Put prime Hakeem in Bill Russell's era

[QUOTE=millwad]You spam about Swede Halbrook crazy much considering that the guy only played in the league 2 years while only being able to average 5.5 points on 34% shooting while your beloved big guy only averaged 6.6 rebounds per game..

Couldn't you find a better scrub?[/QUOTE]

Once again...Dickwad the dumb...

First of all...I "SPAM Swede like crazy"? What a complete moron. Please provide ALL of those "spammed posts" of mine. The ONLY time I bring up Holbrook is when idiots, like yourself, claim that Wilt didn't face tall players. BUT, once again, please find ALL of the MANY times that I have brought up my "beloved big guy."

BTW, Holbrook was no worse a center than players like 7-5 Chuck Nevitt, who averaged 1.6 ppg in NINE seasons, most all of which occurred in the Olajuwon era.

WHY did I bring up the FACT that Russell, in the 50's, had to battle a frontline that included a 7-0 forward and a 7-3 center? Because another idiotic poster (they are all over the place) claimed that Wilt and Russell only played against 6-8 guys.

Now, think about what I posted (I know...you can't comprehend it.) Russell had to battle TWO legitimate 7-0+ footers at the SAME time...and in 1955! You will be hard-pressed to find two seven-footers manning a college frontline TODAY. I can only recall a couple myself (although I'm sure there were a few others), James Edwards and James Donaldson, and Pembrook Burrows and Artis Gilmore (both of whom were dominated by UCLA's 6-9 Sidney Wicks in the NCAA title game BTW.)

OK, let's get back to the REAL question...who were the players that Wilt ROUTINELY faced in his career?

Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2"
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11"
Walt Bellamy: 6'11"
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0"
Nate Bowman: 6'11"
Mel Counts: 7'0"
Walter Dukes: 7'0"
Jim Eakins: 6'11"
Ray Felix: 6'11"
Hank Finkel: 7'0"
Artis Gilmore: 7'2"
Swede Halbrook: 7'3"
Reggie Harding: 7'0"
Bob Lanier: 6'11"
Jim McDaniels: 6'11"
Otto Moore: 6'11"
Dave Newmark: 7'0"
Rich Niemann: 7'0"
Billy Paultz: 6'11"
Craig Raymond: 6'11"
Elmore Smith: 7'0"
Jim Fox: 6-11"
Chuck Share: 6'11"
Ronald Taylor: 7'1"
Nate Thurmond: 6'11"
Walt Wesley: 6'11"

Those were just some of the players that Wilt battled (and yes, heights may vary according to reference.). FURTHERMORE, most all of them were measured in BARE FEET...unlike the CURRENT NBA where players are measured in SHOES. So, you can basicaly add an inch to virtually all of them. Which, of course, means that Wilt was facing QUITE a few "seven-footers" in his career. And before someone mentions that Gilmore did not play in Wilt's leagues, so what? Wilt did battle him in the 71-72 NBA-ABA all-star game, and blocked a couple of his shots, and powered thru him for a couple of dunks in only a few minutes. Furthermore, Gilmore battled MANY of the same centers that Wilt just CRUSHED in his career. Gilmore was never as dominant against the same centers...nor was KAREEM.

And Wilt dominated those guys from his first game of his pro career, until his LAST. Chamberlain's "scoring seasons" were in the first half of the decade...in SLIGHTLY faster paced leagues than later eras. AND, he also hung the HIGH games in EVERY season of the decade of the 60's. He had EIGHT of his 32 60+ point games after the league widened the lane (and BTW, his scoring hardly dropped at all in the two seasons AFTER that, AND his FG% went UP.) He had TWO 60+ games in the 68-69 season alone...in a year in which he averaged 14 FGAs per game...and in a league that averaged 112 ppg. Not only that, but Kareem faced BOTH of those guys the very next season, and couldn't come close to that. Furthermore, in Wilt's 69-70 season (Kareem's rookie season), he was averaging 32 ppg on 60% shooting in his first nine games, and before he shredded his knee (in a game in which he scored 33 points on 13-13 shooting.)

Even as late as his 71-72 season, and near the end of his career, he hung a 31-32 game on 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier...one of TWO 30-30 games that he had that season (out of the 103 he had in his career.) Oh, and BTW, Kareem only had ONE 30-30 game in his ENTIRE 20 year career (and it came after Wilt retired.)

A couple of other points, too. There were only eight to 17 teams per season in Wilt's 14 season career, and about 12 on average. There were less seven-footers because there were less teams.

Secondly, many players in the 60's and 70's were UNDER-measured. Wilt was generally regarded as at least 7-2 (despite his own assertion that he was a little over 7-1.) Kareem was generally regarded as taller than 7-2. Bill Walton was taller than 6-11. Elvin Hayes was listed at 6-8 in college, and was found to be 6-9 1/2. Wicks was listed at 6-8 in college, and was 6-9. Bill Russell, for some reason was listed at 6-9 in the NBA, but was listed at 6-10 in college (and BTW, he himself claimed he was 6-10.)

By contrast, there have been players in later eras that were OVER-measured. Hakeem, himself, was listed at a ridiculous 7-0, when he was no more than 6-10. Ben Wallace was listed at 6-9, when he himself claimed he was no more than 6-7. Ralph Sampson was no more than 7-2 (and no less than 7-4 Mark Eaton claimed as much), AND, he had a long neck and short arms. Kevin Love is slightly over 6-9. Barkley was listed at 6-6 and was probably not even 6-5.

Finally, height, in itself has not proven to be a key to performance. Who was the best defensive center of the last decade? 6-7 Ben Wallace. Who was the best defensive center of the 60's? 6-10 Russell. Who was the best rebounder of the 00's? Here again, 6-7 Ben Wallace. Hell, 6-9 white guy Love ran away with the rebounding title in 2011. How about the 90's? Was it 7-1 Shaq, or 7-1 Robinson, or even 6-10 Hakeem? Nope... 6-8 Rodman, and by a MILE. My god, the 6-5 Barkley not only won a rebounding title...but when he was paired up with Hakeem later on (and both at the same age BTW), Barkley KILLED Hakeem (he outrebounded Olajuwon by FOUR per game.) You can go back to the 80's, too. 6-10 Moses dominated his era in rebounding and power.

In any case, Dickwad continues to make a jackass of himself.

the pumpfake, dropstep, and spinmove were not common moves back then..

you put prime hakeem in there, dont matter how big or strong the dudes are, he's shaking em out of their shoes.

i say he averages wiltesque scoring, but less rebounding, definitely more blocks because he'd be chasin people down left and right, but i dont think he ever tries to lead the league in assists.

[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]People really need to stop looking at the statsheet. Especially the teenaged Wilt fan; I have him on ignore (only person on there) but people keep quoting him.

Read the recap of Kareem's 46 point game. Hakeem is overplaying him the whole time because he's just overmatched. Kareem has roughly 5 inches in height, definitely had a lower stronger body at that point and 15 pounds on him.

That just causes Hakeem to be overmatched and he's forced to gamble on the entry pass. The Rockets also don't bother helping after Hakeem gets beat; Sampson is glued to the PFs the whole time (its said in the recap).

Kareem had an 18 point game in the last game against Houston in the season and Sampson was the initial defender on him. Sampson was again the initial defender on him in the playoffs where Kareem averaged 27 a game. Hakeem was coming over from the weakside trying to help out.

Are you going to claim Sampson is a better defender than Hakeem because he held him to 18 points?

That whole "that wasn't even a prime Kareem" doesn't work. Kareem lost something in rebounding, stamina and defense. He was infinitely worse in that regards but he could still score and pass. He was the Lakers main guy in the halfcourt set up until 1986. In some ways, he was better suited for certain match ups than he was in the early 70s because he was stronger with more weight on. Look at his per 36 scoring numbers, they don't fluctuate it that much.

Secondly, Shaq in 1995 did better against Hakeem than he did against a 38 year old Hakeem in 2001. And I'm just going off the statsheet here which I normally hate doing because its deceptive since we don't know who was guarding each other, the game plans ect ect.

Shaq in 2001, against Hakeem, had a 24 pt 8/19 game with 4 turnovers, a 14 6/14 game with 5 turnovers and a 25 pt on 9/17 game with 2 turnovers. Those first two games are Shaq's worst games of the season. Another thing to be noted is that Shaq had a 43 point game on 17/23 with 0 turnovers against Houston that year where Hakeem did not play.

So yeah, Hakeem must have shut down by using some of dullards logic on here.

And MY GOD, just imagine what would a Hakeem in his defensive prime would hold a peak Shaq to.

I'm guessing 0 points on 0/10 shooting with 6 turnovers.

Hakeem the GOAT. :bowdown:[/QUOTE]

First of all, we KNOW that Hakeem TRIED to guard a 38 year old Kareem...and FLOPPED. 33 ppg on .634 shooting in FIVE H2H's in '86 (and another 40 point game on Hakeem in the '85 season.) It's was embarrassing enough that Kareem could averaged the 33 ppg (and 27 ppg in the playoffs), but that .634 shooting is just stunning. Of course, Shaq went for a 28 ppg .595 series against Hakeem in the '95 Finals, as well. Once again, Hakeem WAS guarding Kareem for the 40+ point games. That Fitch finally gave up and had Sampson guarding Kareem in the playoffs (and with Hakeem helping) just illustrates the fact that Hakeem just COULDN'T guard an OLD Kareem.

Dickwad brings up a PRIME Kareem's scoring against an OLD Wilt...but, in their 28 H2H games (27 of which occurred after Wilt's knee injury, and all of those from a 34+ old Chamberlain)...how about this stat? Kareem shot .464 COMBINED in those 28 games. Here was a PRIME Kareem, shooting WAY under a 100 points under his regular season FG%'s. In fact, Kareem shot .559 over the course of his entire career...and that .464 against Wilt. BTW, an OLD Kareem faced Hakeem-led teams in a 22 games from '86 thru his last season in '89...and shot .599 (and probably higher when guarded by Hakeem.) So, a PRIME Kareem shot 100 points UNDER his career FG% against an OLD Wilt...and 50 points OVER that career mark as an OLD Kareem against a younger Hakeem.

As for Kareem's "36 minute" production...get that NONSENSE out of here. Kareem couldn't even PLAY 36 mpg in the '86 season. In his '71 season he averaged 40 mpg in both the regular season, and the post-season, BUT, he could have played much more. Why? His Bucks went 66-16 and had a +12.2 ppg differential...and then went 12-2 in the playoffs with a record differential of +14.5 However, in his '70 season he averaged 43 mpg in both the regular season, and the post-season. In his '72 season he averaged 44 mpg in the regular season, and 46 mpg in the post-season. In his '86 season, he was at 33 mpg in the regular season, and 35 mpg in the playoffs. The very next season he was at 31 in both.

Kareem, at 38, was FAR slower, and not nearly as athletic. To say that it didn't affect his OFFENSE is pure crap. A 23 year old Kareem could move MUCH quicker, and jump MUCH higher.

And that "per 36 minute" stat is almost as ridiculous as Fecal's +/-. How can you compare a player that plays 30 mpg to a player that plays 45+? There is a reason a player only plays 33 mpg...he simply CAN'T play more. And, if he HAD to play more, his numbers would SURELY decline...especially as the season wore on. Meanwhile, how much more EFFICIENT would a player like Wilt have been, had he only played 40 mpg in his career? 6-8 mpg, multiplied over the course of an entire season, and then multipled over the course of his 14 year career??!!!

Not only that, but you, like many others fail to take into LEAGUE AVERAGE FG%. Kareem's .564 FG% in '86 came in a league that shot .487. In his '71 season, he shot .577 in a league that shot .449. He was a MUCH more efficient shooter in '71. And yes, the numbers bare that out. Take a look at most all of the CENTERS that played in the 70's and into the 80's. Most all shot better (or MUCH better...see Gilmore) in the 80's. THEN, take a look at most all of the CENTERS that played in the 80's and then into the 90's. Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing...all shot much better in the 80's (or early 90's as in Robinson's case.) Why? Why was Hakeem shooting his CAREER best in his ROOKIE season? Because the ENTIRE league was shooting better. Put a PRIME Kareem (or Wilt) in the 80's, and it is almost a certainty that they would have shot MUCH better.

Regarding Shaq against Hakeem. How about the '99 playoffs. 29 ppg on .516 shooting. Granted, it was as overwhelming as his 28 ppg on .595 (!) shooting in the '95 Finals, but he reduced Hakeem to a pathetic 13 ppg on .426 shooting. It was comical to watch, too. Hakeem would dance around with his "dream shake", and Shaq would just stand flat-footed, waiting until Hakeem would finally take the shot, and then he would either block it, or alter it. He also dumped a 37 point game on Hakeem in that series, and on 14-22 shooting. Interesting, though, that that was Shaq's high game against Hakeem, and yet an old Kareem could dump THREE 40+ on Hakeem.

And how about their CAREER H2H's?

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01[/url]


Regular season...covering 20 games...

Hakeem averaged 18.4 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 2.9 apg, and on .447 shooting.
Shaq averaged 22.1 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 3.6 apg, and on .544 shooting.

Playoffs...

Hakeem was at 23.0 ppg, 9.4 rpg, 3.0 apg, and on .465 shooting.
Shaq with 28.8 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 5.1 apg, and .556 shooting.

A PEAK Hakeem was not even as good as a young Shaq...much less comparing them over the course of their H2H's.

So, here is what we do KNOW. A PRIME Kareem struggled mightily against an OLD Wilt. And, he didn't come CLOSE to the domination that a PRIME Chamberlain bombed many of the SAME centers that the two faced in his careers. Then, an OLD Kareem (REAL OLD) leveled Hakeem in the '86 regular season, and battled him pretty damned well in the playoffs (being SLIGHTLY outscored.) This was a 23 year old Hakeem...the same age that Kareem was when he LED the NBA in scoring, won the MVP, and then won the FMVP.

What we were deprived of viewing was a PRIME Kareem against a PRIME Hakeem. From what we do KNOW, it would just not have been close. Secondly, we never got to see a PRIME Wilt against a PRIME Kareem. The closest we ever got, was a Wilt, well past his prime in '69, just pounding a rookie Kareem. After that, Wilt blew out his knee, and was never the same... although in his LAST season, and in SIX H2H games against Kareem, he held Kareem to .450 shooting, while shooting .737 against Abdul Jabbar. He even outscored him one game, 24-21, while outshooting him, 10-14 to 10-27.

In any case, and by extension, a PRIME Wilt would have done just fine against a PRIME Hakeem. And that would be BEFORE receiving all of the advantages that he would have had playing in the 80's and 90's.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]People want to put current players back in time with their full skill set and modern conveniences that developed their game in the present day but want to transport Wilt up to these times without modern day advantages.

No way does Hakeem make the league in the 60's. More than likely there isn't an indoor basketball hoop in Nigeria in the 60's. If he lucks up and does get here. He can't copy Adrian Dantley's post moves. The dream shake is a walk which would demand that his game be more fluid with less moves. He won't get calls and would get treated harsh for being a foreigner and African. There is no big man's camp. He doesn't get access to gyms so his shot suffers. He doesn't have big man coaches to work on his excellent foot work. He doesn't have the same access to video tape to accelerate his learning... . His prime would be delayed because access to things is just plain harder. His skills suffer because they can't be developed like they were in the '80s. Best case scenario he peaks as a player similar to Bill Russel for two years.

If Wilt transports to these times: He would have Hakeem tapes to copy Hakeem's moves. He employs a power game. He would have big man's camp and developed his left hand and probably a jump hook. He gets 24 hour access to gyms so his shot improves and he dribbles better. He gets calls in his favor instead of MMA moves practiced on him. He would have the best last step and first step the game ever saw because his leg length was unbelievable. Wilt would improve on moves like the Shaq giant drop step, Akeem shake, MaHale up and under, because he originated them but was under tighter whistle constraints. Plus he would have to option to employ a giant Ewing hop move, Shaq shuffle, Shaq baby hook.

He has a ton less psychological things to deal with. He can play all out at full blast cause he got masseuse, days off, diet control, better weight trainers. His muscle explosion would be better because of stretching excercises. Gyms have temperature control and even floors. Balls are uniform and new... .

His biggest problem would be his getting up to play another good center (Wilt was rarely outplayed in center duties). He would be saving his energy for DH who would only have a quickness advantage.

Wilt would be much better than he was then. He wouldn't average 50ppg but he would still be almost nondescript. And fully capable of 34 and 17 with 6 blocks over a 7 year prime. And 32 and 17 with 5 blocks on a contender. His size, height, skill, athleticism, speed, long legs, scoring mentality and know how, determination on the boards, good timing would still be the best among centers by a huge gap. DH would be the only one close and its only in the athleticism department where he would be close in those categories.[/QUOTE]

Excellent post...as always.

:cheers:

[QUOTE=Dizzle-2k7]the pumpfake, dropstep, and spinmove were not common moves back then..

you put prime hakeem in there, dont matter how big or strong the dudes are, he's shaking em out of their shoes.

i say he averages wiltesque scoring, but less rebounding, definitely more blocks because he'd be chasin people down left and right, but i dont think he ever tries to lead the league in assists.[/QUOTE]

Well how would Hakeem know how to do them if he played in that era, unless you are presupposing a time machine?

[QUOTE=Fazotronic]who cares? my point was that it is stupid to just make the conclusion of wilt being better than hakeem, beacause a less good (old) version of kareem, dominated a rookie hakeem, while the better and younger version of kareem did not dominate a old wilt.
Considering that we are talking about 3 decades of (developing) Basketball and that hakeem was not the player he was gonna be, this is a extremely superficial argument and you present it as a ice cold fact to determined who was the best player.
Only a mentally challenged person would do that. Don't point the finger at me.



what do you want me to accept? the fact alone of wilt dominating a rookie kareem is enough to rate him higher than Hakeem AND Kareem?
screw that. that makes zero sense to me. those stats are inflated and any person using them to compare them to anything in 6 decades of nba basketball is just straight stupid.
Congratulation for joining that club.

Yea does are Hard stats and data when you consider the circumstances which you and jlauber clearly don't. You compare them 1 to 1 with any year of nba history and you dare to call me a moron? :applause:

And don't be a fool. You're not smiling at all. You're angry of the fact that you and Jlauber are the minority that puts wilt so high.
Also nice job ignoring my whole post and just quoting the last part.
Any of my points is more valid than just copy and past inflated stats to make your guy look better and especially more valid to what you contribute. which is nothing.
Destroying? haha get real.[/QUOTE]

What a moronic post. Kareem was the "bridge." If there was ever a VALID comparison, it would be the Wilt-Kareem, then Hakeem-Wilt H2H's. Did Kareem's game improve in his 20 years? Prove it. He was more dominant in his 71 and 72 seasons than at any other point in his career. In fact, he had some other seasons AFTER that that were considerably WORSE than what he had in the 80's. So, you can't have it both ways. He was dominant early in his career, leveled off in his physical prime, and then, while being a very good center in the 80's was nowhere near as dominant. As mentioned earlier, Moses pounded him in their post-season H2H's.

Furthermore, and as I have stated MANY times...Kareem played IN the Wilt-era for FOUR years. If his competition was so weak back then, how come he couldn't come CLOSE to the numbers that a PRIME Wilt put up? How come Wilt, in the 68-69 season, and considerably past his prime, could hang TWO 60+ point games (in a league that only averaged 112 ppg), and against two centers that Kareem would face the very next year...and yet, where are Kareem's 60+ point games? Don't bother looking them up...you won't find ANY. And how come Wilt could put up TWO 30-30 (of his 103 BTW) in the 71-72 season, including a 31-32 game against 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier...and yet Kareem only had ONE in his ENTIRE 20 year career? And, here again, Kareem played FOUR years in the Wilt era.

Furthermore, in Wilt's LAST post-season, he averaged 22.5 rpg over the course of 17 playoff games. Kareem never came close to those numbers in his entire post-season career (and that was among Wilt's WORST post-seasons.) In fact, Kareem's HIGH post-season was 18.2 (and Wilt, as usual outrebounded him H2H in that one.) BTW, Kareem's 17.7 rpg in the '77 post-season was the next highest post-season since Wilt's LAST post-season of 22.5 rpg.

And, one more damned time..."inflated stats?" What the hell does that REALLY mean? Wilt's 50.4 ppg season would translate into a 42 ppg season in 2011. Just use basic math you idiot. In 2011 the NBA averaged 99.6 ppg. In Wilt's '62 season, the NBA averaged 118.8 ppg. 2011 was at 83% of 1962.

Of course there is no way of PROVING what a PRIME Chamberlain would REALLY average in 2011. What we do KNOW though, is that a PRIME Chamberlain was FAR more dominant against MANY of the SAME centers that Kareem faced. And we KNOW that an OLD Wilt battled a PRIME Kareem to a statistical draw in their TEN H2H games in the '71 season. And we KNOW that an OLD Kareem carpet-bombed a young 23 year old Hakeem in his second season...at the same age that Kareem was in his statistical PRIME. Hakeem went on to be among the best centers in the 90's, and even gave a young Shaq all he could handle in '95. And we KNOW that Shaq just abused the NBA from '95 thru '05.

Now, you tell me just what a 7-2 Wilt (and 7-3 in shoes), with a 7-8 wingspan, and at a massively strong 280-300 lbs, and with a high-jump that WON a Big-7 title in college, and with a sprinter' speed that enabled him to run with KU's 4x100 team, and with solid range of up to 15 ft., and with a myriad of post moves...do in a 2011 NBA in which the only decent center is a 6-10 Howard, who would be much shorter, not nearly as long, no more athletic, and not nearly as strong, and with less skills?

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Well how would Hakeem know how to do them if he played in that era, unless you are presupposing a time machine?[/QUOTE]

Once again, these posters provide NOTHING, except their OPINIONS. They just ASSUME that ANY player from today would crush the players of the 60's...despite the FACT that there has never been a season in which anyone could claim that THAT is when the NBA became what it is today.

You can take any particular season, say 1980, and make a moronic claim that THAT is when the NBA became what we see today. And yet, take a look at the best players in the year before (1979.) You will see players who dominated the better players in 1980. Once again, you can do that with ANY season.

True, there has been a very SLOW and SMALL progression since 1960, but it has been minimal. These idiotic posters who claim that the players of the 60's couldn't dribble with their left hand (which is complete nonsense BTW), ignore the FACT that Earl Monroe was a spectacular dribbler, as was Pisto Pete in the 60's at LSU. Yet, neither were considered among the very best guards of their era (West, Oscar, Bing, Sam Jones, and Greer.)

Connie Hawkins and Gus Johnson were doing sensational dunks in the 60's (Johnson smashed THREE backboards BTW), and yet, neither were considered anywhere near the players that Baylor, Lucas, and Barry were.

And of course, even in the early 70's we had players like Archibald, Dr. J, David Thompson, and McAdoo. All of whom had as much SKILL and ATHLETICISM as anyone playing TODAY.

[QUOTE=Psileas]First of all, Kareem still wasn't in his prime in '83. His prime ended after around '80 or '81. In '83, he was already 36, and on the other hand, Moses was 27-28 and in his prime. Second, like already mentioned, Kareem's defensive weakness was against big players who played a physical offensive game, with Moses being among the GOAT at this. I'd actually say Moses was THE toughest offensive opponent of Kareem ever.
Obviously, comparisons like this are not 100% linear, but you can't claim there's not any kind of relationship, either.

Regarding Kareem vs Hakeem, I'm not into the 39 y.o Kareem being better than 23 y.o Hakeem stuff (mainly due to Hakeem's defensive and rebounding advantage being more crucial than Kareem's passing and FG% ones), but you have to admit he did a job that's just not possible for almost any 39 y.o to do. Hakeem averaged an excellent 30.6/11.2 on Kareem in the '86 playoffs, while Kareem averaged a great 27.0/6.8 and Hakeem is still considered as having performed supremely, despite this. Imagine 2002 Jordan (same age with '86 Kareem) going head to head in a playoff series with an entering his prime Kobe and still hang 27.0 ppg on him vs Kobe's 30.6? Nobody in his right mind would be talking about a crashing victory for Kobe, even if he had better all-around stats. For me, the fact that the Rockets beat the Lakers is far more impressive than Hakeem managing to outplay a 39 y.o Kareem. Heck, the fact alone that he wasn't [B]expected [/B]to outplay him like this is impressive, although this was to somewhat be expected, after Kareem gave the Rockets 33.0/7.6/3.2 during the regular season, so "only" managing 27.0 ppg in the playoffs was considered underperforming, lol.[/QUOTE]

Here's the thing...we KNOW that Hakeem TRIED to guard the 38 year old Kareem in that '86 season (and in at least one 40 point game in '85.) The results...a season of 33 ppg on a mind-boggling .634 FG%. Included was that 46 point game, on 21-30 shooting (70% for the uneducated here), and in only 37 minutes.

I mentioned it previously in this topic, but let's get real here. How many players have even played to the age of 38 in their careers? And, of those, how many were even close to where they were at at age 23? Kareem and Hakeem certainly weren't. Kareem was among the best players in the game at age 38 (he finished 5th in the MVP balloting)...but that was a FAR cry from his PEAK seasons...of which he had MANY. His numbers PALED in comparison to his best seasons, too, especially when league averages are included. And it was a given that Kareem was nowhere NEAR at his PHYSICAL peak.

Kareem at age 38? 23.4 ppg, 6.1 rpg, and .564 shooting. And he was nowhere to be found on the all-defensive teams. Career HIGH's? 34.8 ppg, 16.9 rpg, and .604 shooting. He also had several first and second all-defensive seasons in his career. There is simply no comparison.

Hakeem at 38 was just a SHELL. Hakeem at age 23? He was not at his peak, BUT, consider this... the man averaged 23.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, and shot .526 from the field. Not only that, but in his very next season, he was voted first-team all-defense. His career HIGH's? 27.8 ppg, 14.0 rpg, and .534 FG%(which, BTW, occurred in his ROOKIE season.)

I find it AMAZING that a 38 year old could so thoroughly outplay a 23 year old. BTW, and one more time...Hakeem in '86, averaged 23.5 ppg on .526 shooting over the course of the entire season. Kareem, in that same season, averaged 23.4 ppg on .564 shooting.

And, THAT is the real issue. Kareem at age 38 was, at worst, very near the equal of a 23 year old Hakeem (and he hammered him in the regular season.) BUT, just what a more PRIME Kareem have done?

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Well how would Hakeem know how to do them if he played in that era, unless you are presupposing a time machine?[/QUOTE]

the topic says PRIME HAKEEM ..

so yes this is assuming we had a time machine.

now what ya gotta say , jlauber?

*crickets crickets*

[QUOTE=Dizzle-2k7]the topic says PRIME HAKEEM ..

so yes this is assuming we had a time machine.

now what ya gotta say , jlauber?

*crickets crickets*[/QUOTE]

A PRIME Hakeem was not much better than a 23 year old Hakeem. Of course, there will be those that use his 13 games in the '94 and '95 playoffs as some kind of sample size (his seven games against Ewing in the '94 Finals, and his six games against Robinson in the '95 playoffs.) Yet, they will ignore the fact that in his other 1238 regular season games, and his other 132 playoff games, he was just a very good player. You want a REAL sample size? How about an 18 SEASON career, in which he NEVER led the NBA in scoring, nor in FG%. He led the NBA in rebounding, TWICE, and in blocked shots, THREE times. What does THAT tell you? He simply COULDN'T lead the NBA in scoring, nor in efficiency from the floor. He was, at his peak, a very good rebounder, and nothing more. In fact, when he was paired with Barkley in '97, Barkley outrebounded him by FOUR per game.

Now, if a PRIME Kareem was putting up 35 ppg seasons and on .574 shooting, I suspect that he would have been over 40 ppg, but on a considerably lower FG% in the early 60's. BUT, Hakeem was NEVER even CLOSE to the scorer, or shooter, that a PRIME Kareem was. So, I just don't see Hakeem putting up anything more than 30-33 ppg, and on 46-47% shooting, in the early 60's. Certainly very good numbers, BUT, obviously they would have PALED in comparison to Wilt's seasons (year-after-year.)

Prime Olajuwon would feast on them dudes. He was something else.

[QUOTE=jlauber]A PRIME Hakeem was not much better than a 23 year old Hakeem.
[/QUOTE]

Which only shows you have no idea what you're talking about, jackass. Prime Hakeem was by far better than 23 year old Hakeem, is your head full of crap, seriously?:facepalm

[QUOTE=jlauber]Once again...Dickwad the dumb...

First of all...I "SPAM Swede like crazy"? What a complete moron. Please provide ALL of those "spammed posts" of mine. The ONLY time I bring up Holbrook is when idiots, like yourself, claim that Wilt didn't face tall players. BUT, once again, please find ALL of the MANY times that I have brought up my "beloved big guy."
[/QUOTE]

At least 20 times I've seen you spam about Swede, what a moron:facepalm..


[QUOTE=jlauber]
OK, let's get back to the REAL question...who were the players that Wilt ROUTINELY faced in his career?

[B]Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2" - GOAT CENTER
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11" - He was 6'10 and he was a scrub
Walt Bellamy: 6'11" - Baller
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0" - scrub
Nate Bowman: 6'11" - He was 6'10 and he was a scrub
Mel Counts: 7'0" - Scrub
Walter Dukes: 7'0" - Scrub
Jim Eakins: 6'11" - You idiot, he never played against Wilt, he was in the ABA
Ray Felix: 6'11" - Scrub
Hank Finkel: 7'0" - Scrub
Artis Gilmore: 7'2" - What a jerk you are, Jlauber, he came to NBA in '76
Swede Halbrook: 7'3" - SCRUUUUUB
Reggie Harding: 7'0" - Scrub
Bob Lanier: 6'11" - Barely faced Wilt
Jim McDaniels: 6'11" - Scrib
Otto Moore: 6'11" - Scrub
Dave Newmark: 7'0" - Scrub
Rich Niemann: 7'0" - Scrub
Billy Paultz: 6'11" - You ass, he came to the NBA in '76
Craig Raymond: 6'11" - Played 27 games in the NBA:facepalm.. SCRUB
Elmore Smith: 7'0" - Barely faced Wilt, diff. conference and only for 2 years
Jim Fox: 6-11" - Scrub
Chuck Share: 6'11" - Scrub for one year when Wilt came, then retired
Ronald Taylor: 7'1" - You ass, he never played in the NBA
Nate Thurmond: 6'11" - Baller
Walt Wesley: 6'11" - 1 good year, scrub rest of it
[/QUOTE][/B]

Fixed, and I liked that you namedropped players Wilt never faced as well, "routinely" my ass... You are pathetic.

Can anyone tell me why Jlauber still spams about rookie and 2nd year pro Olajuwon when the title says "PRIME HAKEEM"? And still he puts up pure lies, he won't ever tell you that Olajuwon absolutely demolished the Laker bigs in the playoffs of '86.. It was brutal, 2nd year pro crushing the world champs big man..:applause: And still that was Olajuwon being no where close to his prime..

[QUOTE=millwad]Can anyone tell me why Jlauber still spams about rookie and 2nd year pro Olajuwon when the title says "PRIME HAKEEM"? And still he puts up pure lies, he won't ever tell you that Olajuwon absolutely demolished the Laker bigs in the playoffs of '86.. It was brutal, 2nd year pro crushing the world champs big man..:applause: And still that was Olajuwon being no where close to his prime..[/QUOTE]

Yep... a 23 year old Olajuwon, who got his clocked cleaned in the regular season by a 38 year old Kareem to the extent that his coach finally had to concede that Hakeem couldn't guard Kareem in the playoffs (although he did have to help)...and then outscored by him 31-27 in that series.

Here again, a 23 year old Kareem would have been hanging 50 a night on him.

And Hakeem "nowhere near his prime?" Wow he dramatically improved in his prime. Let's take a closer look shall we? Most would probably consider Hakeem's prime his 93-94 season, when, in a league in which MJ did not play, he won his ONLY MVP. In that season he averaged 27.3 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 3.6 apg, 3.7 bpg, and shot .528 (BTW, he only shot .517 the very next season, when he averaged a career high 27.8 ppg.) All in a career high 41 mpg.

How about the Hakeem that was "nowhere near his prime" in '86? In his 36.3 mpg, he 23.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.0 apg, 3.4 bpg, and a .526 FG%.

So, he was able to score 3.8 ppg more, grab 0.4 rpg more, hand out 1.6 apg more, block 0.3 bpg more, and shoot .002 better. In 5 mpg more per game. Wow!

Now, just for the sake of argument, how about that 38 year old Kareem. He could only go 33 mpg, and obviously he was nearing the end. He averaged 23.4 ppg, 6.1 rpg (yes, 6.1 rpg), 3.5 apg, 1.6 bpg, and shot .564.

Before I get to Kareem's best regular season, we will use his '71 season first (which I consider his second best regular season ever, and overall, his best if you include the post-season.) 40.1 mpg, 31.7 ppg, 16.0 rpg, 3.3 apg, and .577 FG% (in a league that shot .449.)

Here was his 71-72 regular season numbers: 44.2 mpg, 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, 4.6 apg, and .574 shooting. BTW, bpg were not officially kept until the 73-74 season.

So, let's compare shall we? Kareem averaged 11.4 ppg more, 10.5 rpg more, 1.1 apg more, and shot .010 better (in a league that shot .455 instead of .487 in '86.) And that does not include his defense, which was WAY better in the 70's.

I would say that Kareem in '72 was a FAR greater player than a Kareem in '86.