Come on guys honest to god. Prime Shaq, and it's not close!
In his prime, I'm talking his apex as a player, in his best shape ever, a seasoned Shaq is ridiculously better than any single center to ever play the game.
The closest thing if you can interchange eras is Wilt, or Kareem.
You take Shaq from 2000 to 2002 and line him up magically against any center in the history of the game and he gets the better of the match up, period end of story!
Nobody could F with Shaq at the pinnacle 2-3 years of his career!
NOBODY! (and I have a great understanding of how talented Dream was in his prime). _________________ 16 and counting....
As much as I loved watching prime Shaq, Hakeem was MUCH MORE skilled than Shaq and it's not even close.
I'm struggling to think of anything that Shaq was better than Hakeem at besides being stronger physically. Hakeem while being arguably the greatest post player of all time, is also the greatest defending big man of all time, whIle also being a more skilled passer, free throw shooter, etc.
As great as Shaq was, I appreciate Hakeem's game much more as well as his own work ethic. Something that we can't say the same for Shaq. Most of the time now that I think of Shaq despite him being so dominate in his prime, is "what could have been" if he didn't get lazy or content.
The Dream is probably the most skilled bigman ever but that doesn't mean he's the best.
Prime Shaq would destroy him.
just not true. Shaq averaged 29.3 PPG, 11.4 RPG and 2.4 blocks in 94-95.....we can debate if he had entered his prime, but it was one of his more dominant years of his career. In the 1995 Finals, Shaq played well, Hakeem played better.
The years Horry played with Hakeem was when Hakeem was considered by many as the best or 2nd best player in the league.....so its not shocking for him to form that opinion.
1995 Shaq isn't Prime Shaq though.
I'm talking about the "Big Diesel" from 1999-2001. The unstoppable 300lbs monster that destroyed everyone in the playoffs.
Not taking away anything from Hakeem. He's one of the greats. Just not greater than Shaq.
I actually agree with Brian Shaw's view that Shaq was a more dominant player in Orlando.....although I think he became a better basketball player in LA. I saw Shaq do things during those early years with the Magic, when he was leaner and a little more athletic that I never saw in a Lakers uniform. The most unstoppable player through shear power and athleticism was Shaq's last two years in Orlando.
Yup. There was literally nothing like young Shaw in Orlando, and there hasn't been anything remotely close since. He was a specimen among specimen. The most gifted player in a world that included an in (near) prime Michael Jordan.
What Hakeem did to David Robinson in the playoff series, was pure ownage.
As well as what he did to Shaq. I think people in this forum are a bit bias. Shaq's dominance illusion is powerful dunks and high field goal percentage. That's not dominance. Was he ever a force in the middle defensively? Could he have rebounded more? Block more shots? Ask Shaq these questions and he'll even answer to you honestly.
Olajuwon in his prime was a one man wrecking crew on both sides of the court. When he focused a little more on offense in his back to back titles, his rebounds dipped, but it was still on par with Shaq. His blocks also dipped during his back to back years, but it was still higher than anything Shaq had ever done. One more difference is that Houston actually went to Hakeem in the crunch, where as the Lakers had to go to Kobe. And for those who followed those years, you knew dang well, you wanted the ball in Kobe's hands because Shaq's free throws and potential offensive fouls gave you guys white knuckles.
Horry is on point. Those choosing Shaq point to a small window from 99-2002 to make your arguments. We can choose from a much larger window to argue for Hakeem. And like I said, not even Shaq from 99-2002 touched any of Hakeems numbers in boards and blocks.
You're on point with all of this. I rate Shaq ahead of Dream personally, but I admit there may be a hint of bias to it. Shaq's offensive dominance and physicality pushes him just ahead of Hakeem in my rankings. And I also use peak value (which as you said, is mostly offensive, though Shaq could be dominant defensively when he wanted) to give Shaq his edge. But I can't quibble with putting Hakeem ahead too much.
I can't think of too many weaknesses that Hakeem had other than being a bit undersized for the then-traditional center position. He wasn't a big hefty center but he was so nimble and quick, with quick hands (high steal rate for a center). He could easily dominate in today's NBA too.
I don't think he'd dominate but he'd be a top 3 player. Probably only behind LeBron.
lol Hakeem would pretty much be the prototype center for this generation. He'd wreck dudes out here.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:42 pm Post subject:
KBH wrote:
adkindo wrote:
paolomagma wrote:
adkindo wrote:
paolomagma wrote:
The Dream is probably the most skilled bigman ever but that doesn't mean he's the best.
Prime Shaq would destroy him.
just not true. Shaq averaged 29.3 PPG, 11.4 RPG and 2.4 blocks in 94-95.....we can debate if he had entered his prime, but it was one of his more dominant years of his career. In the 1995 Finals, Shaq played well, Hakeem played better.
The years Horry played with Hakeem was when Hakeem was considered by many as the best or 2nd best player in the league.....so its not shocking for him to form that opinion.
1995 Shaq isn't Prime Shaq though.
I'm talking about the "Big Diesel" from 1999-2001. The unstoppable 300lbs monster that destroyed everyone in the playoffs.
Not taking away anything from Hakeem. He's one of the greats. Just not greater than Shaq.
I actually agree with Brian Shaw's view that Shaq was a more dominant player in Orlando.....although I think he became a better basketball player in LA. I saw Shaq do things during those early years with the Magic, when he was leaner and a little more athletic that I never saw in a Lakers uniform. The most unstoppable player through shear power and athleticism was Shaq's last two years in Orlando.
Yup. There was literally nothing like young Shaw in Orlando, and there hasn't been anything remotely close since. He was a specimen among specimen. The most gifted player in a world that included an in (near) prime Michael Jordan.
I can't think of too many weaknesses that Hakeem had other than being a bit undersized for the then-traditional center position. He wasn't a big hefty center but he was so nimble and quick, with quick hands (high steal rate for a center). He could easily dominate in today's NBA too.
No one would be able to guard Hakeem in today's NBA.
The Dream is probably the most skilled bigman ever but that doesn't mean he's the best.
Prime Shaq would destroy him.
just not true. Shaq averaged 29.3 PPG, 11.4 RPG and 2.4 blocks in 94-95.....we can debate if he had entered his prime, but it was one of his more dominant years of his career. In the 1995 Finals, Shaq played well, Hakeem played better.
The years Horry played with Hakeem was when Hakeem was considered by many as the best or 2nd best player in the league.....so its not shocking for him to form that opinion.
1995 Shaq isn't Prime Shaq though.
I'm talking about the "Big Diesel" from 1999-2001. The unstoppable 300lbs monster that destroyed everyone in the playoffs.
Not taking away anything from Hakeem. He's one of the greats. Just not greater than Shaq.
I actually agree with Brian Shaw's view that Shaq was a more dominant player in Orlando.....although I think he became a better basketball player in LA. I saw Shaq do things during those early years with the Magic, when he was leaner and a little more athletic that I never saw in a Lakers uniform. The most unstoppable player through shear power and athleticism was Shaq's last two years in Orlando.
Yup. There was literally nothing like young Shaw in Orlando, and there hasn't been anything remotely close since. He was a specimen among specimen. The most gifted player in a world that included an in (near) prime Michael Jordan.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:37 pm Post subject:
lakersken80 wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cC5fkye1-dI
Respect.
Hakeem probably added years to Kobe being the greatest player on planet earth....because what many consider vintage Kobe moves, and the foundation of his game late in his career was the items he picked up from Hakeem. The first 10-13 years of Kobe's career, it was easy to see the Jordan influence, but later it was much more Hakeem in his game.
I would take shaq in today's nba just to see him annihilate this small league. Hakeem I think would fit in superbly in modern day offense but I also think he'd be defended much better now then before because the league has gone smaller in general (like hakeem a smaller type center that is a prototype for small ball centers). Hakeem skill was superb but those are still tough shots regardless. Shaq's fg% would be even higher in today's nba because of how small and soft the league has gone. I think in this case when they zig you zag and shaq is the perfect zag in todays nba.
Overall who is better? Hakeem is the most complete center of the two, but shaq as an offensive force is unstoppable. Shaq had some holes in his game mainly free throws but if I had to choose I'd choose shaq because he's the surest 2 points. He's the surest shot, highest % shot. Not even off lobs or anything. Just let him go to work and the play has a very very high% of success. I imagine hakeem vs the best centers in nba history and I can see him having some trouble pulling off his fancy shots at a high %. Shaq I can see still being able to get me high % shot vs any historic big.
I imagine hakeem vs the best centers in nba history and I can see him having some trouble pulling off his fancy shots at a high %.
Not sure why you think you have to "imagine" it. Hakeem actually did play against Kareem, Moses Malone, Shaq, David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, Robert Parish, Alonzo Mourning, Dikembe Mutumbo. He did fine against all these Hall of Famers.
The only guy who really gave him fits was Mark Eaton.
What other "best centers in nba history" do you think he'd have trouble against and why?
I imagine hakeem vs the best centers in nba history and I can see him having some trouble pulling off his fancy shots at a high %.
Not sure why you think you have to "imagine" it. Hakeem actually did play against Kareem, Moses Malone, Shaq, David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, Robert Parish, Alonzo Mourning, Dikembe Mutumbo. He did fine against all these Hall of Famers.
The only guy who really gave him fits was Mark Eaton.
What other "best centers in nba history" do you think he'd have trouble against and why?
I guess I should rephrase. I imagine prime hakeem vs other historic centers in their primes. Prime kareem, wilt, russell, or shaq, I'd take all 4 of those guys over hakeem. Not that hakeem isn't as skilled as those guys but those others guys dominate in a way I'd be more comfortable with at the center position. Hakeem as others have said was a bit undersized. Might be why he used quickness agility and smarts to beat his opponents. His versatility and skill is outstanding and maybe even unmatched by any center in history, but I'd roll with the sheer physical talent of the other bigs I mentioned in their primes. Russell I have reservations about, but his dominance on the defensive end is unparalleled and is also what gives him the edge over hakeem as well imo. They just give me a better chance to win imo because their shots are high % that don't rely on, at times, complex footwork, fakes, technique etc to pull off. Their bread and butter were simple, effective, and due to the level of physical dominance of the players, easy to pull off. Easier shots are typically higher % shots. In russells case, defense leading to offense.
in reality, hakeem was better than shaq when they played. shaq was young and dominant at the time when it happened. shaq learned a few things, hakeem retired, and then shaq looked unstoppable. doesn't mean he can still regularly beat hakeem. he probably wouldn't look as bad as the first time, but it is very possible that hakeem would also figure out a few more additional tricks for shaq.
shaq's only advantage is size and strength. for example, yao did well vs shaq. hakeem would do much better than yao.
duncan, lol. hakeem is way better than duncan. same size, same whatever you distinguish. if you want a big man that cant play center, but you still want the size of a center, nobody will top hakeem. duncan is the poor man version of it.
in reality, hakeem was better than shaq when they played. shaq was young and dominant at the time when it happened. shaq learned a few things, hakeem retired, and then shaq looked unstoppable. doesn't mean he can still regularly beat hakeem. he probably wouldn't look as bad as the first time, but it is very possible that hakeem would also figure out a few more additional tricks for shaq.
shaq's only advantage is size and strength. for example, yao did well vs shaq. hakeem would do much better than yao.
duncan, lol. hakeem is way better than duncan. same size, same whatever you distinguish. if you want a big man that cant play center, but you still want the size of a center, nobody will top hakeem. duncan is the poor man version of it.
As the 22-year-old focal point for the Magic, Shaq averaged 28.0 points, 12.5 boards, 6.3 assists and 2.5 blocks in that 1995 NBA Finals series against Houston ... shooting 59.5% from the field along the way against the HOF Olajuwon, reputed to be one of the best defensive centers of all time ...
Are you (bleep) kidding with this "as bad" nonsense? Outside of Shaq himself in the 2000 - 2002 timeframe and Magic in 1987, that 22-year-old's NBA Finals performance in 1995 is literally better than any individual Laker's NBA Finals performance over the past 30 years.
in reality, hakeem was better than shaq when they played. shaq was young and dominant at the time when it happened. shaq learned a few things, hakeem retired, and then shaq looked unstoppable. doesn't mean he can still regularly beat hakeem. he probably wouldn't look as bad as the first time, but it is very possible that hakeem would also figure out a few more additional tricks for shaq.
shaq's only advantage is size and strength. for example, yao did well vs shaq. hakeem would do much better than yao.
duncan, lol. hakeem is way better than duncan. same size, same whatever you distinguish. if you want a big man that cant play center, but you still want the size of a center, nobody will top hakeem. duncan is the poor man version of it.
As the 22-year-old focal point for the Magic, Shaq averaged 28.0 points, 12.5 boards, 6.3 assists and 2.5 blocks in that 1995 NBA Finals series against Houston ... shooting 59.5% from the field along the way against the HOF Olajuwon, reputed to be one of the best defensive centers of all time ...
Are you (bleep) kidding with this "as bad" nonsense? Outside of Shaq himself in the 2000 - 2002 timeframe and Magic in 1987, that 22-year-old's NBA Finals performance in 1995 is literally better than any individual Laker's NBA Finals performance over the past 30 years.
you are misinterpreting the attitude of my post big time. we are comparing the best of best big men, so if i describe it as "bad" vs hakeem, what am i really saying? i'm not saying luc longly levels of bad...i'm saying compared to hakeem (the best of the best) it wasn't enough to beat him (depending on how you look at it).
hakeem definitely outplayed shaq in that matchup. and i don't mean that from the team perspective...sometimes (like wilt) you are better, but you're team is worse despite your great play (jerry west). this is not like that. shaq played great, so did hakeem...but their individual matchup showed that hakeem outplayed shaq as an individual.
btw, shaq himself discusses the event in this way, so you are just overreacting.
in reality, hakeem was better than shaq when they played. shaq was young and dominant at the time when it happened. shaq learned a few things, hakeem retired, and then shaq looked unstoppable. doesn't mean he can still regularly beat hakeem. he probably wouldn't look as bad as the first time, but it is very possible that hakeem would also figure out a few more additional tricks for shaq.
shaq's only advantage is size and strength. for example, yao did well vs shaq. hakeem would do much better than yao.
duncan, lol. hakeem is way better than duncan. same size, same whatever you distinguish. if you want a big man that cant play center, but you still want the size of a center, nobody will top hakeem. duncan is the poor man version of it.
As the 22-year-old focal point for the Magic, Shaq averaged 28.0 points, 12.5 boards, 6.3 assists and 2.5 blocks in that 1995 NBA Finals series against Houston ... shooting 59.5% from the field along the way against the HOF Olajuwon, reputed to be one of the best defensive centers of all time ...
Are you (bleep) kidding with this "as bad" nonsense? Outside of Shaq himself in the 2000 - 2002 timeframe and Magic in 1987, that 22-year-old's NBA Finals performance in 1995 is literally better than any individual Laker's NBA Finals performance over the past 30 years.
you are misinterpreting the attitude of my post big time. we are comparing the best of best big men, so if i describe it as "bad" vs hakeem, what am i really saying? i'm not saying luc longly levels of bad...i'm saying compared to hakeem (the best of the best) it wasn't enough to beat him (depending on how you look at it).
hakeem definitely outplayed shaq in that matchup. and i don't mean that from the team perspective...sometimes (like wilt) you are better, but you're team is worse despite your great play (jerry west). this is not like that. shaq played great, so did hakeem...but their individual matchup showed that hakeem outplayed shaq as an individual.
btw, shaq himself discusses the event in this way, so you are just overreacting.
There is definitely a common belief that Hakeem dominated Shaq in the finals. Shaq certainly respects Hakeem a lot and has played into the hyperbola at times.
Lots of people (including Hakeem fans like Robert Horry) think Shaq played him equal or better and was simply let down by his teammates.
Depending on your point of view, the difference was either (a) shaq and penny commiting a mess of turnovers or (b) scott and anderson being unable to hit the rim with their shots.
It was a series where defense trumped offense.
Personally, this one series isn't a significant factor in how I compare Shaq and Hakeem's individual career.
Joined: 12 Jan 2008 Posts: 3820 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:56 pm Post subject:
adkindo wrote:
BynumForThree wrote:
People get too caught up with "style points."
It doesn't really matter how you get your points if your opponent can't stop you. Prime Shaq was better than Hakeem even if he got his through sheer physical domination and not pretty footwork and fakes.
Not sure where the "style points" are that you speak of....their pure career production was very similar...
Hakeem - 18 Years - 21.8 PPG - 11.1 PPG - 2.5 APG - 3.1 BPG
Shaq - 19 Years - 23.7 PPG - 10.9 PPG - 2.5 APG - 2.3 BPG
You may decide either one was better based on Finals, MVP's, etc., but it has nothing to do with "style points" within their production. Also, Hakeem played his entire career during a period of great centers in the NBA.
BTW, I would take Shaq all day, every day, but I just don't find it surprising that many others would prefer Hakeem. Watching Hakeem in the post and the "dreamshake" on the baseline, there is no doubt where the influence of Kobe's post game was derived from.
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 Posts: 10015 Location: Los Angeles/ Alhambra, CA
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 3:37 pm Post subject:
YSong wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Prime Kobe + Prime Shaq
or
Prime Kobe + Prime Hakeem.
I pick Kobe + Hakeem. Both would get along because both work hard. Hakeem would never get traded. I think those 2 guys can win like 6-7 championships.
Wow... mind-boggling if you got Prime Kobe + Prime Hakeem together.
I mean, Prime Kobe + Prime Pau was a thing of beauty, just because of all the variations on pick and roll, all the passing, crazy court sense, just devastating combo there.
But PH and PK?? Yikes. Shut-down defensive versatility that would be off-the-charts incredible, the edge would have to go to Hakeem on defense. No way PH would get burned on pick and roll as much as Prime Shaq was, and Hakeem was a seriously better all-around defender and shotblocker than pau.
If it was PH + PK vs. PS + PK alone, just two-on-two, it'd be close...
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum