Pretty cool, Bob*... I noticed there's no Drexler, though. Even so, Rockets seem to win more times than not. x34
Sam-So because his stats were down from 95, Shaq has regressed??? Come on. Shaq is a much better passer from down low right now than he was in 95. And you actually think Clyde in 95 (out of his prime) was better than Kobe now?
Sam-So because his stats were down from 95, Shaq has regressed??? Come on. Shaq is a much better passer from down low right now than he was in 95. I agree that he's a better passer than he used to be. He's not better than Hakeem was, though. As for regression - let me put it this way. I don't think Shaq is any BETTER now than he was back then. You'd have a hard time convincing me otherwise. And if Shaq's similar to his old skill level, then he's still not as good as Hakeem at his peak. And you actually think Clyde in 95 (out of his prime) was better than Kobe now? Clyde wasn't exactly old then - 32, right? I wouldn't call that over the hill. His best year might have been 1991 when he went to the Finals versus the Bulls, but it's not like he was chopped liver in 95. IMO he was still the #2 SG in the league, after MJ. And he definitely wouldn't be "shut down" like you said. I would personally take 1995 Clyde's veteran savvy in a seven game series over Kobe this year, but then I'm not a Kobe fan. I concede that it's a very close matchup (as is Hakeem/Shaq). Also Cassell which would you consider the top 5 NBA teams of all time. That's a tough question! Probably the 2nd run Bulls, who won 69 and 72 games in consecutive seasons. The 60s Celtics with all those Hall-of-Famers. The 80s Lakers with Magic, Kareem, and Worthy. Not sure about the other 2! I'd like to include the 95 Rockets in there, but that's the homer in me talking. Also how do you think Fish and Hunter would stack up against Smith and Cassell? Please, Sammy's a much better player than Fisher!!! And in a choice of 3 point specialists, I'd take Kenny over Hunter any day.
Cassell besides Savvy what else do you think Drexler had over Kobe? Also would you say Old Penny was better than present Kobe? And why?
those are good teams to compare each team was lacking a good 4 and were coming of championships hakeem was better ...period...I don't think you can argue that point however, the Kobe vs. Clyde would be interesting...Clyde would have the advantage in a long series because he could lean on kobe good topic
I think Clyde could put some D on Kobe and make Kobe play low post D, which appears to be his weakness. Second, Dream's outside shooting would draw Shaq away from the basket opening up the lane. Mario and Rick Fox, draw, Kenny Smith/Sam Cassell vs. Lindsey/Fisher slight advantage Rocks Bench, Toss up, I don't remember half of the cats. Chucky Brown.
You conveniently forgot that the Rockets used to beat the Jackson-coached Bulls with Jordan during the Bulls' dynasty and finished with an advantage in the series.
It looks like the site uses rosters set on the first day of the season. So, if you take the '95-'96 Rockets, you can basically get the team (without Maxwell) that won the championship.
Did you just start watching basketball? How could Shaq be better now than the guy who had the single most impressive playoff run in NBA history? Do you know how many clutch free throws Hakeem hit that year? Drexler wouldn't guard Bryant, Elie would. The Junkyard Dog would rough him up, to be sure. He would spot up for threes on offense so Bryant couldn't play the passing lanes. If not, Drexler would post Bryant up all day. And the Horry of '95 was light years better than the Horry of today.
Someone stated when i asked who would win Rockets 95 or Lakers 01.. He stated Olajuwon would cancel out Shaq and the Rockets could not guard Kobe.....Lakers have much better role players off bench the Rockets starting 5 is better but past that forget it Drexler does not play good defense (I guess he means not good enough to gaurd Kobe or whoever) shaq is way better now......you dont get worse.....you get better/smarter Shaq in Orlando had no help/experienced players like he does now.......that is why the Magic got swept....too young for the finals basically he thinks the Lakers would prevail in 6 or maybe 7. What do you guys feel about these comments? What do you think about each of these comments Sam Cassell?
He also mentioned on a comparison of Drexler and Kobe... Clyde liked the running game kobe likes to drive in traffic both could score at will but Kobe could score much easier Drexler had to score a lot of jumpers and layups on fast breaks for his points kobe can take over a game......drexler did not have that in his arsenal he was a slasher/fast breaking player who liked to dunk on people in breaks Kobe shoots outside more What do you think of a comparison of 95 Drexler and Prime Drexler vs Present Kobe as well?? Cassell? Anyone?
What do you guys think about those comments above in bold, such as when he says, "Drexler couldnt play D, and he couldnt take over a game like kobe, etc...." Do you agree, disagree?
"i really did not pay much attention to Clyde since Mj was in his prime at the same time" 'Nuff said.
Hey Verse or Cassell what do you guys think? What does anyone else think about those comments of Drexler vs Kobe and Hakeem vs Shaq and how Shaq got smarter and all....? anyone ?
ok, i've waxed long and hard on this one, and came up with this: 2001 diesel vs. 1995 dream well, there's no way in hell dream stops shaq from piling up 30 points, even in his prime. shaq is simply too big and too good offensively for that. and the 1995 dream was still susceptible to being run over by bigger men. that said, shaq of 01 didn't go out and cover men on the perimeter. hakeem would have sat and drained 15 footers till the sun didn't shine. shaq would eventually have to either a) give up 40+ to dream or b) open up the lane for drexler to post up kobe/rick fox. shaq's passing was/is far superior to dream's. shaq's rebounding however, was a little weaker than dream's. shaq's team defense was much weaker than hakeem's. but when i remember the way shaq played against hakeem in 94 (orlando v houston), i know that he could have his way offensively. respect for hakeem? well, he had it, that's for sure. in fact, that may be his biggest weapon against hakeem in this lineup: he may not plow over the dream and draw charges...instead going to drop steps and jump hooks. but, then dream is a wise, cagey player. overall effect on the game: EVEN 2001 Kobe v 1995 Clyde: kobe's in his prime in 01, and would have little to no trouble scoring on clyde. nevermind the fact that clyde was never known for stepping up in the spotlight (finals v jordan was an embarassment for clyde). that said, kobe would have to get past the goaltender (dream). would he be smart enough to dish to the diesel??? who knows... they had a certain amount of issues in that regular season...and clyde may have been able to entice him into a one-on-one match. in that case, kobe may have scored 30, but ultimately hurt his team more than he would have helped them. 95 clyde was older, yet wiser. slower, yet stronger in the post. just ask jeff hornacek. clyde's continued posting of "horny" was enough to make jerry sloan pull horny out of the lineup for utah...which had a huge impact on the outcome of that series, imo. clyde could have posted kobe the same way. if clyde were to post kobe like he did horny, he could go for 25, easy. that's less points than kobe would've gotten, but much, much more effective points. putting rick fox on clyde? BIG MISTAKE. fox gives up too many inches and too many lbs to clyde. clyde would go for 30+, then. '01 horry vs. '95 clyde? horry could hold clyde in the post, no doubt. but could he stick with him on the perimeter? i doubt it. horry's lateral movement has decreased since 95 enough that clyde could have driven and spun off of him with relative ease, imo. keep in mind that shaq couldn't (and wouldn't) help out much, since he had to worry about the "floating dream". i must say, though, that time is the best teacher. clyde had already - at this point in his career - faced a better kobe bryant, when he went against jordan (bulls v blazers). he got a taste of the limelight then. i'd have to believe he'd be on point for this one. kobe...well...kobe f*cking talented enough to still go for 30, but i can see him falling into a 1 on 1 battle with clyde and not allowing the diesel to get off against hakeem. big matchup here: OVERALL EFFECT ON THE GAME: ADVANTAGE CLYDE. EVERYONE ELSE: they're all role players beyond the big wo, but the most intriguing matchup among the role players would be 2001 D-Fish v 1995 Sam I Am! D-Fish, imo, would have torn cassell a new *******. cassell was extremely undisciplined on defense, and d-fish was shooting 75% from 3 point range that playoff run. on the other hand, cassell and his herky jerky style would have been effective vs. fisher. effective enough to drop 10-12 points, which is all the rocks would probably need out of him, anyway. COACHING: hands down phil is a better coach. but rudy discovered something in that matchup against utah: invert the offense. clyde posting with dream floating would be a serious monkey wrench in the system. and i'm not so sure that phil would want to adjust to that immediately. phil's known for letting his players figure it out. who's to say? then again, rudy's penchant for the ridiculous may have kept kenny smith in the game against d-fisher...that equal fisher going off for 25. FINAL LINE: Lakers in 7....on a shaq dunk/no-call charge. why? home court advantage. the rockets would've come into that series with the lesser record, and i believe, that the home crowd would have made enough difference to swing some crucial calls the lakers' way (especially shaq on the charges). even so, it would be one HELLUVA series. i don't believe any game would be decided by more than 5 points.
Hey Verse how can you fault Clyde for losing to MJ that year, Clyde did not have as quality support player as Mj did in Scottie Pippen. I dont think that it was just the fact MJ outplayed Drexler, he obviously outdid Drexler but Drexler I wouldnt say was EMBARRASED, the Blazers still managed to win 2 games and made a close game in Game 6. Drexler did carry his team into the finals...However I felt the Bulls were just the better team in 92, and they had a better second star/support player in Pippen. Also I dont understand how you can say Fisher would torch Cassell or even a vet like Kenny Smith, Fisher barely outplays half pg's in the league now and seems to benefit alot off of Shaq passing out of the double team where Fisher seems to always be WIDE OPEN atleast 5 times a game. Also I dont beleive Shaq is really much of a better passer than Hakeem, I beleive Hakeem had more assists, and made passes out of the double team much like Shaq does to the open shooters today. I see them as pretty much even in that department. Also how can you say Shaq is much better today, he had better stats back in 95 when he actually went up against GOOD CENTERS in 95 such as a Prime Drob, Ewing, Hakeem, Alonzo Mourning, and still came up with better scoring, rebounding....the only thing he didnt have back then was better passing skills....which is why he is slightly better today...Yet Shaq did better against better competition back in 95, although stats dont usually tell everything I just beleive that Shaq is basically the same overall in terms of how he would play against Hakeem versus how he played him in 95. I personally think the Lakers in general are overrated, and this is why I ask for this comparison and hypothetical matchup to see what most of you would say. I feel the Lakers 01 are very close and similiar to this Rocket team yet not as solid all around. Id say Rockets in 6.
