Larry Bird vs Hakeem Olajuwon

[Milbuck]

1) Better peak/prime?

2) You get to draft one of them, who do you choose to build around? You have hindsight. Assume you have the same level of $$$, supporting talent, and coaching to work with. Also...in this scenario let's say Bird's injuries act more abruptly than they really did. So he's still retiring in 92, but in those last years he's not limited, the injuries just end his career immediately after that 92 season.

[navy]

What do we know about Larry Bird's injuries?

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Love Hakeem, one of my alltime faves but this is Larry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WivGOEznCU

Hakeem on Larry Bird:

[Milbuck]

What do we know about Larry Bird's injuries?
Good question..gonna edit the OP.

[navy]

Either way you probably got to go with Bird. Better player. One of the Goat three year stretches, although Hakeem's late two championship runs should not be taken lightly.

[Milbuck]

Either way you probably got to go with Bird. Better player. One of the Goat three year stretches, although Hakeem's late two championship runs should not be taken lightly.
Understatement. What Bird playoff run was better than Hakeem's '95, and by how much?

[WillC]

Bird, by some margin actually.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Understatement. What Bird playoff run was better than Hakeem's '95, and by how much?
86 was the best non MJ or Shaq playoff run.

[navy]

Understatement. What Bird playoff run was better than Hakeem's '95, and by how much?
Probably none if you compare them head to head individually.

[La Frescobaldi]

how overrated are we going with olajuwon? will it ever ever stop

[Milbuck]

86 was the best non MJ or Shaq playoff run.
Hakeem dragged arguably the worst supporting cast out of any of the top 11 ATGs, arguable with 2003 Duncan, to the championship...with:

35/9/4/3/1 on 61% TS against the 60 win Jazz
30/9/4/2/1 on 53% TS against the 59 win Suns
35/13/5/4/1 on 59% TS against the 62 win Spurs, destroying Robinson
33/12/6/2/2 on 51% TS against the 57 win Magic

Overall 33/10/5/3/1 on 56% TS with incredible defense en route to a championship, with again, one of the worst supporting casts for any ATG in history, beating 4 straight 57+ win teams and at least 1 HOFer every round.

[ArbitraryWater]

OP is pretty excited now that he just saw Hakeem's '95 stats through the Xerxes post in the other thread, but still, Bird takes this, rather easily..

Milbuck, you even know that Clyde Drexler was on the '95 team? "arguably worst supporting cast to a title"

[Milbuck]

OP is pretty excited now that he just saw Hakeem's '95 stats through the Xerxes post in the other thread, but still, Bird takes this, rather easily..
I've been talking about Bird for weeks, and I've mentioned many times how highly I think of Hakeem. I don't know what post you're talking about, and anyways it's not like Hakeem's '95 run is some obscure occurrence that I discovered from some post on a message board.

Care to elaborate on your position? Specifically the "rather easily" part?

Milbuck, you even know that Clyde Drexler was on the '95 team? "arguably worst supporting cast to a title"
Because Drexler was at his peak, and because that makes it anywhere close to Bird's help at his peak. Or Kobe's. Or Magic's. Or Lebron, or Jordan, or Russell, etc.

[ArbitraryWater]

Bird is just a better player.. Anyone from the 80's will tell you that. Hakeem himself as you can see above did.

This is like placing Wade outside the top 30 all-time for lack of elite seasons. I won't discredit Bird all-time for injuries. The ranking would lose its value when an inferior player is placed above the other.

Bird played perfect offensive basketball for 4 straight seasons, and injuries put an end to it. I myself have put Bird below Shaq, Duncan is close, but now Hakeem?

Hakeem isn't the same 1994-1995 guy for his entire career. He routinely lost out All-NBA teams to the likes of Patrick Ewing, 2nd-year David Robinson, 3rd-year Shaq, even Daugherty...

1986: KAJ, Hakeem
1987-1989: Ewing as comp

1990: Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson (rookie)
1991: Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem
1992: Robinson, Ewing, Daughtery
1993: Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson
1994: Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq
1995: Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem
1996: Robinson, Hakeem, Shaq

The majority of his career was highlighted by 45 win seasons and first round exits...

[Milbuck]

Bird is just a better player.. Anyone from the 80's will tell you that. Hakeem himself as you can see above did.

This is like placing Wade outside the top 30 all-time for lack of elite seasons. I won't discredit Bird all-time for injuries. The ranking would lose its value when an inferior player is placed above the other.

Bird played perfect offensive basketball for 4 straight seasons, and injuries put an end to it. I myself have put Bird below Shaq, Duncan is close, but now Hakeem?

Hakeem isn't the same 1994-1995 guy for his entire career. He routinely lost out All-NBA teams to the likes of Patrick Ewing, 2nd-year David Robinson, 3rd-year Shaq, even Daugherty...

1986: KAJ, Hakeem
1987-1989: Ewing as comp

1990: Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson (rookie)
1991: Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem
1992: Robinson, Ewing, Daughtery
1993: Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson
1994: Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq
1995: Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem
1996: Robinson, Hakeem, Shaq

The majority of his career was highlighted by 45 win seasons and first round exits...
Has nothing to do with the injuries..I'm not asking for an all time list, nor am I asking about longevity and how injuries play into that. Bird is ahead of Hakeem on the AT list for most of us. I'm asking for peak/prime, and who you'd build around with equal supporting talent. And Hakeem has reached an insane level of play at his peak and took a substantially (it's not even close) inferior supporting cast to titles against nightmarish competition.

Do you or do you not think that Hakeem over his career could win 3+ rings with Bird's supporting talent? Not the players exactly, but the same level of talent built around Hakeem.

[K Xerxes]

Honestly? Hakeem. Better two way player for my money, but I didn't seen Bird play in his prime/peak (though I've seen a lot of footage) so take it with however much salt you want.

[Kblaze8855]

The 95 Rockets were talented if only for the addition of Drexler.

You can talk about 94 as a bad team by champ standards...95?

Hakeem and Drexler is a hell of a duo and they had a solid cast behind them. 94...he didnt have anyone who should be a #2.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Peaks are close; primes are not. Bird was THE offensive weapon - arguably the most skilled player ever.

His defense in his early prime gets a bit underrated too. Bird was a VG defensive rebounder, above average man defender, and played the passing lanes exceptionally well.

When you add stuff like intangibles: leadership, clutch play, in-game iq (as per Hakeem), I just don't think its all that close.

Only my opinion of course.

[fpliii]

1) Better peak/prime?

2) You get to draft one of them, who do you choose to build around? You have hindsight. Assume you have the same level of $$$, supporting talent, and coaching to work with. Also...in this scenario let's say Bird's injuries act more abruptly than they really did. So he's still retiring in 92, but in those last years he's not limited, the injuries just end his career immediately after that 92 season.
I'd ordinarily say this is clearly Hakeem, but (2) is interesting.

Does this mean that 89, 90, 91, 92 are all now high quality seasons, on par with his 80-88? If that's the case, I think it has to be Bird.

[Audio One]

how overrated are we going with olajuwon? will it ever ever stop

:applause:

[CJ Mustard]

Bird clearly. Prime, peak, career, etc. And I'm a huge fan of Hakeem. What's with the downplaying of Bird lately? The guy was a 28/10/7 guy on 50/40/90 in his prime, and he led his team to 3 rings on top of that. He peaked higher than Magic, who is consistently put in the top 5, while Bird is between 7-10 with only slightly worse career accomplishments.

[Audio One]

The 95 Rockets were talented if only for the addition of Drexler.

You can talk about 94 as a bad team by champ standards...95?

Hakeem and Drexler is a hell of a duo and they had a solid cast behind them. 94...he didnt have anyone who should be a #2.

And watching both postseasons, ironically the '94 team had a more convincing run, and would have better matched up w/ any Chicago team imo. The closest Houston came to losing was against New York, and game 6 and 7 saw them come as close as ever to losing, however blocking Starks' shot and shutting down Ewing was all of Olajuwon and Houston's control. If Wesley Person makes that wide-open three, were not even having this discussion

[Audio One]

Hakeem dragged arguably the worst supporting cast out of any of the top 11 ATGs, arguable with 2003 Duncan, to the championship...with:

35/9/4/3/1 on 61% TS against the 60 win Jazz
30/9/4/2/1 on 53% TS against the 59 win Suns
35/13/5/4/1 on 59% TS against the 62 win Spurs, destroying Robinson
33/12/6/2/2 on 51% TS against the 57 win Magic

Overall 33/10/5/3/1 on 56% TS with incredible defense en route to a championship, with again, one of the worst supporting casts for any ATG in history, beating 4 straight 57+ win teams and at least 1 HOFer every round.

Bill Russell beat a 49-win team and 54-win team to win his title in '62, your own Milwaukee team beat 48-win team in '71, and the '72 Lakers beat a 48-win team in the final round. Those teams were MUCH, much better than any team Olajuwon faced in '94 or '95, and any objective b-ball fan imo will tell you those runs were better

[chocolatethunder]

Has nothing to do with the injuries..I'm not asking for an all time list, nor am I asking about longevity and how injuries play into that. Bird is ahead of Hakeem on the AT list for most of us. I'm asking for peak/prime, and who you'd build around with equal supporting talent. And Hakeem has reached an insane level of play at his peak and took a substantially (it's not even close) inferior supporting cast to titles against nightmarish competition.

Do you or do you not think that Hakeem over his career could win 3+ rings with Bird's supporting talent? Not the players exactly, but the same level of talent built around Hakeem.
I don't understand why on this board by a bunch of children who never saw the 95 rockets play, this team is thought of as a bad team? That team was really good. Both of the Houston teams that won championships were really good teams. Horry was a total beast back then. I saw these teams play and they were both really really good.

[chocolatethunder]

The 95 Rockets were talented if only for the addition of Drexler.

You can talk about 94 as a bad team by champ standards...95?

Hakeem and Drexler is a hell of a duo and they had a solid cast behind them. 94...he didnt have anyone who should be a #2.
I guess you can say that but Thorpe balled his ass off for that team and although Horry was young both him and Cassell came up big when it counted. Apart from you, I'm not sure many other people on this board know who Otis Thorpe is but he was pretty damn good in Houston. For my money those Houston teams were really good.

Edit: and Vernon Maxwell could be pretty good too. He was a hot head and took crazy shots but he had a pretty nasty streak in him. Him and Thorpe were like a really good number two guy. Like the two of them combined made a really good second guy.

[3ball]

do i have to state the obvious here?

olajuwon would have zero or 1 ring had it not been for the anomalous occurance of jordan's retirement when he was defending 3-peat champion - so this shouldn't be a conversation.

also, olajuwon only became the unstoppable offensive force that had 1000 moves and footwork in the mid-90's... he didn't have nearly as much of that in the 80's and even entering the 90's.

he really developed and fine-tuned his offense around that time and it took him up closer to that Bird level.

[chocolatethunder]

do i have to state the obvious here?

olajuwon would have zero or 1 ring had it not been for the anomalous occurance of jordan's retirement when he was defending 3-peat champion - so this shouldn't be a conversation.

also, olajuwon only became the unstoppable offensive force that had 1000 moves and footwork in the mid-90's... he didn't have nearly as much of that in the 80's and even entering the 90's.

he really developed and fine-tuned his offense around that time and it took him up closer to that Bird level.
Hakeem also benefitted greatly from Tomjanovich's system which ran the ball though him. His numbers went up as soon as Tomnanovich was coach. That being said, Hakeem is one of the best ever and one of my favorite players. I loved those Rocket teams but they weren't winning shit without Rudy T and his system and that's a fact.

I actually think that they would have beaten the Bulls w Jordan but that's just my opinion.

[3ball]

Hakeem also benefitted greatly from Tomjanovich's system which ran the ball though him. His numbers went up as soon as Tomnanovich was coach. That being said, Hakeem is one of the best ever and one of my favorite players. I loved those Rocket teams but they weren't winning shit without Rudy T and his system and that's a fact.

I actually think that they would have beaten the Bulls w Jordan but that's just my opinion.


i could see it happening, just because the reason Jordan retired in the first place was partially because he had nothing left to prove... so if he had decided to keep playing instead, he wouldn't have been high on motivation.

but this scenario would still be the less likely one - vegas would still favor jordan heavily.

something to consider is that olajuwon came out of nowhere in 1994 - maybe jordan's absence inspired him to step up more than he would have.. in all reality, we don't know what would have happened if jordan had played in 1994, other than him being the prohibitive favorite to win again.

i'm guessing that if jordan had his streak broken in 1994, he would have come back in 1995 and done what he actually did do in 1996 - get redemtion by having one of the GOAT seasons statistically, and leading his team to the best record ever.

[chocolatethunder]

i could see it happening, just because the reason Jordan retired in the first place was partially because he had nothing left to prove... so if he had decided to keep playing instead, he wouldn't have been high on motivation.

but this scenario would still be the less likely one - vegas would still favor jordan heavily.

something to consider is that olajuwon came out of nowhere in 1994 - maybe jordan's absence inspired him to step up more than he would have.. in all reality, we don't know what would have happened if jordan had played in 1994, other than him being the prohibitive favorite to win again.

i'm guessing that if jordan had his streak broken in 1994, he would have come back in 1995 and done what he actually did do in 1996 - get redemtion by having one of the GOAT seasons statistically, and leading his team to the best record ever.
Having seen all of Hakeem's carreer it was kind of an incredible convergence of circumstances that led to him "coming out of nowhere". He was raw when he was in college and his early years. Super athletic and raw. He was never a good open court dribbler ever. He dribbled funny w his hand on top of the ball and pushed it out in front of him. He could dribble in the post just fine. He was improving pretty much every season. He was really smart and would learn and do more and more. Then Rudy T came along and realized how smart he was and how well he saw the game and decided to run the offense through him which really made his stats go up. But it was a great move. So he was peaking and had the team/offense around him at just the right time.

[ArbitraryWater]

This is turning out to be a nice history lesson for OP :applause:

[Milbuck]

This is turning out to be a nice history lesson for OP :applause:
1) No one has disputed what I said. Arguably the worst supporting cast out of the top 11 GOATs behind peak Duncan? Stand by it. Jordan, Bird, Magic, Kobe, Lebron, Shaq, Russell, etc all better casts.

2) You are so excited right now trying to finally "get back at me". Rent free :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[ArbitraryWater]

rent free AND 3 smileys.. someone's butthurt :lol

confirm with reply

[Milbuck]

rent free AND 3 smileys.. someone's butthurt :lol

confirm with reply
Got you already pulling out the "last word" defense, as usual :oldlol:

Anyways, please make a serious post or I’m gonna have to ask you to leave my thread. Last warning. Thanks!

[SugarHill]

Larry Bird is overrated as **** if people are acting like his peak was unquestionably better. Fvck out of here.

[T_L_P]

Hakeem.

He's a big man.
He's a two way player.
He proved he could do it with less (although the addition of Drexler made that 95 squad very strong)
He has better longevity (elite for 12 years then had another good season)

That said, Hakeem's defense for the early part of his career gets overrated. He wasn't commanding or demanding enough to be a true defensive anchor (ala Bill Russell or Ben Wallace), and he was a notorious gambler, something I despise. His defense in the 90s was godlike though, and a low-post man is the most reliable when it comes to the Playoffs.

I have Hakeem ranked 6th or 7th and Bird 9th.

[Milbuck]

Larry Bird is overrated as **** if people are acting like his peak was unquestionably better. Fvck out of here.
But...intangibles. Leadership. Right place at the right time defense. Knowledge of the game. Hakeem was good, but he didn't have that "it" factor.

[SugarHill]

But...intangibles. Leadership. Right place at the right time defense. Knowledge of the game. Hakeem was good, but he didn't have that "it" factor.
Is this sarcasm?

[Milbuck]

Is this sarcasm?
:kobe:

yup

[3ball]

Hakeem was good, but he didn't have that "it" factor.


that's certainly part of it, it's also about how most of hakeem's career was spent achieving mediocre records and playoff results..

also, he didn't develop into a truly elite offensive player until the latter stage of his career, which happened to converge with great fortuitous circumstance that greatly benefited his team (jordan's retirement).

[La Frescobaldi]

Having seen all of Hakeem's carreer it was kind of an incredible convergence of circumstances that led to him "coming out of nowhere". He was raw when he was in college and his early years. Super athletic and raw. He was never a good open court dribbler ever. He dribbled funny w his hand on top of the ball and pushed it out in front of him. He could dribble in the post just fine. He was improving pretty much every season. He was really smart and would learn and do more and more. Then Rudy T came along and realized how smart he was and how well he saw the game and decided to run the offense through him which really made his stats go up. But it was a great move. So he was peaking and had the team/offense around him at just the right time.
Moses Malone spent a lot of time with him when he was a kid. This was when Moses was winning MVPs like candy

[AlphaWolf24]

how overrated are we going with Bird? will it ever ever stop


fixed...

Bird was a beast and an alltime great.....but Dreams Finals runs are on par if not better then anyone....ever.

Dude was as dominating as any player I ever seen....IMO more then Bird

[Roundball_Rock]

I actually think that they would have beaten the Bulls w Jordan but that's just my opinion.

We will never know but that is unlikely. The Bulls battled for the #1 seed with a D-Leaguer at SG. Add MJ, or even Jeff Hornacek, and they presumably become clear favorites.

For what it's worth, the Bulls and Rockets split their season series in 94'--and Pippen did not play in the Bulls' loss (he had 25/12/6/2 in the Bulls' win). The Jordan-less Bulls went 2-2 against the Rockets in 94' and 95' and were 2-1 when Pippen played. Even without Horace Grant and Jordan they split the season series in 95', including holding Hakeem to a 2 for 18 shooting performance in their win.



something to consider is that olajuwon came out of nowhere in 1994 - maybe jordan's absence inspired him to step up more than he would have.. in all reality, we don't know what would have happened if jordan had played in 1994, other than him being the prohibitive favorite to win again.


:biggums: Hakeem was runner-up for MVP in 93'. 1993-1995 were his peak years. He "came out of nowhere" in 93', not 94'.

I have always thought people make too much of how weak Hakeem's "supporting cast" was in 94'. It was indeed weak relative to champions in other years but it was solid in the context of 94'. The Rockets, Knicks, Bulls and Spurs (teams that won 55-57 games, similar to the Rocket's 58 wins) all had the same formula of one superstar and a few other good players (i.e. all these teams featured a PF who was a strong rebounder). That year also featured two contenders without any superstar in Atlanta and Indiana. Unless the Suns or Jazz won you were going to have a champ that year which, in terms of "supporting cast," would be weak compared to champions in other years.

As to the OP, my vote is for Bird. Hakeem has a case for a slightly superior peak (I still take Bird in that category) but Bird clearly had a better prime and better career. People seem to assume that 1993-1995 Hakeem was the Hakeem that existed for his entire career. In reality he was viewed as more or less on par with Robinson and Ewing for most of his career.


1990: Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson (rookie)
1991: Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem
1992: Robinson, Ewing, Daughtery
1993: Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson
1994: Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq
1995: Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem
1996: Robinson, Hakeem, Shaq


So after his rookie year Robinson beat him 4-2 and Ewing was ahead of him in 3 of 7 years, albeit Hakeem missed time in 92'. Granted, all-NBA voting is not a perfect gauge but it does illustrate that Hakeem was not viewed as heads and shoulders above his top competitors at center for most of his career. In contrast, Bird was for several years the undisputed best player in the league (Hakeem was for "only" 2 years and that was only because MJ retired) and was top 2-3 for a almost an entire decade.

Compare their MVP finishes:

Bird from 1980-1988: 4th, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd, 2nd.

Hakeem from 1986-1996: 4th, 7th, 7th, 5th, 7th, 18th, N/A, 2nd, 1st, 5th, 4th.

So one guy was top 3 in eight consecutive seasons while the other guy was top 3 in MVP voting twice in his entire career. Bird simply was on another level than Hakeem.

[bdreason]

I typically side with the big man in these circumstances, but Larry was one of a very few wing players in the history of the game that could dominate a game in multiple ways. Larry had a higher peak and prime, and was also infinitely more marketable.



If we're playing a pickup game, and I get first pick? I'm taking the big man.

[masonanddixon]

I don't remember either well enough but since Hakeem is black I imagine most posters will say he had the greater peak.

[CJ Mustard]

Larry Bird is overrated as **** if people are acting like his peak was unquestionably better. Fvck out of here.
It's close, but the nod goes to Bird. 28/10/7 on 50/40/90 while leading historically great teams is more impressive than Hakeem's 27/12/4 en route to 2 hard fought titles with Jordan out of the game. Bird was a wing who passed the ball better than PG's and rebounded better than PF's and C's. That, along with his ridiculous shooting made him one of the most dominant players ever. Hakeem's superiority defensively makes this an argument, but I'd personally take Bird (who was underrated defensively) every single time.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Top5 all-time peaks: Shaq, Kareem, MJ, Wilt and Bird.
Hakeem would be in my top10.

Got some people always loving to name names when it comes to Larry's teammates, for example... Plenty of names that he "made" also, or else you wouldn't even see them mentioned often enough or close.

Gotta realize the Celtics were a franchise falling apart and also had the 2nd worst record in the league just before Bird got there...
Then with him, new coach and basically the same core roster, they improved by 32W, getting best record in the league and making the ECF.

By his sophomore year, Bird was leading that team to a championship... Cowens was gone, main addition was Parish, who was already 27 and never viewed as all that.

In the 1984 Playoffs, his teammates were playing well below their standards (go check it out) while Bird raised his game and was tearing shit up, leading the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%...
Find me another player doing that; and they went all the way, beating some great competition, winning against a Lakers team with Kareem, Magic, Worthy, McAdoo, Cooper, Rambis, Scott, Wilkes...

What happens when everything is "in place and clicking" (1986)? They tear the league a new one, led by Larry.
He even averaged a triple-double (rounded up numbers) against Hakeem's Rockets in the Finals, while his team won in 6 against the team that beat the showtime Lakers in 5.

They were shitty before him, winning when he got/was there, considerably worse when he was out (even with the addition of Reggie Lewis), and even better again when he returned as a complete shell... Keep saying stacked this or that while "romanticizing" about Hakeem's title runs and teammates, though :rolleyes:
Bird was also playing in what most call the GOAT era, best conference...



[QUOTE=Hamtaro CP3KDKG]Love Hakeem, one of my alltime faves but this is Larry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WivGOEznCU

Hakeem on Larry Bird:

[houston]

larry was wayyy better than Hakeem

[VengefulAngel]

larry was wayyy better than Hakeem

It's much closer than you're making it out to be. Hakeem was a beast.

[La Frescobaldi]

It's much closer than you're making it out to be. Hakeem was a beast.

It was never close at all. Nobody thought that until long after those guys retired and the myths started.

And yes indeed Hakeem was a beast - just more proof of how great Bird was.

[chocolatethunder]

It's much closer than you're making it out to be. Hakeem was a beast.
I would be willing to bet that you werent alive to have seen either of them play.

[LAZERUSS]

Hakeem was seldom regarded as even a top-5 player in his own era, much less all-time.

[La Frescobaldi]

Hakeem was seldom regarded as even a top-5 player in his own era, much less all-time.

correct.

[fragokota]

Nikka please. It's Bird and it's not even close...

[Clifton]

Now or in the 80s? In Bird's time every team had at least one or two decent big guys so it was less important which position your best player played. Now to have Hakeem also means having one of about ten nba-caliber players in the world at that position. If you have Bird (or Lebron or Kobe or whoever) you might not ever find a decent paint protector. Look at the Cavs now. They would be better with Hakeem even tho Lebron os the greater player overall.

[plowking]

Hakeem dragged arguably the worst supporting cast out of any of the top 11 ATGs, arguable with 2003 Duncan, to the championship...with:

35/9/4/3/1 on 61% TS against the 60 win Jazz
30/9/4/2/1 on 53% TS against the 59 win Suns
35/13/5/4/1 on 59% TS against the 62 win Spurs, destroying Robinson
33/12/6/2/2 on 51% TS against the 57 win Magic

Overall 33/10/5/3/1 on 56% TS with incredible defense en route to a championship, with again, one of the worst supporting casts for any ATG in history, beating 4 straight 57+ win teams and at least 1 HOFer every round.

Da hell kind of logic is this?

Clearly his team under performed in the regular season because for the most part, his teammates played better than most of the other star players in the series' he played in.

Look at the Magic one in the final as an example. Shaq can say whatever he wants in terms of Hakeem "dusting his ass", but he outplayed Hakeem. He was more efficient, he drew more double teams, and he was even better in the games down the stretch and in the 4th quarter.

Hakeem played well, and his decent supporting cast upped it one notch more, and really helped out.

Hakeem seriously gets overrated on these forums. I can't believe there are actually people on here that rate him as a better player than the likes of Shaq or Wilt. Like, seriously? Do you even watch basketball?
His career is defined on that one David Robinson series, much like Robinson's is. People act as if he was beating on him their whole careers and that one series is used as evidence. Fact is, Hakeem wasn't on the level of the Shaq's or the Wilt's. He is a dude that stepped up at the right time, beat the right dudes, had a whole lot of luck, and is looked at much more fondly than he could have been had he not put it all together.

[VengefulAngel]

I would be willing to bet that you werent alive to have seen either of them play.

I'll take that bet.

[LAZERUSS]

Da hell kind of logic is this?

Clearly his team under performed in the regular season because for the most part, his teammates played better than most of the other star players in the series' he played in.

Look at the Magic one in the final as an example. Shaq can say whatever he wants in terms of Hakeem "dusting his ass", but he outplayed Hakeem. He was more efficient, he drew more double teams, and he was even better in the games down the stretch and in the 4th quarter.

Hakeem played well, and his decent supporting cast upped it one notch more, and really helped out.

Hakeem seriously gets overrated on these forums. I can't believe there are actually people on here that rate him as a better player than the likes of Shaq or Wilt. Like, seriously? Do you even watch basketball?
His career is defined on that one David Robinson series, much like Robinson's is. People act as if he was beating on him their whole careers and that one series is used as evidence. Fact is, Hakeem wasn't on the level of the Shaq's or the Wilt's. He is a dude that stepped up at the right time, beat the right dudes, had a whole lot of luck, and is looked at much more fondly than he could have been had he not put it all together.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

And how about a post from Colts18 on this very topic...


I decided to rewatch the 1995 finals and chart each possession to see to how effective Shaq and Hakeem were on the court. A special shout out to Jordanbulls for providing the video of this series


Total:
Hakeem: 253 touches, 140 doubles (55.3%)
Shaq: 221 touches, 146 doubles (66.1%)

Here are their stats when they were guarded by each other:
Shaq 32-57 (56.1 FG%), 6-8 FT, 67.3 double teamed%, .578 TS%, 17 assists, 1 O-reb allowed to Hakeem
Hakeem: 31-75 (41.3 FG%), 9-13 FT, 60.2 double teamed%, .446 TS%, 8 assists, 3 O-reb allowed to Shaq

Shaq blocked 2 Hakeem shots, Hakeem blocked 0 Shaq shots. Hakeem did make a 3P on Shaq. Hakeem guarded Shaq on 73.3% of the touches he had, while Shaq guarded Hakeem on 69.6% of his touches. Hakeem got a lot more fastbreak touches than Shaq so in the halfcourt, they guarded each other about even.

When they weren't being guarded by each other, Shaq was being guarded by Charles Jones and Hakeem by Horace Grant.

Shaq vs Jones: 7-11 FG (63.6 FG%), 35 doubles in 52 touches (67.3%), 2 assists
Hakeem vs Grant: 13-24 (54.2 FG%), 33 double teams in 58 touches (56.9%), 6 assists

Jump shots:
Hakeem: 27-62 (43.5%)
Shaq: 2-7 (28.6%)

The vast majority of Shaq's shots were close range hooks.

Dunks:
Hakeem: 1 dunk (vs grant)
Shaq: 9 dunks (2 of them were in Hakeem's face)

Fouls drawn on offense:
Shaq: 37 (17 on Hakeem)
Hakeem: 21 (9 on Shaq)

Hakeem did draw 4 Shaq charges.

Shaq was called for 5 travels, Hakeem 2.

Plus/Minus (Houston outscored Orlando by 28 points total):
On court:
Shaq: -12 in 180 minutes
Hakeem: +17 in 179 minutes

Off court:
Shaq: -16 in 16:37 of action (Houston scored 133 points per 48 in the minutes Shaq missed)
Hakeem: +11 in 17:11 of action (134 points per 48 in the minutes he was off the court)

Interestingly enough, in 2 of the games, the Magic outscored the Rockets when Shaq was on the court. The magic were -8 in about 9 minutes of action without Shaq in game (lost by just 2 points). In game 3, they were -4 in the minutes Shaq missed in a game where they lost by 3 points. In game 1, the Rockets outscored the magic by 9 in the minutes Hakeem missed, but they were outscored by a combined 4 points in games 3 and 4 without Hakeem.

Observations:
-Orlando was for some reason really committed to doubling Hakeem in game 1. They were throwing a lot of hard doubles. Hakeem had 5 assists in that game, all of them 3 pointers, 4 came off of doubles (one was a triple team). I'm guessing it was a response to Hakeem's series vs Robinson. For the rest of the series, Orlando didn't double Hakeem as much and they threw softer doubles.

-Hakeem made like 5 or 6 baskets in transition to Shaq's 1 or so. So while Shaq didn't get credit for giving up those buckets since he didn't guard, a few of those times Shaq was slow in transition. Shaq got about 3 or shots

-One of the commentators compared Horry to Scottie Pippen and Walton took the comment seriously. They are vastly different players IMO

-I'm not sure why Penny wasn't more aggressive. Kenny Smith couldn't guard him at all. When Penny did drive to the basket, he made a few shots over Hakeem.

-Drexler was the man in this series. He really wanted to get his first title badly. For some reason, people rarely talk about him despite him getting more WS than Hakeem in that playoff run

-It's fashionable these days to **** on Hakeem's cast in 94, but this cast was much better than that one. The guards outplayed Orlando's guards. Horry played really well. The 3P shooters benefited a lot from the shortened 3P line.

-Contrary to popular belief, handchecking wasn't allowed in 95. The refs called like 2 handchecking fouls in this series

-I'm so thankful the NBA got rid of the illegal defense. The refs called like 5 of them in each game. It destroyed the flow of the game and limited the ways you could double team a player.

And as for teammates...


Hakeem's TEAMMATES, collectively, had a considerably higher TS% in that series, than Hakeem, himself. So, those that favor this stat, had better prepared to explain that. Looks to me like Houston won that series DESPITE Hakeem.

Meanwhile, Shaq's TS% in that Finals was far greater than what his teammates gave him.

Hakeem shot 55-115 from the field, 1-1 from the arc, and 18-26 from the line.
His teammates shot 70-136 from 2pt range, 36-91 from the arc, and 77-97 from the line.

Shaq shot 44-74 from the field, and 24-42 from the line.
His teammates shot 78-156 from 2 pt range, 41-118 from the arc, and 37-47 from the line.

Using a TRUE TS%, Hakeem shot .508. His teammates collectively shot .589.

Shaq shot a TRUE TS% of .589. His teammates shot a collective .533.


Hell, Hakeem didn't even shoot the post-season NBA average in eFG% (.488 to the league average of .504.)

The MYTH that Hakeem outplayed Shaq in the '95 Finals was blown away a long time ago.

[juju151111]

I take Hakeem. Bird had a Waugh superior team.

[senelcoolidge]

I don't understand why on this board by a bunch of children who never saw the 95 rockets play, this team is thought of as a bad team? That team was really good. Both of the Houston teams that won championships were really good teams. Horry was a total beast back then. I saw these teams play and they were both really really good.

I know. Both teams were very good. I personally preferred the 94 team, but I think the 95 team was better even with the low seeding that they had when they came into the playoffs. During the regular season some key players missed games. They were great in the playoffs. The 94 team probably had a better overall roster, but they had to grind it out in the playoffs.

I'd take Bird. Hakeem was amazing, but Bird was in another stratosphere.

[chocolatethunder]

I'll take that bet.
You can say anything you'd like but if you were five when you saw Hakeem play then who cares.

[chocolatethunder]

I know. Both teams were very good. I personally preferred the 94 team, but I think the 95 team was better even with the low seeding that they had when they came into the playoffs. During the regular season some key players missed games. They were great in the playoffs. The 94 team probably had a better overall roster, but they had to grind it out in the playoffs.

I'd take Bird. Hakeem was amazing, but Bird was in another stratosphere.
Horry wasn't some dude camped out at the three point line back then either. He was an athletic freak putting his nuts in people's faces nightly. I like the 94 team better because Thorpe was such a beast and so underrated. Of course in '95 Horry and Cassell were that much better and I was happy that Glyde got his ring but damn they were both awesome teams and I think that they would have beaten the Bulls.

Hakeem is one of my favorite players ever. But if anyone watches the series against Shaq and said that Hakeem outplayed him then they are fooling themselves. It was a total wash and if anything Shaq outplayed Hakeem by the slimmest of margins.

[T_L_P]

The 'historical revisionism' argument is so deceptive.

If Hakeem really wasn't considered a top 5 player in his own era, why do 99% of you posters rank him above D-Rob or Ewing?

[La Frescobaldi]

The 'historical revisionism' argument is so deceptive.

If Hakeem really wasn't considered a top 5 player in his own era, why do 99% of you posters rank him above D-Rob or Ewing?

it IS an example of historical revisionism. That's the perfect description.

Unfortunately most of the guys defending olajuwon don't know what historical revisionism means so there you go.

It's even worse in the schools. They are being taught lies

[chocolatethunder]

The 'historical revisionism' argument is so deceptive.

If Hakeem really wasn't considered a top 5 player in his own era, why do 99% of you posters rank him above D-Rob or Ewing?
He really wasn't until Tomjonovich got to town. When he was young he relied more on his athleticism. This is a player who didn't peak until 30 or even 31. Once he peaked he was thought of as better than Robinson. I'll say that I like Hakeem more than the Admiral but Hakeem has become a myth on this board and Robinson is so underrated it's pathetic.

[StephHamann]

And Hakeem has reached an insane level of play at his peak and took a substantially inferior supporting cast to titles against nightmarish competition.

.

Showtime Lakers> Every team Houston faced in their title runs

[ArbitraryWater]

The 'historical revisionism' argument is so deceptive.

If Hakeem really wasn't considered a top 5 player in his own era, why do 99% of you posters rank him above D-Rob or Ewing?

Nobody in their right mind would pick those guys over Hakeem.

It's just that, during the first three-peat Barkley was the #2 guy, and during the second three-peat Malone was the #2 guy...

Hakeem seperated him with the back-to-back titles.

[La Frescobaldi]

Showtime Lakers> Every team Houston faced in their title runs

Yes and Kareem was beating Olajuwon so bad the guy would go to the bench almost in tears. You could see the defeat in his shoulders every time he got showed up in LA. Worthy used to laugh at him.

[Roundball_Rock]

The 'historical revisionism' argument is so deceptive.

If Hakeem really wasn't considered a top 5 player in his own era, why do 99% of you posters rank him above D-Rob or Ewing?

He was a top 5 player of his era. Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, K. Malone, Barkley. What people are saying, and what distinguishes Hakeem from the top 10 all-time players (I have Hakeem 11th) is Hakeem had less top 5 seasons than them. Bird was top 3 for nearly an entire decade. People like Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe--the players most commonly ranked next to Hakeem--all had far more top 5 seasons than Hakeem did. Yet he is being compared to Bird and is overrated on ISH because people assume 1993-1995 Hakeem existed for his entire career.

[Milbuck]

He was a top 5 player of his era. Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, K. Malone, Barkley. What people are saying, and what distinguishes Hakeem from the top 10 all-time players (I have Hakeem 11th) is Hakeem had less top 5 seasons than them. Bird was top 3 for nearly an entire decade. People like Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe--the players most commonly ranked next to Hakeem--all had far more top 5 seasons than Hakeem did. Yet he is being compared to Bird and is overrated on ISH because people assume 1993-1995 Hakeem existed for his entire career.
Peak Hakeem is the one I asked about in the OP. Never talked about all-time rankings or anything.

[chocolatethunder]

He was a top 5 player of his era. Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, K. Malone, Barkley. What people are saying, and what distinguishes Hakeem from the top 10 all-time players (I have Hakeem 11th) is Hakeem had less top 5 seasons than them. Bird was top 3 for nearly an entire decade. People like Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe--the players most commonly ranked next to Hakeem--all had far more top 5 seasons than Hakeem did. Yet he is being compared to Bird and is overrated on ISH because people assume 1993-1995 Hakeem existed for his entire career.
Anyone here who thinks that Hakeem was a top five player before he was 30 wasn't around to have seen him play. Thats just a fact.

[Audio One]

do i have to state the obvious here?

olajuwon would have zero or 1 ring had it not been for the anomalous occurance of jordan's retirement when he was defending 3-peat champion - so this shouldn't be a conversation.

also, olajuwon only became the unstoppable offensive force that had 1000 moves and footwork in the mid-90's... he didn't have nearly as much of that in the 80's and even entering the 90's.

he really developed and fine-tuned his offense around that time and it took him up closer to that Bird level.

No, he has zero rings. The popular opinion on this forum seems to be that the '95 team would've been the one to dethrone Jordan, but again, they were a jumpshot here or there from being eliminated in 5 games by a not-so-great Utah or Phoenix team. The time period Houston had gotten the better of Chicago in the regular season saw those teams w/ Maxwell and Thorpe, combining to form a respectable frontcourt, and a player that could somewhat contain Jordan. With Vernon gone, there's no one to guard Jordan, and he would've feasted on that weakened frontline. Clyde Drexler's %100 unreliable against a Michael Jordan-led team imo

[Audio One]

Da hell kind of logic is this?

Clearly his team under performed in the regular season because for the most part, his teammates played better than most of the other star players in the series' he played in.

Look at the Magic one in the final as an example. Shaq can say whatever he wants in terms of Hakeem "dusting his ass", but he outplayed Hakeem. He was more efficient, he drew more double teams, and he was even better in the games down the stretch and in the 4th quarter.

Hakeem played well, and his decent supporting cast upped it one notch more, and really helped out.

Hakeem seriously gets overrated on these forums. I can't believe there are actually people on here that rate him as a better player than the likes of Shaq or Wilt. Like, seriously? Do you even watch basketball?
His career is defined on that one David Robinson series, much like Robinson's is. People act as if he was beating on him their whole careers and that one series is used as evidence. Fact is, Hakeem wasn't on the level of the Shaq's or the Wilt's. He is a dude that stepped up at the right time, beat the right dudes, had a whole lot of luck, and is looked at much more fondly than he could have been had he not put it all together.

This is correct. Russell, Chamberlain, O'Neal, and Abdul-Jabbar make up the 1st tier centers on the first tear of all-time greatness; Olajuwon's down on the 2nd tier w/ Robinson

[Audio One]

He was a top 5 player of his era. Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, K. Malone, Barkley. What people are saying, and what distinguishes Hakeem from the top 10 all-time players (I have Hakeem 11th) is Hakeem had less top 5 seasons than them. Bird was top 3 for nearly an entire decade. People like Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe--the players most commonly ranked next to Hakeem--all had far more top 5 seasons than Hakeem did. Yet he is being compared to Bird and is overrated on ISH because people assume 1993-1995 Hakeem existed for his entire career.

Yet he didn't make the original Dream Team, got beat out by Ewing????????????? :biggums:

[La Frescobaldi]

He was a top 5 player of his era. Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, K. Malone, Barkley. What people are saying, and what distinguishes Hakeem from the top 10 all-time players (I have Hakeem 11th) is Hakeem had less top 5 seasons than them. Bird was top 3 for nearly an entire decade. People like Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe--the players most commonly ranked next to Hakeem--all had far more top 5 seasons than Hakeem did. Yet he is being compared to Bird and is overrated on ISH because people assume 1993-1995 Hakeem existed for his entire career.

His era also included Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Moses Malone, Larry Bird, David Robinson, aged but still totally valid All-Star Julius Erving.

Between your list and these, that's a whole lot of names.

He wasn't a top 5 player of his era. Maybe of the '90s, but not of his era. He was competing with Robinson, but not with those other guys.

Moses was past his days by mid-80s but in his earlier multiple MVP days he was just better.

[La Frescobaldi]

This is correct. Russell, Chamberlain, O'Neal, and Abdul-Jabbar make up the 1st tier centers on the first tear of all-time greatness; Olajuwon's down on the 2nd tier w/ Robinson
below Moses Malone as well.

edit ~ and Bill Walton.

[chocolatethunder]

Yet he didn't make the original Dream Team, got beat out by Ewing????????????? :biggums:
Don't think he was a citizen yet pal.

[fpliii]

Yet he didn't make the original Dream Team, got beat out by Ewing????????????? :biggums:
Hakeem wasn't a U.S. citizen until 96...

[kshutts1]

It's not a disservice to say that Bird was better than Hakeem.

I have Hakeem in my second tier, so he's no slouch... but he's also no Larry Bird.

Edit: Tiers only count for careers, I get that. But even peak play... it may be closer, but it's still Bird by a significant amount.

[Audio One]

http://yallkiltit.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/picture-4.png

Where's Akeem y'all??? :confusedshrug:

EDIT: Wasn't a citizen yet, my bad

[kshutts1]

Do people really think that Dream Team invitations, or lackthereof, are arguments for a player's ability?

I doubt many of us have Stockton, Pippen, Barkley, Mullin, Karl, etc as better players than Hakeem.

[kshutts1]

Not to mention, was Hakeem ever allowed to be on the US Dream Team? I thought he didn't move to the states until he was 18 or so.

Edit: I see others already defended this point.

[chocolatethunder]

Who gives a shit. Bird was better but who really cares? They're both two of the best ever. I hated Bird (Sixer fan) and I loved Hakeem. Fact is, after both of their careers are over I can objectively say that Bird was better. None of it matters. They both won and they were both amazing and I feel lucky to have seen them both win.

[Audio One]

Do people really think that Dream Team invitations, or lackthereof, are arguments for a player's ability?

I doubt many of us have Stockton, Pippen, Barkley, Mullin, Karl, etc as better players than Hakeem.

No, but for whatever the reason (not being a citizen, sure) for as good as Olajuwon is considered nowadays, he wasn't considered any better or worse than Ewing, and especially Robinson, yet he's somehow top-10 all-time. This time frame did see Hakeem face an indefinite suspension from his team, put on the trade market, and wasn't even a top-20 player this year. I admit my error in not knowing about his citizenship, but Olajuwon wasn't really a media fixture at the time, and I'd honestly would've been surprised had he made it, even if he was eligible

[kshutts1]

No, but for whatever the reason (not being a citizen, sure) for as good as Olajuwon is considered nowadays, he wasn't considered any better or worse than Ewing, and especially Robinson, yet he's somehow top-10 all-time. This time frame did see Hakeem face an indefinite suspension from his team, put on the trade market, and wasn't even a top-20 player this year. I admit my error in not knowing about his citizenship, but Olajuwon wasn't really a media fixture at the time, and I'd honestly would've been surprised had he made it, even if he was eligible
The majority would agree that:

Duncan is the best PF ever, yet there are seasons in which Duncan was arguably outplayed by at least two PFs.

Kobe is the second best SG ever, yet there are seasons in which Kobe was arguably outplayed by at least two SGs.

In fact, virtually every great ever was not considered the best at their position for every single year of their career. Lone (likely) exceptions are Wilt and Jordan and Shaq.

Then you included "media fixture" :facepalm

[La Frescobaldi]

The majority would agree that:

Duncan is the best PF ever, yet there are seasons in which Duncan was arguably outplayed by at least two PFs.

Kobe is the second best SG ever, yet there are seasons in which Kobe was arguably outplayed by at least two SGs.

In fact, virtually every great ever was not considered the best at their position for every single year of their career. Lone (likely) exceptions are Wilt and Jordan and Shaq.

Then you included "media fixture" :facepalm
Not even them.

Wizards Jordan? No.
Celtics Shaq? No.
I'm not certain Chamberlain was better than Jabbar in '73. Even The Big Dipper was running out of gas at the end.

[Psileas]

Not even them.

Wizards Jordan? No.
Celtics Shaq? No.
I'm not certain Chamberlain was better than Jabbar in '73. Even The Big Dipper was running out of gas at the end.

Bob Pettit.

[Audio One]

The majority would agree that:

Duncan is the best PF ever, yet there are seasons in which Duncan was arguably outplayed by at least two PFs.

Kobe is the second best SG ever, yet there are seasons in which Kobe was arguably outplayed by at least two SGs.

In fact, virtually every great ever was not considered the best at their position for every single year of their career. Lone (likely) exceptions are Wilt and Jordan and Shaq.

Then you included "media fixture" :facepalm

As far as being in the limelight, and knowing more about a player. Houston didn't have an abundance of games shown on national television, and Akeem wasn't in the commercials and stuff like Sir Charles and Shaquille were, so yeah, unless you were checking for him, or had the time and access to watch all the teams, this knowledge wasn't as accessible for the average fan.

[La Frescobaldi]

As far as being in the limelight, and knowing more about a player. Houston didn't have an abundance of games shown on national television, and Akeem wasn't in the commercials and stuff like Sir Charles and Shaquille were, so yeah, unless you were checking for him, or had the time and access to watch all the teams, this knowledge wasn't as accessible for the average fan.

yeah.

In the earlier days some of my friends had newspapers delivered from non-NBA cities because they still had reporters go to games. They thought Fort Worth or Omaha had better game reviews than a lot of other papers because most were biased - though none were ever as bad as Boston's, which were unreadable if you were interested in facts.

[kshutts1]

Not even them.

Wizards Jordan? No.
Celtics Shaq? No.
I'm not certain Chamberlain was better than Jabbar in '73. Even The Big Dipper was running out of gas at the end.
Good calls, though I was trying to not considering "nearly retired" players. But rather while still all-star caliber stars.

[LAZERUSS]

In terms of absolute PEAK play (3 years or so)...

1. Wilt
2. KAJ
3. MJ
4. Shaq
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Magic
8. Moses
9. Dr. J (including his ABA years, which were his peak...and yes, pure speculation)

10. Hakeem
11. Duncan
12. McAdoo
13. Kobe
14. Oscar

EDIT... added Kobe.

[juju151111]

Give Hakeem teammates like Birds and he wins 4-6 chips.

[LAZERUSS]

Give Hakeem teammates like Birds and he wins 4-6 chips.

Not in the MAGIC era.

Incidently, I would take Boston with Bird and Parish, over Boston with Hakeem and no Bird.

[kshutts1]

In terms of absolute PEAK play (3 years or so)...

1. Wilt
2. KAJ
3. MJ
4. Shaq
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Magic
8. Moses
9. Dr. J (including his ABA years, which were his peak...and yes, pure speculation)

10. Hakeem
11. Duncan
12. McAdoo
13. Oscar
I'm really surprised you have Oscar so low. I guess I don't know enough about him, but Oscar strikes me as the first Lebron, potentially the first Jordan.
If his peak was so far down, why do so many "oldies" say he has a case for GOAT? Why was he voted best player of the century?

Honest questions, not attacking. Was his "peak" play not that great? And he was just always a beast?

[LAZERUSS]

I'm really surprised you have Oscar so low. I guess I don't know enough about him, but Oscar strikes me as the first Lebron, potentially the first Jordan.
If his peak was so far down, why do so many "oldies" say he has a case for GOAT? Why was he voted best player of the century?

Honest questions, not attacking. Was his "peak" play not that great? And he was just always a beast?

To be honest, the majority of these guys are interchangeable. And , yes, I forgot Kobe.

[97 bulls]

Not in the MAGIC era.

Incidently, I would take Boston with Bird and Parish, over Boston with Hakeem and no Bird.
So you don't think a suitable SF replacement for Bird like say Chris Mullin wouldve won multiple championships in the 80s?

[LAZERUSS]

I'm really surprised you have Oscar so low. I guess I don't know enough about him, but Oscar strikes me as the first Lebron, potentially the first Jordan.
If his peak was so far down, why do so many "oldies" say he has a case for GOAT? Why was he voted best player of the century?

Honest questions, not attacking. Was his "peak" play not that great? And he was just always a beast?

Oscar had some decent to even good rosters in his prime, but never enough to beat Boston, LA, or Wilt-led teams.

Later in his career, and after his prime, he was the "leader" of the Bucks teams that went 66-16, 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23...which included two Finals, and a title. Obviously he was not their best player, but without him, they were not a championship team. That was pretty much proven right after he retired, when they fell to 38-44 (yes, they went 35-31 with a healthy KAJ.)

One of the best "what-if" scenarios, though, would have been had a prime Oscar and a prime Chamberlain been paired up. I think they would have won more than a couple of rings.

[97 bulls]

Larry Bird is teflon. Hes literally the only player whose career is not tarnished by having what many feel is the most talented team around him, all his transgressions are overlooked, people say he was unbeatable but yet he was beaten by lesser teams. Bad shooting finals? Not a problem. He's the most clutch. Even though hes lost multiple times when having homecourt.

He wasn't even able to guard his own man, yet his defense can't be questioned.

[LAZERUSS]

So you don't think a suitable SF replacement for Bird like say Chris Mullin wouldve won multiple championships in the 80s?

Boston won titles in '81, and before Hakeem. They won a title in '86, but they didn't face the Lakers, who should have swept them in '84, and easily beat them in '85 and '87 (and were far superior by '88.)

So, perhaps in '86...which is when Hakeem and Sampson shocked the Lakers.

As for '84, Bird played out of his mind in that Finals, and had very little help. Hakeem would have had to have a series for the ages if he had even been in the league. But based on what we KNOW, that an ancient, but still effective KAJ just pummelled Hakeem in the 80's (I know...Hakeem slightly outplayed KAJ in the '86 WCF's...but it was SAMPSON who was tasked with slowing Kareem down)...I doubt he gets the better of Kareem in '84, and '85. And in '87, the Lakers didn't even need KAJ. They would have won a title with Thompson and Green absorbing his minutes. And in '88, they won a title DESPITE Kareem.

By the late 80's the Pistons would have been too much for a Hakeem-led Boston team that was on the decline.

[T_L_P]

Larry Bird is teflon. Hes literally the only player whose career is not tarnished by having what many feel is the most talented team around him, all his transgressions are overlooked, people say he was unbeatable but yet he was beaten by lesser teams. Bad shooting finals? Not a problem. He's the most clutch. Even though hes lost multiple times when having homecourt.

Seriously. How many times was Hakeem not even the best player on his team in a series, like Bird was with McHale a number of times?

[LAZERUSS]

Larry Bird is teflon. Hes literally the only player whose career is not tarnished by having what many feel is the most talented team around him, all his transgressions are overlooked, people say he was unbeatable but yet he was beaten by lesser teams. Bad shooting finals? Not a problem. He's the most clutch. Even though hes lost multiple times when having homecourt.

I actually agree with much of this.

Still, a peak Bird from '84 thru '88 (and not including the '88 post-season, when he folded his tent), was a truly great player. However, most fans tend to forget the rest of his career, when he was considerably less great.

[necya]

:facepalm ISH specialists are coming out

[La Frescobaldi]

:facepalm ISH specialists are coming out

not really. it's just a chump with an axe to grind on Bird, who destroyed his boyfriend for years.

[TheBigVeto]

Bird clearly. Prime, peak, career, etc. And I'm a huge fan of Hakeem. What's with the downplaying of Bird lately? The guy was a 28/10/7 guy on 50/40/90 in his prime, and he led his team to 3 rings on top of that. He peaked higher than Magic, who is consistently put in the top 5, while Bird is between 7-10 with only slightly worse career accomplishments.

They be hatin whiteys.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Larry Bird is teflon. Hes literally the only player whose career is not tarnished by having what many feel is the most talented team around him, all his transgressions are overlooked, people say he was unbeatable but yet he was beaten by lesser teams. Bad shooting finals? Not a problem. He's the most clutch. Even though hes lost multiple times when having homecourt.

He wasn't even able to guard his own man, yet his defense can't be questioned.
Teflon? You sure you want to go with that superlative?

I don't get why people bring up Bird's defense like they're talking about Magic. Larry made multiple all-defensive team, and was actually a very good help/man defender in his early years, always maintaining his elite status on the defensive boards.

[Psileas]

Teflon? You sure you want to go with that superlative?

I don't get why people bring up Bird's defense like they're talking about Magic. Larry made multiple all-defensive team, and was actually a very good help/man defender in his early years, always maintaining his elite status on the defensive boards.

Magic was also a very good help defender for many years and also a great defensive rebounder for a guard. If anything, lots of L.A's fast breaks would be initiated after a quick rebound by Magic.

[senelcoolidge]

Horry wasn't some dude camped out at the three point line back then either. He was an athletic freak putting his nuts in people's faces nightly. I like the 94 team better because Thorpe was such a beast and so underrated. Of course in '95 Horry and Cassell were that much better and I was happy that Glyde got his ring but damn they were both awesome teams and I think that they would have beaten the Bulls.

Hakeem is one of my favorite players ever. But if anyone watches the series against Shaq and said that Hakeem outplayed him then they are fooling themselves. It was a total wash and if anything Shaq outplayed Hakeem by the slimmest of margins.

I liked young Horry. Very athletic, good shot blocker, took it to the basket. I also liked the 94 team because of Thorpe. I was not happy when he was traded the following year. Cassell, Mad Max, Elie, Thorpe, just a tough cast of players. Chucky Brown..:D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5p-T8e94B0

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Magic was also a very good help defender for many years and also a great defensive rebounder for a guard. If anything, lots of L.A's fast breaks would be initiated after a quick rebound by Magic.
No doubt. I just think that bullshit narrative would stick w/ Magic, not Bird who actually made multiple all-defensive teams.

There are actually posters in here talking about Bird's defensive skills as if they're akin to Steve Nash's. :oldlol:

[97 bulls]

Teflon? You sure you want to go with that superlative?

I don't get why people bring up Bird's defense like they're talking about Magic. Larry made multiple all-defensive team, and was actually a very good help/man defender in his early years, always maintaining his elite status on the defensive boards.
I think it says a lot that his coach didnt feel comfortable allowing him to defend his position on certain nights.

And yes teflon. How many threads are made constantly degrading Jordan for having Pip, or Kobe for having Shaq, or that big front line, etc. Or Wilt for only winning two championships, or the Spurs for not winning back back, or Kobe and Jordans bad shooting in the Finals. Or Magics lack of defense. Or Lebron losing with homecourt. Bird meets all these criteria and yet it goes conviently unnoticed.

[eliteballer]

Hakeem's peak can be argued against ANYONE. Those 2 runs in 94 and 95 were just magical....completely dominating on both ends and destroying all time greats at his position.

[Milbuck]

Larry Bird is teflon. Hes literally the only player whose career is not tarnished by having what many feel is the most talented team around him, all his transgressions are overlooked, people say he was unbeatable but yet he was beaten by lesser teams. Bad shooting finals? Not a problem. He's the most clutch. Even though hes lost multiple times when having homecourt.

He wasn't even able to guard his own man, yet his defense can't be questioned.Not necessarily agreeing about his defense, but agreed on everything else. Bird is no doubt an unreal player but it seems every single potential flaw of his is defended to death and his strengths are highlighted beyond belief..a lot of it within reason, but also a lot to a degree that other ATGs just don't get in these discussions. And just how fortunate a situation he was in, at the perfect time, is glossed over..not just loaded teams, but teams that were at their most talented during his peak..whereas a guy like Duncan had the exact opposite..some of the weakest supporting casts of his career were at his peak. But say Duncan's 2003 championship run is more impressive than anything Bird did...and it's blasphemous, not even discussion worthy, etc.

[chocolatethunder]

Hakeem's peak can be argued against ANYONE. Those 2 runs in 94 and 95 were just magical....completely dominating on both ends and destroying all time greats at his position.
He in no way shape or form destroyed Shaq. I love Hakeem and don't like Shaq but he didn't destroy or dominate him at all.

[Euroleague]

This thread is stupid. I think Hakeem was absolutely amazing, and way better than guys like Shaq and Duncan.........

and with that being said, this isn't even a debate for me.

Bird all the way.

[Roundball_Rock]

In terms of absolute PEAK play (3 years or so)...

1. Wilt
2. KAJ
3. MJ
4. Shaq
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Magic
8. Moses
9. Dr. J (including his ABA years, which were his peak...and yes, pure speculation)

10. Hakeem
11. Duncan
12. McAdoo
13. Kobe
14. Oscar

EDIT... added Kobe.

Did you forget LeBron or do you not view him as having a peak high enough to make that list?

[La Frescobaldi]

Did you forget LeBron or do you not view him as having a peak high enough to make that list?

not sure he ever absolutely takes over.... just everything on the court for minutes at a time..... like most of these guys did.

[Euroleague]

In terms of absolute PEAK play (3 years or so)...

1. Wilt
2. KAJ
3. MJ
4. Shaq
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Magic
8. Moses
9. Dr. J (including his ABA years, which were his peak...and yes, pure speculation)

10. Hakeem
11. Duncan
12. McAdoo
13. Kobe
14. Oscar

EDIT... added Kobe.

:wtf:

[LAZERUSS]

Did you forget LeBron or do you not view him as having a peak high enough to make that list?

I have to quit doing these list off the top of my head.

I quit. Too many great players with peak runs.

[Audio One]

Larry Bird is teflon. Hes literally the only player whose career is not tarnished by having what many feel is the most talented team around him, all his transgressions are overlooked, people say he was unbeatable but yet he was beaten by lesser teams. Bad shooting finals? Not a problem. He's the most clutch. Even though hes lost multiple times when having homecourt.

He wasn't even able to guard his own man, yet his defense can't be questioned.

The problem is, is that the player he's being compared to itt has received similar revisionism, but overall I agree with your statement. The fact that he's considered better than Chamberlain or Bryant by many is :banghead:

[La Frescobaldi]

The problem is, is that the player he's being compared to itt has received similar revisionism, but overall I agree with your statement. The fact that he's considered better than Chamberlain or Bryant by many is :banghead:

It's a fact that the greatest players come and go.

I've seen many, many of them; I dunno about the earlier eras but the first I saw at that level was Chamberlain, then Jabbar, then Moses Malone, followed by Bird, Johnson, Jordan, O'Neal, & James.
Of that list, Moses Malone is the forgotten one, the guy nobody knows about. He has the fewest rings, he fell off rapidly, he played in a small market..... but he was the top at the turn of the '80s.

Other guys have won MVPs and received accolades, won rings.... but while they had great great seasons for their teams.... they weren't the best, see.

Bill Walton would likely have been there if his legs had been good. He was completely dominating basketball in the mid '70s, to unanimous acclaim.... but injuries stopped him cold. imo Jabbar's time at the top was extended because of Walton's troubles.
Tim Duncan was fighting Shaq and imo has a severe argument. Shaq is the only player on that list who only took home a single Most Valuable Player trophy.
Some would argue for Kobe Bryant, but I wouldn't be one of them. He had the ability to take over games, yes, but he never dominated the League like those guys did during their runs, wasn't able to inspire his teammates to reach higher the way those guys did. He drove away his teammates. And Duncan, O'Neal, and James were always there. Better than Olajuwon absolutely.

At the height of their careers, all these players were universally recognized by fans, players, coaches, MVPs and all the rest. All these players beat the best to stand at the top. I'm sure Russell was at that point but I don't remember him except at the end. He was a glory even then, like Duncan has been.

Each has about a 4 or 5 year run, and while the world is still saying they are the greatest..... they've already been replaced at the top by somebody else.

Bird was almost universally considered the greatest player in the world for 4 or 5 years. That isn't revisionism, that's how it was in the '80s.

Revisionism is that people today say Magic was always better than Bird. Virtually nobody with much background was saying it seriously at the time (I was an enormous Showtime fan). It wasn't until Bird's physical catastrophe that Magic replaced him at the top.

Revisionism is that Olajuwon was ever, ever at that level. He had a great run, a Dirk-like run, a Kobe-like run. But even when he was winning rings there was an enormous and vocal audience of fans, writers, coaches, other players... all saying Michael Jordan was the best player in the world. Jordan's retirement... that was unparalleled in sports as far as I know. So it's a fact that Olajuwon never beat the best.

Probably you could add Mikan and Russell to that list and you'd have the top of the NBA since the beginnings.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Duncan's 2003 championship run is more impressive than anything Bird did

:applause:

Bird hasn't had any argument over Duncan for a long, long long long time. 2003 was the greatest carry of all time. No doubt about it.

Jordan
Kareem
Duncan

---

The rest.

:pimp:

[MiseryCityTexas]

Hakeem won championships with Kenny friggin Smith as the starting point guard. That's an accomplishment in itself.

[That_Admiral]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2cbf3pO051rtz3xvo1_500.gif

[Audio One]

It's a fact that the greatest players come and go.

I've seen many, many of them; I dunno about the earlier eras but the first I saw at that level was Chamberlain, then Jabbar, then Moses Malone, followed by Bird, Johnson, Jordan, O'Neal, & James.
Of that list, Moses Malone is the forgotten one, the guy nobody knows about. He has the fewest rings, he fell off rapidly, he played in a small market..... but he was the top at the turn of the '80s.

Other guys have won MVPs and received accolades, won rings.... but while they had great great seasons for their teams.... they weren't the best, see.

Bill Walton would likely have been there if his legs had been good. He was completely dominating basketball in the mid '70s, to unanimous acclaim.... but injuries stopped him cold. imo Jabbar's time at the top was extended because of Walton's troubles.
Tim Duncan was fighting Shaq and imo has a severe argument. Shaq is the only player on that list who only took home a single Most Valuable Player trophy.
Some would argue for Kobe Bryant, but I wouldn't be one of them. He had the ability to take over games, yes, but he never dominated the League like those guys did during their runs, wasn't able to inspire his teammates to reach higher the way those guys did. He drove away his teammates. And Duncan, O'Neal, and James were always there. Better than Olajuwon absolutely.

At the height of their careers, all these players were universally recognized by fans, players, coaches, MVPs and all the rest. All these players beat the best to stand at the top. I'm sure Russell was at that point but I don't remember him except at the end. He was a glory even then, like Duncan has been.

Each has about a 4 or 5 year run, and while the world is still saying they are the greatest..... they've already been replaced at the top by somebody else.

Bird was almost universally considered the greatest player in the world for 4 or 5 years. That isn't revisionism, that's how it was in the '80s.

Revisionism is that people today say Magic was always better than Bird. Virtually nobody with much background was saying it seriously at the time (I was an enormous Showtime fan). It wasn't until Bird's physical catastrophe that Magic replaced him at the top.

Revisionism is that Olajuwon was ever, ever at that level. He had a great run, a Dirk-like run, a Kobe-like run. But even when he was winning rings there was an enormous and vocal audience of fans, writers, coaches, other players... all saying Michael Jordan was the best player in the world. Jordan's retirement... that was unparalleled in sports as far as I know. So it's a fact that Olajuwon never beat the best.

Probably you could add Mikan and Russell to that list and you'd have the top of the NBA since the beginnings.

I of course didn't mean to imply that Olajuwon had a dog in this fight, however I do believe that at times Bird's flaws are somewhat overlooked by some folk. Other than that, beautiful post :applause: :applause:

[MiseryCityTexas]

It's a fact that the greatest players come and go.

I've seen many, many of them; I dunno about the earlier eras but the first I saw at that level was Chamberlain, then Jabbar, then Moses Malone, followed by Bird, Johnson, Jordan, O'Neal, & James.
Of that list, Moses Malone is the forgotten one, the guy nobody knows about. He has the fewest rings, he fell off rapidly, he played in a small market..... but he was the top at the turn of the '80s.

Other guys have won MVPs and received accolades, won rings.... but while they had great great seasons for their teams.... they weren't the best, see.

Bill Walton would likely have been there if his legs had been good. He was completely dominating basketball in the mid '70s, to unanimous acclaim.... but injuries stopped him cold. imo Jabbar's time at the top was extended because of Walton's troubles.
Tim Duncan was fighting Shaq and imo has a severe argument. Shaq is the only player on that list who only took home a single Most Valuable Player trophy.
Some would argue for Kobe Bryant, but I wouldn't be one of them. He had the ability to take over games, yes, but he never dominated the League like those guys did during their runs, wasn't able to inspire his teammates to reach higher the way those guys did. He drove away his teammates. And Duncan, O'Neal, and James were always there. Better than Olajuwon absolutely.

At the height of their careers, all these players were universally recognized by fans, players, coaches, MVPs and all the rest. All these players beat the best to stand at the top. I'm sure Russell was at that point but I don't remember him except at the end. He was a glory even then, like Duncan has been.

Each has about a 4 or 5 year run, and while the world is still saying they are the greatest..... they've already been replaced at the top by somebody else.

Bird was almost universally considered the greatest player in the world for 4 or 5 years. That isn't revisionism, that's how it was in the '80s.

Revisionism is that people today say Magic was always better than Bird. Virtually nobody with much background was saying it seriously at the time (I was an enormous Showtime fan). It wasn't until Bird's physical catastrophe that Magic replaced him at the top.

Revisionism is that Olajuwon was ever, ever at that level. He had a great run, a Dirk-like run, a Kobe-like run. But even when he was winning rings there was an enormous and vocal audience of fans, writers, coaches, other players... all saying Michael Jordan was the best player in the world. Jordan's retirement... that was unparalleled in sports as far as I know. So it's a fact that Olajuwon never beat the best.

Probably you could add Mikan and Russell to that list and you'd have the top of the NBA since the beginnings.

Malone's legacy as a player would have been much bigger if Moses would have started his career out in the NBA instead of the ABA. If you weren't Doctor J, George Gervin, George Mcginnis, or Artis Gilmore, you wasn't shit in the ABA popularity wise. ABA legends like Roger Brown, Zelmo Beaty, Mel Daniels, and Bad News Barnes were largely forgotten about basketball legends especially after the merger.

[Asukal]

The amount of disrespect hakeem gets is astounding. :facepalm

Peak for peak: bird
Draft: hakeem

That's all there is to it really. :confusedshrug:

[K Xerxes]

It's a fact that the greatest players come and go.

I've seen many, many of them; I dunno about the earlier eras but the first I saw at that level was Chamberlain, then Jabbar, then Moses Malone, followed by Bird, Johnson, Jordan, O'Neal, & James.
Of that list, Moses Malone is the forgotten one, the guy nobody knows about. He has the fewest rings, he fell off rapidly, he played in a small market..... but he was the top at the turn of the '80s.

Other guys have won MVPs and received accolades, won rings.... but while they had great great seasons for their teams.... they weren't the best, see.

Bill Walton would likely have been there if his legs had been good. He was completely dominating basketball in the mid '70s, to unanimous acclaim.... but injuries stopped him cold. imo Jabbar's time at the top was extended because of Walton's troubles.
Tim Duncan was fighting Shaq and imo has a severe argument. Shaq is the only player on that list who only took home a single Most Valuable Player trophy.
Some would argue for Kobe Bryant, but I wouldn't be one of them. He had the ability to take over games, yes, but he never dominated the League like those guys did during their runs, wasn't able to inspire his teammates to reach higher the way those guys did. He drove away his teammates. And Duncan, O'Neal, and James were always there. Better than Olajuwon absolutely.

At the height of their careers, all these players were universally recognized by fans, players, coaches, MVPs and all the rest. All these players beat the best to stand at the top. I'm sure Russell was at that point but I don't remember him except at the end. He was a glory even then, like Duncan has been.

Each has about a 4 or 5 year run, and while the world is still saying they are the greatest..... they've already been replaced at the top by somebody else.

Bird was almost universally considered the greatest player in the world for 4 or 5 years. That isn't revisionism, that's how it was in the '80s.

Revisionism is that people today say Magic was always better than Bird. Virtually nobody with much background was saying it seriously at the time (I was an enormous Showtime fan). It wasn't until Bird's physical catastrophe that Magic replaced him at the top.

Revisionism is that Olajuwon was ever, ever at that level. He had a great run, a Dirk-like run, a Kobe-like run. But even when he was winning rings there was an enormous and vocal audience of fans, writers, coaches, other players... all saying Michael Jordan was the best player in the world. Jordan's retirement... that was unparalleled in sports as far as I know. So it's a fact that Olajuwon never beat the best.

Probably you could add Mikan and Russell to that list and you'd have the top of the NBA since the beginnings.

Olajuwon is sorry that he wasn't better than Jordan during their era, but he assures you he tried his best.

[ILLsmak]

Hakeem won championships with Kenny friggin Smith as the starting point guard. That's an accomplishment in itself.

wat kenny smith was super wet.

Dude was a killer as far as I'm concerned. He and Cassell hit daggers all of the time.

-Smak

[CJ Mustard]

Hakeem won championships with Kenny friggin Smith as the starting point guard. That's an accomplishment in itself.
Kenny was FAR from a scrub. He was always a pretty good starting guard. Not an all star, but a reliable/clutch player. Pretty much a Danny Ainge caliber player.

[La Frescobaldi]

Olajuwon is sorry that he wasn't better than Jordan during their era, but he assures you he tried his best.

I got absolute respect for that man.... when we are talking centers he is in that tiny circle at the very heights of basketball glory and to me that is an amazing achievement indeed!!!

[chocolatethunder]

Hakeem won championships with Kenny friggin Smith as the starting point guard. That's an accomplishment in itself.
Showing your age right there and proof that you weren't alive to see those teams play. If you had been alive you would never have made that statement. You probably think Horry was the same player he was on the Spurs and Lakers too. I'm sure you have no idea who Vernon Maxwell and Otis Thorpe are. The Knicks know who they are though don't they. That finals was easily the ugliest, worst played finals I've ever seen. The Knicks were terrible offensively and every game was a grind it out defensive battle. It was just awful. Ewing couldn't make a shot but he was blocking shots like nobody's business.

Btw Smith shot over 40% from 3 48% from the field and over 85% from the line and almost never turned the ball over. He was rock solid and clutch as shit. You don't know what you're talking about kid.

[KevinNYC]

how overrated are we going with olajuwon? will it ever ever stop

Why is this not a Larry Bird vs Moses Malone peak thread?

[KevinNYC]

I don't understand why on this board by a bunch of children who never saw the 95 rockets play, this team is thought of as a bad team? That team was really good. Both of the Houston teams that won championships were really good teams. Horry was a total beast back then. I saw these teams play and they were both really really good.
Both those Rockets teams were teams where all the pieces fit together well and were a sum much better than the parts.

[Odinn]

2 of the most disrespected all-time greats on the message board...

[KevinNYC]

So you don't think a suitable SF replacement for Bird like say Chris Mullin wouldve won multiple championships in the 80s?

Chris Mullin is literally my homeboy, but this is delusional.

[KevinNYC]

I think it says a lot that his coach didnt feel comfortable allowing him to defend his position on certain nights. Which allowed him to be a disruptive force. Here's Hubie Brown on Bird after Larry dropped 37 points on 16-22 shooting. What's he talk about? Bird's defense. (http://lexnihilnovi.blogspot.com/2010/01/bird-shows-bernard-whos-king.html)


(Hubie Brown) hardly mentioned Bird's deadly shooting, but said, "The entire Boston team played great defense, but the one man the purists noticed was Bird. He's the real key to their defense. Bird reminded us tonight of a middle line-backer the way he roamed around out there. His ability to clog the lane, double team and strip the ball were the keys to their defense."


The things that Bird was good at on defense were the things that Maxwell or McHale could not do. He was not a lockdown defender on the wing, but, particularly before the back injuries, he was a great defensive player. He just did it differently. His career defensive rating is higher than Pippen's.

[La Frescobaldi]

Why is this not a Larry Bird vs Moses Malone peak thread?

prolly cause nobody remembers Moses and I don't think there's a lot of footage either. Some highlights around, mostly Sixers stuff. He was so great man, and he was somethin' at Houston too. That man was tops.

Dude was FEROCIOUS GOOD!!

30-30s just bang! Smashing on all-time greats too when he did those. We're not talking about Kevin Love doing that to a chump defender like A'mare on the Knicks.

But you know people don't even remember Andrew Toney man.... that dude..... so great of a player but just totally forgot. Everybody just remembers Dr. J they don't even know how stacked that Sixers squad was and what the team really was all about.

They had to be somethin' else to get through both Bird Celtics and the Showtime Lakers.
And that's what they were too.

[97 bulls]

Chris Mullin is literally my homeboy, but this is delusional.
Did the read the whole conversation?????? Lazaruss stated hed take a Boston team with Bird and Parrish over a Boston team with Olajuwan and without Bird. That would make either Parrish or Olajuwan or Mchale redundant. So my point was to replace Parish with Olajuwan, and Bird with Mullin.

I picked Mullin because hes great, but not on Birds level just like Parish while being great, wasn't on Olajuwans level. Its crazy to think a squad with Ainge, Johnson, Mullin, Mchale, and Olajuwan wouldn't be able to win multiple championships in the 80s

[KevinNYC]

prolly cause nobody remembers Moses and I don't think there's a lot of footage either. Some highlights around, mostly Sixers stuff. He was so great man, and he was somethin' at Houston too. That man was tops.

Dude was FEROCIOUS GOOD!!

30-30s just bang! Smashing on all-time greats too when he did those. We're not talking about Kevin Love doing that to a chump defender like A'mare on the Knicks.

But you know people don't even remember Andrew Toney man.... that dude..... so great of a player but just totally forgot. Everybody just remembers Dr. J they don't even know how stacked that Sixers squad was and what the team really was all about.

They had to be somethin' else to get through both Bird Celtics and the Showtime Lakers.
And that's what they were too.

I think if you just look at highlights, you think Hakeem is better than Moses, he is definitely prettier, but Moses was just a beast. Early 80's Sixer-Celtic basketball was amazing.

[97 bulls]

Which allowed him to be a disruptive force. Here's Hubie Brown on Bird after Larry dropped 37 points on 16-22 shooting. What's he talk about? Bird's defense. (http://lexnihilnovi.blogspot.com/2010/01/bird-shows-bernard-whos-king.html)



The things that Bird was good at on defense were the things that Maxwell or McHale could not do. He was not a lockdown defender on the wing, but, particularly before the back injuries, he was a great defensive player. He just did it differently. His career defensive rating is higher than Pippen's.
His defensive rating is high because he guarded the weaker offensive forward. Damn why is this so hard to understand? Carlos Boozer also has a high defensive rating, for the same reason. Its funny how circumstances are totally thrown out the window when it comes to certain players/teams.

I could say Dennis Rodman is a better scorer than Bird based on their career FG%s. But everyone knows its not that simple.

[KevinNYC]

Did the read the whole conversation?????? Lazaruss stated hed take a Boston team with Bird and Parrish over a Boston team with Olajuwan and without Bird. That would make either Parrish or Olajuwan or Mchale redundant. So my point was to replace Parish with Olajuwan, and Bird with Mullin.

I picked Mullin because hes great, but not on Birds level just like Parish while being great, wasn't on Olajuwans level. Its crazy to think a squad with Ainge, Johnson, Mullin, Mchale, and Olajuwan wouldn't be able to win multiple championships in the 80s
I did, but all you said was


So you don't think a suitable SF replacement for Bird like say Chris Mullin would've won multiple championships in the 80s?

so it wasn't clear at all. But since you are talking about Mullin AND Olajuwon, I retract delusional.

[chocolatethunder]

Both those Rockets teams were teams where all the pieces fit together well and were a sum much better than the parts.
That's why it's called a team. You can gather a bunch of names together that sound good and look good on paper but can't deliver the goods. Or you can build a team by realizing which players complement the others and perform seemingly better than you should. I prefer the team.

[KevinNYC]

His defensive rating is high because he guarded the weaker offensive forward. Damn why is this so hard to understand? Carlos Boozer also has a high defensive rating, for the same reason. Its funny how circumstances are totally thrown out the window when it comes to certain players/teams.

I could say Dennis Rodman is a better scorer than Bird based on their career FG%s. But everyone knows its not that simple.
No, his defensive rating is high because that stat values STOPs, defensive rebounds, steals and blocks and Bird was very good at those over his career.

[KevinNYC]

That's why it's called a team. You can gather a bunch of names together that sound good and look good on paper but can't deliver the goods. Or you can build a team by realizing which players complement the others and perform seemingly better than you should. I prefer the team.

Also Thorpe, Horry, Smith, Maxwell, and my man Sam Cassell were all pretty fearless players.

[La Frescobaldi]

Also Thorpe, Horry, Smith, Maxwell, and my man Sam Cassell were all pretty fearless players.

People tend to just slosh past Horry but that guy was a player who knew when it really counted

[chocolatethunder]

Also Thorpe, Horry, Smith, Maxwell, and my man Sam Cassell were all pretty fearless players.
Yea as I've said several times in this god awful thread haha.