Wilt Today

[kflo]

Originally posted by <b>Priest</b>!


Excuses..da dream worked shaq..so bad that shaq said he wanted to be like the dream...it was more like jordan vs marleje

yeah, shaq ONLY averaged 28 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 6.3 apg, 59% fg%.

[kflo]

Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!


I think Hakeem and Wilt are the 2 greatest centers, they would've had battles, neither would be able to stop each other. I think they both have similiar talents, meaning they were both unusually agile for people their height. Wilt would have the strength advantage and the Dream would have the better post moves.

i'd put kareem ahead of hakeem. particularly a young kareem. better offensively (by a decent amount), a great rebounder and strong defender. more dominant overall.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!


I think Hakeem and Wilt are the 2 greatest centers

I agree. I rank them (based on prime NBA value):

1. Hakeem Olajuwon
2. Wilt Chamberlain
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Shaquille O'Neal
5. Bill Russell
6. David Robinson
7. Moses Malone
8. Bill Walton
9. Patrick Ewing
10. Alonzo Mourning

[kflo]

hakeem won 1 mvp. take jordan out of the equation, and hakeem still would have won 1 mvp (he finished top 3 twice in his career).

the only argument for hakeem would be if you analyzed his offensive & defensive skill / ability and concluded that made him the best. because by any other objective measure, stats, accomplishments, awards, success, dominance for era, he lags behind his peers.

hakeem was awesome, but i don't think he warrants a top spot.

[Yyzlin]

Taking Minstrel's cue, here are my center ratings, based on prime value.

1. Wilt Chamberlain
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. David Robinson
5. Hakeem Olajuwan
6. Bill Russell
7. Moses Malone
8. Patrick Ewing
9. Alonzo Mourning
10. Artis Gilmore

[kflo]

ok, here goes:

russell
wilt
kareem
shaq
hakeem
moses
robinson
ewing
reed
thurmond

walton fits somewhere ahead of robinson, but he just didn't do enough.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!

the only argument for hakeem would be if you analyzed his offensive & defensive skill / ability and concluded that made him the best.

That's exactly what I did.

because by any other objective measure, stats, accomplishments, awards, success, dominance for era, he lags behind his peers.

True. And those things all have flaws as measures of cross-era individual ability, in my opinion.

It's satisfying to sum things up quantitatively, but my opinion is that this sort of thing is a purely qualitative exercise and the numbers, awards, etc are all just nice evidence to examine, but not conclusive.

[Yyzlin]

Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!


That's exactly what I did.



True. And those things all have flaws as measures of cross-era individual ability, in my opinion.

It's satisfying to sum things up quantitatively, but my opinion is that this sort of thing is a purely qualitative exercise and the numbers, awards, etc are all just nice evidence to examine, but not conclusive.

I don't any major complains about your list, as it is a subjective exercise, but your inclusion of Walton is curious, as his greatest merits were in the college game.

[Bartholomew Hunt]

There are a lot of good posts on this thread. I think it is impossible to judge accurately. If he was thrust directly from the 60s/70s to today's game, he would suck. If he had developed in the modern era as one person mentioned, he probably would dominate. The best way to judge players is to acknowledge what they did in their time regardless of competition.

[kflo]

Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!


That's exactly what I did.



True. And those things all have flaws as measures of cross-era individual ability, in my opinion.

It's satisfying to sum things up quantitatively, but my opinion is that this sort of thing is a purely qualitative exercise and the numbers, awards, etc are all just nice evidence to examine, but not conclusive.

hakeem's actual production places him well below kareem offensively. scoring, effeciency, passing. would you argue he was as good offensively? i'd say no, based on skills and based on numbers.

his stats show him to be comparable as a peak rebounder. little to debate here, imo.

his stats show him with a slight edge defensively, although we are missing some data for kareem at his peak.

you'd have to argue that hakeem defensively makes up for the offensive disparity. stats don't support it. was he so far superior as a man defender?

hakeem's output, his success, may just not support your overall assessment. maybe it does.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by <b>Yyzlin</b>!

I don't any major complains about your list, as it is a subjective exercise, but your inclusion of Walton is curious, as his greatest merits were in the college game.

I said I was using peak value. At his peak, with the Blazers, he was truly great.

If I were going by career value, he wouldn't be on the list and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar would probably be tops.

[kflo]

Originally posted by <b>-D!</b>!
If he was thrust directly from the 60s/70s to today's game, he would suck.

i agree with the rest of your points. not this one. thrust him directly into today's game, and you'd have a 7'1 athletic freak who could play the game of basketball. he would be hard to stop today. he certainly wouldn't suck.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!


hakeem's actual production places him well below kareem offensively. scoring, effeciency, passing. would you argue he was as good offensively? i'd say no, based on skills and based on numbers.

I think at his peak, he was as good as anyone, offensively. His array of post moves were possibly the best I've ever seen (I'll admit I didn't see Chamberlain play live, but I've seen a lot of film) and he was a perfectly good passer.

his stats show him with a slight edge defensively, although we are missing some data for kareem at his peak.

The statistics aren't a bad thing to use, but I rarely judge defense by statistics. If you overwhelm your opponent and simply force him to give the ball up or to miss a shot, that's great defense, but not encapsulated in blocked shots and steals.

I'd say that Olajuwon was the best defensive center ever (and I've been priviledged to see some of the greatest in Olajuwon, Robinson, Mutombo and Mourning) with the caveat that Russell may have been better, as all I can judge from is film.

I've definitely seen more of Olajuwon.

you'd have to argue that hakeem defensively makes up for the offensive disparity. stats don't support it. was he so far superior as a man defender?

At his peak, I'm not sure I'd agree that Olajuwon was a poorer offensive weapon than Abdul-Jabbar. For a career, Abdul-Jabbar was superior, offensively.

At his peak, Olajuwon was a considerably better defender than Abdul-Jabbar, in my opinion, and better for his career.

If we go with peak value, I'd pick Olajuwon first. If we go with career value, I'd pick Abdul-Jabbar first.

[Yyzlin]

Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!


I said I was using peak value. At his peak, with the Blazers, he was truly great.

If I were going by career value, he wouldn't be on the list and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar would probably be tops.

Looking over Walton's accomplishments again, I'll agree. I never considered him enough of a scorer to warrant such a high ranking, but he does have incredible all-around skills. Being a fringe pick, it doesn't seem as much of a reach as before, though I still think Walton over Ewing is a stretch.

[kflo]

Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!


I think at his peak, he was as good as anyone, offensively. His array of post moves were possibly the best I've ever seen (I'll admit I didn't see Chamberlain play live, but I've seen a lot of film) and he was a perfectly good passer.



The statistics aren't a bad thing to use, but I rarely judge defense by statistics. If you overwhelm your opponent and simply force him to give the ball up or to miss a shot, that's great defense, but not encapsulated in blocked shots and steals.

I'd say that Olajuwon was the best defensive center ever (and I've been priviledged to see some of the greatest in Olajuwon, Robinson, Mutombo and Mourning) with the caveat that Russell may have been better, as all I can judge from is film.

I've definitely seen more of Olajuwon.



At his peak, I'm not sure I'd agree that Olajuwon was a poorer offensive weapon than Abdul-Jabbar. For a career, Abdul-Jabbar was superior, offensively.

At his peak, Olajuwon was a considerably better defender than Abdul-Jabbar, in my opinion, and better for his career.

If we go with peak value, I'd pick Olajuwon first. If we go with career value, I'd pick Abdul-Jabbar first.

again, i don't see how you could argue hakeem was on par offensively. there's just not much to justify it. his production was much lower. era adjusted, it's still not that close. he wasn't as efficient. he didn't score as much. he wasn't even the go-to guy kareem was. he didn't pass nearly as well. to call it a wash is to ignore or just discount what kareem did. he was unstoppable. as much as hakeem could do, he didn't shoot a remarkable %, and he didn't score a remarkable amount, even relative to his peers from his generation. i just don't see how you can call this even. you need more than to say "hakeem had alot of moves".

i agree that defensively, stats don't tell a complete story. but kareem was a dominant shot-blocker, he was athletic, he was very good defensively, at his peak.