Put prime Hakeem in Bill Russell's era

Continuing...

Furthermore, how do we explain players like Roger Maris in 1961, or Denny McLain in 1968? Maris came out of nowhere to hit 61 HRs, and while McLain went from a good pitcher, to having an "immortal" season in 1968? And, as quickly as both exploded into greatness, they fell back down to earth, and were basically washed up within a couple of seasons.

Of course, using YOUR logic, ANY time a player has a truly "immortal" season, it must be attributed to "weaker" competition, right?

Kareem's 70-71 and 71-72 seasons were two of those staggering seasons. BUT, according to you, they were accomplished because of "weak " competition. Let's take a closer look at that 71-72 season, shall we? Kareem faced centers like Cowens, Hayes, Lanier, Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, Unseld, and an old washed up Chamberlain...ALL in the HOF (and in only a 17 team league.) But, none of those guys would be any good in today's era, right?

And yet, Kareem in 85-86, at age 38, and with dramatically reduced physical skills, was at his PEAK? If he was, he STILL CRUSHED Hakeem. Here again, we KNOW that Kareem averaged 33 ppg on just an eye-popping .634 FG%. He even hung a 46 point game, on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes on Hakeem (and that was just one of THREE 40+ point games that Kareem carpet-bombed Hakeem with BTW.)

Of course, you and Dickwad argue that Hakeem was "nowhere near" his peak in 85-86, despite the FACT that his NUMBERS in 85-86 were only SLIGHTLY lower than in his 93-94 season.

So, when Kareem's NUMBERS drop DRAMATICALLY from his PEAK NUMBERS of 71-72 down to merely exceptional NUMBERS in his 85-86 season, according to you, it was not because Kareem was 38 in 85-86, but because his "competition" was tougher in '86 (even though he didn't face nearly the same number of HOF centers in '86.)

AND, somehow we are supposed to then believe that Hakeem's PEAK came in 93-94, even though his NUMBERS were only SLIGHTLY better than in '86...and in a league with even LESS HOF centers.

Which brings me back to Wilt's "inflated" numbers. BEFORE Wilt came into the NBA, the NBA scoring record was 29.2 ppg, and the FG% mark was .490. In Wilt's 14 seasons, he SHATTERED the RECORD BOOK. 45 and 50 ppg seasons. 27 and 27.2 rpg seasons. .683 and .727 FG% seasons.

Not only that, but it was ONLY Wilt. too. Take Chamberlain out of those 14 years, and Barry's 35.6 ppg season in '67 and little known Johnny Green's .587 FG% in 70-71 were the highs. Wilt was LIGHT YEARS ahead of his "competition"...which included players like Bellamy, Reed, Hayes, Unseld, Embry, Lovellette, Schayes, Pettit, Cowens, Thurmond, Lanier, Russell,...and Kareem. ALL in the HOF. And...ONLY Wilt. Why? Was it because those players were "weak" competition?

Of course, Kareem could only shoot .464 against Wilt in their 28 H2H games (27 of which came after Wilt turned 34 and on a surgically repaired knee.) Kareem didn't even shoot 45% against Nate Thurmond, either, in some 50 H2H games. And, Kareem's HIGH game against Thurmond was only 34 points. BTW, Wilt not only had SEVERAL 30+ point games against Thurmond in their few H2H games in Chamberlain's "scoring seasons" he even had one game in which he battered Thurmond 45-13. He also had 20 ppp seasons on .562 shooting against Thurmond's Warriors, and overall he had THREE post-seasons of .500, .550, and .560 against him. Meanwhile, in Kareem's three post-seasons against Thurmond, he only shot .486, .428, and a horrid .405.

And how about Wilt hanging THREE games of 50+ on HOFer Reed, including a high game of 58 points? Or Chamberlain pounding 6-11 HOFer Walt Bellamy with THREE games of 60+, including a 73 point game??!!

Kareem faced Thurmond, Reed, and Bellamy, and yet, he never came CLOSE to dominating those three in the OVERWHELMING fashion that a PRIME Wilt did.

My god, in Wilt's 68-69 season, in a league that averaged 112 ppg, and in a season in which he only averaged 14 FGAs per game, he STILL hung TWO 60+ point games (Including the most efficient 60+ game in NBA history, when he scored 66 points on 29-35 shooting)? What is the significance of those two games? Kareem came in the league the very next season (69-70), and faced BOTH of those SAME centers...and yet, he never came CLOSE to putting up 60 games on them. In fact, his career high game was only 55 points...in 20 seasons. Wilt had 118 games of 50+, and 32 of 60+...and against MANY of the SAME centers that Kareem faced. How come?

And once again...a 37-38 year old Kareem could MURDER a 22-23 year old Hakeem with THREE games of 40+...AND on just mind-boggling FG%'s. While an OLD Wilt held a PRIME Kareem (yes, Kareem's REAL prime was in the early 70's...and against a HUGE number of HOF centers), to about 100 points BELOW his career FG% (Chamberlain held Kareem to .464 shooting those 28 H2H games, while Kareem shot .559 in his career)...and yet an OLD Kareem could not only score at will against a young Hakeem (and whose PRIME NUMBERS were not significantly better than those in '86) he shot .599 in their 22 H2H games (and in which Kareem was between the ages of 38 thru 41)...or nearly 50 points ABOVE his career FG%. How?

And yet, idiots like you and Dillweed claim that Hakeem was better than Wilt? There is no EVIDENCE to suggest anything NEAR that conclusion.

Of course, using YOUR logic, players like a PRIME MJ (probably late 80's), Hakeem (probably early to mid 90's...although his NUMBERS were hardly better than those of his mid-80's shooting, which was at his peak in his ROOKIE season), Kareem (whose PRIME was OBVIOUSLY in the early 70's), and even Shaq (whose PRIME was late 90's to early 00's) would not be NEARLY as great today, since the league is more talented, right?

[QUOTE=millwad]You are just retarded, you show it time after time.
The problem is that you never saw him play, basketball-reference is the only way you know about him. Instead of posting this crap, go and watch the '86 series vs the Lakers, it's on youtube. When you're done with that, go and watch the 94 and 95 playoffs and then you'll shut up. Almost everyone on ISH ranks Hakeem's runs higher than Wilt and especially Wilt's second one..:facepalm

You are so stupid that you think he was just as good in '86 as he was from 93-95 which only proves you stupidity.. The same Kareem and his beloved Lakers big got their ass kicked by Olajuwon in the playoffs still and it wasn't close, Olajuwon killed the Lakers and Jabbar in the WCF and it's not even close. Jabbar killing Olajuwon is a joke considering that Olajuwon the same season abused him and his team in the playoffs.

And prime Hakeem not leading the league in scoring is just a terrible argument, in 1994 he had the third highest PPG average and in 1995 he was the 4th best scorer and the same season he crushed Robinson who was the MVP that year and Robinson was the league's 2nd best scorer that season and in the finals he outplayed Shaq who had the highest scoring average.

And Hakeem still has the highest ppg average in the playoffs for any center of all-time, not Wilt. And Hakeem scored way more than what Wilt did during his runs, in fact, in 1995 Hakeem scored twice as many points per game as an average than what Wilt did during his 2nd run.. Haha.

And by the way, Wilt didn't win crap when he had his high scoring season's and when he finally won in '67 he had the leagues 5th best scoring average and in '72 when he won the 2nd time haha, he averaged 14 points per game..:facepalm[/QUOTE]

I am getting so tired of constantly making a complete fool out of you, but one more time.

I SAW virtually every big game and series in the NBA since the 1963-64 season, including the televised game of that 85-86 WCF series. And no Hakeem NEVER "owned" Kareem. Hell, he couldn't even guard him. This from a 23 year old Hakeem, whose NUMBERs in his supposed "prime" were only SLIGHTLY better later in his career. And, once again, this from a 38 year old Kareem. It is truly comical that a 38 year old could average 33 ppg and on a shocking .634 FG% against a 23 year old Hakeem, who would not be signficantly better even in his so-called prime. A 38 year old Kareem that so annihilated that 23 year old, that in recap, the Houston coach was chastised for allowing the obliteration. A 46 point game, on a staggering 70% FG%, and in only 37 minutes. The recap even claimed that Kareem probably would have easily eclipsed his career high game of 55 points had he played longer.

And you are so proud of that 23 year old Hakeem outscoring that 38 year old Kareem (who had a bad habit of shrinking in the post-season BTW), by a 31-27 margin, too. If anything, that makes Olajuwon look even WORSE. Once again, what would a PRIME Kareem have SHELLED that Hakeem with? 50-60- and perhaps even 70+ point games?

Hakeem played 18 seasons. Yet, his highest scoring season was 27.8 ppg (and on only a .517 FG%, too.) He NEVER came CLOSE to winning a scoring title. Why? Especially since you claim that Hakeem played with poor rosters. How come players like Kobe could score 35 ppg with crappy rosters, or MJ with a 37 ppg season with poor rosters...or a WILT could score 45 and 50 with PUTRID rosters...and yet Hakeem couldn't even approach 30 ppg? Obviously, he couldn't do it.

As for Wilt not "winning crap" in his "scoring seasons. Hmmm, five of those seven seasons were on WINNING teams. AND, Wilt came into the league with a roster that had been in LAST PLACE before he arrived. In fact, he even LED the NBA in scoring (33.5 ppg) in his 65-66 season, and BTW, his TEAM had the BEST RECORD in the league (and oh, BTW, Wilt also averaged a league leading 24.6 rpg, and a then-record FG% of .540.) First of all, Hakeem NEVER led the NBA in scoring, NOR did he ever lead his team to the BEST RECORD in the league.

And this ridiculous assertion that Hakeem was a better scorer in the post-season. True, he had a higher average. BUT, Chamberlain averaged 33 ppg along with 27 rpg, and on .510 shooting...in leagues that averaged .430 shooting in his first SIX post-seasons...COMBINED! In fact, he averaged 29.3 ppg, 26.6 rpg, 4.8 apg and on .518 shooting in his first EIGHT straight post-seasons...COMBINED! Give me ONE post-season in which Hakeem averaged 29 ppg, 27 rpg, and shot .518.

He also had FOUR post-seasons of 33.2, 34.7, .35.0 and 37.0 ppg. How many 30+ ppg post-seasons did Hakeem have? Not to mention that in those four post-seasons, Wilt averaged 23.0, 25.2, 25.8, and 26.6 rpg.

And Wilt had series of 37, 37 and 38.6 ppg, too. He also had FOUR post-seasons of 30+ against Russell, including one of 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

As for Hakeem's slight edge of .528 to .522 in the playoffs...Hakeem played in leagues that averaged over 47% shooting, while Wilt played in leagues that shot about 44% on average. So, the REALITY was, Wilt was shooting FAR higher against his peers than what Hakeem was against his.

Oh, and did I forget to mention that Wilt faced a starting HOF center in 99 of his 160 post-season games, while Hakeem faced one in 32 of his 145? Or that Hakeem's HIGH playoff scoring and rebounding series came in a four game series in which, as USUAL, his team was eliminated in the FIRST ROUND?

His playoff runs in either 93-94, or 94-95 PALES in comparison to Wilt's OVERWHELMING run in '67 too. Wilt had the Sixers HIGH game, of 41 points (on 19-30 shooting) in that post-season, And he DOMINATED in the clinching wins, unlike Greer, who did not. Of course, Wilt not only CRUSHED Russell and Thurmond, he averaged 21.7 ppg, 29.1 rpg, 9.2 apg, and shot .579 in that post-season. How about Hakeem in '94. He led a favored team over Ewing's less talented Knick team in a seven game series, and on .500 shooting. Then, in the '95 Finals, he was FLAMED by a .595 to .483 shooting margin by a young Shaq. Has any other "great" been so thoroughly outshot in a Finals.

Speaking of Finals...Wilt shot .560 in his SIX Finals, while Hakeem shot .488 in his THREE (covering 17 games.) Hell, his high Finals was an even 50%. How about Wilt? He not only had a career .560 in those 35 Finals games, he had one Finals in which he shot .625 (and on ONE leg), along with 23.2 ppg and 24.1 rpg. Find me a Finals like that Hakeem? You won't.

And I can't help by laugh my ass off at Dickwad claiming that he had poorer teammates. First of all, Wilt's teams were ROUTINELY outgunned by HOFers. In fact, in every post-season but two, covering 13, he faced a team with MORE HOFers, and by large a margin as 8-2. Hakeem seldom faced a team with THREE, and when he did, his team lost. His '94 Rockets were as talented as Ewing's Knicks, and they STILL barely won that series. And then in '95, he had a 2-1 edge in HOFers against Shaq's team.

Of course, Hakeem also never had teammates that collectively shot less than 40%. How about Wilt? He had SIX that shot .382, .380, .354, .352, .352 (on a team that went 55-25 BTW...,while Wilt shot .509 in that post-season), and even .332. How did Wilt get those team's, with teammates shooting that poorly to one Finals, and two ECF's against the HOF-laden Celtics, and then in those two ECF's, they went to game seven's, and with losses by TWO and ONE point?????? Hakeem NEVER had to overcome such OVERWHELMING adversity. And, when he did, he and his TEAMs flopped in the first round.

Continuing...

And that was the REAL legacy of Hakeem. The only "great" that "led" EIGHT teams (out of 15 playoff seasons) to FIRST ROUND exits (and most all were blowout series too.) He also "led" FOUR higher seeds to series defeats, as well.

Yep...the SAME Hakeem who was so highly regarded that he won ONE MVP (and that was in a year in which the REAL best player took the year off.) The SAME Hakeem who managed ONE other season in which he came in SECOND. The SAME Hakeem who would finish as high as FOURTH, on TWO more occasions. There you have it...in an 18 season career, Hakeem was voted in the Top-FOUR...FOUR measley times. In fact, he didn't even finish in the TOP_10 in HALF of those EIGHTEEN season (NINE times he couldn't crack the Top-10 in his 18 seasons.)

His TEAM success PALES in comparison to Wilt's who not only led SIX teams to the Finals (and against FAR stronger competition), but got his teams to the Conference Finals in TWELVE of them. And, he didn't have the luxury of facing "cannon-fodder" teams in the first rounds that Hakeem so routinely "stats-padded" in (while taking his team down in flames in the process.) Wilt LED FOUR teams to 60+ wins...including two of 68-13 and 69-13. And how did they do in those two overwhelming title seasons? They routed a 60-21 Celtic team that had SIX HOFers. Then in '72 Wilt easily outplayed Kareem (in which EVERYONE who WATCHED that series claimed that he not only outplayed Kareem, but there were those that claimed that he DECISIVELY outplayed him), and then they buried a Knick team that had FIVE HOFers. Give me a list of teams that Hakeem faced in which he beat that had as many as FOUR. Once again, in his title runs, Hakeem had as many HOFers as Ewing, and MORE than Shaq.

So, Wilt, at his PEAK was FAR better scorer in BOTH the regular season, and then again, in the POST-SEASON. He was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Hakeem in rebounding in BOTH. He won NINE FG% titles, and in leagues that shot FAR worse. And in the post-season, he outshot the LEAGUE AVERAGE by a considerably higher differential than Hakeem did. And, one can only imagine what Wilt would have shot had he played in the "defenseless 80's: when entire LEAGUES were shooting nearly 50%, and even 30-52 teams were shooting as high as .504? Had he had the luxury of playing his post-seasons in the 80's...he would have been shooting at FAR greater clips.

Defense? Take a look at the highest Defensive Win-Shares...

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

Wilt just BLOWS Hakeem AWAY.

130+ RECORDS. SEVEN scoring titles (and he averaged 40 ppg over that span COMBINED.) NINE FG% titles (and he had the TWO highest in NBA history...and by a MILE.) And ELEVEN rebounding titles. All in 14 seasons. He had FIVE seasons in which he LED the NBA in BOTH scoring AND rebounding, at the SAME time. He had FOUR seasons in which he LED the NBA in scoring AND FG%, at the SAME time. He had EIGHT seasons in which he LED the NBA in FG% and rebounding, at the SAME time. And he had THREE seasons in which he LED the NBA in scoring, rebounding, AND FG%, at the SAME time! He even LED the NBA in assists one season (as well as rebounding and FG% at the SAME time.)

How about Hakeem? Two rebounding titles (and he barely won those.) He also had seasons in which he finished MILES behind the leader (the 6-8 Rodman had him by FIVE per game one season). And when he was paired with a another very good rebounder, as he was with Barkley in '97, he was outrebounded by the 6-5 Charles, by FOUR per game.

Unlike Wilt, he was a black hole in the post. While Wilt averaged 4.5 apg in his career, and in leagues in which assists were harder to come by, Hakeem came in at 2.5 apg, Wilt had seasons of 8.6 and 7.8..along with a 5.2 apg season in a year in which he averaged 33.5 ppg. Even in the post-season, Wilt CRUSHED Hakeem. In Wilt's dominating playoff runs he was putting up 9.2 apg and 6.5 apg post-seasons...and he even had TWO series in which he averaged aTRIPLE DOUBLE.

And we all know that Wilt was the greatest shot blocker of all-time, and only Russell came close. In Wilt's WORST seasons he was estimated to have blocked around 6 bpg...or better than the all-time record of 5.6 by Mark Eaton (who, BTW, won more block titles than Hakeem, and they played in the same era.) And we KNOW that Wilt recorded 23 blocks in a nationally televised game in '68, which blows away the "official" mark of 17 by Elmore Smith.

Wilt was, quite simply, better at every facet of the game. He even MADE more FTs than Hakeem, and his IMPACT at the line was considerably greater. Scoring, shooting, passing, defense, blocking shots, and rebounding...Chamberlain...and it's not even close.

TEAM success, and CLUTCH play...again, Wilt by a MILE.

MVP voting? Wilt...by a HUGE margin (4-1, and then a whopping edge in overall voting, too.)

Other than all of that...well, maybe Hakeem has a case.

Again pure nonsense copy and paste job from Jlauber without any good or even decent points.. AS USAL.

[B]The funny thing is that you think you think you're owning everyone everytime you write one of those idiot-essays but people only think you're a tool since the text itself is pure garbage.
[/B]

Come back when you've seen the guy play. You comment on games you even haven't seen, you've made the most ignorant and stupid comments about Hakeem and it's so obvious that you haven't seen the games you comment at all since all you do is writing, "My god, look at this stat".

And still the "crappy" Hakeem won two titles, the same amount of titles Wilt won while dominating way more than what Wilt did during his 2 runs while having way worse supporting casts. I know you're butthurt over the fact that people rank Hakeem's runs over Wilt's but come on, get real, it's just basketball and Wilt played 50 years ago. You didn't even see Wilt play, you were a kid and there's no way you remember 40-50 year old basketball games anyway.

Only really few people rank Wilt's first run over Hakeem's both runs, most of us are sure about the FACT that Hakeem was more dominant during his runs. And don't even get me started on Wilt's 2nd run, getting outscored with 23 points per game by Kareem who also had better FG% and also outassisted Wilt..:facepalm

You're the same idiot who a couple of years ago used to think that the modern era is better in every way there is and suddenly you got butthurt over and insecure and you made a 180 turn. Fact still remains that you changed your mind over some youtube-footage we all saw and some silly quotes which only shows how little of Wilt you'd seen before which takes away your whole credibility.

People, just check Jlauber's previous comments:

[QUOTE]
[B]Originally Posted by jlauber

[QUOTE=GovernmentMan]would he be the most dominant player of all time?[/QUOTE]

Is he going to the Celtics? If so, then probably.