yao can't even hold dream's jockstrap at this point.....he's not even in the same hemisphere as dream....but who knows...one day, if the refs start giving him royal treatement things might change. Otherwise, i don't see yao becoming a true take-the-game-over superstar.
you can't compaire the 2. Yao is great, But he is nowere near Hakeem. when he gets us to the finals and then dominate everybody and wins us a championship we can start compairing. Yao has the advantage of playing basketbal when he was a child. hakeem started playing when he was 16 or 17. Don't compaire these two it is not fair for Yao
I think it's pretty safe to say that both of those are completely intertwined. I wish these Yao vs. Hakeem threads would just go away (I wish a lot of other threads would go away too, but I digress). What purpose do they serve. Both of these guys are Rockets. They never played together or against each other. We know Hakeem was a great player. I'd like to say that Yao is a great player too, but he hasn't proved it yet. He's got plenty of years ahead to prove himself, but he's not there yet. These threads always degenerate into the "Yao won't ever, ever, ever be as good as Hakeem" vs. "But what about this rationalization, and what about that rationalization" camps. It just turns the thread into a bunch of needless bickering, and ends up bringing yet more negativity to the board. Can we all just leave it that Yao needs to prove himself on the court. Maybe he will be a great big man, but he needs to do it on the court first. And then maybe we can go into comparisons.
Not so fast. They do have similar command of the English language, you know. Okay, that was wrong. I'm gonna go stand in the corner now.
meh, a very nice job with the stats, and a topic that is at least a bit different from the usual Yao/Hakeem threads, but I've got to ask you... did you see Akeem (when he was Akeem) play his first 2 years in the NBA? I'm not talking about what little may have been on ESPN Classic, I'm asking if you saw him play during his first 2 years in the league, and in college, for that matter. (although that may not be germane to the topic, unless you want to get into backgrounds pre-NBA) Akeem made remarkable improvement during his first 2 years in the league. Heck, he improved amazingly during his 2nd season, to the point where, in the playoffs, he was a monster. He wasn't just dunking, making layups, and shooting within 5 feet of the basket... he was hitting mid-range jumpers, and doing it a lot. By the time the Rockets got to the Conference Finals against the Lakers, a team, unlike the Rockets (who were forced to use Robert Reid, a 3, as their point), that really was loaded with all-stars, Pat Riley's main focus was to contain Akeem. I love Yao and, the basketball gods willing, he's going to be one of the great centers of his generation, and should help us to several Finals appearences. Comparing him to Dream, however, even in their first 2 seasons, doesn't do Yao any favors. In my opinion, of course.
not really. the number of titles we win and yao's greatness aren't jumbled together, the number of titles depends on yao's greatness. yao can't be some 60's celtic who was above average but went along the ride for 8 titles and then got in the HoF (i assume a few of them did this). yao isn't along for the ride, he's pulling the wagon (along with tmac). his greatness determines how good the rockets are. not the other way around. his greatness will determine if we win titles. if yao is a borderline HOFer we don't get a title most likely. if yao is an all-time great, we get some titles. the order was reversed. or maybe the problem is daoshi is talking about some perceived, media created greatness and i'm talking about real greatness. history can remember yao how it wants, but it doesn't mean anything. yao's greatness is his greatness. playing on a winning team doesn't now make you better than you are. creating the wins does.
This is stupid, they are completely different types of players. Also, lets get another things straight. Hakeem can do anything Yao can, but Yao can never no matter how much he improves be able to do what the dream did. He doesnt have the skills, and physically he just cant.
On a related note, Hakeem is one of the best players in NBA history. Comparing Yao to Hakeem is like comparing TMac to Michael Jordan and Steve Francis to Magic Johnson. The Rockets don't need Hall of Fame killers to get titles, but Tmac and Yao definitely need to maximize the use of their abilities in order to even be in contention for a championship.
Maybe blocks were higher back then because guys like Dream and David Robinson knew how to block shots. Today's big men, like Shaq, Yao, Garnett and Brad Miller, are not impressive in that area. That is stretching it quite a bit. Hakeem was an offensive powerhouse. Yao is not dominant yet. You also have to consider that Hakeem faced more double teams and tougher opponents, not guys like Brian Grant. You can say he is a better passer and free throw shooter, though.
To me, Yao's greatness will be defined by how many titles he can bring in. He'll never be a guy that will dominte with numbers like Wilt. But on the other hand Yao bringing in titles will depend on him being great. It's the whole chicken and egg connundrum. Take Hakeem for example. What if Hakeem put up the same numbers that he did, but instead lost to Robinson and Ewing in those playoff/finals matches. Would he be more highly regarded than those two? My question is, was Hakeem great because he won two titles, or did he win two titles because he was great. I think it's a little bit of both (actually it's a lot bit of both).
he won because he was great. how can it be any other way? it's not like they hand out titles and then say whoever ends up with them is great. you earn titles through greatness. that's how it works. your greatness is your greatness. if it's enough, you'll get some titles, if not, you won't.
meh, How can you claim that "scoring was much higher back in Dream's early days (84-85)" as an excuse for Yao not being able to score as much? Because if you look at Hakeem's 95-96 season he avearged 26ppg/10rpg? Even in 1997 he averged 23ppg/9rpg. Those "old days" were actually closer than you think. Scoring was actually the ability of the PLAYER. Not the era. Go back to the 70's and you might have a point. But even then, shooting skill/team play (league wide) was a priority! I will say this...Yao is loved today by many basketball purists for the same reason that Kareem and Walton were loved. They played the game fundamentally sound. Just like Yao. He's a throw back to the 80's.
If Yao played in the mid-80's he'd have a lot tougher time because he'd have a lot other centers do deal with that could also shoot as well as he (Kareem, Akeem, Moses, Walton, Ewing). He'd have more competition. Not just Shaq and Brad Miller. We have too many 7'ft small forwards today that would be centers back in the 80's. Everyone wants to be a guard/forward today. it's more glamorous than a conventional post-playing center. As far as 110 points per game. There are many reason that teams scored more back in the mid-80's. And you perceive it as worse defense, or less athletic players. WRONG! It's because the best players actually came into the league with some NCAA experience and some concept of shooting, and team-play. That's not the case today. Many of our young stars come into the league as high-school players and have no desire to play the team game (pass). They're more interested in scoring and dunking. That takes a way from the team game, thus TEAMS scored less (even though some players still pad their stats today; which means that you still see players with 27ppg +). Defenses were very strong back then (see Phily, LA, Boston, and Houston). The perception on your part is that the defenses were sooooo "bad" that that's the *only* reason that team's scored so much. Wrong! The players actually had to execute the plays, shoot the ball and collectively knew how the play the teamgame. Today, I'm surprised when players shoot and the ball goes in the basket more than 3 times in a row.
Isn't it what this thread is all about? I think the thread title is clear enough for everyone. Why would we post in this thread anyway if we are not comparing the two? I would either petition to have this thread removed or just stay away from it if I were you.
I'd like to rip this argument to shreds, but I have a headache. I will say this : Hakeem would never have been shut down by Eduardo Najera.
It can be the other way around because the perception of greatness is based around winning titles. What if John Starks doesn't have a terrible game 6 against the Rockets, and the Knicks win the series, but both Hakeem and Patrick play exactly the same. IIRC Hakeem decidedly outplayed Ewing during that series, but if NY won the title, then Ewing would have gotten all the accolades, and Hakeem's legend would have been taken down a notch. Shaq was never regarded as great until he won that first title. And what was the difference between the old Shaq and the Shaq of his first title year? A choking Portland team, and the maturation of Kobe. I don't see the point in arguing this point. It's all semantics. Winning big means being great, and being great means winning big.
