<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I refer you to my signature. If you don't believe it from Hakeem himself, I can sure as hell post MJ's comments [paraphrasing] "It's a good thing they'll never make it to the Finals, because I am sure we wouldn't be able to beat them." [/paraphrasing] Back on the subject of Duncan vs. Dream, seeing all the clips of Hakeem teaching Duncan post up moves is enough proof that Hakeem in his prime would dominate Duncan. Most Centers would have 5 or 6 different post up, go-to moves, Hakeem had 5 or 6 sets of them. He dominated in the paint area, and his footwork resembled something you'd see in an Usher music video ( ). If Hakeem faked you once, he'd let you come back down, fake you again, then lay it back in. </div> MJ was just being humble The Bulls never faced a big center in the finals, true but with Jordan and Pippen...it was going to be lights out for you clowns! <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">'Zo', I am assuming, is Alonzo Mouring. When Olajuwon was playing Mourning was in his prime. Nowadays, he's hobbled, not starting, and no where near his prime. When was the last time Duncan played him? Shaquille O'neal, hobbled as is, again, not really in his prime years now, even when Duncan eliminated him, he was not 100% (something with his toe, foot?). Ben Wallace does not compare to Robinson, Ewing, Mutumbo. Defensively maybe, but he's not a huge factor on offense, doesn't drop 30 on you. He wasn't in the same Conference, same Division. I can't say I am disappointed at the fact that you decided to add Yao into the mix, but please, Hakeem vs. Ming, not even funny. As tall as Yao is, Hakeem would've torched him. He isn't the defensive presence that Mutumbo is, and Mutumbo is 39 (or 80, no one really knows).</div> Alonzo hit his prime during the 97-99 season...by that time the dream was a has been! do you think the dream could have handle Shaq in his prime? the clear answer is NO! Shaq would have taken a piss on him, but guess what Timmy D...eliminated shaq and kobe by himself. Back then mr. Robinson was a has been, t. parker was no where near as good as he is, and gino was just a role player! when was the last time Mutombo ever scored 30+ points? Was Olajuwon the best center of the early 90's perhaps...is Tim Duncan the best PF ever? Damn right he is! Furthermore, with Ewing or not...there was no way the knicks were going to defeat the Spurs in 99! again, Shaq only used that "toe" excuse to look pretty! he average nearly 28 points during the season! Hakeem was better than Robinson, im not denying that...but TD is better than both! The dream may have more moves down low but Duncan has faced and defeated the mighty lakers and now the new bad boys! on the other hand, the dream never - EVER defeated dethroned the Chicago Bulls! TD had an okay NBA Finals, he was not as dominant...but there were 3 different big bodies guarding this man, and all of these guys are street thugs..but guess what TD came through at the end! PS. Adriano will never be as good as O Fenomeno Ronaldo!
I think them bringing up their regular season record against the Bulls doesn't prove anything because preparing to play against a team for one game is a whole lot different than preparing to play against them for the series. NBA playoff series are about adjusting, and I have no doubt that whatever problems the Bulls had against the Rockets in the regular season would've been addressed and solved by the time the Finals rolled around. If my memory is correct, the Jazz won both regular season games against the Bulls during the 1998 season. We all know how the Finals turned out.
This article pretty much shuts down any argument Rockets fans would have saying that they would've beaten Jordan's bulls. Champion Spurs have room to move up -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By John Hollinger ESPN Insider SAN ANTONIO -- Now that the San Antonio Spurs have won their second championship in three years with the Duncan-Ginobili-Parker crew, it's time to begin assessing their legacy. If the mini-dynasty ended right here, where would San Antonio rank among recent champions? To assess that, I compared this year's champions with eight other multiple winners (defined as having at least two titles in three seasons) of recent vintage. Let's meet our contestants: ? The Shaq-era Lakers of 2000-02 ? The Jordan-Pippen-Rodman Bulls of 1996-98 ? The Rockets of 1994-95 ? The Jordan-Pippen-Grant Bulls of 1991-93 ? The Bad Boy Pistons of 1989-90 ? The Magic-Scott-Worthy Lakers of 1985-88 ? The Celtics of 1984-86 ? The Magic-Kareem-Wilkes Lakers of 1980-82 Similar to my previous exercise ranking Shaquille O'Neal's championship teams, I used three criteria: Wins, margin of victory, and playoff wins and losses. I slightly modified the system since we're using multiple seasons. First, because we're dealing only with championship teams, I doubled the emphasis on playoff wins and losses -- effectively, it's only the losses that matter, since everyone has the same number of wins. (I prorated the team's playoff winning percentage to end up with 15 playoff wins, the amount needed to win a title for most of this era). Coaches To Win At Least 3 NBA Titles, All-Time Phil Jackson 9 Red Auerbach 9 John Kundla 5 Pat Riley 4 Gregg Popovich 3 Second, I took the average score of the team's championship seasons and then gave five additional points for each title. That way, a two-time champ would only out-rank a three-time champ if it had been particularly dominant. And now, in reverse order, here are the rankings: No. 9: 1994-95 Rockets This team is certainly the weakest two-time champion in NBA history. Before I get any nasty letters from Texas, the key here is "two-time champion." Somebody has to be the worst, and none of the others went 47-35, or failed to register a 60-win season, and only one other lost a combined 15 playoff games in two seasons. Despite sweeping the Finals to win their second title, these Rockets lost seven playoff games and were on the ropes in elimination games in the first two rounds. No. 8: 2003-05 Spurs San Antonio would outrank the Magic-Kareem-Wilkes Lakers of the early '80s if it hadn't struggled so much in the playoffs. The Spurs lost two games in every round en route to the championship in 2003, and they dropped seven games while taking their second title this year. Otherwise, San Antonio is very similar to that Laker club -- two titles in three years behind a great player to build around (Duncan, Magic), a great center nearing the end (David Robinson, Kareem), and a franchise that looks set to win several more titles if nobody gets hurt. No. 7: 1980-82 Lakers Magic Johnson won two titles in his first three seasons with a cast that included Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes and Norm Nixon, but this was just the tip of the iceberg for America's most well-known theater owner. While these Lakers look good compared to our current champs, their 60- and 57-win seasons were relatively unimpressive compared to the top five champions. No. 6: 1989-90 Pistons The '89 version of the Bad Boys was especially potent, losing only two playoff games en route to Detroit's first-ever championship. But Detroit was very strong in both seasons, averaging 61 wins and 3.5 playoff losses in the two campaigns to put it near the top of the two-time champs. No. 5: 1984-86 Celtics The 1986 Celtics were the second-best team of the past quarter-century. Featuring four Hall of Famers in the frontcourt -- Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Bill Walton -- that club plowed through the regular season at a 67-15 clip and blew through a 15-3 postseason. Boston would rate ahead of the Shaq-era Lakers if its '84 champions had been anywhere near as strong, but that team lacked Walton and McHale and was just starting to blossom. In fact, that team lost eight playoff games and was the lowest-rated champion between 1980 and 1993. No. 4: 2000-02 Lakers Despite the extra title, the Shaq-era Lakers barely outranked the Celtics. L.A. had one great regular season (in 1999-2000), and one great playoff run (in 2001) but never did both in the same campaign. L.A. still might not have beaten out Boston had it faced a tougher opponent in the 2002 Finals, but the Nets of that season were one of the weaker finalists in recent memory. No. 3: 1985-88 Lakers This edition of the Lakers included one truly great team, the 1986-87 club that won 65 games and lost only three times in the playoffs. However, a year later they barely scraped by. Los Angeles won three consecutive series in seven games, including a nail-biting second round series against Utah and a Game 7 of the Finals against Detroit that went right down to the wire. No. 2: 1991-93 Bulls These Bulls made their mark early, sweeping the defending champion Pistons in the conference finals on their way to a 15-2 march through the postseason. Chicago won 67 games the next season, with a whopping 10.4-point victory margin, but the third season wasn't nearly as impressive. Chicago won "just" 57 games and had to fend off a strong challenge from Phoenix in the Finals to claim its first three-peat. No. 1: 1996-98 Bulls As if there were any doubt. The 1995-96 Bulls were simply the greatest team of all time, rampaging to a record 72 wins in the regular season and losing only three times in the playoffs -- twice after taking a 3-0 lead in the Finals. Their opponent was no slouch, either -- Seattle won 64 games and swept defending champion Houston in the second round. Overall, those Sonics were probably better than several teams that won a title, but chose the wrong year to put it all together. Jordan's Bulls didn't slack off much the next two seasons, winning 67 and 62 games and facing only one Game 7 in the three seasons. Overall, the Bulls lost fewer playoff games in winning three titles than the Spurs did to get two. Not that the Spurs care, of course. That ring feels just as good on your finger whether you went 72-10 or 47-35. Now, can they make it three out of four? now who am i going to believe, some lunatic rocket fans or real sports-writers? I hope you little guys learned your lesson here
Article still doesnt prove anything. Sports are unpredictable. Sure you can asume who has an advantage but upsets can happen. I really wish Jordan would have stayed and played. That way we would know the truth. If the Rockets won id be happy. If the Rockets lost id be dissapointed. But atleast I would know that the Rockets lost a REAL game not some matchup that never happened. So no matter what arguement you make, the facts still stay the same. Rockets: 94-95 Champs, Jordan 94-95 Minor League Baseball Scrub. Back to Hakeem vs Duncan Robinson MVP Game 1: Olajuwon: 27 pts - Robinson 21 pts Game 2: Olajuwon: 41 pts - Robinson 32 pts Game 3: Olajuwon: 43 pts - Robinson 29 pts Game 4: Olajuwon: 20 pts - Robinson 20 pts Game 5: Olajuwon: 42 pts - Robinson 22 pts Game 6: Olajuwon: 39 pts - Robinson 19 pts David Robinson in series: 23.8 points 11.3 rebounds 2.7 assists 1.5 steals Hakeem Olajuwon in series: 35.3 points 12.5 rebounds 5.0 assists 4.1 blocks 1.3 steals Olajuwon destroyed Robinson(MVP). When Hakeem has something to prove he's unstoppable. Hakeem or Ducan Speed: Hakeem Athleticism: Hakeem Strength: Duncan Smarts: Equal Shooting: Hakeem Ball-Handling: Hakeem InsideMoves: Hakeem 1on1 Defense: Equal Blocks: Hakeem That's what I see. You compare them in those catagories.
Definately Hakeem. Olajuwon was one of the best defensive centers the NBA had seen, he's Top 3 All-Time on the center list. Duncan while a good defender is not near the level Olajuwon was when he was playing. Hakeem has 1500 more steals than the next closest center Offensively, Duncan also isn't as good as Olajuwon was. As fundamental as Duncan is, Olajuwon is just as fundamental, and he had some extra flair to his game. Hakeem was a very dominant low post scorer, he really maxed out after he turned 30, but he was virtually unstopabble inside. He could beat you with his quickness, agility, speed, his jumpshot, whatever, he could play inside and out, and was dominant either way. Duncan isn't far off, but Hakeem basically matches or beats him in every area possible. Hakeem was also a very good passer, he was a terrific rebounder, slightly better than Duncan, and he was a superior overall offensive and defensive player. Olajuwon played in an era with some of the better group of centers the NBA at had at one time, Robinson, Ewing, Mourning, Shaq, Parish etc and he still dominated.
It's tough to say who's better. Duncan has definitely had more team success than Olajuwon in his first 8 seasons. Olajuwon peaked offensively in his 9th, 10th, and 11th season, whereas Duncan's offense looks to have leveled off the past few seasons. As far as individual production, it's pretty similar. Comparing their first 8 years, they both have similar rebounding rates. Olajuwon's rebounding production fell off after his 10 season, and we can probably expect something similar with Duncan. Olajuwon was a more dynamic scorer, with his interesting fake and spin moves, but Duncan is just as effective. Olajuwon's superior agility and quickness made him more adept at getting steals and blocking shots, but Duncan's long arms and good instincts makes him a superb defensive player as well (even if it isn't as obvious, stat-wise). Duncan's career assist/turnover ratio is far better than Hakeem's. For his career, it's at 1.05/1.00 whereas Hakeem for his career only had .825/1.00 assist/turnover ratio. Of course, Duncan has played more minutes at forward, so this difference is to be expected. In sum, I think there was more artistry and flair to Hakeem's individual game, but Duncan is no less effective in his own quiet way. Duncan has enjoyed much greater team success over his career, so if I was to rank their careers I'd have to put Duncan slightly above Hakeem. He's a greater winner.
