Hakeem vs Kareem

[millwad]

Actually, we don't even need to go to 34. Give Hakeem his whole playoff career stats, up to the age of 39, then take Kareem's stats up to the same age:

Hakeem: 25.9/11.2/3.2
Kareem: 27.3/12.0/3.8

Of course, this is already doing Hakeem a favor, since he only played in 14 playoff games between the ages of 35 and 39, while Kareem played in 83...



He should have won it 3 times. He was clearly more dominant than Magic in 1980, and it took a major injury and a marginal 4-3 voting result to deprive him of this. He was also the pretty much undisputed best player of the 1974 Finals, losing the MVP to Havlicek only because the Celtics won in Game 7.

Haha, now you're getting pathetic, first of all you miscalculated Kareem's scoring and if we're gonna take Hakeem's whole playoff career plus his downfall then we sure as hell are going to take Kareem's whole career playoff plus his downfall. You basically compared Hakeem's whole playoff-career with his downfall to Kareem's playoff career minus his major downfall, seriously..

Just face it, Hakeem has the highest scoring average among all the centers in the NBA in the playoffs and his average is superior to Kareem's when it comes to scoring, rebounding, shotblocking, stealing and a tie when it comes to assists.

And cut the crap about shoulda, woulda and coulda, Magic won the MVP in 1980, end of story. And Havlicek won it it because his team won and he was beasting, end of story.

That's like saying that Hakeem should have won the finals mvp in 86 because he was the best player on the court, he didn't win it because his team lost in 6 games but he still beasted the celtics, end of story.

Hakeem could have won the title a couple of times after 86 if Sampson didn't get injured. Well, he got injured, end of story.

And yeah, Hakeem COULD have won damn much more if he had the opportunity to play with the best point guard ever and a prime HOF SF... at the same time, but he didn't, end of story..

Is it really that hard for you guys to admit the fact that Hakeem had a better average in the playoffs compared to Kareem? And it wasn't just scoring, it was also rebounding, blocked shots and steals..

[Psileas]

Haha, now you're getting pathetic, first of all you miscalculated Kareem's scoring and if we're gonna take Hakeem's whole playoff career plus his downfall then we sure as hell are going to take Kareem's whole career playoff plus his downfall. You basically compared Hakeem's whole playoff-career with his downfall to Kareem's playoff career minus his major downfall, seriously..

Just face it, Hakeem has the highest scoring average among all the centers in the NBA in the playoffs and his average is superior to Kareem's when it comes to scoring, rebounding, shotblocking, stealing and a tie when it comes to assists.

And cut the crap about shoulda, woulda and coulda, Magic won the MVP in 1980, end of story. And Havlicek won it it because his team won and he was beasting, end of story.

That's like saying that Hakeem should have won the finals mvp in 86 because he was the best player on the court, he didn't win it because his team lost in 6 games but he still beasted the celtics, end of story.

Hakeem could have won the title a couple of times after 86 if Sampson didn't get injured. Well, he got injured, end of story.

And yeah, Hakeem COULD have won damn much more if he had the opportunity to play with the best point guard ever and a prime HOF SF... at the same time, but he didn't, end of story..

Is it really that hard for you guys to admit the fact that Hakeem had a better average in the playoffs compared to Kareem? And it wasn't just scoring, it was also rebounding, blocked shots and steals..

It's funny how you're suddenly calling me "pathetic" because of using the same type of arguments that you use (aka, assumptions), and not only this, I'm using assumptions which were much closer to being realized than yours. I'm claiming that Kareem's 2 Finals' MVP's did not do him justice and explain how close he got to a couple more. What you do during the whole thread, on the other hand, is whining about Hakeem having worse teammates and make baseless assumptions about much he'd win if he'd be teammed with Magic, Worthy, etc. I guess all these assumptions are more realistic than Kareem not getting injured and winning a single game more... Well, for one, Kareem was already 32-33 when he first teammed with Magic, so good luck to Hakeem winning as much while getting out of his prime (and he did so pretty quickly). Hakeem at 38 was almost finished, Kareem was winning F.MVP. Second, Hakeem with all these teammates, doesn't get the numbers and accolades he did by playing with all those guys. And, no, Hakeem wasn't the best player of the 1986 Finals. Bird was, and it doesn't depend on the winner.
Want to be straight, with no excuses yourself? 6 titles and 4 Finals' appearances vs 2 and 1. 6 MVP's vs 1. Same number of F.MVP's. More all-NBA teams, all-star appearances, #1 scorer all-time and #2 playoff scorer all-time. Hakeem has zero case against him, career-wise, period. Prime-wise, he's a lot closer, but if primes mattered that much, Hakeem would be a GOAT candidate. Where are you and your Hakeem, BTW, in the GOAT discussions? Why don't you use the "but, but he had no teammates!" excuse against everyone to make a case for him being GOAT? It's pretty well accepted Hakeem had worse teammates than Magic and Bird and Jordan and Russell and Wilt as well, so I guess he must have the same argument over them. Not to mention that, going by averages, he must also have been a better playoff performer than most of them...

[millwad]

It's funny how you're suddenly calling me "pathetic" because of using the same type of arguments that you use (aka, assumptions), and not only this, I'm using assumptions which were much closer to being realized than yours. I'm claiming that Kareem's 2 Finals' MVP's did not do him justice and explain how close he got to a couple more. What you do during the whole thread, on the other hand, is whining about Hakeem having worse teammates and make baseless assumptions about much he'd win if he'd be teammed with Magic, Worthy, etc. I guess all these assumptions are more realistic than Kareem not getting injured and winning a single game more... Well, for one, Kareem was already 32-33 when he first teammed with Magic, so good luck to Hakeem winning as much while getting out of his prime (and he did so pretty quickly). Hakeem at 38 was almost finished, Kareem was winning F.MVP. Second, Hakeem with all these teammates, doesn't get the numbers and accolades he did by playing with all those guys. And, no, Hakeem wasn't the best player of the 1986 Finals. Bird was, and it doesn't depend on the winner.
Want to be straight, with no excuses yourself? 6 titles and 4 Finals' appearances vs 2 and 1. 6 MVP's vs 1. Same number of F.MVP's. More all-NBA teams, all-star appearances, #1 scorer all-time and #2 playoff scorer all-time. Hakeem has zero case against him, career-wise, period. Prime-wise, he's a lot closer, but if primes mattered that much, Hakeem would be a GOAT candidate. Where are you and your Hakeem, BTW, in the GOAT discussions? Why don't you use the "but, but he had no teammates!" excuse against everyone to make a case for him being GOAT? It's pretty well accepted Hakeem had worse teammates than Magic and Bird and Jordan and Russell and Wilt as well, so I guess he must have the same argument over them. Not to mention that, going by averages, he must also have been a better playoff performer than most of them...

Kareem's 2 finals MVP is showcasing the fact that he had amazing players by his side. Well, if Kareem would have won a game more he'd probably have one more Finals MVP, but he didn't, if Hakeem would have won 2 more games against Boston he'd as well have on more Finals MVP, I'm not getting what your point is because the same can be said about Hakeem and since when did a guy on the losing team get the FMVP...

And yeah, Kareem was 32 when he teamed up with Magic, the same age Hakeem was when he dominated Robinson and Shaq in the playoffs and played the basketball of his life, the difference was that Hakeem did it with Kenny Smith, Otis Thorpe, Maxwell and Robert Horry while Kareem did it with Magic Johnson, Wilkes, Norm Nixon and Michael Cooper and after that his teammates even improved a la Byron Scott and Worthy.

My point is that Hakeem's prime gets overlooked because he had terrible player by his side and if you can win with Kenny Smith and Otis Thorpe you sure as hell WOULD win with Magic, Worthy, Scott etc... Even during those years between Kareem's first ring and the second he at some times had better players than Hakeem did during his championshipruns.

And yeah, MVP's only goes to players on great teams and basketball is a teamsport so it's not really fair to compare Hakeem's one MVP to Kareem 6 and lets not forget that Hakeem played in an era dominated by the best player by all-time, Michael Jordan. I have a hard time seeing Kareem winning all those MVP's if he entered the league at the same as Hakeem did.

Thing is, I'm not even saying that Hakeem is better than Kareem, I'm just saying that I think it's way closer than people on here is trying to make it. I really believe Kareem had some great advantages winning his chips and MVP's, his MVP's all came in the 70's beside the last one and it's widely known that the 70's wasn't as good as the 80's and 90's. And winning his chips he had the help of way better players than Hakeem had, Kenny Smith vs Magic Johnson and Oscar Robertson!

Careerwise, yeah, Kareem has an edge mainly due the era he played in and the players he had with him but in their prime's I think Hakeem was just as good as any one else, Kareem included.

[Psileas]

Kareem's 2 finals MVP is showcasing the fact that he had amazing players by his side. Well, if Kareem would have won a game more he'd probably have one more Finals MVP, but he didn't, if Hakeem would have won 2 more games against Boston he'd as well have on more Finals MVP, I'm not getting what your point is because the same can be said about Hakeem and since when did a guy on the losing team get the FMVP...

My point is that, like the regular season MVP, the Finals' MVP is partially a team matter. For me, if player A (not necessarily Kareem, but whoever) got to dominate 4 finals and won the MVP in 2 of them because his team lost the other 2, while player B got to dominate 2 finals, and also won 2 MVP's, I'll rank player A above player B, despite the equal number of Finals' MVP's.

And yeah, Kareem was 32 when he teamed up with Magic, the same age Hakeem was when he dominated Robinson and Shaq in the playoffs and played the basketball of his life, the difference was that Hakeem did it with Kenny Smith, Otis Thorpe, Maxwell and Robert Horry while Kareem did it with Magic Johnson, Wilkes, Norm Nixon and Michael Cooper and after that his teammates even improved a la Byron Scott and Worthy.

Hakeem at 32 is title material. At 33-34 (aka, his 1996-1997 versions), he's still a candidate. What happens next is the matter. His drop off between 1997 and 1998 was very significant. From 2000 and on, I didn't even want to watch him any more.

And yeah, MVP's only goes to players on great teams and basketball is a teamsport so it's not really fair to compare Hakeem's one MVP to Kareem 6 and lets not forget that Hakeem played in an era dominated by the best player by all-time, Michael Jordan. I have a hard time seeing Kareem winning all those MVP's if he entered the league at the same as Hakeem did.

Kareem was the individual dominator of his own era and I consider his prime comparable to Jordan's, so it goes both ways. In other words, he'd make things harder for Jordan, too. Plus, it's not as if Hakeem was losing MVP's to Jordan. Before and after 1994, he was runner-up just once, and he actually finished above Jordan in that voting (I'd say he had an argument to win it and that it was a top-3 or 4 season for him).

(See, I don't even disagree with everything you wrote, although I consider young Kareem better equipped to dominate early in his career and that it wasn't only an era thing).

[millwad]

Kareem was the individual dominator of his own era and I consider his prime comparable to Jordan's, so it goes both ways. In other words, he'd make things harder for Jordan, too. Plus, it's not as if Hakeem was losing MVP's to Jordan. Before and after 1994, he was runner-up just once, and he actually finished above Jordan in that voting (I'd say he had an argument to win it and that it was a top-3 or 4 season for him).

(See, I don't even disagree with everything you wrote).

That's what I meant, he had seasons being overlooked because he was on bad teams which was because he had terrible teammates. And in 95 he clearly showed who the real MVP was.

By the way, I think I've been unclear of my message, I don't think that Hakeem careerwise was better than Kareem, I think that Kareem is the 2nd best player by all-time careerwise and how long he was productive is amazing and unseen of.

Though what I think is that Hakeem could have had achieved what Kareem did if he'd be in the same situation and that Kareem was really fortunate to have the opportunity to play with the guys he did. And that prime Hakeem was just as good as anyone else in the history of basketball.

[Duncan21formvp]

Kareem clearly had the better career. But I'd take prime dream over prime jabar, mainly because he's a better defensive anchor.

Prime Hakeem isn't as good as Prime Kareem, don't fool yourself.

[millwad]

Prime Hakeem isn't as good as Prime Kareem, don't fool yourself.

Prime Hakeem is the only player to win Finals MVP, MVP and DPOY in the same year.. Prime Hakeem is one of the GOAT's.

[ThaRegul8r]

Prime Hakeem is the only player to win Finals MVP, MVP and DPOY in the same year.. Prime Hakeem is one of the GOAT's.

To be fair, the Defensive Player of the Year award is a recent award, having existed less than 30 years. It sure as hell would have been done (on multiple occasions no less) prior to Hakeem had the award existed longer than 28 years.