Not as a person. As a player. Which one is the better player? No bias please! (as hard as it is to be not) Try to be fair, give logical reasons. Thanks.
MMM it is definitely very hard I do think that while Mourning is a better offensive player by a not-too-big not-too-small margin, our very own mt mutombo is just that tad bit better on the defensive end however, in terms of health and longetivity, mutombo gets the nodd mourning is 36?? 37?? while mutombo is outproducing him while being 41 so taking into consideraiton of EVERYTHING.. i would choose mutombo
Right now it looks like Deke but the heavy minutes could take a big toll by March. If Deke continues the inspired play until Yao gets back, he definitely has the edge.
I must say Zo. He gives more on offense and almost 6 blocks per 48min which is just unreal in today's NBA.
Since Zo's prime was cut short by serious health issues I doubt it's reasonable to make that judgement.
I'd take Zo, honestly. I'm just not a fan of having liabilities (offensive or defensive) getting starter's minutes. Zo's large advantage in scoring ability in his early years puts him over the top for me. If we're talking for their career, all things considered, it's Deke.
Deke wasn't an offensive liability in his prime. He had a pretty effective hook shot and his percentages were strong. IMHO he just wasn't aggressive enough on the offense. I wouldn't call that being a liability.
Mourning put up some big offensive numbers in his early career, but I'd prefer Mutombo. He seems to understand the game better and fills his role better. Thery are both pretty good, but here is the way I see it. You have a player who is regularly one of the top 1 or 2 defensive players and top 1-2 rebounders in the league (Mutombo) or a player who is top 10 in scoring, top 10 in rebounding, and top 10 in blocks (Mourning). The bottom line is that Mutombo's teams (Denver, Atlanta, Philadelphia) tend to have overachieved, while Mourning's teams have underachieved (Charlotte, late 90's Miami). The only team which Mourning played on which did well in the playoffs is last year's championship team, and he didn't have that big of a role on it. Mutombo was either the main reason, or the second reason all his past teams have had playoff success. Mutombo is such a defensive and rebounding force that he's still able to change the game significantly now. Mourning has a jack-of-all-trades type of game that wilts under pressure, and he's kind of a headcase. I think of him as an upgraded version of Kenyon Martin.
for me, i really can't pick because people are forgetting alonzo had 3-4 years of his prime taken away from him due to a near-fatal illness. in their prime, both were great defensive players. hell, for the most part they are still great defenders today. neither was very pretty offensively, but alonzo was more productive: 18 ppg (career), 6 seasons of 20 ppg or better, 53% fg it can be argued that dikembe is better defensively, even though alonzo was damn good himself as a 6'9 center in an nba where centers under 7' usually don't play much. in the end, i think both are hall-of-famers and will be remembered for not only their greatness on the court but off the court as well. there may not be two better people in all the nba than deke and alonzo.
zo was under sized as the 5 whereas mutombo was by far the greatest defensive force of the 90s. i also never really liked zo's game. so im biased. i take deke.
in their primes? Alonzo hands down.. I don't see how anyone can think otherwise. Very good defensively (not quite on Deke's level, but he's up there), and a great offensive player. Overall career? Deke just because of Zo's health issues and Deke's longevity.
I think Mourning had the greater overall career but Patrick Ewing usually dominated him in the playoffs.
