Kareem Abdul-Jabbar V.S. Nate Thurmond H2H game by game

[ShaqAttack3234]

Without taking the time to add up the numbers, Kareem not only scored FAR less against Thurmond, he seldom shot 50%, and had many games in the low 40's, or worse.

Clearly, Thurmond was a beast defensively. All of which makes you wonder just how much BETTER Thurmond and especially Wilt were than Olajuwon and Ewing...both of whom an over-the-hill Kareem torched.

Given these numbers, I would HAVE to move Olajuwon behind Thurmond, and of course, WAY behind Wilt in any rankings. Thurmond was much better defensively, and a much better rebounder.

Great stuff!!

Ever think that individual match ups play a part? I'll try to cover everything that needs to be said here.

1.Kareem was about 230 pounds when he faced Thurmond so it makes sense that he was more vulnerable vs strong centers. The version that Olajuwon and Ewing faced was 265 pounds.

2.Kareem was a saavy veteran while Ewing was a rookie and Olajuwon was nowhere near the defensive player he'd become. Olajuwon would bite on a lot of fakes when he was young, look at how much more foul prone than he was later on.

3.The team that you're on plays a big factor. For example, Shaq put up better numbers in the '95 finals vs a prime Hakeem Olajuwon than he did in 2000 vs an old Sabonis and the 2000 version of Shaq was better, but the team's defensive strategy is very important and so is the physical match up. So by that logic, 2000 Sabonis was a better defender than '95 Olajuwon.

Continuing with match ups, Yao Ming had a lot more success defending Shaq in 2004 than Ben Wallace did, I guess a second year Yao was a better defender than the 4-time DPOY Ben Wallace? No, the reality is, Yao matched up better.

An old version of Shaq has had more success guarding Dwight Howard than Duncan did from 2007-2009, and so has Yao Ming. Means nothing as far as who the best overall defender is.

And post defense is just one aspect of defense.

The point I'm trying to get across is just because one player has much more success against a certain player, doesn't mean he's better, it just means that he does a better job reading that particular players moves or has physical attributes that make it tougher on certain players.

Also, acting like Olajuwon and Ewing were near their primes defensively in the mid 80's is ignorant.

And at Wilt being more skilled than Hakeem.

[magnax1]

Good post Shaqattack, but I do think that it's a bit different when it's in a playoffs series and your team loses because you can't play up to your normal standards like Kareem did in 73.

[jlauber]

Ever think that individual match ups play a part? I'll try to cover everything that needs to be said here.

1.Kareem was about 230 pounds when he faced Thurmond so it makes sense that he was more vulnerable vs strong centers. The version that Olajuwon and Ewing faced was 265 pounds.

2.Kareem was a saavy veteran while Ewing was a rookie and Olajuwon was nowhere near the defensive player he'd become. Olajuwon would bite on a lot of fakes when he was young, look at how much more foul prone than he was later on.

3.The team that you're on plays a big factor. For example, Shaq put up better numbers in the '95 finals vs a prime Hakeem Olajuwon than he did in 2000 vs an old Sabonis and the 2000 version of Shaq was better, but the team's defensive strategy is very important and so is the physical match up. So by that logic, 2000 Sabonis was a better defender than '95 Olajuwon.

Continuing with match ups, Yao Ming had a lot more success defending Shaq in 2004 than Ben Wallace did, I guess a second year Yao was a better defender than the 4-time DPOY Ben Wallace? No, the reality is, Yao matched up better.

An old version of Shaq has had more success guarding Dwight Howard than Duncan did from 2007-2009, and so has Yao Ming. Means nothing as far as who the best overall defender is.

And post defense is just one aspect of defense.

The point I'm trying to get across is just because one player has much more success against a certain player, doesn't mean he's better, it just means that he does a better job reading that particular players moves or has physical attributes that make it tougher on certain players.

Also, acting like Olajuwon and Ewing were near their primes defensively in the mid 80's is ignorant.

And at Wilt being more skilled than Hakeem.

Wilt, in the first half of his career was a solid outside shooting center, with a VARIETY of shots (which accounts for his somewhat lower FG%, albeit, still well into the 50's.) He not only scored far more than a prime Olajuwon, he shot considerably better in terms of FG%. AND, that does not take into account that Wilt was playing in an NBA in which the LEAGUE average ranged from .410 to .456 in his last season. Olajuwon benefitted from the defenseless 80's, in which ENTIRE leagues nearly shot 50%.

Chamberlain would have outrun, outjumped, overpowered, and scored in every fashion conceivable against Hakeem.

[DatWasNashty]

This jlauber clown is such a fukking idiot. I don't think he's aware how fukking idiotic his logic is.

"2000 Shaq, at HIS PEAK, was SHUT DOWN by Hakeem. He ONLY averaged 19 ppg on 49% shooting which is A SEVERE DROP OFF from his season averages. CLEARLY, if they matched up EARLIER, Hakeem would HOLD him to 5 ppg on 10% shooting.

[DatWasNashty]

Ever think that individual match ups play a part? I'll try to cover everything that needs to be said here.

1.Kareem was about 230 pounds when he faced Thurmond so it makes sense that he was more vulnerable vs strong centers. The version that Olajuwon and Ewing faced was 265 pounds.

2.Kareem was a saavy veteran while Ewing was a rookie and Olajuwon was nowhere near the defensive player he'd become. Olajuwon would bite on a lot of fakes when he was young, look at how much more foul prone than he was later on.

3.The team that you're on plays a big factor. For example, Shaq put up better numbers in the '95 finals vs a prime Hakeem Olajuwon than he did in 2000 vs an old Sabonis and the 2000 version of Shaq was better, but the team's defensive strategy is very important and so is the physical match up. So by that logic, 2000 Sabonis was a better defender than '95 Olajuwon.

Continuing with match ups, Yao Ming had a lot more success defending Shaq in 2004 than Ben Wallace did, I guess a second year Yao was a better defender than the 4-time DPOY Ben Wallace? No, the reality is, Yao matched up better.

An old version of Shaq has had more success guarding Dwight Howard than Duncan did from 2007-2009, and so has Yao Ming. Means nothing as far as who the best overall defender is.

And post defense is just one aspect of defense.

The point I'm trying to get across is just because one player has much more success against a certain player, doesn't mean he's better, it just means that he does a better job reading that particular players moves or has physical attributes that make it tougher on certain players.

Also, acting like Olajuwon and Ewing were near their primes defensively in the mid 80's is ignorant.

And at Wilt being more skilled than Hakeem.

Very good post.

[jlauber]

This jlauber clown is such a fukking idiot. I don't think he's aware how fukking idiotic his logic is.

"2000 Shaq, at HIS PEAK, was SHUT DOWN by Hakeem. He ONLY averaged 19 ppg on 49% shooting which is A SEVERE DROP OFF from his season averages. CLEARLY, if they matched up EARLIER, Hakeem would HOLD him to 5 ppg on 10% shooting.

Not sure where you got your quote from, but it wasn't me. Shaq killed Olajuwon in the late 90's. BTW, I see you neg repped me too. I won't bother neg repping you because, frankly, I could not care less.

[nycelt84]

No question. BUT, let's give these greats centers of the 60's their just due. If Thurmond was able to reduce Kareem to not much more than ordinary, and yet Kareem could pour in games of 40 against Hakeem and Ewing, at age 39, well, what would a PRIME Wilt, Russell, or Thurmond have done to Hakeem and Ewing? Chamberlain would have not only shut them down defensively, he would scored at will on them.

Are you saying that Nate Thurmond was a better player than Hakeem Olajuwon?

[jlauber]

Are you saying that Nate Thurmond was a better player than Hakeem Olajuwon?

I am. As were Russell, Wilt and Kareem.

[jlauber]

Are you saying that Nate Thurmond was a better player than Hakeem Olajuwon?

I wonder who Kareem would have picked between the two?

[DatWasNashty]

Not sure where you got your quote from, but it wasn't me. Shaq killed Olajuwon in the late 90's. BTW, I see you neg repped me too. I won't bother neg repping you because, frankly, I could not care less.

No, you dumbfukk, I can't rep people nor would I would ever rep someone. You didn't necessarily say that quote but that quote perfectly exhibits your faulty logic.

37 year old Hakeem held peak Shaq to 19 ppg on 49.1% shooting. Doesn't that imply a younger Hakeem who was a significantly more impactful defender should shut down Shaq? Clearly, it does, according to your dumbass logic .... but that's not close to what happened since Orlando Shaq didn't have trouble scoring on young Hakeem.

Basketball doesn't work that way. There's too many factors and variables that you have to take into account such as motivation, teammates and their production, defensive schemes, strategies and roles. You don't understand these things unless you've seen the games which an obsessive, stat-wh0re like you hasn't done so.

[Psileas]

Great-great effort, Alex. I'll save the page.
Since you asked, Kareem scored 26 points in Sun, Feb 29, 1976.

[jlauber]

BTW, there have been 127 30-30 games in NBA history (30+ point, 30+ rebound games), and Nate is second, all-time, with four.

[ShaqAttack3234]

No, you dumbfukk, I can't rep people nor would I would ever rep someone. You didn't necessarily say that quote but that quote perfectly exhibits your faulty logic.

37 year old Hakeem held peak Shaq to 19 ppg on 49.1% shooting. Doesn't that imply a younger Hakeem who was a significantly more impactful defender should shut down Shaq? Clearly, it does, according to your dumbass logic .... but that's not close to what happened since Orlando Shaq didn't have trouble scoring on young Hakeem.

Basketball doesn't work that way. There's too many factors and variables that you have to take into account such as motivation, teammates and their production, defensive schemes, strategies and roles. You don't understand these things unless you've seen the games which an obsessive, stat-wh0re like you hasn't done so.

Exactly, and if someone was just adding up head to head numbers, using your 2000 Olajuwon vs Shaq example, they may forget that Shaq was ejected after 15 minutes in one of those games for the Barkley fight.

Great posts, I agree, you basically covered everything I wanted to say with the last part.

Wilt, in the first half of his career was a solid outside shooting center, with a VARIETY of shots (which accounts for his somewhat lower FG%, albeit, still well into the 50's.) He not only scored far more than a prime Olajuwon, he shot considerably better in terms of FG%. AND, that does not take into account that Wilt was playing in an NBA in which the LEAGUE average ranged from .410 to .456 in his last season. Olajuwon benefitted from the defenseless 80's, in which ENTIRE leagues nearly shot 50%.

Chamberlain would have outrun, outjumped, overpowered, and scored in every fashion conceivable against Hakeem.

A variety of shots? Are you implying that Hakeem didn't have a variety of moves? I've never seen a center with so many moves. He had so many options wherever he caught the ball. He could shoot a baseline fadeaway or use a quick spin baseline, both before the defender could react, and if the defender was ready he could still set up the fadeaway with a dream shake. Or he could go to the middle with a jump hook and if he didn't have that he had the up and under.

And that's just his post game. How about his face up game? He had a crossover later in his career and not only could he catch and shoot, but he could shoot off the dribble. Never mind his use of ball fakes.

So we're to believe the high scoring version Wilt is going to lock down Olajuwon when Bill Russell who wasn't known for his scoring, had several big scoring games vs Wilt in the '62 playoffs and easily topped his season average?

I'm sure Wilt is just going to stop moves like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW4uXlRGAF0#t=2m11s this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW4uXlRGAF0#t=1m43s and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc02Z4-0wDM

Despite letting Russell score with a move like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DZMw_B8srw#t=3m15s

And at using FG% to determine defense? Have you ever considered that players in the 80's were more advanced shooters and ball handlers. Or the fact that the pace in the 60's was much faster and players were shooting more pull up jumpers and 15 foot hook shots?

Besides, Hakeem was at his best in the 90's, not the 80's.

[che guevara]

Shaqattack, you think Hakeem peaked in the 80s? Most people think his peak either in '90 or from '93 to '95.

Oh, and Wilt letting Russell score on him like that? I understand Wilt peaked defensively a few years later but that is just awful.

[PHILA]

I'm sure Wilt is just going to stop moves like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW4uXlRGAF0#t=2m11s this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW4uXlRGAF0#t=1m43s and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc02Z4-0wDM

"All that faking Hakeem does, if you're Bill Russell or Wilt Chamberlain or Nate Thurmond, that **** don't mean nothin'. You just don't leave your deer. You would see Robinson fall for every god-damn fake, and Hakeem would dip around or under him for an easy basket."

-1995