Duncan's peak was higher than Hakeem/Shaq/Malone

[Anaximandro1]

Statistically speaking, Duncan's peak was higher

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s2bWEB4c4ZE/VqJwX6EYKRI/AAAAAAAAFIo/EgcNv5eWkHk/s1600/1.jpg


Key: Duncan takes his game to the next level after the first round
a selfish version of Duncan would have produced amazing regular season numbers, more MVPs ... and less rings (Parker and Ginobili would have been ostracized)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JOrPcNOykqY/VqJwX4HXX0I/AAAAAAAAFIs/ZJyRIB5AXNA/s1600/2.jpg


Big men -TOP individual Playoff Runs (Title Runs since 1974)
Duncan ranks #1 #4 and #7 in Box Plus Minus ...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JhKnZCSGaIU/VNziOFMNgqI/AAAAAAAADyA/AqaFGVg2aDs/s1600/16.jpg


Stats don't tell the whole story
Good luck convincing yourself that Duncan is lacking in terms of intangibles

[tmacattack33]

Maybe/No/Yes

[Dr Hawk]

No/No/Yes

[BuffaloBill]

Maybe/No/Yes

[jayfan]

:rolleyes:






.

[feyki]

For sure . But why you mentioned Karl ? He wasn't on those guys level .

[Harison]

No/No/Yes (if we count hardware)

[jayfan]

This whole thread is flawed, with a misleading title. The study is over a 5-year playoff run for each player. Not their peak years, necessarily. Hakeem, for instance, was not in his peak in 1991.





.

[LAZERUSS]

I don't even know why Karl Malone was mentioned. No one would have put him over Duncan, Hakeem, and most certainly above Shaq.

I would probably go with a tie with Hakeem, but in no way would I take Duncan over Shaq from '00 thru '02. And Malone...why bother?

[T_L_P]

This whole thread is flawed, with a misleading title. The study is over a 5-year playoff run for each player. Not their peak years, necessarily. Hakeem, for instance, was not in his peak in 1991.





.

I mean, he did include one with their best individual run. :confusedshrug:

[warriorfan]

No but close, No but close, Yes

[Young X]

'93 is Hakeem's peak. It's better than any of Duncan's seasons.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Duncan was clearly better if you take into account two-way play, defense, intangibles, alpha dog takeover mentality, raising stats in play offs/finals/further rounds, clutch play, will to win, leadership, ability to carry, etc. You don't just sweep all advanced stats categories by a comfortable margin if you were inferior to the others (Shaq & Hakeem). The numbers are there. Go watch the games. The eye test proves all of this as well.

:pimp:

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Better than either Malones
not better than Keem or Shaq

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Better than either Malones
not better than Keem or Shaq

Sup, Rob Shaw. How's it hangin', big boss?

:oldlol:

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Sup, Rob Shaw. How's it hangin', big boss?

:oldlol:
Rob Shaw? What?:biggums: :biggums:

[jayfan]

Duncan was clearly better if you take into account two-way play, defense, intangibles, alpha dog takeover mentality, raising stats in play offs/finals/further rounds, clutch play, will to win, leadership, ability to carry, etc. You don't just sweep all advanced stats categories by a comfortable margin if you were inferior to the others (Shaq & Hakeem). The numbers are there. Go watch the games. The eye test proves all of this as well.

:pimp:

I watched all the games at the times they were played. My conclusion is different.



.

[Dr Hawk]

Rob Shaw? What?:biggums: :biggums:

Dude calls everyone rob shaw

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

OP is exactly why Duncan gets overrated. Guy was never on peak Shaq or Hakeem's level seeing as those two were a grade above on offense.

Shaq having finals where he practically averaged 40 a game, Hakeem with the efficient skillset vs elite competition - it couldn't be more obvious to anyone that watched these players careers unfold. A debate can be had versus Malone though. With the playoff disasters he accumulated, you could argue Duncan was more consistent while averaging the SAME number of points a game on better efficiency.

[ClipperRevival]

Duncan was clearly better if you take into account two-way play, defense, intangibles, alpha dog takeover mentality, raising stats in play offs/finals/further rounds, clutch play, will to win, leadership, ability to carry, etc. You don't just sweep all advanced stats categories by a comfortable margin if you were inferior to the others (Shaq & Hakeem). The numbers are there. Go watch the games. The eye test proves all of this as well.

:pimp:

:oldlol:

[ClipperRevival]

OP is exactly why Duncan gets overrated. Guy was never on peak Shaq or Hakeem's level seeing as those two were a grade above on offense.

Shaq having finals where he practically averaged 40 a game, Hakeem with the efficient skillset vs elite competition - it couldn't be more obvious to anyone that watched these players careers unfold. A debate can be had versus Malone though. With the playoff disasters he accumulated, you could argue Duncan was more consistent while averaging the SAME number of points a game on better efficiency.

Yup. Duncan never had Hakeem/Shaq take over offensive ability. Those guys carried more of an offensive BURDEN. Alpha dog scoring for a C is huge. Sure, Duncan was a very good offensive player but he just never reached the offensive level of the other two.

[T_L_P]

OP is exactly why Duncan gets overrated. Guy was never on peak Shaq or Hakeem's level seeing as those two were a grade above on offense.

Shaq having finals where he practically averaged 40 a game, Hakeem with the efficient skillset vs elite competition - it couldn't be more obvious to anyone that watched these players careers unfold. A debate can be had versus Malone though. With the playoff disasters he accumulated, you could argue Duncan was more consistent while averaging the SAME number of points a game on better efficiency.

But then you do the exact same and underrated Duncan in the K. Malone argument.

If there's no question that peak Shaq/Hakeem is > peak Duncan, there should also be no question that peak Duncan is > peak Malone, for the exact reasons you specified.

It's not 'A debate can be had'.

[ClipperRevival]

Few players have EVER raised their level of play as profoundly as Hakeem did as the stakes got higher:

RS: 21.8
PO: 25.9
Finals: 27.5


And Duncan never reached offensive heights like Hakeem's 2 title seasons in the playoffs:

30.9 PPG (45 playoff games)

[ClipperRevival]

Shaq's finals PPG is 28.8, 4th all time while Duncan is at 20.8. A whole 8 points better. Duncan very well could've been just as impactful from an overall perspective but he just never reached Hakeem/Shaq peak scoring abilities. He just never had THAT type of offensive game. His game was more within the flow of the offense while Hakeem/Shaq was THE offense for their teams at their peaks.

KG/Duncan and Hakeem/Shaq were different. KG/Duncan being more all around type guys while the latter were DOMINANT, offensive scorers.

[T_L_P]

Few players have EVER raised their level of play as profoundly as Hakeem did as the stakes got higher:

RS: 21.8
PO: 25.9
Finals: 27.5


And Duncan never reached offensive heights like Hakeem's 2 title seasons in the playoffs:

30.9 PPG (45 playoff games)

You can't compare stats across years and team styles like that. If you're going to make that comparison, it should be with Per 100 #s which take into account Pace. And if you do that, 94/95 Hakeem and 02/03 Duncan match up very well:

Hakeem: 38/13/5.5/2/4, .563 TS%

Duncan: 32/19/6.5/4.5, .569 TS%

Duncan has Hakeem beat him in PER and WS/48 too which are Box-Score derived stats.

Again, I'd take Hakeem here, but if we're talking about the best Playoff peaks ever Duncan absolutely belongs on the short-list. He won a title with one of the most offensively inept supporting casts ever. His best offensive options were a 19-year-old Tony Parker (15-3-3 on a horrific .468 TS%), Manu Ginobili (9/3/3 on .522 TS%, much better play than those stats indicate but he was rookie who didn't play a lot) and Stephen Jackson (12/4/3 on .529 TS%). The Spurs were outscoring opponents by 9 pts per 100 with Duncan on the floor in the postseason and getting outscored by 15 pts with him off it. It's one of the greatest title runs ever. :confusedshrug:

[T_L_P]

Shaq's finals PPG is 28.8, 4th all time while Duncan is at 20.8. A whole 8 points better. Duncan very well could've been just as impactful from an overall perspective but he just never reached Hakeem/Shaq peak scoring abilities. He just never had THAT type of offensive game. His game was more within the flow of the offense while Hakeem/Shaq was THE offense for their teams at their peaks.

KG/Duncan and Hakeem/Shaq were different. KG/Duncan being more all around type guys while the latter were DOMINANT, offensive scorers.

At their peaks? Duncan had to be his team's primary scorer, playmaker, defensive anchor and leader. Neither Shaq nor Hakeem had that burden. And in 03 specifically Pop called 4-Down like 90% of the time.

I have a hard time believing you've seen anything from 03 Duncan if you don't think he was the Spurs offense. It was literally 'give it to Duncan and let him score 1-on-1 or kick it out of the double team'.

Again, not saying he was better on offense.. Not saying he had a higher peak. But 03 Duncan and 'within the flow of the offense' are two sentences that don't belong. If anything in 03 Duncan was more of a one-man offense than Shaq or Hakeem ever were (Hakeem's 1st round sweep years aside).

[ClipperRevival]

You can't compare stats across years and team styles like that. If you're going to make that comparison, it should be with Per 100 #s which take into account Pace. And if you do that, 94/95 Hakeem and 02/03 Duncan match up very well:

Hakeem: 38/13/5.5/2/4, .563 TS%

Duncan: 32/19/6.5/4.5, .569 TS%

Duncan has Hakeem beat him in PER and WS/48 too which are Box-Score derived stats.

Again, I'd take Hakeem here, but if we're talking about the best Playoff peaks ever Duncan absolutely belongs on the short-list. He won a title with one of the most offensively inept supporting casts ever. His best offensive options were a 19-year-old Tony Parker (15-3-3 on a horrific .468 TS%), Manu Ginobili (9/3/3 on .522 TS%, much better play than those stats indicate but he was rookie who didn't play a lot) and Stephen Jackson (12/4/3 on .529 TS%). The Spurs were outscoring opponents by 9 pts per 100 with Duncan on the floor in the postseason and getting outscored by 15 pts with him off it. It's one of the greatest title runs ever. :confusedshrug:

Duncan is actually at 30.9 while Hakeem is at 38.2 per 100 possessions. That's a HUGE difference of 7+ ppg. I know Duncan belongs on the short list of GOAT level peaks for playoff runs but my only point is the Hakeem had the type of dominant offensive game Duncan never had. And that is simply indisputable.

[ClipperRevival]

At their peaks? Duncan had to be his team's primary scorer, playmaker, defensive anchor and leader. Neither Shaq nor Hakeem had that burden. And in 03 specifically Pop called 4-Down like 90% of the time.

I have a hard time believing you've seen anything from 03 Duncan if you don't think he was the Spurs offense. It was literally 'give it to Duncan and let him score 1-on-1 or kick it out of the double team'.

Again, not saying he was better on offense.. Not saying he had a higher peak. But 03 Duncan and 'within the flow of the offense' are two sentences that don't belong. If anything in 03 Duncan was more of a one-man offense than Shaq or Hakeem ever were (Hakeem's 1st round sweep years aside).

Yeah, Duncan was huge in 2003. I was referring to his career in general. He was more in the KG mold. All around type impact guys while Shaq/Hakeem were alpha dog scorers most of their careers.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But then you do the exact same and underrated Duncan in the K. Malone argument.

If there's no question that peak Shaq/Hakeem is > peak Duncan, there should also be no question that peak Duncan is > peak Malone, for the exact reasons you specified.

It's not 'A debate can be had'.

I wouldn't argue with anybody having Duncan > Malone. Hell, to me Duncan's peak was more impressive and overall greater than his.

What I'm saying is there's more wiggle room with Malone than Shaq and Hakeem, far as peaks are concerned.

[Anaximandro1]

Hakeem vs Duncan would have been truly epic ...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MyZJmkW2SXw/Vq5tYQhm3dI/AAAAAAAAFLM/1JYR9LR27MU/s1600/4.jpg

Hakeem lateral quickness was incredible for a big man. He had an amazing ability to make tough shots and he was a terrific individual defender.

Duncan was a machine

[Cold soul]

No/No/Yes

[La Frescobaldi]

I don't even know why Karl Malone was mentioned. No one would have put him over Duncan, Hakeem, and most certainly above Shaq.

I would probably go with a tie with Hakeem, but in no way would I take Duncan over Shaq from '00 thru '02. And Malone...why bother?

so.... Yes/No/yes.... right? Tie goes to the runner, as per usual.

That's pretty much my view also. Olajuwan had a little window of beating not much for teams. Great players in front of him personally but... those teams were... lesser levels.
But let's think about Kobe Bryant vs. what Duncan had during those OP years. Stephen Jackson, ancient Steve Kerr, rookies Manu & TP.

When did Duncan ever have a player on his team like Kobe8? Certainly not any Admiral that he ever saw on a court.

One could even argue the Derek Fisher of those days was at least approaching Duncan's guards. Fisher was almighty great clutch and played some staunch defense before he turned into a full-bore floppist

Stilll..... that Shaq peak though....

[K Xerxes]

I don't wish to demean Duncan's ability, but having watched both of them, I view Hakeem as just a slightly better version of Duncan in basically all facets of the game. Just slightly more dominant defender and scorer, which is why there's no question in my mind that Hakeem was a more impactful player in a vacuum. Of course it becomes more difficult when you compare accomplishments as Duncan has had a better situation throughout his whole career, and it's debatable how much of that was down to his leadership and intangibles, which obviously count...

No question with Shaq. Peak Shaq was too dominant offensively and outweighs any defensive advantage Duncan had.

Duncan has a great career, amassed awesome accomplishments and is therefore probably a 'greater' player. But peak for peak... come on, I don't even see it as much of a debate. He was good, but not Hakeem good, and certainly not Shaq good.

[LAZERUSS]

I don't wish to demean Duncan's ability, but having watched both of them, I view Hakeem as just a slightly better version of Duncan in basically all facets of the game. Just slightly more dominant defender and scorer, which is why there's no question in my mind that Hakeem was a more impactful player in a vacuum. Of course it becomes more difficult when you compare accomplishments as Duncan has had a better situation throughout his whole career, and it's debatable how much of that was down to his leadership and intangibles, which obviously count...

No question with Shaq. Peak Shaq was too dominant offensively and outweighs any defensive advantage Duncan had.

Duncan has a great career, amassed awesome accomplishments and is therefore probably a 'greater' player. But peak for peak... come on, I don't even see it as much of a debate. He was good, but not Hakeem good, and certainly not Shaq good.

I agree with much of this.

But Duncan, like Russell and Magic, are the three greatest "winners" in NBA history. They always seemed to get the most of their teammates, and in fact, I have maintained that with them, the whole was almost always greater than the sum.

In any case, Hakeem was an all-time great, and has a case as a Top-10 player. Not bad, and certainly greater than Karl.

[dhsilv]

For sure . But why you mentioned Karl ? He wasn't on those guys level .

Weird, I just assumed he was talking Moses.

[La Frescobaldi]

I agree with much of this.

But Duncan, like Russell and Magic, are the three greatest "winners" in NBA history. They always seemed to get the most of their teammates, and in fact, I have maintained that with them, the whole was almost always greater than the sum.

In any case, Hakeem was an all-time great, and has a case as a Top-10 player. Not bad, and certainly greater than Karl.
It's too bad op didn't use the real Malone in his title.
In that case I'd line them up like this:
Moses
Shaq
Duncan
Olajuwon
Edit jacked up cut and paste lol

Too much lousy attitude from Hakeem for years. He was chumply a lot.

[dhsilv]

'93 is Hakeem's peak. It's better than any of Duncan's seasons.

Duncan's 02 season by most measure was noticeably better. Other than a .3 edge in PER any other metric favors duncan.

[dhsilv]

OP is exactly why Duncan gets overrated. Guy was never on peak Shaq or Hakeem's level seeing as those two were a grade above on offense.

Shaq having finals where he practically averaged 40 a game, Hakeem with the efficient skillset vs elite competition - it couldn't be more obvious to anyone that watched these players careers unfold. A debate can be had versus Malone though. With the playoff disasters he accumulated, you could argue Duncan was more consistent while averaging the SAME number of points a game on better efficiency.

For the millionth time, Hakeem is NOT a better offensive player than Duncan. Stop watching youtube videos!

[LAZERUSS]

It's too bad op didn't use the real Malone in his title.
In that case I'd line them up like this:
Shaq
Moses
Duncan
Olajuwon

As would I.

:cheers:

And a prime Moses dominated ALL of his peers, too. There was simply no one that gave him a battle. He was head-and-shoulders above his peers.

[dubeta]

Funny how LeBron has a higher peak than all 4 of them :lol

Yet ppl here dont even want to acknowledge he's top 5 all-time :facepalm

[K Xerxes]

It's too bad op didn't use the real Malone in his title.
In that case I'd line them up like this:
Moses
Shaq
Duncan
Olajuwon
Edit jacked up cut and paste lol

Too much lousy attitude from Hakeem for years. He was chumply a lot.

I don't know what chumply means... but I agree he didn't have the greatest attitude in his earlier years. He matured by the time he hit his late 20s and 30s, which is what's relevant for a discussion on peaks.


As would I.

:cheers:

And a prime Moses dominated ALL of his peers, too. There was simply no one that gave him a battle. He was head-and-shoulders above his peers.

I can't really comment on Moses as I know less about his peak years than I probably should. I know he was dominant offensively and particularly on the boards, but what about his defense?

[DMAVS41]

For the millionth time, Hakeem is NOT a better offensive player than Duncan. Stop watching youtube videos!

And stop looking at flawed and team dependent stats to overrate Duncan offensively and underrate Hakeem offensively.

Yes, Hakeem was a better offensive player than Duncan...

Duncan was not special offensively...Hakeem was.

[dhsilv]

Duncan is actually at 30.9 while Hakeem is at 38.2 per 100 possessions. That's a HUGE difference of 7+ ppg. I know Duncan belongs on the short list of GOAT level peaks for playoff runs but my only point is the Hakeem had the type of dominant offensive game Duncan never had. And that is simply indisputable.

Hakeem was a better scorer, but he was simply not a better offensive player. The spurs offense flowed through Duncan during the 03 run, that was an entire offense built around him. Duncan is on another planet as far as passing ability and ball movement are concerned from hakeem. There is a reason Hakeem's OBPM numbers are not strong. He just wasn't nearly the offensive player you're claiming he was.

[dhsilv]

And stop looking at flawed and team dependent stats to overrate Duncan offensively and underrate Hakeem offensively.

Yes, Hakeem was a better offensive player than Duncan...

Duncan was not special offensively...Hakeem was.

Both were special by nba history standards. Neither are all time great offensive players. Hakeem was a defensive beast, but he was just NOT a great offensive player by top 50 all time standards.

[K Xerxes]

Hakeem was a better scorer, but he was simply not a better offensive player. The spurs offense flowed through Duncan during the 03 run, that was an entire offense built around him. Duncan is on another planet as far as passing ability and ball movement are concerned from hakeem. There is a reason Hakeem's OBPM numbers are not strong. He just wasn't nearly the offensive player you're claiming he was.

Because, as we all know, the entire Rockets offense wasn't built around Hakeem, it was built around Kenny Smith.

[Round Mound]

Duncan had a has better longevity than Hakeem and Shaq but not Malone.

Peak Wise:

1-Shaq
2-Hakeem
3-Duncan
4-Malone

[dhsilv]

Duncan had a has better longevity than Hakeem and Shaq but not Malone.

Peak Wise:

1-Shaq
2-Hakeem
3-Duncan
4-Malone

As always you really need to get someone to look into that bolding virus, but I don't get this stuff.

The OP put together the stats. Duncan is generally seen as one of the best glue guys, leaders, teammates, etc ever. his stats are unquestionably better. Now the argument for Shaq I think is that we don't have gravity data and his gravity was other worldly. But hakeem? Nobody has been able to address why a guy who everyone claims was so much better as a scorer doesn't have any stats that back that statement up during his peak. Duncan had unquestionably better stats. He was a better leader. Why his hakeem better?

[dhsilv]

So I don't think stats do a good job explaining why Hakeem wasn't a great offensive player. Simply put he's over rated by stats. However since I think people's memory is jaded by all his spin moves and just crazy great moments and not by who he was on average through his prime and even his career, I put a simple list together. The seasons by OBPM which is our best offensive stats for players prior to the real plus minus data.

In short the correlation between the real plus minus data and the bpm stats is close enough that unless a player has skills that don't register in teh box score, it works. Hakeem was NEVER a guy who lacked box score data so if anything again we'll be over valuing him here.

Also I didn't use playoff data where Duncan's stats tended to be better.

The stats are pretty clear here, neither guy was a great all time offensive player. Hakeem even at his best was far from being duncan level.

Oh and this is all players with 500+ minutes played in a season. I've got the top 20 and then hakeem and duncan.

http://i.imgur.com/FEsDBl0.jpg

[La Frescobaldi]

So I don't think stats do a good job explaining why Hakeem wasn't a great offensive player. Simply put he's over rated by stats. However since I think people's memory is jaded by all his spin moves and just crazy great moments and not by who he was on average through his prime and even his career, I put a simple list together. The seasons by OBPM which is our best offensive stats for players prior to the real plus minus data.

In short the correlation between the real plus minus data and the bpm stats is close enough that unless a player has skills that don't register in teh box score, it works. Hakeem was NEVER a guy who lacked box score data so if anything again we'll be over valuing him here.

Also I didn't use playoff data where Duncan's stats tended to be better.

The stats are pretty clear here, neither guy was a great all time offensive player. Hakeem even at his best was far from being duncan level.

Oh and this is all players with 500+ minutes played in a season. I've got the top 20 and then hakeem and duncan.

http://i.imgur.com/FEsDBl0.jpg

olajuwon has always been pretty drastically overrated by Ish as far as i have ever seen. It's kinda funny how bad it is.

For many years the general idea was he failed to live up to his potential. He had a couple of really good seasons in the '80s but for the most part he did very little. Like a top 10 player in the league at most (I never rated him that highly in the 80s.... at all).

Then seemingly out of nowhere (actually out of a Jordan-less, Magic-less, Isiah-less, Bird-less NBA) he won 2 rings in one of the weakest times I've ever seen in 40+ years of watching NBA hoops... and he gets turned into some kind of hype generator by a bunch of guys who never even saw the League before the mid-90s.

[AirBonner]

olajuwon has always been pretty drastically overrated by Ish as far as i have ever seen. It's kinda funny how bad it is.

For many years the general idea was he failed to live up to his potential. He had a couple of really good seasons in the '80s but for the most part he did very little. Like a top 10 player in the league at most (I never rated him that highly in the 80s.... at all).

Then seemingly out of nowhere (actually out of a Jordan-less, Magic-less, Isiah-less, Bird-less NBA) he won 2 rings in one of the weakest times I've ever seen in 40+ years of watching NBA hoops... and he gets turned into some kind of hype generator by a bunch of guys who never even saw the League before the mid-90s.
Right on man. Couldn't have said it any better. :cheers:

[dhsilv]

olajuwon has always been pretty drastically overrated by Ish as far as i have ever seen. It's kinda funny how bad it is.

For many years the general idea was he failed to live up to his potential. He had a couple of really good seasons in the '80s but for the most part he did very little. Like a top 10 player in the league at most (I never rated him that highly in the 80s.... at all).

Then seemingly out of nowhere (actually out of a Jordan-less, Magic-less, Isiah-less, Bird-less NBA) he won 2 rings in one of the weakest times I've ever seen in 40+ years of watching NBA hoops... and he gets turned into some kind of hype generator by a bunch of guys who never even saw the League before the mid-90s.

We need more people like you here! And I want to point out again, I'm not saying Duncan was great offensively. He's a hair better than those OBMP rankings maybe but not all time! Hakeem is just insanely overrated!

[Round Mound]

olajuwon has always been pretty drastically overrated by Ish as far as i have ever seen. It's kinda funny how bad it is.

For many years the general idea was he failed to live up to his potential. He had a couple of really good seasons in the '80s but for the most part he did very little. Like a top 10 player in the league at most (I never rated him that highly in the 80s.... at all).

Then seemingly out of nowhere (actually out of a Jordan-less, Magic-less, Isiah-less, Bird-less NBA) he won 2 rings in one of the weakest times I've ever seen in 40+ years of watching NBA hoops... and he gets turned into some kind of hype generator by a bunch of guys who never even saw the League before the mid-90s.

Hakeem went to the finals his 2nd year with only one other all star (Sampson) in the most difficult era, the 80s. His 1993-95 runs where one of the best ever without an All star. Hakeem was the 2nd best player in the world after MJ in the late 80s and early-mid 90s. You are underrating him

[dhsilv]

Hakeem went to the finals his 2nd year with only one other all star (Sampson) in the most difficult era, the 80s. His 1993-95 runs where one of the best ever without an All star. Hakeem was the 2nd best player in the world after MJ in the late 80s and early-mid 90s. You are underrating him

Drexler wasn't an allstar?

[Round Mound]

Drexler wasn't an allstar?

Sorry he was but he played in 94-95 for the Rockets not 93-94 season: that year, Hakeem won the ring without any all star teamate. You are definetly underrating Hakeem in the 80s too. Hakeem was definetly the 2nd best player in the world late 80's-early mid 90s.

[La Frescobaldi]

Hakeem went to the finals his 2nd year with only one other all star (Sampson) in the most difficult era, the 80s. His 1993-95 runs where one of the best ever without an All star. Hakeem was the 2nd best player in the world after MJ in the late 80s and early-mid 90s. You are underrating him

lots of injuries that year bro. lots. several teams were stopped that way.

and no. olajuwon was never better than Magic Johnson. never.

[LAZERUSS]

Sorry he was but he played in 94-95 for the Rockets not 93-94 season: that year, Hakeem won the ring without any all star teamate. You are definetly underrating Hakeem in the 80s too. Hakeem was definetly the 2nd best player in the world late 80's-early mid 90s.

Hakeem's '94 title run has been way over-rated. Take one look at Ewing's roster in that Finals. Ewing had no more surrounding talent, that also didn't perform any better, than Hakeem's supporting cast. The reason the Rockets barely won that seven game series, was that Hakeem outplayed Ewing. Good for him. He was a better player.

And while he was brilliant up to the '95 Finals, it was his TEAMMATES that wiped out Shaq's teammates in that Finals. At BEST, a prime Hakeem battled a 22 year old Shaq to a draw in that series. And that is being very kind to Hakeem.

[LAZERUSS]

lots of injuries that year bro. lots. several teams were stopped that way.

and no. olajuwon was never better than Magic Johnson. never.

Magic went 2-0 in the post-season (6-1 overall) against Hakeem AFTER Kareem retired. And was EASILY the best player on the floor in both of those series. And crushed him in the clinching games.

Hakeem was never even remotely on the level of Magic. In Magic's WORST full-time season, he led his team to a 57-22 record (and in his last season, and without KAJ), which was slightly better than Hakeem's BEST season of 57-23 (.722 to .713.)

[La Frescobaldi]

Magic went 2-0 in the post-season (6-1 overall) against Hakeem AFTER Kareem retired. And was EASILY the best player on the floor in both of those series. And crushed him in the clinching games.

Hakeem was never even remotely on the level of Magic.


not even remotely.

[dhsilv]

[QUOTE=Round Mound]Sorry he was but he played in 94-95 for the Rockets not 93-94 season: that year, Hakeem won the ring without any all star teamate. You are definetly underrating Hakeem in the 80s too. Hakeem was definetly the 2nd best player in the world late 80's-early mid 90s./QUOTE]

Yes the first title was without an allstar. Hakeem in the 80's was a god damn basketball void where no ball ever leaves the hands of him. He was offensively a mess. Defensively he was so great, that I think he's a top 15 all time guy. I think a part of it was his english and speaking skills looking back. He also had a HUGE ego that as a massive problem.

The thing is I think he's a top 15 guy, but he's more like 12th all time than top 10. I'm not really attacking the guy. I just dont' think his offense is top 25. I think he's a top tier if not the best defender ever. Thus why he ranks high on my list.

[dhsilv]

I should add, was hakeem in the 80's better than Barkley? Or Malone?

Again more hakeem overrating happening right here.

[Overdrive]

olajuwon has always been pretty drastically overrated by Ish as far as i have ever seen. It's kinda funny how bad it is.

For many years the general idea was he failed to live up to his potential. He had a couple of really good seasons in the '80s but for the most part he did very little. Like a top 10 player in the league at most (I never rated him that highly in the 80s.... at all).

Then seemingly out of nowhere (actually out of a Jordan-less, Magic-less, Isiah-less, Bird-less NBA) he won 2 rings in one of the weakest times I've ever seen in 40+ years of watching NBA hoops... and he gets turned into some kind of hype generator by a bunch of guys who never even saw the League before the mid-90s.

Hakeem's one of my favourite players AT and I started watching in '95, but I surely know Duncan was and is better. Duncan changed a franchise the moment he stepped on the hardwood for the first time. No rookie - imo not even Lebron who had more unsubstantial hype, but wasn't as sought after by teams - was as coveted as Duncan. I think the Lakers were the only team who wouldn't have taken him, but I'm sure had Kobe been two years older they would've even traded him.

The Spurs didn't even plan with a high pick prior to Robinson's season ending injury and they would care for fit later. The Admiral took the back seat on his ship in the very first game Duncan played although he was still capable of being the leader for 25 other teams. That's how huge Duncan was the second he entered the NBA.


Hakeem's '94 title run has been way over-rated. Take one look at Ewing's roster in that Finals. Ewing had no more surrounding talent, that also didn't perform any better, than Hakeem's supporting cast. The reason the Rockets barely won that seven game series, was that Hakeem outplayed Ewing. Good for him. He was a better player.

I agree. The Knicks were the recent Grizzlies with a bigger star player but worth 2nd fiddle and no third fiddle at all. Scrappy, but they had no scoring when Starks went cold.


And while he was brilliant up to the '95 Finals, it was his TEAMMATES that wiped out Shaq's teammates in that Finals. At BEST, a prime Hakeem battled a 22 year old Shaq to a draw in that series. And that is being very kind to Hakeem.

That got debunked on your old account years ago.

[La Frescobaldi]

I should add, was hakeem in the 80's better than Barkley? Or Malone?

Again more hakeem overrating happening right here.

not better than Barkley. If you meant Moses it's really not very close until well into Moses' decline. Moses Malone won 3 well-deserved MVPs man. His turn-of-the-80s-decade domination is well and truly forgot around here

[dhsilv]

not better than Barkley. If you meant Moses it's really not very close until well into Moses' decline. Moses Malone won 3 well-deserved MVPs man. His turn-of-the-80s-decade domination is well and truly forgot around here

it makes me sad that someone has to ask if I was talking moses when I say best player in the 80's and say malone. There was one malone in the 80's, the other guy doesn't even matter next to him.

[La Frescobaldi]

it makes me sad that someone has to ask if I was talking moses when I say best player in the 80's and say malone. There was one malone in the 80's, the other guy doesn't even matter next to him.

it is what it is though man. a lot of guys on here are on their high school team... get home from the gym and go read up on Ish to catch the latest.

what's wrong with that?

[ArbitraryWater]

No/No/Of course

[dhsilv]

it is what it is though man. a lot of guys on here are on their high school team... get home from the gym and go read up on Ish to catch the latest.

what's wrong with that?

I get it, some people are younger, but still do a bit of research on the game if you want to comment on the all time greats. Moses is a top 15 all time guy, he's a guy you HAVE to know about.

[houston]

what Duncan did in 03>>>>Hakeem did in 94


Hakeem won with all-star quality just like every other great player. Thrope was an all-star in 92 and was by far the Rockets second best player. Hell he lead the Rockets in rebounds in the Finals. And Drexler was all-nba 3rd team in 95.

[Akrazotile]

Was his peak longer?

Was it thicker?

[La Frescobaldi]

what Duncan did in 03>>>>Hakeem did in 94


Hakeem won with all-star quality just like every other great player. Thrope was an all-star in 92 and was by far the Rockets second best player. Hell he lead the Rockets in rebounds in the Finals. And Drexler was all-nba 3rd team in 95.
Who was even an all-star on the 2003 Spurs anyhow

[K Xerxes]

what Duncan did in 03>>>>Hakeem did in 94


Hakeem won with all-star quality just like every other great player. Thrope was an all-star in 92 and was by far the Rockets second best player. Hell he lead the Rockets in rebounds in the Finals. And Drexler was all-nba 3rd team in 95.

'All star' Otis Thorpe put up a monster 11.3ppg and 9.9rpg in the 94 playoffs. Not to mention second leading scorer on that team Vernon Maxwell with a beastly 13.8ppg on 38% shooting. Olajuwon literally could not have had more help.

[Dr Hawk]

'All star' Otis Thorpe put up a monster 11.3ppg and 9.9rpg in the 94 playoffs. Not to mention second leading scorer on that team Vernon Maxwell with a beastly 13.8ppg on 38% shooting. Olajuwon literally could not have had more help.

What a stacked team :bowdown:

[La Frescobaldi]

'All star' Otis Thorpe put up a monster 11.3ppg and 9.9rpg in the 94 playoffs. Not to mention second leading scorer on that team Vernon Maxwell with a beastly 13.8ppg on 38% shooting. Olajuwon literally could not have had more help.


Who was even an all-star on the 2003 Spurs anyhow?

Tony Parker 14 ppg 2 rpg 3.5 apg, in playoffs. Not an all-star, had Otis Thorpe's role of second guy on team.

At least Thorpe wasn't a rookie.

[Mike Armstrong]

Maybe/Maybe/Yes

[houston]

Who was even an all-star on the 2003 Spurs anyhow


David Robinson was still a starter on the team. Second on the team with rebounds and block shots. Still played defense and help on the team. Dude is a HOF.

94 Rockets,03 Spurs, 04 Pistons teams built practical the same. The frontline with all-star quality bigs who anchor the defense with clutch role players.


:oldlol: @ Otis Thorpe averaging a double double with playing defense on the likes of Buck Williams,Barkley,Malone and Oakley is not help for Hakeem plus lead the team in rebounding in the Finals:facepalm


No team that won championship without at least 2 all-star quality talents. Basketball is a team sports guys you have to acknowledge the team impact players.


"OT was the guy who had my back," said Hakeem Olajuwon. "There were a couple of years after Ralph Sampson was traded that I felt one of our biggest needs was to have somebody strong at the power-forward position. I felt like if I went to block shots or to do all that I could on defense, that I was leaving us open on the inside.

"But all of that changed when OT came to the team. He was the kind of guy who you could always depend on. He was there for us every night and would always do whatever it took."


http://www.chron.com/sports/rockets/article/OTIS-THORPE-1992-1671664.php

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

For the millionth time, Hakeem is NOT a better offensive player than Duncan. Stop watching youtube videos!

This isn't even a response. Either come up with something constructive or withdraw from hitting your reply button.

[La Frescobaldi]

David Robinson was still a starter on the team. Second on the team with rebounds and block shots. Still played defense and help on the team. Dude is a HOF.

94 Rockets,03 Spurs, 04 Pistons teams built practical the same. The frontline with all-star quality bigs who anchor the defense with clutch role players.


:oldlol: @ Otis Thorpe averaging a double double with playing defense on the likes of Buck Williams,Barkley,Malone and Oakley is not help for Hakeem plus lead the team in rebounding in the Finals:facepalm


No team that won championship without at least 2 all-star quality talents. Basketball is a team sports guys you have to acknowledge the team impact players.


"OT was the guy who had my back," said Hakeem Olajuwon. "There were a couple of years after Ralph Sampson was traded that I felt one of our biggest needs was to have somebody strong at the power-forward position. I felt like if I went to block shots or to do all that I could on defense, that I was leaving us open on the inside.

"But all of that changed when OT came to the team. He was the kind of guy who you could always depend on. He was there for us every night and would always do whatever it took."


http://www.chron.com/sports/rockets/article/OTIS-THORPE-1992-1671664.php

Aged, ancient, last season Robinson ? That's what the Spurs had?

What Duncan did was even more impressive than what Olajuwon did.

[Mike Armstrong]

This isn't even a response. Either come up with something constructive or withdraw from hitting your reply button.
I'm fairly certain that was a response.

[rmt]

David Robinson was still a starter on the team. Second on the team with rebounds and block shots. Still played defense and help on the team. Dude is a HOF.

94 Rockets,03 Spurs, 04 Pistons teams built practical the same. The frontline with all-star quality bigs who anchor the defense with clutch role players.


No team that won championship without at least 2 all-star quality talents. Basketball is a team sports guys you have to acknowledge the team impact players.

2003 Playoffs
DRob 7.8 pts 6.6 rebs 0.9 asst 1.3 blks 23 mins

An old player with back problems averaging the above is what you call "all-star quality big"?

Or do you think rookie Manu or 2nd year Parker or SJax were all-star quality?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I'm fairly certain that was a response.

"stop watching youtube videos!!" as a reply to another player being 'greater' is low common denominator garbage.

Kinda like your one liner.

[Dresta]

And Duncan's career has been superior to all 3 also. Duncan never gets enough props; instead, people give it to a whiny man-child, who may have been dominant, but who bailed on his teams, threw tantrums, refused to play, and left them in each in a complete mess--man did this 3 times and people still think he's more valuable than Duncan

:facepalm

[ArbitraryWater]

And Duncan's career has been superior to all 3 also. Duncan never gets enough props; instead, people give it to a whiny man-child, who may have been dominant, but who bailed on his teams, threw tantrums, refused to play, and left them in each in a complete mess--man did this 3 times and people still think he's more valuable than Duncan

:facepalm

LeBron's teams were failures after he left them... lets kill him for it though, like the Heat didn't have enough recourses to build a proper team :oldlol:

Pathetic.. almost as pathetic as you having to include Bron again.

And Shaq/Hakeem > Duncan

[aj1987]

LeBron's teams were failures after he left them... lets kill him for it though, like the Heat didn't have enough recourses to build a proper team :oldlol:

Pathetic.. almost as pathetic as you having to include Bron again.

And Shaq/Hakeem > Duncan
I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.



@Dresta, Shaq did do stupid shit, but as far as being players go, Shaq > Duncan.

[Mike Armstrong]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.



@Dresta, Shaq did do stupid shit, but as far as being players go, Shaq > Duncan.
:roll:

[rmt]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.



@Dresta, Shaq did do stupid shit, but as far as being players go, Shaq > Duncan.

I agree that peak wise Shaq > Duncan offensively, but defensively, Duncan is still considered elite compared to current competition - as seen by the votes in DPOY thread - it's a helluva LONG time since 1997.

[choppermagic]

No.

First off, Im not sure that you understand what peak is. A player's prime is those years when his athletic abilities and experience, skills all match up to take him to the most productive seasons.

A peak can be a single season or so. You are taking 5 year samples, which is normally considered a prime. Shaq at his peak was 2000-2001. Absolutely dominating.

And you only count Playoffs because I assume it helps your cause but the RS is part of a player's resume too. So you've unfairly shrunk the sample size in terms of ignoring RS and also unfairly expanded the sample in another way to mean primes, instead of peaks.

[rmt]

No.

First off, Im not sure that you understand what peak is. A player's prime is those years when his athletic abilities and experience, skills all match up to take him to the most productive seasons.

A peak can be a single season or so. You are taking 5 year samples, which is normally considered a prime. Shaq at his peak was 2000-2001. Absolutely dominating.

And you only count Playoffs because I assume it helps your cause but the RS is part of a player's resume too. So you've unfairly shrunk the sample size in terms of ignoring RS and also unfairly expanded the sample in another way to mean primes, instead of peaks.

Are you referring to me?

[Dresta]

LeBron's teams were failures after he left them... lets kill him for it though, like the Heat didn't have enough recourses to build a proper team :oldlol:

Pathetic.. almost as pathetic as you having to include Bron again.

And Shaq/Hakeem > Duncan
rofl - i was talking about Shaq, man: you know, the subject of the thread. Why would i be bringing up Lebron?

It's almost like you're lying ready-in-wait, on edge for any opportunity to pounce on any post that could in any possible way be an affront to Lebron. And you're calling me pathetic? Brah...

:coleman:


edit: Hakeem > Duncan?

:facepalm

Man is hella underrated on here, probs because Bron and Kobe stans know deep-down that he's better than their heroes, and so they endlessly slander the guy.

[houston]

2003 Playoffs
DRob 7.8 pts 6.6 rebs 0.9 asst 1.3 blks 23 mins

An old player with back problems averaging the above is what you call "all-star quality big"?

Or do you think rookie Manu or 2nd year Parker or SJax were all-star quality?



David Robinson still a starter on that squad. Still second on the team in rebounds and played defense on the squad. Still average 11 ppg and 7 rpg with 2 blks a game in the Finals. Still played vital role on the team to win. And at the end of day David Robinson is a HOF player that help the Spurs in 03.


You always judge NBA talent on what they did in the peak/prime of their careers. Due to NBA comp not every player going to win in their peak/prime years.

No team never won without two all-star quality talents on their team. All-star quality talent a player past or present that still playing a vital role for team success.

[HOoopCityJones]

LeBron's teams were failures after he left them... lets kill him for it though, like the Heat didn't have enough recourses to build a proper team :oldlol:

Pathetic.. almost as pathetic as you having to include Bron again.

And Shaq/Hakeem > Duncan

Wow, fuccing cringe worthy. He's obviously referring to Shaq.


Take Lebron di.k out your ass. :biggums:

[catch24]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.



@Dresta, Shaq did do stupid shit, but as far as being players go, Shaq > Duncan.

LOL

[ArbitraryWater]

lol

[rmt]

David Robinson still a starter on that squad. Still second on the team in rebounds and played defense on the squad. Still average 11 ppg and 7 rpg with 2 blks a game in the Finals. Still played vital role on the team to win. And at the end of day David Robinson is a HOF player that help the Spurs in 03.


You always judge NBA talent on what they did in the peak/prime of their careers. Due to NBA comp not every player going to win in their peak/prime years.

No team never won without two all-star quality talents on their team. All-star quality talent a player past or present that still playing a vital role for team success.

I respectfully contend that you judge players based on their contribution that year - not on what they did in the peak/prime of their careers. You specifically mentioned 03 Spurs - DRob was NOT all-star quality THAT year. And Duncan did win in 2003 without another all-star quality talent on the Spurs THAT year. 2003 DRob, Parker, Manu and SJax were not all-star quality - not what they were or what they would eventually become.

[La Frescobaldi]

David Robinson still a starter on that squad. Still second on the team in rebounds and played defense on the squad. Still average 11 ppg and 7 rpg with 2 blks a game in the Finals. Still played vital role on the team to win. And at the end of day David Robinson is a HOF player that help the Spurs in 03.


You always judge NBA talent on what they did in the peak/prime of their careers. Due to NBA comp not every player going to win in their peak/prime years.

No team never won without two all-star quality talents on their team. All-star quality talent a player past or present that still playing a vital role for team success.
Surely you don't think David Robinson in his last season, with a bad back and creaking legs.... was the sublime athlete of a decade before.

Do you?

Wizards Jordan gets rated like.... 1987 Jordan? Or unretired Magic like.... its 1987?

Come on man nobody does that. Duncan carried the Spurs that year. Absolutely.

[houston]

I respectfully contend that you judge players based on their contribution that year - not on what they did in the peak/prime of their careers. You specifically mentioned 03 Spurs - DRob was NOT all-star quality THAT year. And Duncan did win in 2003 without another all-star quality talent on the Spurs THAT year. 2003 DRob, Parker, Manu and SJax were not all-star quality - not what they were or what they would eventually become.


But he was a HOF THAT year though lololol. The point remain Robinson help Duncan win the championship. No team won a title without 2 all-star quality talents. Yall boys be trying to make yall favorite players into superheroes but basketball is a team game. You ignoring Robinson contributions because you trying make Duncan into some superhero:oldlol: Dude still played a vital role for team success if that wasn't the case he wouldn't still been in the rotation.
Everything a player does in his career counts why diminish Robinson just to overprop Duncan is silly.



So do Duncan title in 2014 count since he wasn't an all-star THAT year?? By looking at your avatar Duncan feels it counts even though he was role player that year same way Robinson feels it counts when he won it in 03 as a role player lol.:rolleyes:

[houston]

Surely you don't think David Robinson in his last season, with a bad back and creaking legs.... was the sublime athlete of a decade before.

Do you?

Wizards Jordan gets rated like.... 1987 Jordan? Or unretired Magic like.... its 1987?

Come on man nobody does that. Duncan carried the Spurs that year. Absolutely.


:facepalm


That what MVP of the league supposed to do carry their squad as their team best player:rolleyes:


Robinson help Duncan win the championship that all I said. He contributed to the team that all I said. He was all-star before that all I said. I didn't say he dominated at a high level. He gave the Spurs something that season or he wouldn't been starting.

[Chadwin]

At their peaks? Duncan had to be his team's primary scorer, playmaker, defensive anchor and leader. Neither Shaq nor Hakeem had that burden. And in 03 specifically Pop called 4-Down like 90% of the time.

I have a hard time believing you've seen anything from 03 Duncan if you don't think he was the Spurs offense. It was literally 'give it to Duncan and let him score 1-on-1 or kick it out of the double team'.

Again, not saying he was better on offense.. Not saying he had a higher peak. But 03 Duncan and 'within the flow of the offense' are two sentences that don't belong. If anything in 03 Duncan was more of a one-man offense than Shaq or Hakeem ever were (Hakeem's 1st round sweep years aside).

Hakeem led the 93-94 team in the playoffs in points per game, blocks per game, steals per game, assists per game, and rebounds per game. He absolutely had that burden, and had to carry more than Duncan did.

[T_L_P]

Hakeem led the 93-94 team in the playoffs in points per game, blocks per game, steals per game, assists per game, and rebounds per game. He absolutely had that burden, and had to carry more than Duncan did.

I wouldn't call Hakeem the primary playmaker on that team though. He was +15.0 in PPG to the next highest player, +1.0 in Rebounds, +0.1 in Assists, and +3.1 in Blks. Duncan was +10.0 in scoring, +8.9 in Rebounding, +1.9 in Assists and +2.0 in Blocks. Duncan lead his team in TRB% and Ast% whereas Hakeem was 2nd and 3rd for his.

I don't think you can say he had to carry more. Duncan had more depth but of the guys who played real minutes Hakeem had a stronger cast. And I think the stats suggest Duncan had to do more things on his team.

Like I said in previous posts, I'm not saying Duncan peaked higher than Shaq or Hakeem (Malone shouldn't be a question), I'm just saying Duncan basically had to do everything on that 03 team. He had a league-average defense around him and perhaps the worst offensive supporting cast in basketball. And he was playing in an era where teams weren't built with just one star, like the team's Hakeem usually faced.

[jayfan]

what Duncan did in 03>>>>Hakeem did in 94


Hakeem won with all-star quality just like every other great player. Thrope was an all-star in 92 and was by far the Rockets second best player. Hell he lead the Rockets in rebounds in the Finals. And Drexler was all-nba 3rd team in 95.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Otis F-ing Thorpe was the second best player on Houston's 94 championship team.

.....Let that sink in......

Yet Hakeem is somehow overrated??

:hammerhead:

[Milbuck]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[rmt]

But he was a HOF THAT year though lololol. The point remain Robinson help Duncan win the championship. No team won a title without 2 all-star quality talents. Yall boys be trying to make yall favorite players into superheroes but basketball is a team game. You ignoring Robinson contributions because you trying make Duncan into some superhero:oldlol: Dude still played a vital role for team success if that wasn't the case he wouldn't still been in the rotation.
Everything a player does in his career counts why diminish Robinson just to overprop Duncan is silly.



So do Duncan title in 2014 count since he wasn't an all-star THAT year?? By looking at your avatar Duncan feels it counts even though he was role player that year same way Robinson feels it counts when he won it in 03 as a role player lol.:rolleyes:

KG is a HOFer - are you saying that having him on a team THIS year is having an all-star quality big? He is a HOFer based on his prime years - NOT THIS year. In 2003, Duncan won without another all-star quality talent (that year) on the team.

In 2014, Duncan was NOT a role player.

2014 Playoffs
Duncan 16.3 pts 9.2 rebs 2 asst 1.3 blks 52.3%FG 120 ORtg 104 DRtg 3.2 WS 4.4 BPM 1.2 VORP

Parker 17.4 pts 4.8 asst 48.6%FG 103 ORtg 109 DRtg 1.1 WS -1.2 BPM 0.1 BPM

Leonard 14.3 pts 6.7 rebs 1.7 asst 1.7 stl 51%FG 119 ORtg 101 DRtg 2.9 WS 6.6 BPM 1.6 VORP

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

LeBron's teams were failures after he left them... lets kill him for it though, like the Heat didn't have enough recourses to build a proper team :oldlol:

Pathetic.. almost as pathetic as you having to include Bron again.

And Shaq/Hakeem > Duncan



I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.



@Dresta, Shaq did do stupid shit, but as far as being players go, Shaq > Duncan.

Schnitzel was sooo ready to defend LeBron. :oldlol: Put on his Cavs jersey and everything.

[dhsilv]

This isn't even a response. Either come up with something constructive or withdraw from hitting your reply button.

I've broken down the eye test why. I've posted plenty of stats. At this point anyone who still is going to state hakeem was a better offensive player is just a troll or really just don't know what they're talking about.

I'm not saying you can't disagree with me, but you'd need to back it up and explain why because the results are pretty clear on who was better.

[dhsilv]

David Robinson still a starter on that squad. Still second on the team in rebounds and played defense on the squad. Still average 11 ppg and 7 rpg with 2 blks a game in the Finals. Still played vital role on the team to win. And at the end of day David Robinson is a HOF player that help the Spurs in 03.


You always judge NBA talent on what they did in the peak/prime of their careers. Due to NBA comp not every player going to win in their peak/prime years.

No team never won without two all-star quality talents on their team. All-star quality talent a player past or present that still playing a vital role for team success.

Robinson was also 7th in minutes in the playoffs for the spurs. He was still a very good defender, but he was playing a very limited role.

[DMAVS41]

I've broken down the eye test why. I've posted plenty of stats. At this point anyone who still is going to state hakeem was a better offensive player is just a troll or really just don't know what they're talking about.

I'm not saying you can't disagree with me, but you'd need to back it up and explain why because the results are pretty clear on who was better.


Dude...stop saying this. It's just not remotely true. There is absolutely nothing "clear cut" about Duncan being a better offensive player than Duncan.

Again...you are going off of absurd notions that ignore the entire makeup of Hakeem's from players to coaches.

Those of us that saw Hakeem realize his gaudy playoff numbers for over a decade do inflate his offensive impact, but you are going way too far on this.

Duncan was nowhere near good enough offensively throughout this career to warrant the kind of talk you are spewing right now...and Hakeem was nowhere near as bad as you are claiming either.

You want to argue Duncan was slightly better offensively...okay...I'll disagree, but it's not the craziest thing ever.

But you aren't saying that...you are saying that Duncan was a definitively better offensive force. And I just don't see how anyone can say that unless they never saw Hakeem play and are only going off of flawed stats that really aren't apt here because of such different situations.

[dhsilv]

Hakeem led the 93-94 team in the playoffs in points per game, blocks per game, steals per game, assists per game, and rebounds per game. He absolutely had that burden, and had to carry more than Duncan did.

http://i.imgur.com/zvOPxgD.jpg

Really simple, just their percentage of their team's total in each area. Dream shot more and scored more. I'm inclined to give the guy with the huge assist lead, rebounding lead, free throw attempts lead, turnover and PF leads the edge over pots, blks and steals. Anyway at least we have numbers vs just people making claims based on per game stats.

94 vs 03 just in case anyone was wanting to confirm.

[dhsilv]

[/B]

Dude...stop saying this. It's just not remotely true. There is absolutely nothing "clear cut" about Duncan being a better offensive player than Duncan.

Again...you are going off of absurd notions that ignore the entire makeup of Hakeem's from players to coaches.

Those of us that saw Hakeem realize his gaudy playoff numbers for over a decade do inflate his offensive impact, but you are going way too far on this.

Duncan was nowhere near good enough offensively throughout this career to warrant the kind of talk you are spewing right now...and Hakeem was nowhere near as bad as you are claiming either.

You want to argue Duncan was slightly better offensively...okay...I'll disagree, but it's not the craziest thing ever.

But you aren't saying that...you are saying that Duncan was a definitively better offensive force. And I just don't see how anyone can say that unless they never saw Hakeem play and are only going off of flawed stats that really aren't apt here because of such different situations.

I think you simply grossly under value passing as both a skill and essential to keeping an offense moving. You're not factoring in the value added to teammates knowing the guy with the ball might actually pass it. I'm sorry but Hakeem doesn't have stats that refuse the eye test. He was a super super skilled guy who really just never got it.

I'm also not going to give a guy any "help" because of his coaches and will only marginally address weak players around him. The guy we saw play, was just not remotely the dominate offensive force that people act like he was. Yes, I agree he had more ability, way more potential, and in a one on one he'd clean the floor with Duncan. But still there's no way you can look at the two and conclude Hakeem was better. You can conclude Duncan was better. You might argue that it's a draw...but given the scenario above that is a clear lead for Duncan.

[dhsilv]

[/B]

Dude...stop saying this. It's just not remotely true. There is absolutely nothing "clear cut" about Duncan being a better offensive player than Duncan.

Again...you are going off of absurd notions that ignore the entire makeup of Hakeem's from players to coaches.

Those of us that saw Hakeem realize his gaudy playoff numbers for over a decade do inflate his offensive impact, but you are going way too far on this.

Duncan was nowhere near good enough offensively throughout this career to warrant the kind of talk you are spewing right now...and Hakeem was nowhere near as bad as you are claiming either.

You want to argue Duncan was slightly better offensively...okay...I'll disagree, but it's not the craziest thing ever.

But you aren't saying that...you are saying that Duncan was a definitively better offensive force. And I just don't see how anyone can say that unless they never saw Hakeem play and are only going off of flawed stats that really aren't apt here because of such different situations.

fyi since we also don't agree on what clearly means, I'm not even sure what purpose this still serves. I have a far lower threshold than you do for using the word.

[DMAVS41]

I think you simply grossly under value passing as both a skill and essential to keeping an offense moving. You're not factoring in the value added to teammates knowing the guy with the ball might actually pass it. I'm sorry but Hakeem doesn't have stats that refuse the eye test. He was a super super skilled guy who really just never got it.

I'm also not going to give a guy any "help" because of his coaches and will only marginally address weak players around him. The guy we saw play, was just not remotely the dominate offensive force that people act like he was. Yes, I agree he had more ability, way more potential, and in a one on one he'd clean the floor with Duncan. But still there's no way you can look at the two and conclude Hakeem was better. You can conclude Duncan was better. You might argue that it's a draw...but given the scenario above that is a clear lead for Duncan.

No...just no. There is no clear lead at all for Duncan. All the things above...while there is some truth...is completely overblown by you and you aren't factoring in the help/coaching aspect. It is so much easier to do the things you are talking about when you actually legit teams around you.

Okay...not gonna talk with someone that utters the bold about Hakeem. Just absurd.

Really...just beyond absurd.

You just never know what crazy shit is going to be said here. Now Hakeem just was a guy that "never got it"...

I guess being a sure fire top 15 player of all time that had two of the best playoff runs of all time (offensively mind you)...just never got it. Yep...well said.

[Smoke117]

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/monkeymind/files/2015/08/Thats_just_your_opinion.jpg

[houston]

Robinson was also 7th in minutes in the playoffs for the spurs. He was still a very good defender, but he was playing a very limited role.


Of course he still contribute to the team that won a championship. In that closeout game against the Nets 13 and 17 on 75% shooting. Him and Duncan out rebounded the whole Nets team that Finals. Still gave the Spurs 11 and 7 with 2 blks a game in that series. Dude was still a starter on the team. Duncan was amazing that year but he had help just like every other superstar that won.



:oldlol: @ Duncan wasn't a role player in 2014. Man I heard it all now dude didn't even make an all-star team that year. Duncan just basically played the Laimbeer role on the team. He was the primary big just like Lambs. Lam average 11 and 11 during his 91 playoff run. 16 and 9 supposed to be some great numbers or something lol. Still that doesn't takeaway on vital he was for team success. Same for Robinson in his limited role for the Spurs that year.


The point remain no team haven't won a championship without a 2 players that made an all-star team that still playing vital role for team success.

[Chadwin]

I wouldn't call Hakeem the primary playmaker on that team though. He was +15.0 in PPG to the next highest player, +1.0 in Rebounds, +0.1 in Assists, and +3.1 in Blks. Duncan was +10.0 in scoring, +8.9 in Rebounding, +1.9 in Assists and +2.0 in Blocks. Duncan lead his team in TRB% and Ast% whereas Hakeem was 2nd and 3rd for his.

I don't think you can say he had to carry more. Duncan had more depth but of the guys who played real minutes Hakeem had a stronger cast. And I think the stats suggest Duncan had to do more things on his team.

Like I said in previous posts, I'm not saying Duncan peaked higher than Shaq or Hakeem (Malone shouldn't be a question), I'm just saying Duncan basically had to do everything on that 03 team. He had a league-average defense around him and perhaps the worst offensive supporting cast in basketball. And he was playing in an era where teams weren't built with just one star, like the team's Hakeem usually faced.

If you watched that playoff run you know their offense was just throw it to Hakeem in the post. They both might have only had one all-star but Bowen made the all-defensive team that year.

[Da_Realist]

Hakeem at his best was better but there's not really that much difference between the two in terms of impact. Hakeem won with two different types of teams -- one where he had to shoulder all of the offensive load while being surrounded basically by shooters and one where he meshed well with a premier perimeter star. His supposed weaknesses get overblown. Dude was trying to do everything because he had nothing to work with. He knew how to pass. He made guys like Mario Elie and Kenny Smith household names on one hand and on the other took nothing away from Drexler's brilliance.

He could have won with Manu and Parker. He could have won with Kobe. Rudy T was never a strategist like Pop or Phil Jackson. He rode Hakeem to those 2 titles. Hakeem came in the league dominated by Magic's Lakers, Bird's Celtics, Isiah's Pistons and MJ's Bulls. They were good teams. The Houston Rockets were Hakeem and some knuckleheads until about 1993. Before that, they had management issues and players with drug problems. They were not a well-oiled machine in a league that required it to compete.

Horry, who played with both, thinks Hakeem was the better player.


http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/horry-wishes-dream-article-1.597868

Let's say you're an NBA GM and you can start a team with either Shaquille O'Neal, Hakeem (The Dream) Olajuwon or Tim Duncan. All in their primes. Who are you going to pick? To get the best perspective, all you had to do last night at the Garden was saunter up to the man in the powder blue suit in the San Antonio dressing room. "I'd take "Dream,' " said Robert Horry, the ageless power forward, who happens to have been fortunate enough to play with all three big men, in their respective primes. "For one thing, Dream could make his free throws. He could shoot them better than Shaq or Tim. I was a Dream fan growing up, so I've got to go with him.

...

But while Duncan can't shoot foul shots like Olajuwon, a solid 75% shooter at the line during his prime, Duncan does resemble Olajuwon in one regard. "As a leader, he's just like Dream," Horry said. "He doesn't talk much. He just goes out there and does his thing on the court.

" Still, all things being equal, Horry will take his old Rocket teammate over Duncan or Shaq. "Dream just had more moves than the other guys," he said. "I'm more of a finesse guy, so give me Dream.

And again...


http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/lakers/la-sp-spurrep6may06,1,1123715.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-nba-lakers

Spur forward Robert Horry, who has played alongside Tim Duncan, Hakeem
Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal, said Olajuwon was the best of the three.

"Each guy's great in a different way," Horry said. "Out of all three, I
still have to stick with Dream because he had so much game. He could shoot
it from the outside like Tim, he could power inside like Shaq. Besides, his
free throws were a little bit better."

Mario Elie agreed.


http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2006/08/mario-elie-compares-hakeem-olajuwon.html

Friedman: "You mentioned that Olajuwon is the greatest player you played with. You also played with the Spurs and Tim Duncan and David Robinson, who was obviously up there in years at that point in time but still a good player. What are your memories of playing with them? Since you do feel that Olajuwon is the greatest player you played with, compare his game to Duncan’s. Some people see a little similarity between their games. What do you think of that?"

Elie: "I love Tim. I think he may be the second best player I played with but 'Dream,' just his performance in pressure situations—when David Robinson got the '95 MVP, 'Dream' told me, 'Mario, he’s borrowing my trophy.' When I heard that I said, 'Somebody’s in trouble tonight.' That guy put on a performance—under that pressure against the MVP and we have no home court advantage—and 'Dream' just dominated that position. It reminded me of when Jordan dominated Clyde when they were comparing the two guards. They were comparing two centers and 'Dream' just totally—I don’t want to say embarrassed—but he really embarrassed him, he dominated him—(series averages of) 35 (points), 13 (rebounds), 5 assists, 4 blocks. Those are amazing numbers for a center."

Friedman: "When you were teammates with David Robinson did you ever talk about that?"

Elie: "Never talked about it. Avery Johnson is one of my best friends to this day and he’s the one who helped get me to San Antonio. I felt that they just needed some toughness. I took a lot of heat early in that year—I went on national TV and really challenged Dave and Tim about being soft. I took a lot of heat in the San Antonio and national media about that, 'Who is this guy Mario Elie, just a basic player, telling these two superstars what to do?' At the end of the year (it became clear that) I was right. I was man enough to step up to those two guys and tell them that they had to play tougher. What it got was the Spurs' first championship and people coming up to me after the season saying, 'Mario, you did the right thing. You took the heat all year, but you were right to challenge those two guys.' I’m glad I did it. Every time I go to San Antonio people still remember me and still love me down there. It was a great two years there."

Friedman: "Is the difference between Olajuwon and Duncan the athleticism? They both have great footwork but Olajuwon was a soccer goalie, so he had great athleticism and the way that he would get steals added another dimension that Duncan perhaps does not have."

Elie: "Exactly. I just think that 'Dream' was more athletic, had a better game on the box and was a better shot blocker. Tim is a great defender. He gets his arms up and he blocks a couple shots, but 'Dream' was an amazing shot blocker. Like you said, he had great hands. He was always hitting the ball away from guys."

Friedman: "He would steal the ball from guards."

Elie: "Exactly. He would pick guys’ pockets. He had a great feel for the game and is just an amazing individual."

[dhsilv]

No...just no. There is no clear lead at all for Duncan. All the things above...while there is some truth...is completely overblown by you and you aren't factoring in the help/coaching aspect. It is so much easier to do the things you are talking about when you actually legit teams around you.

Okay...not gonna talk with someone that utters the bold about Hakeem. Just absurd.

Really...just beyond absurd.

You just never know what crazy shit is going to be said here. Now Hakeem just was a guy that "never got it"...

I guess being a sure fire top 15 player of all time that had two of the best playoff runs of all time (offensively mind you)...just never got it. Yep...well said.

2? Dunno about the second being THAT great, I guess from the stand point of teams beat.

Look imo hakeem is the most talented....maybe player ever to play. I definitely think he's the most talented big man. He was a freak...hell I remember watching the guy dribble the ball with his feet it was amazing...and I'm not a soccer player but I don't recall a basketball being as easy to control as a soccer ball.

Anyway I think hakeem is on the short list for most talented athletes at their respective sport ever. He almost had to TRY to not be a top 5 all time great imo. And really, there's a part of me that wonders why he never got it enough to take it to that next level, but yeah he's around 15th all time...though with more players playing I doubt he's that high much longer. There's no excuse for him to have not be far better.

As for the teammates and coaches, I just don't agree that they were that bad. Plenty of other guys did just fine without better options.

[dhsilv]

Hakeem at his best was better but there's not really that much difference between the two in terms of impact. Hakeem won with two different types of teams -- one where he had to shoulder all of the offensive load while being surrounded basically by shooters and one where he meshed well with a premier perimeter star. His supposed weaknesses get overblown. Dude was trying to do everything because he had nothing to work with. He knew how to pass. He made guys like Mario Elie and Kenny Smith household names on one hand and on the other took nothing away from Drexler's brilliance.

He could have won with Manu and Parker. He could have won with Kobe. Rudy T was never a strategist like Pop or Phil Jackson. He rode Hakeem to those 2 titles. Hakeem came in the league dominated by Magic's Lakers, Bird's Celtics, Isiah's Pistons and MJ's Bulls. They were good teams. The Houston Rockets were Hakeem and some knuckleheads until about 1993. Before that, they had management issues and players with drug problems. They were not a well-oiled machine in a league that required it to compete.

Horry, who played with both, thinks Hakeem was the better player.



And again...



Mario Elie agreed.


NBA players almost always take the guy who'd win a game of horse. I respect Horry but I'm willing to bet if you really drilled him on different parts of the game and who'd be better or worse, you'd find a far more complex and less clear cut answer. But when you ask a simple question you almost and honestly I can't think of an exception, get the guy who'd win horse (unless it's an old timer and then god knows what they'll say).

Now back to the topic which is the 03 spurs vs the 94 rockets. I've posted (I think here) what each player's load of the team's major stats were. It was fairly close outside of Hakeem's dominance in blocks and steal (though teams don't need to get those to play great defense) and assists which greatly favored Duncan. Rebounding was a marginal edge to Duncan while field goal attempts and points marginally favored dream. Dream had a slight edge in minutes as well.

Both teams pretty much ran an offense of throw the ball to the big man and let him do his thing. Duncan was better passing out of the post. Hakeem better at scoring from the post. That was their primes. I think Duncan was a good bit better there, but from a style of play or coaching stand point or even teammates stand point...you'd be rather hard pressed to argue that Duncan really had better people at either THAT year. Other than Robinson was a much better leaderhip old time knowledge source. Though dream imo had a better group of guys from an age stand point. He really got a lot of guys around their peaks all coming together, even if they weren't great peaks. The point being is you can't argue that the style of the team or whatever was a huge factor here. Rudy was a solid coach and he was the first guy to actually turn hakeem into a somewhat competent teammate on offense. Pop might be an all time great coach, but he was on the hot seat even that year if memory serves, there was more than just rumors of Doc becoming the spurs coach.

[rmt]

To me, it's a little unfair to compare Elie's opinion of Hakeem whom he played with at his absolute peak and Duncan whom he played with when TD was a sophomore (3 years outside of his peak).

[Doranku]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about Shaq. Talk about being insecure.



@Dresta, Shaq did do stupid shit, but as far as being players go, Shaq > Duncan.

LMFAO :oldlol:

[Uncle Drew]

LeBron's teams were failures after he left them... lets kill him for it though, like the Heat didn't have enough recourses to build a proper team :oldlol:

Pathetic.. almost as pathetic as you having to include Bron again.

And Shaq/Hakeem > Duncan
AutisticWater adding to his already impressive L collection. :roll:

[houston]

To me, it's a little unfair to compare Elie's opinion of Hakeem whom he played with at his absolute peak and Duncan whom he played with when TD was a sophomore (3 years outside of his peak).


of course espec when he call him soft

[rmt]

of course espec when he call him soft

I hardly think Duncan has a reputation of being soft. Some like the vocal, in your face type. Duncan's more a quiet assassin.

[houston]

I hardly think Duncan has a reputation of being soft. Some like the vocal, in your face type. Duncan's more a quiet assassin.


People forget Duncan didn't grow up in the states so his personality was hard to figure out. People seem to be impress with trash talking KG,Payton style of player. But I always seen trash talking to a degree show immaturity and insecurity we see it all the time espec. in the NBA.

[72-10]

Shaq had the highest peak. Didn't even bother to check to see which Malone you're referring to, it's still Shaq.

[plowking]

What makes Hakeem better than Duncan?

[DonDraper]

What makes Hakeem better than Duncan?

Better offensive player


Better defensive player

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Better offensive player


Better defensive player

Post metrics backing those claims and we can have a debate. The issue I have with this argument is no one saying Hakeem has any actual data supporting their claim. It's all 'eye test.' Well, eye test tells me Duncan was better. Eye test is subjective, but the main thing is people just looking at highlights of Hakeem and not watching full games. Especially from his ENTIRE career and not just cherrypicked from '93-'95. There's a reason he's the GOAT of first round exits and Shaq is the GOAT of getting swept. Neither were as impactful as Duncan was throughout their NBA career and all objective data proves it. Simple as that.