put hakeem on knicks instead of ewing

[dk7th]

do the knicks win any titles between 1986 and 1999 with hakeem olajuwon as the franchise center instead of patrick ewing?

[USA]

PC board. Go.

[RandomKnight]

They win to or three rings easily.

[magicman1978]

Well, they definitely win 93-94 for sure. There's a good chance they get past the Jordan Bulls 2-3 years. So I'm guessing at least 2, maybe 4 championships.

[Laimbeer]

Ewing's cast was no better than Hakeem's, and the gap is overrated. He doesn't get past the Bulls.

[JordansBulls]

Ewing's cast was no better than Hakeem's, and the gap is overrated. He doesn't get past the Bulls.

Not to mention in 1992 they have no shot as Ewing was better than Hakeem that year. Hakeem didn't even make 3rd team all nba that year. 1993 is a wash and 1991 doesn't matter, they ain't beating the Bulls that year and 1989 doesn't really matter either, Bulls still upset the Knicks.

[bastillon]

Ewing's cast in the early 90s was significantly better than on early 90s Rockets. they'd get past Bulls in '92 and '93 for sure. Olajuwon was way better than Ewing offensively and would excell in defensive environment. I don't see anyone beating the Knicks in '92-'95 stretch other than MJ.

[JordansBulls]

Ewing's cast in the early 90s was significantly better than on early 90s Rockets. they'd get past Bulls in '92 and '93 for sure. Olajuwon was way better than Ewing offensively and would excell in defensive environment. I don't see anyone beating the Knicks in '92-'95 stretch other than MJ.

They have no shot in 1992. Hakeem wasn't even good enough to make 3rd team all nba over Brad Daugherty.

[bastillon]

that's irrelevant because his impact was still enormous. Rockets were 2-10 without him and 40-30 with him. he didn't get recognized because of failures on a team level but he was far better player than both Daugherty and Ewing. let's not forget Bulls barely got past the Knicks that year only because they had no scorers. Hakeem was a guy who could score unlimited volumes when he had to so he'd have been a perfect fit for that team. they'd demolish Bulls on the glass with him and Oakley.

[JordansBulls]

that's irrelevant because his impact was still enormous. Rockets were 2-10 without him and 40-30 with him. he didn't get recognized because of failures on a team level but he was far better player than both Daugherty and Ewing. let's not forget Bulls barely got past the Knicks that year only because they had no scorers. Hakeem was a guy who could score unlimited volumes when he had to so he'd have been a perfect fit for that team. they'd demolish Bulls on the glass with him and Oakley.

It certainly is relevant. Hakeem on the Knicks changes the entire dynamics of the team, they don't become the dirty and physical team they were which is why they surprised us in that series as we were expecting them to come out one way and they came out the way they did. Not to mention in 1992 Hakeem had another allstar on his team in Thorpe and the Rockets still failed to miss the playoffs. From 1989-1992 Ewing was better than Hakeem. 1993 it was a wash and 1994-1998 Hakeem was better than Ewing.

[therealbig3]

There's actually quite a big gap between Hakeem and Ewing imo.

Not going too in depth, but specifically against the Bulls, I think they definitely beat them in 89 and 92. Possibly in 91 and 93 as well.

They obviously win the title in 94 with Hakeem instead of Ewing too.

[JordansBulls]

There's actually quite a big gap between Hakeem and Ewing imo.

Not going too in depth, but specifically against the Bulls, I think they definitely beat them in 89 and 92. Possibly in 91 and 93 as well.

They obviously win the title in 94 with Hakeem instead of Ewing too.

Except the fact that Ewing was better than him from 1989-1992.

Let's look at the Realgm POY project for a second

http://rpoy.dolem.com/

1992

4. Patrick Ewing
5. David Robinson

7. Hakeem Olajuwon



1991

8. Hakeem Olajuwon (irrelevant) they aren't beating the Bulls period that year



1989

4. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Patrick Ewing


1993

2. Hakeem Olajuwon 1 15 7 0 0 150 0.652
4. Patrick Ewing 0 0 0 17 5 56 0.243

Let's not forget Hakeem and company nearly lost in round 1 to the Clippers that year as well when they were clearly superior to them.

[therealbig3]

The only years Ewing is ranked ahead of Hakeem are 90 and 92, and that's highly debatable. There could be some bias too, since the Rockets missed the playoffs in 92, and he had the worst playoffs of his career by far in 90. We all know that those are circumstantial and don't tell who the better player is.

Ewing didn't play all that well against the Bulls in 89, 91, or 92. 89 was a tough 6-game series, and Hakeem would have played better than Ewing. 91, Ewing blew, Hakeem would have dominated. 92, Ewing again doesn't play all that great, and that's a 7-game series I believe. I might give Ewing the benefit of the doubt in 93, since he played great, but then again, Hakeem was just a better player, he could have played even better. 96 Bulls are arguably the GOAT team, so I'm not giving the Knicks the victory over them, even with Hakeem.

But I think it's clear Hakeem gets them past the Bulls in 89 and 92, and possibly in 91 and 93.

[magicman1978]

Ewing's cast in the early 90s was significantly better than on early 90s Rockets. they'd get past Bulls in '92 and '93 for sure. Olajuwon was way better than Ewing offensively and would excell in defensive environment. I don't see anyone beating the Knicks in '92-'95 stretch other than MJ.

I pretty much agree with this assessment. We all know that Hakeem was a much better playoff performer than Ewing and I think he would have been enough to put the Knicks over the top in at least one of those years. I think they beat Indiana in 95 and go on to win that year too.

[JordansBulls]

The only years Ewing is ranked ahead of Hakeem are 90 and 92, and that's highly debatable. There could be some bias too, since the Rockets missed the playoffs in 92, and he had the worst playoffs of his career by far in 90. We all know that those are circumstantial and don't tell who the better player is.

Ewing didn't play all that well against the Bulls in 89, 91, or 92. 89 was a tough 6-game series, and Hakeem would have played better than Ewing. 91, Ewing blew, Hakeem would have dominated. 92, Ewing again doesn't play all that great, and that's a 7-game series I believe. I might give Ewing the benefit of the doubt in 93, since he played great, but then again, Hakeem was just a better player, he could have played even better. 96 Bulls are arguably the GOAT team, so I'm not giving the Knicks the victory over them, even with Hakeem.

But I think it's clear Hakeem gets them past the Bulls in 89 and 92, and possibly in 91 and 93.

So you trying to say the Knicks who were an 8th seed is going to beat the Bulls in 1991 who were the #1 seed? You trying to tell me the Knicks in 1989 going to beat MJ that year when he averaged this vs the Knicks

vs. NY, 1989: 37 pts/10 reb/9 ast/52% FG

And how does Ewing not play all that great in 1992?

Ewing averaged 22.1 ppg / 9.7 rpg / 2.3 bpg / 49% FG in that series.

If Hakeem was a better player in 1992 he would have been able to make an all nba team. It's not like he played 40 games or something, dude played 70 games that year.


It is just a hindsight with Hakeem as if he always played like he did in 1994 or 1995 all the time.

He wasn't even on the list for MVP voting in 1992

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awa ... 2.html#mvp

[therealbig3]

Well like I said, I don't know about for sure in 93, but definitely they would have had a shot. Ewing averaged 26 ppg on 57% TS. He played great, and I know Hakeem was definitely capable of playing better than that, but how much better, and how much of a difference would it make? Debatable, which is why that one's up in the air for me.

[JordansBulls]

Well like I said, I don't know about for sure in 93, but definitely they would have had a shot. Ewing averaged 26 ppg on 57% TS. He played great, and I know Hakeem was definitely capable of playing better than that, but how much better, and how much of a difference would it make? Debatable, which is why that one's up in the air for me.

And 1991 definitely isn't debateable either not when they were the 8th seed. Hell the Rockets got swept out west that year in round 1 and you expect Hakeem is going to put the Knicks over the top in 1991 in place of Ewing when they were the 8th seed already? Nor is 1992 debateable much either unless you are giving the Knicks a 1993-1995 Hakeem instead of a 1992 Hakeem.

[therealbig3]

The only years Ewing is ranked ahead of Hakeem are 90 and 92, and that's highly debatable. There could be some bias too, since the Rockets missed the playoffs in 92, and he had the worst playoffs of his career by far in 90. We all know that those are circumstantial and don't tell who the better player is.

Ewing didn't play all that well against the Bulls in 89, 91, or 92. 89 was a tough 6-game series, and Hakeem would have played better than Ewing. 91, Ewing blew, Hakeem would have dominated. 92, Ewing again doesn't play all that great, and that's a 7-game series I believe. I might give Ewing the benefit of the doubt in 93, since he played great, but then again, Hakeem was just a better player, he could have played even better. 96 Bulls are arguably the GOAT team, so I'm not giving the Knicks the victory over them, even with Hakeem.

But I think it's clear Hakeem gets them past the Bulls in 89 and 92, and possibly in 91 and 93.

So you trying to say the Knicks who were an 8th seed is going to beat the Bulls in 1991 who were the #1 seed? You trying to tell me the Knicks in 1989 going to beat MJ that year when he averaged this vs the Knicks

vs. NY, 1989: 37 pts/10 reb/9 ast/52% FG

And how does Ewing not play all that great in 1992?

Ewing averaged 22.1 ppg / 9.7 rpg / 2.3 bpg / 49% FG in that series.

If Hakeem was a better player in 1992 he would have been able to make an all nba team. It's not like he played 40 games or something, dude played 70 games that year.


It is just a hindsight with Hakeem as if he always played like he did in 1994 or 1995 all the time.

He wasn't even on the list for MVP voting in 1992

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awa ... 2.html#mvp

Yeah, in 89 when MJ went nuts, it was still a hard fought 6-game series with Ewing struggling.

In 91, Ewing played like absolute crap, Hakeem in 91 would have played much better, and that might have been the difference between a sweep and an upset. I said this is a maybe.

In 92, yeah, Ewing averaged 22 ppg...on 52% TS. And he was inconsistent as hell in that series, having a good game one night to a bad one the next night. And you don't think Hakeem was capable of dropping more than 22 ppg on the Bulls?

I find your points about MVP voting and All-NBA voting to be laughable and I'm not going to respond to them. I'm just gonna say, focus on their actual games and their abilities, not their accolades, which are highly subjective.

[JordansBulls]

The only years Ewing is ranked ahead of Hakeem are 90 and 92, and that's highly debatable. There could be some bias too, since the Rockets missed the playoffs in 92, and he had the worst playoffs of his career by far in 90. We all know that those are circumstantial and don't tell who the better player is.

Ewing didn't play all that well against the Bulls in 89, 91, or 92. 89 was a tough 6-game series, and Hakeem would have played better than Ewing. 91, Ewing blew, Hakeem would have dominated. 92, Ewing again doesn't play all that great, and that's a 7-game series I believe. I might give Ewing the benefit of the doubt in 93, since he played great, but then again, Hakeem was just a better player, he could have played even better. 96 Bulls are arguably the GOAT team, so I'm not giving the Knicks the victory over them, even with Hakeem.

But I think it's clear Hakeem gets them past the Bulls in 89 and 92, and possibly in 91 and 93.

So you trying to say the Knicks who were an 8th seed is going to beat the Bulls in 1991 who were the #1 seed? You trying to tell me the Knicks in 1989 going to beat MJ that year when he averaged this vs the Knicks

vs. NY, 1989: 37 pts/10 reb/9 ast/52% FG

And how does Ewing not play all that great in 1992?

Ewing averaged 22.1 ppg / 9.7 rpg / 2.3 bpg / 49% FG in that series.

If Hakeem was a better player in 1992 he would have been able to make an all nba team. It's not like he played 40 games or something, dude played 70 games that year.


It is just a hindsight with Hakeem as if he always played like he did in 1994 or 1995 all the time.

He wasn't even on the list for MVP voting in 1992

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awa ... 2.html#mvp

Yeah, in 89 when MJ went nuts, it was still a hard fought 6-game series with Ewing struggling.

In 91, Ewing played like absolute crap, Hakeem in 91 would have played much better, and that might have been the difference between a sweep and an upset. I said this is a maybe.

In 92, yeah, Ewing averaged 22 ppg...on 52% TS. And he was inconsistent as hell in that series, having a good game one night to a bad one the next night. And you don't think Hakeem was capable of dropping more than 22 ppg on the Bulls?

I find your points about MVP voting and All-NBA voting to be laughable and I'm not going to respond to them. I'm just gonna say, focus on their actual games and their abilities, not their accolades, which are highly subjective.

He couldn't even get a game against the Lakers out west in 1991 and you expect an upset over the Bulls? That ridiculous especially in round 1 as an 8th seed?

Hakeem in 1991 averaged 16.5 ppg and 13 rpg and 1.5 bpg on 48% FG against the Bulls, not much different than Ewing.

In 1992 Ewing played well against a good defensive team. Hakeem wasn't even able to make the playoffs that year despite having another guy on the team make the allstar team. Not to mention Hakeem averaged 20.5 ppg on 50% against the Bulls that year while Ewing averaged 22.1 ppg on 49% FG against the Bulls.

And yeah the MVP voting is a joke at times but it sure as hell isn't a joke when you can't even finish in the top 15 that year.


Kinda ridiculous to say a guy who finished 18th in MVP voting in 1991 and wasn't even on the list in 1992 is going to come in and replace a guy who was 11th one year and 5th another year that play the same position and played in the league the same years is going to upset a team that swept them in round 1 as an 8th seed.

[therealbig3]

BTW, since we're talking about Hakeem, bastillon, I must say, I used to find your homerism for Hakeem to be annoying ( ), and I never liked how you clearly thought he was better than Duncan (who's my all-time favorite player), but I've looked into Hakeem more, I've read your analysis more, and I've gained mad respect for Hakeem. I can't really rank Duncan ahead of him anymore, and I love how outside of that one time in 90...the dude was never really contained or slowed down in a playoff series unless you swarmed the hell out of him, and even then, he still got his. And I love how fluid his game was, and he was pretty much the perfect big man.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, good work, your arguments have convinced me.