RealGM

Kareem is a great candidate for GOAT, and for good reason. Six-time NBA champion, six-time MVP, two-time Finals MVP, all-time scoring leader, absolutely dominant statistics, and a slew of all-NBA and all-defensive team mentions that don't even seem significant on his resume.

However, where would he rank if evaluated based purely on his pre-Magic Johnson career, or based purely on his post-Magic Johnson career? Note that the hypothetical question is not how much Magic helped out his career. Rather, in the first case, if he completely retired from the game before Magic came, or in the second case, if he did not begin his career until he was 32 years old. In other words, restated while sacrificing historical accuracy, what if someone named Lew Alcindor accomplished everything Kareem did pre-Magic Johnson, and someone named Kareem accomplished everything post-Magic? Where would they rank on the all-time career lists?

Lew Alcindor (1969-1979)
- 10 seasons, 773 GP: 28.64 ppg, 14.83 rpg, 4.45 apg on 55.1% FG and 70.6% FT; 3.53 bpg*, 1.27 spg*, 3.45 TO** in 41.1 mpg.
- 8 playoffs, 79 GP: 30.15 ppg, 16.37 rpg, 4.06 apg on 52.9% FG and 71.6% FT; 3.21 bpg*, 1.29 spg*, 3.91 TO** in 44.6 mpg.
- 1x NBA champion, 5x NBA MVP, 1x Finals MVP
- 6x all-NBA first team, 3x all-NBA second team
- 3x all-NBA defensive team (1st), 5x all-NBA defensive team (2nd)
- 9x NBA All-Star
- Would rank #23 on all-time career scoring list, behind Kobe Bryant
- Would rank #24 on the all-time career rebounding list, behind Elgin Baylor
* After and including 1973-74 season
** After and including 1977-78 season

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1979-1989)
- 10 seasons, 787 GP: 20.64 ppg, 7.60 rpg, 2.82 apg on 57.2% FG and 74.3% FT; 2.03 bpg, 0.74 spg, 2.59 TO in 32.6 mpg.
- 10 playoffs, 158 GP: 21.39 ppg, 7.52 rpg, 2.82 apg on 53.6% FG and 75.7% FT; 2.24 bpg, 0.89 spg, 3.44 TO in 33.7 mpg.
- 5x NBA champion, 1x NBA MVP, 1x Finals MVP
- 4x all-NBA first team, 2x all-NBA second team
- 2x all-NBA defensive team (1st), 1x all-NBA defensive team (2nd)
- 10x NBA All-Star

Does Lew or Kareem rank higher? Does either still belong part of the immortal six/seven? If not, who jumps ahead of them? Do the big men Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, or Moses Malone? Keep in mind that Lew's stats blow either of theirs out of the water, and he has comparable accolades. How about the little guys like West and Oscar, or even Havlicek and Baylor?

Lew Alcindor would rank higher, obviously. And I think he'd still clearly be top 10 of all time.
KAJ would still be a top 50 player, but somewhere in the 30's or 40's maybe?

Good thread!

Interesting thread.

For Lew, the worst you could say about him is that he's not a Top 5 GOAT guy anymore. My first brush thought on his ranking would 9, after the obvious 5, Duncan, Erving, and Shaq.

For Kareem, well let's see. First guy who comes to mind to compare him to is McHale, and it seems obvious he surpasses him easily, so he's gotta be top 40. Then Ewing comes to mind, and I think I've got to give Kareem the nod there too, so he's gotta be top 30. Next guy in mind is the Admiral - no, I can't put him above Robinson. So yeah, somewhere in the 20s.

Doctor MJ wrote:For Lew, the worst you could say about him is that he's not a Top 5 GOAT guy anymore. My first brush thought on his ranking would 9, after the obvious 5, Duncan, Erving, and Shaq.

Wow, I forgot about Erving when I was making my list, and he's one of the players for whom I have the most respect. Good catch (but not unexpected, as I understand that he's one of your two favorite players ever).

Are you implying that Duncan > Hakeem by his omission? Is this based purely on career accomplishments, or do you also feel that prime Duncan was a greater player than prime Olajuwon?

Great thread, I'd probably rank Lew in top 10; he'd definitely not fall lower than that. Kareem on the other hand I'd say goes top 25? top 20 maybe. I'd say from '79-'83 were his best years in the '80s, but was still very effective from both angles. Top 25 sounds right for Kareem.

talk about a catchy title.

Alcindor's play alone makes him top 10. Excellent rebounder, shot-blocker, defender, passer, scorer-a complete center. As a player, he's better than Duncan, and I think his career accomplishments and stats would be decent enough so I could just ignore Duncan's career and put Alcindor ahead of him. That means he's at least in the top 9 player ever. But he'd be lower than dream, shaq, and bird ito of career, and since I think you can make a fairly strong case that they were better players anyway, Alcindor goes behind them. Russell....it depends how I feel that day lol. So maybe Alcindor gets 8th, maybe 9th.

Kareem? Well in the beginning, he's basically still the same player as Alcindor. He's a big part of 5 title teams. Yeah, I guess around 25. He'd only have his "Alcindor level talent" for a few years. Then he'd just be a very good center...like, better than Robert Parrish...maybe around alonzo/deke level. Even it out, and you get a top 25-40 player ever.

Lew Alcindor is top 5 on the basis of still being one of only three guys in league history to win 5 MVPs (especially if you consider he did it in 10 years). Only Jordan and Russell won as many MVPs over their entire careers as did Alcindor in his first 10.

Then he's got the title and the Finals MVP, having led a team to the ultimate prize. Then he's got four years of prime blocks and steals missing from an average that would otherwise be higher, his best scoring and rebounding years, some epic postseasons...

I think Kareem would be above David Robinson, IMO, but yeah, I think the 20s range is best for him, as others have said.

I'll be quick.

Career pre-Magic: 10-20 range

Career post-Magic: 25-35 range

I think Kareem--as happens surprisingly often--is being underrated by some people.

Why would Early Kareem (and since he changed his name after his first season, I'll stick with calling him "Early Kareem") be behind any center not named "Wilt Chamberlain"? Or, really, anyone? Kareem had no build up period; he entered at his peak and stayed there, didn't miss games, won a title (and should have own more...still ranting about 1974 here), won lots of MVPs, was one of the great defensive Cs of all time, and had no weaknesses in his game.

773 games, 28.6 ppg, 14.8 rpg, 4.5 apg, .552 fg%, .706 ft%, 3.5 bpg, 1.3 spg
Rebound rate: 17.9

Let's compare that to...Hakeem's best 10 year run (1987-1996)
750 games, 24.7 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 2.9 apg, .514 fg%, .728 ft%, 3.7 bpg, 1.9 spg
Rebound rate: 17.6

Kareem scores more, rebounds more, passes better, and shoots better from the field. For 99/9% of players, you would say that Hakeem is clearly the better defender. He did, after all, have 5 All-D first team selections and 2 All-D second team selections. But Kareem had 3 All-D first team selections and 5 All-D second team selections. Kareem's D gets seriously overlooked. It's essentially a toss up there. So you have to go with Kareem.

Playoff play? Hakeem had those two dominant playoff runs that were truly spectacular. More spectacular than Kareem's 1972 playoff run--27-17-2.5? Or 1974 (when they should have won...grrr)...when Kareem averaged 32-16-5? In Kareem's first six years in the playoffs, he averaged 30.5-17-4. That's not for a series; that's six years. Kareem had as many great playoffs moments as series as anyone ever has.

What about Shaq from 1993 to 2002?

675 games, 27.6 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2.8 apg, .577 fg%, .533 ft%, 2.7 bpg, 0.6 spg
Rebound rate: 18.2

Shaq scores as much...a point or two or so more adjusted for pace. He rebounds a little better and shoots better from the field. But he's not nearly as good of a passer, can't convert from the line, and is an inferior defender compared to Kareem. This is leaving out missing more games, conditioning issues, and squabbles among players and coaches. Intangibles are way over on Kareem's side. Again, I'm thinking this goes to early Kareem.

Another point here is that the C position, from 1970 to 1979 was the deepest it would ever be in NBA history. It was good in the period was Shaq and Hakeem overlapped, but didn't have near the depth it had during Kareem's run. So Kareem was slightly better against better overall competition.

So I'm thinking that without 1980-89, Kareem is about even with Magic and Bird. Depending on where you place Russell, that's a top 4-7 player. Add in 1980--his sixth MVP and second title--and Kareem probably butts heads with MJ and Wilt for GOAT.

This also shows why peak trumps career length. Kareem from 1980 to 1986 was still a devastatingly effective player. We're voting on a list of top 100 players right now, and we're in the mid 50s. From 1980 to 1986, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

--Averaged 23.4-8.5-3.3 (in less than 35 mpg) on 58% shooting
--Was in the top 10 of MVP voting seven times
--Was in the top 5 of MVP voting five times
--Won an MVP
--Had four All-NBA first team selections
--Had two All-NBA second team selections
--Had two All-D first team selections
--Had an All-D second team selection
--Won a Finals MVP (and should won it in 1980)
--Won three titles

That's not a top 50 player. That's not even a top 35 player. That's more like a top 20 player. Compare those standards to the players we have listed at 17-21

17. David Robinson
18. Kobe Bryant
19. Walt Frazier
20. Kevin Garnett
21. Elgin Baylor

That's seven years--a good peak for any player. Kareem has the most titles. Nobody won more MVPs...Kobe, DRob, and Garnett won MVPs, but Kareem's overall MVP record from 1980-6 is pretty equivalent to those guys. Behind Drob...he's the best in the group, IMO. Several of those guys were elite defenders...so was Kareem. I'm not going to say Kareem for 1980-6 would be in that group...I'm saying he'd have an argument and it would definitely be close.

I'd put Early Kareem as about a top 5 player, and Later Kareem as a top 20 player...right around #20. And, to be honest, I've largely come to the conclusion that you combine them and get a top 1 player. Kareem is the ultimate combination of high peak and huge career length. I think of it like this.

If I knew nothing about any player's future career going into an all-time draft, Kareem would probably be my first pick. He was the first or second best college player in history...it's between him and Walton.

If I knew everything about every player's future career, Kareem would definitely be my first pick. He had no flaws in his game, a peak as high as anybody's, and achieved extraordinarily high levels of individual and team success for a longer period than nay player in history. That's the ultimate cornerstone.

Anyone think the second half of the career might have contained less all star selections, and all NBA accolades if he wasn't Kareem?

TrueLAfan wrote:I think Kareem--as happens surprisingly often--is being underrated by some people.

Why would Early Kareem (and since he changed his name after his first season, I'll stick with calling him "Early Kareem") be behind any center not named "Wilt Chamberlain"? Or, really, anyone? Kareem had no build up period; he entered at his peak and stayed there, didn't miss games, won a title (and should have own more...still ranting about 1974 here), won lots of MVPs, was one of the great defensive Cs of all time, and had no weaknesses in his game.

773 games, 28.6 ppg, 14.8 rpg, 4.5 apg, .552 fg%, .706 ft%, 3.5 bpg, 1.3 spg
Rebound rate: 17.9

Let's compare that to...Hakeem's best 10 year run (1987-1996)
750 games, 24.7 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 2.9 apg, .514 fg%, .728 ft%, 3.7 bpg, 1.9 spg
Rebound rate: 17.6

Kareem scores more, rebounds more, passes better, and shoots better from the field. For 99/9% of players, you would say that Hakeem is clearly the better defender. He did, after all, have 5 All-D first team selections and 2 All-D second team selections. But Kareem had 3 All-D first team selections and 5 All-D second team selections. Kareem's D gets seriously overlooked. It's essentially a toss up there. So you have to go with Kareem.

Playoff play? Hakeem had those two dominant playoff runs that were truly spectacular. More spectacular than Kareem's 1972 playoff run--27-17-2.5? Or 1974 (when they should have won...grrr)...when Kareem averaged 32-16-5? In Kareem's first six years in the playoffs, he averaged 30.5-17-4. That's not for a series; that's six years. Kareem had as many great playoffs moments as series as anyone ever has.

What about Shaq from 1993 to 2002?

675 games, 27.6 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2.8 apg, .577 fg%, .533 ft%, 2.7 bpg, 0.6 spg
Rebound rate: 18.2

Shaq scores as much...a point or two or so more adjusted for pace. He rebounds a little better and shoots better from the field. But he's not nearly as good of a passer, can't convert from the line, and is an inferior defender compared to Kareem. This is leaving out missing more games, conditioning issues, and squabbles among players and coaches. Intangibles are way over on Kareem's side. Again, I'm thinking this goes to early Kareem.

Another point here is that the C position, from 1970 to 1979 was the deepest it would ever be in NBA history. It was good in the period was Shaq and Hakeem overlapped, but didn't have near the depth it had during Kareem's run. So Kareem was slightly better against better overall competition.

So I'm thinking that without 1980-89, Kareem is about even with Magic and Bird. Depending on where you place Russell, that's a top 4-7 player. Add in 1980--his sixth MVP and second title--and Kareem probably butts heads with MJ and Wilt for GOAT.

This also shows why peak trumps career length. Kareem from 1980 to 1986 was still a devastatingly effective player. We're voting on a list of top 100 players right now, and we're in the mid 50s. From 1980 to 1986, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

--Averaged 23.4-8.5-3.3 (in less than 35 mpg) on 58% shooting
--Was in the top 10 of MVP voting seven times
--Was in the top 5 of MVP voting five times
--Won an MVP
--Had four All-NBA first team selections
--Had two All-NBA second team selections
--Had two All-D first team selections
--Had an All-D second team selection
--Won a Finals MVP (and should won it in 1980)
--Won three titles

That's not a top 50 player. That's not even a top 35 player. That's more like a top 20 player. Compare those standards to the players we have listed at 17-21

17. David Robinson
18. Kobe Bryant
19. Walt Frazier
20. Kevin Garnett
21. Elgin Baylor

That's seven years--a good peak for any player. Kareem has the most titles. Nobody won more MVPs...Kobe, DRob, and Garnett won MVPs, but Kareem's overall MVP record from 1980-6 is pretty equivalent to those guys. Behind Drob...he's the best in the group, IMO. Several of those guys were elite defenders...so was Kareem. I'm not going to say Kareem for 1980-6 would be in that group...I'm saying he'd have an argument and it would definitely be close.

I'd put Early Kareem as about a top 5 player, and Later Kareem as a top 20 player...right around #20. And, to be honest, I've largely come to the conclusion that you combine them and get a top 1 player. Kareem is the ultimate combination of high peak and huge career length. I think of it like this.

If I knew nothing about any player's future career going into an all-time draft, Kareem would probably be my first pick. He was the first or second best college player in history...it's between him and Walton.

If I knew everything about every player's future career, Kareem would definitely be my first pick. He had no flaws in his game, a peak as high as anybody's, and achieved extraordinarily high levels of individual and team success for a longer period than nay player in history. That's the ultimate cornerstone.

I never have to worry about defending KAJ, TrueLA always comes thru nicely.......

shawngoat23 wrote:Wow, I forgot about Erving when I was making my list, and he's one of the players for whom I have the most respect. Good catch (but not unexpected, as I understand that he's one of your two favorite players ever).

Are you implying that Duncan > Hakeem by his omission? Is this based purely on career accomplishments, or do you also feel that prime Duncan was a greater player than prime Olajuwon?

Yes, Duncan > Hakeem based on career not peak. Though, I don't think the peak gap is as great as often gets stated.

NO-KG-AI wrote:Anyone think the second half of the career might have contained less all star selections, and all NBA accolades if he wasn't Kareem?

A fair question. But the answer is no.

The one knock on Kareem in his post 1980 play is his rebounding. But as I look more closely at everything, I'm not sure this is an issue. The Lakers were an outstanding ereebounding team from 1980-6, primarily because of Magic Johnson. In the six seasons where Magic was healthy, the Lakers rebound differential was 3 rebounds a game. That's huge. And most of that was courtesy of Magic...when Magic was hurt in 1981, the Lakers outrebounded their opponents by four. Total. For the season. Wasn't because of Kareem though--he was seventh in the league in rebounding...just behind Unseld and Sikma, and ahead of Gilmore.

I've basically come to the conclusion that Magic's superior rebounding came at the expense of Kareem. The combined rebound rate of Kareem and Magic between 1980 and 1986 averaged about 24.7, which is terrific. (Tyson Chandler and Chris Paul were at 25.7 last season.) Since the Lakers were outrebounding their opponents handily, the only way Kareem was going to get more rebounds was at the expense of other teammates, especially Magic.

Kareem's numbers after 1982 are also seriously impacted by his reduced playing time. The Lakers tried to rest him for the playoffs by keeping his court time around 33 minutes a game. It was a strategy that worked...Kareem did step it up in the playoffs from 1983-6. And still, when he was on the court, he was a beast. His per 40 numbers in those last four years--his "decline" years--are about 27-9-3.5, with over 2 blocks. And top level D. From 1980 to 1983, the Lakers were Kareem's team. Magic may have been slightly (very slightly) more important from 1984 to 1986, after which he became the team leader. So, from 1984 to1986, Magic and Kareem were close to 1 and 1a in value...closer than, say, Jordan and Pippen were. So from 1984 to 1986--Kareem's last three great years--if you balance out that he played less, but was a big man, and all the intangibles, Kareem was probably more or less as valuable as Scottie Pippen ever was alongside Jordan. People may scream and complain about that, but a guy averaging 22-7-3 in less than 33 minutes a game that shoots 58%, is 7'2", and plays great D is going to be considered awesome no matter what. And from 1980-3, he was better than that.

tsherkin wrote:Lew Alcindor is top 5 on the basis of still being one of only three guys in league history to win 5 MVPs (especially if you consider he did it in 10 years). Only Jordan and Russell won as many MVPs over their entire careers as did Alcindor in his first 10.

Well consider this, Lew has 6 Top 2 MVP finishes and 1 title, Larry Bird (the guy I'd put at #5 in this mythical comparison) has 7 Top 2 MVP finishes and 3 titles. Lew's MVPs are eye-popping but I don't think they're as overwhelming as you might think on first glance.

Additionally, I think you've got to factor in how the 70s ended for Lew. The Lakers at that time had had one year with Lew winning 50 games, and in that year they got upset and Lew arguably got shown up by Walton. There was undoubtedly a vibe around Lew at the time that while he was still putting up big numbers, maybe he wasn't having the same impact he used to.

Interestingly, if the decades shifted just one year, so that Magic's rookie year came with Lew, that would change that vibe completely, and of course add another MVP and title. I'd say Lew'd be a true GOAT candidate with that one additional year.

Doctor MJ wrote:
Well consider this, Lew has 6 Top 2 MVP finishes and 1 title, Larry Bird (the guy I'd put at #5 in this mythical comparison) has 7 Top 2 MVP finishes and 3 titles. Lew's MVPs are eye-popping but I don't think they're as overwhelming as you might think on first glance.

I dunno man, KAJ got screwed out of at least one MVP, which would have had him winning an MVP in 60% of a decade in that period.

Additionally, I think you've got to factor in how the 70s ended for Lew. The Lakers at that time had had one year with Lew winning 50 games, and in that year they got upset and Lew arguably got shown up by Walton. There was undoubtedly a vibe around Lew at the time that while he was still putting up big numbers, maybe he wasn't having the same impact he used to.

Yeah, but the Lakers were also a crap team without a lot of help for Kareem until Magic got drafted and he was having all the impact that you like, he just flat-out didn't have the personnel to compete in the late 70s.

I would prefer "KAJ" as "Lew" was even more uptight and aloof. BTW, here the Lakers team that missed the playoffs in 1975:

C - "Lew Alcindor"
PF - Don Ford
SF - Cazzie Russell
SG - Luke Allen
PG - Gail Goodrich
Coach - Bill Sharman

"Lew" got a HOF coach, a HOF playmaker (Goodrich) and a good 3rd scorer (Allen, 15ppg), and he still only wins 40 games? I think "Lew" suffered from "Wilt pre-1967" syndrome: he could not convert his statistical dominance into team success yet.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. First, Gail Goodrich was a HOF player...but it was not exactly a great choice, IMO. The big thing here is balance. Who, other than Kareem on that 1975-6 team, could play even average defense?

(Wind whistles.)

Okay. Who, other than Kareem on the 1976 team, could rebound?

(Wind whistles. Dog howls in distance.)

All right. Now...other than Kareem, who had any sort of frontcourt presence on that 1976 Laker team?

(Wind whistles. Crickets chirp.) Wait...Kermit Washington! He could do those things! Oh, wait. He played less than 500 minutes that season.

Kareem said in Giant Steps that he felt his 1975-6 season was his best individual season, but it was all worthless because the team was not successful. He's got a point. He had career highs in rebounds, rebound rate, assists, and blocks, led the league in minutes played, and was second in scoring. Still, I don't know how they *could* have been successful. Kareem led the league in defensive win shares, and was a fraction (89.8 to 90.0) away from leading it in defensive rating. The team was still 13th out of 18 in defense. Think how miserable the rest of the team was on D. Kareem led the league in rebounding and had a career high rebound rate of 19.6. The Lakers were still outrebounded by nearly 200 that season. The 1975 Lakers were an awful team outside of Kareem. The fact that they won 40 games is a testament to Kareem, not an indictment of him. It's the same as the 1987 Bulls, who had a very good C/PF combo (Oakley/Corzine combined to average 23 points and 19 boards a game), a good combo guards (Paxson) and a couple of serviceable bench players (Threatt, Cureton) and only won 40 games despite having Michael Jordan.

As a matter of fact, the 1976 and 1977 Lakers were pretty much always lousy. A big part of this was the insistance on playing Don Ford. Don Ford was the first player that I, as a pre-teenager, was able to recognize as being a total piece of s---. He played around 2000 minutes a year in those years--a good chunk of time. He could not play defense, score, or rebound. The Lakers kept trying a variety of injury hampered (Lou Hudson, once awesome, but had shot knees when he joined L.A.), overrated (Goodrich), on the downhill slide (Cazzie Russell, Lucius Allen, Don Chaney) and "who the f--- are they?" guys (Earl Tatum, Bo Lamar) as backcourt players. The 1977 Lakers won 53 games with a starting lineup of Kareem, Allen, Russell, Chaney, and Ford. IMO, that is the worst 50 win team ever. Without Kareem, that is a big time lottery team..nearer the bottom than the top of that group. I look at 1976 and 1977 to gauge the value of MVP level players. Without Kareem, those Laker teams would have struggle to win 30 wins a year...25 would have been closer. With Kareem, they averaged over 46. A top 10 all time player having one of his better years is, therefore, worth around 20-25 wins to a team.

The 1977 series between Kareem and Walton is often famously described as having Walton outplay Kareem. It is a lie. Walton played very well and there were certainly times when he outplayed Kareem. Walton was a truly great player that year. But the fact is Walton had the better team...and Kareem had the better series. Here are the stats from the two starting Cs from the series.

Bill Walton
19.3 ppg, 14.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 2.3 bpg, 51% shooting
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
30.3 ppg, 16 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.8 bpg, 61% shooting

Two of those games were on TV. One of them I attended--game 2. Kareem worked Walton; Kareem had 40 in game 2. As the SI story at the time noted

In all fairness to Abdul-Jabbar, he had spent the better part of three games—and would spend yet one more—exhausting himself by bounding up and down and all over the court attempting to deflect the rafter heaves of Lucas as well as those of greyhounds Lionel Hollins and Johnny Davis, who had slithered through or simply zipped around the pitiful Laker backcourt defenders. When Abdul-Jabbar ran down, Portland would counter his weakened offensive efforts by placing Walton in front of him, Lucas behind him and two or three or 15 other Blazers swarming around him on all sides.

Why was Kareem trying to do all of this? Why was he playing one on two (or three...or four) D? Why were the Blazers able to double and triple team him with impunity? Because the Lakers sucked, that's why.

--Mo Lucas was playing against...Don Ford. Lucas outscored Ford 92 to 41. Lucas averaged almost 12 boards a game in the series. Ford averaged...2.8. Yes, the starting PF managed less than 3 rebounds a game.
--Cazzie Russell shot 39% for the series. Thanks!
--Lucius Allen aggravated an injury (dislocated toe) in game 2, and was essentially out for the rest of the series.
--Don Chaney, the defensive "ace" of the backcourt, forgot how to play D, and got thumped by Lionel Hollins and Johnny Davis.

And here's something to consider. The Lakers won a 7 game series against the Warriors before going against the soon-to-be-champions Trailblazers. Kareem had been even better in that series than he was against Portland. How does

37.1 ppg, 18.7 rpg, 4.3 apg, 3.3 bpg

sound?

The Warriors had Rick Barry, Jamaal Wilkes, and Phil Smith. They had a combo C of Robert Parish and Clifford Ray. They had a decent bench. And Kareem carried the Lakers to a playoff series win in monster fashion. Maybe Kareem just got tired and was "only" able to average 30-16-4 on 61% shooting against the 1st team All-D center while the rest of the Lakers folded up like wet tortillas.

After the Portland series, Mo Lucas said, ""Jabbar would never give up. He's the most respected player in the league because he never bows his head. Such great inner strength! You may beat his team but you never beat him." Which says it all for me. Kareem was on the (vastly) inferior team and played his heart out in a series sweep. It kills me that the legend now is that Walton outplayed him. It wasn't true then, and it's not true now.

tsherkin wrote:I dunno man, KAJ got screwed out of at least one MVP, which would have had him winning an MVP in 60% of a decade in that period.

I'd be interested to here you specific point on that. Personally, I believe I've got him down as deserving 1 less MVP than he actually got, when comparing MVPs across eras, because I have Erving ahead of him in '75-76.

tsherkin wrote:Yeah, but the Lakers were also a crap team without a lot of help for Kareem until Magic got drafted and he was having all the impact that you like, he just flat-out didn't have the personnel to compete in the late 70s.

That's a legit viewpoint.

Thinking on my own thoughts here, I realize I'm trying to put myself in the place of people at the time. This of course makes it more than a little foolish to argue with TrueLA, but I have a hard time believing that Kareem's team success in the 80s didn't re-cast perception of Kareem from earlier times, rightly or wrongly.

TrueLAfan wrote:Kareem was on the (vastly) inferior team and played his heart out in a series sweep. It kills me that the legend now is that Walton outplayed him. It wasn't true then, and it's not true now.

An excellent post per usual. Curious your thoughts on Walton's impact relative to Kareem's. In particular considering the way the Blazers fell apart from ultraelite in '77-78 the moment Walton went down.