How great is Dwight Howard, historically?

[Real Men Wear Green]

Watching First Take (yes, I know, I have an unhealthy addiction) and they're arguing over whether or not Howard is going to be one of the All-Time great centers. I hadn't thought of him as part of that convo before, I'm guessing some people alredy see him as a repeat Champ thanks to the trade. But what I've seen from him so far is...Alonzo Mourning with a smile. That's not a guy you put on par with Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem, Kareem, and Russell. He's a level below, really not as good as Ewing or David Robinson.

[TheMarkMadsen]

well if you ask ISH he's a top 50-55 player of all time

:facepalm

He's has the potential to be an all time great, he's still young, entering his prime in terms of skill.

But if you only take into consideration what he's done so far, he's not even close to Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem, Kareem & Russell if you're comparing his 8 years in the league to their entire careers

it's not really fair to compare a guy's career who isn't even 30 to past legends who have already played out their entire career.

[RRR3]

well if you ask ISH he's a top 50-55 player of all time

:facepalm
Dwight is incredible don't underestimate how great he is.

[IGOTGAME]

well if you ask ISH he's a top 50-55 player of all time

:facepalm

well, he is.

defensively, guy is one of the best that ever did it.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Dwight is incredible don't underestimate how great he is.


I went back and added to my comments right after i posted.

No disrespect, Dwight is a GREAT player, has led a team to the finals, multiple DPOY awards..

But to compare his 8 years to an entire career of guys like Shaq, Wilt, Kareem & ask where he ranks is really unfair to Dwight, these guys have already played out their entire careers. Because his 8 years (while great) dont match up to those guys & their entire careers.

[ChuckOakley]

I think he's decidedly better than Ewing. He's a better rebounder and defensive player and on the offensive side of the ball Dwight is much more efficient.

Ewing was a rather overrated and inefficient offensive player (because he was forced to be during his career with the Knicks as they never got him a quality compliment) but he is remembered so much for his offense. He shot rather low percentages for a 7 footer and relied on his fadeaway and jumper from the corner of the key.. his low post game disappeared over time and turned the ball over every other time he tried dribbling across the lane.

Mourning was better than Ewing too IMO which pains me to say since I hated Mourning and the Heat and was a huge Knick fan back in the day.

[Legends66NBA7]

He's overrated and wouldn't be getting the accolades he is getting if he got drafted in the early-mid 90's.

He's on path to be an all-time great center, but like the OP, I don't consider him on the level of those true all-time greats, nor players like Ewing or Robinson.

[BuffaloBill]

I agree with MarkMadsen. I don't like ranking players like Lebron James, Kevin Durant, and Dwight Howard. Dwight is 26 years old, it's hard to tell where he stands now because his career is far from over. And you never know what could happen, he could end up with 3 MVPs, or he could end up with 0. So it's really about how great he could be. I think he has the potential to be great, a top 10 center of all time, and top 25 overall.

[JellyBean]

He has so much upside that he could be great, I just don't have him up there with the Kareem's, Wilt, Hakeem, Bill Russell, and Shaq. I think that Dwight is above the lkes of Wayne "Tree" Rollins. He is just that window below the top floor.

[All Net]

His laker career could decide long term.. We will see

[NumberSix]

He'll go down as the greatest Laker since Shaq left.

[get these NETS]

he's the larry holmes of centers

[Odinn]

Top 15. He has a chance to end up in 8-12 range. I don't think he has a chance to crack into top 7(Kareem, Russell, Chamberlain, O'Neal, Olajuwon, Malone, Robinson).

[IGOTGAME]

he's the larry holmes of centers

you mean the 3rd Greatest Heavyweight of all time. see below

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/heavyweightchart.html

[WillC]

http://basketballjournalist.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/predicting-dwight-howards-place-in.html

[tmacattack33]

Watching First Take (yes, I know, I have an unhealthy addiction) and they're arguing over whether or not Howard is going to be one of the All-Time great centers. I hadn't thought of him as part of that convo before, I'm guessing some people alredy see him as a repeat Champ thanks to the trade. But what I've seen from him so far is...Alonzo Mourning with a smile. That's not a guy you put on par with Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem, Kareem, and Russell. He's a level below, really not as good as Ewing or David Robinson.

That's an insult to Zo, wtf.

Prime Zo (98-2000) > Dwight

[ripthekik]

Really too early to say, as he hasn't done crap in his career so far (except empty trip to the finals). If he can get 3+ rings from now on, then he could climb really high.

[Clifton]

Watching First Take (yes, I know, I have an unhealthy addiction) and they're arguing over whether or not Howard is going to be one of the All-Time great centers.
First of all, good topic.

Second, to answer it, I've long thought it remarkable how decidedly un-great, historically, Dwight Howard is. He's got to be the worst "best center in the league" since Mikan. Anyway, for the best center in the league to be arguably not even a top 5 player has got to be unprecedented. (Let's say top 4 actually. I don't think you could seriously argue for anyone besides Lebron, KD, Paul and Kobe. Still unprecedented... you'd have to go back to Bird, Magic, and Jordan, all of whom have an argument for GOAT, for anything close, but there were centers then.) We've got a lot of great perimeter players right now, but I think Chris Paul has an argument over Howard; neither I nor anybody else would say that about Hakeem or something. Or even Ewing or Robinson. And that's mainly because although Howard is a threat offensively, he's not the kind of guy to control the game or to demand and then seriously take advantage of a double team. Any other historically great center would have been able to win a title with that Orlando team he had. It had all the pieces, it just needed Dwight to be better than he was.

[DCL]

not even top 10 center yet.

historically, he's not in the top 10 as of now. but he has time to change that.

[BlueandGold]

As much as I hate top# ratings I'd say he's anywhere from top40 - 60 right now depending on who you ask.

He's already done something historically significant in winning 3 DPOY (all while also being the leading scorer of his team those 3 years).. we'll see how the rest of his career plays out. He also has the finals record for most blocks in a single finals game.. this isn't like Shaq getting swept by both Hakeem in the finals and then being shut down by Rodman the next year in the east. Dwight did play up to par in the finals and actually showed fight and gave Orlando its first finals victory.. something even Shaq wasn't able to do.. and Shaq had a better backcourt than Dwight as well.

IMO he has a legitimate chance to crack the top15-20 range.. possibly top10. Imagine if he finishes with lets say multiple MVPs, FMVPs on top of the 3 DPOY he already has.. then what rank would he be?

[Clifton]

He's already done something historically significant in winning 3 DPOY (all while also being the leading scorer of his team those 3 years)..
True.

But again, where are the other good defensive players? Would he win DPOY over Ewing? Ewing consistently anchored historically great defenses. So did Ben Wallace. So did Pippen, Rodman. Does Howard do that?

[IGOTGAME]

First of all, good topic.

Second, to answer it, I've long thought it remarkable how decidedly un-great, historically, Dwight Howard is. He's got to be the worst "best center in the league" since Mikan. Anyway, for the best center in the league to be arguably not even a top 5 player has got to be unprecedented. (Let's say top 4 actually. I don't think you could seriously argue for anyone besides Lebron, KD, Paul and Kobe. Still unprecedented... you'd have to go back to Bird, Magic, and Jordan, all of whom have an argument for GOAT, for anything close, but there were centers then.) We've got a lot of great perimeter players right now, but I think Chris Paul has an argument over Howard; neither I nor anybody else would say that about Hakeem or something. Or even Ewing or Robinson. And that's mainly because although Howard is a threat offensively, he's not the kind of guy to control the game or to demand and then seriously take advantage of a double team. Any other historically great center would have been able to win a title with that Orlando team he had. It had all the pieces, it just needed Dwight to be better than he was.


Is this a joke? that Orlando team wasn't even a good team. Dwight was just playing so well that it allowed them to get away with a gimmick style of basketball.

Oh, and what is the argument for Chris Paul over Dwight Howard. I really doubt there is one. I personally have Dwight as the #2 player in the league by a good margin.


True.

But again, where are the other good defensive players? Would he win DPOY over Ewing? Ewing consistently anchored historically great defenses. So did Ben Wallace. So did Pippen, Rodman. Does Howard do that?

yes. he would win defensive player of the year over Ewing because he is a better defender. He doesn't anchor all time defenses because his coach leans on Dwights insane defense to allow the offense to put out gimmick lineups. They were literally starting Lewis at pf and playing with Hedo at pf for long stretches of games...All this while starting Jameer Nelson. That is a bad defensive team and no one historically is gonna make them an all time great squad on defense.

[Poetry]

He has so much upside that he could be great, I just don't have him up there with the Kareem's, Wilt, Hakeem, Bill Russell, and Shaq.

He's not a first-tier all-time great center. That much is explicitly clear. And i doubt he'll ever get to that point, but he is and will be a second-tier all-time great. He is somewhat like 'Zo, but i would take 'Zo over Dwight, though they're basically on a similar level.

[DuMa]

I agree. I would take Zo over Dwight. Shaq is right to a certain exent, Dwight has virtually no competition on almost every given night in the NBA and doesnt dominate like Shaq says he should (28ppg and 15rb).

Also unfair to judge Dwight historically at this point of his career. still has a long career ahead of him barring injuries. However if you drop him in any other era in the NBA, he wouldnt even be considered a Center imho. he would be a good PF.

[KyrieTheFuture]

He was lucky to be drafted when he did.

[TheMarkMadsen]

He was lucky to be drafted when he did.


Why is that?

[Legends66NBA7]

Is this a joke? that Orlando team wasn't even a good team. Dwight was just playing so well that it allowed them to get away with a gimmick style of basketball.

Hakeem, Shaq, Ewing, and Robinson (maybe even Mourning) would have probably won a title with some of those Orlando teams.

Far from a joke, those guys would have been even better for those Orlando teams.


Oh, and what is the argument for Chris Paul over Dwight Howard. I really doubt there is one. I personally have Dwight as the #2 player in the league by a good margin.

Paul is a superior offensive player and damn good defender too. One of the best clutch players in the game (not to say Howard hasn't had any). Paul, like Howard, can take control of any team lacking talent and turn them into a solid team/contender.

And it's personally about preference for me between them. Good margin ? It's close between 2-3 players for spot #2.

[taucesays]

Hakeem, Shaq, Ewing, and Robinson (maybe even Mourning) would have probably won a title with some of those Orlando teams.

Far from a joke, those guys would have been even better for those Orlando teams.

You honestly believe this? Please tell me you're not voting in the coming election.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Why is that?
I probably sounded too blunt but I think he's over rated. He's got a great rep as a defender (well deserved) but there aren't any great offensive centers in the league to truly test him. Also, there aren't other great defensive centers (Bogut is injured too much) to really hinder him. If he was drafted ten years earlier he wouldn't have been considered nearly as good. I think Dwight is a great player but he gets more love than he deserved just due to the relative scarcity at his position. I don't think he should up in the top 7 at his position unless he makes some solid improvements to his overall game.

Edit: I also am of the mindset that ranking players when they're this young is stupid but I had to respond to the thread topic.

[Legends66NBA7]

You honestly believe this? Please tell me you're not voting in the coming election.

I selected 4 centers who were better than prime Howard (assuming their all in their prime/peak). How would they do any less than what Howard did in 2009 and 2010 ? Only one debatable is Mourning.

Look what Hakeem did in 1994. There are similarities of the 1995 and 2009 Magic, so how does Shaq not do as good or better ?

I don't live in the United States, nice try at sarcasm.

[Pointguard]

Dwight will more than likely have more DPOY awards than any player ever but it is very misrepresented if you ask me. He can't be considered in the class of defenders as Russell, Wilt, Thurmond, Kareem, Hakeem, Deke, Robinson and Alonzo. While I think Ewing, Duncan and Wallace will be caught in before Dwight is done I think they would have the same amount of DPOY awards and stood out more defensively if they played now. Dwight doesn't have to guard anybody now and is even taken off of DM Cousins when Orlando played them.

Offensively, he's ok and the quality of guys guarding him is also pathetic. Tyson Chandler and Perkins do a great job defending him and they wouldn't be able to guard most of the great centers. So DH is really hard to calculate. I think that Kareem, Wilt, Duncan and Hakeem would have their way with him on both sideds of the court without question. He would foul out quickly and be held in check. He's not quite in his prime so it is a bit unfair and most modern day centers hit their prime at 28 years of age. So its a bit premature to judge him.

[Gotterdammerung]

He's not quite in his prime so it is a bit unfair and most modern day centers hit their prime at 28 years of age. So its a bit premature to judge him.
Right. He's actually 26 years old. :facepalm

I expect much more from him going forwards: more dominant post play, as well as maintain consistent rebounding and defense. Assuming the back holds up, Howard should dominate for the next 5 years at least.
:kobe:

[All Net]

Right. He's actually 26 years old. :facepalm

I expect much more from him going forwards: more dominant post play, as well as maintain consistent rebounding and defense. Assuming the back holds up, Howard should dominate for the next 5 years at least.
:kobe:

Hopefully dwight's time with Kareem will help him to keep developing his post game.

[Legends66NBA7]

Hopefully dwight's time with Kareem will help him to keep developing his post game.

I think his post game is fine.

It is the versatility in his offensive game that needs more work and improvement as he gets older. More bank shots, 3-9 feet jump shots, hook shots, etc...

[Heavincent]

He'll go down as the greatest Laker since Shaq left.

lol

[Glide2keva]

Not very IMO. He had no competition, except for Bynum. He's the best by default.

[Carbine]

He's going to rank in the top 15 players ever when it's all said and done.

If he stays healthy.

[Dictator]

Kind of overrated considering the lack of great C's. Hs offensive game really isn't that great and his highest ppg was 21 (12fta) despite being "the man".

Though his defense is :bowdown: worthy.

[BuffaloBill]

Not very IMO. He had no competition, except for Bynum. He's the best by default.


Yeah, Dwight would have been garbage in the 60s with all those great dominant, athletic Centers they had back then.

[madmax17]

Well he ain't Wilma Chamberlin, that's fo sure.

[BoutPractice]

Pretty great.
I actually think he's underrated due to lack of competition, not the other way around. With better competition, he'd have been forced to develop more aspects of his game, and would've had the ability to do so.

[lakerspng]

first tier: Wilt, Jabbar, Russell, Olajuwon, Shaq

second tier: Zo, Ewing, Robinson, Dwight, etc...

he has to improve his offensive skill set and maintain his defensive domination, along with winning a couple championships as the main cog to move up. Could certainly see him retiring with as many as 6 DPOY awards. That is pretty significant.

[G-train]

Having religiously studied centres since the late 80's, I can categorically state that Dwight is not better than prime Zo (who was top 2-3 in MVP voting a couple of seasons), in fact Howard may have never played as well as Zo did in his rookie season, but that's arguable. Zo's illness will count against him though as he didn't have the longevity he should have.
Howard isn't as good as Ewing either. Ewing was a better defender and scorer, and would grab 14 rebounds in todays league too.
But he isn't far behind those 2, and a very handy 6'9 centre in this league of 6'8 power forwards playing centre and shooting threes.
Howard would be a less skilled Shawn Kemp in the 90's (where it was mostly a big mans game).
His smaller stature allows him to be more mobile in today's league, but not as suitable at the 5 in other era's.
So in reality its probably unfair to compare them, the league has changed alot - even in the last 20 years.

[G-train]

fCould certainly see him retiring with as many as 6 DPOY awards. That is pretty significant.

Which is historically almost always given to centres. Of which he is the only one that would be considered for the award. Bogut should be considered when healthy, but wont be.
But even if he won 10, the DPOY is a pathetic joke award, like most NBA awards. I mean Ibaka might win one for being a pogo stick.

[BlackVVaves]

Hard to say right now, just assumption based arguments really.

But in all likelihood, Dwight will finish with at least one ring, a MVP, and another DPOY. So, if that's his resume:

MVP
4X DPOY
Champion

You would be hard-pressed to convince someone that based off accomplishment and production, Ewing or Mourning had a better career. Really hard-pressed. And of course, this is hypothetical as stated. And I do agree Dwight is currently (and will likely end up) in the second tier of All Time centers, in the Ewing, D-Rob department. But, I think he has the potential to be at the very top of that tier, even though I believe a player like D-Rob was individually more skilled. But, if Dwight starts winning championships, MVPs, and more DPOYs?

He'll go down top 20-25 All Time.

But, in terms of current rank? I'd say he's amidst Ewing and Mourning somewhere, with great potential to be as high or higher than David Robinson.

All depends on health, production, and how he fills out his resume these next 6-8 years (much like Lebron).

[Real Men Wear Green]

I think he's decidedly better than Ewing. He's a better rebounder and defensive player and on the offensive side of the ball Dwight is much more efficient.Howard has a career ppg of 18.4, maxing out at 23. He's more efficient than Ewing but it's like Rondo being a more efficient scorer than AI in that it's really about a guy playing within his limitations and has nothing to do with actually being a better scorer. Ewing has six seasons where he scores more than Howard's career high. And Howard's dominance of the DPoY award has much to do with the decline of dominant bigs leaving him with a stranglehold on first team All-NBA, All-D, and other such honors for which Ewing had to fight off Robinson, Olajuwon, and Zo, all of whom are equal to or better than Howard, as well as Mutombo competing for defensive honors. Ewing wasn't Howard on the glass statistically but he had 9 seasons of double-digit rebounding normally playing with a rugged 4 like Oakley who would also get boards at a high level. That's an advantage when it comes to wins and losses but left more boards for Howard to accumulate. Howard will stil grab a ton but I doubt he hits 14 now that he's with Gasol.


Ewing was a rather overrated and inefficient offensive player (because he was forced to be during his career with the Knicks as they never got him a quality compliment) but he is remembered so much for his offense. He shot rather low percentages for a 7 footer and relied on his fadeaway and jumper from the corner of the key.. his low post game disappeared over time and turned the ball over every other time he tried dribbling across the lane..
He was a career 50%, which isn't bad at all. And the number is lower than it maybe should be because he played until he was 39.
I agree with MarkMadsen. I don't like ranking players like Lebron James, Kevin Durant, and Dwight Howard. Dwight is 26 years old, it's hard to tell where he stands now because his career is far from over. And you never know what could happen, he could end up with 3 MVPs, or he could end up with 0. So it's really about how great he could be. I think he has the potential to be great, a top 10 center of all time, and top 25 overall.

His laker career could decide long term.. We will seeThere's obviously a lot of time left before we know what his legacy is but it isn't too soon to say what kind of player he is. Howard's been around for 8 years and at 26 a player is set in the mold of who he's going to be. Especially an All-NBA type like Howard. The only way he's going to improve is if he comes back one offseason with skills like Hakeem and starts scoring 25-plus. Anyone see that happening?

[eliteballer]

Well, Zo IS one of the greatest centers of all time. So is Ben Wallace. Mutombo. You don't need to be in the Kareem or Russell class to be called one. Howard has 3 DPOY awards, thats enough to already call him one of the greats.

[Whoah10115]

I think he's decidedly better than Ewing. He's a better rebounder and defensive player and on the offensive side of the ball Dwight is much more efficient.

Ewing was a rather overrated and inefficient offensive player (because he was forced to be during his career with the Knicks as they never got him a quality compliment) but he is remembered so much for his offense. He shot rather low percentages for a 7 footer and relied on his fadeaway and jumper from the corner of the key.. his low post game disappeared over time and turned the ball over every other time he tried dribbling across the lane.

Mourning was better than Ewing too IMO which pains me to say since I hated Mourning and the Heat and was a huge Knick fan back in the day.



You are quite crazy here. Neither of these guys is yet better than prime Ewing or career Ewing. No way.

[redhonda76]

I think he's decidedly better than Ewing. He's a better rebounder and defensive player and on the offensive side of the ball Dwight is much more efficient.

Ewing was a rather overrated and inefficient offensive player (because he was forced to be during his career with the Knicks as they never got him a quality compliment) but he is remembered so much for his offense. He shot rather low percentages for a 7 footer and relied on his fadeaway and jumper from the corner of the key.. his low post game disappeared over time and turned the ball over every other time he tried dribbling across the lane.

Mourning was better than Ewing too IMO which pains me to say since I hated Mourning and the Heat and was a huge Knick fan back in the day.

This is the worst BS post I have read all day. You have no idea what you are talking about. I don't need to repeat what Real Men Wear Green because it's exactly my answer to you.

[red1]

He is the best big of his era by far (2007+) so he will retire with a bunch of defensive awards and all-nba first teams. His career accolades will easily surpass the likes of zo and even drob/ewing by the time he retires.

[Carbine]

I just have to SMH when I hear people talk about putting Dwight in the 90's and watching him not be a great player or whatever.

1) Rules back then would HELP Dwight.

2) He would have to improve against better comp night in and night out

3) A lot less stretch bigs back then, which keeps Dwight near the basket more than now, increasing his effectiveness.

4) Go check his games against a just exiting his prime Tim Duncan & Shaq. Two of the top 10 players ever. This was when Dwight was raw as hell. He didn't struggle against those guys, in fact he did extremely well, so what on earth makes somebody think he wouldn't do that exact same to those bigs back in the 90's?

Bottom line is this. Regardless of his PPG, he's a dominant low post scorer. You single him up he's going to work. If you double him he's getting better and better every year with knowing where to go with the ball in those situations.

His defense speaks for itself. He turned an Orlando team with some of the worst collective defenders in his era into a top 5 defense.

He's a GREAT player. He's going to get better, and he will end up as one of the top 15 players to ever play when it's all said and done.

[Whoah10115]

Any other historically great center would have been able to win a title with that Orlando team he had. It had all the pieces, it just needed Dwight to be better than he was.




:roll:



Some things just are. And this here are just stupid.



One of the best defenders ever and a great player. If he played in the 90's, he'd be a great player. Let's all pay attention that this guy isn't Shaqing up his stats (my apologies to the Shaq fans), he's not beasting on the guys who can't guard him. He's making his team better. That's what he's done.


Dominating the guys who square straight up to you is not the equivalent to playing basketball that helps your team win. The latter is what's important. It has nothing to do with what position he plays, the impact he has on his team is great.

[JtotheIzzo]

Watching First Take (yes, I know, I have an unhealthy addiction) and they're arguing over whether or not Howard is going to be one of the All-Time great centers. I hadn't thought of him as part of that convo before, I'm guessing some people alredy see him as a repeat Champ thanks to the trade. But what I've seen from him so far is...Alonzo Mourning with a smile. That's not a guy you put on par with Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem, Kareem, and Russell. He's a level below, really not as good as Ewing or David Robinson.

He is already better than Alonzo all time but if his career ended today he would be borderline HoF.

Potentially he is an all time great with his potential taking him somewhere below Shaq, Moses and Hakeem (Russell, Chamberlain and Abdul Jabbar are above them), likely in the Robinson/Ewing rank.

At the top the all time great centers fall into the following levels.

1: Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar

2: Shaq, Olajuwon, Malone

3: Robinson, Ewing, Reed, Thurmond

*: Walton, Mikan

*(not sure where to put these guys but they are all-time greats)

Realistically I can't see him reaching level two unless he drastically improves his offense.

[Real Men Wear Green]

2) He would have to improve against better comp night in and night out

3) A lot less stretch bigs back then, which keeps Dwight near the basket more than now, increasing his effectiveness.

4) Go check his games against a just exiting his prime Tim Duncan & Shaq. Two of the top 10 players ever. This was when Dwight was raw as hell. He didn't struggle against those guys, in fact he did extremely well, so what on earth makes somebody think he wouldn't do that exact same to those bigs back in the 90's?2: There's no way to know what effect playing against better centers has on Howard's game. This is nothing but assumption.

3: Guarding a stretch big can force you to the perimeter on D. Being guarded by one dictates nothing and a lot of them are worse post defenders than the traditional types. The only effect on effectiveness might be Howard's ability to protect the basket. But he's got what, 3 DpoYs? Not much here.

4: Go check games played against the NBA. He's a career 18.4 ppg player, and being guarded by Olajuwon isn't going to help.

Bottom line is this. Regardless of his PPG, he's a dominant low post scorer. You single him up he's going to work. If you double him he's getting better and better every year with knowing where to go with the ball in those situations. His max ppg is 22.9. That's dominant? What, does the NBA now have 15-20 "dominant" scorers? Where do we draw the line?

[Real Men Wear Green]

He is already better than Alonzo all time
How?

[Whoah10115]

2: There's no way to know what effect playing against better centers has on Howard's game. This is nothing but assumption.

3: Guarding a stretch big can force you to the perimeter on D. Being guarded by one dictates nothing and a lot of them are worse post defenders than the traditional types. The only effect on effectiveness might be Howard's ability to protect the basket. But he's got what, 3 DpoYs? Not much here.

4: Go check games played against the NBA. He's a career 18.4 ppg player, and being guarded by Olajuwon isn't going to help.
His max ppg is 22.9. That's dominant? What, does the NBA now have 15-20 "dominant" scorers? Where do we draw the line?



22.9 ain't exactly low. People think Shaq deserved an MVP scoring 22.9. And he had fewer good centers to play against than Dwight does.

[Real Men Wear Green]

22.9 ain't exactly low. People think Shaq deserved an MVP scoring 22.9. And he had fewer good centers to play against than Dwight does.
That's his best season, his career number is 18.4 and he's probably going to hover around 20 for the rest of his prime. Do we regard Chris Bosh as a dominant scorer when he's a better scorer than Howard? Howard is a dominant overall player but that takes into account what he does as a rebounder and defender. We're just talking about scoring ability here.

[Jacks3]

He's going to rank in the top 15 players ever when it's all said and done.

:oldlol:

[Whoah10115]

That's his best season, his career number is 18.4 and he's probably going to hover around 20 for the rest of his prime. Do we regard Chris Bosh as a dominant scorer when he's a better scorer than Howard? Howard is a dominant overall player but that takes into account what he does as a rebounder and defender. We're just talking about scoring ability here.



That's his career high, at 24years old. Why would it be likely that he'd hover below that average for the remainder of his career, when he came straight out of high school and is coming into his prime?

[Carbine]

2: There's no way to know what effect playing against better centers has on Howard's game. This is nothing but assumption.

3: Guarding a stretch big can force you to the perimeter on D. Being guarded by one dictates nothing and a lot of them are worse post defenders than the traditional types. The only effect on effectiveness might be Howard's ability to protect the basket. But he's got what, 3 DpoYs? Not much here.

4: Go check games played against the NBA. He's a career 18.4 ppg player, and being guarded by Olajuwon isn't going to help.
His max ppg is 22.9. That's dominant? What, does the NBA now have 15-20 "dominant" scorers? Where do we draw the line?


If you think his PPG is refelctive on how good of an offensive player he is, that's on you. You either understand that's retarded or you don't, ESPECIALLY when this dude came straight from high school and took him a few years to get up to par with his skills.

I think it was in 2007-2008 when you could see the skills coming around, and he's improved upon something every year. We're talking about Dwight now, not what he was as a teenager.

Also, if you watched any Orlando games, you know that the offense they were running was not conducive to scoring lots of points for Howard. They ran pick and roll almost all the time, with Dwight sliding down the middle, which is why they shot so many threes because that's what was available due to the sagging on Dwight.

They didn't run a tradition big man offense through him. There were times they'd go whole quarters without giving him a legit post up. Now you can argue that's on him to be more vocal to give him the ball, but nevertheless.

Tim Duncan from '03 until the end of his prime was around a 20 ppg scorer, doesn't mean it was reflective of his scoring and offensive ability. He was a GREAT offensive player, regardless of the 20 PPG he scored.

[Real Men Wear Green]

If you think his PPG is refelctive on how good of an offensive player he is, that's on you. You either understand that's retarded or you don't, ESPECIALLY when this dude came straight from high school and took him a few years to get up to par with his skills.

I think it was in 2007-2008 when you could see the skills coming around, and he's improved upon something every year. We're talking about Dwight now, not what he was as a teenager.

Also, if you watched any Orlando games, you know that the offense they were running was not conducive to scoring lots of points for Howard. They ran pick and roll almost all the time, with Dwight sliding down the middle, which is why they shot so many threes because that's what was available due to the sagging on Dwight.

They didn't run a tradition big man offense through him. There were times they'd go whole quarters without giving him a legit post up. Now you can argue that's on him to be more vocal to give him the ball, but nevertheless.

Tim Duncan from '03 until the end of his prime was around a 20 ppg scorer, doesn't mean it was reflective of his scoring and offensive ability. He was a GREAT offensive player, regardless of the 20 PPG he scored.
I'm not going to join you in pretending that Howard is offensively skilled. Comparing him to TD is stupid, Duncan is/was all about skills with limited athletic ability while Howard has always been a supreme athlete. As bigs they got it done completely differently. We don't talk about Howard's bankshot because it doesn't exist. And don't play that stupid "if you watch him play" crap, we all have cable, we've seen him play for years and his lack of skill has been evident.

[IGOTGAME]

I'm not going to join you in pretending that Howard is offensively skilled. Comparing him to TD is stupid, Duncan is/was all about skills with limited athletic ability while Howard has always been a supreme athlete. As bigs they got it done completely differently. We don't talk about Howard's bankshot because it doesn't exist. And don't play that stupid "if you watch him play" crap, we all have cable, we've seen him play for years and his lack of skill has been evident.

actually it does exist. Seen him make it several times. It is not Timmy's bankshot but it is there. On an unrelated note, Duncan's bankshot has been overrated for the last 7-8 years.

[Carbine]

YOU JUST TRIED TO USE HIS PPG AS IF THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF THE GOOD OF OFFENSIVE PLAYER HE IS!!!

Then I pull out Timmy being a 20 PPG from '03 to the end of his prime and now it's a completely different tune. Oh they're different players, get it done differently!

Look, if you think Dwight isn't skilled, you aren't paying attention.

Ask ShaqAttack or anyone who really studies him, he's to the point now where his skills are legit. That bank shot you're talkng about? He does that at times.

Video of Dwight in the post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slOlB_LfB-o

If you don't see skills in there, you have no hope. First three moves, bank shit, a catch into a jump hook, then a sweeping left hand across the lane from a triple threat. These are legit skills developed over time.

[Real Men Wear Green]

actually it does exist. Seen him make it several times. It is not Timmy's bankshot but it is there. On an unrelated note, Duncan's bankshot has been overrated for the last 7-8 years.
So...Howard has a bank shot that you've seen, but it's not as good as Duncan's, which is overrated. Which would make Howard's bank shot what, exactly? And this is me quoting your statement.

[Whoah10115]

YOU JUST TRIED TO USE HIS PPG AS IF THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF THE GOOD OF OFFENSIVE PLAYER HE IS!!!

Then I pull out Timmy being a 20 PPG from '03 to the end of his prime and now it's a completely different tune. Oh they're different players, get it done differently!

Look, if you think Dwight isn't skilled, you aren't paying attention.

Ask ShaqAttack or anyone who really studies him, he's to the point now where his skills are legit. That bank shot you're talkng about? He does that at times.

Video of Dwight in the post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slOlB_LfB-o

If you don't see skills in there, you have no hope. First three moves, bank shit, a catch into a jump hook, then a sweeping left hand across the lane from a triple threat. These are legit skills developed over time.



You are correct. They didn't go thru him enough.


The argument against Howard is that he didn't demand the ball more. Is he going to be as prolific as Shaq? He's unlikely to put up those numbers with regularity (if ever), but the guy has legitimate moves in the post.


People always talk about Lebron's bad footwork. Well, Dwight is an athletic freak with terrific footwork. And it's a shame that people can't see it. His body control and footwork are great. What he doesn't do is barrel into people. Maybe he should be more physical, but he has a post game. He gets it done at a high level.

[Whoah10115]

So...Howard has a bank shot that you've seen, but it's not as good as Duncan's, which is overrated. Which would make Howard's bank shot what, exactly? And this is me quoting your statement.



You're taking his comment way out of context.

[longtime lurker]

Well if I use retarded Lebron fans logic if Dwight Howard wins 1 championship he'll be in the top 15 range. If he wins 2 he'll definitely be better than Kobe! All this at the age of 27! :roll:

[Real Men Wear Green]

YOU JUST TRIED TO USE HIS PPG AS IF THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF THE GOOD OF OFFENSIVE PLAYER HE IS!!!You just treid to use capitalization to make 18.4 more impressive than it really is.


Then I pull out Timmy being a 20 PPG from '03 to the end of his prime and now it's a completely different tune. Oh they're different players, get it done differently! It's true. And furthermore, Duncan is playing with 2 better scorers than anyone Howard ever shared the ball with. Howard was always just surrounded by 4 shooter, TD is with guys who create offense.


Video of Dwight in the post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slOlB_LfB-oThis is called a highlight video. If we compile a video of his last Game 1 vs. the Celts where he shot 3-10, what would that look like? To be fair, there are both good as well as bad games for Howard and more good than bad, he's a 20-ppg level scorer. But it's obvious that his game is 99% about athletic and size advantages. Nothing horribly wrong wth that, he's a big. But he damn sure isn't a dominant scoer and never has been.

[Real Men Wear Green]

You're taking his comment way out of context.
I'm showing what's wrong with it. I can show you clips of Rondo hitting threes. Does that make him a legit three-point shooter?

[SCdac]

Comparing Dwight to Tim Duncan offensively is laughable. They're totally different.

In terms of post game, range, court vision, timing, footwork, finesse, and scoring volume.

Duncan averaged virtually 22 ppg for 6 straight seasons, on top of averaging 2.4 to 4.0 assists a game (something Dwight hasn't come close to). And keep in mind that was for a very slow-paced, sharing, offense

All 20 ppg seasons are not created equal. Guys like Jermaine Oneal, Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, etc, have had multiple 20 ppg seasons. In their primes those guys were arguably as good or better scorers than Dwight (not necessarily more efficient, but efficiency is not everything).

[Carbine]

That's my point.

I wasn't comparing them, my point was that judging someone as an offensive player by their PPG is dumb.

Dwight is much more impactful on offense than simply shouting out 18.7 career PPG and leaving it at that. Just like Duncan was a much better offensive player than his PPG indicated from '03 until he exited his prime.

[BlackVVaves]

It escapes me how critical some people can be. As basketball fans, we preach to the choir so often about basketball being a two-way street; that offense is important, but not the ultimate pillar of basketball. To the extent that the saying "Defense wins championships," became a widespread axiom for b-ball, as almost every other sport.

When a player is considered a great scorer, we berate his prowess with "Yea but he ain't shit defensively!! It's all about defense!" When another player is considered a great defender its "Yea but he can't put the basket in the hole, he ain't shit offensively!"

I mean, really? Have we become so cynical in our observation that we are not even capable of appreciating unique players when they stumble across this Association?

Dwight is not as offensively skilled as Duncan, or as prolific a scorer or Shaq. But, what happened to the great praise for players who are capable of changing the landscape of a game, a season, with just his defense? The man took a mediocre team of three point shooters to the Finals at 23...23!. And while he doesn't amaze us with a patented hook shot or Dream shake, he utilizes his physical advantages enough to typically lead the league in FG%.

It's one thing to objectively analyze his game. It's another to place so much emphasis on what he can't do, without properly acknowledging what he can and has done. To be able to single-handedly transform your team into a perennial Top 10 defense in the league each and every year, while it employs some of the worst defenders the league has to offer, is truly an incredible testamant to just how impactful and dominating Dwight has been, and can continue to be.

Seriously. He will never be the greatest center to ever play this game, and won't come close either. But he has dominated his era and that's all that is important. When it's all said and done, people won't be asking what would Dwight have done if he played in the 80s and 90s. They will be asking what did he do when he played period. How did he impact the game? What's his legacy? How many rings, MVPs, FMVPs, rebounding titles, DPOYs. How did he dominate? How did he lead? How did he win?

That's what's important. All this squabbling about who has better touch around the rim and who was a better back to the basket player is impertinent to me. As a basketball fan, all that matters to me is results, and the quality of your performance as your produce those results. Dwight should expand his game, but that doesn't mean his game isn't already great.

It just means this great player can be even greater.

[turnaroundJ]

Maximizing his potential, could he be a top 3-7 defensive big of all time?

[Pointguard]

If you think his PPG is refelctive on how good of an offensive player he is, that's on you. You either understand that's retarded or you don't, ESPECIALLY when this dude came straight from high school and took him a few years to get up to par with his skills.

I think it was in 2007-2008 when you could see the skills coming around, and he's improved upon something every year. We're talking about Dwight now, not what he was as a teenager.

Also, if you watched any Orlando games, you know that the offense they were running was not conducive to scoring lots of points for Howard. They ran pick and roll almost all the time, with Dwight sliding down the middle, which is why they shot so many threes because that's what was available due to the sagging on Dwight.

They didn't run a tradition big man offense through him. There were times they'd go whole quarters without giving him a legit post up. Now you can argue that's on him to be more vocal to give him the ball, but nevertheless.

Tim Duncan from '03 until the end of his prime was around a 20 ppg scorer, doesn't mean it was reflective of his scoring and offensive ability. He was a GREAT offensive player, regardless of the 20 PPG he scored.

TD was very effective offensively because he was very smart and versatile. His passing was superb and he was great at setting players up off the ball as well. And he had that ability at 23 years of age. DH is 26 and he's nowhere near TD's complete offensive feel for the game. TD was very skilled and resourceful as an offensive player.

DH isn't very resourceful and has real trouble with the games only good one on one center defenders. DH played Perkins and Chandler in 44 games and only cracked 20 in ten of them. He gets a big challenge only like seven or eight times a year and he's not up for them? His passing leaves a lot to be desired too. He's not great until he really learns to pass out of the double. The passing could be looked over a bit if he was great in the post, but he isn't that either. I think he's better than the dirth of centers out there in most categories but it doesn't necessarily make him elite all-time because he could be a lot better in the post and a whole lot better with his passing. And the few centers that are very good at some aspect of the game bother him.

Dwight will learn to be better in these aspects of the game, while young, eight years is still a long time to get them. Long enough to second guess it. DH is faster, quicker, more athletic and stronger than almost every center. He's also more experienced, offensively, than any of them by a long shot. So his list of advantages over his competitor are always very numerous.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It escapes me how critical some people can be. As basketball fans, we preach to the choir so often about basketball being a two-way street; that offense is important, but not the ultimate pillar of basketball. To the extent that the saying "Defense wins championships," became a widespread axiom for b-ball, as almost every other sport.

When a player is considered a great scorer, we berate his prowess with "Yea but he ain't shit defensively!! It's all about defense!" When another player is considered a great defender its "Yea but he can't put the basket in the hole, he ain't shit offensively!"

I mean, really? Have we become so cynical in our observation that we are not even capable of appreciating unique players when they stumble across this Association?

Dwight is not as offensively skilled as Duncan, or as prolific a scorer or Shaq. But, what happened to the great praise for players who are capable of changing the landscape of a game, a season, with just his defense? The man took a mediocre team of three point shooters to the Finals at 23...23!. And while he doesn't amaze us with a patented hook shot or Dream shake, he utilizes his physical advantages enough to typically lead the league in FG%.

It's one thing to objectively analyze his game. It's another to place so much emphasis on what he can't do, without properly acknowledging what he can and has done. To be able to single-handedly transform your team into a perennial Top 10 defense in the league each and every year, while it employs some of the worst defenders the league has to offer, is truly an incredible testamant to just how impactful and dominating Dwight has been, and can continue to be.

Seriously. He will never be the greatest center to ever play this game, and won't come close either. But he has dominated his era and that's all that is important. When it's all said and done, people won't be asking what would Dwight have done if he played in the 80s and 90s. They will be asking what did he do when he played period. How did he impact the game? What's his legacy? How many rings, MVPs, FMVPs, rebounding titles, DPOYs. How did he dominate? How did he lead? How did he win?

That's what's important. All this squabbling about who has better touch around the rim and who was a better back to the basket player is impertinent to me. As a basketball fan, all that matters to me is results, and the quality of your performance as your produce those results. Dwight should expand his game, but that doesn't mean his game isn't already great.

It just means this great player can be even greater.
I see how it might look like I'm belittling Howard but calling a guy the new Zo isn't an insult in my eyes. I have a lot of respect for Mourning.

[FatComputerNerd]

Poor mans' Zo' is probably a reasonable comparison.

Zo' could shoot though, and had a more polished offensive game in general.

I'd say a prime Kevin Willis would be a better comparison.

Definitely NOT a top ten all-time Center, but might crack the top 15-20.

If in the league when they were, he would get destroyed by guys like Ewing, Prime Zo, Hakeem, Shaq, D-Rob, Walton, Sabonis (healthy), Moses, Wilt, Bill, Kareem, Mikan, and more.


I'd even go so far as to say a prime Big Z was a better all-around player than Howard.
.
.
.

[Money 23]

Needs an MVP and a couple ring to get legit historically. Out of the centers I've seen ... he ranks below Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, D. Robinson, and Ewing just in terms of all around play. As of right now he really just reminds me of Alonzo Mourning, pre-kidney problems. A defensive and rebounding monster, but weak solo offensively. D12 however has a MEAN roll ability on the pick and cornroll.

[BlackVVaves]

I see how it might look like I'm belittling Howard but calling a guy the new Zo isn't an insult in my eyes. I have a lot of respect for Mourning.

I wasn't particularly referring to you, but the general consensus the thread discussion was developing. I think in terms of where his game is now, he's Alonzo-like, but I think his true potential lays in David Robinson territory.

He just has to get there.

[Dragonyeuw]

A more athletic Mourning is probably a fair comparison, but I think Alonzo was a better overall basketball player fundamentally. In terms of all-time, the next 5-6 years will validate his legacy as he enters his prime and is now in a situation where he's with a winning organization. He's well below the 90's best centers though....

[Money 23]

A more athletic Mourning is probably a fair comparison, but I think Alonzo was a better overall basketball player fundamentally. In terms of all-time, the next 5-6 years will validate his legacy as he enters his prime and is now in a situation where he's with a winning organization. He's well below the 90's best centers though....
Yea, that's basically what I said. I agree on all counts. Rep worthy when I get the chance. Mourning wasn't as dynamic off the pick and roll, D12's insane athleticism allows him to exploit that ... but Mourning actually had a decent jumper. Light years beyond Dwight's t-rex armed shot. I will rep when I get the chance, my dude.

Also, that phatty in your avatar :biggums:


It's killing me here at work man. I'm going to need to go to the bathroom and take a "stroke" break.

[Dragonyeuw]

Also, that phatty in your avatar :biggums:


It's killing me here at work man. I'm going to need to go to the bathroom and take a "stroke" break.

:cheers:

Thanks for the rep.:rockon:

[RRR3]

Well if I use retarded Lebron fans logic if Dwight Howard wins 1 championship he'll be in the top 15 range. If he wins 2 he'll definitely be better than Kobe! All this at the age of 27! :roll:
Get LeBron off your mind, clown.

[zizozain]

Well if I use retarded Lebron fans logic if Dwight Howard wins 1 championship he'll be in the top 15 range. If he wins 2 he'll definitely be better than Kobe! All this at the age of 27! :roll:
lol @ lebrick prostitutes

[Money 23]

Get LeBron off your mind, clown.
It's not like the 3x MVPs, ridiculous career stat line, DPOY caliber anchor, undisputed individual league dominance since 2009 w/ the addition of just one ring wasn't a legit reason to put a top five talent, into the top ten of all-time with his already STUD like resume.

[RRR3]

lol @ lebrick prostitutes
Stick to one account, winwin

[chazzy]

2011 Dwight is underrated. His scoring arsenal improved as he added more counters to his standard post moves and started hitting a bank shot more. Also lead Orlando to the 3rd best defense despite losing their only 2 other defenders on the squad (Gortat and Pietrus).

[JtotheIzzo]

I'd even go so far as to say a prime Big Z was a better all-around player than Howard.
.
.
.

I'd then go so far as to call you a moron.

[FatComputerNerd]

I'd then go so far as to call you a moron.

You can call me anything you like.

Not trying to bash Dwight but people forget how good Prime Z was, and overrate Dwight ridiculously.

His offensive arsenal was certainly > Dwight's, and he was a better offensive rebounder as well.

Dwight is obviously more physically dominant, and would take the edge in most defensive categories.

[FatComputerNerd]

BTW, the people saying prime 'Zo was weak solo offensively are out of their minds and need to watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMwuMPmtH3w

He was more than just a defensive monster. He actually had a nice handle, and took people off the dribble with regularity in ISO.

He could also shoot rather well from outside, and had an array of post moves far superior to Dwight's repertoire.

[magnax1]

To the people saying he isn't as good as Zo, that's just a stupid notion. Zo in his peak single season average 20-11 with 4 blocks on 56 TS%. He only kept that up for two seasons total out of a 15+ year career. Dwight Howard in his prime so far (09-present) has averaged 21-14 with 2 blocks on 61 TS%. Any of those 4 years are better then Zo's peak, and he's already done that for twice as long as Zo's peak/prime with no signs of slowing down at all. They're arguably similar scoring wise, but in most regards Dwight is just plain better for longer.

[FatComputerNerd]

To the people saying he isn't as good as Zo, that's just a stupid notion. Zo in his peak single season average 20-11 with 4 blocks on 56 TS%. He only kept that up for two seasons total out of a 15+ year career. Dwight Howard in his prime so far (09-present) has averaged 21-14 with 2 blocks on 61 TS%. Any of those 4 years are better then Zo's peak, and he's already done that for twice as long as Zo's peak/prime with no signs of slowing down at all. They're arguably similar scoring wise, but in most regards Dwight is just plain better for longer.

It's not all about the box score, and numbers.

'Prime Zo was on an entirely different level than Dwight.

Go watch the video I just posted.

[BlackVVaves]

You can call me anything you like.

Not trying to bash Dwight but people forget how good Prime Z was, and overrate Dwight ridiculously.

His offensive arsenal was certainly > Dwight's, and he was a better offensive rebounder as well.

Dwight is obviously more physically dominant, and would take the edge in most defensive categories.

C'mon man. You're taking being a homer to an all-time low. Don't sit there and try and sell us that "prime" Ilgauskas was better than Dwight. The most points he ever averaged in a season was 17. The most rebounds he ever averaged in a season was 9, DESPITE BEING 7'3. Dude is a career 48% shooter from the field, never getting higher than 51%. AS A CENTER.

What an idiot :roll:

[FatComputerNerd]

C'mon man. You're taking being a homer to an all-time low. Don't sit there and try and sell us that "prime" Ilgauskas was better than Dwight. The most points he ever averaged in a season was 17. The most rebounds he ever averaged in a season was 9, DESPITE BEING 7'3. Dude is a career 48% shooter from the field, never getting higher than 51%. AS A CENTER.

What an idiot :roll:

Perhaps some homerism :D

But keep in mind Z shot from the outside a lot on pick and pops.

Dwight gets ALL his points in the paint, which obviously increases his FG %.

There are also other factors, such as Z's great passing ability, and offensive rebounding.

Scoring more points doesn't always mean you're the better player.




Anyways
.
.
.

Back to Dwight.

No way in hell is he anywhere near as good as Prime 'Zo was.

[Whoah10115]

Perhaps some homerism :D

But keep in mind Z shot from the outside a lot on pick and pops.

Dwight gets ALL his points in the paint, which obviously increases his FG %.

There are also other factors, such as Z's great passing ability, and offensive rebounding.

Scoring more points doesn't always mean you're the better player.



No. Just take him out of the conversation. Dwight Howard is not the best center by default. He's one of the best basketball players in basketball. You cannot compare Ilqauskas to Howard. At best, Ilqauskas deserved an all-star appearance. Dwight Howard deserved the MVP.

[BlackVVaves]

Perhaps some homerism :D

But keep in mind Z shot from the outside a lot on pick and pops.

Dwight gets ALL his points in the paint, which obviously increases his FG %.

There are also other factors, such as Z's great passing ability, and offensive rebounding.

Scoring more points doesn't always mean you're the better player.

You're right.

Which is why your post is even more hilarious, as Dwight was about 20X the defender Z was.

Dwight led a mediocre team of jump shooters to the NBA Finals. Remind me how many times Z even got the Cavs into the playoffs before Lebron came to town.

[magnax1]

It's not all about the box score, and numbers.

'Prime Zo was on an entirely different level than Dwight.

Go watch the video I just posted.
I've watched plenty of Zo, and the impact to say he was better then Dwight just wasn't there. There isn't any sort of great intangible play that would give anyone reason to say that Zo's stats aren't representative of his impact. Defensively maybe, but even then I think most would agree that Dwight was at the very least on the same level as Zo on defense. On offense though, Zo might've been more skilled (maybe not honestly, he wasn't any sort of super dominant post player, and Dwight has become very good in that regard) but tangibly or intangibly it doesn't make a difference on the way they impacted the game. They both scored about 20 points (Dwight more efficiently) while doing little to get their team mates easier buckets. They were scorers and nothing else, and if we're going off Dwight's improvements last year I'd say it's pretty clear that Dwight has become a better passer. Rebounding wise it's very clear who's better. Dwight. He's gotten 14-15 rebounds a game for years, and has brought teams with little rebounding help into the top tier of rebounding differential for all of those years. Zo was a good, but not historically great rebounder like Dwight, so I'm not certain what gives you reason to believe Zo was better.

[FatComputerNerd]

You're right.

Which is why your post is even more hilarious, as Dwight was about 20X the defender Z was.

Dwight led a mediocre team of jump shooters to the NBA Finals. Remind me how many times Z even got the Cavs into the playoffs before Lebron came to town.

Who was he surrounded by?

Anyways, I apologize for bringing Z into the convo. Definite homerism at work.

Please back to Dwight vs 'Zo

[FatComputerNerd]

I've watched plenty of Zo, ......

, so I'm not certain what gives you reason to believe Zo was better.


Because he was, and that is incontrovertible fact.

I doubt many if any pro' bball analysts would disagree w/ me.

Dwight is a great player, but 'Zo was beast.

[Whoah10115]

Because he was, and that is incontrovertible fact.

I doubt many if any pro' bball analysts would disagree w/ me.

Dwight is a great player, but 'Zo was beast.




This is incontrovertibly false.


I'm not saying you can't say Mourning is better. But this is not accurate.


Howard is more talented and should be the better player. Mourning might be the better shot-blocker, but Howard is the better anchor and in the longterm is probably the better defender overall.


Dwight is also the best rebounder in the league. And he's not just swallowing boards. As was already said, he led a team of shitty rebounders to being amongst the better rebounding teams in the league. Dwight gets killed for his post game, but he has post moves and terrific footwork. If he's not better than Mourning already, he's about to be. And Mourning will rightfully be a hall-of-famer.

[tpols]

Because he was, and that is incontrovertible fact.

I doubt many if any pro' bball analysts would disagree w/ me.

Dwight is a great player, but 'Zo was beast.
It's not a fact. :lol It's just your stupid opinion.

[FatComputerNerd]

It's not a fact. :lol It's just your stupid opinion.

I think it would also be the opinion of 85% of all bball fans (who are old enough to remember Mourning), as well as the vast majority of professional basketball analysts.

Anyways, no need to fight about it. Dwight is a great player regardless, and will most likely go down as a top 15 center of all time.

I love this game!

:cheers:

[TyroneNBAFan]

About as great as Dennis Rodman I guess.

And most people have him in the top 45-65.

[tpols]

I think it would also be the opinion of 85% of all bball fans (who are old enough to remember Mourning), as well as the vast majority of professional basketball analysts.

Anyways, no need to fight about it. Dwight is a great player regardless, and will most likely go down as a top 15 center of all time.

I love this game!

:cheers:
Depending on Dwight numbers and success with LA he may go down as a top 15 player of all time much less center and he will certainly be ranked above zo by the end of his career.

You sound like an mj 90s fanboy.

[rodman91]

Zo was better player. Howard is better at rebounding & athleticism but Zo had more offensive arsenal, better scorer, better shot blocker,much better leader and more heart.

Prime Zo even won NBA first team over prime Shaq. Only guy did that from 98 to 06. He deserved MVP in that year actually.

As career, Howard and probably will get better in LA.

[BlackVVaves]

Because he was, and that is incontrovertible fact.

I doubt many if any pro' bball analysts would disagree w/ me.

Dwight is a great player, but 'Zo was beast.

No, it's your opinion.

And, considering you're the same guy that just said Zydrunas friggin Ilgauskas was a better player than Dwight Howard, the weight of your opinion is as significant as the weight of a termite :rolleyes:

[BlackVVaves]

I think it would also be the opinion of 85% of all bball fans (who are old enough to remember Mourning), as well as the vast majority of professional basketball analysts.

Anyways, no need to fight about it. Dwight is a great player regardless, and will most likely go down as a top 15 center of all time.

I love this game!

:cheers:

These, we can agree on :cheers: :rockon: :banana:

[Clifton]

Prime Zo even won NBA first team over prime Shaq. Only guy did that from 98 to 06. He deserved MVP in that year actually.
Wow. Can someone verify?

[FatComputerNerd]

No, it's your opinion.

And, considering you're the same guy that just said Zydrunas friggin Ilgauskas was a better player than Dwight Howard, the weight of your opinion is as significant as the weight of a termite :rolleyes:

It's not my opinion. It's general consensus of NBA analysts.

As for my comments regarding Big Z, I've already admitted that was homerism at work. :confusedshrug:

[Whoah10115]

It's not my opinion. It's general consensus of NBA analysts.



No it isn't.

[GatorKid117]

I find it funny how certain players are criticized for how they score their points.

Oh, this player has only one post move and can only dunk. He's horrible offensively.

Yet he averages more points and shoots a better percentage than the guy with a ton of moves.

Give me the guy who puts the ball in the bucket at an incredible rate. He can't shoot jumpers? Who cares. I'll take my big man dunking the ball over some weak jumpers.

Now obviously I'm using some hyperbole but you get the point.

And LOL @ mentioning Ilgauskas even in the same breath as Dwight. Hilarious!

[DatAsh]

I find it funny how certain players are criticized for how they score their points.

Oh, this player has only one post move and can only dunk. He's horrible offensively.

Yet he averages more points and shoots a better percentage than the guy with a ton of moves.

Give me the guy who puts the ball in the bucket at an incredible rate. He can't shoot jumpers? Who cares. I'll take my big man dunking the ball over some weak jumpers.

Now obviously I'm using some hyperbole but you get the point.

And LOL @ mentioning Ilgauskas even in the same breath as Dwight. Hilarious!

Not all points are created equal.

Player A can average less points on worse efficiency than player B, yet still improve the scoring efficiency of his team as a whole more, which should be the more important measurement.

Historically speaking - though this strays a bit off topic - guard points/%s tend to improve team offenses more on a per point, per % basis than that of big men. As to why that is the case is a different question entirely and beyond the scope of this thread, but it does a good job of showing that we should not regard all buckets in the same manner.

[GatorKid117]

Not all points are created equal.

Player A can average less points on worse efficiency than player B, yet still improve the scoring efficiency of his team as a whole more, which should be the more important measurement.

Historically speaking - though this strays a bit off topic - guard points/%s tend to improve team offenses more on a per point, per % basis than that of big men. As to why that is the case is a different question entirely and beyond the scope of this thread, but it does a good job of showing that we should not regard all buckets in the same manner.

Examples?

[CarlosBoozer]

I feel like he's the Jon Jones of the ufc. Incredibly talented, got the title. But people hate him because of his personality and his christian persona. He's criticized for having no post-moves like how Jon Jones doesn't really have any power in his stand up other than random moves. He got incredible elbows in his gnp like how Howard has his dunks (very effective and go-to move). While Jon Jones is said to just be good because of his height and reach advantage, Howard is known for his athletic ability and defense.

[Whoah10115]

Wow. Can someone verify?


You didn't know that?

[LA Lakers]

We dont know how great historically he is going to be yet. Last time Kobe played with the most dominant big we had a 3peat. If Howard gets a title or 2 under his belt before Kobe Bean retires, then we can start thinking about his place historically. Even then, too early to call.

[chazzy]

Why isn't the "how would he do in the 90s" lithmus applied to players of the past? They're judged by how they perform against their competition, right?

[rodman91]

Wow. Can someone verify?

1998-1999 season:
MVP voting
http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_1999.html

All NBA first team
http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/all_league.html

[Clifton]

I find it funny how certain players are criticized for how they score their points.

Oh, this player has only one post move and can only dunk. He's horrible offensively.

Yet he averages more points and shoots a better percentage than the guy with a ton of moves.

Give me the guy who puts the ball in the bucket at an incredible rate
Duncan or Amare?


1998-1999 season:
MVP voting
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...ards_1999.html

All NBA first team
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...ll_league.html
Thanks. Man, I'm going to spend all day looking at these awards voting and NBA team records...

It's crazy how much BPG there were that year. Everyone and his brother had over 2. Theo Ratliff, Hakeem, Dikembe, DRob... even Vince Carter got 1.5. And I thought Wade was the great shotblocking guard.

[Lebron23]

He's the best Center in the watered down era. This season Dwight has a better supporting casts than Prime Shaq. His team needs to advance in the NBA Finals because the Lakers have a short window of opportunity to win a title with this group.

[L.Kizzle]

Not better than Bob Lanier.

[ILLsmak]

I think he's decidedly better than Ewing. He's a better rebounder and defensive player and on the offensive side of the ball Dwight is much more efficient.

Ewing was a rather overrated and inefficient offensive player (because he was forced to be during his career with the Knicks as they never got him a quality compliment) but he is remembered so much for his offense. He shot rather low percentages for a 7 footer and relied on his fadeaway and jumper from the corner of the key.. his low post game disappeared over time and turned the ball over every other time he tried dribbling across the lane.

Mourning was better than Ewing too IMO which pains me to say since I hated Mourning and the Heat and was a huge Knick fan back in the day.

I think Ewing is overrated, too, but he's not better than Ewing.

Ewing would crush Dwight.

-Smak

[All Net]

I think Ewing is overrated, too, but he's not better than Ewing.

Ewing would crush Dwight.

-Smak

I think you are underrating Dwight here...being in L.A will make the world of difference on how people view him even this year I feel.

[bizil]

I think Dwight when it is all said and done can be a top 10 center of all time. Where in the top ten, I'm thinking more in the 8-10 range, He's not there yet though. We all know about Wilt, Kareem, Russell, Shaq, Hakeem, Moses, Ewing, Robinson, and Mikan GOAT wise. But don't forget guys like Thurmond, Gilmore, Walton (even though injury prone, peak value was epic), Willis, Lanier, Cowens, Bellamy, McAdoo (if u consider him a center), etc. Howard still has to eclipse these guys before he can get to the top ten. But I envision Howard getting to top ten GOAT status. And depending on how many rings he can accumulate, he might get close to the top 5 GOAT level. In terms of being a great defender, great rebounder, and freak athlete, Howard is already CLEARLY a top 5 ever level center.

[Sarcastic]

I think you are underrating Dwight here...being in L.A will make the world of difference on how people view him even this year I feel.

Dwight is slightly ahead of Ewing defensively, but about 2 tiers below him offensively. He's just really a product of this weak era for centers.

[kizut1659]

2: There's no way to know what effect playing against better centers has on Howard's game. This is nothing but assumption.

3: Guarding a stretch big can force you to the perimeter on D. Being guarded by one dictates nothing and a lot of them are worse post defenders than the traditional types. The only effect on effectiveness might be Howard's ability to protect the basket. But he's got what, 3 DpoYs? Not much here.

4: Go check games played against the NBA. He's a career 18.4 ppg player, and being guarded by Olajuwon isn't going to help.
His max ppg is 22.9. That's dominant? What, does the NBA now have 15-20 "dominant" scorers? Where do we draw the line?

Agreed to a degree but what about Duncan then who only had one season above 23 ppg?

[rodman91]

Howard better than Ewing? What the?!

http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs1/3031770_o.gif

[Haymaker]

he's the larry holmes of centers That's an overstatement.

[LA Lakers]

Ewing had John Starks. Dwight is gonna have Kobe Bean and Steve Nash. We'll see what happens.

[Lebron23]

Agreed to a degree but what about Duncan then who only had one season above 23 ppg?


Duncan is a winner. Tim is also a superior playoffs performer than Howard.

[francesco totti]

Nowadys, its the small forward position which is stacked. The center position is pretty poor compared to the past.
I would also not put dwightany high.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Agreed to a degree but what about Duncan then who only had one season above 23 ppg?
Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker. Two scorers that were/are far superior to anyone Howard played with in Orlando. Duncan accepted getting less touches to become a multiple champion. Howard was surrounded by a bunch of jumpshooters that needed every point he can give them.

[All Net]

Dwight is slightly ahead of Ewing defensively, but about 2 tiers below him offensively. He's just really a product of this weak era for centers.
To me the gap is bigger defensively than it is offensively. Dwight may not have loads of post moves but has some and due to amazing strength and speed he can dominate offensivly if he gets the ball in the right areas. With Nash we should see this...hopefully.

[Sarcastic]

To me the gap is bigger defensively than it is offensively. Dwight may not have loads of post moves but has some and due to amazing strength and speed he can dominate obviously if he gets the ball in the right areas. With Nash we should still this...hopefully.

Ewing was a beast defensively. He anchored one of the best defenses on the 1990s, and set the Finals records for blocks against the Rockets.

Dwight in the 1990s probably doesn't even win 1 DPOY.

[ChuckOakley]

Howard has a career ppg of 18.4, maxing out at 23. He's more efficient than Ewing but it's like Rondo being a more efficient scorer than AI in that it's really about a guy playing within his limitations and has nothing to do with actually being a better scorer. Ewing has six seasons where he scores more than Howard's career high. And Howard's dominance of the DPoY award has much to do with the decline of dominant bigs leaving him with a stranglehold on first team All-NBA, All-D, and other such honors for which Ewing had to fight off Robinson, Olajuwon, and Zo, all of whom are equal to or better than Howard, as well as Mutombo competing for defensive honors. Ewing wasn't Howard on the glass statistically but he had 9 seasons of double-digit rebounding normally playing with a rugged 4 like Oakley who would also get boards at a high level. That's an advantage when it comes to wins and losses but left more boards for Howard to accumulate. Howard will stil grab a ton but I doubt he hits 14 now that he's with Gasol.


He was a career 50%, which isn't bad at all. And the number is lower than it maybe should be because he played until he was 39.
There's obviously a lot of time left before we know what his legacy is but it isn't too soon to say what kind of player he is. Howard's been around for 8 years and at 26 a player is set in the mold of who he's going to be. Especially an All-NBA type like Howard. The only way he's going to improve is if he comes back one offseason with skills like Hakeem and starts scoring 25-plus. Anyone see that happening?
Look at how Ewing fell off after 89-90 in FG% relatively early in his career. He wasn't a post player anymore or an efficient scorer. He relied on jumpers, turnarounds and a little runner in the paint (if he could get it off without dribbling off his foot or having in stolen and flailing his arms)

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/237/patrick-ewing

Also... you can't compare Rondo's efficiency to Dwight's. Dwight is a 20ppg scorer and a #1 option. Rondo has been a #4 option taking opportunistic shots generally.

Howard/Ewing is to Howard/Brook Lopez offensively. Lopez is more talented on offense but not as efficient. I'd rather have Howard as a #1 option than Lopez (except at the end of a game), because he will get you two points.. I don't care if it's "just" a dunk or from 5 feet away, he will get you the basket and get the defenders in foul trouble and shooters open.

Had Ewing been used properly by NY (as a 1b or #2 on offense) he probably would have been more efficient, but who knows. The offense was rather stagnant and slow paced with Ewing because it had to be. He was not a great passer or decision maker so I don't know how he would have existed with a wing. He was also rather slow and plodding in part from his knee issues.

He was a consummate professional and under-appreciated by the Knicks in that they never gave him enough talent to win, nor did they treat him well at the end of his career.. but that's probably because they think he failed them by not getting a title.


Again having been a Ewing fan since the late 80's there is little doubt in my mind Howard is the better player and specifically better player to build around/with.

[ChuckOakley]

Ewing had John Starks. Dwight is gonna have Kobe Bean and Steve Nash. We'll see what happens.
Howard had Jameer Nelson, Hedo and Rashard and got to the Finals once
Ewing had Oakley, Mason, Starks and got to the Finals once

[Real Men Wear Green]

Look at how Ewing fell off after 89-90 in FG% relatively early in his career. He wasn't a post player anymore or an efficient scorer. He relied on jumpers, turnarounds and a little runner in the paint (if he could get it off without dribbling off his foot or having in stolen and flailing his arms)After '89-90 Ewing shot 50% or better 5 times. He started declining at 27/28 but was still able to be a 20/10 guy that shot 50% at the age of 35.

Also... you can't compare Rondo's efficiency to Dwight's. Dwight is a 20ppg scorer and a #1 option. Rondo has been a #4 option taking opportunistic shots generally.The obvious point is that they both score within limitations that the guys they are being compared to (Ewing and AI) don't have. That jumper of Ewings you dislike so much is a shot Howard couldn't dream of taking, let alone making.

Howard/Ewing is to Howard/Brook Lopez offensively. Lopez is more talented on offense but not as efficient. I'd rather have Howard as a #1 option than Lopez (except at the end of a game), because he will get you two points.. I don't care if it's "just" a dunk or from 5 feet away, he will get you the basket and get the defenders in foul trouble and shooters open.You complain about a Rondo/AI comparison and then want to make a Ewing/Lopez comparison? Really?

Had Ewing been used properly by NY (as a 1b or #2 on offense) he probably would have been more efficient, but who knows. The offense was rather stagnant and slow paced with Ewing because it had to be. He was not a great passer or decision maker so I don't know how he would have existed with a wing. He was also rather slow and plodding in part from his knee issues.So an elite center that averaged 28 should have been a second fiddle to...who? John Starks?

[ChuckOakley]

After '89-90 Ewing shot 50% or better 5 times. He started declining at 27/28 but was still able to be a 20/10 guy that shot 50% at the age of 35.
The obvious point is that they both score within limitations that the guys they are being compared to (Ewing and AI) don't have. That jumper of Ewings you dislike so much is a shot Howard couldn't dream of taking, let alone making.
You complain about a Rondo/AI comparison and then want to make a Ewing/Lopez comparison? Really?
So an elite center that averaged 28 should have been a second fiddle to...who? John Starks?
Right around 50% ... not 60% like Dwight. Big difference.

Again 50% is not that great for a 7 foot guy who is so revered for both defense and offense. And again his shots were not in the paint. They were jump shots, a turn around fadeaway and the runner in the lane.

His assists were relatively low for two reasons.. a. he was not a great or wiling passer/decision maker and b. the type of shots he was taking were not conducive to finding open players or cutters. He wasn't playing with his back the basket. He put his head down and went into his move.

As for Lopez/Ewing.. yes they are similar offensive players. Good, but not elite of overly efficient...style wise Ilguaskas was a better comparison. Dwight is good and has elite efficiency.

And, no he should not have been passing more to Starks.. he needed more help and should have been a 1b or 2nd option. Starks/Oakley/Mason his main supporting cast were 3rd or 4th option players moved up a notch because the Knicks were not bold enough to make the moves needed until it was too late (Houston/Sprewell).

[ChuckOakley]

Also, I watched Ewing and Knicks religiously during his career. He was one of my 3 favorite players of that era for NY, but it was frustrating watching him play. Some of it was related to his knees and plantar fac., some of it was related to the way the team used him, but much of it was because of his own stubbornness and the flaws he had in his game.

Shaq, Hakeem and D.Rob were clearly better centers that probably would have won the Knicks the title in 94 (I'll leave out 99 since Ewing was injured). Mourning is another player I would have taken over him (and I say that hating Mourning and the Heat).

He was a great center and player.. esp. on defense. The game was slower and more physical and as a result he probably would not do as well in today's game on either side of the ball. I think Dwight's freak strength and athleticism translates over all eras.

I guess my main issue here has been to point out some misconceptions about his offense and not even to tout Dwight. Clearly people have their own preferences and perceptions.. mine is Dwight is the better player and I'm making a case mainly based off of Ewing's offensive exaggeration.

[Whoah10115]

I'm sorry but you're very wrong.



Ewing's efficiency went down in his later years. How much greater was Olajuwon's efficiency?



The offense went thru Ewing and Ewing was not a bad decision maker. He was not a very good passer and he had no handles, but he had the ability to legitimately carry a team. A lot of players, even great ones, don't do that without help. Ewing did.


Also, when looking at efficiency, let's remember Ewing was a very good FT shooter and Howard is not. Also, let's stray from saying Ewing and Lopez are in the same tier offensively. Because they're not.

[LA Lakers]

Hold up. If guys like Chris Bosh and KG can dominate in todays league then Patrick Ewing sure as hell could too.

[ChuckOakley]

I'm sorry but you're very wrong.



Ewing's efficiency went down in his later years. How much greater was Olajuwon's efficiency?



The offense went thru Ewing and Ewing was not a bad decision maker. He was not a very good passer and he had no handles, but he had the ability to legitimately carry a team. A lot of players, even great ones, don't do that without help. Ewing did.


Also, when looking at efficiency, let's remember Ewing was a very good FT shooter and Howard is not. Also, let's stray from saying Ewing and Lopez are in the same tier offensively. Because they're not.
No, there was a precipitous drop after 1989-90 and considering most consider the 90's his prime and the era of the Knicks, that's significant, not the first 5 seasons of his career.

And you're backing up some of what I said... not a good passer (not that Dwight is), poor handles.. and not addressing the others.

Did he not rely on his jumper from 15-20 feet? A turnaround fadeaway from the side of the basket and his dribble drive across the lane that often led to turnovers?

Also, did he not stray from being an inside force playing closer with his back to the basket to the perimeter only a few season in?

Was he not rather slow and plodding, especially as his knees and plantar fasciitis acted up? Again not too long into his career?


And I agree.. he was able to carry a team and was a great leader, but he carried the team more so with defense and leadership than offense, or more than he should have on offense. Again, not entirely his fault given the Knicks inability to land him an a side kick that could take over a game and let him be a more efficient 1b. or 2.. perhaps. But then again like I said he was not a great passer and the offense was specifically catered to him and inflated his offensive numbers.

As for Hakeem in his prime he was a better offensive player, defensive player and rebounder. Overall he was a significantly better player.

As for FT%'s Dwight gets to the line about 50% more than Ewing did and makes for FTs. Take him out at the end if you need, but throughout the game he destroys defenders and gets them in much worse foul trouble.

IMO He'd be the 2nd best center in today's game..not exactly an insult.

[Sarcastic]

Right around 50% ... not 60% like Dwight. Big difference.

Again 50% is not that great for a 7 foot guy who is so revered for both defense and offense. And again his shots were not in the paint. They were jump shots, a turn around fadeaway and the runner in the lane.

His assists were relatively low for two reasons.. a. he was not a great or wiling passer/decision maker and b. the type of shots he was taking were not conducive to finding open players or cutters. He wasn't playing with his back the basket. He put his head down and went into his move.

As for Lopez/Ewing.. yes they are similar offensive players. Good, but not elite of overly efficient...style wise Ilguaskas was a better comparison. Dwight is good and has elite efficiency.

And, no he should not have been passing more to Starks.. he needed more help and should have been a 1b or 2nd option. Starks/Oakley/Mason his main supporting cast were 3rd or 4th option players moved up a notch because the Knicks were not bold enough to make the moves needed until it was too late (Houston/Sprewell).


Dwight shoots 60% because he scores mostly off of being set up for dunks by his guards, and put backs from rebounds. He has no ability to create his own shot, whereas Ewing absolutely could. They are not in the same class offensively.

I guess if we are just going off of FG%, then Tyson Chandler is better than Dwight and Ewing.

[ChuckOakley]

Dwight shoots 60% because he scores mostly off of being set up for dunks by his guards, and put backs from rebounds. He has no ability to create his own shot, whereas Ewing absolutely could. They are not in the same class offensively.

I guess if we are just going off of FG%, then Tyson Chandler is better than Dwight and Ewing.
Except we are comparing 1st options scoring 20+ppg.
Try again.

And why does it matter how Dwight gets you 20+ ppg on 60%?
Is a dunk worthless than a turnaround or jumper?
If Ewing was shooting 3 pointers you may have a point.

[Sarcastic]

Except we are comparing 1st options scoring 20+ppg.
Try again.

And why does it matter how Dwight gets you 20+ ppg on 60%?
Is a dunk worthless than a turnaround or jumper?
If Ewing was shooting 3 pointers you may have a point.


Dwight was barely the first option in Orlando. He can barely get his shot off. If you start giving him 20+ shots/game, his efficiency WILL go down.



As for Olajuwon being SIGNIFICANTLY better than Ewing:

H2H: 21/11/2.6(blocks) vs 18/9/2(blocks). 14-14 in the regular season, and 4-3 in the playoffs. Olajuwon is better, but I wouldn't call that significant.

[ChuckOakley]

Dwight was barely the first option in Orlando. He can barely get his shot off. If you start giving him 20+ shots/game, his efficiency WILL go down.



As for Olajuwon being SIGNIFICANTLY better than Ewing:

H2H: 21/11/2.6(blocks) vs 18/9/2(blocks). 14-14 in the regular season, and 4-3 in the playoffs. Olajuwon is better, but I wouldn't call that significant.
Wow.. Dwight wasn't a first option?

You realize how many FGA he didn't get off because he was fouled going to the line 10+ times or double/tripled teamed?

And the fact he was able to put up 20ppg on only 12-13 FGA is incredible, and would be even better if he made his FTs, but guess who else couldn't hit a FT or hit a shot outside of 5 feet.. some dude named Shaq.

And yes Hakeem was significantly better. Small margins matter when comparing players, especially players of that caliber.. if you can even admit Hakeem was discernibly better that is significant.

[Sarcastic]

Wow.. Dwight wasn't a first option?

You realize how many FGA he didn't get off because he was fouled going to the line 10+ times or double/tripled teamed?

And the fact he was able to put up 20ppg on only 12-13 FGA is incredible, and would be even better if he made his FTs, but guess who else couldn't hit a FT or hit a shot outside of 5 feet.. some dude named Shaq.

And yes Hakeem was significantly better. Small margins matter when comparing players, especially players of that caliber.. if you can even admit Hakeem was discernibly better that is significant.


Career 30 point games vs each other, not incl playoffs:
Ewing - 4
Olajuwon - 2


Yea, that significant. :rolleyes:




And under SVG, Lewis and Turk were getting just as many shots if not more than Howard. That's one of the main reasons that Howard and SVG never got along. The offense never ran through him.

[ChuckOakley]

Career 30 point games vs each other, not incl playoffs:
Ewing - 4
Olajuwon - 2


Yea, that significant. :rolleyes:




And under SVG, Lewis and Turk were getting just as many shots if not more than Howard. That's one of the main reasons that Howard and SVG never got along. The offense never ran through him.
You just said Hakeem was better, not sure if that random stat was mean to refute that. The fact you can declare that is significant. I did not say much or way better, I said significantly. Different interpretations apparently.

[Sarcastic]

You just said Hakeem was better, not sure if that random stat was mean to refute that. The fact you can declare that is significant. I did not say much or way better, I said significantly. Different interpretations apparently.

I guess we are arguing over the word "significantly".

3 points and 2 rebounds is apparently significant to you.


Let me know when Howard comes even within 4 points of Ewing's peak of 28 ppg.

[ChuckOakley]

I guess we are arguing over the word "significantly".

3 points and 2 rebounds is apparently significant to you.


Let me know when Howard comes even within 4 points of Ewing's peak of 28 ppg.
On how many shots and touches?
Ewing never topped Iverson's 30 points either.
Iverson>Ewing?


And maybe I should have used the terms...
Discernibly
Markedly
Clearly

I'm not trying to imply a measure of how much better he was, I'm saying he simply was and I think most agree with little argument otherwise.

[Money 23]

Ewing was pretty athletic up until about 1991.

[ChuckOakley]

Ewing was pretty athletic up until about 1991.
My point exactly.

Most think of his prime in the 90's and the Finals team, which I think was and the majority of his career.

He fell off athletically because of his knees and the plantar fasciitis and his offensive game changed considerably for the worse. He was obviously still a very good offensive player but somewhat inefficient, perimeter oriented and slow.

[Money 23]

My point exactly.

Most think of his prime in the 90's and the Finals team, which I think was and the majority of his career.

He fell off athletically because of his knees and the plantar fasciitis and his offensive game changed considerably for the worse. He was obviously still a very good offensive player but somewhat inefficient, perimeter oriented and slow.
Blew that layup v.s. Indiana in '95 because of it.

:oldlol:

[D.J.]

Mourning was better than Ewing too IMO which pains me to say since I hated Mourning and the Heat and was a huge Knick fan back in the day.


Absolutely not. If you said Mourning was a better defender, that I would agree with. He was not a better overall player. Not even close.

[ChuckOakley]

Absolutely not. If you said Mourning was a better defender, that I would agree with. He was not a better overall player. Not even close.
The way I often look at player comparisons is this...

Ewing was a player you had to build around. As in you had to have a physical slow paced game to get maximum benefit from him offensively and defensively. I've gone over how over-rated and flawed I think people don't realize he was offensively but realize his defense and leadership led his team to good success.

What he was not, was a player you could build with. As in you couldn't plop him into any line-up and expect success. You would have to adjust that team to cater to his needs.

Zo on the other hand could be built around or built with. His defense was better than Ewing's and offensively he could be #1, but he didn't have to be. He was able to co-exist with others and succeed (Rice, LJ, etc.) He was also a more efficient offensive player with great athleticism who IMO was better in the post and comparable on the perimeter.

So maybe my posts need to be read as who I would rather have (and I'll explain why) as opposed to his considered "better" or more "talented".

Clearly Ewing will always be regarded as greater historically over Mourning but I think for most teams and most eras Mourning was a better/easier choice.

[IGOTGAME]

I think playing in this weak era for big men does more to hurt Howard than help. Nothing he does means anything to most people. He can win 3 str8 titles with Finals MVPs and people would just say that insert <big man> would do better.

[D.J.]

Ewing was a player you had to build around. As in you had to have a physical slow paced game to get maximum benefit from him offensively and defensively. I've gone over how over-rated and flawed I think people don't realize he was offensively but realize his defense and leadership led his team to good success.


90's Ewing, yes. But prior to around '91 while he still had athleticism and didn't fall in love with that fadeaway and mid-range J, his offense wasn't as flawed and that's because he still had some quickness. His biggest flaw was him turning the ball over a lot because he dribbled too close to the paint. His turnovers decreased once he started shooting more jumpers, but his athleticism and agility faded quickly at that point.



What he was not, was a player you could build with. As in you couldn't plop him into any line-up and expect success. You would have to adjust that team to cater to his needs.


No player will succeed in every single system. But a guy who can play elite defense(which was Ewing prior to the early-mid 90s) will succeed in more systems than an elite offensive player who's an average defender at best. Ewing's defense and later on his ability to stretch opposing defenses with his ability to shoot are qualities most teams would love to have.



Zo on the other hand could be built around or built with. His defense was better than Ewing's and offensively he could be #1, but he didn't have to be. He was able to co-exist with others and succeed (Rice, LJ, etc.) He was also a more efficient offensive player with great athleticism who IMO was better in the post and comparable on the perimeter.


It's easier to build around elite defenders and especially those who don't command the ball. Ben Wallace was also easier to build around. Zo could be #1 in terms of scoring points, but he just wasn't versatile enough to be depended upon for some huge scoring games or stretching opposing defenses. He may have been more efficient, but he was not a better offensive player. And he did not co-exist with Larry Johnson. Quite he opposite in fact:

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/teammatefeuds/031103.html


Johnson and Mourning, Charlotte Hornets teammates from 1992 to 1995, never got along. Johnson taunted Mourning in 1992, showing him his NBA Rookie of the Year leather coat, and saying, "Hey, young fellow, if you play real hard you might get one of these jackets." All the Hornets who heard the quip laughed -- except Mourning.

And though the two top draft picks were supposed to bring greatness to the Hornets franchise, nothing of the sort happened, as their relationship deteriorated. Just before the 1995-96 season, Mourning demanded $13 million a year from the Hornets. They countered with $11.2 million. Mourning said no go, got traded to Miami, and Johnson thought that Mourning's selfishness cost the team.

The rivalry continued when they opposed each other in coming years, culminating in a fistfight during a Knicks-Heat playoff game in 1998. But when a kidney disease struck Mourning, Johnson made up, first asking Mourning, before a game, if he was OK, then going over and shaking his hand. He clearly missed the rivalry. Upon learning of Mourning's condition in the preseason, Johnson said, "I want him out there so I can whoop him. I don't want him to be sick. When we play Miami I'd rather have him out there."



So maybe my posts need to be read as who I would rather have (and I'll explain why) as opposed to his considered "better" or more "talented".


Ewing was better overall, and most would still rather have Ewing.



Clearly Ewing will always be regarded as greater historically over Mourning but I think for most teams and most eras Mourning was a better/easier choice.


No question Ewing will be regarded as greater, but probably 95% of GMs would take prime Ewing over prime Mourning. It's not a knock at all on Zo. He was a very good player, all-time great defender, got robbed of an MVP IMO, but he also wasn't always in control of his emotions. In a game 7, I'd much rather have Ewing than Mourning.

[ChuckOakley]

90's Ewing, yes. But prior to around '91 while he still had athleticism and didn't fall in love with that fadeaway and mid-range J, his offense wasn't as flawed and that's because he still had some quickness. His biggest flaw was him turning the ball over a lot because he dribbled too close to the paint. His turnovers decreased once he started shooting more jumpers, but his athleticism and agility faded quickly at that point.





No player will succeed in every single system. But a guy who can play elite defense(which was Ewing prior to the early-mid 90s) will succeed in more systems than an elite offensive player who's an average defender at best. Ewing's defense and later on his ability to stretch opposing defenses with his ability to shoot are qualities most teams would love to have.





It's easier to build around elite defenders and especially those who don't command the ball. Ben Wallace was also easier to build around. Zo could be #1 in terms of scoring points, but he just wasn't versatile enough to be depended upon for some huge scoring games or stretching opposing defenses. He may have been more efficient, but he was not a better offensive player. And he did not co-exist with Larry Johnson. Quite he opposite in fact:

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/teammatefeuds/031103.html







Ewing was better overall, and most would still rather have Ewing.





No question Ewing will be regarded as greater, but probably 95% of GMs would take prime Ewing over prime Mourning. It's not a knock at all on Zo. He was a very good player, all-time great defender, got robbed of an MVP IMO, but he also wasn't always in control of his emotions. In a game 7, I'd much rather have Ewing than Mourning.

I don't disagree with much of what you said, but my main issue has been this.. Ewing had a rather short prime of the first 5 seasons of his career. He dropped offensively and defensively in the 90's which was still a majority of his career and what should have been his actual prime.

I think most people think of and talk about that Ewing as his team had most of his success during that early to mid 90's as he put up high PPG.. despite his decreased efficiency.

If we just want to talk about 85-90 Ewing that is one thing, but IMO has to be judged by the majority of his career during his prime years which should have been well into the mid 90's. His game and efficiency changed during that time despite scoring 24 PPG

[magnax1]

If we just want to talk about 85-90 Ewing that is one thing, but IMO has to be judged by the majority of his career during his prime years which should have been well into the mid 90's. His game and efficiency changed during that time despite scoring 24 PPG
This is very true. Ewing really lacked an efficient game for most of his prime. His peak couple years, he was as good as almost any center ever, but once he started to settle for jumpers, it was not only inefficient (averaged 52 TS% from the 90-96 playoffs) but also really stagnated the Knicks offense. The fact that he played out on the perimeter quite a bit and didn't really have the ability to facilitate for his team mates was a large part of the Knicks rarely being an elite offensive team.

[D.J.]

I don't disagree with much of what you said, but my main issue has been this.. Ewing had a rather short prime of the first 5 seasons of his career. He dropped offensively and defensively in the 90's which was still a majority of his career and what should have been his actual prime.


That's not always within your hands. Even if his prime wasn't as long as it should have been, Ewing still had the ball IQ and skills to be just a knotch below up until his final days as a Knick. Even at 35 going on 36 before going down with an injury, he was putting up 21/10 with over 2 BPG on 50% shooting.



I think most people think of and talk about that Ewing as his team had most of his success during that early to mid 90's as he put up high PPG.. despite his decreased efficiency.


Even if his efficiently decreased a bit, he had a good amout of ball IQ and skills. That's why he was still effective at 36-37 years old.



If we just want to talk about 85-90 Ewing that is one thing, but IMO has to be judged by the majority of his career during his prime years which should have been well into the mid 90's. His game and efficiency changed during that time despite scoring 24 PPG


Even if you go from '86-'97, Ewing never averaged under 20 PPG and even with diminished agility and athleticism, was still an elite player. He was just a better player than Mourning and one that just about any GM would rather have.

[ChuckOakley]

That's not always within your hands. Even if his prime wasn't as long as it should have been, Ewing still had the ball IQ and skills to be just a knotch below up until his final days as a Knick. Even at 35 going on 36 before going down with an injury, he was putting up 21/10 with over 2 BPG on 50% shooting.





Even if his efficiently decreased a bit, he had a good amout of ball IQ and skills. That's why he was still effective at 36-37 years old.





Even if you go from '86-'97, Ewing never averaged under 20 PPG and even with diminished agility and athleticism, was still an elite player. He was just a better player than Mourning and one that just about any GM would rather have.
That's fine, I have my preferences.

And this thread is mainly about Dwight not Ewing/Mourning but I will simply remind you that 50% is not that great for a 7+ foot center that people think was so good offensively and no where near Dwight's near 60%. Ewing played a type of offense that became inefficient, stagnant and perimeter based for a majority of his career, he also got to the line about 50% less than Dwight.

Again he was forced be a #1 option when he was perhaps better off as a 1b or #2. He also had knee and foot issues that slowed him down considerably for a majority of his career.

Even though I was a big Knick/Ewing fan back then, I have no problem saying he was rather overrated offensively. Defense and leadership however, no.

[rodman91]

http://i.imgur.com/Mwb1T.gif

[FatComputerNerd]

Dwight = poor man's Kevin Willis w/ less offensive game.

[brain drain]

Highest Dwightmare prime ever. Probably also longest.

Plus, if he walks away from the Lakers after the season, leaving them with a bunch of thirtysomethings with little present and no future, he'll probably end his career as one of the most beloved sports figures anywhere outside of LA (and probably Orlando, but destroying the Lakers might redeem him there).

So, he's set to become a true legend of the game, independently of what he does on the court. Not many players can make that claim :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[Coffee Black]

Dwight is below Alonzo. That's for sure.

[Sarcastic]

I can't believe people were saying he's better than Ewing. :facepalm

[Whoah10115]

Dwight has certainly not passed Ewing...unfortunately, he will tho. Ewing's best was absolutely incredible tho. But Howard can push a lot higher than people recognize.



But he is better than Alonzo and he is a great player.

[SCdac]

The only thing holding Dwight back is himself. Low basketball IQ, not much finesse and elite offensive skills, turnover and foul prone, not much of a facilitator in the post, FT shooting has regressed. He'll be mostly remembered as a DPOY player and great rebounder if you ask me. When his athleticism starts deteriorating how will he remain elite?

[rodman91]

Dwight has certainly not passed Ewing...unfortunately, he will tho. Ewing's best was absolutely incredible tho. But Howard can push a lot higher than people recognize.



But he is better than Alonzo and he is a great player.

Only thing Howard does better than Zo is rebounding. He is already 27 years old. He doesn't have much offensive skill set and he is a liability at freethrows (certainly at clutch)

He might have better career but i don't think he'll become better player than Zo after this age.

[FatComputerNerd]

Dwight is good, but no way in hell is he better than 'Zo was.

Maybe a slightly better rebounder but 'Zo was better at everything else, and also had the heart of a champion; something Dwight has yet to show.

[kNIOKAS]

I don't know, but he plays in LA BABy http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/502a70deecad048452000001-400-/dwight-howard-los-angeles-lakers.jpg

[Whoah10115]

Only thing Howard does better than Zo is rebounding. He is already 27 years old. He doesn't have much offensive skill set and he is a liability at freethrows (certainly at clutch)

He might have better career but i don't think he'll become better player than Zo after this age.



Dwight is good, but no way in hell is he better than 'Zo was.

Maybe a slightly better rebounder but 'Zo was better at everything else, and also had the heart of a champion; something Dwight has yet to show.



This is so ridiculous. Dwight is better than Alonzo at almost everything. Please don't give me this talk of Zo being the better defensive player. I love Alonzo. His favorite player is his favorite player. He had huge heart, but Dwight is the better defender.


If people can't realize the absolute dominance that Howard brings on defense, then I apologize. No player has ever eaten up more space than he does on the defensive end. And "Maybe a slightly better rebounder" is (and I say this with respect) is broke stupid. Alonzo maxed at 11. When was the last time Howard averaged 11?


Also, this talk of offense and post moves...it's an an outdated notion that Howard has no post game. He's good with BOTH hands and has very good footwork. If people can't see that then it's because they don't want to. Alonzo did not have a refined post game. He had a jumpshot, fading away, turning into the basket, catch and shoot. He was a decent FT shooter (and actually great his years in Charlotte). Alonzo put up serious numbers his first year in Miami, and I was there to see him often. He was great and often underutilized in that crappy offense. But Howard -who is not a good passer- is a lot smarter than people give him credit for. He understands how to carry a team offensively, is capable of it and -regardless of his PPG- has done it. A team where he didn't get the ball as much as he wanted, but his team still put up points, because of him. Most of those 3 point shooters are not doing all that without him, at least as an offense.


Alonzo is a better shot-blocker and he challenged everything and is responsible for a crazy amount of shot-altering. But he doesn't anchor like Howard does. Howard does that as well as anyone.



To say Kevin Willis is in the vicinity is insulting, ignorant, and overly nostalgic about the era. He was great, but let's be serious. And he was a PF his whole career. And Dwight Howard would be a center in any era. Go see Nate Thurmond or Alonzo himself.

[Real Men Wear Green]

This is so ridiculous. Dwight is better than Alonzo at almost everything. Please don't give me this talk of Zo being the better defensive player. I love Alonzo. His favorite player is his favorite player. He had huge heart, but Dwight is the better defender.What's the basis for Howard being the better defender?


If people can't realize the absolute dominance that Howard brings on defense, then I apologize. No player has ever eaten up more space than he does on the defensive end. And "Maybe a slightly better rebounder" is (and I say this with respect) is broke stupid. Alonzo maxed at 11. When was the last time Howard averaged 11?2012.



Also, this talk of offense and post moves...it's an an outdated notion that Howard has no post game. He's good with BOTH hands and has very good footwork. If people can't see that then it's because they don't want to. Alonzo did not have a refined post game. He had a jumpshot, fading away, turning into the basket, catch and shoot. He was a decent FT shooter (and actually great his years in Charlotte). Alonzo put up serious numbers his first year in Miami, and I was there to see him often. He was great and often underutilized in that crappy offense. But Howard -who is not a good passer- is a lot smarter than people give him credit for. He understands how to carry a team offensively, is capable of it and -regardless of his PPG- has done it. A team where he didn't get the ball as much as he wanted, but his team still put up points, because of him. Most of those 3 point shooters are not doing all that without him, at least as an offense. Poor Dwight, the great post scorer who can only seem to score 18ppg.



Alonzo is a better shot-blocker and he challenged everything and is responsible for a crazy amount of shot-altering. But he doesn't anchor like Howard does. Howard does that as well as anyone. The Heat played great D. Zo was the foundation of that. Zo was known for his great defense. These are facts.

[Nick Young]

top 250 in the NBA AT BEST.

[Whoah10115]

What's the basis for Howard being the better defender?

2012.


Poor Dwight, the great post scorer who can only seem to score 18ppg.


The Heat played great D. Zo was the foundation of that. Zo was known for his great defense. These are facts.



Your post actually said nothing. Because I'm here challenging whether or not Alonzo is a great defender, much less one of the best ever. You're better than that.



Yes, Howard is SO FAR averaging 11.3RPG...still more than Mourning's career high, and in two fewer minutes a game. Not helping your argument.



And yes, I did call Howard the great post scorer. What I said, quite clearly, is that he can carry a team offensively. 18.3PPG in 09/10. 20.7 and 20.6 the two years before that, followed by 22.9 and 20.6. Again, if you're going to be sarcastic, you may as well be accurate.


In Mourning's first 8 seasons (prior to the kidney issues) his career average was 21.1 and 21.3 per 36. That's higher than Howard's 18.4. Howard, straight outta high school. And at peak, Mourning is at 23.2. Now, if you wanna go beyond raw numbers, then you can try and tell me that Hardaway was a chucker. It wouldn't change the fact that Hardaway was still an elite playmaker and racked him some assists. He's a better playmaker, more of a playmaker, and flat out better than Jameer Nelson (who was good) or Turkoglu or whoever else. Then again, Muggsy was an awesome passer and playmaker who went over 10APG with Mourning and did that before he had either Mourning or LJ. That Orlando offense was built around Howard. They were 6th in the league twice, 10th another, and then had some bad years at the end, when the team got worse and worse and worse(16 and 21).

And who exactly was on that team? They were a decent offense with him as the main piece. I fail to see where I called him one of the great post players ever. I said he's very good there, has very good footwork, and he can finish with both hands and DOES finish with both hands. Those are things that he does better than Mourning.


Howard is an elite rebounder, in all eras. Mourning is not close to him there. And Howard is the better defender. As far as my basis for why, I actually gave some basis in my post. If you disagree, then disagree with the points made and not like you're offended by the idea.


Someone might wanna say to me "Well, he can camp in the lane because there are no centers to defend", as if Shaq didn't do the same and had any more guys to worry about between 99-05. As if an elite defender like Ewing didn't have Oakley and even Mason guard the other team's center so that he could have freedom on defense and not get into foul trouble. As if 1v1 center battles didn't occur more prior to the 80's. As if the 3second violation was in effect back in the 90's and isn't effect now. It's just the thing to say and has no basis in actuality.

[FatComputerNerd]

I do not believe Howard to be a superior defensive player than Mourning was.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Your post actually said nothing. Because I'm here challenging whether or not Alonzo is a great defender, much less one of the best ever. You're better than that.You're saying Howard is a better defender. That's wrong, a fact I pointed out.



Yes, Howard is SO FAR averaging 11.3RPG...still more than Mourning's career high, and in two fewer minutes a game. Not helping your argument.You asked a question and got an answer. Howard's lower rpg is directly related to playing beside a real rebounding pf as opposed to how the Magic often put a 3-point shooter at the 4. "Two fewer minutes?" What's that going to lead to, a quarter more rebounds? Please.



And yes, I did call Howard the great post scorer. What I said, quite clearly, is that he can carry a team offensively. 18.3PPG in 09/10. 20.7 and 20.6 the two years before that, followed by 22.9 and 20.6. Again, if you're going to be sarcastic, you may as well be accurate. 18.4, career, seeing as we're concerned with accuracy.



In Mourning's first 8 seasons (prior to the kidney issues) his career average was 21.1 and 21.3 per 36. That's higher than Howard's 18.4. Howard, straight outta high school. And at peak, Mourning is at 23.2. Now, if you wanna go beyond raw numbers, then you can try and tell me that Hardaway was a chucker. It wouldn't change the fact that Hardaway was still an elite playmaker and racked him some assists. He's a better playmaker, more of a playmaker, and flat out better than Jameer Nelson (who was good) or Turkoglu or whoever else. Then again, Muggsy was an awesome passer and playmaker who went over 10APG with Mourning and did that before he had either Mourning or LJ. That Orlando offense was built around Howard. They were 6th in the league twice, 10th another, and then had some bad years at the end, when the team got worse and worse and worse(16 and 21).Zo was a solid scorer that for all of his career pre-kidney problems hovered around 20. Like Howard in that regard. And he would have been that regardless of who you put at pg. He wasn't spoonfed 10 baskets per night, a pg's assists go out to the entire team.


And who exactly was on that team? They were a decent offense with him as the main piece. I fail to see where I called him one of the great post players ever. I said he's very good there, has very good footwork, and he can finish with both hands and DOES finish with both hands. Those are things that he does better than Mourning.
And yet we're still stuck around 18. Poor guy. Maybe it's because he's black.


Howard is an elite rebounder, in all eras. Mourning is not close to him there. And Howard is the better defender. As far as my basis for why, I actually gave some basis in my post. If you disagree, then disagree with the points made and not like you're offended by the idea.
The problem with the idea that Howard is the better defender is that baseless. Otherwise I wouldn't argue.

[SCdac]

A team where he didn't get the ball as much as he wanted, but his team still put up points, because of him. Most of those 3 point shooters are not doing all that without him, at least as an offense.

He didn't get the ball as much as he wanted because the Magic would lose if they threw the ball into Dwight on every play (he's not a Tim Duncan type, who you can truly and completely run the offense through him). Dwight leads the league in TO's almost every year amongst big men, and he's not a great playmaker (his presence alone isn't enough, because he doesn't dominate double and triple teams).

Those Orlando Magic played outside-in as much as anything. They were a three point shooting team and that helped Howard get his points (having a shooting PF to give Howard room). It was a reciprocal relationship, no doubt, but that team was shooting with or without Howard.

Magic lead the league in 3-point makes and attempts virtually 4 years in a row (08-12).

The season that the Magic went to the Finals, Howard was 4th on his team in shot attempts. That's how they were successful. He lead the team in scoring in about half the playoff games (much different than some other great big men).

1. Lewis - 14.5 FGA
2. Turk - 12.3 FGA
3. Alston - 12.1 FGA
4. Howard - 11.7 FGA

I can understand if his Assists were through the roof (for a big), but he was 5th on that team.. and had a 1.9 to 2.9 assist/turnover ratio in that playoff run.

[Euroleague]

Yao Ming was way better than Howard is. Not even close to the best center even in his own era.

[Whoah10115]

You're saying Howard is a better defender. That's wrong, a fact I pointed out.


You asked a question and got an answer. Howard's lower rpg is directly related to playing beside a real rebounding pf as opposed to how the Magic often put a 3-point shooter at the 4. "Two fewer minutes?" What's that going to lead to, a quarter more rebounds? Please.


18.4, career, seeing as we're concerned with accuracy.


Zo was a solid scorer that for all of his career pre-kidney problems hovered around 20. Like Howard in that regard. And he would have been that regardless of who you put at pg. He wasn't spoonfed 10 baskets per night, a pg's assists go out to the entire team.


And yet we're still stuck around 18. Poor guy. Maybe it's because he's black.


The problem with the idea that Howard is the better defender is that baseless. Otherwise I wouldn't argue.



Your whole post is embarrassing. So you're telling me that you said Mourning is a better defender "a fact I pointed out"...you pointed it out, or you told me you think so? It's baseless? You're just saying it but you don't know why. You don't know, because it isn't true.



And you gave me his career PPG after I had already written it in. I am very aware of that. Howard's RPG in 17 games is indicative of his true ability as a rebounder? Because Gasol is a great rebounder? Gasol is averaging 8.8RPG right now buddy. Howard is on a new team and his back is clearly still bad. Selective much?


Just as I am aware of what Mourning's scoring was like before the kidney issues, as I actually wrote the words and gave you his average and per36 average (separated by .2) prior to 2000/01.



I am well aware that Mourning wasn't spoonfed assists. It was preemptive, in case you said it, as I got the feeling that you were full of shit.



OK, so Howard being a better defender is baseless...OK, why? Because it's so obvious? You don't have anything to say, because you want to say what you want to say. I'm sorry, but I can argue Howard being a better defender than KG. And I could argue KG being a better defender than Alonzo. That's the reality. But you're not interested in that. Your mind is made up. It's as if I said Wade was a better defender than Jordan. That's the view you're taking, that it's not worth discussing, and it's stupid enough to ignore. Which I should.

[Whoah10115]

He didn't get the ball as much as he wanted because the Magic would lose if they threw the ball into Dwight on every play (he's not a Tim Duncan type, who you can truly and completely run the offense through him). Dwight leads the league in TO's almost every year amongst big men, and he's not a great playmaker (his presence alone isn't enough, because he doesn't dominate double and triple teams).

Those Orlando Magic played outside-in as much as anything. They were a three point shooting team and that helped Howard get his points (having a shooting PF to give Howard room). It was a reciprocal relationship, no doubt, but that team was shooting with or without Howard.

Magic lead the league in 3-point makes and attempts virtually 4 years in a row (08-12).

The season that the Magic went to the Finals, Howard was 4th on his team in shot attempts. That's how they were successful. He lead the team in scoring in about half the playoff games (much different than some other great big men).

1. Lewis - 14.5 FGA
2. Turk - 12.3 FGA
3. Alston - 12.1 FGA
4. Howard - 11.7 FGA

I can understand if his Assists were through the roof (for a big), but he was 5th on that team.. and had a 1.9 to 2.9 assist/turnover ratio in that playoff run.



I acknowledged all of that. But he's not a low IQ player, despite what people want to assume. Look at Ewing. He's not a good passer. And he had a decent amount of turnovers and not many assists. And the numbers were very close. Ewing was a better scorer, but not as efficient from the field, tho he was a great FT shooter. You could run the offense thru Ewing. You could also do it better than you could with Howard. But just raw stats don't tell a good tale.


You argue that they were more outside-in than vice-versa. I argue that those 3 point shooters often shot the team in the foot with that approach and that it was just as much an inside-out with gunning shooters. I also think Howard is unselfish, and his intelligence and willingness as a passer made up for his lack of great passing ability and his high turnover rate.


What you're saying is arguable; I just don't agree.

[rodman91]

Zo was giving a decent series against Ewing. Howard got punked by Gasol in finals. If he could play like a superstar they might have a chance against Lakers.

Prime Zo was better than Howard.Prime Ewing was way better than Howard.

[chocolatethunder]

You're saying Howard is a better defender. That's wrong, a fact I pointed out.


You asked a question and got an answer. Howard's lower rpg is directly related to playing beside a real rebounding pf as opposed to how the Magic often put a 3-point shooter at the 4. "Two fewer minutes?" What's that going to lead to, a quarter more rebounds? Please.


18.4, career, seeing as we're concerned with accuracy.


Zo was a solid scorer that for all of his career pre-kidney problems hovered around 20. Like Howard in that regard. And he would have been that regardless of who you put at pg. He wasn't spoonfed 10 baskets per night, a pg's assists go out to the entire team.


And yet we're still stuck around 18. Poor guy. Maybe it's because he's black.


The problem with the idea that Howard is the better defender is that baseless. Otherwise I wouldn't argue.
This should pretty much end this thread. Well done and I agree 100%. I think that Howard is one of the most overrated players of this era in all aspects of his game. His footwork is poor and he absolutely HAS NO IDEA WHAT TO DO WITH THE BALL IN A DOUBLE TEAM. To compare him to Ewing is moronic. He's closer to Zo but I think that Zo was better. This the most watered down era for centers.

[Whoah10115]

I just hate these threads and I'm an idiot for being in them. No, his post does not end any thread. His post is full absolute shit.


Dwight Howard IS better than Alonzo and it shouldn't be a question. Weak era for centers my ass. Zo's peak years had a truly elite player but it wasn't as much day in and day out as it is right now, but people just wanna live in this bullshit ass idea.


More importantly, Howard is one of the best players in basketball. He impacts his team. Forget some overdone idea of 1v1.


Howard is an elite defender and rebounder in any era. And he's a C in any era. This is insane.


Howard is a great PLAYER in this league. The league is the best it's been in a long while. He's not just the best C. He's one of the very best players in the league. You can't be one of the very best based on simply being a center in a centerless league.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Your whole post is embarrassing. So you're telling me that you said Mourning is a better defender "a fact I pointed out"...you pointed it out, or you told me why you think so? It's baseless? You're just saying it but you don't know why. You don't know, because it isn't true.I didn't say Zo was a better defender. I put them both on par. From the first post of this thread I call them equals as players. Zo being the basis of a great defense in Miami is why I put him on this level. To go further, Zo won DPoY twice in an era where there were multiple great centers unlike the modern era where we see the center spot removed from the All-Star ballot. You're embarrassed? Too bad for you then.




And you gave me his career PPG after I had already written it in. I am very aware of that. Howard's RPG in 17 games is indicative of his true ability as a rebounder? Because Gasol is a great rebounder? Gasol is averaging 8.8RPG right now buddy. Howard is on a new team and his back is clearly still bad. Selective much?8.8 rpg is more than anyone Howard has ever played with before. In case you didn't notice Orlando didn't team Howard with guys that played in the paint, they surrounded him with guys like Pat Garrity and Hedo that hit 3s.



Just as I am aware of what Mourning's scoring was like before the kidney issues, as I actually wrote the words and gave you his average and per36 average (separated by .2) prior to 2000/01. That's nice, who cares?




I am well aware that Mourning wasn't spoonfed assists. It was preemptive, in case you said it, as I got the feeling that you were full of shit. That's not as nice. Who cares?




OK, so Howard being a better defender is baseless...OK, why? Because it's so obvious? You don't have anything to say, because you want to say what you want to say. I'm sorry, but I can argue Howard being a better defender than KG. And I could argue KG being a better defender than Alonzo. That's the reality. But you're not interested in that. Your mind is made up. It's as if I said Wade was a better defender than Jordan. That's the view you're taking, that it's not worth discussing, and it's stupid enough to ignore. Which I should.
Ok, ignore me. It's not like you have anything valid to post.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I just hate these threads and I'm an idiot for being in them. No, his post does not end any thread. His post is full absolute shit.

http://katpadi.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/kobe-u-mad.jpg

[Whoah10115]

http://katpadi.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/kobe-u-mad.jpg



Whatever BRO. I explained what I thought. You said he was better. You were happy with that. That's fine. You have a computer screen in-between where you can talk like a dumbass. If it works for you, I guess you win.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Whatever BRO. I explained what I thought. You said he was better. You were happy with that. That's fine. You have a computer screen in-between where you can talk like a dumbass. If it works for you, I guess you win.
And I couldn't say that Howard is the modern-day Zo without a computer? :confusedshrug:

[Whoah10115]

And I couldn't say that Howard is the modern-day Zo without a computer? :confusedshrug:



Probably. It most certainly makes you smarter than me.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Dwight is incredible don't underestimate how great he is.


k :lol

[SCdac]

I acknowledged all of that. But he's not a low IQ player, despite what people want to assume. Look at Ewing. He's not a good passer. And he had a decent amount of turnovers and not many assists. And the numbers were very close. Ewing was a better scorer, but not as efficient from the field, tho he was a great FT shooter. You could run the offense thru Ewing. You could also do it better than you could with Howard. But just raw stats don't tell a good tale.


You argue that they were more outside-in than vice-versa. I argue that those 3 point shooters often shot the team in the foot with that approach and that it was just as much an inside-out with gunning shooters. I also think Howard is unselfish, and his intelligence and willingness as a passer made up for his lack of great passing ability and his high turnover rate.


What you're saying is arguable; I just don't agree.

I agree that the 'barrage of three's' style of play is ultimately not championship basketball, and they did shoot themselves in the foot. Teams like the Spurs surrounded their best big man with shooters too (and were successful), but not the way the Magic did it. Spurs were much more inside-out, and Duncan was like a quarterback. But I think the Magic had to do it differently. Force feeding a young Howard ~18 field goal attempts a game wasn't going to make that team better. It would have slowed them to a halt. There were times when Boston' defense got to him, or the series against Charlotte, or the series against Gasol and Bynum in 09.

Howard's easily one of the most powerful and athletic in the league, but he's never struck me as a heady player. Like at all. And that's not an assumption, that's from watching him. Great rebounding/shot blocking instincts and anticipation, definitely, but never struck me as a "gifted" offensive player. But still an above average scorer when it's all said and done. So were many other bigs (prime Amare, Jermaine Oneal, Elton Brand, etc), albeit Howard is reliably efficient. He's worked to improve his offense every year in the league pretty much (to moderate success imo), which is admirable, but nearing his late 20's I question how much he can improve his overall touch. Even with that moderate success, he's still the best big man in the league, which says more about the league, current crop of players, it's current rules imo. To me, he's definitely more of an Alonzo type than a Ewing, which is no insult.

Just looking at his Usage-% in those 09 playoffs, relative to other long playoff runs, he stands out to me as being more of a "piece to the offense" rather than the base:

Olajuwon (95) - 35.9%
Malone (97) - 33.4%
Nowitzki (11) - 32.0%
Shaq (00) - 31.3%
Duncan (05) - 31.1%
Ewing (94) - 28.6%
Barkley (93) - 27.3%
Mourning (97) - 27.1%
Garnett (08) - 26.6%
Howard (09) - 23.3%
Sheed (04) - 21.0%
Bosh (12) - 20.8%

[Real Men Wear Green]

Anyone's opinion changed? Mine hasn't much...I may have underrated him a little as a rebounder but we definitely did not see anything close to great post scoring. He's a good scorer because he's a great athlete. By NBA standards there's very little skill there.

[Carbine]

He's not close to having the impact on games as he did in '10 and '11 and '12....

As a basketball fan, I hope he returns to that form....at least.