Does Mikan have any argument to be ranked higher than Hakeem?

[frica]

Not really, given he wouldn't even make the league today.

Not really sure how you can make this argument when Deandre Ayton has pretty much the same build and is at least average for a center.

Ayton's skill level and athleticism is way beyond Mikan, who might be well be a YMCA player today.

From limited footage Mikan is a way better passer, with better vision than Ayton.

[One_and_Done]

Not really sure how you can make this argument when Deandre Ayton has pretty much the same build and is at least average for a center.

Ayton's skill level and athleticism is way beyond Mikan, who might be well be a YMCA player today.

From limited footage Mikan is a way better passer, with better vision than Ayton.

Easy to see the right pass over the heads of the unathletic 6-3 guys guarding you I guess.

[penbeast0]

When Mikan won his first BAA title, he faced the Washington Capitols in the championship. They're tallest player was 6'9" Reggie Klermsen. Second was Jack Nichols at 6'7". In the division finals he faced the Knicks. Their 2 tallest players were both listed at 6'7". In the first round, he faced the Warriors whose tallest player was 6'9", but their second tallest was 6'5". So in 3 rounds, Mikan faced 2 6'9" guys and everyone else was 6'7" or shorter.

When Hakeem won his first ring, he faced 15 guys that were 6'10" or taller in 4 rounds. So yeah, you're gonna have to take a loss on this one chief.

For that year, quite possibly. I did a couple of early NBA title years, adding 1.5 inches to each 50s center to compensate for the measure in shoes requirement, and compared them to those faced by Patrick Ewing (contemporary), and it was almost a dead wash league wide (more difference at PG and the forward spots). I haven't looked at BAA stats so I will take your word for it. I also only looked at starters.

As for the shoe thing, look at the pictures from NBA@50 where Hakeem and Russell are together and 6'9 listed Russell is a little bit taller than 7'0 listed Hakeem (used to be listed at 6'11). Height inflation was a real thing; they now release the combine numbers which are presumably far more accurate.

[frica]

Hakeem also played in the tallest (listed) era of the NBA.
Since then Centers and PFs have become slightly shorter. (Every position gravitating towards 6'7 positionless basketball)

[eminence]

Also notable, Mikan didn't play the Knicks or Warriors in '49 POs, lol.

He played the Royals/Stags.

[B-Mitch 30]

Depends on how you contextualize and ultimately value his career. He played against Bob Pettit and retired only one year before Bill Russell entered the NBA. Russ & Auerbach thought highly of him, which is enough for me.

That's interesting, when did Bill talk about Mikan?

[eminence]

Depends on how you contextualize and ultimately value his career. He played against Bob Pettit and retired only one year before Bill Russell entered the NBA. Russ & Auerbach thought highly of him, which is enough for me.

That's interesting, when did Bill talk about Mikan?

It might be in more detail in his interview with Taylor Branch?

But there's also a brief video of him chatting with Bill Walton about when Russell was in high school and the Lakers did an exhibition game in San Francisco. And a 20 min chat with Mikan after the game inspired him to pursue professional basketball. I believe he says it was before he'd really broken out as a high school star, so around ~1950.

[penbeast0]

Ayton's skill level and athleticism is way beyond Mikan, who might be well be a YMCA player today.

From limited footage Mikan is a way better passer, with better vision than Ayton.

Easy to see the right pass over the heads of the unathletic 6-3 guys guarding you I guess.

You will see 6'3 guys guarding centers in the post today far more than you did in the days of the Hawk offenses with far more teams playing switch everything defenses.

If you mean that NBA teams had 6'3 centers, you are just showing your ignorance. Every team back as far as the 1st year of the NBA had at least 1 6'8 player (probably listed at 6'10 in Hakeem's era due to measuring in shoes and height inflation) and almost all had a 6'9 (6'11) guy or taller. In an era when the most efficient offense was getting the ball into the post for the big man to shoot a short hook or pass out to an open shooter, it makes sense that they prioritized size.

[ShaqAttac]

hes 2 after russ

[tsherkin]

If you mean that NBA teams had 6'3 centers, you are just showing your ignorance. Every team back as far as the 1st year of the NBA had at least 1 6'8 player (probably listed at 6'10 in Hakeem's era due to measuring in shoes and height inflation) and almost all had a 6'9 (6'11) guy or taller. In an era when the most efficient offense was getting the ball into the post for the big man to shoot a short hook or pass out to an open shooter, it makes sense that they prioritized size.

TBF, that was not the most efficient offense in the 90s, but it was the style of the day.

In the 40s and 50s, though, that's a separate story. It's worth mentioning that looking back, people see Mikan's FG% and make faces, right? How could a huge, dominant guy shoot so poorly? Hook shots, hook shots, hook shots... but they aren't addressing the .452 FTr he had at around 80% FT, or the career 114 TS+ (and 114 2P+, at that).

Mikan deviated from his peers in scoring efficiency more than did Shaq, and he did it in a league environment where league-average FG% was often under 36%.

So yeah, he was a bit of a beast in his day. It's tough to compare those specific numbers forward, but his relative efficiency was pretty insane.

[penbeast0]

The post offense comment referred to the late 40s/early 50s though as you say it was still a dominant style in the late 80s/early 90s.

[tsherkin]

The post offense comment referred to the late 40s/early 50s though as you say it was still a dominant style in the late 80s/early 90s.

Just clarifying, for sure, hence the separation of my comments.

Mikan was a dominant monster in his day, so it made all the sense in the world to go to a guy playing like he did. So many of the common tropes in coaching come from him, basically. Get it inside for high-percentage buckets, draw fouls, etc. And those underhanded FTs left him shooting around 80% on high volume at the line, which made him even nastier. Imagine if Shaq had even shot 69% like Giannis does? Horrifying.

He's a good example of why cross-era comparisons become very challenging, and why I'm very fond of era-contained discussion. He did everything which was needed in his own time to be dominant. He had horrid longevity, but he was basically all peak and team success.

I struggle to see the forward-port argument for him, but the longer I spend thinking on it, the more I wonder if that's something worth caring about. Does it matter? Or does the insane level of dominance he displayed in his actual career stand tall as the only thing of consequence, despite the very large differences in the game he played versus the game today?

[One_and_Done]

From limited footage Mikan is a way better passer, with better vision than Ayton.

Easy to see the right pass over the heads of the unathletic 6-3 guys guarding you I guess.

You will see 6'3 guys guarding centers in the post today far more than you did in the days of the Hawk offenses with far more teams playing switch everything defenses.

If you mean that NBA teams had 6'3 centers, you are just showing your ignorance. Every team back as far as the 1st year of the NBA had at least 1 6'8 player (probably listed at 6'10 in Hakeem's era due to measuring in shoes and height inflation) and almost all had a 6'9 (6'11) guy or taller. In an era when the most efficient offense was getting the ball into the post for the big man to shoot a short hook or pass out to an open shooter, it makes sense that they prioritized size.

It was a joke, though when you watch the footage his clear height advantage over his contemporaries is obvious. He was not playing in anything resembling the league Ayton played in.

[penbeast0]

Easy to see the right pass over the heads of the unathletic 6-3 guys guarding you I guess.

You will see 6'3 guys guarding centers in the post today far more than you did in the days of the Hawk offenses with far more teams playing switch everything defenses.

If you mean that NBA teams had 6'3 centers, you are just showing your ignorance. Every team back as far as the 1st year of the NBA had at least 1 6'8 player (probably listed at 6'10 in Hakeem's era due to measuring in shoes and height inflation) and almost all had a 6'9 (6'11) guy or taller. In an era when the most efficient offense was getting the ball into the post for the big man to shoot a short hook or pass out to an open shooter, it makes sense that they prioritized size.

It was a joke, though when you watch the footage his clear height advantage over his contemporaries is obvious. He was not playing in anything resembling the league Ayton played in.

If you watch the film, his height advantage is far from clear. He's not the tallest center in the league and pretty much every team has a guy within an inch or two of his height. He is the heaviest listed center in the league by a decent margin; like comparing Ayton to Alex Sarr, it's his strength and skill that are his advantage.

[Cavsfansince84]

If a. you are very high on era relevance/dominance and b. you're not that high on longevity then of course there is. If that's the case someone could easily have Mikan anywhere from 1 to 5 I would say(if you also think his offensive dominance gives him the edge on Russell). It's just a matter of whether you think that the pre shot clock era should get equal consideration to the post shot clock eras. Personally I ding him a bit for that era and for his longevity and have him more in the 13-20 range but he's a very hard guy to rank.

[B-Mitch 30]

While the footage I've seen points to this being mostly due to him shooting underhanded from the line, can I just say Mikan making over 78% of his free throws at height in the 50's is still very impressive? Like holy cow, a lot of more modern centers who I think have/had a shooter's touch didn't reach that efficiency.

[picko]

If you value in-era dominance then sure you could rank him higher than Hakeem. There isn't a player in NBA history who was more dominance against his peers than Mikan was. He's basically a combination of Wilt's statistical domination with Russell's team success. He's also tremendously influential.

But if you have concerns over the quality of the era - and I think you should - then you aren't realistically going to rate him above Hakeem. Between the shot clock, rule chances, segregation we aren't exactly comparing apples-to-apples.

[tsherkin]

While the footage I've seen points to this being mostly due to him shooting underhanded from the line, can I just say Mikan making over 78% of his free throws at height in the 50's is still very impressive? Like holy cow, a lot of more modern centers who I think have/had a shooter's touch didn't reach that efficiency.

Dude rocked the granny toss without shame, and it was a big, big deal for him and his overall effectiveness.

[FrodoBaggins]

Like Wilt, Mikan was restricted in the level of physicality he was permitted to use on offense. I do really like the Jeff Ruland comparison for how Mikan's physicality would translate. Pre-injury, Jeff had an impressive foul-drawing game: .582 FTr/.583 2pt-FTr, 9.6 FTA/100, 7.0 FTA/g (35.3 mpg), 178 FTr+. That's over 303 games and 10,708 MP across five seasons (1982-1986). 71.8% FT.

Prime Duncan (1998-2007) is a '90s/'00s comparison we can take a look at: .456 FTr/.460 2pt-FTr, 10.7 FTA/100, 7.5 FTA/g (37.5 mpg), 145 FTr+. 746 games, 27,966 on-court MP, ten seasons. 68.0 FT%.

Pre-injury DeMarcus Cousins is an even more modern comp: .455 FTr/.510 2pt-FTr, 11.7 FTA/100, 7.6 FTA/g (32.3 mpg), 165 FTr+. 535 games, 17,307 MP, eight seasons (2011-2018). 73.7% FT.

I think Big George would have a comparable draw rate while hitting at a superior FT% hovering around 80%. He hit an impressive 78.2% of his foul shots, which was in an era without modern standardized, high-quality balls, rims, backboards, and general playing conditions such as arena temperature. At 109 FT+, that'd round out to 83.0% FT from 1982-1986, 81.5% FT from 1998-2007, and 81.5% FT from 2011-2018.

[FrodoBaggins]

The limited game footage, scouting reports, general touch in the paint, and in-era FT% indicate a competent outside shooting ability. Some names of Cs, PF/Cs, and C/PFs with an 80.0+ career FT%:

- Dirk (116 FT+)
- Andrea Bargnani (109 FT+)
- LaMarcus Aldridge (107 FT+)
- Kevin Love (109 FT+)
- Joel Embiid (107 FT+)
- Nikola Jokić (106 FT+)
- Karl-Anthony Towns (108 FT+)
- Kristaps Porziņģis (107 FT+)
- Lauri (112 FT+)
- Wemby (103 FT+)
- Sikma (112 FT+)
- Laimbeer (110 FT+)
- Tom Chambers (107 FT+)
- Brad Miller (107 FT+)
- Dolph Schayes (116 FT+)
- Mike Gminski (111 FT+)
- Yao Ming (110 FT+)
- Brandon Bass (110 FT+)
- John Beasley (113 FT+)
- Christian Laettner (110 FT+)
- Red Robbins (110 FT+)
- David West (108 FT+)
- Thurl Bailey (107 FT+)
- Sam Perkins (107 FT+)
- Byron Beck (108 FT+)
- Shareef Abdur-Rahim (109 FT+)
- Danny Schayes (106 FT+)
- Kevin McHale (slightly below at 79.6% FT) (105 FT+)

There aren't that many Cs that have a FT% above league average, let alone 80.0%, or 105-110 FT+. And they're mostly all good outside shooters. Combined with his foul drawing, rebounding, and post-up ability, it makes him a unique offensive threat.