did anyone else just catch pti talking about hakeem's pending retirement. they have him in the second tier of centers who were great and won a championship. the first five were wilt, russell, jabbar, shaq, and walton. i believe at the end they even added mikan into that group. wow, they had nothing negative to say about him but it was a disgrace. i beleive they said "He had some nice offensive moves" that's it?, watch some video. F%*k them!!!
Chen, I understand what you are saying. So, to anwer your question...in Russell's era, all Hakeem needed was his turnaround J , stellar rebounding and quickness to dominate scoring...he had all those day one in the NBA. Maybe you are right that Hakeem wouldn't have developed the dream shake against weaker defense, but that is part of my point. He did develop it, and so back to you is the queston: Would Russell have the size, speed and shooting ability to ever do it, in any era?
Good question...Based on what I've seen and read, I think he will dominate but a different way Hakeem does...through leadership, athleticism, and tenacity....not all great centers can shoot as well or have the quickness like hakeem...shaq uses pure strength and size but can't shoot worth a lick..Kareem is just so damn tall he hooks over people, that sky hook is more automatic than hakeem's fadaway...so on and so forth...
Come to think of it, its unfair for you to ask that, you are essentially comparing players from two different eras with each other...its like saying, is the man who invented the wheel smarter or albert einstein? You can't compare, its all relative...
If I was a GM and had four complete losers for starters, who would I pick from the history of basketball to be my fifth starter? Hakeem. He is absolutely one of the four best centers in league history because he is the single most dominate player out of any position in the history of the NBA. If you want a one man team, Hakeem is the closest thing to it. How many players won the NBA championship as the leading scorer on team, the leading defensive player on the team, the leading rebounder on the team, and the go-to guy in crunch time? Chamberlin, Russell, Jabbar, Magic, Bird, Jordon, O'neal, no one can say that. I'm not saying that Hakeem is the best to ever play the game, I'm saying he is the most dominate single person to play the game. That should be his claim to eternal fame.
Olajuwon was a great nba center and puttin his name up w/ the big boys is true. The guy can still play at 39 and in his prime he was the best there exc. for a certain chicago bulls star. Once he was gone, he went buck wild. He's solid @ #4. No argument from me.
I think Hakeem had the best all round skills of any center ever to play the game. He was a great attacker but even stronger on defense. His dream shake revolutionized the game. He was not as dominant as Wilt who I consider to be a better player because of his unique scoring ability but Hakeem had tremendous skills which were unmatched by anyone else.
I'm so sick of hearing people criticize professional players for "overstaying their prime" Who the hell cares? It's only selfishness those who think that. The reason we loved Hakeem, Jordan etc. is one of the main reasons they still continue to play. The may not play up to our "High Standards", but they love the game and play for that love, not for you selfish a$$es. I know, and most of the people on this board know, that Hakeem is one of the top 4 centers of all time no matter how you look at it. And I'm sorry for you Shaq lovers, any center who cannot hit a free throw consistantly or make a 10 footer is never going to be a top 5 center in my book. So quit worrying what he did the past 5 years and remember the man for who he actually is. We'll miss you DREAM!!!
I think Hakeem is the most underrated basketball player of all time. Do you remember all of the haking,bumping,mugging and abuse he took when he played and never got the call. It's difficult to compare eras but let's face it, Russell,wilt and kareem were the only centers of their own eras. Big men were not common in the old days, especially one that could consistantly knock down a 15 footer. Do you honestly think any one of these guys could play defense on Hakeem? I don't think so, his quickness and footwork along with his jumpshot would frustrate all of these guys because in their era those qualities were not common and not even thought of. Hakeem could play defense on any of these guys, his quick hands and his anticipation to block shots says so. He is the all time shot block leader. In Hakeem's day, he had better big men to play against. Ewing, Mourning, Robinson, hell he even played against kareem before the lakers won three in a row and dominated. I hope he does retire and finds his way back to Houston as a big man coach and teach Yao a thing or two or three and so on.
are you saying these things as a blind fan or are you looking at this objectively? Just curious if you have ever seen Wilt, Russell or Kareem play at their prime? I'm sure Hakeem will probably out play them if he can travel back in time, but you can't do that can you? What does that really prove? If hakeem was born at that time and dominated those guys, that's another story. You are really comparing apples to oranges...the game changed so much over the years.
That was the most senseless piece of bullsh!t I ever heard. Number 7 all time???? Behind Shaq, Walton, and Mikan???? WALTON????????? MIKAN??????????? I was ready for those guys to applaud his career and place him in that upper echelon of centers (in no particular order) but they slapped him in the face. They put him on the same level as Willis Reed, Unseld, Malone, Robinson, etc. Those @$$hole$ just lost a ton of credibility in regards to basketball IMO. Happy trails Dream
Don't forget. You you have to define "greatest." We're talking about two factors: Rings (enough said...), and Stats (defense, offense, whatever...) When I saw that ESPN article, "Olajuwon is thought to be among the greatest centers of all time, just outside the famed circle of Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Wilt Chamberlain" I didn't question it ONCE. But I knew that some CC.net fans would... People forget (homeys) that prior to 1995 (yes, 1995), Hakeem was just considered a very good center. Not a legend, not the most dominate player, just a very good player. A solid All-Star. EPSN, NBC Sports, NY Times, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, you name it didn't consider Hakeem "great" until after he won his 2nd championship. The ESPN Sports Reporters had a feature story about it after the 95 Finals. It was very strange seeing a story about Hakeem on the Sports Reporters, normally featuring personalities like Cal Ripken, Emmit Smith, Greg Maddux, Joe Montana, and Michael Jordan. No one from Houston had EVER, and I mean EVER reached that pentacle before in the eyes of the * national media * as Hakeem did during 1995. Warren Moon, was the closest. Now remember, even when the Sports Reporters ran the feature, they were just discussing weather or not Hakeem should be *** considered *** as ONE of the "greatest" centers of all time. Not THE GREATEST. Just ONE of the "greatest." So please don't' use STATS as the end-all, be-all qualifiers of "greatness" And don't use CHAMPIONSHIPS as the qualifier of "greatness" either. Because if you do, then Hakeem falls short on all accounts. Greatness is an elusive term. It can't be defined easily. I have NO problem thinking that Hakeem was the 4th best center of all time. I can live with that. But, guess what? After Shaq's career is over, he will be considered "greater" than Hakeem. Sorry, it will happen, which sucks! Because, in the end, stats, rings, and dominance will be the determining factor. Not, "But Hakeem beat Shaq in the Finals!" P.S. Regarding the "dominated their era" argument. Respect your elders young man! We all learn from the ones before us. Just as Michael learned from Julius Ervin. Hakeem learned from Moses Malone. To say that Hakeem would have dominated the 50's is just short sighted about the knowledge of the game (coaches/players) during that time. Do you think that there would have been big-men coaches back then saying to Hakeem, "Today we're going to work on your Wilt Chamberlain moves. Tomorrow, your legendary Bill Russell moves." No. They wouldn't exist to emulate and learn from.
But why? You just got done saying not to use championships or stats to quantify which center was the best, or second best, or third best ever. If we don't use objective data to compare the players, how do we rank them? You seem most impressed by what the East Coast media has to say. I think that creates a deplorable situation in which no Houston player would ever be given his due. Hell, most of the East Coast media still thinks the ****ing Knicks should have won the 1994 NBA Finals. My point was never that Hakeem was the "greatest", just that I find it completely unacceptable to say he belongs "just outside" the circle of Russell, Chamberlain, and Abdul-Jabbar. I stand by that. Russell won a ton of championships and changed the way defensive basketball was played. I think it helped he played with Sam Jones, Bob Cousy and John Havlicek etc etc-- he certainly wasn't carrying the Celtics to championships the way Olajuwon carried a team with Kenny Smith and Otis Thorpe to a title. And Olajuwon forced a profound change in the game, too: he almost single-handedly introduced the idea of the mobile center with 17-ft range who could face the basket and score. Chamberlain's statistics and general dominance are unparalleled, but he wasn't able to win until his surrounding cast was improved far beyond what Hakeem had to work with. Abdul-Jabbar's primary qualifications for membership in the "elite circle" seem to be longevity, scoring, and riding Magic Johnson's coattails. I just don't think of any of those three as better than Olajuwon. Hakeem competed in an era where even the tomato cans were 6'11" and physical and where top-level centers-- Ewing, Robinson, O'Neal, etc-- were far more common than what the other three centers had to deal with. No center dominated the post-Kareem era like Hakeem did. I'm sorry his reputation doesn't rise to the level of East Coast media fawning you'd like, but I could not possibly be made to care less about what a Knicks homer thinks about the greatest centers of all time. We all saw Hakeem's career and we know what he had to offer, and I absolutely sneer at the idea that we should settle for Hakeem being lumped in "just below" the annointed Big Three. It should be the Big Four.
1. MJ - Best ever 2. Wilt- Put Wilt in today's NBA (with no big men) and he would dominate 3. Magic- Never played with Losers but anyone who could play all 5 positions would be ok in my book 4. Shaq- Flame on all you want but with no big men, he is unstoppable 5. Any of the following centers (Kareem, Dream, Duncan, Russell). Again with no big men a dominating center can take you a long ways
Sorry, Brian. I should have been more clear. I mean that you should not use rings alone. Or stats alone. Or, defense alone. Or, offense alone as a measure of "greatness." For example. Some say, Abdul-Jabbar is the all-time-best because he has the most points. Or, some say, Bill Russell is the best since he has 11 rings. I think that simplifies that players achievements by just using one factor. A centers (or any player) greatness should reside in the aggregate of his total game over his whole career; which includes his stats AND rings. When all is said and done; many years from now. I think that Hakeem will be one of the top 5 centers of all time. And Shaq will be in that list too. Who had greater skill? Hakeem. Who had greater dominance? Shaq. It all averages out to some level of "greatness." And if Shaq ends up winning more than 3 rings, then he will just add to that greatness. East coast media? I was talking about ANY media OUTSIDE of HOUSTON. And where did you get "Knicks homer" from? No one mentioned Patrick Ewing.
Don't you remember the ad that was run by Sports Illustrated...it showd Sampson blocking KAreem shot and the caption read ... "How does it feel to be 7'2" and a little too short. Sports Illustrated. Get the feeling."
What about even being more subjective than that and just look at their abilities? External factors like teammates and the era in which the player was in the league will play an enormous part in both stats and rings. The way I look at it, in my opinion, it's more likely that Hakeem could do the thing's Russell could do (play good defense, rebound) than Russell could do the things Hakeem could do (put the ball on the floor, have the footwork of a guard, make fadeway jumpshots from behind the backboard with regularity, etc...). I don't see how anyone can say Russell's basketball ability even comes close to Dream's. And I understand a lot of that is just a result of the game evolving, but what are you gonna say? That Russell could do all the things Hakeem could do if he entered the league in the 80's? You could say that, but I think it would be quite a stretch.
