best duo ever

[Francisco Elson]

I see where you're going at, but I was talking about in their primes.
Would a duo consisting of Pippen in his prime and a big man in his prime (Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq even) have been more succesful than Pippen/Jordan in their primes? I think so. A duo like this would've been a lot harder to stop.

Also, about Hakeem's help, Drexler was still a good player, but he played 35, 52, 62 and 70 games in his years with Houston. Not a lot of games to make a difference.

When joining Houston for 98-99, Pippen was coming off a season where he had 19.1ppg, 5.2 rpg and 5.8 apg, hardly a season in decline, he was even able to play 40mpg in Houston. Only his scoring went down, due to lower FGA, because they had to share the ball more. 15ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg.
Barkley was still a rebounding machine in Houston, his scoring had gone down a little because he had less attempts in Houston also. Hakeem needs the ball He still had over 12 rebounds and 15 points a game in 98-99. Hakeem, 19ppg, 10 rpg on 51% shooting. Just below his career numbers. They were also surrounded by talented youngsters like Dickerson, Harrington and Mobley. I'm still amazed they didn't get far.

[GForce11]

I'm a big Stock/Malone fan but I'm gonna have to give it to Kareen and Magic because they had the rings to back it up.

You can't base it solely on rings because Kareem and Magic had a lot more talent around them than most, if not all, the other duos listed. Thus the road to a championship was not as difficult for those two than it was for other players.

Well, what about Kobe & Shaq? Outside those two, they had a bunch of chumps and they still managed 3 consecutive championships. How do you explain that?

[Robby]

The reason why the 1999 Rockets didn't get very far is because Pippen slipped and gave away a game, and ultimately the series, to LA. Also, I don't think a duo of Pippen and Hakeem would have been as successful as Jordan and Pippen's. The reason why Scottie's ppg went down in 98 was because he was basically told to be a spot up shooter while the ball was to run through Hakeem every time on offense. Scottie even said near the end of the season," We're not going to win games with me shooting threes." Pip was never a great shooter and that's the type of players that need to be around Hakeem. Drexler was better shooter than Pippen and there's no way the Rockets get out of the 1st round in 95 without Drexler. Drexler didn't play that much in reg. season in 95, but he was available thorughout the playoffs if my memory serves me right.

Finally, I think the 97 Rockets Team was much better than the 99 one, and maybe it was the best one. I personally think that they could have taken out the Bulls had it not been for Stockton's three pointer at the buzzer.

[Robby]

Well, what about Kobe & Shaq? Outside those two, they had a bunch of chumps and they still managed 3 consecutive championships. How do you explain that?

I don't think that Rick Fox could be considered a chump. Fox used to average around 15pts a game in Boston so he has the ability to put up points. The Lakers had a much easier path to the championship than most of the teams in the 90's. Part of it is that there was no worthy challenger left for Shaq since Ewing, Hakeem, and The Admiral were just shadows of their primes. Also, During their 3 peat, LA basically played teams they matched up well against again and again. Let's see:

2000: Kings, Suns, Blazers
2001: Blazers, Kings, Spurs
2002: Blazers, Spurs, Kings

[magius]

lakers are not a bunch of chumps, just like the spurs are not just a bunch of chumps. spur chumps look better because their are more points to go around, but basically spur 'chumps' and laker 'chumps' play good team defense, and that is why they arent just spare baggage as some people imply. in both cases, the supporting cast is not neccessarily great, but they are not bad either.

why lakers support looks not so good? shaq and kobe = 60 ppg. people who argue lakers supporting cast sucks argue the through the statistics, but the average team can only score 100 points per 48 minute game. that leaves only 40 points for the support, and thus it makes them look bad, when actually they are doing the little things right, like setting screens, playing good help d, stretching the opposing defense by situating in the right spots, making the extra pass etc. etc., and being unselfish for their stars.

[GForce11]

goodness. one little comment about the laker bench being a bunch of chumps and they get all defensive.

Lets just say that if you took away each teams best two players, the lakers wouldn't be worth much. Even Shaq says that they need more help. Give me a break. Mitch Kupchak has been riding on Shaq n Kobe for 3 years now. Why do you think they went out and grabbed KM and GP?

[TRUball]

Why do you think they went out and grabbed KM and GP?

Because they costed only around 6.4 Million

[magius]

[Andrew]

I see where you're going at, but I was talking about in their primes.
Would a duo consisting of Pippen in his prime and a big man in his prime (Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq even) have been more succesful than Pippen/Jordan in their primes? I think so. A duo like this would've been a lot harder to stop.

I don't think they'd be any harder to stop, at least at the offensive end. MJ outscored Hakeem every year except 85/86 (when MJ missed 64 games with a broken foot) and 94/95 (played 17 games after an 18 month retirement). I don't think different pairings would show significant difference.

Also, about Hakeem's help, Drexler was still a good player, but he played 35, 52, 62 and 70 games in his years with Houston. Not a lot of games to make a difference.

What about the playoffs? That is where the championship is won.

When joining Houston for 98-99, Pippen was coming off a season where he had 19.1ppg, 5.2 rpg and 5.8 apg, hardly a season in decline, he was even able to play 40mpg in Houston. Only his scoring went down, due to lower FGA, because they had to share the ball more. 15ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg.

You're right about Pippen, he was still more or less the player he was during the 90s.

Barkley was still a rebounding machine in Houston, his scoring had gone down a little because he had less attempts in Houston also. Hakeem needs the ball He still had over 12 rebounds and 15 points a game in 98-99. Hakeem, 19ppg, 10 rpg on 51% shooting. Just below his career numbers. They were also surrounded by talented youngsters like Dickerson, Harrington and Mobley. I'm still amazed they didn't get far.

Barkley, by his own admission, was no longer the player he used to be. Hakeem's last truly great season was 95/96. Nagging injuries and advancing age affected his performance during the 97/98 season and beyond. Like all the great players of the 80s/90s era, Barkley and Olajuwon were starting to decline from 97/98 onwards.

[air gordon]

i think if you pair hakeem and pip together in their primes, that would be one of the best defensive duos ever. but on the offensive side, i'm not entirely sure how effective they would be. pippen, for the most part of his career, flourished playing without a dominant post presence (not counting mj). also consider pippen would be drawing the opponents best perimeter defender (unlike in chicago). outstanding defensive duo, pretty good on offense i say

[Robby]

Hakeem's last truly great season was 95/96.

I'd have to disagree. I think his last great season was 96-97 and I think that was Houston's best team ever. He averaged 23+ ppg and 9+ rpg and he did this while having to share the ball with a still very good Sir Charles (19+ ppg and 13+ rpg) and a productive Clyde Drexler 18ppg and 6rpg and 5.7 apg). Houston was the best team in the league that season (even better than Chicago, and the Bulls were concerned about the Rockets too) but unfortunately for Houston, the big three missed some games which caused them to have a bad playoff position and then John Stockton's three pointer in game 6 was the final stroke of bad luck the Rockets had.

[magius]

your sig is scary

[Robby]

Just changed it.

[Andrew]

Hakeem's last truly great season was 95/96.

I'd have to disagree. I think his last great season was 96-97 and I think that was Houston's best team ever. He averaged 23+ ppg and 9+ rpg and he did this while having to share the ball with a still very good Sir Charles (19+ ppg and 13+ rpg) and a productive Clyde Drexler 18ppg and 6rpg and 5.7 apg). Houston was the best team in the league that season (even better than Chicago, and the Bulls were concerned about the Rockets too) but unfortunately for Houston, the big three missed some games which caused them to have a bad playoff position and then John Stockton's three pointer in game 6 was the final stroke of bad luck the Rockets had.

True, 96/97 was far from being a bad year for Hakeem. But his 95/96 numbers were superior (and his final 20-10 season).

[Robby]

True, 96/97 was far from being a bad year for Hakeem. But his 95/96 numbers were superior (and his final 20-10 season).

Like I said, his numbers went down because of the addition of Charles Barkley. However he was still the best center in the league that year (starter at 97 all star game and all NBA First team). He didn't even make the All NBA First team in 95-96. Also, he was absolutly dominant in the 97playoffs (He averaged 30 ppg against the Jazz in the Western Conference Finals that year). I call that a pretty good year.

[Andrew]

I have to concede that 96/97 was Hakeem's last great season. But from 97/98 on, injuries and age took their toll on his game. Compare 96/97 when he had two other All-Star teammates (Barkley and Drexler) to 98/99 where he also had two other All-Star teammates (Barkley and Pippen).

[Robby]

I have to concede that 96/97 was Hakeem's last great season. But from 97/98 on, injuries and age took their toll on his game. Compare 96/97 when he had two other All-Star teammates (Barkley and Drexler) to 98/99 where he also had two other All-Star teammates (Barkley and Pippen).

All right! And you're right that 97-98 was when injuries started happening. By the 98-99 season, he wasn't very quick at all and his game suffered as a result, as well as Barkley. However, I'm still amazed at how the 97 Houston Rockets didn't win the championship. They were so good: Hakeem, Charles, Clyde, Kevin Willis, Eddie Johnson, Mario Elie, Sedale Threatt. Amazing!

[Andrew]

Who knows what might have happened if Stock hadn't hit that three and the series had gone to a seventh game.

[TRUball]

Who knows what might have happened if Stock hadn't hit that three and the series had gone to a seventh game.

well if we start saying that than...

The utah could of won a championship in 98 if only MJ didn't hit that foul line jumper in game 6 than Karl Malone and Stock could of been known as the best duo ever as they would of won a championship.

[LeBron James]

[.]

:)

Make a positive contribution. Don't post POINTLESSY

[Shadyon]

i voted for stockton/malone. these two just ruled the nba for so long, always together!

[Andrew]

Who knows what might have happened if Stock hadn't hit that three and the series had gone to a seventh game.

well if we start saying that than...

The utah could of won a championship in 98 if only MJ didn't hit that foul line jumper in game 6 than Karl Malone and Stock could of been known as the best duo ever as they would of won a championship.

True, but even if it went down that way it still would have been 1 championship to MJ and Pip's 5. And who's to say they definitely would have won Game 7?

But anyway, I was just agreeing with Robby that the Rockets could have made the Finals that year; they would have had a great shot had they forced a Game 7. But it wasn't to be.

[Rens]

Make a positive contribution. Don't post POINTLESSY

And how much of a contribution is it when you post that after every post?

[Jackal]

Make a positive contribution. Don't post POINTLESSY

And how much of a contribution is it when you post that after every post?

Since when is it a crime, to try helping out the forum from becoming a spamming forum? All he did by posting that was to remind Mr. "Kidd" to follow the rules, its better then telling him to stfu isnt it?