Tim Duncan V Hakeem Olajuwon V Shaq

[Prokorov]

1. Duncan
2. Shaq

3. Hakeem

I have no idea how someone can put Hakeem ahead of Duncan or Shaq in this conversation.

agreed. hakeem doesnt belong in this conversation

[Effercon]

Shaq > Duncan > Hakeem

[Prokorov]

I don't care if Shaq's efficiency was based on dunks. That's what made him dominant- the ability to get to the rim and dunk pretty much at will. Don't you think Akeem would have dunked every ball if he had the ability? It's the highest % shot. You're trying to punish a player because he constantly was able to create the highest % shot there is in the game!

this is spot on. dominance isnt about being the most versatile player or good at alot of things. its being able to do what you want, the other guy knowing it, and not being able to stop you. one thing advanced stats have really diminished is just how valuable scoring is... its almost like scoring alot of points is a BAD thing, especially if you arent doing most of it from 3 or the FT line. efficiency is great, im not saying scrap it from the conversation, but being able to score at will at shots right at the hoop should be heavily valued. not only because its the best/highest % shot in basketball, but because of how it collapses a defense, how it controls the game, how it changes the opponents approach.

its similar to barkley in his 93 MVP season, others have had better statistical seasons, but the dominanance and the way he controlled games that season was unlike few others before or after

[Shot Clock]

I'm not doing anything to prop up my side. I'm just stating that because Akeem started playing late in life, he was more raw in his early years than the version that people remember as "the Dream". He added a lot to his game over the years. I never said he was bad. Please quit turning this into me bashing Akeem. I love Akeem. He's my 2nd favorite center to ever play the game. I'm just saying that the Dream in 94 and 95 isn't the same Akeem that we saw in his first couple of years in the league.

No you said he was "very raw". This doesn't imply more raw then a later version. Every player is. Jordan wasn't raw early on but people like to imply it. He certainly added to his game later but most greats do. When you think of "raw" or "VERY raw" players you think of guys that have rudimentary skills and need to develop an area of their game. Hakeems post game is better then most of the post games I've seen from guys in their first couple years. He wasn't a Dwight Howard that came in with little post skill.

I think it's you that's forgetting how good he was. Go look at a game from the Laker series or Celts.

Jeez. I never said he was inefficient either. You are completely twisting the things I say.

Akeem was very raw for his first few years in the league. And he had awesome post moves. But he shot a low% for a center with his skill.

So compared to who? What Big in his era was scoring at a higher efficiency on volume scoring? You definitely said he was inefficient in relation to his peers.

We have a good comparison in this thread. Tim Duncan. A skilled big man who came in the league and shot .513 FG% for his first three years. While Hakeem shot .524 FG% for his first 3. Yes I used FG% for you so you don't skate out of this one too.

I don't care if Shaq's efficiency was based on dunks. That's what made him dominant- the ability to get to the rim and dunk pretty much at will. Don't you think Akeem would have dunked every ball if he had the ability? It's the highest % shot. You're trying to punish a player because he constantly was able to create the highest % shot there is in the game!

His efficiency was directly related to being allowed to get away with blatant fouling. How can anyone defend him when he's allowed to get away with this crap? And don't bring up Barkley's back down or Jordan leaning back. It was nothing like what Shaq was doing.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ3FXLyNFew[/youtube]

The league wouldn't stop it because he was their next cash cow.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Robinson was a great player. No shame in getting outplayed by him. Doesn't take away from Mutombo's status as an elite defensive player in 2001, when Shaq dominated him.

Yeah the here's the best version of Mutombo vs. Olajuwon,

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUtJmDgIFI8[/youtube]

the only version that was actually able to lead his team to a series win in his career that year, not that 34 year old version in Philly Shaq was allowed to elbow and barrell his way through while the refs turned a blind eye.

He isn't slowing Hakeem h2h anymore than he did Shaq. And I guess this is the best as it gets in terms of big men Shaq outperformed during his peak.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

I'm sure it happened JUST like you say it did! I guess the microcosm of Akeem's career was that when he won titles, the TWO years out of all his entire career, he was all smiles and giggles. But when he wasn't winning (which was the majority of the time) he was a hothead that was getting bounced out in the first round.

So am I making things up? He didn't run all-star guard Nick Van Exel outta LA after the '98 series? A better PG than anyone Olajuwon ever played with in Houston "all these years he was getting bounced in the 1st round"? Did he not admit to jealousy of Penny's rise to stardom in Orlando? This guy fell out with guys BETTER than what Hakeem couldn't get outta the 1st round with, and better than what he won his 1st title with. And better than any SG Duncan ever had.

I'm supposed to believe Shaq could lead a malcontent like Mad Max to a title in Dream's shoes? Or make Sleepy Floyd a winner when you use this laughable oh he doubled up Hakeem's rings? He had a problem with Kobe's shooting, had a problem with Penny's shooting, these guys were vastly better than anything in Houston. Shaq wasn't winning a damned thing in Houston in Hakeem's shoes.

Yeah, I know that sounds ridiculous. But nowhere near as ridiculous as your stuff. Read the article I provided to you. Shaq LEAD his team to a 20 pt lead because he was outplaying your hero. His leadership is what allowed them to build that lead! Should he have LEAD Nick Anderson's free throws into the basket? I'm not sure what you expect. Shaq, MJ, Wilt, Kareem, or even Akeem himself could have MADE Nick Anderson make 1 of 4 free throws!

Where in the article does it state Shaq going scoreless in O/T? I like how that's omitted. Shaq was up 20 and torching Hakeem as the article claims. The reserves should've been in and Orlando up 1-0 if Shaq had kept pouring it on. But he became PASSIVE, Hakeem, didn't stop shooting regardless of what his FG% was in that game. All that nonsensical article rambles on about is efficiency, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Orlando sentinel columnist.

Lemme ask you this? I saw MJ torch Clyde for 39 in Game 2 and see him foul out with 4 minutes left up 10, and Chicago still loses the game. Are you gonna sit here and tell me MJ isn't partly to blame for the loss as the LEADER of the team because he put up a great night and was efficient?

More wahhh wahh. If Portland doesn't crap the bed in 4th quarter shooting, does LA win in '00? They didn't come back because Shaq dominated that game, they came back because Portland went cold from their jumpers. Are you crying for Portland too?

[Jaseface]

I have no idea how anyone can put Duncan ahead of either.

This is when RealGM simply perplexes me. Duncan's resume speaks for itself. I don't know what else you really need to know....

[Shot Clock]

I have no idea how anyone can put Duncan ahead of either.

This is when RealGM simply perplexes me. Duncan's resume speaks for itself. I don't know what else you really need to know....

Ummm thanks, you convinced me...

Like Shaq or Hakeem's resume doesn't speak for themselves.

[RayBan-Sematra]

His efficiency was directly related to being allowed to get away with blatant fouling. How can anyone defend him when he's allowed to get away with this crap? And don't bring up Barkley's back down or Jordan leaning back. It was nothing like what Shaq was doing.

Sorry but that is just nonsense.
What Shaq & Barkley did is actually very similar. They both used their physical gifts combined with elite footwork along with reasonably varied and very fluid post games to overpower opposing defenses and garner high percentage shots at will.

Nothing Shaq did was illegal and while he did "get away" with fouls at times so did/do all Super-Stars.

Legendary power players will overpower opposing defenders but that doesn't mean they are committing fouls or playing the game in a non-legal fashion.

I very much doubt that by Shaq's 2nd year Stern told the refs to allow Shaq to get away with things especially when there were still plenty of big name stars at or near their Peak's like Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, Payton, Malone, Barkley and on and on.
Tring to discredit an ATG with such conspiracy nonsense is always a weak argument which can generally only be supported through cherry picked examples (something you could for any ATG).
Even a very raw Rookie Shaq was among the 10 best players in the game while Jordan was still having his way with the league.

He isn't slowing Hakeem h2h anymore than he did Shaq. And I guess this is the best as it gets in terms of big men Shaq outperformed during his peak.

#1. Shaq at his Peak dominated a Prime Duncan + Robinson duo.
That is arguably more impressive then Hakeem's dismantling of Ewing or his dominant series VS Robinson.
Shaq also outplayed Hakeem overall from 93-95 in the regular-season and dominated Hakeem overall in their 96-97 matchups.

#2. Hakeem could not having dominated Dikembe the way Shaq did.
These are the stats Hakeem put up VS Dikembe over his career : 22.6 / 10.6 / 2apg / 3bpg on 49%FG
Compared to Shaq who dropped 33 / 16 / 5apg / 3bpg on 57%FG

Hakeem in 27 meetings with Mutombo over his ENTIRE career had exactly ONE game where he performed at a level similar to Shaq's average level in the 01 Finals.
But lets ignore that and assume that Hakeem would easily replicate what Shaq did.
At the very least it is obvious that Hakeem would not dominate the boards the way O'neal did.

[jaypo]

So it's illegal for Shaq to bang into Deke, but it's legal for Deke to put his body at a 45 degree angle and push Shaq? Read what I said- if the ACT of creating contact is a foul, then every player in the league would be called for an offensive foul when they drive into a defender. It's no different than when Kobe drives to the lane and bumps against the defender. The difference is that Shaq's power creates more space. If the ACT constitutes the foul, then games would last 8 hours.

Again, Fusheng, you state that Shaq was scoreless in OT. I told you earlier- he scored 1 and Akeem scored 2 until the last play where Shaq had to leave Akeem to try and prevent a wide open layup by Drexler. Orlando was up mainly because Shaq was 8/12 and dished out a career high in assists while Akeem was 9/21 (scored 1 more basket on almost twice as many shots!) and held to 4 rebounds. The game was tied because Kenny Smith set a FINALS RECORD in 3 pointers! Again, your futile attempt to pin that on Shaq has failed miserably.

Care to try again????

So basically, Akeem turned into a chucker and had his role players bail him out- Kenny hitting all those 3's, Horry blocking the last second shot, and Nick Anderson going 0-4.

Imagine for a second if that game ended 113 to 110, Orlando. Shaq would have posted 26 pts, 12 boards, a career high in assists on 57% from the field while Akeem would have scored 27 on 9/21 shooting and 4 rebounds.

What would you have to say about that? Shaq didn't score all 113, so obviously, he sucked??

Dude, let the hate go. Oh. And I'm pretty sure Shaq felt really good when he hoisted his 3rd FMVP in a row over his head, a feat that Akeem never could accomplish!

[jaypo]

And Shot Clock, I'm not sure who peed in your Cheerios, but you're going to seriously argue about the degree of Akeem's rawness as it pertains to my opinion???? Dude, get a grip. Shaq was more raw when he came into the league. I'm not all that anally pained about it!

To clarify, I meant that the version of the Dream that many remember is not the rookie version. It's the more polished version from around 94 and 95.

Please quit looking for some kind of stupid argument. I've gone on record to say that he is my 2nd favorite center. But he wasn't God. MJ was the best player ever, but he wasn't always the assassin we saw during his 2 3 peats, now, was he??

[FuShengTHEGreat]

#1. Shaq at his Peak dominated a Prime Duncan + Robinson duo.
That is arguably more impressive then Hakeem's dismantling of Ewing or his dominant series VS Robinson.
Shaq also outplayed Hakeem overall from 93-95 in the regular-season and dominated Hakeem overall in their 96-97 matchups.

You're still denying Shaq had to adopt the Wilt '72 vs Jabbar role if he was going to get past a Duncan led team in the playoffs. Duncan was ALWAYS SA's best player at BOTH ends of the floor when they won those series. Had to assume a BIGGER role for his team to get past LA in the playoffs than Shaq had to to get past SA.

2001 Shaq's best winning performance vs. SA 27pts/13rebs & 54% FG. Meanwhile Tim couldn't win a game despite averaging 23/12 & 47% FG. And he led SA in ALL facets: Scoring, rebounding, blocking, assisting and stealing. He tripled the amount of blocks Shaq had. Ask Shaq to fulfill such a role for his team and they don't go anywhere. That ain't dominating anyone.

Interesting fact about the 2001 series: Kobe Bryant scored as many points as Tim Duncan's 2nd AND 3rd best scorers combined!!! Kinda hard to lose with that kinda production.

I wouldn't even mention Ewing or Robinson, because Shaq wouldn't have gotten far enough to face any of those guys in Hakeem's shoes in '94 or '95.

[RayBan-Sematra]

You're still denying Shaq had to adopt the Wilt '72 vs Jabbar role if he was going to get past a Duncan led team in the playoffs.

Shaq averaged 27 / 3apg against Duncan in that 01 series.
He was hardly some defensive specialist letting Duncan get his on low efficiency while Kobe carried the bulk of the scoring load for his own team.

Comparing Shaq's role and actual performance on that 01 squad to Wilt's on his 72 squad is laughable.
That is a terrible comparison.

27 / 3 on high efficiency are godly 1st option stats considering the fact that they came against what may have been the GOAT post defensive duo.

I also don't discredit Shaq's performance because Kobe (who was a Super-Star that year) dominated one of the weakest perimeter defenses of his era and an overall defense that was focused completely on stopping Shaq.

Duncan was ALWAYS SA's best player at BOTH ends of the floor when they won those series.

That doesn't hold any relevance when simply looking at who performed better h2h.
Shaq badly outplayed Duncan h2h in that 01 series on both ends of the court.

Kobe wasn't keeping the Spurs from focusing their defense on him.
Kobe wasn't helping Shaq much when it came to shutting down Duncan or Robinson.

I would also add that Shaq was arguably his teams best offensive/defensive player in the 01 & 04 Spurs series.
Certainly Kobe put up more impressive raw offensive stats in the 01 series but one must take into account context.
Shaq was the main focus of the Spurs defense. Kobe was not.
Shaq was facing the GOAT post defensive duo. Kobe was in all honestly facing a putridity weak perimeter defense.

Not trying to knock Kobe who was absolutely amazing in that series but Shaq still might have been more valuable to his teams offense when you take into account their roles and what they had to deal with.

2001 Shaq's best winning performance vs. SA 27pts/13rebs & 54% FG. Meanwhile Tim couldn't win a game despite averaging 23/12 & 47% FG. And he led SA in ALL facets: Scoring, rebounding, blocking, assisting and stealing. He tripled the amount of blocks Shaq had. Ask Shaq to fulfill such a role for his team and they don't go anywhere. That ain't dominating anyone.

Shaq still dominated Duncan in that series.
Give Shaq the same team Duncan had and he is still gonna win the series because he outplayed Duncan.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

#2. Hakeem could not having dominated Dikembe the way Shaq did.
These are the stats Hakeem put up VS Dikembe over his career : 22.6 / 10.6 / 2apg / 3bpg on 49%FG
Compared to Shaq who dropped 33 / 16 / 5apg / 3bpg on 57%FG

Hakeem in 27 meetings with Mutombo over his ENTIRE career had exactly ONE game where he performed at a level similar to Shaq's average level in the 01 Finals.
But lets ignore that and assume that Hakeem would easily replicate what Shaq did.
At the very least it is obvious that Hakeem would not dominate the boards the way O'neal did.

I like how you don't add the bulk of these meetings weren't with defences having to zero in on a prime Kobe or Wade like Shaq had the luxury of going against Mutombo. Matt Geiger a decent to good PF/C missed the 2001 Finals with injury, so that could've helped skewer the rebounding numbers a bit, not that Shaq wouldn't have dominated. LA was light's out from 3pt land in the Finals hitting 48% and people here are whining about Houston's 40% in the '95 Finals, lol.

Whereas on the other hand 18 out of 27 of these career games Olajuwon faced Mutombo he was the only real true star on the team.

Yeah Shaq on the other hand in 24 career meetings averaged 21.5ppg/12.3rpg/2apg/1.8bpg/0.8stls on 52% FG vs Mutombo.

Whoa what a big difference, looks like Hakeem was scoring more vs. Deke in his career than Shaq was.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

I also don't discredit Shaq's performance because Kobe (who was a Super-Star that year) dominated one of the weakest perimeter defenses of his era and an overall defense that was focused completely on stopping Shaq

This is a big myth. I watched Kobe's 45 pt game, and much of that series. He was beating their guards in transition in that series. He was facing up guys one on one and scoring at will on the perimeter where none of SA bigs or Shaq were. He was getting all sorts of fastbreak points before Shaq even got down the floor. He didn't need any defence zeroing in on Shaq in that series to score boatloads of points vs that as you say "weakest perimeter defence of his era" .

They were both working well off of each other in that series, and pretty much the entire playoffs.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Yeah Shaq on the other hand in 24 career meetings averaged 21.5ppg/12.3rpg/2apg/1.8bpg/0.8stls on 52% FG vs Mutombo.

Whoa what a big difference, looks like Hakeem was scoring more vs. Deke in his career than Shaq was.

The point is Hakeem rarely ever dominated Mutombo the way Shaq did in the 01 Finals.
There is little evidence to say he would consistently perform at such a high level VS him in an extended series.

Not saying he could or couldn't only that assuming he would doesn't make all that much sense.

If Hakeem had even a handful of those GOAT type performances VS Mutombo over his career then I might feel differently but he had exactly ONE in 27 meetings.

This is a big myth. I watched Kobe's 45 pt game, and much of that series. He was beating their guards in transition in that series. He was facing up guys one on one and scoring at will on the perimeter where none of SA bigs or Shaq were. He was getting all sorts of fastbreak points before Shaq even got down the floor. He didn't need any defence zeroing in on Shaq in that series to score boatloads of points vs that as you say "weakest perimeter defence of his era" .

I never said they were leaving Kobe unguarded in that series.
Obviously they tried to never help on Shaq using Kobe's defender.

That doesn't change the fact that Kobe faced less help defense due to the presense of Shaq nor does it make his ability to abuse horrible undersized and unathletic defenders in transition and in 1v1 any more impressive.

The point is the Spurs defense was focused on Shaq.
They weren't gonna cover him any differently if Kobe existed or not.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

That doesn't hold any relevance when simply looking at who performed better h2h.
Shaq badly outplayed Duncan h2h in that 01 series on both ends of the court.

Uhhh yes it does as far as I'm concerned. Tim Duncan had to do more for his team to have a chance to win in 2001 vs. LA than Shaq did vs SA. Kobe Bryant equalled Tim Duncan's 2nd & 3rd scoring option's combined scoring output in that series. When is the last series you can recall a 2nd option =ing someone else's 2nd AND 3rd option in a playoff series?

Shaq still dominated Duncan in that series. Give Shaq the same team Duncan had and he is still gonna win the series because he outplayed Duncan.

Yeah Shaq with a aging DRob he was feuding with in the 90s is suddenly gonna go on the road and sweep a prime Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant combo missing Derek Anderson to injury with a 3pt shooting perimeter that puts up 22% FG for the series because you say so. I beg to differ!

[RayBan-Sematra]

Tim Duncan had to do more for his team to have a chance to win in 2001 vs. LA than Shaq did vs SA.

Sure I can agree with that.
Doesn't change the fact that Shaq still "did more" then Duncan did in that series and outplayed him.

Yeah Shaq with a aging DRob he was feuding with in the 90s is suddenly gonna go on the road and sweep a prime Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant combo missing Derek Anderson to injury with a 3pt shooting perimeter that puts up 22% FG for the series because you say so. I beg to differ!

No.
I am saying that if they both had Robinson and identical Spurs casts that Shaq would still win the series.
If Shaq had the same support Duncan had it wouldn't change the outcome of the series because Shaq still dominated Duncan h2h.

Also Shaq didn't need Kobe to play that well for them to win the series.
Kobe could have averaged 20ppg and they still would have won the series.

Their average margin of victory in that series was I believe a record +20ppg.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

The point is Hakeem rarely ever dominated Mutombo the way Shaq did in the 01 Finals.
There is little evidence to say he would consistently perform at such a high level VS him in an extended series.

Not saying he could or couldn't only that assuming he would doesn't make all that much sense.

If Hakeem had even a handful of those GOAT type performances VS Mutombo over his career then I might feel differently but he had exactly ONE in 27 meetings.

Yeah whatever, Hakeem more than any other player in NBA history has the highest statistical increase from regular season production to playoff averages. As far as I'm concerned in terms of facing Centers unless 92-95 Hakeem was facing a fellow top 5 all-time Center like Shaq, Jabbar, (I don't know enough of Wilt or Russell, given I didn't see them play) they're getting torched for big nights all series long.

So I don't need any regular season game breakdown to tell me otherwise. Olajuwon historically was a better playoff player than regular season player. Ewing, Mason and Oakley triumvirate held him to 26ppg. DRob/DRodman combo got destroyed. And he put up a combined 33ppg/11rpg facing Shaq/Ho.G. 34 year old Mutombo in 2001 Finals couldn't hold a candle to any of those defences....DPOY or no DPOY.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Again, Fusheng, you state that Shaq was scoreless in OT. I told you earlier- he scored 1 and Akeem scored 2 until the last play where Shaq had to leave Akeem to try and prevent a wide open layup by Drexler. Orlando was up mainly because Shaq was 8/12 and dished out a career high in assists while Akeem was 9/21 (scored 1 more basket on almost twice as many shots!) and held to 4 rebounds.

What's comical about that article is boasting of his career high assists and not mentioning Shaq's career high....in turnovers. 7 of them....more than anyone else in the game. Maybe that's why they got apprehensive to go to him at times. Oh let me guess, the team didn't get him the ball at "x" spot on the floor, their fault. The ref shouldn't have called that charge on Shaq.

So basically, Akeem turned into a chucker and had his role players bail him out- Kenny hitting all those 3's, Horry blocking the last second shot, and Nick Anderson going 0-4.

Wow a guy hits 50% of his shots facing Shaq and a all NBA def PF and 71% of his freebies is being called a chucker, great analysis. In 2001 and 2002 Shaq got more 3 pt help in a Finals than any team Olajuwon ever played for and you're bringing up getting 3 point help? Getting bailed out means you didn't play up to par. Shaq vs. Portland in Game 7 got BAILED OUT. Shaq vs. SA in 2002 got BAILED out. I like how you won't jump to any of these losing teams' defence and you know why? Because Shaq won that's why, and you could care less for the losers.

You and others here can post these laughable efficiency charts of Shaq vs. Hakeem and X player not hitting a shot or not, but Hakeem's ability to consistently draw Shaq away from the rim had more impact on his team offensively than Shaq being able to score on high FG%. Clyde wasn't a better offensive 2nd option than Penny, he was getting easier baskets at the rim and in transition, because Shaq was away from the rim and Hakeem (and Horry) caused more turnovers than Shaq or anyone else did. I won't even mention Shaq not making enough effort getting back defensively on some plays....oh yeah his teams' fault,lol.