RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #6 (Hakeem Olajuwon)

One_and_Done · Post #121 » by **One_and_Done** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:28 am

Curry has more longevity than Mikan though. Oscar has like 10 prime years, 11 tops. I don't see eithers case over Curry longevity wise, depending on how much you care about Curry being rested or hurt during irrelecant parts of the RS.

Post #122 » by **ijspeelman** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:33 am

I've not had a lot of time to scout and research this last week (will probably be like this for the next three weeks while I am finishing school).

Here's just some clips and thoughts on Hakeem.

Help Defense

Spoiler:

Post Defense

Spoiler:

Transition Defense

Spoiler:

Off-Ball Movement

Spoiler:

Offensive Rebounding

Spoiler:

Passing

Spoiler:

Scoring

Spoiler:

On offense, I really like in his young years that he crashed the glass as much as he could. This fades in the 90s, but looks to have made for great value. Looks like he developed a pick and pop game as he got older. It really helped him not block the lane. Speaking of blocking the lane, he does it a lot. Especially in his younger years. I also think he misses a lot of passes for harder shots by himself. He's incredibly good at these contested shots, but there are easier ones available.

On defense, he's incredibly smart and quick with the help. He had a few plays in the 1993 finals game where he got going the wrong way or was too slow guarding players down hill. Obviously, a great post defender (maybe a bit of an inkling to jump at pump fakes). I do not like how lazy he is getting back on defense in transition.

Post #123 » by **ijspeelman** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:34 am

One_and_Done wrote:Curry has more longevity than Mikan though. Oscar has like 10 prime years, 11 tops. I don't see eithers case over Curry longevity wise, depending on how much you care about Curry being rested or hurt during irrelecant parts of the RS.

For these older guys you may have to adjust your thoughts on longevity. With less access to medicine and rehab, it makes sense the average high end of career length was around that 10-12 year mark.

f4p · Post #124 » by **f4p** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:41 am

AEnigma wrote:
ElGee wrote:Team Quality/Role

When Olajuwon shot well in the playoffs, his team actually fared worse. That suggests a team not reliant on his efficient scoring to win, often the mark of a good or balanced team. When he shot poorly, their record barely changed (.500).

Then again, when he shot the ball a lot (25+ FGAs), something he did frequently in the 90s, Houston fared very well (.727%). This suggests Iverson's Law of unipolar offense, where a player carrying massive offensive load is helping an otherwise flawed team,

I think this is a big part of why I hold guys like Hakeem in higher esteem. This somewhat applies to Kobe, to an even greater degree to Jordan, and to something like 2006 Finals Dwyane Wade. Outside of maybe Jordan, none of these guys are typically praised for the aesthetics of their game (and I don't just mean having good footwork). Their rTS% doesn't pop off the page at you. Shooting a lot doesn't give us those off-ball impact vibes. We don't get the team play feel-goodness from it. But, as famed basketball historian Joseph Stalin once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own."

I think there is some hidden value to a relentless offensive player. The guy who doesn't just go at you most of the time if you leave him in single coverage, but who goes at you 100% of the time if you leave him in single coverage. Who absolutely will keep shooting if he already has 35. Who won't care that you put your best defender on him. Who won't feel his way into the game. A guy who must be accounted for at all times. You might have a defensive gameplan, but defense is played and coached by human beings. There's only so much a defender wants to get scored on. Only so many times a coach wants to watch a great player get a good shot. You might tell yourself that he is only at a +0.9 rTS%, that maybe you can just let him shoot his way to defeat, but intuitively you feel like you are living on borrowed time. And maybe more doubles come than they should. And maybe more guys overhelp a little because they see the attempts, even if not the points, piling up.

And of course the player's own team is reaping the benefits of having a larger and larger portion of their team's offensive output accounted for at an acceptable level, without having to turn to the role players. Floor-raising, as we call it. There was no defensive strategy, short of all-out double teams, as relentless as Hakeem himself, from the Sonics, that could stop Hakeem from getting a shot. For basically 13 straight years. In November or in June. Against mediocre defenses or great ones. Hakeem didn't just seem to have inelasticity in his efficiency, but in his volume. And I can't help but think it's a more valuable skill in the playoffs, where everything isn't perfect, than in the regular season.

One_and_Done · Post #125 » by **One_and_Done** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:49 am

ijspeelman wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Curry has more longevity than Mikan though. Oscar has like 10 prime years, 11 tops. I don't see eithers case over Curry longevity wise, depending on how much you care about Curry being rested or hurt during irrelecant parts of the RS.

For these older guys you may have to adjust your thoughts on longevity. With less access to medicine and rehab, it makes sense the average high end of career length was around that 10-12 year mark.

My previous comments on my views RE: era adjustment are extensive, so I'll keep this short. It's not fair to grant people longevity they never had. It would be like arguing Walton should get credit for a lengthy career because of advances to medical science that would have sorted his foot issues out.

rk2023 · Post #126 » by **rk2023** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:51 am

One_and_Done wrote:Curry has more longevity than Mikan though. Oscar has like 10 prime years, 11 tops. I don't see eithers case over Curry longevity wise, depending on how much you care about Curry being rested or hurt during irrelecant parts of the RS.

And Curry has 10 in the span of 2013-23, 9 if you count when he broke out into what I would consider an MVP level of play in 2014 - compared to 1961-70 for Oscar. Obviously this excludes 2020, when he was injured. When 71-74 Oscar is > 10-13 Curry in aggregate, I don’t know how you would take Curry’s longevity over Oscar’s in a vacuum - let alone mentally curving for era.

lessthanjake · Post #127 » by **lessthanjake** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 3:44 am

OhayoKD wrote:With all this talk about injury I may as well as note that there are significant opposing injuries in every title-run. The only two exceptions I can think off going back all the way to 89 would be....

Miami Heat's run in 2012....and the Houston Rocket's run in 94. Injury is also an especially odd to fixate on if you're backing Steph when his team was a big beneficiary of opposition health in 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2022. Iow, every time He's won a title

Yeah, it’s true that this sort of thing is true for virtually every recent title. It’s just the way things go these days. It’s less true as you go back in time. For instance, the Bulls didn’t really face many teams with a significant player out with injury either. Not sure if this being less true as you go back in time is because players are bigger and faster than before and as a result the body just can’t handle collisions and falls as well without injury, or whether it’s because players don’t play through stuff as much as before (probably a combination of the two). But players are definitely out with injury a lot more these days than in the past. That said, I suspect that that probably just obscures many title teams in the past having advantages we just aren’t aware of, because guys on opposing teams who were injured probably simply played and were much less effective than they’d otherwise have been and we just don’t know they were injured.

ceoofkobefans · Post #128 » by **ceoofkobefans** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 7:09 am

Wanna go ahead and get my vote out before I forget and I will start utilizing the alternate vote (this is my voting post) but don’t feel like giving super in-depth reasonings rn (if y’all ask I’ll talk more about why)

Vote: Shaquille O’Neal

Like the third time I’m voting for him so wont go too in depth but goat tier peak (thanks to his combo of strength size athleticism making it really easy to do whatever he wanted). Other than maybe Kobe and curry he has without a doubt the most gravity in league history which helped him create a good amount of shots for teammates as a center. He’s also a pretty good defender and is playing at clear all time levels for near a decade

Alternate: Hakeem Olajuwon

Now I have Kobe over Hakeem all time but I have to wait for Kobe to get nominated to vote for him. I think Hakeem is in that fringe t5 for peaks and his longevity is in the top 10 range so I think the 6-9 range is pretty good for him

Nominate: Kobe Bryant

Eventually I will stop slacking and will do a better job defending my sweet bean but rn I just wanna talk about two main things about Kobe

1. He was not inefficient relative to his era especially and even for an elite scorer

Kobe was at or above league average ts% his entire career outside of his last two years and is peaking in the RS at near +4 rTS with goat tier scoring volume and gravity which is very impressive (that efficiency is good in general but when you account for the difficulty of his scoring his efficiency becomes that more impressive). He’s also a playoff riser and has multiple playoff runs where he’s pushing +5 rTS

2. Kobe was not some shot chucker that just held the ball and ball stopped in ISOs. He was very active off the ball as a cutter rebounder and even off screens on the perimeter (and a pretty good off ball mover too) and also was a more than willing passer (you don’t average 4.5 APG in a 20 year career if you aren’t)

I’ll prolly talk more about bean soon

Btw didn’t nominate anyone since I’m using my alternate on a non nominated player

70sFan · Post #129 » by **70sFan** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 7:22 am

ceoofkobefans wrote:Other than maybe Kobe and curry he has without a doubt the most gravity in league history which helped him create a good amount of shots for teammates as a center.

Do you have any evidences to believe that these three have more gravity than someone like Kareem, Wilt or LeBron for example?

Bklynborn682 · Post #130 » by **Bklynborn682** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:11 am

70sFan wrote:
Bklynborn682 wrote:
70sFan wrote:We can use samples from other series. It's not my video, but here is the one from 2001 WCF:

Watch on YouTube

Of course Duncan didn't defend Shaq nearly as much overall in this series, but we can see how effective he was in isolation against Shaq in games one1 and 2 in perticular (when he spent the most time on him).

Duncan didn't guard Shaq much in 2004, but I will be rewatching 2003 series this month, so I hope to provide more data on that subject.

I have every playoff game Duncan and Shaq have played against each other sans suns vs spurs. So I will do pbp as well.
In regards to YouTuber nobody touches Jordan I’ve seen couple of his videos before and they’ve always left me feeling clickbaited as I’ve seen the game in it’s entirety as opposed to the way he chops it up.

Yeah, I know the youtuber isn't the best source. I will share the results when I finish and it would be nice to compare them with your data.

Anyway, thanks for the civil discussion

Same here it’s always refreshing when you can have a conversation with someone with both sides remaining civil lol

Bklynborn682 · Post #131 » by **Bklynborn682** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:18 am

Samurai wrote:
Bklynborn682 wrote:
Samurai wrote:Could you imagine Shaq trying to play his bully ball style with someone like Earl Strom on the court?? Earl would have sent Shaq to the showers so fast Shaq would still be trying to figure out what the heck happened.

At any rate, I try to avoid knocking a player for the rules that were in place when they played. The players don't write the rules so it doesn't make sense to penalize them for it.

I know earl strom as a referee. but was he known for calling cheap offensive fouls or something?

Earl was well known for ensuring that his way was the only way. He was more than happy to toss you from a game since that put the spotlight on him; to my knowledge he is still the only ref to eject a coach (Red Auerbach) in the All Star game as well as ejecting a team mascot, Benny the (Chicago) Bull. If you disagreed with him, he'd answer with his fists. In the 65 Finals, he got into a fist-fight with a fan and had to ref Game 7 with a cast on his broken hand. In a 1970 ABA game, he fought a fan on the court. And former referee Dick Bavetta made the serious mistake of overturning one of Strom's calls in a Sixers/Nets game and poor Dick was seen by witnesses running from the official's locker room with a ripped shirt, black eye and bloody nose.

Remember in the 60's the rules were that if a defender had position, he was entitled to that spot as much as an offensive player. You could not just run over a defender who had established position; that is called an offensive foul. Earl would call the game the way he felt it should be and no one was going to change his mind. Ah, the good old days....

Yeah I’m aware of the way the game was called back then from the ball handling to the lack of physicality allowed. But somehow I’d never heard those stories of strom. Or if I had they’ve slipped my mind over the years lol

eminence · Post #132 » by **eminence** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 12:59 pm

Voting Post

Vote #1: Kevin Garnett
Vote #2: Shaquille O'Neal

Nominate: George Mikan

Homer time - got to go for that KG/Mikan double.

Still thinking on that 2nd vote, will come back to edit. Likely won't be Magic, as he doesn't seem to be really in the race - tough choice between Wilt/Hakeem/Shaq, I find any of the 3 reasonable picks.

KG KG KG, far and away the most wasted talent from an organizations perspective. The Wolves had a generational talent for a dozen years and the best they could do was late-prime Terrell Brandon, one good year of Cassell (who was beat the heck up by playoff time - bad hip, bad back, bad groin, ruptured eardrum?!?), and for career Wally Szczerbiak? It's just sad really, and Oscar is the only superstar I have coming all that close for a sustained period in terms of poor support.

And still 8 of the Wolves 11 .500 or better seasons in 34 years of franchise history ('98-'05 for KG, '18,'22,'23, '97/'14 notable as 40-42 seasons). Their only playoff series wins ever in '04.

Record with KG ('96-'07): 497-430, 44 win pace
Record without KG ('96-'07): 4-21, 13 win pace
Record for the rest of franchise history: 594-1191, 27 win pace

34 damn years! Thank you KG, game 7 vs the Kings was absolutely rocking.

But also thank all that is good you got to experience a bit of competent management when you went to Boston. Weren't what you were by that point, but still enough and led some all-time defenses. Got yourself that all important ring and piled up the career value.

KGs pros vs other nominees:
+Great great great defender, floating terrible Minnesota defenses, and then spearheading an All-time defense in Boston
+Strongest longevity here in my estimation (I have him as All-NBA+ from '97-'13, dinged for Injury in '09)
+Managed a string of top 5 offenses in Minnesota playing as a clear #1, which is pretty good for a guy who should've been built around as a 1B on offense (I still like to daydream a bit about that rumored Nash/KG pairing)

Edit: Went with Shaq for alternate. More actualized than the other two, certainly led higher highs.

Post #133 » by **ijspeelman** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 1:39 pm

I think I am leaning KG over Hakeem with this pick. I also may like Wilt over Hakeem. Both are undecided and my thoughts could change again in a few hours.

Why KG over Hakeem, Wilt, and Shaq?

I'll start with Shaq with that I think KG's dominance on both ends trumps Shaq's utter dominance on the offensive end.

With Wilt, I've voiced it already and even with the add'l film analysis by Ben, I still have doubts with Wilt's offensive impact compared to these other guys.

And Hakeem, I think I like KG's constant motor better. They both have insane post, help, and transition defense skills, but KG's seems more consistent. I also like KG's footspeed which makes him more versatile in my eyes (which admittedly mattered less for Hakeem in the 80s and 90s). They both come away shooting similar efficiency adjusted to era and similar volume. I care a little bit that KG could space the floor more (though because of illegal defense rules, this again mattered less in Hakeem's era). I could easily flip back to Hakeem with some arguments for him. His tough shot making is incredible (not that KG is a slouch).

therealbig3 · Post #134 » by **therealbig3** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 1:39 pm

Re: Curry vs Kobe

I don't think it's clear at all that Curry is a more capable offensive anchor in the PS than Kobe. Kobe's 08-10 Lakers squads were consistently better offensively than most of Curry's Warriors teams. I think Kobe was more resilient as a playoff performer actually. RS wise, Curry may very well be the GOAT, but his dropoff in PS play has always been the issue. Not to say he isn't great or isn't worthy of discussion at this level, but he goes from a clear offensive GOAT to clearly not the offensive GOAT, and more in line with guys like Kobe and Dirk (which is still an incredible offensive talent).

OhayoKD · Post #135 » by **OhayoKD** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:26 pm

ijspeelman wrote:I think I am leaning KG over Hakeem with this pick. I also may like Wilt over Hakeem. Both are undecided and my thoughts could change again in a few hours.

Why KG over Hakeem, Wilt, and Shaq?

I'll start with Shaq with that I think KG's dominance on both ends trumps Shaq's utter dominance on the offensive end.

With Wilt, I've voiced it already and even with the add'l film analysis by Ben, I still have doubts with Wilt's offensive impact compared to these other guys.

And Hakeem, I think I like KG's constant motor better. They both have insane post, help, and transition defense skills, but KG's seems more consistent. I also like KG's footspeed which makes him more versatile in my eyes (which admittedly mattered less for Hakeem in the 80s and 90s). They both come away shooting similar efficiency adjusted to era and similar volume. I care a little bit that KG could space the floor more (though because of illegal defense rules, this again mattered less in Hakeem's era). I could easily flip back to Hakeem with some arguments for him. His tough shot making is incredible (not that KG is a slouch).

Since you(and others) are undecided, maybe I should bring up some of the great hakeem(and a bit of shaq) analysis that's been done on this board?

Spoiler:

fatal9 wrote:^^ that's a great post by datwasnashty, I agree with what he writes about his career trajectory on defense. Just because I really enjoy talking about Hakeem's defense, I'll write down some things that made him such a complete and impactful defender in my mind.

His post defense. He makes a swipe at the ball when the guy in the post is receiving it, which would be classified as "gamble defense" for most centers, but due to his quick feet, he recovers right away and then plays you straight up. This is such a nuisance for guys in the post because there's no time to gather yourself and get into your move, dude is ALWAYS pressuring you, on the post entry pass, then when you make your move he is reacting quickly with his feet to take that away, his quick hands are taking away the ball if you expose it and then uses his impeccable timing to contest your shot. Phenomenal defensive footwork, look at how much trouble Ewing had against him in the post because of this. Even when you see him against someone so physically dominant as a Shaq, he could still make a player like him have inefficient offensive games. No one is going to contain Shaq one on one or when he has position on you…he will score and he did against Hakeem. But in that series Hakeem used his quick feet (to get in position and draw offensive fouls) and hands to make Shaq very turnover prone (something that is NEVER mentioned when people post their respective ppg/FG% stats, Shaq averaged 5.3 TOs, more than he has in any playoff series of his career). His savviness depending on the opponent is an underrated part of his overall post defense. I read a post (bastillon’s I think) a while ago where performances of opposing centers were summed up and against Hakeem they saw the biggest drop (yes, aware that centers don't play each other straight up over a full game, but it's something to consider).

His pick and roll defense is KG like, except he has even quicker feet. Best I've seen at shutting down the most effective offensive play in basketball for most teams (Duncan's pick and roll D is a joke in comparison). As Kenny mentions in that open court clip, when you put into words what he's doing when defending the pick and roll, it sounds ridiculous, it IS ridiculous, but...he was actually doing it. This is of course one play and it's an example of how ridiculous his pick and roll and overall floor coverage was:

Watch on YouTube
; onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is going to annoy some people because I’m highlighting one play (and I get why it would) but lets look at what he’s doing for a second here. Dude went out to the three point line to cover the pick and roll, made a clean swipe at the ball to pressure the guard (often stripped them like this), then recovers to shadow the guard and stays between him and the basket to intimidate him out of a layup, then gets in the paint and makes a shot block at the rim off the pass to a guy who thinks he's open, all while keeping the ball in play for a fast break opportunity. And the thing is, he did stuff like this in every game, and if you need to be convinced of that, watch his playoff games from ’93 and ’94. His pick and roll coverage from any spot on the floor was deadly, had the ability to defend basically every option that develops from it. Which other big man did it better?

His overall floor defense. No such thing as a “mismatch” exists if Hakeem was switched on to you, doesn’t matter if you’re a forward or a guard, he had the feet to stay in front of you. In the '93 series vs. Sonics who had all sorts of perimeter scorers, watch how well he stays in front of them. He clears up his teammates (and own) mistakes because his recovery defense and floor coverage is amazing. His instincts too, he's great at seeing offensive plays develop. I was watching the Jazz series a while ago, all these cute little plays those guys ran like pindowns for Malone and backscreens and what not, Hakeem would come in and just take that away from them (averaged 2.6 steals, 4.6 blks partly because of how he could read what they wanted). He would come up from somewhere above the foul line (illegal defense restrictions of the time) and come out of nowhere to take away those easy Malone baskets when he is pinning down the forwards (in game 5 Snapper Jones remarks “the problem for Karl Malone is he can’t find Hakeem Olajuwon”). He made so many game winning (and even championship winning) plays at the end of games when teams were running their bread and butter plays, because he was good at reading them (who does that remind you of?). It was that sort of cerebral ability to read his opposition which he combined with everything else he did (you can definitely argue he maybe didn't have in his younger years), that made his defensive impact so huge. Hubie Brown made a great remark about Hakeem regarding his understanding of the game given how late he learned it, "he has a PhD in basketball, but where did he get it?"

Then he could absolutely lock down the paint with his shot blocking and altering. King of surprise weak side blocks, could get his own man, challenge guards and make them have to shoot low percentage floaters in the lane. His timing, reflexes and the quickness of his jump are unparalleled at his position. Not many, if any shot blockers you can call better, and usually he kept the ball in play to trigger fast breaks.

His activity. If you watch playoff games from his prime, announcers are always asking "does this guy ever get tired?" He would wear down his opponent on offense and then not let up at all on defense. Nightmare matchup for opposing Cs because of this and it helped him win one on one matchups. His activity and stamina was on another level to everyone else on the court (prime MJ like, where the player makes you feel like he is "everywhere" and involved in every big play on both ends). Does such a great job of getting back on defense and covering people in transition too, the motor is always running.

His team stats. Since he came into the league, his team was top 5 in defense 8 of out 10 years. And when he was out, his teams generally saw a big decline. If that's your thing, ElGee’s post earlier in the thread sums it up.

If you want to hear what coaches and players who played against him or watched him thought of his defensive skills, hit up google and look at the awe they are in with how he is able to impact the game defensively. It’s a little bit of a shame that the ’95 run is his defining GOAT moment for a lot of people, because they miss out the better defense he is playing in previous years (not to say he wasn’t still among the best in ’95, but overall activity/rebounding wise he had taken a step back from the standard he set in earlier years).

Back to back defensive player of the years when Ewing was anchoring historical defenses, Mutombo was leading the league in blocks and D-Rob was his usual phenomenal self. Elevating him above KG and Duncan isn’t an insult to those guys, he could just do more than them, it's obvious to me from watching them play, kind of like KG’s overall floor defense with Timmy’s paint defense and shot blocking. Imagine everything you want out of a big man defensively and Hakeem basically gave that to you. You think Timmy and KG are better? Fine, I strongly disagree, but everyone has their opinion. But no need to act like Hakeem doesn’t warrant his position as the 2nd defensive GOAT. Based on watching him play, his skills, his well roundedness, his numbers, his team impact, opinion of people around the game, anyway you slice it, dude deserves the praise he gets on defense. There have been great big men who did some of the things I mentioned (Duncan/KG), some who did most of the things I mentioned (D-Rob), but did anyone do ALL of them at the level Hakeem did?

Honestly chipping in my own two-cents, defensively at least, I think Hakeem has a signficant advantage as man-defender and a shot-blocker and I'm not sure KG's advantages seem more marginal to me. Also worth considering that Hakeem's passer-rating and box-creation jumped in the playoffs to grades similar to duncan

This is eye test stuff, and it is affected by Garnett languishing in Minnesota during what should have been his prime defensive years, but I think Hakeem had more of that Dwight Howard effect in him where his range of recovery was absurd. There is an element of that in the famous 1994 Finals Game 6 block, but that was not exactly an irregular sequence for Hakeem. In ATDs we used to joke about how Hakeem could cover the entire court at once, and while that is not literally true, that is the atmosphere he gave off because of how quickly he could cross space and disrupt a play. Garnett could do that too, but a lot of that was his innate length (think Giannis), while Hakeem was just fast and wirey.

Of course you could always vote both :wink:

I guess I'll add that I think people overplay Hakeem's offensive limitations(largely as a product of context):

Spoiler:

fatal9 wrote:Who exactly is an elite efficiency player then?

In playoffs:

'86-'97: 27.5 ppg on 57.8 TS%, in 126 games played (shot 53.7% from the field as well). Jordan over the same stretch was at 57.1 TS% (in 154 GP, on 33.7 ppg).

Shaq from '95-'04? 27.3 ppg on 56.8 TS%. Even looking at just peaks, '93-'95 Hakeem had a higher TS% than Shaq did from '00-'02 in the playoffs. Hakeem even beats out '70-'81 Kareem, both in FG% and TS%. This is without playing with Penny or Kobe or Oscar or Magic. This is while taking more short clock/bail out shots than a center normally would due to a skillset that allowed him to create shots effectively from anywhere under the three point line. If Hakeem wasn't an efficient volume scorer, who was? You’re essentially saying the most reliable and efficient volume scorer at his position is not elite in terms of efficiency.

This is just...false. We are discussing peaks in this thread, and there is absolutely no center who was as dynamic of a playmaker as Hakeem. Okay, he's not Vlade or Sabonis or Walton, and Shaq probably is a bit better at passing, but to call him subpar? especially as a center? SUB-PAR? Against a focused/elite team defense, like the kind we've already seen him perform well against in the playoffs? Somehow his offensive decision making, which is excellent, has been turned into a weakness. If I don't have a star guard to give my offense the kind of dynamic playmaking that is important in the playoffs (ie. team is filled with role players/shooters instead of all-star guards), I would comfortably take Hakeem to lead my offense in the playoffs over Shaq. His dynamic form of playmaking is much more valuable and harder to plan around than the traditional, "wait for a double team" strategy (where the defense can make adjustments to control exactly when they double, who they double off and where they double from).

This is what often makes big men not so good solo offensive/volume scoring anchors in playoffs, their game is a lot more rigid, they can have problems syncing high volume scoring with keeping rest of the team involved and engaged. You just don't get big men averaging close to 5 apg while scoring 30+ ppg, they are just not dynamic enough as playmakers. Dude consistently averaged more apg in a volume scoring role than any other center, and somehow he's been turned into a subpar passer. '93-'95 Hakeem averaged more assists than '00-02 Shaq and turned the ball over less, has lower TO/TO% and higher ast/ast% numbers over their entire playoff career when the "defense is focused". Rockets even used to run a play with Otis Thorpe and Hakeem, where Hakeem would make a lob post entry feed to OT over the defense, rarely see that kind of a play run with a center making the feed. You can see him striking shooters all game, finding players who are cutting, consistently made the right pass in crunchtime to win huge playoff games. Hakeem was also a master at using a single dribble to collapse a defense, people need to take a note of this when they watch him play, one well used dribble and he creates a play on call. He might not be the GOAT passing big man, but to be critical of his passing and ability to read the defense, two things that are actually major strengths for his position, doesn't make much sense at all.

Not a single mention of Kobe here, why? 30/7/6 secondary players don’t exactly grow on trees. Kobe was the primary ball handler and scoring on the same volume as Shaq, so calling him secondary (offensively speaking) would be underselling him. This is honestly my least favorite meme on this site, take a team stat and start drawing conclusions about one player from it instead of trying to capture the full picture. These stats don't tell us what you think they are telling us with any kind of certainty, and a 1.1 difference in team offense over a playoff run is enough to make sweeping conclusions over? A team with arguably the two best offensive players in the league, both playing at their full capabilities and taking turns destroying teams, might have something to do with the "higher ceiling"/”historical” PS offense.

This can be said about any scoring minded player who has the skill to create good shots for himself from virtually anywhere on the floor. Only very few superstars can consistently make shots over the defense while maintaining a high level of efficiency, Hakeem was one of them (Jordan, Kobe two other that stick out, though Kobe's ego takes a bit too far with this). Depending on the situation, how set the defense is, what the time on the clock is, it isn’t exactly a bad thing to have an extraordinary shot maker on your team and overall, well placed aggression as a scorer places tremendous pressure on the defense. Of course there’s a fine balance, but it didn't come at the expense of his teammates or his own efficiency, the Rockets role players thrived with Hakeem. I feel like we are watching different players, Hakeem's offensive decision making was very good and he did use the defensive attention the right way to create countless looks for his teammates, that was the foundation of their entire half court offense, and Hakeem was lauded for how well he synchronized his game with rest of the team. You say "Shaq would make the right pass majority of the time", as if Hakeem wouldn't?

Double Clutch wrote:
Hakeem was criticized early in his career but never at his peak which is the issue at hand. That criticism was warranted to a certain extent in the first half of his career but regardless, it's not something that really applies to a peak Hakeem who was often praised for his unselfishness. Houston's game plan was fairly simple in terms of having Hakeem take more of a scoring mindset if he was being played straight up or become a passer when he was doubled aggressively although even when he was double teamed, he'd still be able to create shots for himself due to his diverse repertoire that allowed him to split, negate and evade doubles and ability to hit jumpers from various spots on the floor. There's multiple games where Hakeem's passing allowed the perimeter game to get going and it was noted as a difference maker such as game 1 vs Orlando in the finals which was the reason Orlando chose to play him straight up in game 2, game 4 vs Seattle in 1997 which forced Seattle to play single coverage in game 5 and focus more on Maloney, game 7 vs Seattle in 1993 etc. Houston essentially forced their opponents to pick their poison with the type of offense they ran and they were successful regardless of the strategy used against them.

Just an interesting piece of info, Hakeem was actually voted the best passer out of double teams in the low-post in 1997, not that I would go that far especially in terms of passing off the catch/in a stand still position but nonetheless, it shows high praise for his passing skills.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1009424/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Shaq has an edge in terms of passing off the catch/when he's trapped in a standstill position and he has to release the ball. I thought he did a great job holding the ball away from his body, protecting it from the double teamer and he could hit the open man on the weakside or a cutter with precision. I think Hakeem held the ball a little longer when he was doubled off the catch and was a bit slower in kicking the ball out which allowed the defense to rotate more effectively. Obviously, Shaq had bigger hands and size in general which allowed him to grip the ball and see over the defense a little better especially when he's being doubled with a forward as opposed to a guard so those two physical features give him a natural and inherit edge over Hakeem in terms of passing. But, Hakeem makes up for that with his ability to pass on the move where I feel Hakeem's athleticism and superior footwork helped bail him out in that regard. He was more creative, could use fakes and spin moves to suck the defense (made a lot of passes off the spin) and then kick out to the perimeter. You can also argue Shaq benefited from the triangle which allowed him to showcase his passing skills more often (more man movement, pass-heavy offense, guys like Ron Harper were excellent cutters and Phil also encouraged Shaq to kick the ball out if he didn't immediately have a good look and re-post with deeper position) as opposed to Houston's offense which was more stagnant in terms of guys standing around (little motion and cutters) waiting for Hakeem to get double teamed to receive the ball. Although, you can play devil's advocate and say it could've taken Hakeem longer than Shaq to learn the triangle and use his passing skills more effectively. Anyway, passing is something I'd give to Shaq regardless of whether we're discussing peak or career while playmaking goes to Hakeem.

Hakeem's skills and versatility do have a positive effect on the team's offense too so not all are individualistic. His ability to hit the jumper from multiple spots on the floor will stretch the defense giving his teammates more room to operate for either penetration or post-ups and it can also be critical when they're going up against an elite shot blocker since he'd be forced to come out and guard Hakeem thus making it easier for his teammates to score inside. On possessions where the shot clock is running down and somebody has to get up a bailout shot, his ability to shoot or create something out of nothing can help the team get a shot up unlike say Shaq who wouldn't be somebody you'd look for in that situation. It can allow him to work in a PnP giving the defense another dimension to worry about. It can help the team from a strategic standpoint if there's a mismatch they're trying to exploit or if they're milking the clock for instance though this is interrelated to my first point about stretching the defense. I've talked about this in more detail when there was a Shaq/Hakeem 1995 finals breakdown posted. Here's the link to the post (first half of the post): http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1242882&start=75" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, individual adjustments aren't to be completely brushed to the side especially when a center is being quickly double teamed without even having the time to put the ball on the floor and this will be further magnified if his teammates are cold from the perimeter. I know this isn't peak Shaq who was a more skilled player but look at his series vs the Bulls in 1995. You expect him to dominate on paper because of the Bulls' Cs but he actually had a clearly worse offensive series than he did in the 1995 finals going up against a great defensive C for example. The Bulls slowed the game down taking away Shaq's transition game, double teamed him with Pippen and often managed to force him into a passing rhythm, he was reluctant to use his turnaround jumper so he couldn't create as many shots for himself (something he clearly improved on though), they had 3 Cs so they had fouls to give which they utilized anytime Shaq was near the basket and at times, this led to Shaq rushing shots which did play a minor part in him shooting only 48% from the field in that series. The Bulls also pressured the entry passer (especially Jordan on Anderson) which meant that at times, Shaq wouldn't even receive the ball. Another example is Portland during the 2000 WCF as there were multiple games where they were able to get away with loading up on Shaq since they were a poor 3 pt shooting team though, they did make them pay in the 4th quarter of game 7 IIRC and Shaq was instrumental in the comeback. They had a big body in Sabonis who could somewhat deny Shaq from getting deep position until the double team came, they had Pippen guarding Harper who was a non-shooting threat which allowed Pippen to pressure the entry passer and double team Shaq off the catch, Sheed was playing off of Green often coming from the weakside and with poor perimeter shooting, this allowed them to limit Shaq's impact to a certain extent. These defensive strategies are something a C like Hakeem can counter due to his plethora of skills and a diverse repertoire. Not entirely of course, there's a reason Seattle kept his shot attempts low in the playoffs due to similar strategies as the ones listed above but he could come out to the wing/top of the key and play a face up game, Houston could run him off some curls for a foul line jumper, he could space the floor so his teammates can play a penetrate and dish style of basketball etc.

With all this said, I view peak Shaq as a tier above peak Hakeem as an offensive player/anchor (simply a bigger mismatch) but there's definitely aspects of offense where Hakeem holds an edge or better put, his skills can be more effective in countering certain defensive strategies.

Lastly, I don't know about Shaq being a much more imposing rim protector either. More intimidating due to his size, sure but I don't know if that led to more effectiveness. In 2000 (Shaq's defensive peak), the Zo led Heat had a better defense in the paint than the Lakers did both in terms of pts allowed as well as FG% (you can check in the paint opponent numbers on hoopsstats). Obviously, some of that could be attributed to the contrasting styles of defense the two teams played. Riley loved fronting the post which obviously leaves room for entry passes to be lobbed over so Zo would have to rotate quickly and help out and Riley would grade his performance on a game by game basis usually giving him high praise. He'd also prefer to have PJ Brown guard the opposing team's best low-post player since he was a better big-man defender and that also allowed Zo to help out and avoid foul trouble. On the other hand, the Lakers' strategy was built around Shaq's presence in the paint so the guards could be aggressive on the perimeter knowing Shaq was behind them to clean up mistakes and they could also funnel their man baseline or in the lane towards Shaq. It was a great strategy since they had the top defense overall but based strictly on the paint results, Miami fared a little better.

Post #136 » by **tsherkin** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:49 pm

OhayoKD wrote:

fatal9 has an entertaining quote in there:

You just don't get big men averaging close to 5 apg while scoring 30+ ppg, they are just not dynamic enough as playmakers.

I'm sure the quote is older, but we've seen Jokic do this for two straight playoffs in a row now, and was at 29.8 ppg and 5.0 apg the year before that, just to throw some context on that comment for a little later in this project.

21-23: 35 GP, 30.1 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 7.7 apg, 54.0% FG, 40.8% 3P (4.2 3PA/g), 57.2% 2FG, 62.1% TS.

The comparison point between Jordan and Hakeem and Shaq in the playoffs is an interesting one. I think 70sFan was the one who has had some good remarks about how Rudy T's system helped simplify reads for Hakeem, and of course how having shooters around him enabled that to work a little more effectively than earlier on in his career. Certainly having someone like Horry who could float from the 3 to the 4 and hit an outside shot helped open up some interior space for Dream to operate as well. I don't know that he was a terribly advanced passer, but he certainly took to the system effectively when it was there, which sounds in many ways like conversations about Wilt's passing (just without his emphasis on specific statistics).

lessthanjake · Post #137 » by **lessthanjake** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:50 pm

70sFan wrote:
ceoofkobefans wrote:Other than maybe Kobe and curry he has without a doubt the most gravity in league history which helped him create a good amount of shots for teammates as a center.

Do you have any evidences to believe that these three have more gravity than someone like Kareem, Wilt or LeBron for example?

There’s of course no way to measure that in a way that would create concrete “evidence.” But, at least with Steph, we can watch the games and see it. All these great players have teams collapse on them when they’re in positions where they are super dangerous to score. But there’s a few things that IMO make the effect Steph exerts substantially better:

1. The thing with Steph is that the positions where he’s super dangerous to score are super far from the basket, which means that his gravity creates more space (i.e. because opponents are pulled even further away from Steph’s teammates). So, even if opponents are only pulled as close to him as they are to some other all-time great, that “gravity” creates more space. For instance, a double team 10 feet from the three point line creates more space for teammates than a double team 12 feet from the basket does.

2. Relatedly, there’s a difference in *where* the space Steph creates is located on the floor. When your gravity is exerted far from the basket, you’re naturally pulling opponents *away* from the basket. This is in contrast to gravity exerted by most players (including the ones listed) whose gravity generally pulls opponents *towards* the basket. And pulling opponents away from the basket is generally better. Why? Well, pulling opponents away from the basket creates space closer to the basket, while pulling opponents towards the basket creates space away from the basket. Therefore, gravity like Steph’s is more likely to create an open shot near the basket, while other types of gravity are more likely to create an open outside shot. And shots near the basket are the most efficient shots in basketball, so this is better. I provided evidence of this effect in prior threads, in which I detailed how Steph being on the floor increases his teammates’ percent of FGA’s at the rim in a completely outlier manner, even as compared to guys like LeBron. This is because he’s creating space in a different way that is more likely to manufacture shots at the rim.

3. Another aspect of this is the frequency with which one is able to get in positions that exert gravity. Steph exerts gravity in the most basic of situations. He can just have the ball 5-10 feet behind the three point line and get a screen from a teammate, and he’ll get doubled off the screen. Or he’ll create space just by running around off the ball behind the three point line. Teams do try to take some potshots at him as he runs around screens, to try to slow him down, but overall it’s very hard to actually prevent him from being a position to exert his gravity, because it’s very hard to prevent someone from being in a position to receive the ball anywhere within several feet from the three-point line or from running a pick and roll behind the three-point line. In contrast, it’s harder for other players to get in a position to exert their gravity. For instance, if Kareem gets the ball 2 feet from the basket, he will definitely exert a lot of gravity. But he has to genuinely work really hard to get position like that—it’s not something he can easily do basically every time down floor. And once he’s in that position, it requires a good entry pass from a teammate—which is easier to do with someone with Kareem’s catch radius, but still can get legitimately dicey and potentially wreck the positioning. Similarly, with someone like LeBron, who exerts gravity mostly when the defense collapses on his drives, this requires LeBron to beat his man and get near the basket—something he is certainly very capable of doing, but which is still much further from automatic than Steph being able to exert his gravity.

So I think Steph’s gravity is substantially superior to these guys’. Steph’s gravity creates more space, creates space in better parts of the floor, and can be more consistently exerted.

eminence · Post #138 » by **eminence** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:55 pm

therealbig3 wrote:Re: Curry vs Kobe

I don't think it's clear at all that Curry is a more capable offensive anchor in the PS than Kobe. Kobe's 08-10 Lakers squads were consistently better offensively than most of Curry's Warriors teams. I think Kobe was more resilient as a playoff performer actually. RS wise, Curry may very well be the GOAT, but his dropoff in PS play has always been the issue. Not to say he isn't great or isn't worthy of discussion at this level, but he goes from a clear offensive GOAT to clearly not the offensive GOAT, and more in line with guys like Kobe and Dirk (which is still an incredible offensive talent).

I think that's a pretty clear sample bias, if you look at Kobe's best stretch it'll look nice compared to anyones career because Kobe was a damn good player.

Career to career? Ehh, I'm not seeing it.

therealbig3 · Post #139 » by **therealbig3** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 3:00 pm

eminence wrote:
therealbig3 wrote:Re: Curry vs Kobe

I don't think it's clear at all that Curry is a more capable offensive anchor in the PS than Kobe. Kobe's 08-10 Lakers squads were consistently better offensively than most of Curry's Warriors teams. I think Kobe was more resilient as a playoff performer actually. RS wise, Curry may very well be the GOAT, but his dropoff in PS play has always been the issue. Not to say he isn't great or isn't worthy of discussion at this level, but he goes from a clear offensive GOAT to clearly not the offensive GOAT, and more in line with guys like Kobe and Dirk (which is still an incredible offensive talent).

I think that's a pretty clear sample bias, if you look at Kobe's best stretch it'll look nice compared to anyones career because Kobe was a damn good player.

Career to career? Ehh, I'm not seeing it.

I'm comparing to Curry's 15-19 Warriors though, which is Curry's best stretch, outside of 22.

Kobe was also the clear 2nd best player on the Shaq-led Lakers, and often times, the Lakers had a better offense with Kobe and without Shaq than vice versa in the playoffs.

I've also always had a hard time grouping in the KD-era Warriors with Curry's overall offensive accomplishments, which essentially just ignores the presence of Kevin freaking Durant (who himself was capable of anchoring dominant PS offenses in OKC which outperformed the 15 and 16 Warriors in fact). I think comparing Curry's non-KD years to Kobe's non-Shaq years is a much fairer comparison. The 22 Warriors is really the only time where Curry stepped up and had a comparable PS run to Kobe on the 08-10 Lakers. The 15 and 16 Warriors were underwhelming by comparison, they largely won with their defense.

Again though, Curry is the RS offensive GOAT, don't think anyone would really offer much resistance to that idea. I think there's a clear dropoff in offensive efficiency in the PS though, which does drop him from offensive GOAT conversation to that 2nd tier of offensive anchors, which is where Kobe exists.

OhayoKD · Post #140 » by **OhayoKD** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 3:17 pm

cupcakesnake wrote:It's pretty fun when two strong candidates emerge and we get a ton of this head-to-head debate. I had Hakeem and Wilt in a tier here so to get to read all kinds of takes specific to this ranking is one of the things that makes this project great.

Does anyone have strong feelings on how Wilt and Dream compare defensively, especially relative to era? In a vacuum, I think Hakeem is a better defensive player due to his quickness advantage (those ballerina feet help him in almost every kind of defensive situation, some of which have been well-documented in this thread). But Wilt is probably the greatest athlete ever at that size, and the sheer obstacle he was in that era of basketball is mountainous. Goaltending wasn't as strict either, which meant Wilt was allowed to occasionally snatch shots out of the sky.

Not an expert myself, but there have been some pretty great breakdowns of Hakeem's defense and impact from previous projects linked here:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107691144#p107691144
(defense)
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107691402#p107691402
(impact)
I do a bit of my own impact breakdown here as well:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=107607357#p107607357

Personally I think Hakeem is probably the best post-russell defender and I think his impact proabably compares well to anyone left. Pair that with him being the best playoff-riser left(maybe the best playoff-riser ever) and I do think Hakeem has a strong impact case even if we pay no mind to situation which, it doesn't seem to be the case for you:

I have Hakeem and Wilt categorized amongst NBA greats who were poorly utilized in their own eras due to combinations of poor coaching, roster construction, roster talent level, and era related rules. I think it's more egregious with Wilt, who was the subject of a flawed basketball experiment (let the highest FG% player take all the shots!) for most of his physical prime. Not only that, but basically anyone who wasn't on the Celtics in the 60s should be considered to have poor fortune when looking at their career success and championship equity. But Hakeem is on the short-list of stars who played with low levels of talent for most of his career.

I do feel equating wilt and hakeem's situation is a bit off. Wilt did have very strong "talent-level" from 67 to 72. Frankly he probably had more talent than Hakeem won with in 67. 68, and 69.

I also think Hakeem himself suffered from bad coaching potentially suppressing what he offered in the 80's :

I don’t actually think Hakeem is having a huge offensive impact during the Chaney years because of how poorly the offense is organized/structured. There’s really not much synergy between him and his teammates. Watching the Lakers series in ’90, when he’s getting an outrageous amount of defensive attention, Rockets are basically clueless on how to actually take advantage of all the defensive attention he is drawing. Even when the first pass by Hakeem was a proper one, the second and third passes by his teammates weren’t (very lazy, slow, indecisive passing that allows defense to recover despite how compromised it was). There is very poor player movement, the floor spacing is puzzling at times and the Rockets were known for being a very poor half court passing team (the guards not exactly a smart, altruistic bunch). In contrast, Lakers know exactly where the ball is going after Magic or Worthy (who btw undressed Buck Johnson in the series) kicks it out of a double team and the second and third guys make the quick hitting plays to get the right guy the ball. To be fair, Hakeem iirc was also was frustrated by the attention and forced bad shots at times, but it's alarming how incapable Houston was of exploiting such aggressive double/triple teaming.

And here, we get to another big difference. Wilt literally went to a team with optimal coaching and then left even though it was the optimal situation to win. Then he joins another very talented team and loses again. For all the talk about Hakeem as "mercurial" I'd say Hakeem was pretty patient all considered:

Watch on YouTube

After letting him down over and over again the Rockets then accuse him of faking an injury and try to make him the scapegoat for them losing. He only really got a co-star in 95(rockets were basically unaffected by both sampson and thorpe's absences over large samples) while Wilt was handed optimal coaching and a stacked cast and then he left that very good to join what was on pace to be the best rs team ever with west the previous year and still lost. Don't think you can say their situations were comparable. That the end-result was I think reflects very well on Hakeem:

There is one difference. Actually, two. Two championships to go with two finals MVPs in the playing his best(or near-best) basketball. Garnett won one as he massively scaled down his minutes in a role closer to what Draymond offers than what we would want from one of the best at their best. But Hakeem did not win two scaling down, he won two as his team's best scorer, defender, and creator to crown an impressive apex where, at least at the end of two consecutive seasons, he was the consensus best player in the league. Impact suggests he should have entered that conversation much sooner. By my guess, he was already the league's best player by 93, but set that aside.

In a comparison with Olajuwon I do not think it would be unfair to expect a three-peat from 67 to 69(injuries made 68 tricker but they did have a 3-1 lead and I do not think Russell was on a great team at that point), especially if we account for the fit issues in 69 being partially self-inflicted(Wilt had a great situation with the Sixers). Yet Wilt only emerged with one, and it would take another great situation in 72(benefitted greatly by Kareem's help breaking down) for him to pull up even.