Thats not a given. Hakeem didnt dominate his era like Wilt, Kareem and Russell dominated theirs. Would Hakeem have dominated in the 60s/70s and the others in the 90s? Its a great point to argue. But no one can say for certain.
#1 I never said most people look at points and longevity. I said that most people think that points and longevity MATTER. And they do. If they didnt, then Karl, Charles, etc. wouldnt never be considered great players! Ive said all along that championships matter the most. Thats why I have Russell ahead of Hakeem and thats how this discussion got started.
You have not read my posts. I never said Hakeem shouldnt be included in the "elite circle". I just said I have him ranked #4. A circle can be made up of 3 people or 4 people. I never once said Hakeem didnt compare to them or wasnt in their league. People did call Hakeem a playoff loser before his two titles BTW. Which obviously wasnt justified.
Enough. Hakeem was the greatest center in his era. What more can you ask. Because, since all sports are an evolution the players with the most ability are going to be from recent times. If you took all the centers in thier prime Hakeem would destroy them all. He is simply a better athlete. Comparing between eras is extremely unfair and I cringed when I read how ESPN summarized hakeem's career as outside "that greatest circle" or centers. That is absolutely shameful, but I guess it something that hakeem has always had to deal with. He never got the media's support nationally, as lets say micheal jordan. I really think it has to do with the fact that hakeem is not american enough to be "popular". He's muslim, and and he still doesn't speak english as fluently as someone who grew up in the states. He always get some half assed article that word plays on his name sake "the dream" for couple hundred words that says absolutely nothing about the player he is (like that waste of space peter may wrote on espn). I don't care if everyone agree's that he was the best center of all time because to me he was the best player that I have EVER seen. Basketball players are tall for a reason and there has simply never been a taller, more graceful, and skilled player from any era. I grew up watching Hakeem start his career in Houston and I couldn't have asked for better role model. I feel very fortunate and unique that he was my role model growing up. All I have to say is that Bill Russel had cousy and havlechek (sp?), abdul jabbar had magic, and wilt chamerblin had Jerry west. Look at the times when Houston placed some sort of talent around Olajuwon, they ended up in the finals. Don't blame Olajuwon for NOT being a gm, and NOT being a coach. Hakeem should be going into the hall of fame with more rings then he has now, but even if he never got one - He would still be they player I have ever seen.
Codell, and anyone else believing his crap. people NEVER called Hakeem a playoff loser. NEVER. He destroyed Magic/Kareem/Worthy in his second year in 1986 4 games to 1...damn dude. People really, really said Kareem was a loser over and over. Now we all know once again that you are a full of **** schmuck, just like when you said Barkley was a one man team, completely forgetting about Kevin Johnson. You are speaking from zero experience. I saw Jabbar play in his loss to Cowens. I saw Hakeem's whole career...you obviously did not. Garnett and Webber are playoff losers, not Hakeem. They are playoff losers because they did not raise their game. Hakeem owns the NBA record for most points in a 4 game series at 37.5ppg with 17 rpg. Hakeem's teammates were losers for snorting COCAINE. Hakeem was not a playoff loser. Hakeem set the NBA record of 8 blocks against the glorious 1986 Celtics in game 5 and scored 31 points to force game 6. Hakeem later extended that record to 10 blocks in another series. Hakeem DESTROYED Magic, Worthy, and Jabbar with a 35 point per game average and rebound leader in the 4 straight wins against the Lakers in 1986. Hakeem scored 49 points in an elimination game against Seattle in like 1987. Hakeem is the 6th leading pts per game scorer in Playoff history. 6 points above his average. NO ONE....I mean, NO ONE has ever called Hakeem a playoff loser. you know nothing about playoff history. Do you want to explain to us again how Barkley was a one man team, again, even though Kevin Johnson will probably become a HOFers.
Hakeem would destroy Wilt in their primes? Hakeem would destroy Russell in their primes? COME ON! You are not being objective at all here. You are thinking with your heart not your head.
Yet you claim Hakeem is #4, behing Wilt, Russell, and Jabbar. Clearly, you feel that you can say for certain. I would agree with the argument that Hakeem, Wilt, Russell, and Jabbar were the 4 greatest centers, and it's impossible to say who was the greatest amongst them. But that's not what you are saying. You are saying that Hakeem was number 4. I say, if you are going to make that comparison, Hakeem wins and is number 1.
Nothing is for certain of course because its only my opinion. Outside of this forum and this city, your opinion is in the minority by far.
Bottom Line, this is how I feel: Hakeem is the greatest center in his era... <b><font color=red>But how much greater compared to the rest of the players in that era??????????</font></b> Wilt and Russell were the greatest of their era....<b> <font color=red>But how much greater compared to the rest of the players in that era??????????</font></b> remember that this is all <b>RELATIVE, RELATIVE, RELATIVE</b>, I need to drill this in everybody's brains, I'm really really sick of people comparing these players directly...
You are totally right. We can only compare them to other people in their own eras. Otherwise, all we have is stats and championships to use to rate them and thats why Hakeem is normally rated after the other 3.
dude, you keep saying forget about what other people think yet you keep bringing it up. that's your only argument thus far, that "everyone says chamberlain, russell, and jabbar are the best so i guess they are." have you not looked at the posts and numbers that have been shown to you. most national media could give a damn about hakeem olajuwon and that is why his name is not in there, not because he doesn't deserve it. heyp, stop bringing your facts into this discussion, don't you know where talking about legends here.
The # of championships (wilt being the exception), suggest they are better, not what everyone says. Wilt is up there based on how he dominated his era in a way that no one else has. Ever. I only said forget about what the media thinks since alot of you consider them to be morons and discount what they say, although they are more qualified to make that judgement than any of us, including yourself. I said past and present NBA players normally have Hakeem ranked behind the other 3. Thats pretty well been established. Your opinion is very biased. Until you come to grips with that, you will never look at the other 3 in the right light.
chamberlain and hakeem both won 2 rings so i guess they're the last of the group? if you can't compare them then you can't compare them with championships either. russell didn't take those rings at the expense of hakeem.
Exactly. Many people rate Hakeem and Wilt behind Russell and Jabbar. Would Jordan be considered the all time greatest if he hadnt won a ring? Of course not. And Hakeem didnt get his rings or stats against russell. So how how can you be so adamant that Hakeem is better than Russell? I think you are confusing yourself friend. lol
Im going to leave this thread alone. We can all agree that its not fair to speculate Wilt/Jabbar/Russell vs. Hakeem because they were different eras. We CAN compare what they did in their own eras. Jabbar vs. his own era - 3 collegiate titles, 6 NBA titles, 6 time MVP, 2 time finals MVP, all time leading scorer, 24.6 points per game, 11.2 rebounds, 3.6 blocked shots and a .559 shooting percentage. Wilt vs. his own era - 2 NBA titles, 4 time MVP, 1 NBA final MVP, 30 points per game, 23 rebounds per game, and averaged over 7 assists a game several times and even lead the league one year. Russell vs. his own era - 2 collegiate titles, 11 NBA titles, 5 time MVP, (they didnt award a finals MVP in his era), 15.1 ppg and 22.5 rpg for his career. Hakeem vs. his own ear - 2 NBA titles, 1 MVP, 2 time finals MVP, 22 PPG, 11 RPG, 3 BPG and a .512 shooting percentage. Wilt, Kareem and Russell all performed better and accomplished more, against other teams in their own era, than Hakeem did vs. other teams in his era. This has been a great thread. I have really enjoyed it.
trust me i'm far from confused. in fact i've said twice now that i don't put hakeem ahead of russell. i don't put him ahead of any of those 3, i'm just trying to make them equal. you are the one saying you can't compare era's yet unfairly sticking dream at #4. secondly i'm not basing these desicions on being a rocket's fan, but that has allowed me to watch more footage of hakeem than most national writers combined. you say most players wouldn't put hakeem in that ecehlon but where are they, where are the quotes? ask david robinson if dream is the best he's ever seen. how about shaq? this is bill walton during the spur's vs rockets series in 95. "here's where hakeem olajuwon is in a historical sense. olajuwon has joined the superelite players, the jabbars, the chamberlains, the russells, the jordans. he's playing at a level that few have ever reached" "if i were to play hakeem now, i'd be sure and bring the larry birds, the kevin mchales, the dennis johnsons. there would be alot of double teams." is he a homer? where is the case that he doesn't belong as their equal? it does not exist other than this whole "legend" crap.
Robinson deserved the MVP. It was what he did during the season. If Hakeem would have won the MVP and then lost in the playoffs he still would have deserved the season MVP. He still would be the most valuble player for the Rockets... Next...Are sportswriters the judge? Yes. But also the fans, GM, coaches, and other players. Of course Houston fans will vote for Hakeem. How can that be non-bias? How can NY media, GM, fans and coaches voting for Wilt, Russell and Kareem be biased? And please don't say east-coast bias. Can you say Dallas Cowboys?! They are giving credit where credit is due. I can't stand Kobe, but I still give him credit.
BigM. Time will allow Hakeems legacy to grow. Then, and only then will he be one of the greats. He is not a legend yet. Time makes legends.
YOU: IF Hakeem did this (went back in time), IF he did that(better teammates), Hakeem would have won more rings, thus he's better that this guy or that guy 30 years ago. ME: Russel did DO this (stats). Russell did DO that(rings). That's what I judge him on. Hakeem did DO this(stats), Hakeem did DO that(rings). That's what I judge him on. End the end, those players will be judged by what the DID, not what you speculate they would'a-could'a-shoud'a done.
