RealGM Greatest Peaks Project (2022): #7 - 1993-94 Hakeem Olajuwon

[Dutchball97]

Hi y'all! I think we rate Curry vs the competition a bit differently, and I haven't seen your replies to any of the arguments in favor of Curry yet, so I thought I might start a discussion to understand your perspective better. (apologies if you have and I just missed it!)

To me, there's been some pretty convincing arguments for Curry over this competition (though I am biased since I'm one of the ones making the arguments ). For example, people have shown he has a favorable case over Hakeem by the impact stats, by a skill comparison (e.g. comparing scoring vs playmaking vs defense), by in-depth film analysis, and by qualitative analysis (e.g. using scalability arguments, time-machine arguments, etc.)

Is there any reason why you're rating Curry lower? Is there anything in those arguments do you don't find convincing? Feel free to raise any points in favor of other players too if you think I'm underrating them

Curry doesn't really have a runaway peak year. I'm probably going for 2017 but his regular season wasn't as impressive to me as other contenders around this range and I can't say his post-season really swings me around on that with how unbelievably stacked the Warriors were. Then you've got an arguable GOAT regular season in 2016 that ended in a whimper in the play-offs or a well rounded 2015 season that overall just lacks behind the likes of Hakeem, Russell, Bird and Magic for me personally.

I'm also a bit worried you might be comparing these different eras a bit too much as if they're the same. Being a +5 in anything in 1960, 1990 or 2020 doesn't always mean the exact same thing. These impact stat comparisons become very flimsy the moment we go back to the early-mid 90s already and become pretty much obsolote in my eyes pre-1974.

As to skill comparisons, I can't say I consider that at all. Comparing a guard and a big with very different roles and skillsets isn't that productive. We're going to see huge gaps that are expected but what can you tell from that? I like to eliminate the noise and just look at total impact, no matter how they get it. Be it scoring, playmaking, defense or shouting at teammates.

I do use some qualitative arguments but I purely look at how well did a player do within a season and not at how well would they do in other eras. Even then how does Curry have an edge in scalability/time machine stuff? Hakeem's skillset would translate about as well as anyone in league history. He'd fit in just fine in the 60s or the modern game, where Steph gradually loses impact the farther back you go. Besides that we've seen Hakeem carry a solid at best supporting cast to a title, while Curry has gotten increasingly more help nearly every year of his prime. I'm not sure any other superstar in the modern era has had to carry as little of a load as Curry. I'm not comfortable projecting Curry carrying a team to a title without the help he's gotten especially since we've seen him fail to even drag his team to the play-offs when the other stars are out.

As much as i often push back on curry in this board i think 2022 disproves the point of curry only winning with overwhelming help (2015 has the injury luck argument against it to a degree)

The 2022 warriors have more ralent thab the 94 rockets but they are not "overwhelming"

I don't entirely agree with this tbh. The 2022 Warriors might not have had as much top level talent as 2015-2018 but they were the deepest team in the league. They pretty much broke the luxury tax system with all the players they had to pay.

The Warriors beat the Nuggets and Mavs pretty much by default due to their large talent gaps despite Jokic and Luka playing as well as, if not better than, Curry on an individual level. Ja was also outplaying Curry before getting injured. The finals are the reason I turned around a bit on Curry's 2022 post-season as the Celtics were a very well rounded and deep team themselves with Curry being the clear standout player in that series.

Even then, I do not give credit to earlier seasons for what someone does later on nor do I prop up later seasons because someone proved they could do it in earlier seasons. 2022 Curry influences my view on 2022 Curry and pretty much nothing else.

[jalengreen]

1. 1964 Bill Russell
(1965)
(1962)

Not terribly confident as to which specific season of Russell is his best, but I certainly think that the most dominant defender in NBA history was worthy of being near the top of this project at his peak. 1964 seems like a sensible pick given the absurd relative defensive rating posted by the Celtics in the regular season. There's certainly a "one-way player" argument to be made (and I'm not one who is high on Russell's offense), but I consider Russell's defensive impact to be greater than the offensive impact of guys like Magic or Curry who are not very far from being on this ballot.

2. 1993 Hakeem Olajuwon
(1994)

Speaking of defense, I think right about now is where the guy I have as the 2nd greatest defender ever should go. While I think his offensive repertoire is sometimes overrated (not suuper high on his scoring/playmaking which is what ultimately causes me to give Duncan the edge), the way he tended to elevate his game in the postseason holds weight to me.

3. 2004 Kevin Garnett

Multiple good picks to go with here... this is where I strongly considered George Mikan. Ultimately the absurd impact of KG on the '04 Wolves is historic and hard to overlook. I'm not too concerned with the perceived postseason underperformances of Garnett. While I don't personally care too much about portability / the time machine argument, I think KG also looks very favorably in those lenses.

HM: Mikan, Bird, Magic, Curry

[LA Bird]

Here are the results for round 7

Winner: 94 Olajuwon

There were 19 voters in this round: iggymcfrack, Dutchball97, capfan33, Samurai, Doctor MJ, SickMother, Djoker, trelos6, Dr Positivity, f4p, Eddy_JukeZ, JordansBulls, ardee, 70sFan, Ginoboleee, OhayoKD, Proxy, Blazers-1977, jalengreen

A total of 28 seasons received at least 1 vote: 03 Garnett, 04 Garnett, 15 Curry, 16 Curry, 17 Curry, 19 Curry, 20 Antetokounmpo, 21 Antetokounmpo, 21 Curry, 22 Antetokounmpo, 22 Curry, 50 Mikan, 61 Russell, 62 Russell, 63 Russell, 64 Russell, 65 Russell, 66 Russell, 76 Erving, 84 Bird, 86 Bird, 86 Olajuwon, 87 Bird, 87 Johnson, 88 Olajuwon, 93 Olajuwon, 94 Olajuwon, 95 Olajuwon

Top 5 seasons
94 Olajuwon: 1.000 (27-0)
93 Olajuwon: 0.962 (25-1), loses to 94 Olajuwon
64 Russell: 0.958 (23-1), loses to 94 Olajuwon
65 Russell: 0.889 (24-3), loses to 64 Russell, 93 Olajuwon, 94 Olajuwon
62 Russell: 0.852 (23-4), loses to 64 Russell, 65 Russell, 93 Olajuwon, 94 Olajuwon

H2H record
94 Olajuwon vs 93 Olajuwon: 10-4
94 Olajuwon vs 64 Russell: 10-4
94 Olajuwon vs 65 Russell: 11-4
94 Olajuwon vs 62 Russell: 12-3
93 Olajuwon vs 64 Russell: 6-6
93 Olajuwon vs 65 Russell: 7-5
93 Olajuwon vs 62 Russell: 7-5
64 Russell vs 65 Russell: 7-4
64 Russell vs 62 Russell: 6-5
65 Russell vs 62 Russell: 5-4

[f4p]

As much as i often push back on curry in this board i think 2022 disproves the point of curry only winning with overwhelming help (2015 has the injury luck argument against it to a degree)

The 2022 warriors have more ralent thab the 94 rockets but they are not "overwhelming"

not overwhelming like 2017, but obviously the most in the nba. they still have klay and draymond at reasonable ages for this era (just turned 32) and they paid andrew wiggins $25M a year plus luxury tax to be their 4th or 5th best player. people don't like wiggins because he was usually being paid $25M to be the franchise guy. that's a disaster. andrew wiggins using his #1 overall pick athleticism to play good defense and then having the luxury to drift in and out on offense like he has done throughout his career. not a disaster. in fact, quite good. and then you have jordan poole. steph couldn't start at the beginning of the playoffs. so the warriors started jordan poole. in 3 games, he average 28.7 ppg on 84.0 TS%. in nba playoff history, do you know how often someone has averaged 28+ ppg on 84+ TS% over 3 games? twice. lebron in the bubble, and jordan poole. so the warriors 6th man was so good that he started for steph and did something even steph had never done, in the exact areas steph excels at. that is a loaded roster.

and similar to tom brady with belichick giving him the best defense over his career (and tampa as well), the part of the game steph least impacts (defense) is where the warriors excelled once again. in 2015, #1 in defense. in 2017, #2 in defense. in 2018, slacked off but then #1 defense in the playoffs. 2022, #1 in defense. much like brady, steph always has the margin of error from the defense. so he can play poorly like the memphis close out game or be outplayed by a player on the other team (doncic) and still survive. to me that is what is most overlooked with loaded rosters. you can win when playing poorly, which people then ignore because you won, and you get chances at redemption and more chances at greatness. he was good in the finals, but maybe other guys on less loaded rosters would never even get to prove it in the finals because they would have already lost. guys like hakeem barely even got chances in his career, and even in those chances he had to practically be perfect because of the limited supporting cast. that's what makes it feel more impressive. there's no margin for error and no second chances.

[homecourtloss]

As much as i often push back on curry in this board i think 2022 disproves the point of curry only winning with overwhelming help (2015 has the injury luck argument against it to a degree)

The 2022 warriors have more ralent thab the 94 rockets but they are not "overwhelming"

not overwhelming like 2017, but obviously the most in the nba. they still have klay and draymond at reasonable ages for this era (just turned 32) and they paid andrew wiggins $25M a year plus luxury tax to be their 4th or 5th best player. people don't like wiggins because he was usually being paid $25M to be the franchise guy. that's a disaster. andrew wiggins using his #1 overall pick athleticism to play good defense and then having the luxury to drift in and out on offense like he has done throughout his career. not a disaster. in fact, quite good. and then you have jordan poole. steph couldn't start at the beginning of the playoffs. so the warriors started jordan poole. in 3 games, he average 28.7 ppg on 84.0 TS%. in nba playoff history, do you know how often someone has averaged 28+ ppg on 84+ TS% over 3 games? twice. lebron in the bubble, and jordan poole. so the warriors 6th man was so good that he started for steph and did something even steph had never done, in the exact areas steph excels at. that is a loaded roster.

and similar to tom brady with belichick giving him the best defense over his career (and tampa as well), the part of the game steph least impacts (defense) is where the warriors excelled once again. in 2015, #1 in defense. in 2017, #2 in defense. in 2018, slacked off but then #1 defense in the playoffs. 2022, #1 in defense. much like brady, steph always has the margin of error from the defense. so he can play poorly like the memphis close out game or be outplayed by a player on the other team (doncic) and still survive. to me that is what is most overlooked with loaded rosters. you can win when playing poorly, which people then ignore because you won, and you get chances at redemption and more chances at greatness. he was good in the finals, but maybe other guys on less loaded rosters would never even get to prove it in the finals because they would have already lost. guys like hakeem barely even got chances in his career, and even in those chances he had to practically be perfect because of the limited supporting cast. that's what makes it feel more impressive. there's no margin for error and no second chances.

These are good points about Curry and the Warriors’ defenses through these years. One counterpoint would be that Curry’s unique offensive skillset allows for defense to built around him, but that counterpoint ignores how good Draymond is and what a generational defensive QB he is and perfect for the pace and space era.

Also, almost forgot that crazy Poole run, most of it created by him (only 3.3 catch and shoots per game in that stretch).

Also, I did forget about that wild LeBron 3 game stretch against Portland. 35/9/9 on 84% TS and 84% eFG.

[eminence]

I do appreciate the irony of a post focused on folks not appreciating defense also claiming Luka outplayed Steph in the WCF.

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/defensive-impact/?Season=2021-22&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=3&TeamID=1610612742&sort=MIN&dir=1&PerMode=Totals

BBQ Chicken Ernie

[Doctor MJ]

I know it was just a throwaway comment in an unrelated argument, but I don't think Curry would lose anywhere near as much in 1962 as you'd think. Steph has a career EFG% of .581. The league average this year was .532. Meanwhile, Curry has a career FG% of .473. The league average for that stat in 1962 was .426. Even without a 3-point shot available, he'd be outperforming the league average by a similar amount.

I don't think you realize how much of a difference it makes for Curry. Using very crude estimation you just did:

Curry's career: 62.4 TS%, 58.1 eFG%, 114 TS+

Curry without 3P adjusted for 1962 averages: 52.6 TS%, 47.3 eFG%, 110 TS+

That would make Curry less efficient than quite a high volume scorers (including Wilt). It's not a good way to evaluate cross-era comparisons though, which brings us to...

Now take into account that the league was used to not guarding people even close to Curry's range. Even when they adjusted, they still wouldn't have experience trying to follow a shooter that closely off of screens on the perimeter and Curry would undoubtedly shoot significantly better than he does today. Furthermore, if they suddenly have a guy they have to guard from 30 feet when they hardly have to guard anyone else in the league past 15 feet, his gravity would warp the court even more than it does today and would get amazing looks for his teammates. I think there's a strong argument that Curry would be just as dominant if not more in the '60s than he is in the modern game.

You are doing it completely wrong here. It's true that 1960s players weren't used to defend someone like Curry in a way modern teams do... but they wouldn't need to. Curry is extremely dangerous outside 30 feet strictly because him shooting 40% on threes is extremely efficient offense. Curry shooting 40% long range jumpshots from 30 feet without three point line leads to 0.8 ppp, which is horrible even for 1960s standards. Even if we assume that he'd make more threes with less pressure, 45% still doesn't generate strong offense.

Curry would be still a freak with his shooting, but the same plays wouldn't have the same value. Teams would be able to live with Curry taking a lot of long threes unguarded, because that would never lead to elite offense - unless Curry gets extremely hot. So even though he'd still score a lot of points, his off-ball gravity would be significantly less impactful. That's what makes him so dangerous and you don't have that anymore. You basically leave us with better shooting, but smaller and worse defensively version of Jerry West instead.

By the way, I don't think Curry would make threes at significantly better rate, even with less defensive pressure. Balls were much different back then and we can see how big of an impact it had on players, when the NBA changed balls at the beginning of 1969/70 season and league FT% went way higher than ever before.

So first off, just wanted to reiterate how much insight I'm gaining from your post 70s. Love it!

But also: You're sure it was '69-70 when the new balls came in? Mostly I hear people say 1970 and this page says it was '70-71. I don't know anything about the credibility of that site and they may be interpreting '69-70 as '70-71 because of the ambiguity of "1970" in a basketball season, but the one year off thing is really kind of a big deal in the way of what you pointed out about FT%. If the balls came in a year later, the percentage actually decreases with their arrival, which aside from possibly being noise, might make some sense with players getting used to something new.

[70sFan]

I know it was just a throwaway comment in an unrelated argument, but I don't think Curry would lose anywhere near as much in 1962 as you'd think. Steph has a career EFG% of .581. The league average this year was .532. Meanwhile, Curry has a career FG% of .473. The league average for that stat in 1962 was .426. Even without a 3-point shot available, he'd be outperforming the league average by a similar amount.

I don't think you realize how much of a difference it makes for Curry. Using very crude estimation you just did:

Curry's career: 62.4 TS%, 58.1 eFG%, 114 TS+

Curry without 3P adjusted for 1962 averages: 52.6 TS%, 47.3 eFG%, 110 TS+

That would make Curry less efficient than quite a high volume scorers (including Wilt). It's not a good way to evaluate cross-era comparisons though, which brings us to...

Now take into account that the league was used to not guarding people even close to Curry's range. Even when they adjusted, they still wouldn't have experience trying to follow a shooter that closely off of screens on the perimeter and Curry would undoubtedly shoot significantly better than he does today. Furthermore, if they suddenly have a guy they have to guard from 30 feet when they hardly have to guard anyone else in the league past 15 feet, his gravity would warp the court even more than it does today and would get amazing looks for his teammates. I think there's a strong argument that Curry would be just as dominant if not more in the '60s than he is in the modern game.

You are doing it completely wrong here. It's true that 1960s players weren't used to defend someone like Curry in a way modern teams do... but they wouldn't need to. Curry is extremely dangerous outside 30 feet strictly because him shooting 40% on threes is extremely efficient offense. Curry shooting 40% long range jumpshots from 30 feet without three point line leads to 0.8 ppp, which is horrible even for 1960s standards. Even if we assume that he'd make more threes with less pressure, 45% still doesn't generate strong offense.

Curry would be still a freak with his shooting, but the same plays wouldn't have the same value. Teams would be able to live with Curry taking a lot of long threes unguarded, because that would never lead to elite offense - unless Curry gets extremely hot. So even though he'd still score a lot of points, his off-ball gravity would be significantly less impactful. That's what makes him so dangerous and you don't have that anymore. You basically leave us with better shooting, but smaller and worse defensively version of Jerry West instead.

By the way, I don't think Curry would make threes at significantly better rate, even with less defensive pressure. Balls were much different back then and we can see how big of an impact it had on players, when the NBA changed balls at the beginning of 1969/70 season and league FT% went way higher than ever before.

So first off, just wanted to reiterate how much insight I'm gaining from your post 70s. Love it!

But also: You're sure it was '69-70 when the new balls came in? Mostly I hear people say 1970 and this page says it was '70-71. I don't know anything about the credibility of that site and they may be interpreting '69-70 as '70-71 because of the ambiguity of "1970" in a basketball season, but the one year off thing is really kind of a big deal in the way of what you pointed out about FT%. If the balls came in a year later, the percentage actually decreases with their arrival, which aside from possibly being noise, might make some sense with players getting used to something new.

I remember it being 1969/70, but I could be wrong. Will have to check out the source.

[DraymondGold]

Here are the results for round 7

Winner: 94 Olajuwon

There were 19 voters in this round: iggymcfrack, Dutchball97, capfan33, Samurai, Doctor MJ, SickMother, Djoker, trelos6, Dr Positivity, f4p, Eddy_JukeZ, JordansBulls, ardee, 70sFan, Ginoboleee, OhayoKD, Proxy, Blazers-1977, jalengreen

A total of 28 seasons received at least 1 vote: 03 Garnett, 04 Garnett, 15 Curry, 16 Curry, 17 Curry, 19 Curry, 20 Antetokounmpo, 21 Antetokounmpo, 21 Curry, 22 Antetokounmpo, 22 Curry, 50 Mikan, 61 Russell, 62 Russell, 63 Russell, 64 Russell, 65 Russell, 66 Russell, 76 Erving, 84 Bird, 86 Bird, 86 Olajuwon, 87 Bird, 87 Johnson, 88 Olajuwon, 93 Olajuwon, 94 Olajuwon, 95 Olajuwon

Top 5 seasons
94 Olajuwon: 1.000 (27-0)
93 Olajuwon: 0.962 (25-1), loses to 94 Olajuwon
64 Russell: 0.958 (23-1), loses to 94 Olajuwon
65 Russell: 0.889 (24-3), loses to 64 Russell, 93 Olajuwon, 94 Olajuwon
62 Russell: 0.852 (23-4), loses to 64 Russell, 65 Russell, 93 Olajuwon, 94 Olajuwon

H2H record
94 Olajuwon vs 93 Olajuwon: 10-4
94 Olajuwon vs 64 Russell: 10-4
94 Olajuwon vs 65 Russell: 11-4
94 Olajuwon vs 62 Russell: 12-3
93 Olajuwon vs 64 Russell: 6-6
93 Olajuwon vs 65 Russell: 7-5
93 Olajuwon vs 62 Russell: 7-5
64 Russell vs 65 Russell: 7-4
64 Russell vs 62 Russell: 6-5
65 Russell vs 62 Russell: 5-4

Someone just let me know that my vote wasn't counted in this round (thanks for letting me know! I'm a new member so I'm not able to respond to PMs yet).

LA Bird, could you make sure to count it in the next round? I definitely put some effort into my ballots, so I'd really appreciate it. Thanks!

[LA Bird]

Someone just let me know that my vote wasn't counted in this round (thanks for letting me know! I'm a new member so I'm not able to respond to PMs yet).

LA Bird, could you make sure to count it in the next round? I definitely put some effort into my ballots, so I'd really appreciate it. Thanks!

Yes, I have counted your votes in all of the previous rounds and you have definitely contributed a lot to this project. However, rules are rules so I can't count your vote in this round without a third player on your ballot. The same applied to falcolombardi too:

1. 2017 Steph Curry
1b. 2016 Curry
2. 1986 Bird
3. TBD, will edit later. Likely either Russell, Garnett, or Hakeem.

1-1993 hakeem
1 B1994 hakeem
2- 1964 bill russel
3-i am unsure here but i will think about this later, not really sure who to pick 3rd

If you want to edit your post to add a third pick, I can update the results accordingly. Usually I message individual voters privately a day before the deadline if they are missing explanations or picks but I was busy last weekend so I didn't send any reminders.