Kareem wants a statue ...NOW!

Well, that might be a bit of a stretch. On that last Finals team, Kareem was only playing scant backup minutes (even though he technically remained in the starting lineup) and contributed little. He only played about 1600 minutes the entire season, which ranked him SEVENTH on the Lakers depth chart behind Magic, Scott, Worthy, Green, Cooper and Thompson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/1989.html).

And, speaking of statues, that's essentially what Kareem was on the defensive end his final few seasons, an immobile statue. Kareem's overall game took a big dropoff his final three seasons. But, oddly enough, that did not impair the Lakers' fortunes at all, in fact they had their best seasons ever during those broken down Kareem years, winning two straight championships and and going to three straight finals. Magic, Worthy and Byron Scott (all 3 at their absolute apex) were the guys carrying the heaviest load on those late Laker championship teams, not Kareem.

 

Okay, I stand corrected. He only contributed heavily in his team at least going to the finals, six of his last eight years.

 

Could be a cool statue, too--Kareem doing a sky hook.

Speaking of which, there aren't many other players who essentially own a signature shot like that. I'm not sure you could say there are really any like that.

And where has the hook shot gone in today's game? Done by a big man, it's a virtually impossible shot to defend or block. Yet, no one seems to employe it anymore.

 

Two other Hall of Famers in their prime on those teams...

 

Too much clutching and grabbing at ground level to get into the hook-shot motion. If Kareem came into the game today and tried that dribble-hitch-and-hoist move he'd be tied up like a mummy. The only way you can get off a hook shot now is a one-motion catch-and-flick type thing.

Plus, coaches absolutely forbid anybody from taking any shots besides dunks and 3-pointers. Anybody takes a 10-foot hook shot, they'll be planted on the bench.

 

Somewhat. I mean that he played seemingly forever, and as a result, some people will hold that against him. For similar reasons, Shaq will probably unfairly be judged by his last couple of years on the Cavs, Suns and Celtics, as opposed to if he just retired after winning his last title with the Heat. For whatever reason, guys just seem to take a hit when they continue to play for a couple years.

 

Nothing was worse than Jordan on the Wizards.

 

heh, I assume you're being kind of facetious. Jordan on the Wizards prevented him from being Jordan the Executive, which is far worse And Jordan was still a good player on the Wizards. That team was just so awkwardly constructed though, and it didn't really need him outside of as a gate attraction.

 

a) Jordan averaged 21 ppg the two seasons he was with the Wizards.

b) The Wizards improved by 17 wins the season he arrived, and declined by 12 games the year he left.

He wasn't MICHAEL JORDAN anymore, but he was better than the shit they were putting on the floor before and after.

 

Slightly facetious. I just don't like when great players change teams and put their legacies at risk. It's like Gretzky playing on the Rangers and Blues, or if Yzerman would have left Detroit for Calgary or something.

 

But you know something? Down 3-2 in Game 6 of the 1988 Finals against Detroit, L.A. trailed 102-101 with 27 seconds left. They got the ball to . . . Kareem, who drew a foul on Laimbeer and hit two very clutch FTs to win the game 103-102.


In his prime, Shaq wouldn't have gotten the ball in that situation.

 

Truly great players never really put their legacies at risk.

Does anybody care about 300-pound Babe Ruth stumbling around for the Boston Braves? Anybody care about 41-year-old Bob Cousy averaging 0.9 ppg for the Cincinnati Royals? Johnny Unitas fumbling snaps for the San Diego Chargers?

Nah.

The only time that crap really matters is if the player wasn't really that good to start out with, or if the "decline phase" lasts so long it really damages their career averages.

Mickey Mantle is about the only case I can really think of, right off the top of my head. If he had quit after 1964, he would have been ranked right up there with Ruth/DiMaggio/Mays/Aaron/Ted. By hanging around three more years, he cost himself about 15 points off his lifetime average, which dropped him into the "second echelon" of all-time outfielders in "conventional wisdom."