Peaks: Lebron vs Jordan vs Shaq vs Hakeem

Gregoire · Post #21 » by **Gregoire** » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:03 am

princeton_o wrote:I rate the four players in their prime, in the following order:

1. Jordan
2. Shaq
3. Lebron
4. Olajuwon

I thought about ranking Shaq #1, in his prime. He's the most physically dominating athlete the game has ever seen, aside from Chamberlain. His size, strength and athleticism made him impossible to defend. But he missed an unusually large number of games throughout his prime, and his free throw shooting was unacceptably poor.

Michael Jordan's level of play has never been matched, and likely never will be. He is the most competitive athlete to ever play a team sport. He has been described as a competitive sociopath, and I agree with this description. If he had been playing in today's era, which is becoming increasingly 3-point centric, I'm convinced he'd do whatever was required to become a top level 3 point shooter.

Lebron James is likely even more gifted athletically than michael jordan. He's taller, stronger, just as fast and has a similar vertical. He's become more proficient at the 3 pt shot than jordan ever was, and is probably a better, and more willing passer.

Unfortunately, Lebron will never be as competitive as Jordan. This is a standard that not even Kobe Bryant could reach, since Jordan's competitive mentality is very close to being pathological and dysfunctional outside of a pro sports context. The gap between Jordan and Lebron is most telling in the playoffs, and especially in the finals. I won't say any more than that, but the evidence speaks for itself.

As far as olajuwon, he is one of the most complete big men to ever play the game. His post game ranks with mchale's as the most creative and effective.

I rate Shaq at his peak, higher than Olajuwon simply because shaq was so much bigger and more athletic. Shaq was rumored to have weighed in, at his most, at 380+ lbs with the lakers. Yet, he still had the speed of a much smaller player. It's just not possible to guard a player who weighs nearly 400 lbs yet still has elite athleticism for a center.

I would choose Jordan over Shaq and Lebron by a slim margin.

Good list, Lebron - Shaq debate is very tough for me, especially because of current Lebron maybe better than in 2013.

Gregoire · Post #22 » by **Gregoire** » Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:33 am

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1265620&start=60
These thread may be relevant and interesting...

nolunch · Post #23 » by **nolunch** » Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:33 am

1. Shaq
2. Jordan
3. Hakeem
4. Lebron

Effercon · Post #24 » by **Effercon** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 2:50 am

Shaq. By the way, I think Jordan's peak was 88-91, not 90-92.

Gregoire · Post #25 » by **Gregoire** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:23 am

For me its very tough right now Lebron vs Shaq for number 2 spot... Assuming Lebrons peak is ( will be) in 2014

Gregoire · Post #26 » by **Gregoire** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 10:29 am

franktony wrote:Jordan
Shaq
Hakeem
Lebron

Lebron last? no way IMO...

B_Creamy · Post #27 » by **B_Creamy** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:24 pm

RayBan-Sematra wrote:As offensive anchors.
1. Jordan
2. Shaq
3. Lebron/Keem (not sure yet) (Lebron has the higher ceiling I think but Hakeem is arguably a less flawed scorer)

What do you mean "less flawed scorer"?

Gregoire · Post #28 » by **Gregoire** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:49 am

Effercon wrote:Shaq. By the way, I think Jordan's peak was 88-91, not 90-92.

88 - no way could be peak of MJ.

Rasho_libre · Post #29 » by **Rasho_libre** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:57 am

Gregoire wrote:
Effercon wrote:Shaq. By the way, I think Jordan's peak was 88-91, not 90-92.

88 - no way could be peak of MJ.

Yup, the goat didn't peak in his 3-4 season lol

Effercon · Post #30 » by **Effercon** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:50 am

Gregoire wrote:
Effercon wrote:Shaq. By the way, I think Jordan's peak was 88-91, not 90-92.

88 - no way could be peak of MJ.

1988-89 was his absolute peak, in my opinion.

Splits of 32.5pts/8reb (at the 2-guard)/8ast/2.9stl and shooting splits of 54/28/85.

Seriously, though, I think the thread creator didn't pick the four best individual seasons ever.

1) Shaq 2000
2) Jordan 1989
3) Oscar 1962
4) Wilt 1962

JordansBulls · Post #31 » by **JordansBulls** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:30 am

Effercon wrote:
Gregoire wrote:
Effercon wrote:Shaq. By the way, I think Jordan's peak was 88-91, not 90-92.

88 - no way could be peak of MJ.

1988-89 was his absolute peak, in my opinion.

Splits of 32.5pts/8reb (at the 2-guard)/8ast/2.9stl and shooting splits of 54/28/85.

Seriously, though, I think the thread creator didn't pick the four best individual seasons ever.

1) Shaq 2000
2) Jordan 1989
3) Oscar 1962
4) Wilt 1962

Kinda difficult to use 1989 MJ here when statistically and success wise he was better in 1991. Also I don't get the 2000 Shaq hype. Sure he was great in the season, but when you are 3-3 in a series on the verge of elimination down 15 in the 4th, he didn't win because of dominating that quarter but rather a team choking. To me that can't be the top peak of all time. Now had he dominated in that 4th leading his team back that is a different story. You should never be down in a game 7 in the 4th at your peak at home.

Effercon · Post #32 » by **Effercon** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:44 am

Actually, I'd like to take back my prior post. My actual rankings are:

1) Shaq 2000
2) Jordan 1989
3) Hakeem 1994
4) Jordan 1991
5) Wilt 1962
6) Oscar 1962
7) Jordan 1988
8) Kareem 1971
9) Wilt 1967
10) Magic 1982

Yep, LeBron 2013 doesn't even crack the top 10, in my opinion.

aol4532 · Post #33 » by **aol4532** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:17 am

Are we talking about 1-year peak or 4-year peak. If this is 1-year peak, then

1) Hakeem, no one in this group could have done what Hakeem did in 93-94, in his place. Only prime Shaq could have come close, Lebron and Jordan wouldn't have even come close(it's like asking whether Jordan could have won even 1 championship without Pippen or Lebron without Wade).

If you watch the way Hakeem dominated Ewing in one-on-one situations on youtube(even more so when you considered that the Knicks were much more aware of Hakeem, basically, will not allow him to get comfortable without some sort of slap, reaching in, double-team, etc, whereas Hakeem doesn't seem to worry much about Ewing at all. Ewing's numbers would probably be even lower, if the Rockets had decided to defend Ewing the same way the Knicks defended Hakeem. No doubles and Hakeem would have dominated Ewing the same way he did Robinson. Give credit to Riley, for some reasons, he were very aware of Hakeem's ability, even though his domination of Robinson came the year after), pretty much only prime Shaq can hang with Hakeem.

2) prime Shaq

3/4 Jordan/Lebron

If we're talking 4-year peak, then it's still:

1) Hakeem

2) Jordan - if you use Jordan's 3 years when he won the 1st 3 championships as his peak + 88-89 as his 4-year peak, then you have to ask, could 4-year peak Hakeem done the same? The answer is yes, whereas you cannot assume that Jordan could have won 2 championships(94-95 was a good idea of how Jordan would have done with Clyde, and NO starting quality big, not even Thorpe, since he was traded), in Hakeem's place.

3) Lebron - for all the talk about Wade's injury, he was still as good as Clyde when Hakeem got him(Wade played less minutes but higher PER last year. They both made NBA 3rd-team. Can't use the postseason as an excuse, because he got the surgery before the season started, and if he was good enough to put up those numbers in the regular season, then you can't use the same excuse again in the postseason). 3 years ago, it's no contest. Add Bosh and you can see Lebron got overwhelmingly more help. Unless Lebron wins at least 1 more championship with this group, count that + the last 3 years, then his 4-year peak is not as good as Hakeem's.

4) I think Shaq is the weakest here. His 00-01 postseason was about as good as the 99-00 season, but he missed too many games in the regular season. The other two he wasn't as good.

aol4532 · Post #34 » by **aol4532** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:19 am

Are we talking about 1-year peak or 4-year peak. If this is 1-year peak, then this is easily:

1) Hakeem, no one in this group could have done what Hakeem did in 93-94, in his place. Only prime Shaq could have come close, Lebron and Jordan wouldn't have even come close(it's like asking whether Jordan could have won even 1 championship without Pippen, and David West instead of Grant, or Lebron without Wade, and David West instead of Bosh).

If you watch the way Hakeem dominated Ewing in one-on-one situations on youtube(even more so when you considered that the Knicks were much more aware of Hakeem, basically, will not allow him to get comfortable without some sort of slap, reaching in, double-team, etc, whereas Hakeem doesn't seem to worry much about Ewing at all. Ewing's numbers would probably be even lower, if the Rockets had decided to defend Ewing the same way the Knicks defended Hakeem. No doubles and Hakeem would have dominated Ewing the same way he did Robinson. Give credit to Riley, for some reasons, he were very aware of Hakeem's ability, even though his domination of Robinson came the year after), pretty much only prime Shaq can hang with Hakeem.

2) prime Shaq

3/4 Jordan/Lebron

If we're talking 4-year peak, then it's still:

1) Hakeem(92-96)

2) Jordan - if you use Jordan's 3 years when he won the 1st 3 championships as his peak + 88-89 as his 4-year peak, then you have to ask, could 4-year peak Hakeem done the same? The answer is yes, whereas you cannot assume that Jordan could have won 2 championships(94-95 was a good idea of how Jordan would have done with Clyde, and NO starting quality big, not even Thorpe, since he was traded), in Hakeem's place.

3) Lebron - for all the talk about Wade's injury, he was still as good as Clyde when Hakeem got him(Wade played less minutes but higher PER last year. They both made NBA 3rd-team. Can't use the postseason as an excuse, because he got the surgery before the season started, and if he was good enough to put up those numbers in the regular season, then you can't use the same excuse again in the postseason). 3 years ago, it's no contest. Add Bosh and you can see Lebron got overwhelmingly more help. Unless Lebron wins at least 1 more championship with this group, count that + the last 3 years, then his 4-year peak is not as good as Hakeem's.

4) I think Shaq is the weakest here. His 00-01 postseason was about as good as the 99-00 season, but he missed too many games in the regular season. The other two he wasn't as good.

JordansBulls · Post #35 » by **JordansBulls** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:23 am

Plenty of guys could of have done what Hakeem did and win a title when the defending champions lose the best player in the league and the #1 seed in your conference who is your nememis is out of the playoffs early on. Now had Hakeem got thru the Sonics and Bulls that would be a different story. Hakeem had HCA in each series and was even down 3-2 in a series with it, something that didn't happen with some all time greats with HCA.

aol4532 · Post #36 » by **aol4532** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:33 am

JordansBulls wrote:Plenty of guys could of have done what Hakeem did and win a title when the defending champions lose the best player in the league and the #1 seed in your conference who is your nememis is out of the playoffs early on. Now had Hakeem got thru the Sonics and Bulls that would be a different story. Hakeem had HCA in each series and was even down 3-2 in a series with it, something that didn't happen with some all time greats with HCA.

Best player in the league, says who? Don't make empty claims when it's exactly what we're trying to debate.

What's not debatable is that Jordan had a very talented cast around him(and it's not even a hypothetical, they won 55 games exactly the year that Jordan missed, so you don't even have to ask, how good would that team be without Jordan), and by reasonable assumption, you cannot say that Hakeem's team could have won the same number of games without him(in fact, as I've shown before, that team would have competed for the #1 pick. Compare that team without Hakeem to last year's Cavs and they are not any better).

You seem to keep ignoring that the reason that prime Hakeem wouldn't be able to beat prime Jordan is not because Jordan is better, it's because of Pippen and co. are more talented than his cast. Prime Hakeem is easily better than prime Jordan(2 points at least), but that doesn't matter if Pippen, Grant and Phil(even if he's worth 1 more point than Rudy, that's still a pretty big difference) are better.

Plenty of guys could have done what Hakeem did, who? Name me a guy who won a championship without another Hall-of-Famer on his team.

JordansBulls · Post #37 » by **JordansBulls** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:36 am

aol4532 wrote:
JordansBulls wrote:Plenty of guys could of have done what Hakeem did and win a title when the defending champions lose the best player in the league and the #1 seed in your conference who is your nememis is out of the playoffs early on. Now had Hakeem got thru the Sonics and Bulls that would be a different story. Hakeem had HCA in each series and was even down 3-2 in a series with it, something that didn't happen with some all time greats with HCA.

Best player in the league, says who? Don't make empty claims when it's exactly what we're trying to debate.

What's not debatable is that Jordan had a very talented cast around him(and it's not even a hypothetical, they won 55 games exactly the year that Jordan missed, so you don't even have to ask, how good would that team be without Jordan), and by reasonable assumption, you cannot say that Hakeem's team could have won the same number of games without him(in fact, as I've shown before, that team would have competed for the #1 pick. Compare that team without Hakeem to last year's Cavs and they are not any better).

Plenty of guys could have done what Hakeem did, who? Name me a guy who won a championship without another Hall-of-Famer on his team.

Jordan did not have a very talented cast when he first won his first title, that team would have been a lottery team without him. Not to mention MJ was the only allstar on the team in 1991 when he won and actually beat a 2x defending back to back champions to win. Hakeem lucked out by not having to deal with a 3x defending champions and the #1 seed in his conference. Like I said anyone could have won in those circumstances. Now had Hakeem dominated the competition and beat Seattle and the 3x defending champion Bulls with MJ that would be a different story. He barely got by the Knicks and was even down 3-2 in the series on the verge of elimination in game 6.

B_Creamy · Post #38 » by **B_Creamy** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:41 am

Effercon wrote:Actually, I'd like to take back my prior post. My actual rankings are:

1) Shaq 2000
2) Jordan 1989
3) Hakeem 1994
4) Jordan 1991
5) Wilt 1962
6) Oscar 1962
7) Jordan 1988
8) Kareem 1971
9) Wilt 1967
10) Magic 1982

Yep, LeBron 2013 doesn't even crack the top 10, in my opinion.

Peak by it's definition denotes you can only have one year for one player.

Also '82 Magic? Why? The rebounds and steals?

aol4532 · Post #39 » by **aol4532** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:44 am

JordansBulls wrote:
aol4532 wrote:
JordansBulls wrote:Plenty of guys could of have done what Hakeem did and win a title when the defending champions lose the best player in the league and the #1 seed in your conference who is your nememis is out of the playoffs early on. Now had Hakeem got thru the Sonics and Bulls that would be a different story. Hakeem had HCA in each series and was even down 3-2 in a series with it, something that didn't happen with some all time greats with HCA.

Best player in the league, says who? Don't make empty claims when it's exactly what we're trying to debate.

What's not debatable is that Jordan had a very talented cast around him(and it's not even a hypothetical, they won 55 games exactly the year that Jordan missed, so you don't even have to ask, how good would that team be without Jordan), and by reasonable assumption, you cannot say that Hakeem's team could have won the same number of games without him(in fact, as I've shown before, that team would have competed for the #1 pick. Compare that team without Hakeem to last year's Cavs and they are not any better).

Plenty of guys could have done what Hakeem did, who? Name me a guy who won a championship without another Hall-of-Famer on his team.

Jordan did not have a very talented cast when he first won his first title, that team would have been a lottery team without him. Not to mention MJ was the only allstar on the team in 1991 when he won and actually beat a 2x defending back to back champions to win. Hakeem lucked out by not having to deal with a 3x defending champions and the #1 seed in his conference. Like I said anyone could have won in those circumstances. Now had Hakeem dominated the competition and beat Seattle and the 3x defending champion Bulls with MJ that would be a different story. He barely got by the Knicks and was even down 3-2 in the series on the verge of elimination in game 6.

Scottie Pippen with 20 PER and Grant with 17 PER(same as Thorpe), and Phil is not very talented? That's more talented than Hakeem's cast in the 2nd championship(again Thorpe was traded, and no Phil), and not even close to as bad as Hakeem's cast in 93-94, try again.

Effercon · Post #40 » by **Effercon** » Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:51 am

B_Creamy wrote:
Effercon wrote:Actually, I'd like to take back my prior post. My actual rankings are:

1) Shaq 2000
2) Jordan 1989
3) Hakeem 1994
4) Jordan 1991
5) Wilt 1962
6) Oscar 1962
7) Jordan 1988
8) Kareem 1971
9) Wilt 1967
10) Magic 1982

Yep, LeBron 2013 doesn't even crack the top 10, in my opinion.

Peak by it's definition denotes you can only have one year for one player.

Also '82 Magic? Why? The rebounds and steals?

Regarding the peaks: in that case:

1) Shaq 2000
2) Jordan 1989
3) Hakeem 1994
4) Wilt 1962
5) Oscar 1962
6) Kareem 1971
7) Magic 1982
8) LeBron 2013
9) Duncan 2003
10) Bird 1985

And regarding Magic in 1982: 18.6/9.6/9.5/2.7 with a ring. Yeah. Would've been ahead of Oscar 1962 due to pace discrepancy, but Oscar 1962 is just so damned iconic that I had to put it ahead of Magic 1982. However, I put Jordan 1989 ahead of Oscar 1962 because in spite of how iconic Oscar's season was, Jordan 1989 is just so much better that it's not even funny.

Highest peak in last 25 years