Tired of Jordan's Legacy, the Bulls were the best defensive team of the 90s.

[TitleMaster]

To the guy who's offended against the remarks denigrating Wilt with Hakeem comparisons, I hope you understand my point.

The fact when folks endlessly pump up Jordan, they do a disservice to other greats (see Wilt, Petit, Thurmond, Big O, etc), who happened to not be on top defensive teams, that could win titles like the Russell dynasty.

Realize, other than myself (& a few others), very few people pump up Hakeem. And I don't think Hakeem is better than either Russell or Wilt though I don't have first hand experience of it, since it was before my time.

And as for Kareem, his final 5 titles were on very good Lakers squads with Magic, Cooper, Nix/Wilkes or Worthy/Scott and they were during the latter part of his thirties. His prime was with the Bucks where in effect, he was top alpha male scorer but on a less than stellar defensive units and thus, couldn't get repeat titles since Oscar was past his prime after '72.

The same goes for Wilt's title runs, where in effect, he was expected to carry the Warriors, while the rest of his unit was shutdown by the Celtic's D. Sorry, but that seldom gets one a championship.

[GreenFaith1819]

Did someone on page 2 actually say that Hakeem was definitely a top 3 center all time and probably top 2 behind Russ? Come on man. Do you really think Hakeem was better then Wilt? Sure, Hakeem had a variety of excellent moves around the basket but who do you think would score more effectively there? Who is the better rebounder? The better offensive player or for that matter defensive player? I say one on one and Hakeem is lucky to get into double figures in scoring and probably would get 1/3 of his shots blocked. Wilt was way, way too much for Hakeem to handle. He was bigger (by a lot), stronger beyond compare, faster, probably quicker. My how time changes things.

Yes - Hakeem was better than Wilt...a better teammate, better passer, and better defender. And more agile.

Wilt was just BIG...Hakeem was Big, Agile, and quick - with an array of low-post moves that would put Shake and Bake out of business.

Who do you think Kobe stole "Dream Shake" from?

I'm not sure Hakeem makes my top 5 centers.  Russell, Wilt, and Jabbar are head and shoulder above Hakeem.  After that you could make a case for Hakeem, but I think you could also make a case for Shaq, George Mikan, or even Tim Duncan, who for all the times he was called a power forward, probably played more center. 

And while you can wax poetic about Hakeem having crap teams, I personally believe the mid '90s was the nadir of basketball quality.  Sure, he went to the Finals in 1994 with Otis Thorpe, Sam Cassell, Robert Horry, and Vernon Maxwell, but he also played against Patrick Ewing and the likes of John Starks, Charles Oakley, and Hubert Davis. 

I mean outside of Hakeem and Ewing, no one else on either of those teams could crack our starting rotation, and each team would be lucky if half of the rest of their starters could even crack our playoff rotation. 

I understand your rankings, but it's impossible to change my mind about Hakeem being the best All-Around Center. He was.

Wilt? Truly a Great One, but not as talented as Hakeem. Russell? The best Defensive Center.

I think your point is All Time, though, and I can understand that. To be honest, I was thinking in frameset of 90's until now.

One point I didn't want to bring up, though, because it may lessen the legacy of Russell and Wilt: There were not as many centers in the game that could compete with those two. IMO, I think the age of Centers were from 80's to 90's, and a few over the last 10 years (Yao, Dikembe, Zo, Shaq).

But again - my outlook is from my 20 year or so frame of reference.

Not to be disrespectful, but what type of analysis is "Wilt? Truly a Great One, but not as talented as Hakeem. Russell? The best Defensive Center"?

Let's get specific.  Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50.4 ppg (while pulling down over 25 rpg) in the '61-62 season.  That's absolutely absurd.  He also averaged 8.6 assists per game in the '67-68 season.  Even mentioning Hakeem's name in the same breath as Wilt is probably insulting to Wilt.  If Wilt hadn't had to contend with Russell's dynasty, he likely would've won more titles than Hakeem. 

Kareem is the all time leading scorer in NBA history and the owner of 6 rings.  I think that outstrips Hakeem.

And Russell in the winningest player in pro sports history, I think that puts him a notch above Hakeem as well. 

The notion that there weren't any great centers when Wilt and Russ played is flawed too.  Kareem was actually in the league when Wilt was still around.  And let's not do a disservice to Hall of Fame big men that played in the '60s like Willis Reed, Nate Thurmond, Dolph Schayes, Bob Petit, and Wes Unseld.

You made good points, Jon - all of them true.

But I stand by my original comment: Hakeem Olajuwon was the Best Center, Ever. That doesn't mean he won the most titles, blocked the most shots, got the most rebounds.

He was the Total Package, IMO - Smart, Could make his freethrows, score inside, outside, a wide-array of low-post moves, good passer, Stellar Defender, quick, agile.

Out of all the Centers you named, none of them could tout all of those skills.

[Celtics4ever]

Would it be best to say he was the most complete center ever?   Wilt was way more over powering, Russ was a better defender though.  Hakeem though was very skilled in all areas, I grant that, but he didn't dominate his era like say a Wilt or Russell did.  He dominated a few years, played well through out his career.  Definitely, no slouch.   Curious, how does all time stat wise does Shaq compare with Hakeem I think the answer may surprise you.

[TitleMaster]

He was the Total Package, IMO - Smart, Could make his freethrows, score inside, outside, a wide-array of low-post moves, good passer, Stellar Defender, quick, agile.

Thank you GreenFaith1819, I concur 100%.

And then, using my thesis statement of great defensive team plus one alpha male scorer/defender => championships is the reason why the Bulls would not have had a dynasty had Hakeem played on the Riley coached Knick starting 91-92 season, in place of Ewing.

[Celtics17]

I think if Hakeem had played power forward you could probably make a very good case for him being the best ever. When you say he is the best center ever though he has some pretty stiff competition. AS mentioned, you might be surprised with how dominant Shaq was in his prime too. Was he as complete of a player? Well, it's really hard to say. He didnt block as many shots, maybe, or get as many steals but if you take Shaq in his prime and Olajuwon in his and need points and/or rebounds then I go with Shaq. You just couldnt stop him in his prime.

[GreenFaith1819]

I think if Hakeem had played power forward you could probably make a very good case for him being the best ever. When you say he is the best center ever though he has some pretty stiff competition. AS mentioned, you might be surprised with how dominant Shaq was in his prime too. Was he as complete of a player? Well, it's really hard to say. He didnt block as many shots, maybe, or get as many steals but if you take Shaq in his prime and Olajuwon in his and need points and/or rebounds then I go with Shaq. You just couldnt stop him in his prime.

Good Point - but who would you rather have at the free throw line?

A team could certainly ride Shaq, all the way up until the last minutes of the game.

I must say, though - Shaquille O'Neal, to his credit, ALWAYS managed to make those freethrows when it counted....

I'm glad to have the Big Fella onboard now, even if it is at the tail end of his career! He may be older, but he's not done by any stretch.

[BballTim]

Not to be disrespectful, but what type of analysis is "Wilt? Truly a Great One, but not as talented as Hakeem. Russell? The best Defensive Center"?

Let's get specific.  Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50.4 ppg (while pulling down over 25 rpg) in the '61-62 season.  That's absolutely absurd.  He also averaged 8.6 assists per game in the '67-68 season.  Even mentioning Hakeem's name in the same breath as Wilt is probably insulting to Wilt.  If Wilt hadn't had to contend with Russell's dynasty, he likely would've won more titles than Hakeem. 

Kareem is the all time leading scorer in NBA history and the owner of 6 rings.  I think that outstrips Hakeem.

And Russell in the winningest player in pro sports history, I think that puts him a notch above Hakeem as well. 

The notion that there weren't any great centers when Wilt and Russ played is flawed too.  Kareem was actually in the league when Wilt was still around.  And let's not do a disservice to Hall of Fame big men that played in the '60s like Willis Reed, Nate Thurmond, Dolph Schayes, Bob Petit, and Wes Unseld.

  The thing is you're comparing how Wilt did vs players in the 60s to how Hakeem did against players in the 90s. It's not really a fair comparison. Look at your HOF big men. Thurmond (a fairly weak HOF player IMO) was 6'11. Russell, Petit  and Reed were 6'9 and Schayes and Unseld were 6'7. Wilt had 4-6 inches on most of these guys. I'm not comparing the two players, but if you stuck Shaq in the nba in the early 60s he could easily score 40-50 points a game.

[Celtics17]

No Shaq is still a ways from being done and will help this squad a lot more then most think he will. As far as him having to shoot free throws to win a title, well, I dont remember him missing any that cost his team a title. I guess that is certainly possible but at least the ones they did win he seemed so dominant that a few free throws would probably not decide the series.

[moiso]

Hakeem was the better, more skilled, and more complete player.  But Shaq was still more dominating, in part due to his freakish size and athleticism combination.

But out of all the centers, the most underrated is Kareem.  Probably because he played until he was 57 years old.  The Kareem I remember was an old bald guy.  But if you go back to his earlier years, he was an amazing all around center.  He held his own and kicked the butts of all the great centers, including Wilt.  Based only on the first half of his career, a case can be made that Kareem is the best center ever.

[GreenFaith1819]

Hakeem was the better, more skilled, and more complete player.  But Shaq was still more dominating, in part due to his freakish size and athleticism combination.

But out of all the centers, the most underrated is Kareem.  Probably because he played until he was 57 years old.  The Kareem I remember was an old bald guy.  But if you go back to his earlier years, he was an amazing all around center.  He held his own and kicked the butts of all the great centers, including Wilt.  Based only on the first half of his career, a case can be made that Kareem is the best center ever.

Can't argue with you there - A defining moment for Kareem, I think was that game VS HOU in the 86 WCF's. HOU won on that last sec shot by Sampson, but man throughout that game Kareem held his own against both Hakeem and Sampson. They both pummeled LA, but Kareem played proudly.

I don't think Hakeem hit his full stride until the 90's, but sure Kareem was a great one, too.

[Celtics17]

Kareem may have 'kicked Wilts butt' but it was an old Wilt who had averaged probably 45 minutes a game for his career. A young Wilt would have destroyed Kareem.

[Celtics17]

If you want to learn a little about Wilt go to 'Greatness Revisited" in the area called Bleacher Report. I realize that talking about Wilt on this site may be bad but let's give the man his due.

One of the more interesting things I read said that Wilt was playing Walt Bellamy, a 6' 11" guy who weighed almost 250 ( I guess that is one of those short guys you are referring to that he played against). Anyway, Bellamy was averaging over 29 points per game and Wilt told him before the game started that Bellamy would not get a shot off in the first half and then went out and blocked all nine shots that Bellamy took. At the beginning of the second half he told him that he could "go ahead and play" now. Noone has ever dominated the game of professional basketball the way Wilt did. Love him or hate him but give him his due.

[BballTim]

If you want to learn a little about Wilt go to 'Greatness Revisited" in the area called Bleacher Report. I realize that talking about Wilt on this site may be bad but let's give the man his due.

One of the more interesting things I read said that Wilt was playing Walt Bellamy, a 6' 11" guy who weighed almost 250 ( I guess that is one of those short guys you are referring to that he played against). Anyway, Bellamy was averaging over 29 points per game and Wilt told him before the game started that Bellamy would not get a shot off in the first half and then went out and blocked all nine shots that Bellamy took. At the beginning of the second half he told him that he could "go ahead and play" now. Noone has ever dominated the game of professional basketball the way Wilt did. Love him or hate him but give him his due.

  Yes, since I specifically mention players that are 6'9 or under or 4-6 inches shorter than Wilt when I talk of "short guys", it's unsurprising that you'd think I meant one of the few 6'11 players in the league. And nobody's saying that Wilt didn't dominate in his time. But, honestly, if you put Shaq in the early 60s when most of the centers were 6'9 or under (not all, as you noticed) what would have happened? Keep in mind that the lane was narrower at the time, so he'd be getting the ball a few feet closer to the basket than he does now on every play. It would get pretty ugly. Possibly Wilt ugly. Admit it.

[moiso]

Wilt was ultra talented, but Shaq played with much more physicality so Shaq may have dominated even more than Wilt did.
Another strike against Wilt in my opinion was how infatuated he was with stats, often at the expense of winning.  And having read just about every book about the nba written in the last 30 years, it is absolutely surprising to hear all of the negative quotes about him from former peers, coaches, and teammates.  Most were amazed at his talent but considered him somewhat of a choker, and not a winner for the majority of is career.  I don't hear much negative stuff about Shaq from his peers.

[Greenbean]

To the guy who's offended against the remarks denigrating Wilt with Hakeem comparisons, I hope you understand my point.

The fact when folks endlessly pump up Jordan, they do a disservice to other greats (see Wilt, Petit, Thurmond, Big O, etc), who happened to not be on top defensive teams, that could win titles like the Russell dynasty.

Realize, other than myself (& a few others), very few people pump up Hakeem. And I don't think Hakeem is better than either Russell or Wilt though I don't have first hand experience of it, since it was before my time.

And as for Kareem, his final 5 titles were on very good Lakers squads with Magic, Cooper, Nix/Wilkes or Worthy/Scott and they were during the latter part of his thirties. His prime was with the Bucks where in effect, he was top alpha male scorer but on a less than stellar defensive units and thus, couldn't get repeat titles since Oscar was past his prime after '72.

The same goes for Wilt's title runs, where in effect, he was expected to carry the Warriors, while the rest of his unit was shutdown by the Celtic's D. Sorry, but that seldom gets one a championship.

You can easily pump up players who historically have failed to receive the proper attention WITHOUT downgrading players for playing on great teams to make your point.