You also have to wonder about the chemistry of Squad A. The last time Westbrook and Durant teamed up it didn't end so well. They blew a 3-1 series lead and one guy left town. BNM
What is the original source for this question? It would be fun to see how the opinions of this forum correlate to the general population. Younger fans who didn't see Jordan, Pippen, Hakeem, Barkley, or even Payton in his prime, play may not realize just how good those guys were. I mean none of those guys ever averaged a triple-double for a season, so how good could they have been? BNM
Shaq was nowhere near his best in Orlando. All he could do back then was dunk. Admittedly, he did that quite well. That was back when he talked openly of being better than Olajuwon/Robinson/Ewing before long. It seemed laughable at the time, but it eventually became a reasonable debate. As for Shaq guarding Hakeem, he has a huge element in his favor: Duncan. Right there with KG as the best defenders at PF, able to cover anywhere on the floor and provide help as needed. Fair point. But, once you get down to that level of detail, you need to account for who each team has on the bench, since they're not going to foul out their starters hacking him.
Being old enough to see all of these players in their prime, it's B, easy. Jordan is the best player I've ever seen. Hakeem is the best center I've ever seen (I stand by this and have forever). Pippen and Glove are two of the best perimeter defenders I've ever seen. And, well - Chuck is chuck. He was the most statistically dominant player on the Dream Team**. Sign me up. **EDIT: while playing ON the Dream Team
Man, this seems like it would have been prime offseason fodder. I choose B for the obvious reasons stated above by multiple other smart people.
I agree with you on Jordan, but Kobe was too much of a competitor to not at least hold his own. I mean, John Starks went straight from grocery bagging to giving Jordan a solid challenge, so it's not like the GOAT was above being fought tooth and nail. I put Hakeem in the same group as Ewing and Robinson. All in the conversation as best ever, but no different from the tier Shaq is in. Barkley is where I disagree. He could dominate in a setting like the Olympics because there was no one to match up with him. He literally bullied the opponents. But, when facing an even bigger bully like Malone, he tended to disappear. He would be absolutely shut down by Duncan, and wouldn't have the slightest glimmer of hope of slowing Timmy at the other end. As long as Team C holds close to even at the other 4 positions, they kill Team B at the PF. Pippen can't leave McGrady open to cover for Barkley's "short" comings.
No. I'm 42. Missed Jabbar not by much and obviously I didn't see Wilt. I emphasized "with my eyes" - that's the whole point.
Barkley and Malone is interesting. Early in their careers, Barkley tended to dominate Malone in head-to-head matchups. Mid to late career Malone tended to dominate Barkley. Malone had a much longer career and a much longer prime than Barkley, but comparing peak Barkley to peak Malone favors Barkley in many areas (mostly scoring efficiency). Unfortunately, with Barkley and Duncan, there wasn't sufficient overlap between their careers to draw any conclusions from their limited head-to-head matchups. Here's an interesting article that compares Barkley's advanced analytics to Malone and Duncan: Charles Barkley Doesn’t Love Analytics, But Analytics Sure Love Him Barkley was a ridiculously efficient scorer. BNM
Diaz with the 3K to close the door on the Indians was an awesome way to start the season. Oh and Felix’s quick pitch was awesome! Go M’s!
