Patrick Ewing vs David Robinson, who has the better legacy?

[JordansBulls]

Both players were selected #1 in their respective draft. Ewing in 1985 and Robinson in 1987, who was the better player and had the better legacy?

[ronnymac2]

Robinson. Both were great players. They'd be the absolute best 2 centers of their generation if it weren't for shaq and hakeem (Who are 2 top 10 players ever imo). Robinson and ewing, in the regular season, held their own against dream. And shaq, for that matter. Shaq always said ewing, along with zo and dream, were the guys he couldn't just kill whenever he wanted (He and drob didn't have the best relationship, so he wouldn't publicly give robinson credit, but i'm sure in reality robinson held his own.)

Part of ewing and robinson's legacy is that they both got killed by hakeem in the playoffs. Now, it's true that ewing did. He shot something like 36% from the field. Robinson got destroyed,too, except he put up fairly good numbers against dream. It's just dream went off on him, badly.

These criticisms, that they couldn't hold their own against dream in 94 and 95, shouldn't be weighed heavily against either of them imo. It's one series, going up against an amazing player. It doesn't define their careers.

I think of ewing as a warrior. I live in New York, so i remember very vividly everything ewing did for the knicks. And all the **** everyone gave him. That guy was dominant. He rebounded, he defended (very well), blocked shots, and is one of the best jump shooting centers ever. He scored in the post, too.

D-rob was a freak athlete. Too nice, wasn't mean enough lol. It probably makes him a better person than most, though. He was dominant on defense, blocked shots and got steals. He rebounded. And he was one of the most versatile scorers at the center position in history.

Overall, I'd say robinson was the better player in a player-2-player comparison. And as for career, the admiral won 2 titles at the end, got an mvp, a scoring title, and more stats. So Robinson's legacy is greater than ewing. But they're both AT LEAST top 10 centers of all time.

[shawngoat23]

D-Rob, by a bit. Only MJ and Wilt have had higher PERs (single season or career), and his two rings as a second option trump Ewing's zero.

[ThaRegul8r]

Robinson. Both were great players. They'd be the absolute best 2 centers of their generation if it weren't for shaq and hakeem (Who are 2 top 10 players ever imo). Robinson and ewing, in the regular season, held their own against dream. And shaq, for that matter. Shaq always said ewing, along with zo and dream, were the guys he couldn't just kill whenever he wanted (He and drob didn't have the best relationship, so he wouldn't publicly give robinson credit, but i'm sure in reality robinson held his own.)

If I haven't missed any games, David Robinson averaged 26.3 points, 12 rebounds, 4.7 assists, 2.67 steals and 2.44 blocked shots against O’Neal from ’92-93 to ’97-98, when Robinson was Second Team All-NBA and Second Team All-Defense, to Shaq's 26 points, 12.7 rebounds and 2 blocks during the same period. So Robinson held his own quite nicely. Scoring and rebounding is virtually identical, and Robinson outassisted, outblocked and outstole Shaq.

Just to include Hakeem and Ewing since I did this before because I was curious to see how Shaq matched up and the great centers of the era before they passed their primes:

Hakeem vs. Shaq from 1992-93 to 96-97, when Hakeem was still First Team All-NBA and Second Team All-Defense:
Hakeem: 26 points, 10.6 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 3.56 blocked shots, 2.22 steals
Shaq: 23.2 points, 14 rebounds, 3 assists

Hakeem outscored, outassisted, outblocked and outstole Shaq, while Shaq outrebounded Hakeem.

Ewing vs. Shaq from 1992-93 to 97-98:
Ewing: 26.9 points, 11.2 rebounds, 2 assists, 2.06 blocked shots
Shaq: 28 points, 12.4 rebounds, 2.4 assists, 3.17 blocked shots

Ewing's actually the only one of the great centers against whom Shaq was better across the board against. So based on their performances against Shaq during the same years, Robinson was better.

[Blame Rasho]

I think Robinson is notably better than Ewing and has a much more distinguished legacy.

[pewing33ny]

robinson will have the better legacy because of the 2 rings. if he didn't get them i think ewing because he was involved in some of most incredible playoff series whereas you never felt the spurs were going to go all the way until the strike year.

robinson couldn't get to the finals until he had duncan to help him. ewing took the knicks to game 7 of the finals in '94 and even in '99 everyone remembers houston hitting that shot against miami but ewing had something like 22/12 with a couple blocks. if only he wasn't injured, that finals could have been epic and changed the course of the nba (duncan maybe would have signed with orlando if they lost). even jordan said those 90s knicks teams were the hardest ones he faced.

i don't want to be called a homer but i can't say robinson was better. he put up better stats but then again zach randolph put up 24/10. if i had to draft either of the 2 players i would probably think for a very long time and eventually get ewing. he was more of a workhorse in the playoffs and i think he would have gotten a championship as a leader if jordan wasn't blocking him.

[SOUL]

What do you mean legacy? By championships its DRob but if you asked the average person who they remembered more in the 90s I'm sure they'd say ewing.

[Blame Rasho]

What do you mean legacy? By championships its DRob but if you asked the average person who they remembered more in the 90s I'm sure they'd say ewing.

Well that is easy... one played in New York, the other played in San Antonio.

[NO-KG-AI]

Zach Randolph shot horrible percentages and played no D.

Robinson was a better player, and has the better legacy. MVP's, DPOYS, getting all defensive first teams, and all NBA teams over Ewing, Olajuwon and Shaq at the time....

I think Ewing is criminally underrated, but it was pretty clear who was the better player during the time.

Edit: Pat is only more known because of Space Jam.

[kooldude]

robinson will have the better legacy because of the 2 rings. if he didn't get them i think ewing because he was involved in some of most incredible playoff series whereas you never felt the spurs were going to go all the way until the strike year.

robinson couldn't get to the finals until he had duncan to help him. ewing took the knicks to game 7 of the finals in '94 and even in '99 everyone remembers houston hitting that shot against miami but ewing had something like 22/12 with a couple blocks. if only he wasn't injured, that finals could have been epic and changed the course of the nba (duncan maybe would have signed with orlando if they lost). even jordan said those 90s knicks teams were the hardest ones he faced.

i don't want to be called a homer but i can't say robinson was better. he put up better stats but then again zach randolph put up 24/10. if i had to draft either of the 2 players i would probably think for a very long time and eventually get ewing. he was more of a workhorse in the playoffs and i think he would have gotten a championship as a leader if jordan wasn't blocking him.

you're a homer. I'm a Knicks fan, but to say that Robinson's superior stats are insignificant because Zach Randolph can avg a double-double, is beyond ridiculous.

[NO-KG-AI]

And to be totally fair, when Jordan was around, I never got the feeling that New York was going all the way either....

[etopn23]

^^The fact that Robinson played in SA is irrelevant. He was among the most popular players in the league...

[Ryoga Hibiki]

There's more difference between Robinson and Ewing than between Hakeem and Robinson.

[tkb]

There's more difference between Robinson and Ewing than between Hakeem and Robinson.

I agree. This is David Robinson all the way. No questions about it IMO.

[Captain_Morgan]

David Robinson by a mile. I don't even think it's close.

[pewing33ny]

you're a homer. I'm a Knicks fan, but to say that Robinson's superior stats are insignificant because Zach Randolph can avg a double-double, is beyond ridiculous.

don't try and base my whole post on 1 point, that was used as an extreme. if you want to use it that way you can also use the intangible factor of prime ewing's teams doing more in the playoffs against better teams than prime robinson's teams. and they both had similar talent on there teams until '99 (when they weren't teh best players on their teams anymore).

again, i didn't say ewing was better, i just can't go along with the herd saying that robinson was better. he was certainly a much better regular season player but his stats dipped in the playoffs and he only made the WCF once. hell, 3 times they lost in the first round. he did win a championship and they wouldn't have won it without him, but he wasn't the #1 option by then, would've gone the same way with ewing in '99 (if he was still around and they won).

[NO-KG-AI]

Pat wasn't exactly Hakeem in the playoffs either, he only shot over 50% 4 times.

Career playoff averages of:

20.2/10.3/2 on 46.9% with 2.2 BPG, .9 steals, 2.48 TO's. 139 games

to Robinson's

18.1/10.6/2.3 on 47.9% with 2.54 BPG, 1.23 steals, 2.28 TO's. 123 games

That's too close to call, they both had a lot of games past their primes in the playoffs, Robinson especially, which drags both of their stats down, but Pat certainly doesn't have an advantage that would make you take him over Robinson who was CLEARLY the much better regular season player...

[treis]

Robinson has a MVP, scoring title, and rings that Ewing doesn't have. Robinson's legacy is easily superior.

[kooldude]

you're a homer. I'm a Knicks fan, but to say that Robinson's superior stats are insignificant because Zach Randolph can avg a double-double, is beyond ridiculous.

don't try and base my whole post on 1 point, that was used as an extreme. if you want to use it that way you can also use the intangible factor of prime ewing's teams doing more in the playoffs against better teams than prime robinson's teams. and they both had similar talent on there teams until '99 (when they weren't teh best players on their teams anymore).

again, i didn't say ewing was better, i just can't go along with the herd saying that robinson was better. he was certainly a much better regular season player but his stats dipped in the playoffs and he only made the WCF once. hell, 3 times they lost in the first round. he did win a championship and they wouldn't have won it without him, but he wasn't the #1 option by then, would've gone the same way with ewing in '99 (if he was still around and they won).

It's hard to take your previous post seriously, when you make ridiculous statements like that.

and what's this intangible factor? You mean when the Knicks took the Rockets to 7 when Ewing played like ****, while Robinson had moderate offensive success against Hakeem and the Spurs still lost in 6. So it's an indication of intangibles when you play horribly and your team goes 7 over when you play respectable and your team lost in 6? Don't use team success to evaluate individual players.

Ewing's playoff stats dipped also. His PPG, FG%, FT%, BPG all decreased, while av'g more minutes in the postseason.

haha, I like how you use the "herd" term in this instance. I guess I follow the "herd" when I think MJ is the GOAT.

Ok, let's end the semantics, you said Robinson isn't better so either you think Ewing was better or they're equal players despite the superior stats and accolades on Robinson's part. Which one is it?

[pewing33ny]

again, it was an extreme used just to get the point across. it's hard to take your posts seriously when you take things out of context.

and i certainly will use team success to gauge a player. would jordan be the GOAT if his teams only made it a round or two into the playoffs? they had similar talent on their teams in their primes and ewing's teams were more successful. i know they're not touching the ball every possession but when you only have 1 star on your team and it's your center, it has a lot more effect on the game than most think.

and ewing certainly wasn't a great playoff performer either, but he wasn't bad. he hit a lot of big shots like down the stretch in game 7 of the ecf. i know i can't base everything off of 1 game but there were a bunch of games like that. everyone remembers the series in 95 when he missed the fingerroll but he also put up 30 points in that game. i did watch some spurs series (not as much as the knicks though) but i remmeber that spurs/jazz series where robinson just disappeared and wouldn't even shoot the ball.

i'll admit i haven't seen every game ever played but i watched more than enough in the 90s to know how good players really were. robinson at times was ridiculous but a lot of those were in teh regular season. didn't dirk have better numbers than duncan last year and get MVP? actually, a better comparison would be robinson and duncan. drob has better numbers but whose the one with 4 rings as the main guy?

as i said, robinson definitely has the legacy. a lot of this argument comes down to how much you measure team success against individual stats and that's a grey area. i think in this case because their teams were very similar for a large part of their careers it comes downs to team success. and even that is partly a grey area beacuse there are so many factors involved. i believe the knicks were more of a true contender those years and because they meant more to their teams than most players it comes into play more than most situations.

so i can't say that one was better than the other. there are wayyyyyy too many factors (stats, team success, individual accolades, intangibles) that 99.9% of people on this board (including me) are ignorant to, just because no one has time to watch every game for every player and evaluate everything.

i would love to talk about this in person with you guys because i could get my point through a little easier (it's hard to make clear on a message board) and we could probably converse for hours on all the little nuances of the game and it's players. but just like pat and drob, i'm constricted to my situation and trying my hardest to make the best argument i can.