RealGM

Olajuwon was selected first overall by the Rockets and led became one of the greatest players ever and a top five center of all time.

Jordan was drafted third overall and would go on to become the goat.

Here's the question. Lets say you were a teenager around the time these two were drafted and you were a Rockets fan then and now. Do you wish the Rockets would have chosen Jordan over Olajuwon in the draft.

At first I would say no because even with Olajuwon the Rockets did have sucess.

Now I do believe an argument can go both ways.

No. Despite MJ being the better player, ill find Olajuwon's career more impressive for me, carrying his team with no second star to 2 rings.

Hakeem is my favorite center of all time. Nothing he couldn't do in the paint. I bet in this era he'd even develop a 3. Although it would limit his effectiveness and what makes him so great.

FelixD wrote:No. Despite MJ being the better player, ill find Olajuwon's career more impressive for me, carrying his team with no second star to 2 rings.

Drexler was the 2nd star for the 2nd ring.

What also needs to be taken into account here is that Houston won their 2 titles due to the void that MJ left when he took 2 years off. Hakeem could have easily ended up with zero rings without MJ’s mid career retirement.

Anyways, to answer the question, of course you’d rather have MJ than Hakeem, he was the better player.

Anyways its Portland that should be have revisionist history in this context. They could have had anyone but Sam Bowie (yes I understand Injuries)

You never know for sure how drafting Jordan would have worked out, it’s not guaranteed that you get more than 2 rings. I think you keep the bird in hand.

The_Hater wrote:

FelixD wrote:No. Despite MJ being the better player, ill find Olajuwon's career more impressive for me, carrying his team with no second star to 2 rings.

Drexler was the 2nd star for the 2nd ring.

What also needs to be taken into account here is that Houston won their 2 titles due to the void that MJ left when he took 2 years off. Hakeem could have easily ended up with zero rings without MJ’s mid career retirement.

Anyways, to answer the question, of course you’d rather have MJ than Hakeem, he was the better player.

Hakeem made the finals before Jordan did and then played with bad supporting casts for most of his career. If Jordan played with the guys Hakeem did, no guarantee he would have won more rings.

Wait, why are we opening up an argument about whether or not someone whom absolutely everyone agrees is a better player--is actually a better player? Hakeem is a great great player while Jordan is a top-3 all-time player at worst. The gap between them is pronounced and we could all find many stats to back it up, in addition to the team success argument.

I'm not a Jordan worshipper and I used to love watching Hakeem but this is just a bridge too far. Jordan's the better player, and I don't think it's worth debating if that's 100% because he had Scottie Pippen at his side.

HotelVitale wrote:Wait, why are we opening up an argument about whether or not someone whom absolutely everyone agrees is a better player--is actually a better player? Hakeem is a great great player while Jordan is a top-3 all-time player at worst. The gap between them is pronounced and we could all find many stats to back it up, in addition to the team success argument.

Context is everything, though. The Rockets organization was not exactly great at surrounding Hakeem with talent. I mean, he had Sampson early on, but he broke down quickly and terribly. They got two horribly overrated players for him, neither of whom contributed anything to team success. Hell, one of them played the same position as Hakeem so that was a waste. They had two players suspended for more than a season for doing cocaine in 1986. When they were re-instated two years later, the Rockets put the two in the starting lineup. I mean, half of Hakeem's starting lineup was literally cokeheads. In '92, Hakeem missed 12 games and the team promptly went 2-10 in those and missed the playoffs.

Sure, MJ is the greatest ever, but the gap is not quite what you make it out to be. Or rather, it might not have been enough for him to drag some pretty terrible teams to any significant playoff glory had he been drafted by the Rockets and surrounded by the kind of riffraff Hakeem was surrounded by. I mean, hell, let's pretend MJ doesn't retire in '93 and swap him and Hakeem. Does Jordan take that Rockets team to the title? How does Hakeem do if you put him next to Pippen, Grant and Kukoč on that 55-27 Bulls team?

You can't be mad at the pick. As great as Jordan was a lot of his success was due to great team construction. Imagine a Scottie Pippen and Hakeem duo in their primes along with Horace Grant and later Dennis Rodman and tell me they wouldn't have won more than two championships.

Hakeem was great, but not as great as Jordan. You take the best every time to build around. I used to cheat and put Olajuwan as the best PF of all time, but now we have Tim Duncan. He isn't the best center ever. I'm not going to crap on the pick at #1 though. The consensus was to take the big man. Yet, Michael took ROY honors over Hakeem in 1985.

The top vote getters for NBA Rookie of the Year in 1985, were:

Michael Jordan (CHI) - 57.5 (first place votes)
Hakeem Olajuwon (HOU) - 20.5

Shock Defeat wrote:

The_Hater wrote:

FelixD wrote:No. Despite MJ being the better player, ill find Olajuwon's career more impressive for me, carrying his team with no second star to 2 rings.

Drexler was the 2nd star for the 2nd ring.

What also needs to be taken into account here is that Houston won their 2 titles due to the void that MJ left when he took 2 years off. Hakeem could have easily ended up with zero rings without MJ’s mid career retirement.

Anyways, to answer the question, of course you’d rather have MJ than Hakeem, he was the better player.

Hakeem made the finals before Jordan did and then played with bad supporting casts for most of his career. If Jordan played with the guys Hakeem did, no guarantee he would have won more rings.

Are you actually making an argument that Hakeem was as good or better than Jordan?

I’ll let you dig your own hole. Good luck.

This is a nonsense topic. When you select a Hall of Fame player, that was the consensus pick at the time, you don't have regrets because a "better" Hall of Fame player went later. The 76ers selected Iverson in 1996, and Kobe went later, and I've never heard one 76er fan of that age, express regret or concern that they could've had Kobe. I doubt there is a single Rockets fan that was of age at that time, that thinks twice about selecting Olajuwan over Jordan.

The_Hater wrote:

Shock Defeat wrote:

The_Hater wrote:
Drexler was the 2nd star for the 2nd ring.

What also needs to be taken into account here is that Houston won their 2 titles due to the void that MJ left when he took 2 years off. Hakeem could have easily ended up with zero rings without MJ’s mid career retirement.

Anyways, to answer the question, of course you’d rather have MJ than Hakeem, he was the better player.

Hakeem made the finals before Jordan did and then played with bad supporting casts for most of his career. If Jordan played with the guys Hakeem did, no guarantee he would have won more rings.

Are you actually making an argument that Hakeem was as good or better than Jordan?

I’ll let you dig your own hole. Good luck.

I already made my comment. Reply to it or not.

Shock Defeat wrote:

The_Hater wrote:

Shock Defeat wrote:Hakeem made the finals before Jordan did and then played with bad supporting casts for most of his career. If Jordan played with the guys Hakeem did, no guarantee he would have won more rings.

Are you actually making an argument that Hakeem was as good or better than Jordan?

I’ll let you dig your own hole. Good luck.

I already made my comment. Reply to it or not.

I did. I pointed out how bad a comment it was.

The only thing I'll add is that its quite possible that MJ only wins 2-4 rings had he gone to Houston and wasted the 87-92 years like Hakeem did due to injuries on the roster, drug problems and stuff like that. He might have even just left.

With the benefit of hindsight, of course you'd take Jordan. So it's a wish, but in this case not a nagging wish. The Rockets did just fine.

I love how it goes straight to "ringz".

If you tell me I get to have local market tv games of MJ vs Hakeem, who cares about rings in that era? Do people forget how frustrating it was not seeing more of MJ play back then?

AMW27 wrote:Olajuwon was selected first overall by the Rockets and led became one of the greatest players ever and a top five center of all time.

Jordan was drafted third overall and would go on to become the goat.

Here's the question. Lets say you were a teenager around the time these two were drafted and you were a Rockets fan then and now. Do you wish the Rockets would have chosen Jordan over Olajuwon in the draft.

At first I would say no because even with Olajuwon the Rockets did have sucess.

Now I do believe an argument can go both ways.

Lets say MJ goes to Rockets and Olajuwon goes to the Bulls.

Who would get more rings if Everything goes in the exact same way roster wise/draft but with those 2 switching.

Olajuwon would proably be higher up in the rankings wouldn't he?

2 rings = success

You don't know how it would've worked w MJ, Hakeem didn't have Pippen. Take the 2 chips, take Hakeem again.