Put prime Hakeem in Bill Russell's era

[GovernmentMan]

would he be the most dominant player of all time?

[donald_trump]

kareem used to get the better of hakeem even in his late 30's, and wilt used to outplay kareem. so no. he'd be worse than chamberlain.

[SunsCaptain]

What about prime Hakim?

[Ben Wallace]

What about prime Hakim?

Prime Hakim Warrick? Dayuummm now that's a good question

[millwad]

Prime Hakeem would abuse them all, Russell had no offense so Hakeem would neutralize him easily. Wilt couldn't even beat Russell, Hakeem would have destroyed Wilt.

[BlackJoker23]

What about prime Hakim?

warrick would phucking rape those garbage scrubs. queers like bill russell and that phagg0t nate thurmond would get dunked on every possession.phucking garbage scrubs played in the 60s

[millwad]

kareem used to get the better of hakeem even in his late 30's, and wilt used to outplay kareem. so no. he'd be worse than chamberlain.

No, he didn't use to be better than Hakeem late in his 30's, he got Hakeem in his rookie season and then in Hakeem's 2nd pro season he absolutely toy'd Kareem and the showtime Lakers in the playoffs and led his Rocket team to an easy 4-1 win in the WCF..

[Sarcastic]

100/100/100 would not be out of the question.

[Fazotronic]

kareem used to get the better of hakeem even in his late 30's, and wilt used to outplay kareem. so no. he'd be worse than chamberlain.

what the hell kind of logic is that?
hakeem didn't even grow up playing basketball. he started playing bball later than 99% of the nba players would.
Now ppl are using his rookie year against KAJ (one of the greatest of all time) to judge how good he would be in the weak ass era of the 50s/60s? GTFO

hakeem >> wilt/russell

[Legends66NBA7]

There's no time machines so it doesn't work that way.

The real question is:

"What if Hakeem was born in 1934 (the year Russell was born) ? Would he still be the same player ?"

Obviously not. Doesn't mean he wouldn't be great, but he wouldn't be the same player, at all.

[artificial]

If I say Hakeem would be a scrub and constantly get abused, no one could prove me wrong.

If I say Hakeem would dominate, no one could prove me wrong. Or right, for that matter.



This threads and fun and all, but sometimes I feel some of you really believe you are making actual statements or proving anything within this hypothetical scenarios. Hope I'm wrong.

[millwad]

what the hell kind of logic is that?
hakeem didn't even grow up playing basketball. he started playing bball later than 99% of the nba players would.
Now ppl are using his rookie year against KAJ (one of the greatest of all time) to judge how good he would be in the weak ass era of the 50s/60s? GTFO

hakeem >> wilt/russell

Good point, and also no one mentions how he in his 2nd year toy'd Kareem and the Lakers in the playoffs. Guys like Jlauber spam's about regular season games without any importance at all but he always forgets to tell that the Lakers in '86 had no answer for Hakeem in the playoffs.

And even though Hakeem wasn't close his prime he led the Rockets to an easy 4-1 in the series and he was unstoppable. In game 5 in that series, the game that came to be the last in that series, he just abused the Lakers putting up 17 freaking points just in the 3rd quarter of that game.

[millwad]

There's no time machines so it doesn't work that way.

The real question is:

"What if Hakeem was born in 1934 (the year Russell was born) ? Would he still be the same player ?"

Obviously not. Doesn't mean he wouldn't be great, but he wouldn't be the same player, at all.

That should be the real discussion, obviously the game and the player has gotten better over time but idiots like Jlauber claims that the guys in the 60's would be just as good or even better than the players of the modern era.

Instead of praising the oldschool ballers for being pioneers people are now laughing at them because of stupid wankers like Jlauber who spams 24/7 while "MY GOD":ing people all the time over how amazing the guys in the 60's used to be and how crappy the modern era ballers are..

[Fazotronic]

There's no time machines so it doesn't work that way.

The real question is:

"What if Hakeem was born in 1934 (the year Russell was born) ? Would he still be the same player ?"

Obviously not. Doesn't mean he wouldn't be great, but he wouldn't be the same player, at all.

your correct. olajuwon wouldn't evolve to the player he was in 95 if he would play in the 60s. russell would evolve to a much better player today than he was in the 60s.
Cold fact is that russell would never stand out from the masses as much as he did in the 60s today.
its just logic to say that a phenom like hakeem that actually was better than almost everyone in the NBA (a worldwide popular NBA) would be more successful than a guy like russell.
I mean ther is no footage of wilts 100 points game. Way much smaller and unathletic competition in a sport that depends so much on size.
can you imagine how many super athletes didn't even knew about basketball?
how can anyone with a straight face say that russel would dominate the league today? I found it to be much easier to say todays players would have a better chance at being succsessful in the 60s just beacause of the fact that they are tested against the whole world.

[PHILA]

Top 3 center.