What's new

How valuable is our 1st round draft pick?

I personally feel Hakeem at his best is the GCOAT. But he wun't no Jordan (nobody was).

Hakeem's Rockets were the only team in NBA history that had a winning-record against Jordan's Bulls during the 90s (IIRC).

:)


Him winning a championship with that '94 Rockets team is probably the single most-impressive "one-player-leads-a-team-to-a-championship" performance in contemporary NBA history.
 
Imagine if Ralph Sampson was never saddled with injury problems-- they took either the greatest, or second-greatest NBA roster of all-time to 6 games, while Hakeem was only 23 years of age. Damn.
 
Him winning a championship with that '94 Rockets team is probably the single most-impressive "one-player-leads-a-team-to-a-championship" performance in contemporary NBA history.
You'll find no argument from me. I've been making this argument for many, many years*.

*best argument ever: "but dude clyde derxler" even though that was '95
 
You'll find no argument from me. I've been making this argument for many, many years*.

*best argument ever: "but dude clyde derxler" even though that was '95

-0512da65e5d68c.gif


(though the seeds of friendships were sown after my devout prayers made in the name of He, BJB)
 
Hakeem = GCOT

I took him 3rd in our fantasy draft, and would have taken him 2nd, if that's where I had been picking.
 
The game is still largely dictated by the play of bigs. That Lebron is an other-worldly talent is the exception that proves the rule (as evidenced by the Eastern and Western Conference finalists and the only teams that gave the Heat any real problems). You can't build an entire defense around a perimeter player, but you can build an entire offense around a big. Also, the rules favor PERIMETER players (not just wings) because bigs always have had an immense advantage and the rules are there to level the playing field as much as anything else.

Of course, where this gets really interesting is if Parker plays as a 4 (or in other words, can guard NBA 4s in the post). That would be the thing that separates him from Wiggins, IMO. There still isn't much of an answer for a dominant perimeter 4.

While this is true, I think you can build an entire offense around Parker, and finding a player you can build an offense around is rarer than a player you can build a defense around.
 
Not saying you can.
In fact, I probably take Parker #1 and just take the risk that Wiggins reaches his potential and becomes a top 10 player of all time... and be happy with Parker .. the almost sure-thing perennial all-star.

Been thinklin.. (thats me thinkin like franklin).

There's been too much Parker kool-aid been dranklin (thank you).

Wiggins is the super super star..... stahp prognosticatlin.

.
 
Shaq>>>Haq, and it's not close.

Though I understand the case that can be made for Shaq, I respectfully disagree.

A Shaq in his prime was a couple questionable calls away from losing to Webber and Divac.

Who could stop Hakeem in his (albeit shorter-lived) prime? Not to mention the plethora of great bigs in the 90s in contrast to the early-mid 2000s.
 
Back
Top