Start a Franchise - Hakeem or Shaq

[Statlanta]

Hakeem. Shaq had a better career but I think Hakeem is more portable across eras.
I want to start with an all-time great defensive C quarterbacking my defense.

[dhsilv2]

I remain a huge contrarian on the hakeem is a top 10 all time narrative. He just was not a good enough passer to the point it was detrimental to the offense. I'm not a big shaq fan, but he wins this by a land slide.

I think passing was his biggest weakness, but it's hard to quantify how bad it hurt. I think of it kind of like Durant, tends to ball stop and doesn't have great vision, but not a black hole either.

I mean every highlight dream shake had 5 plays where he used up 10 seconds before giving it back up. Ball park here. That imo is worse than kd who tends to imo, no data, get his shot pretty fast. But not a bad comp.

[Witzig-Okashi]

I am going to try and type myself through this.

I'm tempted to say Hakeem solely because he didn't come with the drama/baggage that Shaq did, but let's not forget that Hakeem was a bit of a hothead himself before he converted to Islam (I think another poster brought his conversion up, too.) Hakeem's two PO runs also probably drag a more favorable light. However, I am not just convinced yet (outside of 93) that Hakeem provided enough of title contending years. But, on the other hand, Shaq was fortunate to have all-star/superstar calibre teammates.

Also, part of me wants to hold Shaq accountable for those series against the Jazz (and for '97 at least its definitely reasonable), but couldn't the same be said for Hakeem and his run-ins vs. Seattle? Mind you, if they didn't lose that series against Denver and Mutombo having the defensive series of his life, the Rockets could have run into them again in the conference finals (and possibly another defeat). I suppose Shaq having GOAT potential and underachieving (iirc he was swept in the playoffs for 4 out of 5 seasons) prior to Phil Jackson's arrival. Shaq's injury history in the regular season is also making me hesitant, too.

If I'm going solely off of potential, it's Shaq. If hindsight plays a role, I may lean towards Hakeem, though it isn't as definite a pick.

[thekdog34]

I remain a huge contrarian on the hakeem is a top 10 all time narrative. He just was not a good enough passer to the point it was detrimental to the offense. I'm not a big shaq fan, but he wins this by a land slide.

I think passing was his biggest weakness, but it's hard to quantify how bad it hurt. I think of it kind of like Durant, tends to ball stop and doesn't have great vision, but not a black hole either.

I mean every highlight dream shake had 5 plays where he used up 10 seconds before giving it back up. Ball park here. That imo is worse than kd who tends to imo, no data, get his shot pretty fast. But not a bad comp.

I disagree with this. He usually went to his move pretty quickly. It wasn't pound it for 10 seconds like Barkley.

The problem wasn't so much holding it a long time as it was not having the vision IMO.

[thekdog34]

I am going to try and type myself through this.

I'm tempted to say Hakeem solely because he didn't come with the drama/baggage that Shaq did, but let's not forget that Hakeem was a bit of a hothead himself before he converted to Islam (I think another poster brought his conversion up, too.) Hakeem's two PO runs also probably drag a more favorable light. However, I am not just convinced yet (outside of 93) that Hakeem provided enough of title contending years. But, on the other hand, Shaq was fortunate to have all-star/superstar calibre teammates.

Also, part of me wants to hold Shaq accountable for those series against the Jazz (and for '97 at least its definitely reasonable), but couldn't the same be said for Hakeem and his run-ins vs. Seattle? Mind you, if they didn't lose that series against Denver and Mutombo having the defensive series of his life, the Rockets could have run into them again in the conference finals (and possibly another defeat). I suppose Shaq having GOAT potential and underachieving (iirc he was swept in the playoffs for 4 out of 5 seasons) prior to Phil Jackson's arrival. Shaq's injury history in the regular season is also making me hesitant, too.

If I'm going solely off of potential, it's Shaq. If hindsight plays a role, I may lean towards Hakeem, though it isn't as definite a pick.

Hakeem went to the Finals as a rookie.

And he's a good article taking a look at that team and how it could have possibly been a dynasty before it got hit with injuries and drug suspensions.

http://grantland.com/features/an-oral-history-hakeem-olajuwon-ralph-sampson-1980s-houston-rockets/

[dhsilv2]

I think passing was his biggest weakness, but it's hard to quantify how bad it hurt. I think of it kind of like Durant, tends to ball stop and doesn't have great vision, but not a black hole either.

I mean every highlight dream shake had 5 plays where he used up 10 seconds before giving it back up. Ball park here. That imo is worse than kd who tends to imo, no data, get his shot pretty fast. But not a bad comp.

I disagree with this. He usually went to his move pretty quickly. It wasn't pound it for 10 seconds like Barkley.

The problem wasn't so much holding it a long time as it was not having the vision IMO.

Ok fair, certainly not like chuck!

[thekdog34]

[url][/url]

I mean every highlight dream shake had 5 plays where he used up 10 seconds before giving it back up. Ball park here. That imo is worse than kd who tends to imo, no data, get his shot pretty fast. But not a bad comp.

I disagree with this. He usually went to his move pretty quickly. It wasn't pound it for 10 seconds like Barkley.

The problem wasn't so much holding it a long time as it was not having the vision IMO.

Ok fair, certainly not like chuck!

One thing I never remember him doing was being a good passer from the high post. He would never do what Duncan, Garnett, Draymond do. He was better at finding 3pt shooters from the post, ok at finding cutters I think.

[dhsilv2]

[url][/url]

I disagree with this. He usually went to his move pretty quickly. It wasn't pound it for 10 seconds like Barkley.

The problem wasn't so much holding it a long time as it was not having the vision IMO.

Ok fair, certainly not like chuck!

One thing I never remember him doing was being a good passer from the high post. He would never do what Duncan, Garnett, Draymond do. He was better at finding 3pt shooters from the post, ok at finding cutters I think.

He got better as he aged and by the mid 90s he was almost average. But early on...those assist percentages are god awful. Everything i have seen and read considered early hakeen to be a blackhole.

[Witzig-Okashi]

I am going to try and type myself through this.

I'm tempted to say Hakeem solely because he didn't come with the drama/baggage that Shaq did, but let's not forget that Hakeem was a bit of a hothead himself before he converted to Islam (I think another poster brought his conversion up, too.) Hakeem's two PO runs also probably drag a more favorable light. However, I am not just convinced yet (outside of 93) that Hakeem provided enough of title contending years. But, on the other hand, Shaq was fortunate to have all-star/superstar calibre teammates.

Also, part of me wants to hold Shaq accountable for those series against the Jazz (and for '97 at least its definitely reasonable), but couldn't the same be said for Hakeem and his run-ins vs. Seattle? Mind you, if they didn't lose that series against Denver and Mutombo having the defensive series of his life, the Rockets could have run into them again in the conference finals (and possibly another defeat). I suppose Shaq having GOAT potential and underachieving (iirc he was swept in the playoffs for 4 out of 5 seasons) prior to Phil Jackson's arrival. Shaq's injury history in the regular season is also making me hesitant, too.

If I'm going solely off of potential, it's Shaq. If hindsight plays a role, I may lean towards Hakeem, though it isn't as definite a pick.

Hakeem went to the Finals as a rookie.

And he's a good article taking a look at that team and how it could have possibly been a dynasty before it got hit with injuries and drug suspensions.

http://grantland.com/features/an-oral-history-hakeem-olajuwon-ralph-sampson-1980s-houston-rockets/

I was aware of him going to the finals in '86, but Ralph Sampson was an all-star caliber teammate that player along with him that season (and Lloyd gets overlooked for that season, too...). Shaq was seemingly more expected to be because of his GOAT potential. Hakeem was hyped to be sure, but I don't think he was more hyped coming into the league than his contemporaries like Sampson or Ewing.

The one thing that Shaq has going for him is that he always was casted with great teammates, and Hakeem always seemed to have been missing that next guy...Until '94. But as great as that season was (and 95 too), how much of it had to do with Jordan's retiring, certain favorable playoff matches, etc. I suppose that I shouldn't be so harsh on Hakeem, as all players have to deal with what's in front of them.

Thanks for the link, though. I was aware of Sampson's injuries and the drug issues, not some of the other stuff...

[thekdog34]

I am going to try and type myself through this.

I'm tempted to say Hakeem solely because he didn't come with the drama/baggage that Shaq did, but let's not forget that Hakeem was a bit of a hothead himself before he converted to Islam (I think another poster brought his conversion up, too.) Hakeem's two PO runs also probably drag a more favorable light. However, I am not just convinced yet (outside of 93) that Hakeem provided enough of title contending years. But, on the other hand, Shaq was fortunate to have all-star/superstar calibre teammates.

Also, part of me wants to hold Shaq accountable for those series against the Jazz (and for '97 at least its definitely reasonable), but couldn't the same be said for Hakeem and his run-ins vs. Seattle? Mind you, if they didn't lose that series against Denver and Mutombo having the defensive series of his life, the Rockets could have run into them again in the conference finals (and possibly another defeat). I suppose Shaq having GOAT potential and underachieving (iirc he was swept in the playoffs for 4 out of 5 seasons) prior to Phil Jackson's arrival. Shaq's injury history in the regular season is also making me hesitant, too.

If I'm going solely off of potential, it's Shaq. If hindsight plays a role, I may lean towards Hakeem, though it isn't as definite a pick.

Hakeem went to the Finals as a rookie.

And he's a good article taking a look at that team and how it could have possibly been a dynasty before it got hit with injuries and drug suspensions.

http://grantland.com/features/an-oral-history-hakeem-olajuwon-ralph-sampson-1980s-houston-rockets/

I was aware of him going to the finals in '86, but Ralph Sampson was an all-star caliber teammate that player along with him that season (and Lloyd gets overlooked for that season, too...). Shaq was seemingly more expected to be because of his GOAT potential. Hakeem was hyped to be sure, but I don't think he was more hyped coming into the league than his contemporaries like Sampson or Ewing.

The one thing that Shaq has going for him is that he always was casted with great teammates, and Hakeem always seemed to have been missing that next guy...Until '94. But as great as that season was (and 95 too), how much of it had to do with Jordan's retiring, certain favorable playoff matches, etc. I suppose that I shouldn't be so harsh on Hakeem, as all players have to deal with what's in front of them.

Thanks for the link, though. I was aware of Sampson's injuries and the drug issues, not some of the other stuff...

Don't disagree with anything except their matchups weren't too favorable, other than not having to beat Seattle and Jordan.

He had to go through Barkley, Stockton and Malone, Ewing, David Robinson, and young Shaq and Penny. There were some very strong teams there, particularly in 95.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

shaq is clearly the better scorer/passer and hakeem is the better defender. they're both A+ rebounders so i'll take shaq

Shaq has no advantage over Hakeem whatsoever offensively in the playoffs save being more efficient.

He's a terrible FT shooter as well when compared to Hakeem. No version of Shaq would be offensively good enough to lead a 2nd option of the calibre of Vernon Maxwell anywhere near a title.

The gap between Shaq and Hakeem defensively in extremely large outside of man to man defence where even there Hakeem was so slouch.

A team like Utah made a mockery of Shaq's defence.

Hakeem is one of the top 3 greatest offensive C's ever in the playoffs. Shaq isn't even a top 5 defensive C ever.

He wasn't even more efficient in the playoffs.

Hakeem had a slightly higher career TS%. .569 vs .565.

Well I mean generally Shaq shot higher % shots than Hakeem closer to the basket.

But I find it laughable people actually rank him over Hakeem offensively. He couldn't lead a team anywhere past the age of 30 and needed younger perimeter superstars to carry him through a lot of key stretches. Hakeem was Houston's go to option for 13 years straight with superior longevity to Shaq as a first option.

In the 05 playoffs with Wade hurting Shaq couldn't even be counted on to put them over the top.

Hakeem at the same age was dumping 33ppg on he and his Orlando squad and out playing him to win a Finals MVP.

[thekdog34]

It's interesting that sometimes Hakeem is not considered portable because he wasn't a great passer.

But if you look at it, he led very strong teams with very different teammates:
1. Twin towers with Ralph Sampson
2. A bunch of role players in 94
3. A strong SG in Drexler and a stretch 4 in Horry during the 95 run
4. A ball dominant big in Barkley (made the WCF even though they were all past their primes). The record with the big 3 healthy was very good.

Hakeem may be one of the tougher guys to rank.

[SkyHookFTW]

The more I think about this the more I want to say Hakeem, even if Shaq is one of my favorite players ever. Hakeem might be more portable than Shaq for today's game. If Shaq's size meant I'd get Wilt-like rebounding and rim protection it would be a different story, but he never had that total dominance on the boards one might expect for a man of his size and strength. It's almost hard to believe that Shaq never led the league in rebounding, and his 2.5 assists per game don't make him a passing hub. Fushing's posts made me look closer at the numbers. On the other hand, Hakeem has 2.5 assist per game as well, so he wasn't exactly a facilitator in his own right. Hakeem had one more board per game, Shaq two more points. In the playoffs, both players saw points, rebounds, and assists increase stat-wise to a small degree. Hakeem did lead the league in rebounding twice. Eye test pushes me to Shaq, but did Hakeem have a tougher road to push through in the playoffs? Were Shaq's teammates really that much better than Hakeem's? Was it easier to play with Hakeem or Shaq? Whose presence on the floor made it easier for the other players?

[euroleague]

What went on between him and Nick Anderson?
Don't know the story.....

But I would pick Shaq though--even with the injuries....people seem to think Hakeem's career only lasted from 1994 to 1997....he had a career before 1994.

after the game shaq went on him in the locker room. he was losing it on anderson. Anderson never played the same.

the Magic still should've won in that series, they were much more talented than the rockets, they beat the Bulls (not an easy feat).

Shaq also feuded with Penny after 'lil Penny' got so huge, and because Penny was winning while Shaq was on the bench from his injuries.

Shaq feuded with kobe as well (although that one may have been warranted).

Not sure where you heard that stuff about him going off on Nick Anderson, but I followed his career from the start, and this is the first I've heard of it. I think Anderson broke mentally after costing them HCA, and I don't think Shaq "getting on him" was the problem.

The feuding with Penny stuff is just not true. Shaq left Orlando because they low balled him on their offer, and the Lakers actually offered him more than he wanted.

I watched a bunch of interviews and reports on what happened. I know about why Shaq left Orlando, as well - watched the ESPN documentary on it as well.

Of course the feuding with Penny stuff is true from hearing everyone talk about it in interviews. I don't know where your sources are regarding Penny? It's not the reason Shaq left (that was primarily the big market in hollywood that was in LA), but it was a feud.

[jaypo]

after the game shaq went on him in the locker room. he was losing it on anderson. Anderson never played the same.

the Magic still should've won in that series, they were much more talented than the rockets, they beat the Bulls (not an easy feat).

Shaq also feuded with Penny after 'lil Penny' got so huge, and because Penny was winning while Shaq was on the bench from his injuries.

Shaq feuded with kobe as well (although that one may have been warranted).

Not sure where you heard that stuff about him going off on Nick Anderson, but I followed his career from the start, and this is the first I've heard of it. I think Anderson broke mentally after costing them HCA, and I don't think Shaq "getting on him" was the problem.

The feuding with Penny stuff is just not true. Shaq left Orlando because they low balled him on their offer, and the Lakers actually offered him more than he wanted.

I watched a bunch of interviews and reports on what happened. I know about why Shaq left Orlando, as well - watched the ESPN documentary on it as well.

Of course the feuding with Penny stuff is true from hearing everyone talk about it in interviews. I don't know where your sources are regarding Penny? It's not the reason Shaq left (that was primarily the big market in hollywood that was in LA), but it was a feud.

I remember there being speculation, but I never remember there being any proof. I remember the buzz after he left was that it was because of Penny's popularity. But recent interviews I've seen from both players lead me to believe that there was no real feud. Shaq told the story about his decision to leave. Basically, (I believe KG) got a huge contract. Shaq's was coming up, so he told them what he wanted (I think it was $110MM). There was a poll in the Orlando paper asking if people thought he was worth the money. The results said he wasn't. Orlando countered with a lowball offer. Jerry West called and offered him $125MM (I believe) which was more than he told Orlando he wanted.

So in a nutshell, his dream franchise offered him more than he asked for, and the team that drafted him lowballed him after an inferior player was paid much more. And the fans of his team basically told him he wasn't worth the money.

I believe this had more to do with him leaving than jealousy of a puppet.

[jaypo]

Shaq has no advantage over Hakeem whatsoever offensively in the playoffs save being more efficient.

He's a terrible FT shooter as well when compared to Hakeem. No version of Shaq would be offensively good enough to lead a 2nd option of the calibre of Vernon Maxwell anywhere near a title.

The gap between Shaq and Hakeem defensively in extremely large outside of man to man defence where even there Hakeem was so slouch.

A team like Utah made a mockery of Shaq's defence.

Hakeem is one of the top 3 greatest offensive C's ever in the playoffs. Shaq isn't even a top 5 defensive C ever.

He wasn't even more efficient in the playoffs.

Hakeem had a slightly higher career TS%. .569 vs .565.

Well I mean generally Shaq shot higher % shots than Hakeem closer to the basket.

But I find it laughable people actually rank him over Hakeem offensively. He couldn't lead a team anywhere past the age of 30 and needed younger perimeter superstars to carry him through a lot of key stretches. Hakeem was Houston's go to option for 13 years straight with superior longevity to Shaq as a first option.

In the 05 playoffs with Wade hurting Shaq couldn't even be counted on to put them over the top.

Hakeem at the same age was dumping 33ppg on he and his Orlando squad and out playing him to win a Finals MVP.

Kinda like how Akeem needed Mario Elie to shoot 65% FOR THE ENTIRE FINALS to push him thru Shaq's Magic? Or how he needed Kenny the Jet to save his butt in game 1 by scoring 23, 9 assists, and shooting 62% from the field with 64% from 3 including the shots that got them into overtime?? Mario Elie shooting 50% from 3 and 64% in the same game?? In the same game where Shaq put up 26 and 16 on 63% from the field with 9 assists, only to have Nick Anderson choke the game away? Looks to me like Shaq was dusting Akeem's hind quarters while 2 of his "young perimeter superstars carried him through a lot of key stretches". I'm glad you made that statement. However, it totally applies to Akeem!

Fusheng, I know every word you're gonna type as your rebuttal, but you cannot twist what I just wrote. Your entire argument is that Akeem was so much better than Shaq and that Shaq's success only came from those "superstars" around him. However, what I just showed you above shows that Akeem needed the same thing as ANY superstar. Superstar efforts from teammates.

I'm not going to enter into a 10 page war with you, as we've done in the past. However, just look at the paragraph above. That's all that needs to be said!

Oh, and for the record, I reiterate that I believe Akeem to be the more skilled center, but to build a franchise, you always pick Shaq. For on the court and off the court purposes.

[thekdog34]

He wasn't even more efficient in the playoffs.

Hakeem had a slightly higher career TS%. .569 vs .565.

Well I mean generally Shaq shot higher % shots than Hakeem closer to the basket.

But I find it laughable people actually rank him over Hakeem offensively. He couldn't lead a team anywhere past the age of 30 and needed younger perimeter superstars to carry him through a lot of key stretches. Hakeem was Houston's go to option for 13 years straight with superior longevity to Shaq as a first option.

In the 05 playoffs with Wade hurting Shaq couldn't even be counted on to put them over the top.

Hakeem at the same age was dumping 33ppg on he and his Orlando squad and out playing him to win a Finals MVP.

Kinda like how Akeem needed Mario Elie to shoot 65% FOR THE ENTIRE FINALS to push him thru Shaq's Magic? Or how he needed Kenny the Jet to save his butt in game 1 by scoring 23, 9 assists, and shooting 62% from the field with 64% from 3 including the shots that got them into overtime?? Mario Elie shooting 50% from 3 and 64% in the same game?? In the same game where Shaq put up 26 and 16 on 63% from the field with 9 assists, only to have Nick Anderson choke the game away? Looks to me like Shaq was dusting Akeem's hind quarters while 2 of his "young perimeter superstars carried him through a lot of key stretches". I'm glad you made that statement. However, it totally applies to Akeem!

Fusheng, I know every word you're gonna type as your rebuttal, but you cannot twist what I just wrote. Your entire argument is that Akeem was so much better than Shaq and that Shaq's success only came from those "superstars" around him. However, what I just showed you above shows that Akeem needed the same thing as ANY superstar. Superstar efforts from teammates.

I'm not going to enter into a 10 page war with you, as we've done in the past. However, just look at the paragraph above. That's all that needs to be said!

Oh, and for the record, I reiterate that I believe Akeem to be the more skilled center, but to build a franchise, you always pick Shaq. For on the court and off the court purposes.

Of course the reason Elie and Smith shot so ridiculously from 3 was because of Hakeem's gravity.

The offense ran through Hakeem and he created tons of open looks.

Shaq did not dust Hakeem. Hakeem forced him into tons of turnovers. Shaq had 7 turnovers in game 1.

[jaypo]

Well I mean generally Shaq shot higher % shots than Hakeem closer to the basket.

But I find it laughable people actually rank him over Hakeem offensively. He couldn't lead a team anywhere past the age of 30 and needed younger perimeter superstars to carry him through a lot of key stretches. Hakeem was Houston's go to option for 13 years straight with superior longevity to Shaq as a first option.

In the 05 playoffs with Wade hurting Shaq couldn't even be counted on to put them over the top.

Hakeem at the same age was dumping 33ppg on he and his Orlando squad and out playing him to win a Finals MVP.

Kinda like how Akeem needed Mario Elie to shoot 65% FOR THE ENTIRE FINALS to push him thru Shaq's Magic? Or how he needed Kenny the Jet to save his butt in game 1 by scoring 23, 9 assists, and shooting 62% from the field with 64% from 3 including the shots that got them into overtime?? Mario Elie shooting 50% from 3 and 64% in the same game?? In the same game where Shaq put up 26 and 16 on 63% from the field with 9 assists, only to have Nick Anderson choke the game away? Looks to me like Shaq was dusting Akeem's hind quarters while 2 of his "young perimeter superstars carried him through a lot of key stretches". I'm glad you made that statement. However, it totally applies to Akeem!

Fusheng, I know every word you're gonna type as your rebuttal, but you cannot twist what I just wrote. Your entire argument is that Akeem was so much better than Shaq and that Shaq's success only came from those "superstars" around him. However, what I just showed you above shows that Akeem needed the same thing as ANY superstar. Superstar efforts from teammates.

I'm not going to enter into a 10 page war with you, as we've done in the past. However, just look at the paragraph above. That's all that needs to be said!

Oh, and for the record, I reiterate that I believe Akeem to be the more skilled center, but to build a franchise, you always pick Shaq. For on the court and off the court purposes.

Of course the reason Elie and Smith shot so ridiculously from 3 was because of Hakeem's gravity.

The offense ran through Hakeem and he created tons of open looks.

Shaq did not dust Hakeem. Hakeem forced him into tons of turnovers. Shaq had 7 turnovers in game 1.

Shaq also had 16 rebs and 9 assists. And he shot 63% against the player you guys claim are so defensively dominant.

So I say to you- of course the reason Penny, Kobe, and Wade were so good was because of Shaq's "gravity". Ask Penny himself!

You can't have it both ways. You're talking about 2 of the best C's ever, both dominant on both ends of the court. You can't say "Akeem made his teammates better 'cause gravity" and then say that Shaq's teammates were the only reason he won. If you want iron clad proof, go watch the 2006 finals. A past prime Shaq was covered by 4 friggin' players at the same time! He had 1 man behind him and 1 man in front of him, and 2 collapsed on him when the pass came or was attempted. Ask Avery Johnson about gravity!

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Kinda like how Akeem needed Mario Elie to shoot 65% FOR THE ENTIRE FINALS to push him thru Shaq's Magic? Or how he needed Kenny the Jet to save his butt in game 1 by scoring 23, 9 assists, and shooting 62% from the field with 64% from 3 including the shots that got them into overtime?? Mario Elie shooting 50% from 3 and 64% in the same game?? In the same game where Shaq put up 26 and 16 on 63% from the field with 9 assists, only to have Nick Anderson choke the game away? Looks to me like Shaq was dusting Akeem's hind quarters while 2 of his "young perimeter superstars carried him through a lot of key stretches". I'm glad you made that statement. However, it totally applies to Akeem!

Fusheng, I know every word you're gonna type as your rebuttal, but you cannot twist what I just wrote. Your entire argument is that Akeem was so much better than Shaq and that Shaq's success only came from those "superstars" around him. However, what I just showed you above shows that Akeem needed the same thing as ANY superstar. Superstar efforts from teammates.

I'm not going to enter into a 10 page war with you, as we've done in the past. However, just look at the paragraph above. That's all that needs to be said!

Oh, and for the record, I reiterate that I believe Akeem to be the more skilled center, but to build a franchise, you always pick Shaq. For on the court and off the court purposes.

Umm how about no?. Elie was playing at that level....because of Hakeem and Rudy Ts offensive system. He was a member of GS.....he was a member of Portland befote Houston. He was barely a blip on the radar for those teams in the playoffs. But with Hakeem he reached unseen individual levels as a player not replicated elsewhere.

And after Houston he played with the GOAT PF Duncan and didn't come close to that.

A far cry from Penny who played better for all of 95/96 in games Shaq missed while having them above .500 and even remained a superstar 2nd only to MJ amongst guards in 96/97 who led them to the 1st rd with b2b 40+ pt games vs Miami.

Or Kobe who went to 3 straight Finals and 2 titles without Shaq as the man in LA.

Or Wade who peaked in 2009 with Shaq long gone and thoroughly outperformed prime LBJ in the 2011 NBA Finals.

It's clear to see every perimeter star Shaq was either paired with or later on made a career of running to attained higher individual levels as players without him than with him.

Shaq doesn't offer a franchise either a offensive or defensive advantage over Hakeem. I'm sorry if the truth hurts.

We all know Shaq lags FAR behind Hakeem outside of 2000 defensively (and even that year he doesn't compare to 93 Hakeem).

Offensively Shaq only offers a franchise 10 to max 11 years as their best player and even then you have to have him switching teams to do so. At 31 he was being played to a standstil by the likes of Yao Ming. Once in Miami on....Wade was carrying his hide in the playoffs.

Hakeem on the other hand offered 13 years in a row at this level. His last good playoff run at 34 he was outscoring league MVP Karl Malone in the playoffs ....the same year a younger Shaq underwhelmed. Hakeem at 34 played 78 games.

Shaq at 34 was a fading overweight shell of himself playing 40 games and getting swept by a team of the calibre of the Bulls lol.

I will give Shaq the advantage of dominating creampuffs in the Finals and posting astronomical stats Hakeem didn't quite reach. But then again none of Hakeems 3 Finals appearances were cakewalk.

Well....maybe against Shaq's Orlando lol.

[thekdog34]

Kinda like how Akeem needed Mario Elie to shoot 65% FOR THE ENTIRE FINALS to push him thru Shaq's Magic? Or how he needed Kenny the Jet to save his butt in game 1 by scoring 23, 9 assists, and shooting 62% from the field with 64% from 3 including the shots that got them into overtime?? Mario Elie shooting 50% from 3 and 64% in the same game?? In the same game where Shaq put up 26 and 16 on 63% from the field with 9 assists, only to have Nick Anderson choke the game away? Looks to me like Shaq was dusting Akeem's hind quarters while 2 of his "young perimeter superstars carried him through a lot of key stretches". I'm glad you made that statement. However, it totally applies to Akeem!

Fusheng, I know every word you're gonna type as your rebuttal, but you cannot twist what I just wrote. Your entire argument is that Akeem was so much better than Shaq and that Shaq's success only came from those "superstars" around him. However, what I just showed you above shows that Akeem needed the same thing as ANY superstar. Superstar efforts from teammates.

I'm not going to enter into a 10 page war with you, as we've done in the past. However, just look at the paragraph above. That's all that needs to be said!

Oh, and for the record, I reiterate that I believe Akeem to be the more skilled center, but to build a franchise, you always pick Shaq. For on the court and off the court purposes.

Of course the reason Elie and Smith shot so ridiculously from 3 was because of Hakeem's gravity.

The offense ran through Hakeem and he created tons of open looks.

Shaq did not dust Hakeem. Hakeem forced him into tons of turnovers. Shaq had 7 turnovers in game 1.

Shaq also had 16 rebs and 9 assists. And he shot 63% against the player you guys claim are so defensively dominant.

So I say to you- of course the reason Penny, Kobe, and Wade were so good was because of Shaq's "gravity". Ask Penny himself!

You can't have it both ways. You're talking about 2 of the best C's ever, both dominant on both ends of the court. You can't say "Akeem made his teammates better 'cause gravity" and then say that Shaq's teammates were the only reason he won. If you want iron clad proof, go watch the 2006 finals. A past prime Shaq was covered by 4 friggin' players at the same time! He had 1 man behind him and 1 man in front of him, and 2 collapsed on him when the pass came or was attempted. Ask Avery Johnson about gravity!

Yes, Shaq was amazing. I'm just saying he did not outplay Hakeem in 1995.