speaking of sand. he owns the coarsest set of hands i have ever shaken. i think he worked in construction part time.
Will watch the video later, but I definitely have him in my top 10 and he's a top 3 player that I've watched over the last 30 years or so
Sounds like you are talking about something very similar to Ben Taylor’s Thinking Basketball series of the best NBA peaks/careers done in 2018. There was a revisit done last season on his podcast but I can’t find the episode at the moment. He ends up with Hakeem/Shaq as his 5th/6th best of all time.
Video notes Hakeem only played with one person who made an all-nba team, which is not true. In a rocket's uniform, Clyde made third team in 1995 (Championship) and Barkley made third team in 1996. Bill Simmons recently did a recap of Clyde's career in response to a prevailing narrative that Damian Lillard is the greatest Blazer of all time. Clyde was an unbelievable talent that is being overlooked here.
I think he said full season. Clyde wasn't an all-star in 95 and he did say until 96 and it's not about overlooking Clyde-it's pointing out that Hakeem spent so long without someone of that caliber until his mid 30s. I too argue Dame is not the greatest Blazer. Clyde led them to 2 Finals appearances and never missed the playoffs as the teams best player. Dame got 1 WCF sweep and 2 missed playoffs and a whole lot of 1st round exits. Dame also ranked horribly and last as a defender even as Harden lowlights made their rounds. The highlight of his game is pulling up from inside half court and just casually throwing up 3s. Arenas used to do that in charity and all star games. It's just a different era where they can just do whatever they want out there. All that said, and Bill Walton is the franchises only MVP and FMVP. He's the only one who brought them a championship. IDC about injuries after the fact, the fact is he swept Kareem en route to a championship for your franchise. You don't just overlook or disrespect that mans short prime. If DRose led Chicago to championship and FMVP on top of his MVP, he'd be forever legendary and yet people scoff at Walton's name when he's spoken of.
No. Thorpe could play some offense, he never took his shoes off during a game, and never pouted on the bench. It was always team with OT, never about himself. And we don't beat the Knicks without him holding his own against their thug frontcourt players.
Clyde was out there with the Blazers averaging 27, 8, and 6 off 51% shooting in an era when scoring was much less than it is today. Hakeem didn't get that version of Clyde. He got the "almost made the all-star game" version. People forget that Clyde Drexler in 1995 wasn't much better than Otis Thorpe in 1994. In my view, both of Hakeem's championships came alongside only roleplayers, no guys who produced at true star level, let alone superstar level.
No one in NBA history has won b2b without an all star teammate. Of course you can get into semantics and talk about former or future all-stars, but as it is, factually, it's true. When people today try to give Bron, KD and these guys super teaming up and try and act like it's always been done and they mention the Boston big 3 and Houston and Chuck. There's a difference from them at their ages coming together after being the man and carrying their teams their whole primes. Despite their age and decline, Houston the only team that could give Utah trouble. Shaq with 3 all stars -swept in 98. Beat in 5 in 97. Duncan and Robinson beat in 5 in 97. Houston lost their game 7 chance to a bear hug uncalled illegal pick leaving Stockton open in 97 and after being up 2-1 in 98 first round best of 5, Chuck goes down and it's over since we had no depth that we had to rely on the old big 3.
I think Hakeem would've won 5-6 titles if he had prime Drexler (or equivalent) with him during throughout his prime. Severe mismanagement by the Rockets imo. There was nothing wrong with Hakeem's game except that there was no one decent to pass the ball to most of the time. Barkey-KJ, Stockton-Malone, Shaq-Penny, Ewing-Starks, Payton-Kemp, MJ-Pippen, etc were all better duos than we ever had. The Rockets should have dumped anything and everything the moment Sampson went down and tanked or traded for Hakeem's sidekick. We got really lucky Rudy T did the math and realized his teammates should be taking as many 3's as possible. The game is half offense and half defense. He's an A+ on both ends. He's arguably the best defender in NBA history across eras. I do not believe for a second Bill Russell would be a better defender in all eras - he would get toasted on the perimeter. When the playoffs rolled around, Hakeem was forcefully damaging your offense at its core and scoring on ANYONE - and he had range on offense. I don't believe that MJ could single-handedly throw a wrench in your offense while maintaining his offensive dominance. In fact I don't believe any guard/forward/wing player has ever or will ever be able to have the defensive impact of a Hakeem simply due to position. Speculatively, I'm also quite sure that Hakeem could have developed a 3pt shot if it were necessary in his era. Some things we'll never know, but I really believe Hakeem has a case for the GOAT if we're talking purely about individual ability to impact a game. Guys like Nowitzki and Curry have won "Hero Titles" where they carried a team almost single-handedly, but none have done it twice in a row. Those Rockets had no business winning those titles. The only reason we have them is because Hakeem could lift a team higher on his own than most top 10 all time players.
I agree wholeheartedly that Dream is in the conversation for GOAT. The main thing Jordan has on him is titles. If Hakeem had Drexler for his entire career he would have half a dozen rings or more and likely considered better than Jordan since his teams would likely have defeated some of the Jordan led teams leading to Hakeem having more titles.
Patterson and Weinhauer are no Krause......those role players were a tad better in the regular season also. Great GMs can make a 6 title dynasty out of otherwise 2-3 titles. A great start would have been to have Dream, Jordan and Drexler all on the same team.
-We rejected Portlands offer of #2 and Clyde(coming off the bench for Paxson as a rookie) for Ralph. We could have either had our late 90s big 3 since rookies or Dream, Clyde and MJ. Damn. -Russel got regularly toasted in his own era. His team was just better and Russell didn't take offensive possessions away from anyone, but Wilt regularly gave him the business and Bob Petit handed him his only Finals loss while also destroying him individually. Still, you have to be impressed that he led little USF to 2 national titles and 60 win streak and then won a gold medal and then 11 rings. He was a winner everywhere be it with nobodies in a small school or stacked with HOF talent. All that said, i agree and believe Hakeem and KG and young Robinson are the most translatable greatest defenders across eras. Kareem and Duncan and Dike and Zo would get toasted on the perimeter in switch everything era today. Ben Wallace may have slowed down older Miami Shaq in that 7 game series loss(Kobe is the reason the Lakers lost to Detroit), but i don't think Ben is as good in the 90s vs the HOF C's. Dwight probably holds his own, but he's not switching everything today. As for Russell, he was a great athlete that could be unlocked further today to be out there on the perimeter, i just don't think teams are going to be okay with him getting pummeled for 40 and 20 games on the inside by bigger C's while adding only screens and ball movement but no shooting or scoring on O. He would be 6'11 in shoes today, but he was thin and lean and didn't look wiry strong like Hakeem. Hakeem had those broad shoulders and solid legs. Russell just thin top to bottom. It was a race track back then, but i dont see a body that can get strong enough to bang with 90s C's or Jokic and Embiid or even 2k's PF's. -Dirk 11 Mavs had some gamers. Tyson(DPOTY), Matrix, Terry, older but still 8 and 8 Jkidd who could actually shoot by then, Peja. They were a lot like the Rockets inside out 3 pt shooting, but with far better talent around Dirk. -Steph still had his big 3+Wiggins+Poole playing like a 6MOTY. Not like he carried nobodies. -Hakeem doesn't even need the 3 to be effective today. Instead of imaging him developing the 3, i imagine he would tighten up and level up his handles so he can take more guys off the dribble and go coast to coast or downhill attack like Giannis + keep his post skills including face up game and fadeaway game and hooks. I'd also imagine he'd become an even better passing big. I see the same for young explosive David Robinson
There was a Sporting News article in late 86 or maybe in 87 titled: "Team of the 90's: Houston Rockets" I wish I still had it. I cut it out back then and saved it somewhere...but that's been a while
Aaaah, what could have been... In 1983, the Rockets selected Rodney McCray with the #3 overall pick. He didn't even make this recap video about Hakeem's lack of help. Imagine if the Rockets had selected any other available elite talents in that draft (Byron Scott, Derrick Harper, Dale Ellis, or even Drexler, who was still on the board at pick #14). After they got Hakeem in 1984, the front office kept hoping a late first-rounder would make a difference. Can you imagine if Kareem had Steve Harris or Derrick Chievious on the wing instead of Byron Scott? As a big man, Hakeem was so much better at elevating everyone on the court. He might have had 200 more blocks if his teammates had common sense and just trusted him to block the shot rather than foul their man (who had beaten them).
