OK, I did a little number crunching on Hakeem's blocks record just for kicks. Don't look too much into these numbers. This really enchances the greatness of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar more than knocking on Hakeem... Blocks weren't recorded until Jabbar's 5th season. For a nine year stretch from 73-82, he blocked over 200 shots per season except one year that he missed 20 games, so we'll call these his "dominant" shot blocking years. During that stretch, he blocked 256 shots per year. I extrapolated that 256 blocks over his first four seasons and added to his career total to get 4213 blocks, almost 400 blocks more than Dream. Here's some more...I took Hakeem's last real dominant year in the league, 1996-97. He averaged 2.2 blocks per game that season. I multiplied that by the number of games that Hakeem WOULD have played during the final four injury riddled, non lockout seasons had he not missed any games due to injury. That's 721 potential blocks missed due to injury. Then, I added that total to his 123 blocks during the lockout season when he averaged 2.4 blocks/game for a total of 844, to which I added to the 3363 blocks he got his first 13 seasons in the league, for a grand total of 4207, six blocks short of Jabbar's fantasy number. So, would Hakeem have broken Jabbar's blocks record had blocked shots been recorded for Jabbar's whole career? I say that since he wasn't that much of a stat mongor, he probably would have let the record stand if he were only a few blocks short or whatever. Personally, I rate Hakeem as the third greatest shot blocker of all time behind Kareem and Mark Eaton.
A better question might be - "how many blocks would Hakeem have had if he didn't play offense, like Russell?"
Didn't Kareem have about six more seasons than Hakeem as well? I think the hypothetically healthy Hakeem you calculated would have had an extended career due to such conditioning. So yes, he still would've beaten Jabbar's record.
What difference would it make, its not like the guy was Ben Wallace, as a matter of fact what's amazing about Russell and Hakeem's blocks output, was that they were able to help out on defense as well as rebound. Concentrating on the defensive board would prevent a player from getting as many blocks as they could more than being an offensive player. For their careers, Russell doubled Hakeem's rebounds while only being outscored by 6 points.
As much as Rocket homers like to think otherwise, Hakeem is at best, the #4 center of all time, and Shaq is really hot on his heels.
Of course it makes a difference. Are you going to say that expending more energy on offense doesn't affect you defensively? "Only" being outscored by 6 points. Good one. Check the FG percentages. And I'm sure Hakeem would have had more rebounds as well had he played against midgets.
Yes, Russell shot a low percentage, meaning his shot output is actually CLOSER to Hakeem's than his scoring average reflects. Russell may have played against midgets but he's no giant. And again, Bill Russell wasn't completely offensively inept. He's not Ben Wallace.
Well, I was just focusing on the raw numbers, but you do have a point. Hakeem averaged 3.09 blocks/game compared to Kareem's 2.57 while blocks were recorded...of course, my counter-argument would be that Hakeem is so humble that he would let the record stand for as long as possible.
There is absolutely no comparison between the offensive burden shared by these two players when they played. None. Hakeem was a one-man show when he racked up most of his blocks. Russell was a role player on offense surrounded by multiple hall-of-famers, and his percentage was still crap.
Bill Russell won a championship in college, averaged 20 points in college, and was the best player on all 11 of his Celtics' championship teams. To call him a role player is laughable at best, disrespectful at worst, he was the ultimate team player, gave up scoring for the good of the team. I'll take a crap fg% and 11 rings any day.
i'll take a revolving door of HOFers in the starting lineup (sometimes including all 4 starters and the 6th man i believe) to support me anyday too. hakeem did more for the rockets than russell did for the celtics. he absolutely was everything to us on offense and defense. russell was only everything on defense. and any advantage you could even try to give russell on D would be small considering hakeem is also the greatest stealing center of all time. as far as the blocks, what's this about not starting until his 5th season? i thought he came in in like 71 and they stared in 72 or 73. edit: i guess it was his 5th season. came in 69, blocks became a stat in 73. still doesn't matter, the blocks/game argument kind of makes it hard to call kareem a better shotblocker. the others with even higher averages never had to play offense.
honestly...i know you could say, "11 rings is 11 rings." but it's just not. how many rings does scottie pippen have? how many rings does robert horry have?? does that make them greater small forwards than Larry Bird?? and 11 rings...it's absurd because in today's game, it wouldn't/couldn't happen. it's apples and oranges. mike's 6 seem untouchable in a league of 30+ teams.
