microfib4thewin wrote:Shaq and young Hakeem playing in today's game would foul out in 30 minutes. They were racking up fouls at an alarmingly high rate in an era where fouls are called less often and they spent more time defending other giants as opposed to 6'6 smalls slashing to the rim. Transporting their prime self to post 04 handchecking where they constantly have to defend much smaller guys where any contact would constitute a foul for the defender? All I can say is good luck with that.
Do you watch today's game? In fact less fouls are called today than ever before. The top 7 seasons in NBA history for fewest fouls per game happened in the last 7 years. The 3 seasons with the fewest FTA/game happened in the last 3 years.
Magic has lower longevity than the bigs, has a lower peak than Hakeem or Shaq (and is right next to Duncan) and his lack of defense and combined individual impact as two way player accounting for team support is worse. LeBron also has a case as an individual player over Magic as well.
90sAllDecade wrote:Magic has lower longevity than the bigs, has a lower peak than Hakeem or Shaq (and is right next to Duncan) and his lack of defense as an individual impact as two way player accounting for team support is worse. LeBron also has a case as an individual player over Magic as well.
I know you're a big Hakeem guy, and I'm considering him for my vote here.
In your opinion, what was the final year of his offensive prime? What about the final year of his defensive prime?
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
Pay no mind to the battles you've won It'll take a lot more than rage and muscle Open your heart and hands, my son Or you'll never make it over the river
ronnymac2 wrote:Thinking of Latrell Sprewell here...
Hmm... interesting choice.
Could you expound a bit for me? I'm having some trouble getting my hands around it.
I remember your posts from the RPOY project, you consistently brought it. Please continue to do so, sir. This board needs guys like you to counteract ... worthless posters
Retirement isn’t the end of the road, but just a turn in the road. – Unknown
90sAllDecade wrote:Magic has lower longevity than the bigs, has a lower peak than Hakeem or Shaq (and is right next to Duncan) and his lack of defense as an individual impact as two way player accounting for team support is worse. LeBron also has a case as an individual player over Magic as well.
I know you're a big Hakeem guy, and I'm considering him for my vote here.
In your opinion, what was the final year of his offensive prime? What about the final year of his defensive prime?
I would say offensively his prime ends after age 33 or so and defensively, although he ages better on that end to others, I would say around 32 (his peak at 94' due to his coaching system and roster imo).
Actually, I think his true defensive best was in the 80's when he was at his most athletic and he lead the league in Drtg for 5 consecutive years, as well as got a rebounding and some shot blocking titles. In comparison, neither Duncan or Shaq did that defensively and arguably had better defensive team support to make their jobs easier on that end as well.
I really wish we had team impact data or RAPM for that time period as I think it would really open people's eyes about him defensively.
I know you were interested in his younger pre peak years, so here's his footage so you can see the athleticism I'm talking about. He was a better athlete than Duncan imo and even though he wasn't as big, he was quicker laterally, more coordinated than Shaq and better defensively. (the first half or so is his younger years)
You have provided a wide range of stats here, but it feels a little like you are cherry picking ones that make Hakeem look good and not providing a full picture. I've already posted a per100 stat comparison showing Duncan, Shaq and Hakeem, and while Hakeem looks great in blocks and steals, he's similar to Duncan at scoring/efficiency and far behind Shaq in that regard.
Maybe my per100 stats for the RS need to be updated to show what sort of playoff performers each were. To what extent does the smaller sample size tell us more about the player than their regular season games? (Here's the playoffs data) Magic... 23.9PTS.595TS% 9.5REB 15.1AST2.3STL 0.4BLK 4.5TO 3.4PF Duncan. 30.2PTS.584TS% 16.5REB 4.4AST 1.0STL 3.3BLK 3.7TO 4.0PF Shaq.... 34.7PTS .565TS% 16.6REB 3.8AST 0.8STL 3.0BLK 4.3TO 5.1PF Hakeem 33.7PTS .569TS% 14.6REB 4.1AST 2.2STL4.2BLK 3.8TO 5.0PF
So what conclusions can we reach from this? Both Magic and Duncan were more unselfish players or were offensively underutilised relative to Shaq/Hakeem, given that they had greater efficiency and lower point totals. Duncan's regular season rebounding lead evaporates compared to Shaq (which fits the narrative that Shaq didn't try as hard during the regular season). Hakeem continues to be an unimpressive rebounder, but superlative overall defender as seen from steals and blocks.
These lists would make more sense I think if they were ranked from best to worst, not with Hakeem always at the top.
90sAllDecade wrote:Hakeem is the greatest player in NBA history with the lowest team support and highest competition. This shows just how good he had to be versus the others who had outstanding high team support and lower competition advantages.
I think that looking at 'All Star players' and 'HOF coach' is a particularly flakey way of evaluating how much support a player has. Also, I could have sworn that I thought that RudyT was a HOF coach before he went to LA.
90sAllDecade wrote:In his prime (age 23-33) Hakeem dominated or outplayed his HOF center peers in the playoffs throughout his career.
Actually, in the Duncan vs Hakeem megathread, I posted a comparison of the ACTUAL data of matchups between the two and their chief opponents (even giving Hakeem the credit of ignoring Shawn Kemp, whose sonics slaughtered the Rockets), and I found two things. Firstly, Hakeem had a vanishingly small number of playoff battles vs opposing heavyweights (as opposed to Shaq vs Duncan, who ran into each other 6 times in their careers). And secondly, Duncan didn't do that badly in that sort of analysis either.
[quote=me]The arguement you are making is that Hakeem dominated his HOF opponents. And you've given some details of that. That seems well and good. But let's look at the full picture. Who were the HOF players that Duncan went against? Let's say they were Shaq, Garnett and Dirk. Here's the breakdown (with the figures culled from BR showing PTS TRB AST STL BLK ORtg DRtg)
Duncan vs Garnett, Shaq and Dirk in the playoffs
Spoiler:
1999 SAS 3, MIN 1 Duncan 18.8 10.8 3.3 0.8 3.0 112 94 Garnett 21.8 12.0 3.8 1.8 2.0 100 97 Garnett has better raw stats on points and rebounds, but Duncan has far better O/DRtg, and a better TS%. You could argue this series either way I think. A tie
1999 SAS 4, LAL 0 Duncan 29.0 10.8 3.3 1.0 2.0 111 95 Shaq 23.8 13.0 0.5 1.0 1.8 106 105 This looks like a win for Duncan here.
2001 SAS 3, MIN 1 Duncan 22.5 13.0 3.5 1.0 2.0 104 88 Garnett 21.0 12.0 4.3 1.0 1.5 120 99 Both players are great, although I'd give the nod to Duncan here.
2001 SAS 4, DAL 1 Duncan 27.0 17.4 3.6 1.0 2.0 107 93 Dirk 23.0 8.6 1.2 1.8 0.8 116 110 Now THIS is dominance. Yes? Duncan
2001 LAL 4, SAS 0 Duncan 23.0 12.3 4.3 1.3 4.3 99 108 Shaq 27.0 13.0 2.5 0.8 1.3 106 90 I think Duncan's DRtg says it all, especially when compared to the previous two rounds. The Lakers were too dominant offensively and broke the SA defense. This is clearly Shaq.
2002 LAL 4, SAS 1 Duncan 29.0 17.2 4.6 1.0 3.2 103 97 Shaq 21.4 12.2 3.2 0.6 3.0 100 94 Duncan may have lost the series, but I think he was the most dominant player in the series.
2003 SAS 4, LAL 2 Duncan 28.0 11.8 4.8 0.3 1.3 120 102 Shaq 25.3 14.3 3.7 0.7 2.8 117 104 Duncan has the point lead and won the series, but I'd be inclined to call this one a tie. Shaq was NOT the reason the Lakers lost this.
2006 DAL 4, SAS 3 Duncan 32.3 11.7 3.7 1.0 2.6 122 111 Dirk 27.1 13.3 2.7 1.4 0.4 128 107 Looks like a great series out of both players. I'd give the slight edge to Dirk here.
2009 DAL 4, SAS 1 Duncan 19.8 8.0 3.2 0.6 1.2 115 113 Dirk 19.2 8.6 2.2 1.0 0.6 118 106 Interesting how the stats shoot down in the post-Thibs world. Looks like another very close series. I think this is another tie.
2014 SAS 4, DAL 3 Duncan 17.3 8.4 1.3 0.1 1.9 129 110 Dirk 19.1 8.0 1.6 0.9 0.9 96 111 Those numbers look quite similar until you get to the offensive ratings. Holy cow! It's not often that Duncan has a better TS% than Dirk.
Now let's apply the same methodology to Hakeem. I think his HOF big men were Karl Malone, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, David Robinson, Shaq and Patrick Ewing. I don't think much of Robert Parish (I rate Shawn Kemp higher and think he was a contemporary of Olajuwon that had his number, but he's not in the same class as the guys above).
Hakeem vs Kareem, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq and Malone in the playoffs
1995 HOU 3, UTA 2 Hakeem 35.0 8.6 4.0 0.8 2.6 116 112 Malone 30.2 13.2 3.8 1.4 0.4 114 118 I'm not in love with the low rebound total, but Hakeem is probably this one too.
1995 HOU 4, SAS 2 (the infamous series that is the reason this topic is even being discussed) Hakeem 35.3 12.5 5.0 1.3 4.2 111 101 Robinson 23.8 11.3 2.7 1.5 2.2 106 107 Easily Hakeem.
1995 HOU 4, ORL 0 Hakeem 32.8 11.5 5.5 2.0 2.0 107 106 Shaq 28.0 12.5 6.3 0.3 2.5 109 115 Eh, this isn't dominance to me. Hakeem's extra points come courtesy of his much higher USG%, he was actually much less efficient than Shaq. I'd be inclined to call this a tie.
1997 UTA 4, HOU 2 Hakeem 27.2 9.3 3.8 2.0 3.3 122 105 Malone 23.5 11.5 3.2 1.3 1.2 102 106 Utah won the series, and I still don't like his rebounding totals, but this is Hakeem.
1999 LAL 4, HOU 1 Shaq 29.5 10.3 4.0 0.8 4.0 109 104 Hakeem 13.3 7.3 0.5 1.3 0.8 94 105 Maybe a little unfair since this is clearly the end of his career, but it's no different from the Hakeem vs Kareem comparison that starts this sequence off. Easily Shaq.
So if you tally that up, you get Duncan (Win-Loss-Tie) vs Garnett 1-0-1 vs Shaq 3-2-1 vs Dirk 3-2-1
So although Duncan's not pantsing his HOF opponents, he does get the better of them more than they get of him.
Hakeem (Win-Loss-Tie) vs Malone 3-1-0 vs Kareem 1-0-0 vs Ewing 1-0-0 vs Robinson 1-0-0 vs Shaq 0-1-1
So really, I think it's a little surprising how infrequently Hakeem was paired up against HOF calibre players in the playoffs. Duncan had far more battles with his contemporaries than Hakeem did.[/quote]
And to help account for teammate help or hindrance and pace for Drtg.
This is good, do you have the similar numbers for Duncan? I would guess that 2002-2005 would be his 4 year prime. Just so that we are performing apples-to-apples comparisons and not cherrypicking stats. Edit: I've added the Duncan numbers in there, looks like he had a similar impact in the playoffs as Hakeem, although a lesser on in the regular season.
90sAllDecade wrote:Magic has lower longevity than the bigs, has a lower peak than Hakeem or Shaq (and is right next to Duncan) and his lack of defense as an individual impact as two way player accounting for team support is worse. LeBron also has a case as an individual player over Magic as well.
I know you're a big Hakeem guy, and I'm considering him for my vote here.
In your opinion, what was the final year of his offensive prime? What about the final year of his defensive prime?
I would say offensively his prime ends after age 33 or so and defensively, although he ages better on that end to others, I would say around 32 (his peak at 94' due to his coaching system and roster imo).
Actually, I think his true defensive best was in the 80's when he was at his most athletic and he lead the league in Drtg for 5 consecutive years, as well as got a rebounding and some shot blocking titles. In comparison, neither Duncan or Shaq did that defensively and arguably had better defensive team support to make their jobs easier on that end as well.
I really wish we had team impact data or RAPM for that time period as I think it would really open people's eyes about him defensively.
I know you were interested in his younger pre peak years, so here's his footage so you can see the athleticism I'm talking about. He was a better athlete than Duncan imo and even though he wasn't as big, he was quicker laterally, more coordinated than Shaq and better defensively. (the first half or so is his younger years)
Thanks, I'll check out the video shortly. I've actually seen a good deal of him in the playoffs the first couple of years, and watched him live starting 92-93. I ordered his autobiography and it arrived a couple weeks ago, gonna try and read as much as I can tonight, and watch some of his playoff games from 87 through 91 tomorrow before casting my vote.
So just to confirm, you'd say defensively his prime ended around 95, offensively around 96?
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
I have a question: To what extent do people think that a players single season or 3 year peak overshadows what they manage to accomplish in their whole career?
I think that peak counts for something. And Prime. And Career. And if you factor in all three of them, you're effectively counting the value of peak three times, and prime years twice. But I've seen some posts which are ONLY looking at peak/prime, which is effectively giving the value of the whole career a nil value.
I don't think it's nothing that Duncan managed to be the cornerstone of championship teams both before AND after his prime.
There's a thread I linked to in my post, which went on forever comparing Duncan and Hakeem. The Duncan crowd like me came in and swung things around from a large pro Hakeem vote to being deadlocked at 53 at the end (when it was locked, I assume out of sheer exhaustion). In it all-90's made a number of quite inaccurate claims, most of which (as Micro pointed out last thread) he never addressed. Hakeem was a great player, he totally deserves to be discussed soon, but he only has 3 years he was really comparable to Duncan.
Just to refer back to the last thread post I made on this:
Spoiler:
90sAllDecade wrote:Here's a point addressing Duncan vs Hakeem's supporting casts:
Actually, the way this post was originally phrased in the Duncan v.s Hakeem thread is here: viewtopic.php?p=40178758#p40178758 In it, you describe Hakeem's support cast as "nothing". Well, "nothing" included all-star power forward Otis Thorpe, and in games Hakeem missed over 91 and 92 "nothing" managed to post a 28-20 record. A bit hard to see how that was "nothing".
Duncan
97-98 to 00-01 - D. Robinson - age 32 (All NBA 2nd team x1, All NBA 3rd team x2) 04-05,10-11 - M. Ginobilli (All NBA 3rd team x2, Sixth Man of the Year x1) 05-06 to 13-14 - T. Parker (All NBA 2nd team x3, All NBA 3rd team x1)
All NBA Defensive teammates: Bruce Bowen (1st team x5, 2nd team x2),K. Leonard (1st team x1) D. Robinson (2nd team x1) HOF Coaches: G. Popovich x17 yrs
Total: 11 years with 1+ All Star, 9 years with all NBA defensive player, 1 HOF coaches x 17 years
Hakeem
84-85 to 86-87 - R. Sampson (All NBA 2nd team x1) 91-92 - O. Thorpe 94-95 to 97-98 - C. Drexler- age 32 (All NBA 3rd team x1) 96-97 - C. Barkley - age 33 01-02 - V. Carter All NBA Defensive teammates: Rodney McCray (1st team x1, 2nd team x1), S. Pippen - age 33 (1st team x1) HOF Coaches: 0
Total: 8 years with 1+ All Star, 3 years w/All Defensive player, 0 HOF coach
This is such a misleading analysis, because it has no context to it. You're excluding whole years that are inconvenient, and not mentioning key players, and including non-prime years (why?). You're also acting like Hakeem and Duncan were achieving comparable results with these weak support casts, when they plainly weren't. Looking at Hakeem's career during this period; 42 wins in 1987 (lost to the 39 win Sonics who were barely a playoff team), 46 wins in 88 (lost to the solid but not great Mavs), 45 wins in 1989 (lost to the X-Man Sonics again), 41 wins in 1990 (lost to the Showtime Lakers, but if Hakeem had helped them win more games they never have to play the Lakers in Rnd 1), 1991 they go out in the first round again, and in 92 they did not even make the playoffs (and the injury to Hakeem is an insufficient excuse, because their record with him was only 40-30, hardly comparable to what Duncan was doing with weak support casts in 01-03.
Hakeem often had plenty of good team mates, and until his peak in 93-95 (when he finally put it together) he was not carrying them in remotely the same way as Duncan proved he could. Let's take his support cast in 1990 when they won 41 games for instance. Hakeem had Otis Thorpe, a 17-9-3 all-star, defensively tough power forward with killer efficiency at 548. FG%; Sleepy Floyd, still in his prime at 29 years old, and having made an all-star team several years earlier. He had Mad Max, a fierce defender and talented player (who much like Artest, often gunned it too much from the 3pt line), and solid to excellent role players like Buck Johnson, Wiggins, Lucas and Woodwon (for most of the season anyway). 41 wins? Are you kidding me? Hakeem had most of those guys, including Thorpe and Sleepy, the previous season too.
Even when he put it together in 93, he still lost to the Sonics in the playoffs (who always seemed to own him, by employing a borderline illegal defense which, very importantly, would be totally legal in today's game... Hakeem was very fortunate he didn't have to play those same Sonics in 94 or 95 IMO, and of course they took him down in 96- through the regular season and playoffs Hakeem just seemed hopeless against the Sonics, and it was all by using a tactic that is now legal- a worrying point).
Sure, Duncan had more help in general over his career... and he met or surpassed expectations in all those years when he had good talent around him. But when he didn't have help, in 01-03, he still delivered. Hakeem didn't when the chance to carry bad teams arose, and he had plenty of chances. Those Rocket teams I referred to from 87-92 were positively brimming with talent compared to the 01-03 Spurs support casts.
magicmerl wrote:I have a question: To what extent do people think that a players single season or 3 year peak overshadows what they manage to accomplish in their whole career?
I think that peak counts for something. And Prime. And Career. And if you factor in all three of them, you're effectively counting the value of peak three times, and prime years twice. But I've seen some posts which are ONLY looking at peak/prime, which is effectively giving the value of the whole career a nil value.
I don't think it's nothing that Duncan managed to be the cornerstone of championship teams both before AND after his prime.
Speaking solely for myself, I had to think about where I stood on that, after a couple of posts—along with my responses to them—caused me to deliberate on the matter.
I've often used Bill James as an example, in his Historical Baseball Abstract, he separates rankings into Peak and Career. When you're evaluating a player, you're evaluating his career, meaning his entire body of work. Peak is merely a part of it, as a player will not be at his peak for his entire career. So my perspective is, from draft day to retirement, how much did he help his team(s) win during that period? So I take into account the whole body of work.
I remember your posts from the RPOY project, you consistently brought it. Please continue to do so, sir. This board needs guys like you to counteract ... worthless posters
Retirement isn’t the end of the road, but just a turn in the road. – Unknown
I really think LeBron deserves to be getting some traction at this point. He has been the clear best player in the league for longer than anyone since Jordan, 4 MVPs (only the top 4 on this list have more, no one else has as many), 2 Finals MVPs.
Probably the most versatile player of all time. He scores and gets his teammates involved at rates practically never seen. He can play at least four positions on both sides of the ball. You can easily build a team around him and he can literally transform a bottom feeder into a title contender. I don't believe any player in history would have made his Cleveland teams consistently among the league's best (though I acknowledge those teams were built around him). After his departure, a 61 win team became a 19 win team (has this ever happened?)
He has dominated the numbers (box score and plus minus alike): 2nd in JE's 14 year rapm dataset (http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/14y.html) and 3rd in average npi rapm 1997-2014 - only Shaq & Duncan are higher. 2nd in career PER after MJ, 5th in WS/48 after MJ, DRob, Wilt, and CP3, 2nd in ASPM, 1st in my Estimated Impact.
His teams have never been bad - a testament to him more than his teammates - and they have pretty much been dominant in his prime (something you can't say about Hakeem, for example). He has never had teammates as good AND complimentary as Magic, Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, or (especially) Bird. His two all-star level teammates have similar skillsets to his and just aren't particularly complimentary. He hasn't missed the playoffs in his prime (though he has always played in a weaker east).
His longevity is underrated - he has played the 18th most playoff minutes, more than Hakeem, Stockton, and Dirk, for example, and more regular season minutes than Magic.
I also think he's super portable to any era - certainly more, in my opinion, than many who played in older eras. He could be the best player in any era as his combination of size, speed, and skill is completely unique and only arguably replicated by Magic, who didn't have the defensive versatility or strength of LeBron. The only real knock on him is his 2011 finals performance, which was bad to be sure, but it seems that it overshadows in peoples' minds his two great finals performances and his 2009 playoff run which was one of the best we've ever seen. Hakeem, Kareem, and Wilt had seasons in their primes where they didn't even make the playoffs, which I think should be more of a strike against them than one poor series is against LeBron.
Ok, so a few things. Magic isn't getting the traction I thought he was going to be? Maybe I have slightly overrated him given the newer talent that came to pass and is current in the nba?
So right now I am leaning Shaq. He, Hakeem and Duncan are all in the same breath with me. All have great longevity but Shaq's 3 year peak plus sustained 14 year play is too valuable to me. I don't think any GM is thinking ..and this guy will be contributing past his 15th year etc...if it happens great, but 14 years of high level play with basically a top 2-3 peak is very hard to pass up. Highest efficiency of the group and his weaknesses, which btw make perfect sense when you see just have much bigger he is than the rest, aren't enough of an issue for the positives you get with him...and I mean a lot of them.
Great rebounding, man defender, lane intimidator and rim protector. Not as agile, well the others aren't as efficient, and his game gels fantastically with another volume scorer perimeter player. Obviously, health at about 67 games/year during this run isn't top quartile, but most is regular season, and the playoff performances are worth the time off Defensively, I don't think he gets enough deserved credit, I mean, how many play did I watch players pass the ball or change route cause Shaq was in the middle. To me, while not as noticeable, close in value to help defense albeit it just looks different.
But you can't stop his offense and while it took the league years to somewhat try to correctly 'ref' him, his presence alone allows all of your teammates to take advantage. You just can't leave him in single coverage and Shaq was such a good passer out of the post...more so willing.
He was a bit of a diva no doubt, oh well.......can't win them all. However, his focus on court rarely let this affect his play. He knew he was basically unstoppable and thrived to prove it. One of the more colorful careers, but you can't say he didn't back it up.
I will review more pages and edit this post as my official vote once ready.
I am actually thinking of TD next and then LBJ, then Hakeem as crazy as that sounds. I think I would really like to read an LBJ post around Hakeem and himself.
If Shaq was better than Duncan, why did he have less success in his career, despite: better team mates, a better peak, and a slightly longer prime? That's a simplistic question, but a telling one IMO.
I'll start off with arguments you haven't refuted and still stand.
1. Hakeem is a better athlete than Duncan 2. Better individual playoff performer 3. Played tougher competition in his peak 4. Had less team support throughout his career 5. Duncan had a GOAT level coach over Hakeem 6. Duncan was a worse scorer in both the RS and PO 7. Duncan has a lower peak 8. Duncan is worse defensively as an individual (steals, blocks and defensive assignments)
Hakeem is a better offensive scorer, comparable passer, better defensive player and athlete. Duncan is a better rebounder, passer & longevity (had a GOAT coach, HOF teammates and system which enhanced his numbers and helped make his job easier imo). Hakeem was the clear #1 offensive and defensive anchor in his prime, Duncan deferred to Robinson, Manu, Parker and Leonard.
If these two met head to head, Duncan would likely get outplayed or even undressed by peak Hakeem imo. He destroyed Robinson at his peak who is a better athlete, defender, bigger and at his peak a better scorer than Duncan when he was healthy.
magicmerl wrote:You have provided a wide range of stats here, but it feels a little like you are cherry picking ones that make Hakeem look good and not providing a full picture. I've already posted a per100 stat comparison showing Duncan, Shaq and Hakeem, and while Hakeem looks great in rebounds and steals, he's similar to Duncan at scoring/efficiency and far behind Shaq.
Maybe my per100 stats for the RS need to be updated to show what sort of playoff performers each were. To what extent does the smaller sample size tell us more about the player than their regular season games? (Here's the playoffs data) Magic... 23.9PTS.595TS%9.5REB15.1AST2.3STL 0.4BLK 4.5TO 3.4PF Duncan. 30.2PTS.584TS% 16.5REB 4.4AST 1.0STL 3.3BLK 3.7TO 4.0PF Shaq.... 34.7PTS .565TS% 16.6REB 3.8AST 0.8STL 3.0BLK 4.3TO 5.1PF Hakeem 33.7PTS .569TS% 14.6REB 4.1AST 2.2STL4.2BLK 3.8TO 5.0PF
So what conclusions can we reach from this? Both Magic and Duncan were more unselfish players or were offensively underutilised relative to Shaq/Hakeem, given that they had greater efficiency and lower point totals. Duncan's regular season rebounding lead evaporates compared to Shaq (which fits the narrative that Shaq didn't try as hard during the regular season). Hakeem continues to be an unimpressive rebounder, but superlative overall defender as seen from steals and blocks.
More "unselfish'? You're comparing a PG with Bigs, who will naturally have more assists? We could even include Tony Parker and he's have a better AST%. Duncan also has a top 4 GOAT level coach & system and played with prime HOFers to enhance his passing.
And saying Duncan was underutilized is a spin imo, the objective career evidence is right there. Be it RS or Playoffs he flat out overall was a worse volume scorer than Hakeem. Per100 doesn't mean Duncan can handle that volume over the decades Hakeem or Shaq did it, nothing says he was a better offensive scorer over his career.
These lists would make more sense I think if they were ranked from best to worst, not with Hakeem always at the top.
The comparison is primarily based on Hakeem versus others. The number are real and people can verify them, I don't think that really matters imo as I wouldn't be concerned if a pro Duncan guy had his name on top. Hakeem is comparable according to those AST% and all those other greats in those categories.
I think that looking at 'All Star players' and 'HOF coach' is a particularly flakey way of evaluating how much support a player has. Also, I could have sworn that I thought that RudyT was a HOF coach before he went to LA.
All star years, HOF coaches are objective evidence that provides broad strokes of a teammates play relative to the league at that position. Relative to competition at their positions, those guys had better team support.
What objective evidence have you brought to rate team support over different eras or decades? That is your subjective opinon and you have a right to it, I brought objective evidence. We can agree to disagree.
I will be updating it with All NBA and defensive teams as well later, it still show the same picture.
Actually, in the Duncan vs Hakeem megathread, I posted a comparison of the ACTUAL data of matchups between the two and their chief opponents (even giving Hakeem the credit of ignoring Shawn Kemp, whose sonics slaughtered the Rockets), and I found two things. Firstly, Hakeem had a vanishingly small number of playoff battles vs opposing heavyweights (as opposed to Shaq vs Duncan, who ran into each other 6 times in their careers). And secondly, Duncan didn't do that badly in that sort of analysis either. Here's a snippet of my post in that thread:
Spoiler:
The arguement you are making is that Hakeem dominated his HOF opponents. And you've given some details of that. That seems well and good. But let's look at the full picture. Who were the HOF players that Duncan went against? Let's say they were Shaq, Garnett and Dirk. Here's the breakdown (with the figures culled from BR showing PTS TRB AST STL BLK ORtg DRtg)
Duncan vs Garnett, Shaq and Dirk in the playoffs [Spoiler] 1999 SAS 3, MIN 1 Duncan 18.8 10.8 3.3 0.8 3.0 112 94 Garnett 21.8 12.0 3.8 1.8 2.0 100 97 Garnett has better raw stats on points and rebounds, but Duncan has far better O/DRtg, and a better TS%. You could argue this series either way I think. A tie
1999 SAS 4, LAL 0 Duncan 29.0 10.8 3.3 1.0 2.0 111 95 Shaq 23.8 13.0 0.5 1.0 1.8 106 105 This looks like a win for Duncan here.
2001 SAS 3, MIN 1 Duncan 22.5 13.0 3.5 1.0 2.0 104 88 Garnett 21.0 12.0 4.3 1.0 1.5 120 99 Both players are great, although I'd give the nod to Duncan here.
2001 SAS 4, DAL 1 Duncan 27.0 17.4 3.6 1.0 2.0 107 93 Dirk 23.0 8.6 1.2 1.8 0.8 116 110 Now THIS is dominance. Yes? Duncan
2001 LAL 4, SAS 0 Duncan 23.0 12.3 4.3 1.3 4.3 99 108 Shaq 27.0 13.0 2.5 0.8 1.3 106 90 I think Duncan's DRtg says it all, especially when compared to the previous two rounds. The Lakers were too dominant offensively and broke the SA defense. This is clearly Shaq.
2002 LAL 4, SAS 1 Duncan 29.0 17.2 4.6 1.0 3.2 103 97 Shaq 21.4 12.2 3.2 0.6 3.0 100 94 Duncan may have lost the series, but I think he was the most dominant player in the series.
2003 SAS 4, LAL 2 Duncan 28.0 11.8 4.8 0.3 1.3 120 102 Shaq 25.3 14.3 3.7 0.7 2.8 117 104 Duncan has the point lead and won the series, but I'd be inclined to call this one a tie. Shaq was NOT the reason the Lakers lost this.
2006 DAL 4, SAS 3 Duncan 32.3 11.7 3.7 1.0 2.6 122 111 Dirk 27.1 13.3 2.7 1.4 0.4 128 107 Looks like a great series out of both players. I'd give the slight edge to Dirk here.
2009 DAL 4, SAS 1 Duncan 19.8 8.0 3.2 0.6 1.2 115 113 Dirk 19.2 8.6 2.2 1.0 0.6 118 106 Interesting how the stats shoot down in the post-Thibs world. Looks like another very close series. I think this is another tie.
2014 SAS 4, DAL 3 Duncan 17.3 8.4 1.3 0.1 1.9 129 110 Dirk 19.1 8.0 1.6 0.9 0.9 96 111 Those numbers look quite similar until you get to the offensive ratings. Holy cow! It's not often that Duncan has a better TS% than Dirk.
So, how many times did he get outplayed in his prime against PFs? Hakeem never got outplayed in his prime against other centers.
You make statements about me but don't include Amare who ripped the Spurs offensively in both the RS and Playoffs. Amare played center but his natural position is PF, Duncan played PF and center as well but the Spurs hid him on defense to stay out of foul trouble.
Now let's apply the same methodology to Hakeem. I think his HOF big men were Karl Malone, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, David Robinson, Shaq and Patrick Ewing. I don't think much of Robert Parish (I rate Shawn Kemp higher and think he was a contemporary of Olajuwon that had his number, but he's not in the same class as the guys above).
Hakeem vs Kareem, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq and Malone in the playoffs
1995 HOU 3, UTA 2 Hakeem 35.0 8.6 4.0 0.8 2.6 116 112 Malone 30.2 13.2 3.8 1.4 0.4 114 118 I'm not in love with the low rebound total, but Hakeem is probably this one too.
1995 HOU 4, SAS 2 (the infamous series that is the reason this topic is even being discussed) Hakeem 35.3 12.5 5.0 1.3 4.2 111 101 Robinson 23.8 11.3 2.7 1.5 2.2 106 107 Easily Hakeem.
1995 HOU 4, ORL 0 Hakeem 32.8 11.5 5.5 2.0 2.0 107 106 Shaq 28.0 12.5 6.3 0.3 2.5 109 115 Eh, this isn't dominance to me. Hakeem's extra points come courtesy of his much higher USG%, he was actually much less efficient than Shaq. I'd be inclined to call this a tie.
1997 UTA 4, HOU 2 Hakeem 27.2 9.3 3.8 2.0 3.3 122 105 Malone 23.5 11.5 3.2 1.3 1.2 102 106 Utah won the series, and I still don't like his rebounding totals, but this is Hakeem.
1999 LAL 4, HOU 1 Shaq 29.5 10.3 4.0 0.8 4.0 109 104 Hakeem 13.3 7.3 0.5 1.3 0.8 94 105 Maybe a little unfair since this is clearly the end of his career, but it's no different from the Hakeem vs Kareem comparison that starts this sequence off. Easily Shaq.
So if you tally that up, you get Duncan (Win-Loss-Tie) vs Garnett 1-0-1 vs Shaq 3-2-1 vs Dirk 3-2-1
So although he's not pantsing his HOF opponents, he does get the better of them more than they get of him.
Hakeem (Win-Loss-Tie) vs Malone 3-1-0 vs Kareem 1-0-0 vs Ewing 1-0-0 vs Robinson 1-0-0 vs Shaq 0-1-1
So really, I think it's a little surprising how infrequently Hakeem was paired up against HOF calibre players in the playoffs. Duncan had far more battles with his contemporaries than Hakeem did. [/spoiler]
More spin here.
You accuse me of manipulating and cherry picking, but use Karl Malone whose natural position is PF and has never been listed as a center his whole career; and also use post prime Hakeem? Karl Malone's natural and career position PF: http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... nka01.html
With the exception of Kareem, Hakeem's primary defensive duties were those centers. Duncan is a natural PF who got hid from quicker PFs or could defer to others for defensive duties. Other than Kareem (who they go head to head game 4 or so and he dominates in those few plays), Hakeem guarded all those guys.
Hmm, still leaning towards Magic for #5, then Kobe/Duncan. Hakeem talk is interesting, though I don't feel his 2 year playoff span vaults him into my Top 10. Don't think I've seen a single Bird post yet, when he was getting alot of attention last time around.
Baller2014 wrote:If Shaq was better than Duncan, why did he have less success in his career, despite: better team mates, a better peak, and a slightly longer prime? That's a simplistic question, but a telling one IMO.
If Shaq was better than Kobe, why did he have less success in his career, despite: better team mates, a better peak, and a equal prime length? That's a simplistic question, but a telling one IMO.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016 Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
Hopefully this doesn't turn into a redux of the locked Hakeem v. Duncan thread.
I remember your posts from the RPOY project, you consistently brought it. Please continue to do so, sir. This board needs guys like you to counteract ... worthless posters
Retirement isn’t the end of the road, but just a turn in the road. – Unknown
Defensively, I don't think he gets enough deserved credit, I mean, how many play did I watch players pass the ball or change route cause Shaq was in the middle. To me, while not as noticeable, close in value to help defense albeit it just looks different. 
