tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:

TMC wrote:

tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:houston was at disadvantage at two positions and at you can make the case that they had the edge at two though that is debateable. Doesn't sound "undoubtably superior".

Houston was undoubtably superior... due to Hakeem. The rest of the teams were pretty even. Even Shaq admitted that.

agreed. though horry did so well that series he was compared to pippen

Yes he was. He was compared to Pippen because he even handled the ball that series and did great. If he hadn't been traded he could have continued that and turned into a star player!

tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:First of all, you just exposed your ignorance by saying Vernon Maxwell and Otis Thorpe were on that team. They weren't. And just naming the players is tricky because it was a young horry and a young cassell. Try offering some semblance of statistical proof that could even suggest that the magic were inferior.

It doesn't matter what I give you. You're turning a deaf ear to obvious facts. I've referenced several reasons (backed up with stats, logic, and proof) as to why Orlando had a lesser team than Houston, but you're so hell-bent on defending your favorite all-time center (while bashing a future Hall-of-Famer that you, personally, don't care for) that you won't listen to reason. I'm done squandering my time on somebody whose going to plug his ears and scream everytime I show him the logical side of the debate. It's not worth the headache for me to explain the obvious to you.

tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:And if you think that PER is "official" you are truly a sad case. PER says that chris paul is better than magic and kidd and Wade was this year's MVP.

I posted the link to the stats, but you're obviously in need of spelling sh*t out...

SHAQ: 29.3 PPG, 11.4 RPG, 2.4 BPG, 58.3% from the field... All NBA 2nd Team
DREAM: 27.8 PPG, 10.8 RPG, 3.4 BPG, 51.7% from the field... All NBA 3rd Team

Shaquille O'Neal outplayed Hakeem Olajuan during the 1995 season. If you disagree, you're the sad case. It's so painfully obvious that it shouldn't need clarification for somebody whose putting out effort to avoid the truth (simply because he likes the way Hakeem had more post-moves than Shaq). O'Neal was a better shooter from the field (because he took higher percentage shots), was poorer from the free-throw line (but that didn't matter, because Shaq still scored more points than Hakeem), and (ultimately) was put on a higher All-NBA team than Hakeem because he outplayed him all year long.

But, okay, let's disregard the PER's because they don't help your case. Shaq had a higher Usage Rating, more Player Wins, and more Win Shares... along with a higher PER. I admit, Hakeem was (undeniably) the league's best center for a long time... but Shaq clearly took the '95 season, hands down. But, don't worry, I'm sure you'll continue to argue in favor or Hakeem because "you liked him more". Please.

pest and 32...cagematching it on every forum
truth is, both hakeem and shaq belong in a discussion of five greatest centers of all time along with kareem, wilt and Russell, clearly hakeem was more skilled, but equally clearly, Shaq was literally unstoppable in his prime. Also true that Shaq has more rings, but also true that hakeem never had the robin to his batman that penny, dwade and kobe were for shaq. In the end, I think it boils down to aesthetic preference, grace versus brawn - both highly effective, among the most effective ever...

coltraning wrote:pest and 32...cagematching it on every forum
truth is, both hakeem and shaq belong in a discussion of five greatest centers of all time along with kareem, wilt and Russell, clearly hakeem was more skilled, but equally clearly, Shaq was literally unstoppable in his prime. Also true that Shaq has more rings, but also true that hakeem never had the robin to his batman that penny, dwade and kobe were for shaq. In the end, I think it boils down to aesthetic preference, grace versus brawn - both highly effective, among the most effective ever...

I can't think on a better way to end this quarrel.

TMC wrote:

coltraning wrote:pest and 32...cagematching it on every forum
truth is, both hakeem and shaq belong in a discussion of five greatest centers of all time along with kareem, wilt and Russell, clearly hakeem was more skilled, but equally clearly, Shaq was literally unstoppable in his prime. Also true that Shaq has more rings, but also true that hakeem never had the robin to his batman that penny, dwade and kobe were for shaq. In the end, I think it boils down to aesthetic preference, grace versus brawn - both highly effective, among the most effective ever...

I can't think on a better way to end this quarrel.

I can - Hakeem was better than Shaq

migya wrote:I can - Hakeem was better than Shaq

Here we go again...

coltraning wrote:pest and 32...cagematching it on every forum
truth is, both hakeem and shaq belong in a discussion of five greatest centers of all time along with kareem, wilt and Russell, clearly hakeem was more skilled, but equally clearly, Shaq was literally unstoppable in his prime. Also true that Shaq has more rings, but also true that hakeem never had the robin to his batman that penny, dwade and kobe were for shaq. In the end, I think it boils down to aesthetic preference, grace versus brawn - both highly effective, among the most effective ever...

You said it all. Personal preference. I'm outta this thread!

pest = CAPTAIN... Save yourself... ***030***