I looked at the 94-95 season, looks these guys: -Shaq 29.3PPG 11.4RB 2.4BPG -Hake 27.8PPG 10.8RB 3.4BPG (+1.9SPG, 9th in the league) -DRob 27.6PPG 10.8RB 3.2BPG (+1.7SPG, 15th in the league) These all compare well with the best center seasons ever that were not personally achieved by Wilt or Kareem. Then you have -Ewing 23.9 11.0 2.6 -Zo... 21.3 9.9 2.9 -Deke 11.5 12.5 3.9 -Valde 16 10.4 2.2 certainly all-stars most "normal" years". Meanwhile the last few years we have sent Gasol, Okur, Magloire, Miller, and Big Z to all-star games, and Ben Wallace and Jermain Oneal are freaken regulars. And lets not forget Malone (26.7, 10.6) and Barkley (23, 11.2 + 4APG) roaming the west in those years, unquestionably 2 of the 5 best ever power forwards (even if you call Duncan a PF). You also had Kemp (19, 11 + 1.5BPG) and Rodman (with his crazy league leading 17RBPG and 1st team all defense). In short, the Cs and PFss were just phenomenal then. Now on the other head I don't think they had the swingmen to compare with Wade, Kobe, Lebron, Tmac, Iverson, once you got past Jordan. I think these things are just cyclical/random. But either way it was a really bad time to make a name for yourself as a merely outstanding NBA big at that time while people like Dampier can get 10+ million per year and not get completely laughed at for saying "I'm number II, I am number II".
Thank you for proving my entire point. If you can't judge a player at all it's always easy to simply use any stat that suits your argument. People who can judge use stats to try to show tendencies and abilities. But on this board anyone that does that is labeled "a nut rider" by Sam. But Sam only purports facts.
i'm pointing out some stuff people might not know. did i say that in my post? or are you a jedi? i am a jedi. I serve emperor Maxwell.
And I'd really like to see your list of 10 better centers than David Robinson. I don't think you can get to 8 without looking silly, but go ahead and try. If you have not figured this out you also have to consider context in evaluating stats, even what you claim as "goal standard" composites. Look at their relative competion. (couple of posts before). Of course your PER and composites playing against usually the weaker of opponents PF/C (which Duncan typically has since he arrived in SA) in an era where Magloire and Brad Miller get on all-star teams is going to be inflated relative to a guy who personally covered the Oneals, Robinsons, Ewings, Zos, Divacs and were guarded by the Dekes, Robinsons, Zos, Oneals, Ewings, etc. Stats, accomplishments, and yes, some subjective evulations and considering historical context all come into play. If this were all objective teams would not spend millions scouting prior to the draft, they would just look at NCAA and international stats sheets and run the numbers.
BBall Scientist, do you need help to find a San Antonio Sperms...oppp I mean Spurs...fans site? I can show you how to google it.
Jordan said the center he'd pick on his all-time team was Hakeem - over Kareem, Shaq, and Wilt. He just felt Hakeem brought it all. Hakeem is faster, stronger, more versitile, and beats Duncun is every facet of the game. Offense, defense, and decision making. Hakeem was a better foul shooter as well. How many times did Duncun block a 3-point attempt in the playoffs with the game on the line? I think if you actually go back and watch some of Hakeem's playoff games, particularly against your beloved Spurs, you might not be prone to take this stance. Hakeem today would dominate the league in a sick way. You think Yao is the best center? Hakeem would slice up the NBA with the girly rules in place now. He's light Duncun up like the Macy's Chirstmas tree. Duncun would be calling up D-Rob and asking him, "How did you defend him???" and D-rob would say, "By stopping him from hitting 50 points and 20 boards". MJ knew what he was talking about when he said he'd pick Hakeem at center over wilt, kareem and russell, and shaq
You can look at the stats yourself... http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h.cgi?req=1&playoffs=Y&p1=malonka01&p2=robinda01 '96 Stats for Karla: Series against Spurs: 25ppg, 9.33rbpg, 4.67 apg, 1.33 spg, .833 bpg, 44.7% FG Regular Season: 25.7 ppg, 9.8rbpg, 4.7apg, 1.7spg, .7bpg, 51.2% FG Aside from the 32 - 11 pt performance you quoted, and a game where Robinson fouled out in 24 minutes, they played their standard games. That's not dominating, that's playing your typical level of basketball. It doesn't matter if you make it look ugly, KM makes everything look ugly, and DR was a player that relied on his quickness and leaping ability and not brute strength like Karla. Labels like "soft" thrown around by the media are irrelevant. When you lose, its the standard reasoning. MJ was once thought of as a great scorer who could never lead his team. 6 championships later... What Karla did is nothing like when Hakeem elevated his game and dominated Robinson. It's just a story line.
All you do is ignore the metrics that make Spanoulis look bad (i.e. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM) and only take into account the metrics that make him look good (i.e. the ones you came up with out of your ass specifically designed to make Spanoulis look good).
Can someone kindly explain why I am getting responses like I said Duncan was better or even as good as Hakeem? Can someone explain why I posted how stats can be manipulated and gave examples and because of that I was told to look for a Spurs forum? HAKEEM WAS BETTER THAN DUNCAN!!!!!!!!!!! Does my viewpoint get through NOW?
This is a pure concocted fantasy. I have said over and over his Euro stats COUNT as a consideration. MANY posters here made up their OWN IMAGINARY rule that they don't and cannot be considered. If you cannot accept that others will look at them just because they do not "count" in your own viewpoint that's on you. I have NEVER skewed any stats that I have posted. I always post stats that are detailed and precise saber metrics data. The same stats Morey uses. For example the defensive composite stats or the Hollinger translation stats, or the advanced metrics ratings, etc. If you don't like some good stats from Euroleague being posted here you and many others need to make a petition to Clutch to make your imaginary rule that they "don't count" and should not be allowed don the board become a real rule on the forum. There are a bunch of people here who simply want to refuse to allow any Euro stats being posted, that doesn't give you the right to make up things like they don't count or that they are fake or skewed stats which is clearly what you accuse me of doing. Like I said, get Clutch to make your imaginary rule a real rule on the forum and I will happily oblige it. I follow rules. And I am breaking none with any stats I have ever cited here. In fact since there is no rule eliminating the Euro saber metrics stats (for example they are all over the board for Scola and Eliyahu posted by OTHERS) it is in fact not me, but rather others here that constantly criticize for using such and such stat that "doesn't count" and should not be "allowed here" because we "don't give a damn about any stats not from NBA" that are basically in effect complaining and accusing for no logical reason. And of course it's just nonsense because so many posts about no stats count or should even be considered unless an NBA stats means many here believe that no NCAA stats should even be looked at. I really hope the Rockets scouting does not share these ideas that NCAA and Euroleague stats should be ignored at all costs like so many fans here believe.
We care about his performance in the NBA. His NBA stats are abominable. The fact that he played well in the Euroleague means jack **** because he sucked donkey balls for us. Actual data always trumps a projection. Your only remaining excuse is that JVG didn't give him a chance, and to that I say BS, he got his chance after Snyder got injured and flopped horribly. You have the right to post whatever... but everyone else has the right to call you an idiot as well.
Interesting that you leave out Robinson's stats. Just as a quick perusal, I note that Robinson went from a 25 and 12 average in the regular season to a 19.3 ppg and 9 rpg average against Malone and the Jazz in that year's playoffs. His play went in the toilet in that series outright. Not exactly a first for the guy, as we should all be well aware. Actually, that's a big lie as Malone played 33 minutes to get his 32 on Robinson. David? He played 35 minutes for his 11 points. Malone held Robinson to 11 in the next game as well (two games in a ROW where an MVP is held to statline like that?!?! Name me another great big that happened to, in his supposed prime) and then to 17 in the closeout game. Those are dominating defensive numbers, and the Mermaid is chiefly on the wrong side of them. What Karla did is both very impressive and, to me, at least as much of an indictment against Robinson as a player, period. He was abused in that series by Maul. The stats support it, as do the tapes (whoever has them). Here's the next game's output and a bit of recap between Malone and Robinson from Google: Chris Morris scored 25 points and a stifling defense held David Robinson to 11 points as the Utah Jazz routed the San Antonio Spurs, 101-86 to take a 3-1 lead in their Western Conference semifinal series. Karl Malone added 22 points and was 10-for-10 from the free throw line for the Jazz, who travel to San Antonio for Game Five on Tuesday. Also, as it was for the brunt of the series, it was Malone guarding Robinson so effectively. Player to player, Robinson was badly dominated in that series. 32-11, 22-11, 25-17 in games 3, 4 and 6 is a conistent drubbing. Then, looking back to 94, we have games such as these: San Antonio went without a field goal in 25 attempts over a 16-minute span of the second and third quarters Saturday, as Utah evened their playoff series at 1-1 with a 96-84 victory. [...] In the above game, Malone had 23 and 14. David? 12 points. Noticing a trend yet? No? Well, here's another example: SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Utah's second straight first-round playoff rout of San Antonio had 20,000 Jazz fans rocking. Karl Malone, however, sat out the victory dance. He hopes to celebrate Thursday night, when Utah can wrap up its best-of-5 series with the Spurs in the Delta Center -- and avoid a Texas finale on Saturday. "I can say that these were our best back-to-back games of the season, but they are behind us now," Malone said after scoring 24 points in Utah's 105-72 triumph Tuesday night. "The biggest game of the season is Thursday night." Malone also grabbed 13 rebounds as the Jazz manhandled cold-shooting San Antonio, which shot just 32 percent to Utah's 53 percent. [...] David Robinson and Antoine Carr paced the Spurs with 16 points each. [...] While Malone hit 10 of 17 shots, Robinson, the NBA's leading scorer, hit only eight of 21 attempts. So, let's see, just through a quick browse, I have 5 games over two playoff series where Robinson put up mediocre role player numbers against Malone. These are star stats? Not hardly. In a way I agree: David is soft and, yes, from that irrelevant in discussions of the truly great C's. It's funny how you label Malone as "ugly" (I would have gone with dirty, evil, some form of hellspawn, etc.), thus labeling his game fully, but within the same paragraph then pretend that labels are "meaningless". Nice contradiction. I know I'm laughing. Labels are "irrelevant", except, of course, for the times you want to throw them around. Malone was a dirty b*stard, no doubt. Well, there's as little doubt on that one as there is on the meme about Robinson being a a charmin-soft poser that couldn't stand toe to toe with the truly great bigs of his gen.
Which everything you say here means that it is not factual to imply that citing Euro or NCAA stats is "skewing stats". And this projection thing is nonsense. I must have posted 10 times that projections do not count unless the player plays over 500 minutes. In case you missed it Hollinger and 82games.com don't even count Spanoulis' stats or anyone else if under 500 minutes. I never used any "projection" based on scrub PT only if he played over 500 minutes in the NBA. How this is in any way confusing is beyond me. He didn't actually play 500 minutes in the NBA so the projection doesn't count, meaning his "projection" is a conjecture on IF he played more than 500 minutes. To claim that someone citing this is skewing stats or whatever other nonsense is nothing more than being complete disengenous. Does it even register with you that 82games.com and Hollinger also use this same exact rule of 500 minutes or do you simply make your own rules on how stats are conceived? If player A does not play 500 minutes in NBA then his Hollinger Euro stat is not yet applied. If player A does not play 500 minutes in NBA then his Hollinger stats do not count. I never skewed any stats I simply used stats that some people here believe "do not count." And it should be pointed out that the Rockets GM himself uses these stats that "do not count." Get back to me if you actually ever have a point. And should be noted here, you have attempted to hijack this thread, which is against rules. I would not let blatant untrue accusation against me stand. I will post no more in your blatant hijack of this thread.
Yes he does have limited defence! Duncan has limitations of speed and athleticism, he tries to compensate for these deficiencies with his intelligent play. On the other hand Hakeem had excess speed and athleticism and could perform wonders - like blocking Jabars famed Hook shot and Michael Jordans three point shot. Duncan would never be able to make these defencive plays- so he has limitations and limited defence when comparisons are made.
Sorry but your post was confusing. To me when you used the word limited I thought you meant that his D was indeed limited and not very good, in other words limited like doesn't play D. I didn't think you meant limitations on the defensive end because of quickness, which indeed compared to Hakeem would be a weakness. I think you should have used the word limitation initially instead of limited, I think that was a bit confusing but I understand what you are saying. Not that Duncan's D is bad, just not as all around as Hakeem's because of some physical limits to athletic ability.
i saw this thread on rockets talk Duncan<Hakeem. This would answer the question from the Spurs's fans, but the Spurs fans can argue the case with the Ducan's four rings, then we can not deny it.
i saw this thread on rockets talk Hakeem >Duncan. This would answer the question from the Spurs's fans, but the Spurs fans can argue the case with the Ducan's four rings, then we can not deny it.
