'90 Hakeem Olajuwon diamond card

Other Editions

Name Hakeem Olajuwon
Edition 1990
Theme Rewards
Collection Collector Level Rewards
Position C / PF
Age 26
Height 7'0"
Weight 255lbs
From Houston
Plays Post Up High, Post Up Low
Sell Value 3600
Added September 30th, 2015
Info Collect 2500 cards
?????
Not checked yet
?????
Not checked yet
?????
Not checked yet

98 Overall

78 Outside scoring

  • 84 Standing shot mid
  • 75 Moving shot mid
  • 63 Standing shot 3pt
  • 60 Moving shot 3pt
  • 98 Shot IQ
  • 72 Free throw
  • 98 Off. consistency

96 Inside scoring

  • 98 Standing shot close
  • 98 Moving shot close
  • 98 Standing layup
  • 74 Driving layup
  • 95 Standing dunk
  • 58 Driving dunk
  • 55 Contact dunk
  • 85 Draw foul
  • 99 Post control
  • 98 Post hook
  • 98 Post fadeaway
  • 97 Hands

56 Playmaking

  • 61 Ball control
  • 60 Passing accuracy
  • 45 Passing vision
  • 74 Passing IQ

81 Athleticism

  • 65 Speed
  • 62 Acceleration
  • 65 Vertical
  • 95 Strength
  • 98 Stamina
  • 85 Hustle
  • 98 Overall durability

95 Defending

  • 96 On-ball def. IQ
  • 99 Low post def. IQ
  • 98 Pick & roll def. IQ
  • 98 Help def. IQ
  • 58 Lateral quickness
  • 98 Pass perception
  • 95 Reaction time
  • 77 Steal
  • 95 Block
  • 98 Shot contest
  • 98 Def. consistency

96 Rebounding

  • 92 Offensive rebound
  • 97 Defensive rebound
  • 98 Boxout

3708 Total attr.

Updates OVR POS INS OUT PLY ATH DEF REB
03/01/16 (Viewing) 98 C PF 96 78 56 81 95 96
10/27/15 96 C PF 96 76 56 78 95 92

Comments Sort by

  • 20

    If this guy played one on one with Kareem, he (Hakeem) would win. He had better post moves, better defence etc.

    8

    Hakeem even blocked the hook shot

    4

    I think kareem would win, despite popular belief kareem had more than just a hook shot. he a nice mid range shot, great post awareness. he was stronger than hakeem aswell. kareem was a better player.

    Show 3 replies...
    0

    and kareem would win to because he was 7"2 and hakeem is 7"0 so kareem is higher and got better hook so hakeem not supposed to have the ability to defend it

    1

    hakeem's wingspan is 7'2. You dont block shots with your head

    -14

    [Deleted]

    Show 1 more reply...
    -54

    Wilt would destroy Hakeem in 1 on 1 though

    Show 38 replies...
    15

    Wilt would destroy ANYONE 1 on 1 though, he was a monster. Crazy athletic, could jump higher then most point guards, if not all. Super fast as well for his height.

    4

    I can't imagine him jumping higher than Spud Webb...

    14

    Shorties have higher verticals. Wilt is a 7 footer and still had a nice vertical.

    2

    Why does it always have to be an argument about WIlt?

    7

    no... Hakeem has the sickest post moves

    2

    Well Everyone hated that

    -11

    Kareem/MJ would destroy Wilt 1v1

    8

    How would jordan be able to guard a center 7 inches taller than him and alot stronger than him? Jordan is one of the best perimiter defenders of all time but there is no way he could stop wilt in the post.

    -2

    If Jordan starts with the ball, thats another mismatch. Wilt won't be able to keep up with hin.

    5

    Wilt was crazy fast for his height. It would be easier for wilt to guard jordan on the perimiter than mj to guard wilt in the post.

    6

    that's prob true, but MJ did have some moves. He was pretty elusive. It wasn't exactly easy for anyone to guard him 1 on 1 ever, no matter who they were. Enitre teams had trouble guarding him. He was great at shaking people and creating space for high percentage shots for himself and combined with his quickness, ball handling, high vertical, and just general knack for getting open and getting his shot, made him a deadly mid range shooter great at converting them. MJ was definitely the better shooter. Wilt would kill him with his physicality though in the post and everywhere on the court, and I'm sure would give him a lot of difficulty with all his athleticism, his versatile speed and vertical and his long and extremely strong frame. I don't see MJ getting too many rebounds if any. Wilt would definitely bully him, which MJ would not like. prime mj vs prime wilt, I would love to see that game go down. Neither of those guys liked to lose so I could definitely see that game turning into a fight. MJ wasn't the type to back down, and I can't seeing him standing much of a chance of putting WIlt on his ass. It is pretty lame they only gave us the 72 Wilt this year, the 61-62 Wilt would've been insane this year with the improved post game.

    1

    2 on 1?

    -3

    / means or.

    So either Kareem OR Mj would beat Wilt 1v1.

    8

    Well obviously since Wilt`s dead

    -2

    I was talking about when they played and I know you knew that.

    0

    In what way?

    0

    Because I don't think you think I'm dtupid enough to coumt dead Wilt in a 1v1 and not when he played.

    -1

    I meant in what way would those guys beat Wilt

    0

    Jordan/Wilt is essentially who starts off with ball wins. Kareem had superior post moves.

    2

    Wilt would block everything from MJ, most centers wouldn`t have the speed to keep up with him, but Wilt did. He would then precede to score an easy bucket over the 6`6" Jordan in the post.

    LOL what post move is Kareem better at? Skyhooks? The same shot that Wilt blocked many times? Easy win for Wilt.

    2

    Yes he blocked the skyhook

    He also goaltended it...

    -3

    Not necessarily...

    2

    Yes, not all the time. But Wilt played not fearing a goal tend being called, which makes things a lot easier. The reason you dont see guys do Wilt-esque 'top of the shot arc blocks is

    3

    they fear a goaltending call. Wilt didn't have that fear, so he could go up for it regardless. Weve seen guys like Dwight do it, but its rare due to goaltending. As a reference to how easy it would be to block less goal tending, watch the clip of D12 'tipping' Iverson's after the whistle shot. He exerts little effort and still hits it all the way back out to the 3pt line. Guys like Russel and Wilt lived off this unfair rule.

    Wilt was also 7'2", which is tall by todays standerds. Back then, teams hadn't yet figured out how to deal with the extremelly tall players, including Kareem.

    -1

    Wilt couldn't even beat Bill Russell... how do expect him to beat both?

    5

    1 on 1 he did. Just because the Celtics won doesn`t mean Russell beat Wilt...

    -2

    you clearly didn't see the documentaries...stat whore

    3

    *Sigh. I`ve explained all of this. Clearly you`re new here...

    -2

    I'm gonna stop here before you give me aids, when you actually watch a basketball game and learn about it, then you can talk.

    2

    Watch basketball games from the 60`s? Ok mate...

    0

    A stat whore that doesn't know how to read, I said watch an actual game, from any era...bye baby

    3

    Wow you MUST be new here. And did you just call ME a stat whore? Ok then...

    -1

    Lmaoo

    0

    Great argument there kid. You've really swayed my viewpoint.

    0

    He's mentally handicapped mate.

  • 13

    I'd take Hakeem over Wilt any day. Wilt is just way too easy to beat with the Hack-A-Shaq strategy. If you just hack Wilt, you take away almost all of his offensive game. Therefore, Wilt will only be able to play defense and rebound, which is not much better than Hakeem's defense and rebounding

    5

    Hakeem was actually a better defender than Wilt.

    Show 1 reply...
    0

    Tottaly. Even know Wilt is a better rebounder.

    3

    WW

    Show 4 replies...
    3

    WWWW

    0

    Hakeem's underrated af by some peeps imo

    1

    Hell yes! He is considered bad because he was selected over Jordan! But this man singlehandedly led the Rockets to back to back championships!

    Show 1 more reply...
    0

    How long can you Hack-a-Wilt before everyone is in foul trouble? Plus, the new rule...

    Show 74 replies...
    0

    Long enough to the point where they're not scoring efficiently. When a team hacks, they have to respond strong on offense to put the team getting hacked in a hole. You still can hack people outside of the two minutes at the end of the quarter, so you can hack 40/48 minutes, which is a lot.

    0

    Then why do the Clippers win games? After all, DeAndre is a worse foul shooter than Wilt was. By your logic, the Clippers should be winless in games DeAndre plays in. But the Hack a Wilt strategy also pretty much guarantees one point per possession, which is better than average

    0

    The Clippers wouldn't win games if their opponents really hacked DJ constantly. DJ averaged only eight FTs a game, which would equal hacking DJ on four possessions. You don't win a game by hacking a terrible FT shooter for four times. You win a game by hacking a terrible FT shooter with the entire bench and some of the starters. If DJ really got hacked constantly, he could easily end up shooting fifty FTs a game. There are eight guys on the bench that can foul six times per game, which already equals 48 fouls. After a team is in the bonus to shoot two free throws per foul, the entire Clippers' offense comes from DJ at the line. The points per possession for hacking doesn't even come close to one point per possession. If the points per possession was one point, hacking wouldn't even have started in the NBA. For the season Wilt shot 61% from the line, the odds of Wilt making both free throws are 0.61 squared, which comes out to a bismal 37%. For this past season when DJ shot 43% from the line, the odds of DJ making both free throws are only 18%. In other words, the Clippers field goal percentage would be 18% at that time because that is the percentage of them scoring two points in a single possession. If a team goes through a long stretch of getting hacked because of a poor FT shooter, especially one as bad as DJ, they probably won't beat even the worst teams in the league, like the Lakers and 76ers were this past season. There are only four ways a team that's getting hacked for a while can win, which are their opponents just suck, they're facing a team with a bad FT shooter that gets a lot of minutes, their opponents are having an off game or the defense of the team that's getting hacked is just too beastly. All four of those reasons don't happen too often, so the team that's getting hacked is virtually screwed.

    0

    Also, eventually Wilt's team will get smart. They'll give him the ball and if the guy tries to foul him he'll put up a shot. Teams won't want to risk and ones, especially with a guy as ridiculously strong as Wilt who was incredible at finishing through contact. And Wilt was way faster than any other big men and he had tons of stamina so he could really run the other big men into the ground before they could foul him too much

    0

    You do realize that teams can foul Wilt once the play starts, right? Therefore, teams would foul Wilt before he even gets the ball in the first place. How is Wilt going to get a shot off, which would be a rushed shot anyway, if he got fouled before he could even get the ball?

    0

    1. Inbound the fucking ball to Wilt. If you wanna come foul him early, go ahead, he'll make sure to chuck up a shot and get three free throws while he's at it. Wilt was a good enough ball handler to not get stripped. And you can't foul a player before the ball leaves the inbounder's hands or else it's a free throw and the ball, that was part of the new rules change

    0

    You actually want Wilt to go to the line, which is the whole point of hacking him. What is Wilt going to do? Throw up a fast shot while not really being able to aim because he's trying to shoot right away? That strategy only works when inbounding in the front court anyway. What about when they have to inbound from the other side of the court? What are you going to do? Inbound the ball to Wilt when he is all the way down the court and risk getting picked off with ease? The new change of rules still don't really help the Hack-A-Somebody strategy.

    0

    1. Yeah, he'll throw up a fast shot without being able to aim and that'll get him three free throws instead of two.
    2. I don't know, maybe actually have Wilt come and get the ball? Jesus, you really thought that through.

    0

    If you foul him while he shoots, wrap him up so he can't make the shot. If someone fouled him while he was shooting, he'd still get two FTs. Now, we're back to square one where Wilt needs to make FTs efficiently, so he doesn't slow down the team offensively. Of course I thought it through. If Wilt were to come get the ball, just foul him when he's coming up the court. The only way Wilt can't get fouled is if he chucks up a full court shot. Even Curry can't make those prayers efficiently.

    0

    You clearly don't get what I'm saying. You give Wilt the ball. The point isn't to make the prayers. The point is, if the other team comes up and tries to foul him anywhere beyond the three point line (including the backcourt), Wilt can just throw up a shot, regardless of whether or not it goes in, while he's getting fouled and it'll be three free throws. Then you'll be trying to beat a team who's getting 1.83 points per possession. Good luck with that. Oh, and you underestimate Wilt's strength. Wilt actually dislocated Gus Johnson's (6'7", 245 pounds of muscle, could run like a deer, could leap out of the building, broke 3 backboards in his career) shoulder by blocking Gus's dunk. It's extremely hard to wrap Wilt up when he's going to the basket

    0

    Irl back in Wilt's day, there was no such thing as a three-point line. A foul on the other side of the court is the same as a foul right in front of the basket. In today's game, just foul him when he gets in two-point rage, which would be just short of the three-point line. There wouldn't be no and-one because Wilt wasn't a great outside shooter and he'd rush up a shot too, which lowers the odds of the shot going in. Someone can just grab his stomach to foul him. The strongest guys can't avoid getting intentionally fouled.

    0

    Also take into account that Wilt was a track star in college. So, you let him build up this full head of steam. You decide you want to intentionally foul him when he gets in two-point range. Well guess what, no one's gonna be strong enough to stop him without committing a flagrant foul and he would be moving so fast that if you threw a weak foul at him then he would probably be at the rim quick enough for a continuation foul. Wilt was literally like a human locomotive - once he got a full head of steam it was almost impossible for someone else to stop him. Also,Wilt did have a pretty good outside shot. He wasn't Curry or anything, but he could shoot 20+ foot jump shots

    0

    If Wilt did run somebody over like that, he'd probably get ejected in today's game because they got softer on rules. As shown in today's game, touching somebody can be a foul, which would send Wilt to the line. What about a rushed shot though! Many players can't rush shots, unless they're pure shooters like Curry.

    0

    Well no, if Wilt had built up a full head of steam and someone got in his way without setting their feet it would be a blocking foul, but no one would want to sit in their and get barreled over by a 275-300-pound sprinter. And to stop Wilt someone incredibly strong like Dwight or Boogie would have to try and legitimately football tackle him

    0

    Wow, that may be worse than the Bad Boy Pistons. Wilt can get called for unnecessary contact even if someone fouled him, especially if Wilt lowers his shoulder into the hit. I'd just grab his arm, which is a common foul and doesn't involve getting runned over.

    0

    Yeah but Wilt wasn't the type of player to lower his shoulder into anyone. There's really only one known clip of an angry Wilt (I can't find it but I've seen it before). He was generally known to be super chill and never really lost his cool. Here's a quote from teammate Al Attles:

    "I would talk to Wilt about all the players pounding on him. Sometimes, he said he didn't notice it--he was so strong. But I also believe that there were two sets of rules. By that, I mean because Wilt was so strong, the officials let the man guarding him get away with more--almost trying to equalize the game. I also believe that Wilt just took it because he didn't want to get thrown out, and because ithad always been like that with him. But I'd watch it and I'd get mad. It takes me a while to get my temper going, but when it does--look out. I'd see what the other players were doing to Wilt and what the officials were allowing, and I'd get more upset than if it were happening to me. So I jumped in there. It wasn't that Wilt couldn't defend himself. If he ever got really hot, he'd kill people, so he let things pass. But I didn't have to worry about that. I was strong for my size, but I was not about to do anything like the kind of damage would."

    0

    Good, so he doesn't end up in trouble like Draymond Green or Boogie. I like calm guys like that.

    0

    Then why do you think teams don't employ this strategy? What, are you suddenly smarter than every NBA coach? Part of the reason why teams don't hack the whole game is because it takes away transition opportunities, which are the most efficient offensive possessions. It is A LOT harder to score in the half court then it is out in the open floor, especially when you have a presence like Wilt who can dominate the middle and switch onto guards on pick and rolls

    0

    How can you justify the blasphemous scoring percentages while hacking? Even though they have to face a great defender on the other side of the court, coaches should do it because it's embarrassing to lose to a team that is getting hacked. Even Pop and the Spurs did it at the end of a game to DJ and the Clips to seal the win. Pop doesn't like hacking, but even one of the greatest coaches ever chose to do so because he knew it's effective. Are you saying Pop, who may be the smartest coach we've ever seen in the NBA, is stupid? You still can score even when there are great all-around defenders in the paint like Wilt in the half-court setting. Look at Team USA right now with DJ on the court. Other players that aren't even close to the NBA are roasting superstars offensively because they can't play defense. Plus, the Clippers are pretty weak defensively on the wing because Redick and Crawford, who are terrible defenders, play most of the game. It takes much more than one versatile defender to shut down a team defensively. Even when a team has multiple versatile defenders, strong offensive superstars, like Curry, PG-13, AD, Westbrook, Harden, KD, Kawhi and LeBron get buckets no matter what because they are way too good. When a team constantly hacks an awful FT shooter, they should win the game no matter what, especially if their offense is unstoppable.

    0

    See, the Knicks kind of tried that in 1962...

    0

    So it worked for one game? Even Shaq can make FTs efficiently for one game.

    0

    In the 1962 season, there were 14 games in which Wilt attempted 20 or more free throws. In 6 of those games he shot 70% or better from the line (and two over 80%), and his worst performance was 13-for-25, or 52%, or 1.04 points per possession. Say Wilt has his worst high-volume foul shooting performance that night and you foul him every possession. The league average pace last season was 98.4 possessions per game, which means, excluding how the free throw possessions would affect the game, you would be banking on scoring more than 102.3 points. And that's if Wilt was on his WORST night. On an average night, you'd have to bank on your team scoring AT LEAST 110-120 points per game

    0

    The pace at that time doesn't matter because it's between the two teams that are playing who decide the pace. Two teams that play two totally different paces are the Grizzlies and the Warriors. The Grizzlies are lacking fast-break players because they don't have solid wings to run the court and their bigs are so slow. The Warriors play Green at the five a lot, so they should outrun everybody. Wilt shot over 70% in less than half of those games, so it'd work most of the time. When a team hacks someone, it is easier for them to score because they have to focus on offense only. Plus, there are much more offensive players in the league than there are defenders in the league. Look at pretty much every team that ever played in the NBA. Almost every single team have or had more offensive players than defenders. With that being said, there is going to be more holes in the defense than the offense. Not to mention that almost all of Wilts teammates weren't that good, so that's why Wilt had to score so much. In today's game, almost all of the playoff teams averaged more than 102.3 points per game. If we were to look at pace, the pace in today's game is faster than the pace in the 1962 season.

    0

    Actually, the pace in the 1962 season was substantially faster

    0

    Some reliable source like SportsCenter said Westbrook would've averaged a better trip dub if he played in the season where The Big O averaged a trip dub during the season. The Big O was playing around the time Wilt was playing.

    0

    https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/4jhnp1/in_1967_wilt_chamberlain_had_perhaps_the_greatest/ That's why Wilt was the greatest player to ever set foot on the floor in his prime

    0

    Yes, Wilt's stats from early in his career are inflated due to pace. Here's my opinion on Wilt: he was the greatest pure basketball talent to ever set foot on the floor. I mean, he led the league in PPG 7 times, RPG 11 times, APG once, and FG% 9 times, and he holds the single season records for PPG, RPG, FG%, and MPG, and he also holds the distinction of being the only non-point guard to lead the league in assists. In terms of prime production, no one has ever been more dominant than Wilt. However, best NBA career of all time easily goes to MJ or Kareem. Here is an awesome picture comparing them if you click on the link: http://www.1vs7gaming.com/mobile/forum/viewthread/page/3/m/15081921/id/13621301-my-introduction-yank4everchamps

    0

    Either way, teams get the ball just as much as their opponents. I don't base my opinions off of stats too much because stats would be different in different eras. I agree that Wilt had the best prime and that MJ or Kareem had the best career.

    0

    Hakeem only shot 71% from the line in this season. Not exactly a godly foul shooter. 61% isn't straight up awful

    0

    71% is better than 61%. If you want to hack Hakeem, he'll hit more FTs than Wilt.

    0

    I can see hacking a 40-50% foul shooter the whole game but 61% is a stretch

    0

    Based on the statistics I showed, it makes sense to hack a 61% FT shooter like Wilt, who also shot 51% from the field in that season.

    0

    Then why doesn't every team hack the whole game?

    0

    One time the Rockets made Drummond shoot 36 FTs. Idk how, but the Pistons still won the game. That just embarrassed the Rockets knowing that they couldn't beat a team that shot poorly from the line with many attempts.

    0

    And Wilt wasn't nearly as bad of a foul shooter as Drummond

    0

    True, but he still wouldn't be efficient, especially with a cold start.

    0

    Not that many more really

    0

    Not many more, but he still would beat Wilt.

    0

    Another thing about Wilt, he had a knack for getting in rhythm the more free throws he took. If you look at his stats he actually shot his best free throw percentages in the seasons where attempted the most free throws

    0

    Wilt's best season from the line was 61% and it got worse and worse from there. You can hack Wilt on occasions, which would still throw him off of his game because he's not shooting FTs regularly. It's hard to get in a rhythm when you're not doing something constantly. Plus, Wilt would still get hacked a lot. He wouldn't get hacked as much, but it would still be more than normal. Wilt may have gotten in rhythm, but he's still not that great of a FT shooter. It also takes a while to get in rhythm. At the beginning of the game, Wilt would still be missing free throws because he's not in rhythm yet. That slow start will backfire because the team that's hacking Wilt will be scoring more efficiently in the beginning and they might not even get back in the game. When you are playing the top teams in the league, you have to be shooting at least okay from start to finish.

    0

    I can't believe you actually think you're smarter than NBA coaches

    0

    I don't see a reason why the coaches don't do it in the first place. Plus, some coaches make some dumb calls too.

    0

    The coaches also partially don't do it because it would make the game so long and boring that it would be unwatchable. Games would be going until 4 o'clock in the morning, ticket sales and endorsements and TV deals and everything money-related would go down, and the NBA would most likely go out of business

    0

    They don't have to do it that long, but long enough to the point Wilt's team falls behind offensively.

    0

    Also some of Wilt's teammates said he was so fast and so well-conditioned that while everyone else was tired after 30 minutes of playing, Wilt would have barely broken a sweat after playing the whole game, and he was so fast that sometimes he would outrun the other team trying to foul him. This in turn also caused a lot of chaos that opened up scoring opportunities for his teammates

    0

    It's not hard to foul someone in the half court because they can only run so much before they are out of the play. I have a feeling you're exaggerating because Wilt must get sweaty while playing 30-40 gruesome minutes of ball. Stamina doesn't really matter when hacking because there are a lot of breaks when people are shooting FTs repeatedly.

    0

    You're really trying to assert that you know more about basketball than every NBA coach ever

    0

    No one has an answer to my questions though.

    0

    Ask an NBA coach and I bet he will

    0

    You pretty much asked me everything and I still believe in hacking. Obviously, Bickerstaff, who was the interim head coach for the Rockets, believes in hacking despite the flaws of hacking.

    0

    Yeah but they don't hack the whole game. I also think that strategy would just be bad for the NBA as a whole if you did it a lot, not even the full game, if you hack too much then no one will like basketball. That or everyone will become REALLY good at shooting free throws

    0

    It may be really boring, but it's 100% legal. Every single poor FT shooter had their whole career to improve on FTs, yet they didn't.

    0

    That's not even a Pyrrhic victory, winning with that strategy is just really a loss for everyone. Less money to be made, less interest in the game, basketball is less fun, etc. I get what you're saying but still. Yeah Wilt actually got worse. At the start of his career he was halfway decent from the foul line. But over time the mental block just grew and grew. Wilt was plenty skilled - he was a great mid range shooter and his turnaround jumper was one of the most unstoppable moves in NBA history. But when he stepped up to the line, something was just not right in his head

    0

    They'd just have to limit hacking then, but they still can do it to the point it lowers their offensive production. I found it weird to that Wilt could make mids in traffic, but not FTs when he's wide open.

    0

    J.R. Smith is a similar case. He shot 40% from 3 but only 63% from the free throw line this season. I think Wilt's FT% also went down over his career because as he got older he took less and less jump shots - the polar opposite of what happens with most players

    0

    I totally agree. It's sad to see how much Wilt's skills significantly dropped as he got older. The Wilt with the Lakers was like "bleh!"

    0

    Imo Wilt has the greatest forgotten performance of all time. Late in Game 4 of the 1972 NBA Finals, he broke several bones in his shooting hand. While most players would sit out, Wilt came back out for Game 5 (the final game) with his shooting hand wrapped up like an offensive lineman. He played more than 40 minutes and put up 24 points, 28 rebounds, 8 assists, and 8 blocks while holding Jerry Lucas to a mere 14 points. He won Finals MVP with one hand. At the age of 36. Oh, and he had just whooped up on a prime Kareem in the previous round

    0

    I agree with that too. I can only imagine how hard that was for him, especially in The Finals. It's one of those times where the greats make it look easy.

    0

    Well later in his career with the 76ers and Lakers he was much more of a team player. He became the most dominant paint defender the league has ever seen, still got boards for days, and shifted his offensive focus from scoring to setting screens to passing (btw imagine Chris Paul throwing lobs to the 7'1", 275-lbs guy with a 7'8" wingspan, 12" hands, and a vertical well over 40 inches). He rarely ever took jump shots or handled the ball like he did in his Warriors days. He still had quite a bit of leaping ability and speed - the main thing the knee injuries that he suffered with the Lakers took from him was his lateral quickness, which severely hindered him in guarding Willis Reed (possibly the deadliest mid range shooter of all time)

    0

    That is when Wilt's downfall started. His role on his team switched almost completely and his freakish athleticism switched completely as well. When someone is 7'1," 275 pounds, as athletic as Wilt and ran so much as a track and basketball athlete, the aches and pains will catch up sooner rather than later. Imagine what could have been if all of these setbacks didn't happen to a legend so unreal that it doesn't seem real.

    0

    He would probably have more than two rings as well. If he didn't hurt his knee in the 1969 Finals then that would have almost guaranteed him three rings. Also, free agents would have been craving LA with a presence like Wilt (when he was healthy) in the middle. No telling how many rings he could've won if he played 20 years like Kareem instead of the 14 he did

    0

    Yeah, all of this just watered down his legacy. Unless you like the ball a lot or a center that wants to start, who wouldn't want to play with Wilt? Even the older Wilt wasn't that bad to play with. Wilt playing only fourteen seasons also tainted his legacy. It's a shame that he couldn't play something like nineteen seasons like Kobe or Timmy D did. Like I said in one of my previous comments, his unique combination of quickness and strength just backfired on him in many ways.

    0

    What do you do in the last two minutes of the quarters, when all of your players are in foul trouble and you can't hack Wilt? He will absolutely FEAST on the other team, and you know how basketball is a game of runs

    0

    That's why you have eight guys on the bench for. Use them to hack and the starters won't pick up too much fouls. The starters can foul occasionally too.

    0

    And then with 8 bench players you have next to no offensive firepower

    0

    Sub them in one at a time and keep four other scorers in the game.

    0

    And at this point you're getting desperate to foul Wilt and aren't developing an offensive gameplan

    0

    It's easy to focus on offense when you don't need to play defense.

    0

    There's a difference between hacking at the end of the game and hacking the whole game. You've been talking about hacking the whole game, which no one does. However, hacking a poor foul shooter when they have the ball at the end of the game is acceptable

    0

    No one does it, but they definitely should. Even if a team can't run in transition because they're hacking somebody, it is almost impossible to lose to a team that is struggling to even put points on the board. Some teams like to play a half-court offense anyway because they're too slow to run in transition. Two examples of guys that are better in a half-court setting are Magic and Bird because they're slow. They may be slow for perimeter players, but they can rip teams apart in a half-court setting. How would DJ or Wilt's team's top someone like Kawhi Leonard or Curry from scoring because they don't have to go in the paint to score? Curry lives and dies by shooting anyway, even if the interior defense is weak.

    0

    You do realize that Magic THRIVED off of the fast break, right? He ran the Showtime Lakers FFS. Bird was great in transition or in the half court, but overall it's just way harder to score in the half court, and the teams who run slow offenses generally also run the least efficient offenses.

    0

    They are both slow players though. Imagine Bird having to chase KD, LeBron or Kawhi Leonard around all game. Same with Magic having to chase around CP3, Curry, Westbrook, Wall and Lillard.

    0

    Well Bird actually guarded PFs while McHale guarded the SFs. That's why Bird had the better rebounding numbers, because he was playing inside more on defense. And I think Magic could do it because he wasn't the greatest sprinter but he was really shifty and his length would help

    0

    What about the screens though? Length doesn't matter when going around a screen. Plus, Curry can shoot over shot blockers too by using his ball handling.

  • 9

    Only player to win Defensive player of the Year and MVP in the same season - The best two way centre of all time (IMO)

    11

    Wilt is better at-

    Defending (Arguable, but blocks weren't tracked in his time, Wilt and Russell would probably far outnumber Hakeem in blocks however)

    Athleticism (More athletic than most PG's, was a track star in High School, many reports say he could touch the top of the backboard and then some)

    Playmaking (Led the league in assists one year)

    Better at scoring, I don't need to explain this one, I'll just say Hakeem never scored 50 ppg in a season or 100 in one game

    Rebounding (This isn't even close, Wilt nearly doubles Hakeem's rebounding totals for a career and Wilt played in a few less seasons than Hakeem, Wilt is the #1 all time rebounder [career])

    Hakeem is better at-

    Shooting (Wilt was terrible at free throws and was never a great shooter from anywhere not pretty close to the basket)

    He is more well rounded offenseively (Post moves [mainly since Wilt wasn't dangerous when he wasn't near the rim, Hakeem had the fade, dream shake etc, things Wilt didn't] as well as shooting in general, free throws as well)

    IN MY OPINION Wilt is better, but Hakeem is pretty close behind. The way he completely shamed the Admiral was very impressive considering Drob is another one of the best centers of all time



    Tl;dr- Wilt is better at pretty much everything except shooting

    Show 22 replies...
    7

    But Hakeem was a better dribbler and fundamentally sound

    4

    Relax man, I just said that Hakeem was better IMO - In my opinion

    -4

    Yeah, that's your opinion, and I respect that, and I responded with my own opinion.

    1

    Wilt did have a post fade tho, he was deadly with it. People don't give him enough credit for that because he couldn't shoot from anywhere else, they just assume he couldn't hit it. Sure he didn't have Hakeem's post fade ability, but only slightly worse

    0

    Wilt had a post fade but couldn't shoot, partly because the fade took his crazy strength out of the equation and he could just focus on the mechanics he was so good at

    0

    Wilt had a fade away shot...

    0

    EXACTLY your a smart man

    0

    In Hakeems defense, there was no rules against offensive goaltending back when Wilt played. But lets face it, they're both very good centers

    0

    No, they made the goaltending rule back then because of Wilt. He played a couple years at most without it.

    0

    Hakeem is better at defense and playmaking.
    Scoring could be arguable cause hakeem had the sickest post moves to lose his defender and score, Wilt just had to reach over 6'9 shorties.
    But wilt is more athletic and better rebounder.

    0

    He averaged 2 steals and nearly 5 blocks and 14 rebs, AND is ELEVENTH in steals, try that in the 1990s wilt

    1

    Wilt averaged 25 rebounds per game in '62 now that we're taking everything from one specific year. Since Wilt was like 7 foot 2 and one of the best athletes and defenders the NBA has ever seen, yes, that would be fun to watch

    0

    Well back then everyone was terrible shooters from all over the court and from free throw range, hence why rebounding numbers were inflated so that 25 boards is exaggerated but nobody couldn't jump with wilt so it's not a good point to bring up due to the athleticism back then and fundamentals being garbage.

    0

    No, you just have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. ~5 percent less in FG% doesn't mean fundamentals were garbage, and athleticism was pretty much no different back then (if anything, new technology/sport science makes it easier for players nowdays). Hell, nobody in the game today is an athletic freak like Wilt was. Over 7 foot 1 without shoes (Dwight Howard is 6 foot 9 without shoes), ran a half mile in 1:59 only four years after the 4 minute mile barrier was broken, and had a vertical leap of nearly 4 feet (he dunked on 12 foot rims they had at Kansas. That has nothing to do with the competition. The average height is only 2 inches taller today than it was in the sixties. I doubt you've ever seen game film from that time period based on how you describe it, but people didn't suck, Wilt was just too fucking good for them, or anyone, to play against.

    1

    61-62 season the season where wilt averaged 50 points, 39.5 attempts a game. Give Jordan 39 attempts a game and see what happens. The sad part is, WILT NEVER did this in the playoffs, odd, next the league average during this season was 42%, People literally could not shoot despite having no 3pt line. Trust me I have watched many tapes with my grandfather, the overall league athleticism is garbage in comparison today. Technology don't make westbrook become that damn explosive or rose. It's simple training and genetics. I agree with no athlete today being a complete freak like wilt hence why his era was terrible being that nobody had even an ounce of athleticism to even test him let alone rival or over power him. Yes let's be honest, if it takes 9'000 attempts to average 120 points, there is a problem, it takes 2'000 attempts less for the 80s era of ball to average 100 plus points a game compared to the 60s Celtics whooping 9000 attempts, 1'000 attempts less then 60s league average for the 80s to average 100 plus point games. the 07-08 suns takes 6'000 attempts to aveage 110 points a game. The 61-62 Chicago packers needed 8'405 attempts just to average 110 points a game. Sorry brotha, the era was garbage. It's not their fault, because many people had side jobs so couldn't solely focus on basketball, but for the most part, it was the infancy of the NBA for a reason.

    0

    hakeem averaged 4 blocks this season

    0

    It's estimated wilt averaged over 10 per game

    0

    OO ...ouch...
    _

    0

    Key word is "estimated" :D
    Still, adjusted for pace that's be like 6 or 7, which is crazy

    0

    thats still a defensive beast, because he already averaged about 20 rebs his entire career

    -3

    Wilt could shoot too https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA

    9

    Totally true.

    There were faster centers, taller centers, stronger centers than Hakeem. But no one was a more complete player than the Dream, on both sides of the court.

    He's the best center to ever play the game.

    Show 20 replies...
    -18

    Wilt is

    4

    Wilt was great, he was a beast physically, but Hakeem had a much greater offensive moves arsenal. Also, keep in mind that Hakeem played during the golden era of the NBA's centers, mid 80's till 90's. Wilt was undoubtedly great, but he played in a time when he was a giant amongst boys.

    -5

    HOF centers that Wilt played against

    Bill Russell
    Kareem
    Walt Bellamy
    Willis Reed
    Nate Thurmond
    Wes Unseld
    Elvin Hayes
    Dave Cowens
    Bob Lanier
    Bob McAdoo


    Also puts up better numbers than any other center. Name all the HOF centers that Hakeem went up against. Something to point out. Wilt was quintuple teamed in his 100 point game. He hasn't played in over 40 years and still has about 70 records. Only player in history to record 20 points 20 rebounds and 20 assists in a single game.

    9

    HOF centres that Hakeem played against:

    Shaq
    Patrick Ewing
    David Robinson
    Alonzo Mourning
    Dikembe Mutumbo

    2

    And Robert Parish, Bill Walton,Kareem,Moses malone, and I'll add Bill Laimbeer as he could torment wilt

    -4

    He didn't play as much hall of fame centers as Wilt did. And Wilt has better numbers. And since there was only 8 teams, wilt played against them more

    4

    True but since Hakeem led his team to the playoff and finals many times having to go up against people such as Kareem and shaq... U have to admit it would be a good 1 on 1 game

    -6

    Wilt did to. He led a poor Warriors tram to game 7s against a 6 hall of famer team Celtics. It would be a good 1 on 1 game, but I know Wilt would win

    3

    my money is on hakeem... sorry he has a better arsenal of offensive moves.

    how do u feel about george mikan.

    -4

    Milan is decent. Buy no way in hell Hakeem beats Wilt. Bugger, faster, stronger, age also an unstoppable post fade. Wilt also recorded multiple unofficial 20 block games and he blocked Kareem's sky hook twice. And that was when he was old ads had knee problems

    1

    Hakeem blocked Kareem as well.. I would 1 v 1 u in 2k and i will win... Im confident in that.

    -1

    Old Wilt blocked young Kareem. Young Hakeem supposedly blocked old Kareem's sky hook. We are talking real is basketball, not 2K....

    1

    you have your opinion and i have mine... thats what it comes down too so.

    DO u have a PS4 we should talk more.

    0

    Xbox 1

    0

    It blows my mind on how many people downvoted your comment. When you were stating facts...

    0

    That's why you like wilt more.

    1

    Pssssst, @J_Oak

    Elvin Hayes isn't a center.

    Also if you think height doesn't make a difference, then why do the two tallest centres (Wilt and Kareem) also happen to be the tallest?

    1

    *Best centres
    **Tallest of their era

    0

    61-62 season the season where wilt averaged 50 points, 39.5 attempts a game. Give Jordan 39 attempts a game and see what happens. The sad part is, WILT NEVER did this in the playoffs, odd, next the league average during this season was 42%, People literally could not shoot despite having no 3pt line. Trust me I have watched many tapes with my grandfather, the overall league athleticism is garbage in comparison today. Technology don't make westbrook become that damn explosive or rose. It's simple training and genetics. I agree with no athlete today being a complete freak like wilt hence why his era was terrible being that nobody had even an ounce of athleticism to even test him let alone rival or over power him. Yes let's be honest, if it takes 9'000 attempts to average 120 points, there is a problem, it takes 2'000 attempts less for the 80s era of ball to average 100 plus points a game compared to the 60s Celtics whooping 9000 attempts, 1'000 attempts less then 60s league average for the 80s to average 100 plus point games. the 07-08 suns takes 6'000 attempts to aveage 110 points a game. The 61-62 Chicago packers needed 8'405 attempts just to average 110 points a game. Sorry brotha, the era was garbage. It's not their fault, because many people had side jobs so couldn't solely focus on basketball, but for the most part, it was the infancy of the NBA for a reason.

    0

    This was wilt's competition. It's painful to watch in comparison to all star games later years.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09xvhy9paR0&list=PLcFcQzGJXbKDsiCk810tgquL4k_FCf3tA&index=62

    Show 3 more replies...
    0

    Michael jordan won mvp and dpoy in 1988

    Show 1 reply...
    0

    It's DPOY, MVP, and Finals MVP
    Hakeem is the only one to do that.

    0

    wilt averaged 50 and 20, wilt better imo

    -1

    this is not true. michael jordan did it in 1988

  • 4

    No 99 Block???

  • 2
  • 2

    2k isnt generous with 99s anymore. Deserves a 99 post hook and standing layup especially being a rare reward

  • 2
  • 1

    Holds NBA block record by of 700 and has a 95 block....2k

    0

    FUCKK 2k always underrating this man's blocking stats

  • 1

    It went up even more? WTF!!

  • 1

    best center ever. kareem is close tho

  • 1

    There should be Historic Moments Card for Hakeem
    The man got a quadruple double

  • 1

    "Bitch, the door"

    0

    Ooh I see it!!!

  • 1

    [Deleted]

    -3

    I'm pretty sure this would be a better reaction to your comment:
    *Inserts laughing emoji's

    Show 19 replies...
    -1

    [Deleted]

    2

    Not a Warriors fan...

    -1

    Wilt is better than Hakeem. Bigger, faster, stronger, and also has post moves.

    1

    Who averaged the most blocks in a career... Cough cough Hakeem

    1

    Blocks weren't counted when Wilt played...

    3

    Post: Hakkem
    Mid Range: Hakeem
    Free Throws: Hakeem
    Inside: Wilt
    Blocks: Hakeem... Hakeem is the Goat of centers

    -1

    Scoring:Wilt easily
    Rebounding: Wilt
    Defense: even( even though Wilt had multiple unofficial 20 block games.
    Athleticism: Wilt(Not even close one bit)
    Passing: Wilt(led league in assists in 1967-68)
    Wilt is bigger, faster, and stronger than Hakeem. Wilt also has post moves. He has a finger roll and a post fade. Wilt is better than Hakeem at basically every aspect of the game. Especially scoring. In 1961-62 Wilt averaged 50 ppg against centers that were 6'10 with their shoes off. Just to give you an idea of how tall that is, Dwight Howard is 6'9 1/2" with his shoes off.

    6

    Hakeem was a much better offensive player than Wilt, but Wilt was easily the better scorer if that makes sense. Hakeem revolutionized the role of a scoring big man and the kind of post footwork he would showcase had never been done and has never been replicated by anyone except Kobe. There's not enough defensive statistics for Wilt unfortunately and not enough film to gauge how good he really was on the defensive end, as well as accounting for the fact that all the crazy 60s numbers are inflated due to pace there's no choice but to give Hakeem the nod for defense.

    So I'd have it:

    Scoring: Wilt
    Offensive skillset: Hakeem
    Rebounding: Wilt
    Defense: Hakeem
    Athleticism: Wilt easily
    Passing: Wilt

    2

    >using dwight as an example, one of the smallest centres on the league
    >using wilts stat padding assist season to say he's a better passer

    0

    Stat padding!??? More like passing to the open man. I've watched lots of his film, and theres no stat padding there. It's all just nonsense that the media says. Especially Bill Simmons.

    1

    even admitted he was gunning for the assists record

    2

    So then he's a better passer. Stat padding is irrelevant. Bear in mind also that the assist rules then were much stricter than now. If the receiver dribbles the ball after catching it, the assist no longer counts. Today all you have to do is hit the receiver moving in a direct line to the basket. For Wilt to average the amount of assists he did is remarkable. He very well could have been averaging a triple double under today's assist rules.

    -1

    Might have had assists but his passing didnt create as many points as bill russels outlet pass to start a fastbreak or even kareems

    1

    Do you have any numbers to substantiate that claim?

    -1

    no as you said assists weren't counted after a dribble, I've watched enough bill russel film that my granddad recorded to know that he created ALOT of points my starting the fastbreak with havlieck. To see kareems passing watch any showtime lakers squad he starts the break for magic with his half court passes

    2

    Also take into consideration that Wilt was renowned by his teammates as being a great outlet passer. You can't make claims for two players with inferior numbers and not take Wilt into consideration either.

    1

    That wasn't what I asked you. I'm well aware of those things. I asked if you have numbers to substantiate your claim that Wilt didn't create as many points from his passing. From a pure numbers standpoint Wilt is the best passer out of the three and there doesn't exist enough video evidence of Russell nor Wilt to dispute who was the better passer under modern assist rules.

    -2

    >watching highlights

    -1

    Not highlights, film. Meaning full games. And he never said he was a stat padder. Don't try to make up garbage

  • 0

    ROIKI
    Hakeem was 6'11 trust me I saw a photo with him and shaq and share was taller

  • 0

    Hakeem is my favourite center of all time, but I definitely don't think he deserves a 98 in 2k's new rating system.
    There are centers far better than him who are 97 and below. But good luck facing whoever manages to get their hands on this Diamond Olajuwon. Rebounding was probably the only major flaw in this card and now he has a 92 O Reb.

    0

    Rebounding is still a bit of an issue because his vertical is still low.

    Show 3 replies...
    0

    How is rebounding an issue? 92 O, 97 D, and 98 Boxout.
    Vertical doesn't impact rebounding that much; Dennis Rodman only has 82 vertical and is one of the best rebounders in 2k.

    0

    Besides 82 vertical is good for big men

    0

    Against other great rebounders with higher verticals like Dwight, Bill Russel and Wilt it will be an issue

  • 0

    Took until the end of March, but the first Youtuber got this Diamond Hakeem. I wonder how long it'll take to get Diamond MJ...

  • 0

    But how many 6'7 white guys was Wilt matched up against... While Hakeem played in the most competitive era in NBA history, Wilt played in the least competitive era.

    9

    First off.... Wilt scored 60 and once got 55 rebounds on bill russell arguably the best center defender of all time. He didn't play against 6'7 white guys ill give you a whole list of people.
    Walter Dukes (7'0", 220 lbs.)
    Swede Halbrook (7'3, 235 lbs.)
    Tom Boerwinkle (7'0", 265 lbs.)
    Bob Lanier (6'11", 265 lbs.)
    Darrall Imhoff (6'10", 220 lbs.)
    Otto Moore (6'11", 210 lbs.)
    Sam Lacey (6'10", 235 lbs.)
    George Johnson (6'11", 245 lbs.)
    Paul Ruffner (6'10", 230 lbs.)
    Dick Cunningham (6'10", 245 lbs.)
    Walt Bellamy (6'11", 225 lbs.)
    Leroy Ellis (6'10", 210 lbs.)
    Nate Thurmond (6'11", 235 lbs.)
    Mel Counts (7'0", 235 lbs.)
    Nate Bowman (6'10", 230 lbs.)
    Clyde Lee (6'10", 210 lbs.)
    Walt Wesley (6'11", 230 lbs.)
    Henry Akin (6'10", 225 lbs.)
    Hank Finkel (7'0", 240 lbs.)
    Lew Alcindor aka Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (7'2", 225 lbs.)
    Neal Walk (6'10", 220 lbs.)
    Elmore Smith (7'0", 250 lbs.)
    Jim McDaniels (6'11", 230 lbs.)
    LaRue Martin (6'11", 215 lbs.)
    Tom Riker (6'10", 225 lbs.)

    Wilt also had a great post fade. I would say even better than Olajuwan's fade.
    Wilt even came third the league in assists. He could bench around 500. more than shaq could ever bench. so there goes that idea. know your facts before you talk shit about the greatest scorer that has ever been in the nba.

    Show 1 reply...
    0

    sorry, reported by accident.

    0

    The average height of a center in the 60'was about 6'9". The whole 6'6" 220 lb center theory is a complete myth, as the 1960s was chalked full of great big men including Russell, Chamberlain, Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and many more.

    Show 2 replies...
    -1

    Nothing says "Reliable source" like yahoo answers
    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110423104839AAcW8VN

    1

    I found that information on multiple sites. The one from Yahoo answers had the best explanation so I posted it. Where did you find information that 60s centers were 6'7?

    Show 1 more reply...
    -8

    How was Hakeem in the most competitive era in NBA history? Name me 2 other dominant bigmen in his era.

    Show 7 replies...
    10

    Shaq, Kemp, Malone, David Robinson, Ewing, Mourning, Barkley, Rodman, Webber, Grandmama. Not all necessarily dominant, but great players. Drob Ewing and Shaq are DEFINITELY dominant though

    -6

    Kemp=extremely overrated, to me he was better in his Cavalier days and Olajuwon was gone then.
    Larry Johnson=would never have gone up against Olajuwon because the hornets had Alonzo Mourning.
    Barkley=Overrated because of his rebounding, but was an infamous shot jacker.

    Olajuwon was great, I am not saying he wasn't great. He is not the best center of all time IMO. Also do your research instead of just spewing out dumb internet myths, the average height of players during Wilt's era was 6'6, while the average height of players during Hakeem's era was only 6'7.

    3

    I'm not going to touch on the other two (or the irony of the Barkley statement), but saying the Kemp was overrated and going as far as to say that he was better in his Cavalier days is one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard on this website
    Kemp was an absolute and total monster in his SuperSonic days, and if he continued on the path he was on in his SuperSonic days, he would be first-ballot, no doubt.
    When I get home I'll get you some statistics.

    4

    In the 1996 WCF Shawn Kemp averaged 20 points with 9.7 rebounds while his match-up was Karl Malone (who would later go on to neutralize Tim Duncan on offense in the 2004 WCF at 40). The kicker though? He did that on 69% shooting. That's higher than Shaq ever shot in a playoff series.
    In the 1996 Finals Kemp shot 55% for 23 points and 10 rebounds while his defender was Rodman
    Rodman is almost inarguably the best defender post ABA merger and certainly has a strong case for best defender of all time.
    Also a noticeable difference in Shawn Kemp on the Sonics vs Shawn Kemp on the Cavaliers
    Kemp was the best player on a first round bounce team in 97-98
    He then was the best (and most out of shape) player on a bad Cavaliers team for the next two years and proceeded to not make the all-star team again for the rest of his career.

    0

    Okay fine I'll admit that I'm wrong about most of the things I said there. However I still don't think Hakeem is the greatest center of all time.

    0

    Right nowvthe average height is 6'7 that is just ridiculous

  • 0
  • 0

    telling his hoes to gtfo

  • 0

    i wish it wasnt a pay to play reward

  • 0

    My favorite center of all time

  • 0

    Got regular hakeem, then dpoy hakeem (got rid of regular hakeem), and 127 cards away from hakeem, bye bye DPOY Hakeem!

  • 0

    He can actually shoot if he is wide open for three.

  • 0

    Entire 2k community

    95 block? I'll pass.

    0

    "63 3PT? I'll pass."

    -2K Community

  • 0

    Hakeem the Dream

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

    The Best "Eems"

    1. Kareem
    2. Hakeem
    3. Hasheem

    0

    Do not forget Rakeem.

    Show 1 reply...
    0

    Oh yeah lol

  • 0

    How do u get him

  • 0

    now he's worth getting. Just wish his FT wasn't lowered from the DPOY Hakeem, but the rebounding is nice on this. I'm almost there.

  • 0

    How well do you know the nab 2k ratings? Find out on this quiz: http://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/170641/2015-16-players-by-2k-rating

  • 0

    Now thats a good card to work for it, but good luck collecting 1 million cards.

    5

    In other words, good luck spending 1000$

    Show 10 replies...
    2

    As shitty as packs r I bet $1000 would be gone in no time, and would barely make a dent. It would prob take more like $10,000 to get enough mt for 2500 cards for this hakeem.

    0

    For 1000$ you can buy 6000k mt so you would easily get him.

    0

    Who do u know Mr Splashman that sells mt at that rate? R they honest, reliable, and not a scammer?

    0

    I don't buy mt or vc so I don't know. I just went on a few websites to see how much mt could you get for a 1000$.

    0

    yeah me too. I wonder if 2K really bans people for buying and selling mt or just says that to scare people.

    0

    Oh I was meaning if u buy VC. I know 2K did say that if u buy or sell mt they'll ban u, but that's prob just to scare people. I've gone thru 5,500,000 mt and I have 1700 cards. I've spent a lot on badges though. If I didn't do that I might have him by now.

    0

    Wow! How did you get so much mt?

    0

    actually not til some more cards come out though

  • 0
  • 0

    Has anyone dream shaked with Hakeem yet?

  • 0

    Hakeem is 6ft 11 irl but 2k made him a 7 footer this year. He was 6' 11" in previous 2ks

  • 0

    why his best card is from '90? his best season was '93

  • 0

    LOL they changed his rating because of Steph Curry

  • 0

    "Look at all the fucks I give"

  • 0

    That Post fade will be cheese tho!!!

  • 0

    Kareem sky hook vs Hakeem Dream Shake

  • 0

    how to unlock him

  • 0

    Hekeem is a dominate post player. But has 74 driving layup.... aint nobody stopping him

  • 0

    The only real changes were a little more strength and rebounding but I guess that was enough for 2 ratings. High 96 overall to low 98 overall I'm guessing.

  • 0
  • 0

    Lower OVR than Kareem, yet more total stats.

  • 0

    Greatest defensive player to ever play the game of Basketball.

    0

    I think that honor goes to Bill Russell. The 11 championships he won were based on the four-point swings created when he blocked a shot, kept it in play (unlike Wilt, FYI), and gave some of the best outlets in history to his speedy swingmen for easy layups. Hakeem, though he is #2, just can't compete with that.

    0

    I have his auto

    Show 3 replies...
    0

    You've told me lol

    0

    I was gunna change my profile pic to my cards

    0

    Feel free to test them out.

  • 0
  • -1

    I'm wet right now. Even though I can't access the fucking black market cause I dont have enough fucking runes

    -1

    lol I'm stupid it's not black market

  • -1

    Akeem Olajuwon

  • -1

    How well do you know the nab 2k ratings? Find out on this quiz: http://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/170641/2015-16-players-by-2k-rating

  • -1

    How can I get this card?

  • -1

    Oh shit...

    -1

    Well... Here comes the hate BETTER THAN WILT

    Show 21 replies...
    2

    Not gonna lie if I would ever make the case for a Center to be better than Wilt it's this dude. Hakeem revolutionized scoring at the position and to boot was the absolute elite of the elite on defense. Greatest shot blocker ever and greatest post game of any big ever. Extremely complete game.

    0

    Just because he has a more complete game doesn't make him better than Wilt. Also, blocks weren't recorded in the 60's but it's understood Wilt and Russell were getting waaaay more blocks than anyone more modern.
    Wilt almost always is in the top 5 GOAT lists while Hakeem doesn't make it into some people's top 10's

    2

    I've gone over countless times how the pace of the 60s and the lack of a 3 point line would have inflated blocks and inflated stats across the board anyway so I'm not getting into this debate again. Don't look at Wilt's raw numbers as if he'd be able to do that in the 80s or 90s.

    0

    Did you also look at how nobody in the modern nba would be able to play at the pace they did in the 60's as well? Probably not. Everyone uses that same argument but will always fail to look at it in the other direction. Around 30 extra possessions a game which was the pace of the 60's would mean effectively playing 110 game seasons in the modern NBA. Careers wouldn't be as long and longevity records wouldn't have been as easily broken.

    Also, Hakeems career high bpg average rounded up to 5 adjusted for 1960s pace which is 6.5 is still not as high as Wilts block numbers over a 112 game sample size with a majority of the numbers coming AFTER his prime rounded down to 8.
    Looking the other way, Wilts 8.8bpg over that sample size rounded down to 8 is still higher than Hakeems 4.3 career high rounded up to 5.
    Its fine tho. Continue being ignorant.
    2K got it right.

    1

    I said don't use raw numbers. You're adjusting Hakeem's numbers but he played in an era with a 3 point line. Use some common sense.

    0

    That same common sense would tell you that a lack of a 3pt lane doesn't mean more shots are funneled into Wilt.
    That same common sense would tell you that me boosting Hakeems block numbers past his career high and rounding down Wilt's numbers is more than enough compensation for the fact that there was a 3pt line in the 90's. The underused, still considered a novelty at the time, 3pt line. That's not much of an argument but like I said, it's fine.

    1

    There's also no argument when you're not considering the inferior talent and the loose goaltending rules but it's fine.

    0

    Oh, the usual "Wilt played against 6ft white guys" "Wilt blocked half his shots on the way down" Spewing the usual messy arguments now? Not going over that, you need to educate yourself on the 60's. 2k got it right. Wilt is better than Hakeem. An overwhelming majority of these GOAT lists got it right too. Wilt is almost always higher than Hakeem. Noble little argument you got there, but nope. It's fine tho. Continue with that ignorance. Maybe you'll convert somone else.

    1

    Also to clarify because you started on me for no reason, I didn't say that I thought Hakeem was better than Wilt, because regardless of the era he played in he still was a monster. I'm a firm believer that he would be the best Center in the league regardless of what era he plays in. I said above IF I had to argue for a Center over Wilt it's The Dream. Why do I say Hakeem is the greatest shot blocker ever? Because he dominates the numbers and played in a more competitive era. Wilt has absurd numbers but he doesn't have full career block numbers so almost his entire career is left to speculation on that front. Maybe he is a better shot blocker than Hakeem but I'm gonna argue for the guy with the definitive proof and footage of his defensive dominance

    0

    "I said above IF I had to argue for a Center over Wilt it's The Dream."

    And I told you why it's not an argument. Once, again it's fine. I don't really care anymore.

    0

    I didn't say Wilt played white guys you're putting words in my mouth, I said the competition was inferior, and it was. I've debated this countless times before, if Russell's Celtics played the 86 Celtics they would be blown out by 50. The game has evolved and the talent has evolved and this is not at all debatable. There's a circlejerk around the 60s like it was the greatest era of basketball but they played little to no structured defense and they ran laughable offensive schemes. A current day college team is more advanced than an NBA team was in the 60s. Wilt is an anomaly and would compete in any era but you're kidding yourself if you think the competition then at all compares to the 80s - today. The raw numbers are extremely misleading, and it's not a coincidence that in 1962 that there were so many record breaking stat stuffing seasons.

    0

    Completely missed the point but ok cool.

    0

    I guess I did since there was no point made to begin with. Nice talking with you.

    1

    Like I said, continue that ignorance. You and the few others who support that argument. Cool

    1

    He's better now don't judge a center by his era,

    0

    Also yes, you can do this for EVERY stat across the board and Wilt would still be better.

    -2

    bill russell was the greatest shot blocker