David Robinson's playoff performance underrated

[G35]

I already bring up scoring numbers for 11 years primes and they look identical. Let's take 3 years peaks:

In regular season:

1993-95 Olajuwon: 25.8 points per75 on 56.8 TS% (+3.2 rTS%)
2001-03 Duncan: 23.9 points per75 on 55.9 TS% (+4.0 rTS%)

In postseason:

1993-95 Olajuwon: 27.6 points per75 on 56.4 TS% (+2.8 rTS%)
2001-03 Duncan: 24.2 points per75 on 55.8 TS% (+3.9 rTS%)

Hakeem has slight edge in volume, Duncan was slightly more efficient. As I said, you can give Olajuwon slight edge for his additional volume, but they are within the same tier. I think you are confused by Olajuwon's aestically pleasing game, he wasn't GOAT-level scorer. He was very good isolation scorer who relied on very tough shots and wasn't great at creating easier ones.

As far as passing goes, I didn't say that Hakeem was bad passer, but he wasn't good for a high volume superstar. You talk about getting the ball to shooters, but Hakeem missed a lot of openings in his best years. He was frequently doubled and he usually saw only the most obvious reads, he didn't have the ability to manipulate defenses, he wasn't good at finding cutters either. I will share my collection of Hakeem clips at some point in some form, I don't have enough time for that noe unfortunately.

Duncan around 2002 became very good passer. Not elite one like Jokic of course, but his awareness of double teams was on another level compared to Olajuwon. He was also more versatile passer, as he could find cutters from the high post and even play two-man game with old Robinson. Hakeem's passing outside the post wasn't much of a factor, outside of occasional outlet pass (Duncan was better at that as well) or rare inside pass from drive.

It's fine to pick Hakeem, but they were comparable offensive players.

Over three points a game difference over three years is a massive gap.

If you look at all time PPG leaders in the playoff and the 25.0 PPG is Dirk/Kobe Bryant while 22.0 PPG is Tracy McGrady/Demar Derozan.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_per_g_career_p.html




No, I showed you the list of the leaders in PPG in the playoffs.

Hakeem's career PPG in the playoffs is 25.90

Duncan's career PPG in the playoffs is 20.61

That is over a 5 PPG difference. Hakeem is a significantly greater volume scorer over his playoff career vs Duncan.

I also would say peak Olajuwon is the 1994 and 1995 playoffs. I would say you pick any two years you want from Duncan's career and Hakeem is clearly ahead.

Then if we just want to cherry pick seasons, Hakeem had a GOAT type series in 1987-88 vs the Mavericks.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1988-nba-western-conference-first-round-rockets-vs-mavericks.html

PPG - 37.5
REB - 16.8
FG% - .571
FT% - .881
TS% - .641
ORTG - 134

Those are NBA2K numbers and Tim does not have that sort of scoring mentality to maintain that sort of average over a series. That's not how he plays. And in the playoffs, I will take a dip in efficiency, with a bump in volume. Defenses are going to be better and points are at a premium. Efficiency is not the messiah in the playoffs that some like to make it seem. Efficiency is nice, scoring is better. And one of Tim's weaknesses in the playoffs is FT shooting, Hakeem is better in this area.....

[70sFan]

No, I showed you the list of the leaders in PPG in the playoffs.

Hakeem's career PPG in the playoffs is 25.90

Duncan's career PPG in the playoffs is 20.61

That is over a 5 PPG difference. Hakeem is a significantly greater volume scorer over his playoff career vs Duncan.

You can't compare raw scoring average in postseason, Duncan played much more games past his prime in the playoffs. If we take their first 12 seasons, it's close on per75 accoount:

23.7 vs 25.8

Hakeem has the edge, but it's not massive and Duncan has all non-scoring advantages over him.

I also would say peak Olajuwon is the 1994 and 1995 playoffs. I would say you pick any two years you want from Duncan's career and Hakeem is clearly ahead.

Alright:

1994-95 Hakeem: 28.7 points per75 on +2.8 rTS%
2002-03 Duncan: 24.2 points per75 on +4.9 rTS%

Again, Hakeem has considerable volume edge, but efficiency difference is also quite big.

Then if we just want to cherry pick seasons, Hakeem had a GOAT type series in 1987-88 vs the Mavericks.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1988-nba-western-conference-first-round-rockets-vs-mavericks.html

PPG - 37.5
REB - 16.8
FG% - .571
FT% - .881
TS% - .641
ORTG - 134

Those are NBA2K numbers and Tim does not have that sort of scoring mentality to maintain that sort of average over a series. That's not how he plays.

I mean, Duncan averaged 32/12/4/3 on 62 TS% against far better Dallas team in 2006...

And in the playoffs, I will take a dip in efficiency, with a bump in volume. Defenses are going to be better and points are at a premium. Efficiency is not the messiah in the playoffs that some like to make it seem. Efficiency is nice, scoring is better.

That's fair, but you can't say there is no case for Duncan just because you prefer one thing over the other.

And one of Tim's weaknesses in the playoffs is FT shooting, Hakeem is better in this area.....

Career playoff FT%:

71.9% vs 68.9%

12 years prime FT%:

71.7% vs 67.9%

2 years peaks:

73.8% vs 72.1%

Gigantic gap, indeed...

[G35]

No, I showed you the list of the leaders in PPG in the playoffs.

Hakeem's career PPG in the playoffs is 25.90

Duncan's career PPG in the playoffs is 20.61

That is over a 5 PPG difference. Hakeem is a significantly greater volume scorer over his playoff career vs Duncan.

You can't compare raw scoring average in postseason, Duncan played much more games past his prime in the playoffs. If we take their first 12 seasons, it's close on per75 accoount:

23.7 vs 25.8

Hakeem has the edge, but it's not massive and Duncan has all non-scoring advantages over him.

I also would say peak Olajuwon is the 1994 and 1995 playoffs. I would say you pick any two years you want from Duncan's career and Hakeem is clearly ahead.

Alright:

1994-95 Hakeem: 28.7 points per75 on +2.8 rTS%
2002-03 Duncan: 24.2 points per75 on +4.9 rTS%

Again, Hakeem has considerable volume edge, but efficiency difference is also quite big.

Then if we just want to cherry pick seasons, Hakeem had a GOAT type series in 1987-88 vs the Mavericks.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1988-nba-western-conference-first-round-rockets-vs-mavericks.html

PPG - 37.5
REB - 16.8
FG% - .571
FT% - .881
TS% - .641
ORTG - 134

Those are NBA2K numbers and Tim does not have that sort of scoring mentality to maintain that sort of average over a series. That's not how he plays.

I mean, Duncan averaged 32/12/4/3 on 62 TS% against far better Dallas team in 2006...

And in the playoffs, I will take a dip in efficiency, with a bump in volume. Defenses are going to be better and points are at a premium. Efficiency is not the messiah in the playoffs that some like to make it seem. Efficiency is nice, scoring is better.

That's fair, but you can't say there is no case for Duncan just because you prefer one thing over the other.

And one of Tim's weaknesses in the playoffs is FT shooting, Hakeem is better in this area.....

Career playoff FT%:

71.9% vs 68.9%

12 years prime FT%:

71.7% vs 67.9%

2 years peaks:

73.8% vs 72.1%

Gigantic gap, indeed...

First, I'm not going to down Tim because he's in my top four players all time. I love what Tim does. I think he is the embarkation point for what a player has to bring to carry an offense in the playoffs. This is why I don't think Kevin Garnett is even close to what is needed to be a #1 option for the playoffs. Because if you want to harp on efficiency, Garnett's efficiency is the worst of any big man. But was efficient, but he had to be because he was not a volume scorer. So I think it goes like this:

- volume scorer ---> you can have a dip in efficiency compared to regular season

- average scorer ----> you cannot have a dip efficiency compare to RS

As I said, imo, you cannot have both a dip in scoring and a dip in efficiency and be considered top tier.

I usually am not on the side of having to defend Hakeem, I'm not necessarily against Hakeem, but I was never a big fan. Probably because I was a Barkley fan and the Rockets twice came back from a 3-1 deficit and beat the Suns in the playoffs. The kiss of death shot by Mario Elie, might be one of worst feelings I ever felt. But I saw what Hakeem can do in the playoffs, he was not the best passer, but he was good enough, and the Rockets was at the forefront of seeing the advantages of 3pt shooting. I would say a modern comparison would be how the Orlando Magic set up their team around Dwight Howard in the late 2000's. Except Dwight is obviously not the dynamic scorer that Hakeem is. That is a perfect example of why efficiency is not as good as scoring.

Dwight's efficiency is nearly Hardenesque, it eclipses both Hakeem and Duncan's efficiency in the playoffs...even with his atrocious FT shooting. But he couldn't score enough points to carry his team in the playoffs. It took all the stars to align for the Magic to beat Lebron and the Cavs in 2009.

I would say that if the Spurs had built teams like those Magic around Robinson he would have done better with more spacing and having more one on one opportunities. But with non-shooters like Avery Johnson, Dennis Rodman, Willie Anderson, and Vinny Del Negro who was an avg shooter, it did not alleviate the defensive pressure on Robinson.

Even with all that, DRob still put up numbers that would be top 25 all time, it just was not up to his RS standards, so he does knocked down a bit. But if you switched Duncan and DRob's careers where Duncan got hurt and DRob comes in fresh as a rookie. I think he puts up crazy numbers with Duncan backing him up.......