Shaq and Kobe....Drexler and Hakeem...Who is the better Championship Tandem

Steve Francis --

When Shaq goes up against some real competition at his position, like Patrick Ewing in his prime, and David Robinson in his prime, then we can start talking about him being a "greater offensive force" than Hakeem. Sorry, but Rik Smits doesn't cut it. Hell, Hakeem put up similar numbers to Shaq against two of the best centers ever. Shaq does it against Rik Smits, a 40 year-old Sam Perkins, Arvydas Sabonis, and Luc Longley? Hakeem also dominated defensively, something Shaq doesn't even come close to doing. Saying that "Charles Barkley and Isiah Thomas said he could become the greatest ever" is a joke, by the way.

I must quote you again:

"Kobe is clearly superior to Drexler at the time he came to Houston."

Let's see what the stats say about that. Comparing Bryant's 2000 stats to Clyde's '95 stats:

Bryant -- 22.5 pts, 4.9 ast, 6.3 reb, 82%ft, 47%fg, 1.6 stl, 32% 3pt
Clyde -- 21.8 pts, 4.8 ast, 6.3 reb, 82%ft, 46%fg, 1.8 stl, 36% 3pt

Let's also look at each player's playoff stats for the same time period:

Bryant -- 21.1 pts, 4.5 reb, 4.4 ast, 1.5 stl
Clyde -- 20.5 pts, 7.0 reb, 5.0 ast, 1.5 stl

You call that clearly superior? You're now going to say "but Kobe plays better defense!" I watched the playoffs. Bryant plays decent one-on-one defense, but his team defense is nothing special, unlike Clyde. Bryant definitely didn't shut anybody down by any stretch.

The numbers don't lie. When you consider that Clyde only played 35 regular season games with the Rockets, his playoff performance is clearly better than Bryant's. I come back to my original point that the quote "Kobe is clearly superior to Drexler at the time he came to Houston" should be a bannable offense on this board. That has been proven to be an outlandish statement. Bryant's performance in these playoffs is in no way, shape, or form better than Clyde's '95 performance. Bryant shot 37 percent from the field in the Finals, averaging 19 pts (not counting game 2). You call that superstar numbers?

Compare Bryant to Penny Hardaway or Scottie Pippen, not Clyde. When Bryant can be clearly the best player on his team and lead them to 2 Finals appearances, then you can compare him to Clyde.



------------------
Too-Rye-Aye!

 

FREAK,

Look at Shaq's regualar season scoring and see that it is higher than Dream's ever was. Plus Shaq has high scorers in Bryant and even Rice to share the ball with. It's close between the two, but Shaq is a hair better as a scorer than Dream was. Now consider if Shaq was a decent free throw shooter like Dream, the numbers wouldn't even be close. As for Bryant, his defense was superior in the playoffs until the injury limited his lateral movement. A healthy Bryant IS a much better jump shooter, defender, and comparable in penetrating to the 95' Drexler. READ CAREFULLY-I'm not saying Kobe Bryant has had a better career up to this point than Drexler. I'm saying that the ascendant Bryant is a better player than the declining Drexler. Many people even go so far to label Kobe the second best player in the league, while nobody said the same thing about Drexler. Had Bryant not been injured, his numbers would be way ahead of Drexler.



------------------

 

This argument is really ridiculous. TheFreak provided you with accurate statistics and good, logical analysis. We have no tinted glasses on. Maybe Shaq is slightly better than Hakeem offensively. Note that I stress MAYBE. As TheFreak pointed out, Hakeem played against other dominant centers, during their prime. These are players like Patrick Ewing and David Robinson, who will also be remember as some of the greatest centers of all time. As already pointed out, the best center Shaq plays against is Zo, and he wont ever be remember as one of the greatest centers ever UNLESS he eventually wins a ring (A note here, when SHaq does play against good defensive centers such as ZO or D.Mutombo, his stats clearly suffer). Now, you argument that says Shaq is better offensively is because he is a poor free throw shooter. HELLO. IS anybody home. That is one fo the reasons HAkeem is better than him. You cant say "well, if Shaq shot free throws lke HAkeem he would be far superior" because the fact is that Shaq doesnt shoot free throws like HAkeem. He is a horrible free throw shoot adn that is a MAJOR flaw in his game.

Also, as previously pointed out, Hakeem is a MUCH better defensive center than Shaq. Hakeem can arguably be named the greatest defensive player of all time. As a center he is number one all time in blocks and top ten in steals. As a center. Defense is at least half of the game (Defense wins championships) and Hakeem is far superior there.

On Kobe, well I think the stats say it all. You can cry injury if you want, but then you can just look at the regular season stats. They were also the same. Kobe is on his way up this year, The Glyde was on his way down back in 95.

To automatically coronate Shaq as the next greatest player ever and to say Kobe will be a top 5 top 10 all time shows a serious lack of knowledge concerning the game and a lack of respect for the players of yesteryear.

Think about it this way. You contend that the LAkers have the 2 best players in the league. They have the future greatest player of all time on their team and most likely one of the top 5 or 10 players ever in your opinion. WHile I hate Phil Jackass, you cant argue agaisnt a man with 7 rings. They also have Tex Winters, maybe the greatest assistant coach of all time and some pretty solid veteran role players. With all of that, the Lakers are taken to the brink in the first round agaisnt and 8 seed. They lose a record 9 playoff games in one year. They completely underachieve throughout the playoffs and were 12 minutes away from not even making the Finals and a game seven in the Finals.

Now look at the Rockets with HAkeem and Clyde. As a 6 seed, ont he road the entire playoffs, the beat 4 teams with over 50 wins. They are taken to elimination games in the first two rounds, but as the playoffs go on, and the competition gets harder, the Rockets get better. They OVERACHIEVE. They beat MVP David Robinsons' Spurs in 6 and continue to SWEEP a magic team with none other than the future greatest player of all time, Shaquille Oneal.

Maybe Im wrong, but think at this point at lest there is still no question about who the better players were.

------------------
When I die I want to go peacefully like my grandfather. Not screaming like the passengers in the back seat!

 

What if Dream had the size, strength, and jumping ability of Shaq, to to add to his agility and shooting touch? Dream would have been the 2nd person in NBA history to score 100 points in a game.

 

Actually, in my mind the Lakers are extremely crappy team outside of Shaq and Kobe. Just about to a man the key players around the Houston twosome in 95 was better than the comparable Laker supporting cast (they had AC AND Harp starting for Pete's sake). Another way to think of it, in Houston's run Mario hit big shots, Horry hit big shots, and Kenny Smith hit big shots. Cassell also provide huge bench sparks--which the Laker's have nobody remotely as good as off the bench. Getting supporting help is also true in most other runs-Elliot hitting huge shots last year, Kerr and Paxon for the Bulls. Now for the Lakers?? I can hardly remember a key shot with the game on the line that wasn't made by Kobe or Shaq, usually Kobe (game winning shots versus Phoe, Blazers & Pacers). I think Harper may have made one easy 12 foot baseline shot (Portland series?) because the whole defense line-up to stop Shaq and Kobe--but that is the only play that comes to mind where Shaq or Kobe did single(two)-handidly carry the Lakers. Even Horry, who saved probably his best Laker play for these playoffs (he might be their third most valuable player in their playoff 4th quarters), was a shadow of the player defending, shot blocking, dunking and 3 point shooting for us back in 95.

Houston in 95 had the better team, but the Shaq/Kobe tandom was CLOSE to Hakeem/Clyde tandom in over contributions whether you consider overal statistics (let's compare the combined PPG, RPG, APG, SPG, BPG of the pair). Statistically it is close, but when you consider Kobe hitting just about all the big shots with the game on the line, I think the objective person says the tandems match up REALLY, REALLY, CLOSE in overall play.



------------------
"The Rockets were ahead of the Suns by 20 late in game 2 of the series, but when the going got tough, we just Pippened . We would not be done in the series though."

 

Just remember not all big shots come at the end of games. The LAkers "not so decent" bench and role players are better than they appear. Remember game seven of the POrtland series where the only reason the LAkers had the chance at the end of the game was beacuase of the fantastic shooting of Shaw, Horry, Fisher, etc. And of course you have the Harper shot, etc, etc. Jackson knew what he was doing in assembling his supporting cast. He wasnt just picking up crappy players. That being said, I think you are right that the two tandems are very similar and Houston probably had a better supporting cast and because of that I beleive that Houston team would have beaten this LAkers team. Of course, when they won their secodn straight that year, nobody was calling them a dynasty!

------------------
When I die I want to go peacefully like my grandfather. Not screaming like the passengers in the back seat!

 

JayZ, I think Portland is an interesting team to compare how bad the Laker's player outside of Kobe and Shaq really are. Let's say you take the 2 best players off of Portland (say Smith & Wallace) and the 2 best players of the Lakers. Of the next best 8 players, I would think at least 6 are on the Blazers roster (say the best in roughly this order are--Pippen, Grant, Rice, Sabonis, Stoudimire, Wells, with the last slot a tie between Scrempf and Horry.

A couple of other things to think about. I think it was Fox who admitted playing with Shaq makes all the other Lakers look so much better than they really are. Robert Horry is an interesting case as well. Take away his playoff runs playing side by side with the most dominant player in the league at the time, and Robert Horry has done zero in this league. Of course I agree Horry does make a nice role player in exactly the right situation.

------------------
"The Rockets were ahead of the Suns by 20 late in game 2 of the series, but when the going got tough, we just Pippened . We would not be done in the series though."

 

The stats are finally coming to prove my point that people have already forgotten Hakeems's greatness. Shaq may be unstoppable in the paint, but Dream was unstoppable period. Shaq's offensive numbers are only questionably better, but when is the last time you really saw Shaq steal the ball. Hakeem was also a much more consistent and effective defender than Shaq. Hakeem basically carried a team to the finals by himself, and won.

------------------

 

One thing I never thought I'd see in here was TheFreak being accused of wearing Rocket-tinted glasses. That's pretty funny.

------------------

 

The Lakers are very good team right now, but with a little more time they will be one of the very greatest teams of all time. They have two of the top 5 players in the NBA right now, and have a lot of room to grow. Don't forget that the Lakers are a major drawing card and will have no problem getting top free agents over the next few years. Unlike San Antonio, where most of the players, save Duncan, are past their primes, the Lakers tandem is young. They are a dynasty in the making for these reasons. I don't question Olajuwon's greatness-he is one of the top 5 centers in NBA history. However, I think Shaq will ultimately be the best of the best, given his athleticism and physical dominance. Shaq is very underrated by those who consider him to be a mere dunking machine. He was just that in the beginning, but he has rounded into a complete player. He won't improve too much offensively from here, but he is only beginning to tap into his potential as a defender. I brought up free throw shooting because Shaq still has a real chance of substantially improving it, although it becomes less likely every year. Olajuwon doesn't have the genetics to reach Shaq physical prowess, he can't change that. Also, Kobe Bryant was a first team all defense this year. I don't recall Drexler ever being named to either of the all defensive teams. He simply wasn't a very good defender. People also forget that Kobe Bryant is the greatest 21 year old in basketball history. Not even Michael Jordan was that good at 21. I think Bryant will ultimately get a good deal better and will be ranked somewhere below Michael Jordan and ahead of Julius Erving. That would clearly put him in the top dozen or so players of all time.

------------------


[This message has been edited by steve francis (edited June 23, 2000).]

 

I also agree that Portland was much deeper. However, I still think there is some underestimation of LA's role players here. I mean Wallace and Smith are a very very good tandem themselves. ONly slightly worse than Shaq/Kobe. If the Blazers have the next 6 best players they should have definitely won the sereis, maybe in 6. I think it is a good point, but the Portland sereies is the one sereis where LA's role players had to show what they were made of for LA to win, and they did (harpers shot, 4th quarter of game seven, etc,etc). Granted, the lack of other talent around SHaq and Kobe is the LAkers biggest flaw (why they almsot lost to POrtland) but still they have a lot of things going for them and they still had a very underachieving playoff run despite the championship.

------------------
When I die I want to go peacefully like my grandfather. Not screaming like the passengers in the back seat!

 

"People also forget that Kobe Bryant is the greatest 21 year old in basketball history. Not even Michael Jordan was that good at 21."

Well, I've got to hand it to you, just when I thought I'd heard it all...

THE GREATEST 21 YEAR OLD IN BASKETBALL HISTORY. Did you really just say that? What the hell does that mean, anyway? The guy is in his 4th season. Magic Johnson, as a 20 year-old ROOKIE, started at CENTER in 1980 for the Lakers in the NBA Finals when Abdul-Jabaar was out with injury, scored 42 points, and LA won the championship. But no, Kobe Bryant, now in this FOURTH season, not even the best player on his own team, not relied upon to carry his team, not the primary focus of the defense (not even close), is the "best 21 year-old in basketball history". Who cares if he's 21. He's played 4 years. He's not going to play any longer than anyone else. Michael Jordan was a 21 year-old ROOKIE, who was by far the best player on his team, the main focus of the defense, etc, etc, and put up 28 pts a game, 6.5 boards and 6 assists, while shooting 52 percent from the field. As you can see, Bryant is not even in the same league, ballbark, or sport as either of these 2 guys. The "greatest 21 year-old in league history".....HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!

By the way, Clyde is one of the all-time league leaders in steals. He just happened to have 2 of the greatest defensive 2 guards of all-time in the league at the same time, Jordan and Joe Dumars, thus the lack of all-defensive team selections. Alvin Robertson was also in the league then as well. Clyde also had zero hype. Zero. Bryant's got what other 2 guards to compete with....oh, that's right, NONE. He's also the most hyped player in the league. There, there's a title you can give him -- "The most hyped-up player in league history". I like that one much better.

------------------
Too-Rye-Aye!

 

Clyde did get a lot of steals no question, but other guys could play much better individual defense. Jordon was one of those guys, another was Dumars, so were Richmond, Starks and Maxwell better individual defenders too. I dare say Kobe would play MJ much better defensively than Clyde did with a ring on the line, then again I think Clyde could do more offensively against Jordan than Kobe could.

Freak, agreed saying Kobe is the equal of a 21 year old Magic or Jordon is laughable. Kobe is not in Jordon or Magic's class, more than likely will never be. He also isn't better than a 21 year old Moses, or a 21 year old Wilt, Kareem, Robertson, Barry or Walton (yes, Bill was that good for a very, very brief spell).

Clyde in his peak was overall a better player than Kobe is currently. However Kobe might end up better than Clyde or say Pippen when it is all said and done (probably not better than Dr. J though), I do think him and Carter are the most talented 2 swing players to enter the league since Jordon. Carter will have to learn to play better defense (he has the tools to), Kobe needs to improve his J's accurancy and understanding of a team offense (he has the tools to do this as well), but either has the tools to be mentioned among the 5 or so best 2 guards to play by the time they are done. I give it maybe a 1-100 chance they are as good as either Jordon or Robertson though.

Kobe is not the second coming of Jordan, but he is probably the best 2 guard in the league (I would start with him, than Carter, than Iverson), and cleary one of the 10 or 12 best players in the league right now.


[This message has been edited by sir scarvajal (edited June 22, 2000).]

 

How dare you use Pippen and greatness in the same sentence.

------------------

 

Pippen lacks greatness.

------------------
No signature for you!

 

This topic is laughable.

Now considering the original question of which makes a better championship tandem, you have to go with Dream and Drexler. They won one in their first year together, without home-court advantage, against better teams (yes the Jazz, Suns, Spurs and Magic that year were better than every team the Lakers faced this year, except Portland.....and they choked). The next year Drexler and Cassell get hurt, and they lose to Western Confrence Champ Seattle. The year's after that, they lose to eventual Western Confrence Champ Utah.

The Lakers on the other hand have been swept how many times with Shaq and Kobe together. The majority of their teams had equal talent to the Rockets, and some teams had better talent (Van Exel, E.Jones and Campbell). They are champions now, but obviously the weakest one to come through in the last 20 years or so. They sqeak by Sacremento, destroy Phoenix, receive a miracle against Portland, and get all the breaks against Indiana. Shaq dominated, but Kobe had more bad games in the playoffs than good ones. I just don't see how you can even make a comparison.

Comparing the players individually favors the Rockets duo as well. Sure, Shaq scores more than Hakeem, but he also shoots more fg's and free throws. He also has a new rule that says you can't bump him down low (and most importantly, allows him to charge into the offensive player) which gets him even more free-throw attepmts. If you had to pick an offensive player, the natural choice would be Hakeem. Sure, Shaq is unstoppable down low, but Hakeem is unstoppable period!! Also, Hakeem wasn't a liability on the offensive end during the last two minutes of a game, Shaq is. And there is no guarentee that Shaq will start to hit his free-throws, so you can't assume that he will. The odds say that he won't. I won't even go into how Dream played against better competition in their primes. The best big man in the league behind Shaq isn't even a center.

You can make an argument picking Shaq over Dream, but to pick Kobe over Drexler is just insane. No, I don't want to hear the crap about potential, because that has to be lived up to, and there is no guarentee that he will do that. He could blow out his knee next week. How much potential do you think Ralph Sampson had? No, Clyde wasn't a great one-on-one defender, but he wasn't so mediocore that other teams attacked him primarily. This has been done to Kobe. After watching Kobe in this postseason, I don't see how you can even rank him as a good defender. Everyone torched him, and Phil had to switch Fox, Harper or Horry to his man numerous times. Sure, he made a few good plays, but he was consistently abused. Clyde was not great on defense, but I can never think of him being abused in the way that Kobe has this postseason, especially by the likes of Tony Delk, B.Wells and Augmon. Plus, Clyde is one of the all-time leaders in steals, and I believe his per-game avg is higher than Kobe's.

Offensively, what can Kobe do that Clyde can't. Kobe is a better jump-shooter, but Clyde is better at getting his shot, and career-wise has a higher fg % (not to mention he was double-teamed as the main offensive weapon for most of his career, unlike Kobe who has Shaq to make his life easier). He rebounds the ball better, and was a much better passer. He was just as athletic and quick as Kobe is. An original Dream-Teamer, and Kobe can't even get selected unless someone gets hurt. He finished second to Jordan for MVP once, how can you compare thet two?? In 95, he played played consistent ball throughout the playoffs. Can you count the number of good games Kobe had this postseason on more than one hand? Bottom line, when Clyde retired, he was one of only 3 players in NBA history to amass over 20,000 points, 6,000 rebounds and 3,000 steals.

------------------

 

And I don't even have to compare Shaq and Hakeem's defense, do I?

------------------

 

For those who think O'Neal's free throw shooting will get better...he's played 8 seasons. Here are his ft numbers:

year 1 -- 59.2
2 -- 55.4
3 -- 53.3
4 -- 48.7
5 -- 48.4

(note that through his first 5 seasons, he managed to lower his percentage each year)

year 6 -- 52.7
7 -- 54.0
8 -- 52.4

1st year, 59.2, this past year, 52.4. There is no reason to think that he will ever exceed 60%.

------------------
Too-Rye-Aye!

 

Icehouse, considering Kobe was 1st team all defense (I don't think Drexler ever was I am named 4-5 much better defensive 2 guyards in his era) I would say an aweful lot of people disagree about how good his defense is.

A couple of other points--except for game 5 versus the Jazz, I never remember Clyde being the difference for the Rockets (or Portland for that matter) in the clutch. Kobe during this playoff period alone won 3-4 games for them with key buckest with the game absolutely in the balance.

I'll give you Clyde was the better offensive player in 95, and Kobe is not yet the equal player of Clyde in his heyday, but this is not an easy call, or laughable as you call it. Just ask MJ about who were the toughest guys for him to get off on, and Clyde would not have been one of them (didn't MJ set the all-time finals scoring high against him??). If Kobe was around then, he would have been in the same breath of Dumars, Max, Starks and Mitch defensively--the guys who gave Jordan a few more problems.

------------------
"The Rockets were ahead of the Suns by 20 late in game 2 of the series, but when the going got tough, we just Pippened . We would not be done in the series though."

 

Shaq better than Hakeem at his peak? What are you smoking? Beyond five feet from the basket, Shaq has nothing! Moves? What moves? All he does is post as close to the basket as he can (while the refs can't count to three). Free throws, passing, switching defense? Hakeem was far and away superior to the Leaning Tower of Cement.



------------------
"Who Wants To Be A Rocket?" - and probably a millionaire as well. The off-season will be interesting!