Sorry, but statistics say otherwise. His 05-06 season was cut short due to his back spasms. That's why I didn't include it as a "prime" season for him. And yes, based on statistics alone, you can argue that 06-07 McGrady was still in his prime. However, I disagree b/c his game had changed. He stopped attacking the basket aggressively and began settling for perimeter shots. No offense, but if you didn't want me to use it for comparative purposes, you shouldn't have included it as one of his "prime years". What's the point you're trying to make? Originally, it was that Horace Grant wasn't the same caliber of sidekick that Kobe was. And after I brought up Hardaway's numbers in comparison to Kobe's numbers (during the first 2 years of Shaq's "prime"), you say that Kobe wasn't Kobe until 99. As it stands right now, your thoughts don't make sense. If possible, could you clarify them? No, it's not. You think Mutombo is a better or equal defender than Olajuwon? Really? Do you know who the NBA's all-time leader in blocked shots is? Out of the top ten league leaders in steals in NBA history, do you know who the only non-guard/wing is? It also means more variety, which gives more relevant information. For example, look at Barry Sanders' Detroit Lions. They were a weak team but sported arguably the greatest running back in NFL history. He led the Magic to the finals in 95. If the Magic had won the series, would you argue that Shaq was in his prime in 95? From 93-95, Olajuwon was at his peak and IMO, was the best center the league has ever seen. Be honest...did you see Olajuwon during those years? Also, and I may be in the minority here, but Shaq benefited from the refs refusing to consistently call him for offensive fouls. In the finals against the Sixers, I saw Shaq elbow Mutombo's face and Mutombo was called for the foul.
dam the season needs to hurry up n start already. Wilt, KAJ n Russell > Hakeem n Shaq. fine. these arguments are so subjective anyway. we have no time machine to send these guys back in time and watch them put up godly numbers. imagine if Wilt grew up in the 80's n came into the league when the game of basketball wasnt an infant. He probably wouldnt dominate as he did in his era but would still have dam good numbers. I do have a hard time believing Russell would do as well. I see him having more of a Barkley or Paul Pierce kind of career if he played sometime in the last 3 decades but definitely wouldnt have 11 rings in 13 seasons. place hakeem, shaq, wilt, KAJ, or even detlef schrempf on those boston teams and i think they still get 11 rings maybe more. all that said. they did what they did and they did it in the era they played in. yeah, its obvious hakeem and shaq are more dominant and prolly more skilled than any center who came before them but they became who they were because of what these centers did in the past. taking everything into account. and since shaqs game didnt become shaqs game until AFTER hakeem took him under his wing... i rank them 1. Wilt 2. Russell 3. KAJ 4. Hakeem 5. Shaq if we are doing Time Rider rankings based on each player in their true primes then: 1. Shaq (can't overlook his dominance. just too much muscle and with everything hakeem taught him. he becomes the biggest threat to any defense. and his durability gives him the edge here.) 2. Hakeem (no homerism here. he had too many moves. too quick. stellar defense and altho shaq would plow thru him. he could still beat shaq. maybe the edge goes to hakeem here b/c he could hit his freethrows consistently and had a legitimate jump shot. but shaq is more durable. 3. KAJ 4. Wilt 5. Russell Just my opinion. thats all. im not stating anything as the holy word like many ppl on here are.
Playoffs and 99-00 Shaq say otherwise It was a part of his prime years because that's about the time he started to becoming successful. Fine if you want one season that defines Shaq's prime then it's 99-00. Now the argument is over since 94-95 Shaq and Prime Olajuwon can't come close to that. 96-99 Kobe wasn't as good as 99-Current Kobe. What don't you understand? Eddie Jones was taking the shots Kobe would usually take. If steals and blocks actually mattered, Allen Iverson would be one of the best perimeter defenders ever. No cause he's nowhere near as good as Shaq during 99-00 Shaq's peak>>>>>>Olajuwon's peak. I'll be honest I was born on 91(the 93 in my name is a mistake) so I've never seen him play live. However after watching some clips and highlights going by stats and accomplishments, Olajuwon is not as good as Shaq was I'm sure the sixers got a few calls in their favor as well. It all balances out in the end. If you've seen the series you'd know very well that Olajuwon would have died if he faced Shaq. Replace Olajuwon with Mutombo that series and the outcome is no different. Shaq was just so powerful, that with just one pu sh Mutombo was lifted off the ground and flew back a few feet. Olajuwon is even shorter and probably weighed less than Mutombo.
You can debate who was better forever. Generally you will probably find over time the players will be better, like Hakeem playing in an earlier era with what he had would of had huge numbers. In any era its an even playing field for those in it, so surely you gotta give it to Wilt for his dominance?
And that's the end of the discussion... By the way, in 2005, in an interview with Cigar Aficionado (I believe in 2005, correct me if I'm wrong), Michael Jordan was asked to create his "dream team". Here's what he said: "But if I had to pick a center, I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him."
Finally, someone who agrees with me. I didn't see Wilt or Russell live, but I've studied their careers extensively, and I agree with everything said above. You did see them play, so you have a realistic perspective, whereas I can only speculate.
Assuming you're under 50 years old, don't you ever say that Hakeem is better than Wilt and Bill Russell then. Jordan might be the greatest basketball player ever, but he's no genius when it comes to picking talent. Just ask Kwame Brown.
It boggles the mind that people put Russell in the top 3, when he was a mediocre offensive player AT BEST. Poor shooting percentage @47% (for a player reputed to have a magical sense for the game) 15 ppg for someone hauling in 20+ rb/game He should have had 15 ppg at 60% shooting on putbacks alone. --------- And anybody who puts Shaq over Wilt is crazed as well. Wilt was more athletic (faster, jumped higher, blocked way more shots, had more moves) and had better stamina and body control. He went a whole season without fouling out once, for Pete's sake - averaged 48.5 minutes a game. By the way, Wilt did the Shaq back'em in thing for one year - he averaged 50 ppg that season. So he was a better offensive and defensive player than Shaq. -------- My top 3 would be: 1. Wilt - more dominant and more ridiculous than anyone, ever. 2,3: Hakeem, Kareem
If you've read my arguments, you'll see that I tend to focus on the differences in eras and how it relates to the quality of players. Btw, its funny to see a kid tell me "don't you ever say..." Seriously...I laughed out loud. Incorrect. Jordan made a mistake because he misjudged Kwame Brown's potential. In that article, he had full access to the compete body of work of all the centers, and he chose Olajuwon.
Players are biased towards their own eras. If you want a sampling of what Wilt's peers thought of him, have a look here: http://wiltfan.tripod.com/quotes.html If contemporary accounts are to be taken as the truth then Wilt is flat out godlike.
Do you believe that Olajuwon's era, in general, had far better athletes than Wilt's? If not, how would you rate them?
8 teams means you play the top players more often, which can actually make it harder to win. More teams = more scrubs in the league = games against sorry teams like the Grizz and also = going from playing a top competitor all the time (i.e. Russell vs Wilt) to only seeing them at most, 4 to 5 times a season. And as far as HOF'ers coming off the bench, have you looked at the numbers for some of those HOF players? Please let me know which HOF Russell played with that was better than Pippen? Please list a team during the MJ era that had a better supporting cast than MJ did. Kareem also played at a competitive level until he was 40 without the benefit of taking a two year break. You don't think MJ taking a break helped prolong his career, and saved his legs for the 2nd 3-peat? You say Kareem played 5 more seasons to get his extra MVP, but he won his 6th MVP when he was 32/33 (his 11th season). He won his 5th in his 8th year. MJ didn't win his 5th one until he was 34/35 (his 13th season). In other words, you are being very misleading by claiming it took Kareem 5 additional seasons to accomplish something Jordan didn't. Replace Hakeem with a center from the CBA. Do the Rockets still win 50+ games and get to the 2nd round? Replace Kareem with a center from the CBA, and does his team still win 50+ games and get to the 2nd round. What about Magic, Bird, Duncan, Kobe, etc??? Yes, its a big difference from going to NBA champion to 2nd round team. But if you are the "undisputed GOAT", and we lose you and replace you with a scrub, I would expect my team to go into the shi&&er like most teams do when you lose a player of that caliber. The fact that this did not happen to Chicago shows you just how much support MJ had on his team, especually considering his teammate (Pippen) finished 3rd in MVP voting that season. No, I just find it funny that someone can claim a man is beyond the shadow of a doubt the best ever when there are other players that have accomplished just as much as him. This isn't Gretzky in hockey, who basically owns like every record. MJ has not won the most. He has not won the most accolades. His name isn't in the record book the most, etc.
The top two are Wilt and Kareem. Wilt was dominant like Ruth was dominant, completely dwarfing the accomplishments of his peers. I think it was his dominance of the game that actually hurt his career team accomplishments. He needed to be challenged. Things like being called out as selfish and then leading the league in assists show what he was capable of if he put his mind to it. One thing I haven't seen mentioned it that Wilt literally changed the game. The rulebook now is largely a result of the game no longer being fair once he started playing. Things like dunking in free throws and offensive goal tending were disallowed because of him. Unlike the rule changes they make now to showcase stars (like disallowing hand checking) they were changing the game to make the others able to compete with him. The only modern rule changes used to hamper players were getting rid of the illegal D to kill the ISO, and implementing the 5 second backdown rule so guys like Barkley and Mark Jackson couldn't abuse people as much any more. People talk about Kareem's longevity, but he was great from the beginning. He won the state championship in high school every year he played. He won the national championship in college every year he played. He won six championships and six MVPs in the NBA. The next three are Russell, Olajuwon and O'Neal in some order. The arguments about these three go in circles, but I would put them in the order I listed them.
What's the point? some people don't even know that Dream made it to the finals way before Jordan sniffed it. What's the point when they ignore the fact that the Magic got HIV and Larry Bird's back was broken which led the way to other teams to succeed? What's the point of talking to stupid teenagers who weren't old enough to walk when Nick Anderson and company beat MJ in the playoffs
HAKEEM AND RUSSELL!!!! HAHAHA only cause I really don't think Lew Alcindor was that good...maybe its cause I saw him when he was old and not as effective in the 80s at least compared to Olajuwon. I do believe Wilt is better than Russell at least physically, but then again I didn't see them play either...But I take Hakeem and Russell only cause I think Hakeem's offensive skill set is amazing, and Russell might be the best defender of all time.
Yea...I mean no doubt Russell's accomplishments are great and I do know Wilt is amazing. I guess part of it is my loyalty and love for the Rockets and Hakeem but I'd take Hakeem any day for the same reasons just like Jordan said. But if someone were to actually argue that Wilt and Russell were number 1 and 2 of top 3 centers and Hakeem was 3, I wouldn't have a strong argument against him. As for Kareem...I still don't think he was that good...then again I also have always hated the Lakers
I know you were born in '91 (so ur 18?) so you might have been young when you saw those guys but how the heck do you compare Ben Wallace to any of the 4 centers you just mentioned? I mean he had a couple years with some decent numbers 12-15 rebs, 3 blks, 2 stls...but no way would I ever put Wallace on a list with 4 future or current hall of famers (I think Rodman is the only one that isn't there yet, but I assume he'll make it mostly cause of his good defense and amazing rebounding stats for so long plus winning a few rings with jordan and others didn't hurt haha). Ben Wallace might make it to the Hall of Fame, I dont deny he was a good center for a couple seasons, but not a great one. And he only had at most 3-4 noteworthy seasons, after that he's just an overpriced scrub (Chuck Hayes is more valuable than he is right now). I highly doubt he'll be a first ballot, especially when he avg at best 9 pts a game. Ben Wallace...really?? Maybe you should watch some old NBA games of the 80s and 90s. While you're at it, watch some classics too. Haha...Wallace...really?? Next you'll be telling me Kobe is the best player ever to play in the NBA
Exactly.. A person who was born during Michael Jackson "Dangerous" won't know and would never know how it was when "Thriller" came out for this comparison, you had to be living when they had the Jackson 5 cartoon. Stop the love you save could be your own
