RealGM

I was watching NBA vault last night and they were profiling Ralph Sampson. All i kept thinking was, "wow, this guy would be a very effective player in todays game."
His career was short-lived but had he been able to stay healthy do you feel that he would have been a HOF'er with Hakeem?
The Twin Towers would definitely have had a verrry good shot at taking down a couple titles.
Here's some clips of him:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XGj4W9V-wCk

Also, pound for pound who do you think were the more effective twin towers of their respective times?

The Main Event wrote:I was watching NBA vault last night and they were profiling Ralph Sampson. All i kept thinking was, "wow, this guy would be a very effective player in todays game."
His career was short-lived but had he been able to stay healthy do you feel that he would have been a HOF'er with Hakeem?
The Twin Towers would definitely have had a verrry good shot at taking down a couple titles.
Here's some clips of him:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XGj4W9V-wCk

Also, pound for pound who do you think were the more effective twin towers of their respective times?

Well we didn't get to see much of Raplh and Hakeem, only 2 solid seasons. The first season Raplh and Hakeem I think won 32 games? don't have it clearly in my mind, but the second season as a combo, it was Raplh's 3rd season, while it was Hakeem's 2nd took the Rockets to the NBA finals. They got passed the ShowTime Lakers, only to lose to Bird's Celtics. They were a pretty amazing combo, I think in terms of which combo was better it has to go to Raplh and Hakeem, at their short 2 seasons, and if it was stretched out, it would have been amazing. Yes, I think he would be in the hall of fame if he was healthy, the guy had amazing skills for a 7'4 center. Hakeem and Sampson had strength, offense, unbelievable defense from Hakeem, agility, both had the ability to score 20+ and grab 10+ rebounds. I think in reality Hakeem + Sampson could of been or even in talent terms is better then David and Timmy. Because Robinson was close to out of his prime when Timmy came into the league.

If both Duncan and Robinson were in their primes, it's them for sure. To me, Hakeem is better than both of them individually. But we never saw Sampson's prime. So, as long as both Duncan and Robinson are in their primes, I'll take them.

Ya but what little we did get to see from Sampson was enough to make a fairly accurate estimation on where his career would have been headed. I personally think that had he stayed healthy, he and Hakeem would have been the most dominant 4-5 combo the game had ever seen.

The Main Event wrote:Ya but what little we did get to see from Sampson was enough to make a fairly accurate estimation on where his career would have been headed. I personally think that had he stayed healthy, he and Hakeem would have been the most dominant 4-5 combo the game had ever seen.

No doubt, in both of their primes if it ever happened I can see a combined 50pt, 22reb, 5blk, 3stl, 50% FG. I've said this earlier, but with a couple of years of experience after 1986 with one another, I can see them winning a championship in the late 1990s, or even early 1990s. I can see the combo bringing in about 3 championships. Lol, but this is if only....

The Main Event wrote:Ya but what little we did get to see from Sampson was enough to make a fairly accurate estimation on where his career would have been headed. I personally think that had he stayed healthy, he and Hakeem would have been the most dominant 4-5 combo the game had ever seen.

I agree. They were just starting off and were already dominant. Drob and Duncan never had their primes coincide together. It was either young Duncan with very good Drob. Or prime Duncan with good, but old Drob.

When comparing the tandems using what actually happened, there's a perfectly legit argument that dream/ralph were better than duncan and drob, even with the 2 titles. But If I got Duncan from 2003 and Drob from 1995, going up against Sampson in 86 and Dream in 94, I'll take Drob and Duncan.

^ But you can't also really measure that, because Sampson didn't even hit his prime, he was knocked out, or his rookie years was his prime. Hakeem is considered better then both Duncan and Robinsion in his prime in individual talent perspective. And if Sampson did turn out to be the great player people say, then I think Sampson and Hakeem would have been better, but again no way of measuring that.

IMHO, if Sampson doesn't get hurt, the Rockets and not the Bulls are the next dynasty, and Hakeem's the fave for GOAT, not MJ.

*ducks*

*comes back*

No, I'm serious.

*ducks again*

^ i gotta agree with Palmer. These two would definitely have given MJ a serious run for his money. Go youtube some of Sampsons highlights with the rockets, it's sickening.

Baller 24 wrote:^ But you can't also really measure that, because Sampson didn't even hit his prime, he was knocked out, or his rookie years was his prime. Hakeem is considered better then both Duncan and Robinsion in his prime in individual talent perspective. And if Sampson did turn out to be the great player people say, then I think Sampson and Hakeem would have been better, but again no way of measuring that.

No, you can compare 2003duncan/1995Drob vs. 1986ralph/primehakeem. You can measure that. Well, as much as you can measure any other speculative comparison. Those players that I mentioned did in fact exist. We'd just be speculating how they match up, and how the tandems coexist with each other. What you can't say is 2003duncan/1995drob vs. primedream/prime ralph, because the consensus is that prime ralph unfortunately never existed.

To bad for us, because if we did see Sampson in his prime, maybe he's a 25/12/3/ very good d type of player. Then this comparison gets even more interesting.

But as it is, I take tim/drob in their primes vs. prime hakeem/ '86 sampson (the best version of sampson that actually existed).

Harry Palmer wrote:IMHO, if Sampson doesn't get hurt, the Rockets and not the Bulls are the next dynasty, and Hakeem's the fave for GOAT, not MJ.

*ducks*

*comes back*

No, I'm serious.

*ducks again*

What could of been, Sampson if not injured would be known as one of the best centers of all time, IMO Sampson was just a bigger version of Moses at 7'4. Sampson could score very well, rebounding was also great, the only thing Sampson wasn't good at was his D, but even then I think with his size he was great. Hakeem you can't say enough about his defense, on offense he basically can wipe the floor with you with his agility. Harry Palmer is right, I think something like that could of happened, but winning 6-7 championships would be very hard to do especially with the way MJ played. But I'm pretty sure there would be a Bulls vs. Rockets rivalry if Sampson was healthy. There is no way the Bulls could of stopped the Sampson and Hakeem combo, but then again on the offense, there was no answer for MJ. Would have been VERY interesting..

Harry Palmer wrote:IMHO, if Sampson doesn't get hurt, the Rockets and not the Bulls are the next dynasty, and Hakeem's the fave for GOAT, not MJ.

*ducks*

*comes back*

No, I'm serious.

*ducks again*

what about who's the better player?