After Shaq won his 4th title on Tuesday, many experts said that this put right behind Wilt, Kareem, and Russell..................that's okay, except they're excluding one man who had a much more better all around game than Shaq (and in reality a better all around game then the other 3 big men as well). I might sound a little bias in saying this (and because of my screen name), but when it comes to Shaq and Hakeem, it's not even close imo. In Hakeem we have a better defender.......wait let me take that back, a much better defender .Shaq has always been a good defender, but I don't think he's ever made all defensive 1st team before. Now let's get to the offensive end, now a person might look at their numbers and think, "yeah Shaq was much better offensively", but a lot of Hakeems offensive statistics dropped, because of his decline after his prime. I don't think Hakeem ever broke the 30 ppg mark when he was in his prime (was always around 27 or 28 points), but his offensive game was much more versatile and imo "effective" than Shaq's. Hakeem could overpower you, he could face you up and cross you over, he could spin on you, he could shoot fadeaways, he could knock down the open 15-20 ft jumper with consistency, he could come across the middle with the hook shot, AND he could shoot freethrows. I put emphasis on that last point, because I've never understood how you can be the most dominating player, yet you can't even touch the ball in the last 2 minutes, because the other team would foul you on purpose, because you can't hit your throws. Would teams foul Hakeem on purpose in the last 2 minutes???..................no........they wouldn't. Another and probably the biggest thing people forget is the era in which Shaq dominated. Seriously the guys hardest competition in the west at one point was Vlade Divac and Sabonis. Hakeem dominated against D Rob (embarrased him), Pat Ewing (just outplayed him), Mutombo (never met in the playoffs, but he was around none the less), and Shaq (outplayed him and swept him in the finals). Imagine if Hakeem got to play in his prime and his hardest competition was Vlade Divac in the middle? Would he have gotten 3 titles???.....my guess is YES and possibly more. Shaq is a great player and center, but he's either 5 or 6 on my all time list, my main reason being my last complaint. Anyways feel free to discuss.
I would take Hakeem in his prime over Shaquille as well. I don't know why he doesn't get his dues...maybe it cause he joined the Raptors as his last team?
I'd have to put Olajuwon behind Shaquille O'neal. Shaq was in the top 3 in PER for 10 straight seasons (94-03). He had the highest PER in 5 straight seasons (98-02). In contrast, Hakeem was top 3 in PER only four times (86, 93-95), and never led the league in PER. Without question, Shaq was by far the best offensive center in the modern era. Defensively, yes, Hakeem has an edge. Is it enough to offset Shaq's advantage on the offensive end? I would say no. Here are some numbers to consider: Offensive Rating and Defensive Rating correspond to a player's "efficiency" (points per possession) on both ends. A portion of the team's offensive and defensive possessions, points scored, and points allowed is allotted to the player based on their activity. And then: Off Rating = 100*individual points generated / individual offensive possessions Def Rating = 100*individual points allowed / individual defensive possessions <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><br/><font color=""Navy"">Off RatingDef RatingLeague Avg</font><br/>Shaq114 (109)100 (95)105 (100)<br/>Hakeem*109 (102)98 (91)108 (100)<br/><br/>Hakeem108 (101)98 (92)107 (100)<br/><br/><font size=""2"">*first 14 seasons</font><br/></div> As expected, Shaq was a more "efficient" offensive player, while Hakeem was a more efficient defensive player. Note I include both Hakeem's first 14 years (probably the more fair comparison) and also Hakeem full career. Also, the numbers in paranthesis are "normalized" to league average. Now, we can use these ratings to derive individual player wins and losses. This is a matter of estimating individual player winning% (PW%) from the Off Rating and Def Rating ( ORtg^14 /[ORtg^14 + DRtg^14] ), and then estimating the number of games a player is responsible for (PG) by considering % of minutes played, % of offensive possessions the player is allotted, the % of defensive possessions the player is allotted. Then, Player Wins is simply PG*PW% and Player Losses is PG*(1-PW%): <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><br/><font color=""Navy"">MinutesPlayer WinsPlayer LossesPW%</font><br/>Shaq34791 (2500)154.7 (11.1)31.0 (2.2)83.3%<br/>Hakeem* 38466 (2500)170.1 (11.1)39.5 (2.6)81.2%<br/><br/>Hakeem44222 (2500)186.8 (10.6)50.9 (2.9)78.6%<br/><br/><font size=""2"">*first 14 seasons</font><br/></div> It's actually pretty close. Over their first 14 regular seasons, per 2500 mintues, they both generated about the same number of wins, while Hakeem had slightly more losses (clearly, Hakeem was responsible for more games due to his higher activity on the defensive end). Was it easier for Shaq to thrive, at least statistically, then Hakeem? Were defenses against centers less effective in Shaq's prime years? I'm not convinced by the argument that the lack of stars at the center position in Shaq's best years indicate it was easier for him to be productive.
This is one of those cases where I'll have to throw stats out the door for a minute...lol...not to take anything away from Shaq (actually I am, but at least it sounds nice), but not only was his competition at the center position weaker, but the teams he beat to win those titles were easier also (sac town was the hardest competition they faced). I mean Hakeem played in the toughest era (mid 80's to mid 90's). Hakeem's overall game and superior defensive edge, plus the fact that he had to face tougher teams and centers to win his titles gives him the knod over Shaq imo (defenses were a lot better at that time also)....One question durvasa, let's say you switch Hakeem and Shaq around. Do you think Shaq would've had the same success in Houston as well as Dream in L.A. My bet would be that Hakeem would have had just as much success in L.A. as Shaq....I'm not to sure if we would have two titles with Shaq in the middle.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting THE DREAM:</div><div class="quote_post">One question durvasa, let's say you switch Hakeem and Shaq around. Do you think Shaq would've had the same success in Houston as well as Dream in L.A. My bet would be that Hakeem would have had just as much success in L.A. as Shaq....I'm not to sure if we would have two titles with Shaq in the middle.</div> Well, since I consider Shaq a better player (not that it's a huge difference), I would say Shaq would have helped Houston a bit more, and Hakeem wouldn't have helped LA quite as much. But, honestly, that's nothing more than an guess. I wouldn't put money on it. Hakeem is my favorite player (obviously), but I'm just trying to be objective. When the individual numbers favor Shaq, and his teams were also much more successful, it's hard not to put him ahead of Hakeem. Certainly, Shaq's had a more acomplished career. He's appeared to have a greater impact on winning for his teams. Beyond that (adjusting for teammates or opponents faced), it's pretty much guesswork. I will also add that if you did a similar statistical analysis between Hakeem and David Robinson for their regular seasons, Robinson also comes out ahead. Does this mean I think Robinson was a better player? No way.
^^^You can make an argument, but the fact that Shaq won in an era of less stellar teams, kind of takes away some points in my book, and that goes along with the freethrows.....those Laker teams were "Shaq's teams", but Kobe was the finisher (because of Shaq's inability to make FT's)...and Hakeem embarrassed D Rob in his prime and possibly his best season, there ain't no argument there.
I'd take shaq over hakeem. The main argument alot of people have for hakeem is that he was more skilled which is true but earl boyking probably has more true skils than shaq, but i wouldn't take him. Shaq is/was such a dominant force i dont think anybody could stop him when he really put his mind to it as evidence to 35 ppg average in his first 3 final wins. As for the myth that he totally schooled shaq check the number's for that series shaq has more rebounds than hekeem and only slightly less points. As for hakeem being forgotten he never really was that marketed or marketable as a shaq or MJ i guess, i don't think he ever had a line of shoes of his and other stuff etc. not to mention he was overshadowed alot by playing most of his career during the same time as MJ.
^^^but earl boyking wasn't Hakeem Olajuwon....Hakeem was not only more skilled, but he was a great player to go along with that....and as far as that 35 ppg, that's where the "era of big men" argument comes in...I really don't see Shaq doing that against Hakeem (he avg. 28 against him in the finals).....Hakeem avg. 35 points against D. Rob in his prime, and 32 against O'Neal.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post"> I will also add that if you did a similar statistical analysis between Hakeem and David Robinson for their regular seasons, Robinson also comes out ahead. Does this mean I think Robinson was a better player? No way. </div> this is funny, shaq numbers are better so he is better, but Drob's numbers are better, yet he is worse. I agree with you, but it is still odd. in the wilt/shaq thread i said that i might take Drob over shaq, so they woldnt even be that far off sttistically right?
How did he destroy Drob so much. he was such a great defender? i cant really remember anything specific from them playing against one another.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post"> I will also add that if you did a similar statistical analysis between Hakeem and David Robinson for their regular seasons, Robinson also comes out ahead. Does this mean I think Robinson was a better player? No way. </div> wierd, so shaq is better because of his numbers, but Drob is worse despite better numbers. i agree that hakeem is better, but stats are stats
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting THE DREAM:</div><div class="quote_post">^^^see 1995 WCF</div> He destoryed d-rob in that series.
Those that watched the Dream actually play wont ever forget him as a premire center.. He's right up there on my list of great centers. He tooled Shaq in the finals too! haha.
Shaq won in less stellar years. BUt Hakeem won while mike was retired. Hakeem was a complete player. Hakeem could stretch the defence out 18-20 feet with his j. He can hit his freethrows. He has that balance of power and finess. MIke stole most of his post game from Hakeem. Hakeems footwork was just sick. I men in the 90's some games hakeem dominated shaq and then there were games that shaq turned the tables. But to put it all to rest the rockets beat the Magic to win the title. Im taking Hakeem over Shaq simply because there isnt a chink in his armor. Pound for pound arguablythe best center ever. And most definatly the most skilled. P.S. He aint forgotten in my book he was my second fav player growing up. Watch a few allstar games from back then. 1 year shaq would destroy then another year Hakeem would rock him to sleep. Why pick tho. Just put em in at the same time!!!!
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trench:</div><div class="quote_post">Those that watched the Dream actually play wont ever forget him as a premire center.. He's right up there on my list of great centers. He tooled Shaq in the finals too! haha.</div> No he didn't i mentioned that earlier, its just a myth their numbers were very close, shaq actually outrebounded hakeem. Shaq had a very young team hakeem had alot of vets. The numbers were: 28.0 points, 12.5 rebounds for shaq 32.8 points, 11.5 rebounds for Hakeem better but not by that much.
Dream <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">but the fact that Shaq won in an era of less stellar teams, kind of takes away some points in my book</div> What exactly could Shaq have done about that? durvasa <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I will also add that if you did a similar statistical analysis between Hakeem and David Robinson for their regular seasons, Robinson also comes out ahead. Does this mean I think Robinson was a better player? No way. </div> .... I'm surprised you said something like that durvasa without coming back and explaining that comment. -- <font color=""Purple"">To acknowledge facts and quantify there relativness in favor of one player, yet ignore them when concerning another player</font>........ hmm If I didnt know, Id swear u were part of the ...
