Haha! This thread is slightly becoming Kobe vs Lebron - nothing new here. :oldlol:
Printable View
Haha! This thread is slightly becoming Kobe vs Lebron - nothing new here. :oldlol:
[QUOTE=Raymone]What has Hakeem ever done that LeBron hasn't?[/QUOTE]
Not get swept in finals. :lol
[QUOTE=jcsrplumply]Haha! This thread is slightly becoming Kobe vs Lebron - nothing new here. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]
And you can check who brought him up :oldlol:
Hakeem would be absolutely unfair in today's NBA.He is the best big man of the modern era.I can imagine a scenario where LeBron remains ringless.
A couple of examples.
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMilINcdjSM"]45 pt vs Jazz (G1 1995 PO)
[/URL][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXb7dn7yKWk"]40 pt vs Jazz (G4 1995 PO)[/URL]
More
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNGJl2MfyiI"]40 pts vs Lakers (G3 1986 PO)[/URL]
[QUOTE=Anaximandro1]Hakeem would be absolutely unfair in today's NBA.He is the best big man of the modern era.I can imagine a scenario where LeBron remains ringless.
A couple of examples.
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMilINcdjSM"]45 pt vs Jazz (G1 1995 PO)
[/URL][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXb7dn7yKWk"]40 pt vs Jazz (G4 1995 PO)[/URL]
More
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNGJl2MfyiI"]40 pts vs Lakers (G3 1986 PO)[/URL][/QUOTE]
Posts like these I don't agree with. Getting slightly off topic, and more into the effectiveness of post players today.
With defenses of today focusing on double teaming, heavy trapping, etc, and along with the rules of today taking away the impact of the big man on offense, I don't think they'd statistically dominate. In fact I think most big men would suffer statistically in this era. Not due to not being as good, just the way the game is played.
[QUOTE=plowking]Posts like these I don't agree with. Getting slightly off topic, and more into the effectiveness of post players today.
With defenses of today focusing on double teaming, heavy trapping, etc, and along with the rules of today taking away the impact of the big man on offense, I don't think they'd statistically dominate. In fact I think most big men would suffer statistically in this era. Not due to not being as good, just the way the game is played.[/QUOTE]
Meh, if Dwight Howard can average 23 on 59% for season then there's no doubt in my mind an all time great like Hakeem can dominate statistically. It's not like there are any big men right now who would be putting up bigger numbers outside of this era
[QUOTE=chazzy]Meh, if Dwight Howard can average 23 on 59% for season then there's no doubt in my mind an all time great like Hakeem can dominate statistically. It's not like there are any big men right now who would be putting up bigger numbers outside of this era[/QUOTE]
Disagree. Players like Al Jeff, Dwight Howard, Zach Randolph, Aldridge, etc would be force-fed the ball back in the 80's and 90's.
People love to diminish Howard as some no skilled, muscle pumped douche, but in reality he has plenty of skills that translate well, hence why he does score at an efficient rate. He'd be a good center in any era.
[QUOTE=plowking]Disagree.[/QUOTE]
How would Hakeem NOT be not be more statistically dominant?
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]How would Hakeem NOT be not be more statistically dominant?[/QUOTE]
As I said. Rules put in place to stop big men being effective, and the fact the game is moving away from the big man simply due to defenses of today. Everything is geared towards getting the wings to take more shots.
What do you expect him to average? 35/15 now?
[QUOTE=plowking]As I said. Rules put in place to stop big men being effective, and the fact the game is moving away from the big man simply due to defenses of today. Everything is geared towards getting the wings to take more shots.
What do you expect him to average? 35/15 now?[/QUOTE]
I meant compared to today's centers. How would he not be better statistically than, say, Dwight?
And about the rules - they implemented the defensive three-second rule in 2001. Was Shaq still not dominant? Don't tell me you think something like "zone" would prevent Hakeem, a great midrange shooter, from dominating. :confusedshrug:
Colts18...
[QUOTE]I decided to rewatch the 1995 finals and chart each possession to see to how effective Shaq and Hakeem were on the court. A special shout out to Jordanbulls for providing the video of this series
Total:
Hakeem: 253 touches, 140 doubles (55.3%)
Shaq: 221 touches, 146 doubles (66.1%)
Here are their stats when they were guarded by each other:
Shaq 32-57 (56.1 FG%), 6-8 FT, 67.3 double teamed%, .578 TS%, 17 assists, 1 O-reb allowed to Hakeem
Hakeem: 31-75 (41.3 FG%), 9-13 FT, 60.2 double teamed%, .446 TS%, 8 assists, 3 O-reb allowed to Shaq
Shaq blocked 2 Hakeem shots, Hakeem blocked 0 Shaq shots. Hakeem did make a 3P on Shaq. Hakeem guarded Shaq on 73.3% of the touches he had, while Shaq guarded Hakeem on 69.6% of his touches. Hakeem got a lot more fastbreak touches than Shaq so in the halfcourt, they guarded each other about even.
When they weren't being guarded by each other, Shaq was being guarded by Charles Jones and Hakeem by Horace Grant.
Shaq vs Jones: 7-11 FG (63.6 FG%), 35 doubles in 52 touches (67.3%), 2 assists
Hakeem vs Grant: 13-24 (54.2 FG%), 33 double teams in 58 touches (56.9%), 6 assists
Jump shots:
Hakeem: 27-62 (43.5%)
Shaq: 2-7 (28.6%)
The vast majority of Shaq's shots were close range hooks.
Dunks:
Hakeem: 1 dunk (vs grant)
Shaq: 9 dunks (2 of them were in Hakeem's face)
Fouls drawn on offense:
Shaq: 37 (17 on Hakeem)
Hakeem: 21 (9 on Shaq)
Hakeem did draw 4 Shaq charges.
Shaq was called for 5 travels, Hakeem 2.
Plus/Minus (Houston outscored Orlando by 28 points total):
On court:
Shaq: -12 in 180 minutes
Hakeem: +17 in 179 minutes
Off court:
Shaq: -16 in 16:37 of action (Houston scored 133 points per 48 in the minutes Shaq missed)
Hakeem: +11 in 17:11 of action (134 points per 48 in the minutes he was off the court)
Interestingly enough, in 2 of the games, the Magic outscored the Rockets when Shaq was on the court. The magic were -8 in about 9 minutes of action without Shaq in game (lost by just 2 points). In game 3, they were -4 in the minutes Shaq missed in a game where they lost by 3 points. In game 1, the Rockets outscored the magic by 9 in the minutes Hakeem missed, but they were outscored by a combined 4 points in games 3 and 4 without Hakeem.
Observations:
-Orlando was for some reason really committed to doubling Hakeem in game 1. They were throwing a lot of hard doubles. Hakeem had 5 assists in that game, all of them 3 pointers, 4 came off of doubles (one was a triple team). I'm guessing it was a response to Hakeem's series vs Robinson. For the rest of the series, Orlando didn't double Hakeem as much and they threw softer doubles.
-Hakeem made like 5 or 6 baskets in transition to Shaq's 1 or so. So while Shaq didn't get credit for giving up those buckets since he didn't guard, a few of those times Shaq was slow in transition. Shaq got about 3 or shots
-One of the commentators compared Horry to Scottie Pippen and Walton took the comment seriously. They are vastly different players IMO
-I'm not sure why Penny wasn't more aggressive. Kenny Smith couldn't guard him at all. When Penny did drive to the basket, he made a few shots over Hakeem.
-Drexler was the man in this series. He really wanted to get his first title badly. For some reason, people rarely talk about him despite him getting more WS than Hakeem in that playoff run
-It's fashionable these days to **** on Hakeem's cast in 94, but this cast was much better than that one. The guards outplayed Orlando's guards. Horry played really well. The 3P shooters benefited a lot from the shortened 3P line.
-Contrary to popular belief, handchecking wasn't allowed in 95. The refs called like 2 handchecking fouls in this series
-I'm so thankful the NBA got rid of the illegal defense. The refs called like 5 of them in each game. It destroyed the flow of the game and limited the ways you could double team a player. [/QUOTE]
Exactly as I saw the series. There has been so much revisionist history regarding this nonsense that Hakeem outplayed Shaq in that series (and I don't give a damn about what Shaq said, either.)
Best case for Hakeem...a draw. Reality...Shaq, as he would his entire career against Hakeem, outplayed him (and there is no doubt as to who was the more dominant player in their career head-to-heads, either...Shaq outplayed Hakeem in EVERY facet of the game.)
The reality was, Hakeem's teammates wiped out Shaq's. They outshot Shaq's teammates by a huge margin; had every bit as much of an edge from the arc; and of course the stat that no one ever brings up...Take away Hakeem and Shaq's free throws, and Hakeem's teammates made 50 more FTs. The fact was, three of those four games were won at the FT line.
Hakeem outscored Shaq in that series by five pts per game...and did so with ten more FGAs per game. Shaq was superior in every other area of the game.
Hakeem has become vastly overrated in the last decade. And I find it amusing that very few actually take the time to look up their career head-to-heads. Very onesided in Shaq's favor.
As for the OP, no question that a title and another MVP will easily vault Lebron past Hakeem. There will be no criteria that exists that would place Hakeem over him.
[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]As for the OP, no question that a title and another MVP will easily vault Lebron past Hakeem. There will be no criteria that exists that would place Hakeem over him.[/QUOTE]
your mother loves hakeem's c0ck a lot more jlauber
[QUOTE=BlackJoker23]your mother loves hakeem's c0ck a lot more jlauber[/QUOTE]
This coming from the son of a toothless Georgian backwoods hillbilly.
[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]As for the OP, no question that a title and another MVP will easily vault Lebron past Hakeem. There will be no criteria that exists that would place Hakeem over him.[/QUOTE]
teammates. road to playoffs.
:pimp:
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]I meant compared to today's centers. How would he not be better statistically than, say, Dwight?
And about the rules - they implemented the defensive three-second rule in 2001. Was Shaq still not dominant? Don't tell me you think something like "zone" would prevent Hakeem, a great midrange shooter, from dominating. :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
He would be more dominant than Dwight. I see him as a 25/12 player in this era, which would be exceptional for a big man.
Shaq was still dominant, but my point is, the effectiveness and focus of big men is taken away by today's game. If it were up to me, I wouldn't want it that way, but its the way it is. Hence the lack of dominant big men.
[QUOTE=plowking]Disagree. Players like Al Jeff, Dwight Howard, Zach Randolph, Aldridge, etc would be force-fed the ball back in the 80's and 90's.
People love to diminish Howard as some no skilled, muscle pumped douche, but in reality he has plenty of skills that translate well, hence why he does score at an efficient rate. He'd be a good center in any era.[/QUOTE]
Yes, Howard is more like what a modern center has to be like. To me Hakeem is the only center that could move as fast as Howard does but Hakeem would be selective as to when he would up himself to that speed. Howard is really quick if you look at him in comparison to previous centers. And I don't know who I would have as more athletic/agile/explosive than him at center either. The one exception would be another speed player that didn't have a polished game but averaged 26 a game. Duncan who is considered a defensive great, who was very fundamental, often had trouble with both Amare and DH. So I think they would score the same regardless of era.
I think the game is a little bit faster and the cave condensing on the inside game would affect centers from other era's some.
[QUOTE=Pointguard]Yes, Howard is more like what a modern center has to be like. To me Hakeem is the only center that could move as fast as Howard does but Hakeem would be selective as to when he would up himself to that speed. Howard is really quick if you look at him in comparison to previous centers. And I don't know who I would have as more athletic/agile/explosive than him at center either. The one exception would be another speed player that didn't have a polished game but averaged 26 a game. Duncan who is considered a defensive great, who was very fundamental, often had trouble with both Amare and DH. So I think they would score the same regardless of era.
I think the game is a little bit faster and the cave condensing on the inside game would affect centers from other era's some.[/QUOTE]
Yeah.
Speaking of centers, I think D-Rob's game would translate best out of most of the great centers. Loved to face up, had a great first step, and was a beast when it came to running up and down the court. His game would be suited to today's style.
[QUOTE=Electric Slide]There is legitimately zero argument that rose was better than lebron in 2011.[/QUOTE]
True, although Lebron wasn't better than Dwight Howard that year.
The MVP too often goes to players with the better "story." Which Rose had. But, Lebron was dominant but probably one of less dominant years in his prime, while Dwight was at his best and his impact on the course of the game defensively, paired with an improved productiveness offensively, made him the best player of the league that year.
So yea, I agree Lebron was better than Rose (IMO) in 2011 (certainly debatable, I mean Rose DID have a terrific year, and was largely un-guardable one on one). But, Dwight was even better than Bron that year.
[QUOTE=ripthekik]Youngest team in the league? What was their average age.. 23?
I havent checked this stat.. but seems like they're the youngest team ever in the finals..
So congrats Heat, you beat the youngest team ever in the finals. :applause:[/QUOTE]
the team that demolished the lakers
[QUOTE=plowking]Yeah.
Speaking of centers, I think D-Rob's game would translate best out of most of the great centers. Loved to face up, had a great first step, and was a beast when it came to running up and down the court. His game would be suited to today's style.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, imagine him with John Wall.
[QUOTE=chazzy]You guys are being way to quick to dismiss Hakeem's title runs. Look at his team in 94 and look at his numbers in 95[/QUOTE]
This.
And honestly, regular season numbers don't mean all that much with the greats like this. Compare the playoff stats...you want to know what these guys do when it matters most.
Lebron
29/9/7 on 47/31/75
Hakeem
26/11/3 on 53/22/71
Now, those are a little misleading considering Hakeem played 3 years in the playoffs outside of his prime. And Hakeem's title run in 95 was amazing. 33/10/5...
I think Lebron does pass him if he wins the title and finals mvp this year. But if he doesn't, I'd still rank Hakeem higher. It's already getting pretty close though.
Just depends on if you mean basketball or resume. Lebron has a better resume already than most legends. Hes gonna blow Hakeems away.
Id still rather have Hakeem on my team. All the rest is pretty whatever to me in situations like this where I have seen the entire career of both sides. Im not guessing like I am with some older players.
I know what Hakeem could do...and Lebron. Not taking Lebron. Its not like....5 levels apart. But its not something id have to look at the team first either.
Id take Hakeem every time. Too disruptive on defense with the right mix of skill and aggression on offense.
If Lebron more often played the way hes capable of id take him. Id take out to prove a point Lebron over Hakeem. I wouldnt take average Lebron though.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Steve Nash has more MVPs than Isiah Thomas. That doesn't make him better. Heck Derrick Rose has more MVPs than Isiah. The MVP is not a great tool to rate players against each other for several reasons. For one, the voting rules have changed. The players themselves used to vote. Now the media does. Also the definition of what truly is the MVP has never been defined.
Michael Jordan should probably have 10 MVPs, but instead he only has 5. The voters change their opinions from year to year on who should get the award. Sometimes they like to crown a past champion, and sometimes they get fatigue and want to give it to a new guy.
On top of that, the competition is different from era to era. Dirk has an MVP, but he never competed with Magic, Bird, nor Michael to get it. It's just an awful awful awful way to try to judge players from different eras.[/QUOTE]
Great post
MJ battled all time greats in their prime for MVP the likes of Magic, Bird, Barkley, Malone, DRobinson, Hakeem, Shaq etc.
Let's be real, LBJ competition for MVPs are nowhere near that level considering that most of them are either old or injured. Who's his biggest comp? KD? Fair enough but he's still only 23? Who's next? Melo? Paul? lol
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Just depends on if you mean basketball or resume. Lebron has a better resume already than most legends. Hes gonna blow Hakeems away.
Id still rather have Hakeem on my team. All the rest is pretty whatever to me in situations like this where I have seen the entire career of both sides. Im not guessing like I am with some older players.
I know what Hakeem could do...and Lebron. Not taking Lebron. Its not like....5 levels apart. But its not something id have to look at the team first either.
Id take Hakeem every time. Too disruptive on defense with the right mix of skill and aggression on offense.
If Lebron more often played the way hes capable of id take him. Id take out to prove a point Lebron over Hakeem. I wouldnt take average Lebron though.[/QUOTE]
Meh...you over-rate Hakeem's impact. Not by a lot, but enough if you would take Hakeem in every situation.
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Just depends on if you mean basketball or resume. Lebron has a better resume already than most legends. Hes gonna blow Hakeems away.
[/QUOTE]
How is his resume better? He has 1 ring on a stacked team in a weak era. Hakeem has 2 on a weak team in a strong era.
I agree with the rest of your post though.
[QUOTE=TheMan]
[B]MJ battled all time greats in their prime for MVP the likes of Magic, Bird, Barkley, Malone, DRobinson, Hakeem, Shaq etc.
Let's be real, LBJ competition for MVPs are nowhere near that level considering that most of them are either old or injured. Who's his biggest comp? KD? Fair enough but he's still only 23? Who's next? Melo? Paul? lol[/B][/QUOTE]
:applause:
excellent post.
Every realistic situation. If you are gonna say who would I take if a team already had Shaq and Zo....thats one thing. But any reasonable....likely...situation?
No question who.
And its not as simple as impact. Hakeem might well not make say...the 09 Cavs win 66 games.
Im picking him because of what he allows me to do team building wise and us being in a league I can find a 20ppg swingman just laying outside some GMs window looking for a meal but I cant find a spare bigman I can depend on to save my life.
The only centers id call franchise players even potentially....Bynum and Dwight? One is a giant child...well...both are giant children...and one of them is a hurt one who gets sued by neighbors for too much weed smoke in the backyard.
Hakeem wasnt perfect...he got in fights and so on. He supposedly slapped a teammate or two...
But give me the shot to build a team around Hakeem where hes only gonna play a center likely to score 20 like...6 times a season...where the highest scoring 4/5 in the league does like 20 a game(Aldridge)?
He would have so much defensive freedom he wouldnt know what to do with it. Hes barely breaking a sweat defending his man. There is nobody left who makes you work on the boards and man to man(closest being Dwight or Bynum if he returns). Hakeem would have so much less to do in this league I cant imagine he doesnt find a way to excel even more at whats left.
I watched Dwight average like 27 a game for a stretch just off being fed the ball and not automatically kicking it back out. Hakeem isnt getting slowed by rule changes and he would have freedom on defense I feel a need to see.
Dwight was too effective on Orlando for me to believe Hakeem isnt gonna be better. And Dwight at his peak(2011) wasnt more than a step behind Lebron anyway.
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Every realistic situation. If you are gonna say who would I take if a team already had Shaq and Zo....thats one thing. But any reasonable....likely...situation?
No question who.
And its not as simple as impact. Hakeem might well not make say...the 09 Cavs win 66 games.
Im picking him because of what he allows me to do team building wise and us being in a league I can find a 20ppg swingman just laying outside some GMs window looking for a meal but I cant find a spare bigman I can depend on to save my life.
The only centers id call franchise players even potentially....Bynum and Dwight? One is a giant child...well...both are giant children...and one of them is a hurt one who gets sued by neighbors for too much weed smoke in the backyard.
Hakeem wasnt perfect...he got in fights and so on. He supposedly slapped a teammate or two...
But give me the shot to build a team around Hakeem where hes only gonna play a center likely to score 20 like...6 times a season...where the highest scoring 4/5 in the league does like 20 a game(Aldridge)?
He would have so much defensive freedom he wouldnt know what to do with it. Hes barely breaking a sweat defending his man. There is nobody left who makes you work on the boards and man to man(closest being Dwight or Bynum if he returns). Hakeem would have so much less to do in this league I cant imagine he doesnt find a way to excel even more at whats left.
I watched Dwight average like 27 a game for a stretch just off being fed the ball and not automatically kicking it back out. Hakeem isnt getting slowed by rule changes and he would have freedom on defense I feel a need to see.
Dwight was too effective on Orlando for me to believe Hakeem isnt gonna be better. And Dwight at his peak(2011) wasnt more than a step behind Lebron anyway.[/QUOTE]
Then maybe you don't over-rate Hakeem. Seem to under-rate Lebron then...at least last years Lebron and this year so far.
I'm not sure there has been a team in the league since 09 that Lebron wouldn't lead to 50 regular season wins.
I'm just curious. Would you also take Hakeem over Bird and Magic and Kobe everytime as well?
[quote=DMAVS41]Then maybe you don't over-rate Hakeem. Seem to under-rate Lebron then...at least last years Lebron and this year so far.
I'm not sure there has been a team in the league since 09 that Lebron wouldn't lead to 50 regular season wins.
I'm just curious. Would you also take Hakeem over Bird and Magic and Kobe everytime as well?[/quote]
No. Many times though. Im talking for today. His advantage over his peers would be much greater than theirs for the most part.
Kobe id take him over every time as well though. I suspect that leads into a "Why Magic/Bird at times and not Kobe/Lebron" thing that would make it seem like an old school/new school issue but it isnt. Hakeem is from the same era they are in a way. Shit if Magic went to 4 years of college he would have come in in what....81 or so?
I dont think Hakeem is flat better than all of them. But I think he would need to do the least to stand out these days.
Lebron has reached a level of dominance where it's certainly debatable, but I'd still go with Dream and if Lebron never gets better than he is now, he'll remain behind Dream who was obviously on a completely different level defensively.
Amazing player to watch offensively as well. Could hit baseline fadeaways away from the double all day, but sometimes he'd do a quick spin as soon as he got the entry pass, and defenders were fooled by that constantly because he'd also sometimes shoot the fadeaway immediately after receiving the pass. Or he'd go to a little step through and jump hook in the lane, and sometimes he'd spin and end up getting swarmed, but find a wide open 3 point shooter.
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]No. Many times though. Im talking for today. His advantage over his peers would be much greater than theirs for the most part.
Kobe id take him over every time as well though. I suspect that leads into a "Why Magic/Bird at times and not Kobe/Lebron" thing that would make it seem like an old school/new school issue but it isnt. Hakeem is from the same era they are in a way. Shit if Magic went to 4 years of college he would have come in in what....81 or so?
I dont think Hakeem is flat better than all of them. But I think he would need to do the least to stand out these days.[/QUOTE]
Not at all. I was just curious.
I guess I don't see how you can say you'd take Hakeem every time, but that is fine. I wouldn't obviously.
Although I do think it's a little difficult to defend your taking of Hakeem every time over Lebron...and not every time over Bird or Magic (especially with the defensive part of your argument)...but that is just me.
Got alot of work cut out for me here, lol... ill try reply as much as possible when i get home.
[QUOTE=pauk]Got alot of work cut out for me here, lol... ill try reply as much as possible when i get home.[/QUOTE]
writing another essay :applause:
[QUOTE=plowking]Disagree. Players like Al Jeff, Dwight Howard, Zach Randolph, Aldridge, etc would be force-fed the ball back in the 80's and 90's.
People love to diminish Howard as some no skilled, muscle pumped douche, but in reality he has plenty of skills that translate well, hence why he does score at an efficient rate. He'd be a good center in any era.[/QUOTE]
Al Jefferson, Dwight Howard, Zach Randolph, and Aldridge are no where near the skill level of Hakeem Olajuwon.
Do you think people will pay $10,000 for a week to learn post moves from Dwight Howard? I seriously doubt it.
Magic and Bird brought the game to a different level. They decentralized the game. In its most basic form the center is closest to the basic and likely to get the easiest shots. But when thinker/skilled players came to the game it was like bringing an air dimension to a ground game or turning checkers to chess. You can flank a center by nature of his local. But try catching a guy that can fly and can be anywhere. Shaq was the most dominant center in modern times but he was a clear second to Jordan. With the way most of you rank players, Hakeem wouldn't be in this conversation if baseball wasn't in Jordan's heart.
I give Hakeem the individual defensive edge. He's is straight up better. But the team and mental aspect is way to much to overlook overall.
With four other players on the court and Lebron's influence on them is just going to give you more impact. Lebron's figuring out offenses at a level Hakeem simply can't and could not affect. Too many players on Miami overflow with crazy confidence.
Hakeem was one of the few centers that played the full Wilt model of center responsibilities. Score, Rebound, protect the paint, block, pass out of double teams, etc. If you are a traditionalist he's doing all of this, together, at the highest level in modern times.
Lebron is unique in that his level of responsibility from the perimeter is as complete in obvious responsibilities. But there is a big difference. Lebron adapts at levels Hakeem never could. Lebron can ignite his team into the best running team in the league. Or he can slow the game down. He can choose which players he wants to get on. He can flip the opponents game plan on them. He can go outside if they pack the game in. He will penetrate or post if they don't. He can do all of this on the fly with his teammates excelling with him and feeding off of it.
I am not so ready to give Hakeem total impact on the defensive end either.
On the defensive end Lebron's team is a bit better than any Hakeem team I can recall. The real kicker is that when Lebron is not playing they aren't that good. And its something you have to consider. Lebron's versatility, in the present game, means he can guard directly almost any player in the game (a legit 98%+) now and slow them down some. Hakeem was great defensively but he was going to watch Jordan beat him without much interference. At least Lebron could be effective in some way. Adaption is major.
Lebron keeps his shooters happy, he can adapt his team into a great defense, assist with their great shooting, lead them into the best running game, he can break the defense down in at least a half dozen ways, he mentally refocus his team to change at a whole different level. Hakeem was great under the basket but the game isn't played there anymore and everybody knows where to look for him. The sword had its day.
[QUOTE]Hakeem was great defensively but he was going to watch Jordan beat him without much interference. At least Lebron could be effective in some way. Adaption is major.[/QUOTE]
Just stuck out to me....
[QUOTE]The Rockets, in fact, had a 5-1 record vs. Jordan and the Bulls from 1991 through 1993, the span of Chicago's first "three-peat."
After a loss on his home floor at Chicago Stadium in 1993, Jordan said, "We have no answer for the big guy. It's a good thing they won't ever make it to the (NBA) Finals, because I don't think we could beat them."[/QUOTE]
In some of those games he had:
23/10/5 7 blocks and 2 steals
32/17/ 9 blocks and 3 steals
24/11/8 blocks
28/13/7/5/4
18/17/ 5 blocks 4 steals
28/11/ 6 blocks
Hell he had 32/16/5/4/4 vs us when he was older.
I remember them playing the Rockets...hakeem did not just watch Jordan beat him. He usually beat Jordan when they were both top of their games in the early 90s.
Lebron isnt even in the top 20 ever what makes people think he is better than Hakeem?
[QUOTE=daj0264]Lebron isnt even in the top 20 ever what makes people think he is better than Hakeem?[/QUOTE]
:applause:
[QUOTE=pauk]Got alot of work cut out for me here, lol... ill try reply as much as possible when i get home.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://0-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/wsg/image/1339/64/1339642005135.gif[/IMG]
I might just lock it right now to be a dick.