Robert Horry played with Hakeem, Shaq & Duncan...

[jayfan]

He played with each of them in their primes, and won championships with each of them.

Hou 92-96
LA 97-03
SA 03-08


No one on earth is better suited to judge the three.

And he claims, without hesitation or equivocation, that Hakeem is the greatest of the three.

In fact, he thinks Hakeem is the greatest of all time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_-9Z2LF4fI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlurRMPlfxQ

[LosBulls]

Robert Horry has to be one of the most top notch guys to ever play the game. Such a good guy and professional, never had beef with anybody.

Really, a good guy that comes to mind whenever the word sportsmanship is said.

[TheReal Kendall]

I like Horry and respect his opinion but at the same time it's just an OPINION.

I think all 3 players are great and they have different play styles.

Can't go wrong with either one as a franchise player.

[rmt]

In Duncan's defense, Horry didn't play with him in his MVP years as he did with Shaq and Hakeem. 2004 is when Pop started reducing TD's minutes from 39-40 to 36.

I loved Horry on the Spurs - such a high bbiq, so CLUTCH but lazy.

[jzek]

Ultimate coat tail rider.

[plowking]

Some players just use some flat out stupid shit to justify their reasons, and truly believe that is justification as to why a certain player is better than another.

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:



Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story. Watching the two play, you can see who impacts the game more. Could Hakeem do more shit? Sure. Doesn't make him better though, and I don't think he has any case.

EDIT: And another thing, Hakeem is a player who made his name off that David Robinson series, and at the same time Robinson's name and legacy is defined by that series. Pretty stupid seeing as prior to that, Robinson was viewed as good, if not better than Hakeem. Then that series happens, and 15-20 years later, people act as if Hakeem was always consensus best among centers, and always better than Robinson. If anything, up until that point, Robinson got the better of Hakeem, and not the other way around. So there isn't some big gap between Robinson and Hakeem as a player, let alone Hakeem being a level above Shaq.

[scm5]

My only issue is that Hakeem only shot 2% better FT's than Duncan.

In one of the clips, he said Hakeem shot 85% from FT, when in actuality, he shot 71.2% for his career compared to 69.6% for Timmy.

[K Xerxes]

Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story. Watching the two play, you can see who impacts the game more. Could Hakeem do more shit? Sure. Doesn't make him better though, and I don't think he has any case.

I agree that Shaq was better, but no case? Hakeem was a more valuable defender. Shaq was more dominant offensively. You can make a judgement on what the separation is there. But Horry played with both guys. Maybe Hakeem was a better leader, inspired his players more and was more valuable to them. Who knows.

[jayfan]

Some players just use some flat out stupid shit to justify their reasons, and truly believe that is justification as to why a certain player is better than another.

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:



Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story. Watching the two play, you can see who impacts the game more. Could Hakeem do more shit? Sure. Doesn't make him better though, and I don't think he has any case.

EDIT: And another thing, Hakeem is a player who made his name off that David Robinson series, and at the same time Robinson's name and legacy is defined by that series. Pretty stupid seeing as prior to that, Robinson was viewed as good, if not better than Hakeem. Then that series happens, and 15-20 years later, people act as if Hakeem was always consensus best among centers, and always better than Robinson. If anything, up until that point, Robinson got the better of Hakeem, and not the other way around. So there isn't some big gap between Robinson and Hakeem as a player, let alone Hakeem being a level above Shaq.


:biggums:

[plowking]

I agree that Shaq was better, but no case? Hakeem was a more valuable defender. Shaq was more dominant offensively. You can make a judgement on what the separation is there. But Horry played with both guys. Maybe Hakeem was a better leader, inspired his players more and was more valuable to them. Who knows.

Maybe Horry just liked Hakeem more as a person? I don't know, but he isn't better. I mean the dude was saying he shot 85% on free throws when it wasn't the case. Some of us have biases and glorify players.

I saw Shaq win a 3 peat, and Hakeem never reached that level.
For the most part, Hakeem was always around 24/12 throughout his prime.
Shaq gave you 28/12. There is a gap. In stats, when watching the game and seeing the amount of attention Shaq draws compared to Hakeem, and simply the level of dominance.

[plowking]

:biggums:

Don't act shocked.
Robinson was being placed on 1st team ALL NBA in his sophomore season, and there was no consensus best center really. Everyone had a different opinion. You also had Shaq and Ewing in the mix.

When you bring up David Robinson's name,vyou immediately think that Hakeem series, and it isn't fair. It doesn't outline or give a correct representation of how good he was or the gap between the two players. The only thing that it represents, which is correct, was that Robinson did shrink on the big stage at times.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Hakeem was always around 24/12 throughout his prime.
Shaq gave you 28/12. There is a gap. In stats, when watching the game and seeing the amount of attention Shaq draws compared to Hakeem, and simply the level of dominance.

:biggums:

Yeah, if you ONLY look at scoring and rebounding numbers. Why not include blocks, assists, etc in there? Oh, because it doesn't fit your agenda. Defense as well. How could Shaq ever draw as much attention as Hakeem when he played with prime Kobe, who is another top 10 player all time and has more rings than him? I just don't see any teams giving him single coverage and letting him go off so that they can shut down Kenny Smith in the corner.

[plowking]

:biggums:

Yeah, if you ONLY look at scoring and rebounding numbers. Why not include blocks, assists, etc in there? Oh, because it doesn't fit your agenda. Defense as well. How could Shaq ever draw as much attention as Hakeem when he played with prime Kobe, who is another top 10 player all time and has more rings than him? I just don't see any teams giving him single coverage and letting him go off so that they can shut down Kenny Smith in the corner.

I don't have an agenda. I don't care enough to make up some giant agenda against any of them. I watched them all play, and Duncan is the only one I like really.

Why didn't I mention assists? Why would I? Shaq averaged more if anything, and was probably the better passer out of the post. They both have the same apg average over their careers. Are you seriously out here accusing me of an agenda when you can't even back up your own claims? :biggums:
Anyway you look at it, Shaq had the better raw numbers.

Hakeem was the more versatile and better defender. No arguments there. I'd still say Shaq was more of a deterrent for players wanting to drive in the paint. No one wanted to get clobbered by Shaq on a layup.

Go watch the 95 finals and tell me how Shaq wasn't getting double teamed because of Kobe... oh right.

Shaq was a monster, and just a better player. At his best, probably the best of all time or at least close. Unstoppable. You needed 2 players to have any chance of stopping him in the post. Guy was out there dropping 30ppg on near 60% from the field. Hakeem is all time great, but Shaq is just another level above that only a few have reached, if that.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Horry is welcome to have an opinion. I still rank Hakeem behind Shaq and Duncan.

[JellyBean]

Some players just use some flat out stupid shit to justify their reasons, and truly believe that is justification as to why a certain player is better than another.

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:



Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story. Watching the two play, you can see who impacts the game more. Could Hakeem do more shit? Sure. Doesn't make him better though, and I don't think he has any case.

EDIT: And another thing, Hakeem is a player who made his name off that David Robinson series, and at the same time Robinson's name and legacy is defined by that series. Pretty stupid seeing as prior to that, Robinson was viewed as good, if not better than Hakeem. Then that series happens, and 15-20 years later, people act as if Hakeem was always consensus best among centers, and always better than Robinson. If anything, up until that point, Robinson got the better of Hakeem, and not the other way around. So there isn't some big gap between Robinson and Hakeem as a player, let alone Hakeem being a level above Shaq.

http://www.survivingcollege.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/will-smith-shaking-his-head-gif.gif

[SugarHill]

Shaq also said Hakeem is the best but based it entirely on not being able to get into his head.

[T_L_P]

Shaq also said Hakeem is the best but based it entirely on not being able to get into his head.

Shaq talks so much shit. :oldlol:

I'm pretty sure he said the exact same thing for both Hakeem (spoken) and Duncan (his book).

Something like 'I couldn't break him. I'd throw him a bow and he'd laugh and say ''nice shot'''. Then for Duncan it was 'I couldn't break him. He'd just look at me with his bored face and say ''watch me bank this off the glass'''

Come on, Diesel.

[SugarHill]

Shaq talks so much shit. :oldlol:

I'm pretty sure he said the exact same thing for both Hakeem (spoken) and Duncan (his book).

Something like 'I couldn't break him. I'd throw him a bow and he'd laugh and say ''nice shot'''. Then for Duncan it was 'I couldn't break him. He'd just look at me with his bored face and say ''watch me bank this off the glass'''

Come on, Diesel.
Shaq is still hilarious tho. Said he never had any idea what Hakeem would do in the post. He had way too many moves to guess what would happen and then compared him to Zo and Ewing. Said the "Georgetown guys fake left and go hard right with that dumb running jump hook" :oldlol:

[comerb]

I saw Shaq win a 3 peat, and Hakeem never reached that level.
For the most part, Hakeem was always around 24/12 throughout his prime.
Shaq gave you 28/12. There is a gap. In stats, when watching the game and seeing the amount of attention Shaq draws compared to Hakeem, and simply the level of dominance.

Hakeem was a DPotY who was a perennial on the all-defensive team, and had no weakness in his game offensively. He's still the measure by which centers are compared when mentioning posting up. He could do everything offensively, you couldn't even game-plan against him.

Shaq was a defensive liability and couldn't hit a shot outside of 10 feet to save his life (including free-throws). He was massively dominant, but Shaq could also hurt his team with his weaknesses. Hakeem easily makes up that 4 point scoring gap just on his defensive prowess alone.

Shaq's 3 peat was won in an era where the teams where nowhere near as competitive as what was going on in Hakeems era. We're talking about an era where first ballot HoFers like Barkley, Malone, and Stockon couldn't even win a ring.

[ClipperRevival]

Hakeem is one of my fav all time players so I really respect his skills and accomplishments. There was no one more fun to watch down low. His post moves were legendary and the game has never seen another like him before or since. Some were more dominant (Shaq, Wilt) and some were more methodical (Kareem, Duncan) in tne paint but no one could operate in the post like Hakeem with his vast array of moves. No one had his complete arsenal.

Shaq was more dominant at his peak and Duncan had the longevity but I take Hakeem. I just love his overall game. Might be the best rim protector ever. His overall impact on both ends, at his peak, might be the GOAT ever for a big.

[ClipperRevival]

And let me clarify, just because I would take Hakeem doesn't mean I rate him above Shaq or Duncan because being objective, they both have to be ranked higher.

[Round Mound]

I`ve seen Hakeem play in his prime and he was definetly much better than Duncan. I did not watch peak Shaq (cause i had no interest for the NBA post 1998 untill the 2008 season) but in Hakeems peak there was only 2 players that could rival him: MJ and Sir Charles.

[plowking]

I`ve seen Hakeem play in his prime and he was definetly much better than Duncan. I did not watch peak Shaq (cause i had no interest for the NBA post 1998 untill the 2008 season) but in Hakeems peak there was only 2 players that could rival him: MJ and Sir Charles.

You say he is better than Duncan, yet you didn't watch peak Shaq, so how could you have watched peak Duncan? :oldlol:

[Round Mound]

You say he is better than Duncan, yet you didn't watch peak Shaq, so how could you have watched peak Duncan? :oldlol:

Ive Seen alot of Videos of Prime Duncan on Youtube and He was Asoume Like A Stronger, Faster and More Athletic Version of Daugherty but Hakeem`was Better Both Offenisvely and Defensively. Stats Also Don`t Lie. To Be Honest With You Hakeem Was The 2nd Best Player in the World From 88-95. I Did See Shaq From 92 to 98 Though...

[ClipperRevival]

Don't act shocked.
Robinson was being placed on 1st team ALL NBA in his sophomore season, and there was no consensus best center really. Everyone had a different opinion. You also had Shaq and Ewing in the mix.

When you bring up David Robinson's name,vyou immediately think that Hakeem series, and it isn't fair. It doesn't outline or give a correct representation of how good he was or the gap between the two players. The only thing that it represents, which is correct, was that Robinson did shrink on the big stage at times.

And isn't that exactly WHY that series is so revered? Because Robinson was that good? I remember when Drob came onto the scene, he was dominant from the get go and most viewed him as the next dominant big. And Drob had the advantage on paper in 1995. Best record/team in the league and Drob was regular season mvp. Rockets were the 6th seed (iirc). The Spurs were supposed to win. But they didn't and the main reason they didn't was because of Hakeem.

[Living Being]

Some players just use some flat out stupid shit to justify their reasons, and truly believe that is justification as to why a certain player is better than another.

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:



Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story. Watching the two play, you can see who impacts the game more. Could Hakeem do more shit? Sure. Doesn't make him better though, and I don't think he has any case.

EDIT: And another thing, Hakeem is a player who made his name off that David Robinson series, and at the same time Robinson's name and legacy is defined by that series. Pretty stupid seeing as prior to that, Robinson was viewed as good, if not better than Hakeem. Then that series happens, and 15-20 years later, people act as if Hakeem was always consensus best among centers, and always better than Robinson. If anything, up until that point, Robinson got the better of Hakeem, and not the other way around. So there isn't some big gap between Robinson and Hakeem as a player, let alone Hakeem being a level above Shaq.
On NBA Live '95 and '96, I always had 4 custom teams that were basically all-star teams. One team was mine, and the other three were my opponents.
My team always had Olajuwon and DRob. My enemies were Shaq, Ewing, Mourning, and Mutombo.

http://www.gamefabrique.com/storage/screenshots/genesis/nba-live-95-05.png
http://blogs.gamefilia.com/files/imce/u579071/NBALIVE96-MD_a.png

[MavAlbert]

I don't have an agenda. I don't care enough to make up some giant agenda against any of them. I watched them all play, and Duncan is the only one I like really.

Why didn't I mention assists? Why would I? Shaq averaged more if anything, and was probably the better passer out of the post. They both have the same apg average over their careers. Are you seriously out here accusing me of an agenda when you can't even back up your own claims? :biggums:
Anyway you look at it, Shaq had the better raw numbers.

Hakeem was the more versatile and better defender. No arguments there. I'd still say Shaq was more of a deterrent for players wanting to drive in the paint. No one wanted to get clobbered by Shaq on a layup.

Go watch the 95 finals and tell me how Shaq wasn't getting double teamed because of Kobe... oh right.

Shaq was a monster, and just a better player. At his best, probably the best of all time or at least close. Unstoppable.

You needed 2 players to have any chance of stopping him in the post.

Guy was out there dropping 30ppg on near 60% from the field. Hakeem is all time great, but Shaq is just another level above that only a few have reached, if that.


guess you missed the 2004 finals

[KG215]

Some players just use some flat out stupid shit to justify their reasons, and truly believe that is justification as to why a certain player is better than another.

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:
Makes fun of college kids for giving stupid reasons why they thought a certain player was better than the rest, then says this...



Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story.
:wtf:

Great argument, there. So much better than those silly college kids.

"He just isn't." Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!

"He just isn't." Dammit that's gold.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

guess you missed the 2004 finals

You mean the finals where the Pistons let Shaq get his and proceeded to shut down the rest of the team? He shot .631 from the field that series, the only other player on the team to shoot over .400 was Rick Fox (2.7 PPG).

[plowking]

Makes fun of college kids for giving stupid reasons why they thought a certain player was better than the rest, then says this...



:wtf:

Great argument, there. So much better than those silly college kids.

"He just isn't." Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!

"He just isn't." Dammit that's gold.

What are you doing here? Shouldn't you be in the Cavs thread complaining about the officiating, or talking about how stacked they are? Oh wait, the games haven't started yet have they? Hold back a little longer there petal.

Great analysis of my post. Ignore all the other shit I posted. F@g.

[KG215]

What are you doing here? Shouldn't you be in the Cavs thread complaining about the officiating, or talking about how stacked they are? Oh wait, the games haven't started yet have they? Hold back a little longer there petal.

Great analysis of my post. Ignore all the other shit I posted. F@g.
I did. You actually made some solid arguments.

But starting off with "He just is" after making fun of college kids and why they argue a certain player is the best? :oldlol:

[plowking]

I did. You actually made some solid arguments.

But starting off with "He just is" after making fun of college kids and why they argue a certain player is the best? :oldlol:

Clearly that wasn't to summarize my whole post after a list of reasons why. :biggums:

[rmt]

You mean the finals where the Pistons let Shaq get his and proceeded to shut down the rest of the team? He shot .631 from the field that series, the only other player on the team to shoot over .400 was Rick Fox (2.7 PPG).

Sometimes, depending on strategy or personnel, it's just better to do this. It's similar to when Spurs played PHX - let Amare get his, turn Nash into a shooter and shut everybody else (3 pt shooters) down.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Sometimes, depending on strategy or personnel, it's just better to do this. It's similar to when Spurs played PHX - let Amare get his, turn Nash into a shooter and shut everybody else (3 pt shooters) down.

I'm not saying it wasn't the smart thing to do, was just replying to a poster who seemed to be implying that Shaq wasn't a player who had to be double teamed to be stopped, citing the 2004 finals as proof. Had to add some context. :oldlol:

[jayfan]

You mean the finals where the Pistons let Shaq get his and proceeded to shut down the rest of the team? He shot .631 from the field that series, the only other player on the team to shoot over .400 was Rick Fox (2.7 PPG).

He may have shot .631 for the series, but that was on only 2 effective games and 3 ineffective games.

game 1 - 13 for 16

game 2 - 10 for 20

game 3 - 7 for 14

game 4 - 16 for 21

game 5 - 7 for 13


.

[westsideozzie]

Some players just use some flat out stupid shit to justify their reasons, and truly believe that is justification as to why a certain player is better than another.

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:



Hakeem isn't a better player than Shaq. He just isn't. He isn't more valuable on the court, and that is the end of the story. Watching the two play, you can see who impacts the game more. Could Hakeem do more shit? Sure. Doesn't make him better though, and I don't think he has any case.

EDIT: And another thing, Hakeem is a player who made his name off that David Robinson series, and at the same time Robinson's name and legacy is defined by that series. Pretty stupid seeing as prior to that, Robinson was viewed as good, if not better than Hakeem. Then that series happens, and 15-20 years later, people act as if Hakeem was always consensus best among centers, and always better than Robinson. If anything, up until that point, Robinson got the better of Hakeem, and not the other way around. So there isn't some big gap between Robinson and Hakeem as a player, let alone Hakeem being a level above Shaq.

GOAT POST!

[24-Inch_Chrome]

He may have shot .631 for the series, but that was on only 2 effective games and 3 ineffective games.

game 1 - 13 for 16

game 2 - 10 for 20

game 3 - 7 for 14

game 4 - 16 for 21

game 5 - 7 for 13


.

Averaged 26.6/10.8. He got his, the rest of the team was shut down.

[guy]

EDIT: And another thing, Hakeem is a player who made his name off that David Robinson series, and at the same time Robinson's name and legacy is defined by that series. Pretty stupid seeing as prior to that, Robinson was viewed as good, if not better than Hakeem. Then that series happens, and 15-20 years later, people act as if Hakeem was always consensus best among centers, and always better than Robinson. If anything, up until that point, Robinson got the better of Hakeem, and not the other way around. So there isn't some big gap between Robinson and Hakeem as a player, let alone Hakeem being a level above Shaq.

There's a different perception on a ton of things from the NBA in the 90s versus what people actually thought and were saying 20 years ago i.e. no one remembers Shaq getting criticized for getting swept all the time, Reggie Miller really wasn't anywhere nearly as great as he is memorable (big difference), Jordan's supporting casts weren't nearly considered as great (even while they were winning championships, there were claims that he wasn't getting enough help similar to what they say about Lebron the last few years), etc.

While you're right that they were considered on the same level for a while, is it a problem that that wasn't the case after that series? First off, Hakeem didn't make his name out of that series. He made his name off winning back-to-back titles and beating not only Robinson, but also Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, and Malone during that time. And he greatly outplayed Robinson, who was basically in his prime, in the one series they ever got to play each other in. Is that not enough?

[plowking]

There's a different perception on a ton of things from the NBA in the 90s versus what people actually thought and were saying 20 years ago i.e. no one remembers Shaq getting criticized for getting swept all the time, Reggie Miller really wasn't anywhere nearly as great as he is memorable (big difference), Jordan's supporting casts weren't nearly considered as great (even while they were winning championships, there were claims that he wasn't getting enough help similar to what they say about Lebron the last few years), etc.

While you're right that they were considered on the same level for a while, is it a problem that that wasn't the case after that series? First off, Hakeem didn't make his name out of that series. He made his name off winning back-to-back titles and beating not only Robinson, but also Ewing, Shaq, Barkley, and Malone during that time. And he greatly outplayed Robinson, who was basically in his prime, in the one series they ever got to play each other in. Is that not enough?

I'm not saying it in a bad way. All it takes is a finals, or 2 in Hakeem's case to really state your claim. Yes, he is a better player than Robinson, but it wasn't by much, and looking back at history will tell you that.

Just like the perception that Hakeem dusted Shaq's ass, simply because "Shaq said so" and a bunch of other nonsense reasons. If you look at the raw stats, Shaq was better... If you look at all the "clutch" scoring and "4th quarter clutchness" stats from the 95 finals, you'll see that Shaq came up trumps against Hakeem once again. It was simply because Shaq said something, Hakeem winning, and his cast stepping up while Shaq's dwindled, that people act like Hakeem schooled Shaq.
Really wasn't the case. They both played well.

[Droid101]

Averaged 26.6/10.8. He got his, the rest of the team was shut down.
...because they were able to single-cover him and not leave his teammates open for kick outs.

Do you people even watch the game of basketball or what? :facepalm

[jayfan]

Averaged 26.6/10.8. He got his, the rest of the team was shut down.

Why are you talking averages when we're able to break down 5 games?

He "got his" for 2 games out of 5. Not very goat-like, particularly for getting single-teamed most of the series.


.

[plowking]

Why are you talking averages when we're able to break down 5 games?

He "got his" for 2 games out of 5. Not very goat-like, particularly for getting single-teamed most of the series.


.

It is hard to play well when your teammates don't play well.

27/11 on 63% and you're calling it a bad series? Goes to show how good the guy was.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Ive Seen alot of Videos of Prime Duncan on Youtube and He was Asoume Like A Stronger, Faster and More Athletic Version of Daugherty but Hakeem`was Better Both Offenisvely and Defensively. Stats Also Don`t Lie. To Be Honest With You Hakeem Was The 2nd Best Player in the World From 88-95. I Did See Shaq From 92 to 98 Though...

Stop. You said yourself you didn't watch NBA from '98 to '08 which perfectly lines up with Duncan's prime. You clearly hate Duncan, no need to keep going. We get it. And you said Barkley was the 2nd best player from '88 to '95 in the past, now Hakeem is. Make up your mind. What stats are you looking at? Hakeem won his chips in one of the weakest eras ever (Jordan-less mid '90's) with his comp being a bunch of other ringless wonders. Duncan won his chips against Shaq/Kobe, two other top 10 all timers. Had to go through them for his '03 chip with a similar level of talent that Hakeem had in '94 vs. a ringless Knicks squad that Duncan also obliterated in '99. For being so much better, he sure accomplished a lot less over a long career. Then again, that's what can be expected from someone who is the GOAT of first round exits.

:lol

[Legends66NBA7]

I remember a bunch of college players sitting around talking on video who was better a while back; in fact it may have been Bill Walker and a bunch of others from his draft class. I remember they were all talking about who the best player was, and typically Kobe and Bron got mentioned, and a few Wade mentions (in 08 or 09?) and then Bill brings up Carmelo... lol. Said something like he has the best looking jumpshot, and he is the best because of it. The majority of the rest of the kids agreed because of it, and you had a room full of current college players thinking Carmelo was the best. :oldlol:

I know which video your talking about.

IIRC, it wasn't just about the best player but they were also talking about who you would want take the game winner. Bill said something like Melo's jumper is money/wet or whatever... also went on to hype himself up and said how he wasn't scared of anyone in the league coming at him.

[ClipperRevival]

Averaged 26.6/10.8. He got his, the rest of the team was shut down.

And averaged less than 1 bpg and about 1 apg. This was no longer peak Shaq. He was clearly out of shape by this time and didn't seem to want it as badly as his peak years. Bottom line is Detroit killed the Lakers. It wasn't even close.

[Round Mound]

Stop. You said yourself you didn't watch NBA from '98 to '08 which perfectly lines up with Duncan's prime. You clearly hate Duncan, no need to keep going. We get it. And you said Barkley was the 2nd best player from '88 to '95 in the past, now Hakeem is. Make up your mind. What stats are you looking at? Hakeem won his chips in one of the weakest eras ever (Jordan-less mid '90's) with his comp being a bunch of other ringless wonders. Duncan won his chips against Shaq/Kobe, two other top 10 all timers. Had to go through them for his '03 chip with a similar level of talent that Hakeem had in '94 vs. a ringless Knicks squad that Duncan also obliterated in '99. For being so much better, he sure accomplished a lot less over a long career. Then again, that's what can be expected from someone who is the GOAT of first round exits.

:lol

Not True. I Consider Duncan The Best Player of The 00s after Shaq. Barkley Was The 2nd Best from 88-93 but Overall Hakeem Was Better in 94 and 95, So Hakeem Is The 2nd Best Player From 88 to 95. I Don`t Hate Duncan At All, He Is The Last Great Big Man in The NBA, He Just Wasn`t Better Than Prime Sir Charles, Thats All. Give Prime Hakeem: Parker and Ginobilli In The 00s And He Wins 5-6 Titles In A Row. Hakeem Was A Better Scorer Than Duncan, A Better Shot Blocker and Rim Protector, A Better Floor Defender (Highest SPG Avg For a Center), As Good Rebounder In His Prime and Overall A More Skilled Player Than Duncan Offensively (Post Moves Included, And Duncan Was a Fine Post Player). The Only Things I See Better In Duncan: Is Passing and Ballhandaling. That It! :confusedshrug: