt "choked" in the BIG GAMES in the playoffs, right?"

Wilt played in 35 post-season games in which his team either faced elimination (must win games), or it was a clinching game.


Quote:
The idiotic Bill Simmons claims that Wilt "shrunk" in the post-season, particularly in BIG games.

Had he actually done any real research into Wilt's post-season career, he would have found that Wilt averaged 27.0 ppg in his 35 "must-win" and/or clinching games. Meanwhile, his starting opposing centers averaged 14.5 ppg in those 35 games. He also outscored his opposing starting center in 29 of those 35 games, including a 19-0 edge in his first 19 games of those 35. Furthermore, in his 13 games which came in his "scoring" seasons (from 59-60 thru 65-66), Chamberlain averaged 37.3 ppg in those "do-or-die" or clinching games. And there were MANY games in which he just CRUSHED his opposing centers in those games (e.g. he outscored Kerr in one them, 53-7.)

Wilt had THREE of his four 50+ point post-season games, in these "elimination games", including two in "at the limit" games, and another against Russell in a "must-win" game. He also had games of 46-34 and 45-27 (and only 4 months removed from major knee surgery) in these types of games. In addition he had games of 39 and 38 in clinching wins.

In the known 19 games in which we have both Wilt's, and his starting opposing center's rebounding numbers, Chamberlain outrebounded them in 15 of them, and by an average margin of 26.1 rpg to 18.9 rpg. And, had we had all 35 of the totals, it would have been by a considerably larger margin. A conservative estimate would put Wilt with at least a 30-5 overall edge in those 35 games. He also had games, even against the likes of Russell, and in "must-win" situations, where he just MURDERED his opposing centers (e.g. he had one clinching game, against Russell, in which he outrebounded him by a 36-21 margin.)

And finally, in the known FG% games in which we have, Chamberlain not only shot an eye-popping .582 in those "do-or-die" games, but he held his opposing centers to a combined .413 FG%. BTW, he played against Kareem in two "clinching" games, and held Abdul-Jabbar to a combined .383 shooting in those two games.

The bottom line, in the known games of the 35 that Wilt played in that involved a "must-win" or clincher, Wilt averaged 27 ppg, 26.1 rpg, and shot .582 (and the 27 ppg figure was known for all 35 of those games.)

And once again, Chamberlain played in 11 games which went to the series limit (nine game seven's, one game five of a best-of-five series, and one game three of a best-of-three series), and all he did was average 29.9 ppg (outscoring his opposing center by a 29.9 ppg to 9.8 ppg margin in the process), with 26.7 rpg, and on .581 shooting. Or he was an eye-lash away from averaging a 30-27 game, and on nearly .600 shooting, in those 11 "at the limit" games.


Oh, and BTW, Chamberlain's TEAMs went 24-11 in those 35 games, too.

That was the same player that Simmons basically labeled a "loser", and a "choker", and who "shrunk" in his BIG games.



Want me to give you ALL of Bird's and Kareem's "flop jobs?"

[Deuce Bigalow]

Wilt would clearly have won 2 FMVPs. He also had an entire post-season, of 21.7 ppg, 29.1 rpg, 9.2 apg (along with a .579 FG%),m and in which he reduced Russell and Thurmond to ashes.

And, he was a TOTAL of NINE points, in FOUR game seven's, of winning FOUR more rings. No other player can make that claim. Even in their game seven losses, none of them were nearly that close.

And, Wilt DOMINATED his opposing players in EVERY post-season, and was even MORE dominant in his "must-win" games...

How about this...



Want me to give you ALL of Bird's and Kareem's "flop jobs?"
stats stats stats. Winning matters. Wilt didn't win enough. You can post all the stats you want.

[jlauber]

winshares - garbage

Ok, how about DPOY's?

Hakeem won TWO. Mutombo won FOUR and THREE came IN the Hakeem era! Rodman won THREE, and IN the Hakeem-era! 6-7 center Ben Wallce won FOUR. Dwight Howard has won THREE. Even "cement shoes" Eaton won TWO, and IN the Hakeem-era!

Of course, that award did not exist before the 82-83 season, or players like Walton, Hayes, Russell, and Wilt would have won MULTIPLE DPOYs. My god, Russell would have won EIGHT or more. And Wilt most certainly would have won in '67, '68, and '72 (he was the league's best defensive player in '73 too.)

[jlauber]

stats stats stats. Winning matters. Wilt didn't win enough. You can post all the stats you want.

In Wilt's 14 seasons, he went to TWELVE conference Finals (Bird went eight BTW.) He led his team's to SIX division titles, and SIX conference titles. He played in SIX finals (Bird played in five.) He played on FOUR teams with the BEST RECORD in the league (Kobe played on TWO, and Hakeem had ZERO BTW.) Wilt played on FOUR teams that won 60+ games (Kobe had TWO and Russell THREE BTW.) Chamberlain also played on TWO teams that went 68-13 and 69-13 (ONLY MJ, among the "greats" ever played on team's with a better record BTW.)

Once again, Wilt won TWO rings, but he played in stacked league's and against HOF-LADEN rosters his entire career.

[G-Funk]

Kobe

[BlueandGold]

Kobe by far, 5 titles > 2 and Kobe had to play two incredibly different roles for the first 3 and last 2, both of which he was extremely effective. Hell Kobe may be the best 2nd option on a championship team of all time, outside of Kobe and Shaq there was no clear-cut 3rd, 4th or even 5th options.

This is nothing against Hakeem, I have him literally 1 spot below Kobe at #8 but Kobe is by far the better franchise and overall player. More NBA all-defensive teams and a stronger competitive will and work ethic than Hakeem (and that ssaying a lot since Hakeem was definitely no slouch either). Plus to take it even farther Kobe is a much more vocal and lead by example type of leader than Hakeem since Kobe is actually able to hit clutch shots and close in the 4th (vs a big man who needs time to establish himself in the paint) and also because of his convenient and impressive ability to speak two languages, eloquently and fluently.

[Horatio33]

First of all, you need to stop saying that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the playoffs. They were head-to-head in most games, till the fourth quarter when Hakeem took over... almost every single time.

Second, Mark Eaton... really?

JLauber only looks at stats, doesn't watch the games.

[Horatio33]

Gotta love it. Hakeem is allowed exuse-after-excuse. He was young when a 39 year old Kareem wad rountinely scoring 40+ points against him, and on staggering FG%'s. He was old when Shaq just murdered him the '99 playoffs. His teammates were rotten when he couldn't even win 50 games, and they were old when he couldn't win with HOFers.

Chamberlain not only faced teams with more HOFers EVERY season in his post-season career, he generally did so when HIS teammates played WORSE than they did in the regular season.

And Baylor? PLEASE. The man was shell by the time Wilt arrived...and here again, he played WORSE (WAY worse) in the post-season. Oh, and he and Wilt only played ONE FULL season in the league together (and only TWO post-seasons, and Baylor was AWFUL in both.)

As for Reed? How about the fact that Wilt outscored Reed in that first half, 11-4, outshot Reed, 5-10 to 2-5, and outrebounded him, 12-3? Or that, Wilt's TEAMMATES, including West, were just horribly outplayed. Oh, and BTW, Chamberlain, himself, was only FOUR MONTHS removed from MAJOR KNEE SURGERY, and was NOWHERE near 100%. Don't take my word for it, though. Watch game seven of the '70 Finals, and then watch game five of the '72 Finals. And older Wilt was MUCH more mobile (and leaping MUCH higher.)

Look the reason Wilt isn't allowed excuses is because you talk about him like he is Superman, Batman and Spiderman combined. He was faster than a speeding bullet, jumps higher than a mountain etc. But when he choked, he gets a pass.

Quoting stats is great and all, but in the context of the games when were the points scored? Were they clutch points? Were they in a barrage to keep his team close? Were they stat padding points? In 68' after being 3-1 up in the series, HIS team choked away the last 3 games, including game 7 where and I quote


In game 7 of the 1968 Eastern Conference Finals, which the Sixers lost by 4 points, Hal Greer, Wali Jones, Chet Walker, Luke Jackson and Matt Guokas hit a combined 25 of 74 shots with Wilt playing the role of rebounder and distributor.

Three hall of famers there, not a terrible team. But, Wilt was playing the role of rebounder and distributor. Why? The most dominant scoring force ever should be DOMINATING these moments. He was injured? So, plenty of players get injured in the playoffs or play sick. It's the playoffs. It's what seperates the average from the good, the great from the good. Kareem used to play with migraines, Jordan with the flu, Kobe's injured finger on his shooting hand, West's numerous ailments, Reed's famous injury.

In '70 finals, West had two sprained thumbs. but according to you he didn't step up. Wilt had an injury in the '70 season, missed most of it, but made it back to help the team to the finals. So he must have been healed pretty good to manage that. But in ONE game in the finals, when his matchup at centre was limping noticibly and didn't play the whole game, and a 6-8 foward had to guard Wilt, he disappeared. And also the game before, without injured Willis checking him, He had 45 points and 27 boards. So much for the injury cost him. He choked. A distinct advantage and he choked. Blame injury but if you're using that standard for Wilt you also have to use it for West. I've never sprained a thumb, nevermind two, but i imagine it's difficult to dribble a basketball with both thumbs sprained. But it wasn't Wilt's fault they lost!!!!!!!!

[millwad]

JLauber only looks at stats, doesn't watch the games.

The guy is a retard, EVERYONE says that Hakeem outplayed Shaq in the finals of '95, even Shaq himself. But Jlauber on ISH doesn't agree, he says that it was a draw at best but really he thinks Shaq got outplayed.

Why? He watch the stats as the true retard he is.

But when it comes to stats it's not the same for Wilt, even though Kareem averaged 40 points on 50% shooting on prime defensive Wilt in the regular season of '72 and then outscored Wilt with 23 points per game on better FG% while also outassisting Wilt in the series. That he claims was Wilt absolutely trashing and murdering Kareem but at the same time the old fart can't admit that Shaq got outplayed by Hakeem.

And you gotta love how this troll always mentions the regular season head to heads Hakeem had in his first and 2nd year against Kareem, but he never mentions that Hakeem absolutely destroyed the Lakers and Kareem in the playoffs as a 2nd year pro while leading his Rocket team past the world champs feat. 3 HOF:ers...

Haha, this Jlauber clown is pathetic.

[jlauber]

Look the reason Wilt isn't allowed excuses is because you talk about him like he is Superma, Batman and Spiderman combined. He was faster than a speeding bullet, jumps higher than a mountain etc. But when he choked, he gets a pass.

Quoting stats is great and all, but in the context of the games when were the points scored? Were they clutch points? Were they in a barrage to keep his team close? Were they stat padding points? In 68' after being 3-1 up in the series, HIS team choked away the last 3 games, including game 7 where and I quote



Three hall of famers there, not a terrible team. But, Wilt was playing the role of rebounder and distributor. Why? The most dominant scoring force ever should be DOMINATING these moments. He was injured? So, plenty of players get injured in the playoffs or play sick. It's the playoffs. It's what seperates the average from the good, the great from the good. Kareem used to play with migraines, Jordan with the flu, Kobe's injured finger on his shooting hand, West's numerous ailments, Reed's famous injury.

In '70 finals, West had two sprained thumbs. but according to you he didn't step up. Wilt had an injury in the '70 season, missed most of it, but made it back to help the team to the finals. So he must have been healed pretty good to manage that. But in ONE game in the finals, when his matchup at centre was limping noticibly and didn't play the whole game, and a 6-8 foward had to guard Wilt, he disappeared. And also the game before, without injured Willis checking him, He had 45 points and 27 boards. So much for the injury cost him. He choked. A distinct advantage and he choked. Blame injury but if you're using that standard for Wilt you also have to use it for West. I've never sprained a thumb, nevermind two, but i imagine it's difficult to dribble a basketball with both thumbs sprained. But it wasn't Wilt's fault they lost!!!!!!!!

Do some damn reseach. I posted his performances in "must-win" and "series clinching games." I bet you didn't know that in their two "series clinching games" in the '71 and '72 WCF's, that Wilt outshot Kareem by a .545 (18-33) to .383 (23-60) margin?

Or that in the '65 ECF's, in the deciding game seven, that Wilt scored eight of Philly's last ten points, to cut a 110-101 deficit down to 110-109. Not only that, but the "clutch" Russell then hit a guidewire with an inbounds pass, and the 40-40 Sixers were one play away from accomplishing the greatest playoff upset in NBA history, and against a HOF-laden 62-18 Celtic team at their PEAK. In a game in which Wilt scored 30 points, on 12-15 shooting, and with 32 rebounds. In a series in which Wilt averaged 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

And did you know that in the '68 ECF's, Wilt's Sixers were up 3-1, without HOFer Billy Cunningham playing a minute in that series? Do you think Russell, without Hondo, would have been up 3-1 in that series (obviously no, since the two were playing, and were behind 3-1.) Or that in game five, BOTH Luke Jackson and Wali Jones sustained injuries, and missed the rest of that game, and were basically worthless the remainder of the series? Or that Wilt, himself, was nursing SEVERAL injuries, including a torn calf (which was similar to the torn quad that Reed had in the '70 Finals, and which limited him to a bystander in the last three games)? Or that, in the last half of that game seven, Wilt's teammates IGNORED Chamberlain (he had a TOTAL of NINE touches on tghe offensive end in that half...and only TWO in the 4th quarter...and both of those came on offensive rebounds.) All of that resulted in a game seven, 100-96 loss. Think about that, if even ONE of those events does not take place, the Sixers roll to a second consecutive romp over the great Celtic Dynasty.

And, no, I did NOT blame West for the loss in the '70 Finals. In fact, in the first six games of that series, he was butchering Frazier. He was averaging 33 ppg going into that game seven. BUT, he was HORRIBLE in that game seven. He couldn't even get the ball past half court for much of the first half.

And, it was not just Reed who guarded Wilt in that first half. The Knicks SWARMED Chamberlain nearly every time he got the ball. And all Reed could do when he was faced with the few one-on-one's against Wilt was to foul him (4 fouls in the first half.)

And, no, Kareem would NOT have played in that game, either. The man missed a pivotal game six of the '80 Finals with a sprained ankle. And, unlike Wilt's teammates, who usually choked, Kareem's teammates stepped up. Not only did Magic dominate that clinching Finals game (and it was perhaps the greatest Finals game in NBA history), Jamaal Wilkes also had 37 points.

Now, once again, take a CLOSE LOOK at ALL 35 of Wilt's "must-win" and "series clinching" games in the post-season...and get back to me...

[jlauber]

Ok, here they are...Wilt "the choker" in his 35 "must-win" and "series clinching" games...EVERYONE of them...


Ok, here are the known numbers in Wilt's "must-win" playoff games (elimination games), and clinching game performances (either deciding winning or losing games), of BOTH Chamberlain, and his starting opposing centers in those games.

1. Game three of a best-of-three series in the first round of the 59-60 playoffs against Syracuse, a 132-112 win. Wilt with 53 points, on 24-42 shooting, with 22 rebounds. His opposing center, Red Kerr, who was a multiple all-star in his career, had 7 points.

2. Game five of the 59-60 ECF's against Boston, a 128-107 win. Chamberlain had 50 points, on 22-42 shooting, with 35 rebounds. His opposing center, Russell, had 22 points and 27 rebounds.

3. Game six of the 59-60 ECF's against Boston, in a 119-117 loss. Wilt had a 26-24 game, while Russell had a 25-25 game.

4. Game three of a best-of-five series in the first round of the 60-61 playoffs , and against Syracuse, in a 106-103 loss. Chamberlain with 33 points, while his opposing center, the 7-3 Swede Halbrook, scored 6 points.

5. Game five of a best-of-five series in the first round of the 61-62 playoffs, against Syracuse, in a 121-104 win. Chamberlain had 56 points, on 22-48 shooting, with 35 rebounds. Kerr had 20 points in the loss.

6. Game six of the 61-62 ECF's, and against Boston, in a 109-99 win. Wilt with 32 points and 21 rebounds. Russell had 19 points and 22 rebounds in the loss.

7. Game seven of the 61-62 ECF's, against Boston, in a 109-107 loss. Wilt with 22 points, on 7-15 shooting, with 21 rebounds. Russell had 19 points, on 7-14 shooting, with 22 rebounds in the win.

8. Game seven of the 63-64 WCF's, and against St. Louis, in a 105-95 win. Wilt with 39 points, 26 rebounds, and 10 blocks. His opposing center, Zelmo Beaty, who would go on to become a multiple all-star, had 10 points in the loss.

9. Game five of the 63-64 Finals, and against Boston, in a 105-99 loss. Chamberlain with 30 points and 27 rebounds. Russell had 14 points and 26 points in the win.

10. Game four of a best-of-five series in the 64-65 first round of the playoffs against Cincinnati, a 119-112 win. Chamberlain with 38 points. His opposing center, multiple all-star (and HOFer) Wayne Embry had 7 points in the loss.

11. Game six of the 64-65 ECF's, against Boston, a 112-106 win. Chamberlain with a 30-26 game. Russell with a 22-21 game in the loss.

12. Game seven of the 64-65 ECF's, and against Boston, a 110-109 loss. Wilt with 30 points, on 12-15 shooting, with 32 rebounds. Russell had 15 points, on 7-16 shooting, with 29 rebounds in the win.

13. Game five of a best-of-seven series, in the 65-66 ECF's, and against Boston, in a 120-112 loss. Wilt had 46 points, on 19-34 shooting, with 34 rebounds. Russell had 18 points and 31 rebounds in the win.

14. Game four of a best-of-five series, in the first round of the 66-67 playoffs, and against Cincinnati, a 112-94 win. Wilt with 18 points, on 7-14 shooting, with 27 rebounds and 9 assists. His opposing center, Connie Dierking, had 8 points, on 4-14 shooting, with 4 rebounds in the loss.

15. Game five of the 66-67 ECF's, and against Boston, in a 140-116 win. Chamberlain with 29 points, on 10-16 shooting, with 36 rebounds, 13 assists, and 7 blocks. Russell had 4 points, on 2-5 shooting, with 21 rebounds, and 7 assists in the loss.

16. Game six of the 66-67 Finals, and against San Francisco, in a 125-122 win. Chamberlain with 24 points, on 8-13 shooting, with 23 rebounds. His oppsoing center, HOFer Nate Thurmond, had 12 points, on 4-13 shooting, with 22 rebounds in the loss.

17. Game six of the first round of the 67-68 playoffs, against NY, in a 113-97 win. Wilt had 25 points, and 27 rebounds. His opposing center, HOFer Walt Bellamy, had 19 points in the loss.

18. Game seven of the 67-68 ECF's, against Boston, in a 100-96 loss. Wilt with 14 points, on 4-9 shooting, with 34 rebounds. Russell had 12 points and 26 rebounds in the win.

19. Game six of the first round of the 68-69 playoffs, against San Francisco, in a 118-78 win. Wilt with 11 points. Thurmond had 8 points in the loss.

20. Game four of the 68-69 WCF's, against Atlanta, in a 133-114 sweeping win. Chamberlain with 16 points. His opposing center, Zelmo Beaty had 30 points in the loss.

21. Game seven of the 68-69 Finals, against Boston, in a 108-106 loss. Chamberlain had 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Russell had 6 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds in the win.

22. Game five of a best-of-seven series (the Lakers were down 3-1 going into the game) in the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, and against Phoenix, a 138-121 win. Wilt with 36 points and 14 rebounds. His opposing center, Neal Walk, had 18 points in the loss.

23. Game six of the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, against Phoenix, in a 104-93 win. Wilt with 12 points. Jim Fox started that game for Phoenix, and had 13 points in the loss.

24. Game seven of the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, against Phoenix, and in a 129-94 win, which capped a 4-3 series win after falling behind 3-1 in the series. Wilt with 30 points, 27 rebounds, and 11 blocks. Fox had 7 points in the loss.

25. Game four of the 69-70 WCF's, against Atlanta, in a 133-114 sweeping win. Wilt with 11 points. Bellamy had 19 points in the loss.

26. Game six of the 69-70 Finals, against NY, in a 135-113 win. Wilt with 45 points, on 20-27 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Nate Bowman had 18 points, on 9-15 shooting, with 8 rebounds in the loss.

27. Game seven of the 69-70 Finals, against NY, in a 113-99 loss. Wilt with 21 points, on 10-16 shooting, with 24 rebounds. HOFer Willis Reed had 4 points, on 2-5 shooting, with 3 rebounds in the win.

28. Game seven of the first round of the 70-71 playoffs, against Chicago, in a 109-98 win. Wilt with 25 points and 18 rebounds. 7-0 Tom Boerwinkle had 4 points for the Bulls in the loss.

29. Game five of the 70-71 WCF's, against Milwaukee, in a 116-94 loss. Wilt had 23 points, on 10-21 shooting, with 12 rebounds, 6 blocks (5 of them on Alcindor/Kareem.) Kareem had 20 points, on 7-23 shooting, with 15 rebounds, and 3 blocks in the win. Incidently, Wilt received a standing ovation when he left the game late...and the game was played in Milwaukee.

30. Game four of the 71-72 first round of the playoffs, against Chicago, in a 108-97 sweeping win. Wilt had 8 points and 31 rebounds. Clifford Ray had 20 points in the loss.

31. Game six of the 71-72 WCF's, against Milwaukee, in a 104-100 win. Chamberlain with 20 points, on 8-12 shooting, with 24 rebounds, and 9 blocks (six against Kareem.) Kareem had 37 points, on 16-37 shooting, with 25 rebounds in the loss.

32. Game five of the 71-72 Finals, against NY, in a 114-100 win. Chamberlain with 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with 29 rebounds, and 9 blocks. HOFer Jerry Lucas had 14 points, on 5-14 shooting, with 9 rebounds in the loss.

33. Game seven of the first round of the 72-73 playoffs, against Chicago, in a 95-92 win. Wilt with 21 points and 28 rebounds. His opposing center, Clifford Ray, had 4 points.

34. Game five of the 72-73 WCF's, and against Golden St., in a 128-118 win. Wilt with 5 points. Thurmond had 9 points in the loss.

35. Game five of the 72-73 Finals, against NY, in a 102-93 loss. Wilt with 23 points, on 9-16 shooting, with 21 rebounds. Willis Reed had 18 points, on 9-16 shooting, with 12 rebounds.

That was it. 35 "must-win" elimination and/or clinching post-season games.

[Shepseskaf]

Kobe by far.
:facepalm

[millwad]

Ok, here they are...Wilt "the choker" in his 35 "must-win" and "series clinching" games...EVERYONE of them...

This is a thread about Hakeem vs Kobe, get the f'ck out you phagg0t with your Wilt-spam.

Are you mentally challenged? Stop spamming about Wilt in threads that are not about him.

[Horatio33]

Do some damn reseach. I posted his performances in "must-win" and "series clinching games." I bet you didn't know that in their two "series clinching games" in the '71 and '72 WCF's, that Wilt outshot Kareem by a .545 (18-33) to .383 (23-60) margin?

Or that in the '65 ECF's, in the deciding game seven, that Wilt scored eight of Philly's last ten points, to cut a 110-101 deficit down to 110-109. Not only that, but the "clutch" Russell then hit a guidewire with an inbounds pass, and the 40-40 Sixers were one play away from accomplishing the greatest playoff upset in NBA history, and against a HOF-laden 62-18 Celtic team at their PEAK. In a game in which Wilt scored 30 points, on 12-15 shooting, and with 32 rebounds. In a series in which Wilt averaged 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

And did you know that in the '68 ECF's, Wilt's Sixers were up 3-1, without HOFer Billy Cunningham playing a minute in that series? Do you think Russell, without Hondo, would have been up 3-1 in that series (obviously no, since the two were playing, and were behind 3-1.) Or that in game five, BOTH Luke Jackson and Wali Jones sustained injuries, and missed the rest of that game, and were basically worthless the remainder of the series? Or that Wilt, himself, was nursing SEVERAL injuries, including a torn calf (which was similar to the torn quad that Reed had in the '70 Finals, and which limited him to a bystander in the last three games)? Or that, in the last half of that game seven, Wilt's teammates IGNORED Chamberlain (he had a TOTAL of NINE touches on tghe offensive end in that half...and only TWO in the 4th quarter...and both of those came on offensive rebounds.) All of that resulted in a game seven, 100-96 loss. Think about that, if even ONE of those events does not take place, the Sixers roll to a second consecutive romp over the great Celtic Dynasty.

And, no, I did NOT blame West for the loss in the '70 Finals. In fact, in the first six games of that series, he was butchering Frazier. He was averaging 33 ppg going into that game seven. BUT, he was HORRIBLE in that game seven. He couldn't even get the ball past half court for much of the first half.

And, it was not just Reed who guarded Wilt in that first half. The Knicks SWARMED Chamberlain nearly every time he got the ball. And all Reed could do when he was faced with the few one-on-one's against Wilt was to foul him (4 fouls in the first half.)

And, no, Kareem would NOT have played in that game, either. The man missed a pivotal game six of the '80 Finals with a sprained ankle. And, unlike Wilt's teammates, who usually choked, Kareem's teammates stepped up. Not only did Magic dominate that clinching Finals game (and it was perhaps the greatest Finals game in NBA history), Jamaal Wilkes also had 37 points.

Now, once again, take a CLOSE LOOK at ALL 35 of Wilt's "must-win" and "series clinching" games in the post-season...and get back to me...


In the 1968 Eastern Division Finals, the Sixers yet again met the Boston Celtics, again with home court advantage, and this time as reigning champions. Despite the Sixers' injury woes, coach Hannum was confident to "take the Celtics in less than seven games": he pointed out the age of the Celtics, who were built around Bill Russell and guard Sam Jones, both 34. But then, national tragedy struck as Martin Luther King was assassinated on April 4, 1968. With eight of the ten starting players on the Sixers and Celtics being African-American, both teams were in deep shock, and there were calls to cancel the series. In a game called "unreal" and "devoid of emotion", the Sixers lost 127–118 on April 5. After attending Dr. King's funeral, Chamberlain called out to the angry rioters who were setting fires all over the country, stating Dr. King would not have approved. In Game 2, Philadelphia evened the series with a 115–106 victory, and won Games 3 and 4, with Chamberlain suspiciously often played by Celtics backup center Wayne Embry, causing the press to speculate Russell was worn down. Prior to Game 5, the Celtics seemed dead: no NBA team had overcome a 3–1 series deficit before. However, the Celtics rallied back, winning Games 5 and 6 122–104 and 114–106 respectively, powered by a spirited John Havlicek and helped by the Sixers' terrible shooting.


What followed was the first of three consecutive controversial and painful Game 7s in which Chamberlain played. In that Game 7, the Sixers could not get their act together: 15,202 stunned Philadelphia fans witnessed a historic 100–96 defeat, making it the first time in NBA history a team lost a series after leading 3 games to 1. Although Cherry points out that the Sixers shot badly (Hal Greer, Wali Jones, Chet Walker, Luke Jackson and Matt Guokas hit a combined 25 of 74 shots) and Chamberlain grabbed 34 rebounds and shot 4-of-9, the center himself scored only 14 points. In the second half of Game 7, Chamberlain did not attempt a single shot from the field. Cherry observes a strange pattern in that game: in a typical Sixers game, Chamberlain got the ball 60 times in the low post, but only 23 times in Game 7, and only seven times in the third and only twice in the fourth quarter. Chamberlain later blamed coach Hannum for the lack of touches (i.e. scoring opportunities), a point which the coach conceded himself, but Cherry points out that Chamberlain, who always thought of himself as the best player of all time, should have been outspoken enough to demand the ball himself. The loss meant that Chamberlain was now 1–6 in series against the Celtics

all the bold is to show things that could be debated against Wilt. Two of Boston's were 34 years old, one of whom was the coach, who was worn down so Wilt was guarded by his backup. Sixers were 3-1 up in the series and lost. Against two 34 year old men, one who was fatigued.

Wilt dominated everything except winning. He shrank. Rick Barry said he was a loser. Bill Bradley used part of his book to go over wilt's crunch time woes. Havlicek ridiculed his Foul out streak, saying it cheated his team out of wins.

Theguy cared more about stats than winning. In '68 game 7 he shifted the blame onto his team mates for their poor shooting saying they weren't feeding him the ball, even though he wasn't making the effort to get into position to recieve it in scoring position. It's written above. But keep denying it. Blame injuries. Make excuses. Then mock other players for their 'excuses.' No one ever had more excuses than Wilt Chamberlain.

[Big#50]

Hakeem. It isn't even close. Kobe is a great second option though. He can't carry a team to a ring. Then again, only Shaq, Tim, and Hakeem have done that.

[BlackJoker23]

Do some damn reseach. I posted his performances in "must-win" and "series clinching games." I bet you didn't know that in their two "series clinching games" in the '71 and '72 WCF's, that Wilt outshot Kareem by a .545 (18-33) to .383 (23-60) margin?

Or that in the '65 ECF's, in the deciding game seven, that Wilt scored eight of Philly's last ten points, to cut a 110-101 deficit down to 110-109. Not only that, but the "clutch" Russell then hit a guidewire with an inbounds pass, and the 40-40 Sixers were one play away from accomplishing the greatest playoff upset in NBA history, and against a HOF-laden 62-18 Celtic team at their PEAK. In a game in which Wilt scored 30 points, on 12-15 shooting, and with 32 rebounds. In a series in which Wilt averaged 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

And did you know that in the '68 ECF's, Wilt's Sixers were up 3-1, without HOFer Billy Cunningham playing a minute in that series? Do you think Russell, without Hondo, would have been up 3-1 in that series (obviously no, since the two were playing, and were behind 3-1.) Or that in game five, BOTH Luke Jackson and Wali Jones sustained injuries, and missed the rest of that game, and were basically worthless the remainder of the series? Or that Wilt, himself, was nursing SEVERAL injuries, including a torn calf (which was similar to the torn quad that Reed had in the '70 Finals, and which limited him to a bystander in the last three games)? Or that, in the last half of that game seven, Wilt's teammates IGNORED Chamberlain (he had a TOTAL of NINE touches on tghe offensive end in that half...and only TWO in the 4th quarter...and both of those came on offensive rebounds.) All of that resulted in a game seven, 100-96 loss. Think about that, if even ONE of those events does not take place, the Sixers roll to a second consecutive romp over the great Celtic Dynasty.

And, no, I did NOT blame West for the loss in the '70 Finals. In fact, in the first six games of that series, he was butchering Frazier. He was averaging 33 ppg going into that game seven. BUT, he was HORRIBLE in that game seven. He couldn't even get the ball past half court for much of the first half.

And, it was not just Reed who guarded Wilt in that first half. The Knicks SWARMED Chamberlain nearly every time he got the ball. And all Reed could do when he was faced with the few one-on-one's against Wilt was to foul him (4 fouls in the first half.)

And, no, Kareem would NOT have played in that game, either. The man missed a pivotal game six of the '80 Finals with a sprained ankle. And, unlike Wilt's teammates, who usually choked, Kareem's teammates stepped up. Not only did Magic dominate that clinching Finals game (and it was perhaps the greatest Finals game in NBA history), Jamaal Wilkes also had 37 points.

Now, once again, take a CLOSE LOOK at ALL 35 of Wilt's "must-win" and "series clinching" games in the post-season...and get back to me...
bitch ass fakkit 1966 called and they're tired of u so feel free to join us in 2012

ur mother shouldve swallowed