Uhm, not really. Duncan could easily average those numbers if he didn't have Manu and Parker on his team. For me, championships speaks volumes. I'll take Duncan's 4 rings and leadership skills and build my team around him.
<div class="quote_poster">Mamba Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Uhm, not really. Duncan could easily average those numbers if he didn't have Manu and Parker on his team. For me, championships speaks volumes. I'll take Duncan's 4 rings and leadership skills and build my team around him.</div> Thats just stupid, considering it takes a team effort to win a championship, and Duncan wouldnt have won anything without the help of his team mates (same goes for any star player who has won a championship). You're much better off making a case for him based off his M.V.P awards and other individual accolades. I dont think Duncan could ever average those kind of numbers playing in Hakeem's era, Hakeem was doing it against alot better competition (Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, Parish, Barkley, Bird, Malone etc.) I think that if Duncan didnt have Ginobili or Parker he would actually play worse, as he usually just gets fed the ball down in the post, and I cant vision him being able to run the court and create his own shots, like KG is capable of doing. Thats not to say I dont think Duncan is a good player, the numbers dont lie, I just think its an unfair comparisson against Hakeem, as Hakeem was playing against such better competition. Duncan caught a few of those guys on the decline, but the only real decent competition he has faced in his career has been up against Shaq and KG.
God I watched NBA TV last night and they were showing the '86 WCF game 5 against the Lakers.....I had never "really" seen Sampson play, but that guy was a beast on both ends,we're talking swatting shots (including a nasty one on Michael Cooper), rebounding, sweeping hook shots, thunderous dunks, amazing quick footwork....and Hakeem was lighting up Kareem with hook shots, fadeaways, etc., lol.....as great as Kareem was (and he was great even at that stage in his career) in some ways he was no match for both Sampson and Olajuwon.....that laker team was THE Laker team that won the title the season before and by no means was that series a fluke <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I'll take Duncan's 4 rings and leadership skills and build my team around him.</div> so duncan's a better leader now????....is there anyway you can prove that??? EDIT 2 http://youtube.com/watch?v=65VopPKEPmY ^^^Check out around 3:12.......hell check the whole video, lol....Hakeem was an athletic freak in his younger days.... http://youtube.com/watch?v=HYW6TdOSF4I ^^^here's another one recapping that classic '86 series...
I'll take Karl Malone over both of them though. Karl Malone's longevity puts him over both of them. Barely though. Considering Malone's Jazz knocked off Olajuwon's Rockets and Duncan's Spurs in one playoff run tells me something and also if it weren't for a guy named Michael Jordan he would have 2 rings.
Wow that video of Hakeem and Ralph was crazy. SWAT SWAT SWAT! And for Karl Malone he did have his chance to win a title without Michael Jordan their too. Houston was just a better team at the right time.
Tim Duncan played in a time where the only other great big man was Shaquille Oneal....and he was never able to stop Oneal during the LA reign....while Hakeem played with a few more big men, and also legends like jordan and MJ like the dream said
<div class="quote_poster">elevate Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Tim Duncan played in a time where the only other great big man was Shaquille Oneal....and he was never able to stop Oneal during the LA reign....while Hakeem played with a few more big men, and also legends like jordan and MJ like the dream said</div> Why are you talking about Duncan as if he's retired? I'm sure Duncan has also played against a prime Shaq, KG, Malone, Dirk, prime CWebb, Jermaine O'Neal, and younger guys like Amare and Howard. Though most of those guys aren't as great as Dream, DRob, Ewing, Barkley, etc. they are/were certainly above average big men. Also, whoever compared Duncan's career stats with Hakeem please stop. Average out his numbers before 97-98 when he could play more than 50 games a season and then see how they compare. A broken down Dream who wrongly thought he can still play in the NBA should not have his legend diminished from what he once was, which is a player better than Duncan.
I also would place Hakeem above Duncan. Duncan is undeniably great, and gets a lot of undeserved flak for being uninteresting (I'm sure Spurs fans would rather have the rings than the hothead personality), but I consider Olajuwon to be the NBA's greatest all-around center. Hakeem the Dream, as they say.
Hakeem never had to play a prime Shaq, which is much better than any center Hakeem had to play. Hakeem needed the MJ of his era to take a break to win his championships, Duncan won 2 when his Jordan (Shaq) was in the middle of his prime, while Shaq got 3 then, Duncan still managed to get 2, which Hakeem couldn't do with the best player of his era playing.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, then... I disagree principally with the Shaq/Jordan analogy because I think Jordan's skill as a basketball player so utterly dwarfs Shaq's. By which I mean, if Shaq were not blessed with the body he has, he'd be nothing, because his fundamnetal basketball skills are not remarkable, and all depend on him being so enormous (and generous officiating when he lowers his shoulder). Jordan could've been five foot four and figured out a way to impact a basketball game. Also, the year Hakeem squared off against Shaq in the finals was one of Shaq's best scoring seasons of his career, so I think it's fair to consider that victory.</p> I'm also not entirely sold that Hakeem's Rockets wouldn't have beaten the Bulls if Jordan had stuck around. I know people may view that as blasphemous, but the Bulls never had to deal with a Finals team that had a big man as good as Hakeem. The closest was Karl Malone, and he let himself be intimidated by the Bulls, which is not something Hakeem ever would've allowed to happen. </p>
Re: <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NTC)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> <div class="quote_poster">Mamba Wrote</div> <div class="quote_post">Uhm, not really. Duncan could easily average those numbers if he didn't have Manu and Parker on his team. For me, championships speaks volumes. I'll take Duncan's 4 rings and leadership skills and build my team around him.</div> Thats just stupid, considering it takes a team effort to win a championship, and Duncan wouldnt have won anything without the help of his team mates (same goes for any star player who has won a championship). You're much better off making a case for him based off his M.V.P awards and other individual accolades. I dont think Duncan could ever average those kind of numbers playing in Hakeem's era, Hakeem was doing it against alot better competition (Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, Parish, Barkley, Bird, Malone etc.) I think that if Duncan didnt have Ginobili or Parker he would actually play worse, as he usually just gets fed the ball down in the post, and I cant vision him being able to run the court and create his own shots, like KG is capable of doing. Thats not to say I dont think Duncan is a good player, the numbers dont lie, I just think its an unfair comparisson against Hakeem, as Hakeem was playing against such better competition. Duncan caught a few of those guys on the decline, but the only real decent competition he has faced in his career has been up against Shaq and KG.</div></p> I think you're right NTC, in the sense that Hakeem is underrated. But I wouldn't put as much importance on Ginobili and Parker as you do.</p> What I really wanted to point out though, is that you have that cool avatar again. Congrats man, you're a real fan. Lol.</p> </p>
Having seen all these guys play (including Wilt and players of his era), I guess I'll way in.</p> First of all, the Bulls beat numerous teams with true top-notch centers in the playoffs on their way to the championships. Including Ewing, Shaq, Rik Smits, Mourning, Mutumbo (and that's just in the Bulls' Conference). I just peeked at the 1997 season, when DRob and Duncan were teammates on the Spurs, but didn't beat the Bulls in the finals (or make it to the finals, for that matter). The previous 3-peat team faced those guys and Brad Daugherty. Bulls did beat the Lakers in the finals, with Kareem.</p> Second, Hakeem was just an amazing player even as a rookie. He consistently would block shots at the defensive end and end up dunking on the resulting fast break. He ran the court like a deer, which was quite special for a true C. He was a terrific defender, shot blocker, and had every post move you could imagine in a C (except the trademarked skyhook). Sampson was one of those rare players that everyone knew would be a superstar in the league. Like LeBron or Oden; I mean that rare franchise player, consensus first pick in the draft. Hakeem was exactly the same kind of draft pick - it was ridiculous that Houston was able to draft both with #1 picks.</p> Third, Hakeem was 1st pick, taken over Jordan. With all hindsight and knowing how good Jordan turned out, I would still pick Hakeem over him as a player to build a team around.</p> Fourth, I don't think that the Rockets played either player at PF. They were both effective post players and they basically used them both as post players. I suppose Sampson might have guarded opposing PFs for the most part, but who you defend doesn't necessarily peg you at a position in the lineup, IMO.</p> Fifth, the league was stocked with great players during Hakeem's time, and I do not think the current NBA rosters are anywhere near as deep or talented. You have to look at Hakeem's MVPs in the contxt that it was really hard to win the award with Jordan and Magic and Dr. J and Barkley (among others) as the competition. It's no shame to not win the MVP when Jordan or Magic wins it. I love Nash's game, but he's not in the same league as Magic or Jordan - neither he nor Duncan would be winning MVP with those guys in the league.</p> Sixth, similarly, the Spurs have had no dynasty of a team to have to beat. To some degree, I see the Spurs' championships as ones for lack of a conherent challenger. Someone has to win the championship, and the Spurs just did.</p> There's no way that Duncan is as good as Hakeem was, IMO. I don't think Duncan is as good as Ewing was. I'm not belittling Duncan, because I do think he's been one of the very best players in the NBA during his playing days, just not when his career overlapped with the likes of Hakeem or Ewing.</p> </p>
http://basketballrecruiting.rivals.com/vie...mp;pr_key=34318</p> </p> I just felt like it was appropriate.</p>
