Was Hakeem Olajuwon's post-up game a little overrated?

[FrodoBaggins]

His shooting percentages (FG%, 2PT%, TS%) were never as high as Shaq's, Kareem's, Barkley's, Dantley's, Wilt's, Jokic's, and McHale's. And yet, he's often considered the best in the post. My personal opinion is that, while still one of the pivot greats, his post-up game was overrated due to its aesthetic appeal. No one has a prettier low-post highlight reel than The Dream.

IMO, what hurt his back-to-the-basket game was shot selection and, to a lesser degree, passing. He wasn't as good at getting the high-percentage looks, often settling for that tough baseline fadeaway jump shot. His touch in the paint was very good, but a level below Jokic, McHale, Dantley, and Kareem—the gold standards. He wasn't a huge foul drawer, and his FT% was below league average.

[Sane]

No, because you don’t measure a post up game by overall FG% or TS%. He’s taking (and making) more midrange jumpers than those people so it’s obvious not a logical comparison.

What you’ve shown here is just that his FG% is not higher than those other guys which is a different topic.

If you were to analyze his post game you’d pull up the post scoring volume, shot chart and efficiency in the playoffs. Plus you would compare within each era so that you factor in the quality of defense.

[FrodoBaggins]

Hakeem career 2pt%: 51.6
Kareem career 2pt%: 55.6
Shaq career 2pt%: 58.0
Wilt career 2pt%: 53.8
Barkley career 2pt%: 57.8
McHale career 2pt%: 55.8
Dantley career 2pt%: 54.0
Jokic career 2pt%: 60.4

[EmpireFalls]

His offense was a bit overrated by aesthetic bias. He didn’t have a super reliable way to finish at the rim, often settling for jumpers and hooks, his reading of the game offensively was just a tad slow at times, and while he could pass, it wasn’t a big part of his game until his later career.

However I think he didn’t get used as a roller anywhere near enough either, and I also think he deserves some grace for his overall hardship in situation.

He (like KG, who shares similar issues) developed and played many years of his prime in such a dysfunctional environment where he had to do everything defensively and then paper over the cracks offensively too. So I’m willing to give him grace compared to a lot of the other guys.

[TheShow2021]

Offensively one of the most overrated players of all time. His TS+ was quite low.

[druggas]

Had such good moves that players came to him to learn his footwork.

[Frankie]

No.

[CodeBreaker]

All I wanna say is Jokic has better post-up game

[Onlytimewilltel]

Offensively one of the most overrated players of all time. His TS+ was quite low.

Says someone who’s never watched him play

[LeBronSpaghetti]

Yes it is overrated. Very similar to how Kobe’s offensive game is very overrated. Just because a guy has deep bag doesn’t mean he has the brain to know how to properly use it.

[ikedog34]

Dream took tough shots. Hurt his percentages...however come playoff time his numbers were hurt far less than his peers due to his ability to hit them. Made him far harder to guard than his competitors when it mattered. And I don't want to hear about Shaq. Give Hakeem Kobe and Wade and and he'd be challenging Jordan on ring count.

[FrodoBaggins]

No, because you don’t measure a post up game by overall FG% or TS%.

No play-type player-tracking data prior to 2004-05. 2PT% and TS% are good general correlates for overall scoring efficiency. They're the best we can do, and they're worth a mention. They show that Hakeem had a lower 2PT% and TS% compared to the listed players. Why is that? Was he taking more difficult shots? Did he need to take tougher shots? Was he not as good at making shots?

He’s taking (and making) more midrange jumpers than those people so it’s obvious not a logical comparison.

Was he? How many per game? At what shooting percentage? He's not the only guy mentioned who shot from a distance. And were those the best quality shots available on the possession, or did he settle for them?

What you’ve shown here is just that his FG% is not higher than those other guys which is a different topic.

If you were to analyze his post game you’d pull up the post scoring volume, shot chart and efficiency in the playoffs. Plus you would compare within each era so that you factor in the quality of defense.

No play-type stats prior to 2004-05. The best we can do is are box score, PBP from 1997-2004, and subjective analysis/scouting reports based on available game footage.

[Mirotic12]

No, it wasn't overrated. He had the best post game in basketball history.

[FrodoBaggins]

Here's what the 2PT% and TS% looks like relative to league average:

Hakeem: 106 2PT+, 103 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 109 2PT+, 106 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Kareem: 119 2PT+, 114 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 112 2PT+, 109 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Shaq: 123 2PT+, 111 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 119 2PT+, 107 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Wilt: 125 2PT+, 113 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 120 2PT+, 107 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Barkley: 119 2PT+, 114 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 113 2PT+, 109 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
McHale: 113 2PT+, 112 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 114 2PT+, 115 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Dantley: 112 2PT+, 116 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 109 2PT+, 113 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Jokic: 116 2PT+, 112 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 105 2PT+, 107 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)

[Yoshun]

Hakeem's lower TS% was probably because he took way more shots beyond 10 feet than guys like Shaq and Wilt. I didn't check them all, to be honest, but that would be my guess in most comparisons. This is especially true later in his career. In his last season, for example, 40% of his shots were 10-16 feet. He was much less of a dunker than guys like Shaq and Wilt.

The counter argument would probably be he took more mid-range shots because he had a weaker post game, I don't think that's true though. I think he was more likely to get the ball further away from the basket than many of those other guys, for a variety of reasons that I don't have the data to back that up though.

[JustBuzzin]

There is a reason all the superstars go to Hakeem to train during the summer.

This topic is disrespectful. Hakeem has the best post game of all-time.

[dk1115]

No?

[tsherkin]

Hakeem didn't have the physical tools Shaq or Wilt did, and he wasn't 7-foot a billion like Kareem. He was quite quick and very strong, and extremely adept at drawing fouls (particularly as a younger guy).

It's worth remembering that he hit the league shooting like 61% from the FT line and had limited range. Then, like Karl Malone, he developed his jumper. He developed his handle to enable his face-up attack, and he had a wonderful array of countermoves. His footwork was fantastic.

I think the mistake people are making here is correlating "post game" with "scoring efficiency."

Shaq had very good footwork, timing and off-ball movement (which a lot people don't like acknowledging), but he was always a 7'1, 300-pound (or more) physical monster with explosive leaping and quickness. You can be quite deft in the post and (shy of being Jokic), you're not going to match his scoring efficiency at volume, right? Same same with Wilt. Same same with the 7'3 guy wheeling to deal a skyhook you can't block. Kareem's post game was relatively simplistic... but it was quite effective.

Olajuwon didn't have the same kind of mass advantage as Shaq or mid/late Wilt, nor did he have Kareem's height. But he had quickness, balance and handles, so he could attack and create for himself. And he had a good array of spins, drop steps, up-and-unders and the like. But as others have mentioned, he gamed a lot for contested shots. He wasn't a great passer, and partly that led to him GOING for the shot regardless. So he grew accustomed to dealing those wheeling fadeaways into the lane, and the baseline fades and such.

But if you actually watch his footwork and action in the mid and low post, it's fantastic. He had a great set of sequences he could go to. Very... I'll borrow from the John Danaher and say "Enter the System." He had you on his back and you were giving up a spin, a fadeaway in one direction or the other, a hook in the lane or some kind of lean-in or up-and-under situation. That's just what it was. Unless you were able to hard double, he was getting something he was comfortable taking.

So the actual proficiency of his game was there in terms of the variety. Was it the most effective? No, of course not. Variety is often overstated. Hakeem did well, and he was quite resilient into the playoffs, but the other guys mentioned here are all monsters of a greater magnitude. And winning bias/nostalgia has changed the perception of how people approach Hakeem's game.

Dantley was a much better scorer. His run from 80-85 is insane, especially since he was 6'5. Insane deep seals, great up fakes, lots of face-up drives and short jumpers, but mostly off-ball action ahead of a simple fake and/or hook. And he shot Shaq-like FG% while drawing tons and tons of fouls and shooting well at the line. Kareem was obviously a better scorer. Shaq, Wilt. Chuck, though Barkley did a lot more than just attack in the post. Jokic is a much better scorer. McHale was a better scorer largely because he was a better shooter (and he had a shot diet not dissimilar to Olajuwon). You can talk some about how the Celtics roster had such talent around him that it was challenging to guard him effectively and that's fine, but he was still north of 60% TS in 89 and 90, and Bird played 6 games in 89.

So yeah, I think Hakeem's a BIT overrated. He had a lot of moving parts to put together, developing his shot, developing the handle, being more than just a mobile athlete with a motor like he was when he first hit the league (although some of the rudiments were there). And even at his peak, he wasn't quite as effective as some of his positional peers across the eras. He won a lot with defense and roleplayer contribution, which people don't like to discuss as much as his whirling dervish style. But it WAS effective, and he WAS something like a +2% rTS guy for a dozen years or so, with a peak at 108 and 107 TS+ when he started to have some better spacing and a better offensive system to work with. Carrying that kind of volume, attacking effectively out of the face-up with range and live-dribble dynamism more like a small forward or shooting guard, that was pretty big for what it enabled him to do.

But yeah, strictly from the POV of who was the best post scorer, it's not him.

[pepe1991]

Career 26 ppg on 57% TS in playoffs in years when even in regular season average TS% couldn't pass 55% TS, and often in playoffs couldn't crack 52%...

And offense wasn't only thing he was great at. Guy was monster on defense and top 1-5 defender for near decade.


1993-94 title
33 ppg
10,3 rpg
4,5 apg
2,8 bpg

56% TS

It doesn't sound as impressive until you see league's average in playoffs

94 ppg
51,6% TS
5,5 bpg
41,8 rpg

Basically Hakeem alone averaged 35% of league's average points on 5% higher efficiency than it was league's average & 50% of league's average blocks a game.

In today's numbers it's equivialent of 39 ppg, 61% TS playoffs peformances on championship roster for entire playoffs

[Optms]

Guess what else the selective stats say?

Dwight Howard is also better than Hakeem as a post player, the stats back it up and it isn't close. And a whole other number of bigs as well. I wonder why OP didn't include them. What's the agenda here?