put hakeem on knicks instead of ewing

[therealbig3]

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.

You're talking about 4 regular season games for one guy vs a total of 10 playoff games for another guy. It's not the same situation.

And Ewing's FG% really doesn't matter, his TS% in 92 was 52%, that's not very good, and like I said, he was inconsistent. And it's weird to be comparing the regular season performances for one guy, who notoriously stepped up big time in the playoffs, to the playoff series of another guy, who didn't have a history of stepping up in the playoffs.

Although I might have to take back what I said about 91, simply because Hakeem only played 56 games that year, and the Knicks might not have made the playoffs that year with only 56 games of Hakeem...but if they did, I stand by my statement that it's a maybe series.

[magicman1978]

As long as we're using some illogical reasoning that I can't wrap my head around - how about we throw in the fact that, Hakeem, with generally worse teammates overall, managed to go 5-1 against the Bulls in the regular season while Ewing managed a record of 2-9. Edit- for 91-93

[JordansBulls]

As long as we're using some illogical reasoning that I can't wrap my head around - how about we throw in the fact that, Hakeem, with generally worse teammates overall, managed to go 5-1 against the Bulls in the regular season while Ewing managed a record of 2-9. Edit- for 91-93

Cavs were 6-0 against the Bulls in 1989 and had the #1 SRS rating in the league and still got upset by MJ and the Bulls.

Jazz were 2-0 against the Bulls in 1998 as well and went down to us in the finals

Both times those teams had HCA.

[JordansBulls]

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.

You're talking about 4 regular season games for one guy vs a total of 10 playoff games for another guy. It's not the same situation.

And Ewing's FG% really doesn't matter, his TS% in 92 was 52%, that's not very good, and like I said, he was inconsistent. And it's weird to be comparing the regular season performances for one guy, who notoriously stepped up big time in the playoffs, to the playoff series of another guy, who didn't have a history of stepping up in the playoffs.

Although I might have to take back what I said about 91, simply because Hakeem only played 56 games that year, and the Knicks might not have made the playoffs that year with only 56 games of Hakeem...but if they did, I stand by my statement that it's a maybe series.

Yeah the Rockets were out in round 1 for 4 years in a row and then missed the playoffs, but yet supposed to believe switching Hakeem who finished 18th in MVP voting and then wasn't even on the list in 1992 is going to turn a team that was an 8th seed into knocking off the Bulls in round 1 who only lost 2 games all postseason both times by 2 points.

My point is that Hakeem in 1991 nor in 1992 played at a MVP level and if he did he would have finished much higher in MVP voting. There is no way a guy who is playing at a MVP level is going to finish outside the top 10 in MVP voting yet alone 18th and not even make the list the next year no matter how bad the team is (which in this case was around teams that won at least 40 games).
BTW, Ewing's TS% was higher than Hakeem's in 1992 as well. Ewing's went down in the playoffs playing the Pistons who were #1 in OPP PPG and then had to deal with the Bulls.


Let's not forget as well that in 1993 when the Rockets were 55-27 they went the distance and nearly lost in round 1 to a team that was 41-41 and won game 5 the finale by 4 points.
I fail to see that if Hakeem's impact was that great (when he was clearly much better in 1993 than he was in 1991 and 1992) that he would be in a situation like against a team that was .500 on the dot in the opening round and that switching him to the Knicks means he lifts them over the Bulls especially in 1991 and 1992 when those versions of Hakeem were no where as good as the 1993 version of Hakeem.

[bastillon]

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.

well that's why we're spending days of our lives on this board - to convince people. I'm glad my homerism didn't stop you from being objective analyst and I must say I'm impressed with the way you're able to change your opinions about someone. this is an area where several posters here, including me, are lacking in.

JB, Hakeem was always a vastly better player than Ewing. Hakeem 89-92 was no different from 93-95. the reason why he didn't perform as well was Rockets offensive scheme that let Mad Max and Sleepy Floyd do whatever they wanted. if you looked closer at those years Chaney was epically inept head coach and Rockets had no spacing to speak of. I'll go out on a limb and say that 89-92 Hakeem was at his best but he wasted the years in middle of his physical peak because of idiotic management and coaching.

I agree with JB '91 series couldn't be close. Ewing played so poorly for a reason, Pippen and MJ played great help defense together and 91 Bulls posted one of the best postseason runs of all-time. that series wasn't close whatsoever with Bulls demolishing the Knicks by 20 pts a game. even if you added Hakeem to that team that still might have been a contest.

in 92 though ? you'd have to be crazy not to think Olajuwon wouldn't push the Knicks over the top. that series was already 7-games long and Ewing played well only for his standards. but 22 ppg is a horrible series for Olajuwon. Hakeem AVGED 25.9 ppg in his playoff career (on 57% TS, no less)... that includes his games in 98-02 when he was mostly injured and in the late 30s. it'd be a huge surprise if Bulls could keep Olajuwon under 30 in that series. they had nobody to guard him and he's probably the hardest big man to double team bc of all the fakes.

also comparing Hakeem and Ewing in terms of scoring doesn't make a lot of sense because they didn't face similar defensive attention. Ewing was often left 1 on 1, whereas I haven't seen a playoff series during which Hakeem wouldn't be consistently doubled or tripled. Phil Jackson himself once said nobody demanded more defensive coverage than Olajuwon and I believe it was Riley who seconded that later. watch any quarter in '94 finals or '86 finals and you'll see what I'm talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCAA6BQ0 ... re=related

Hakeem was playing against level of defensive coverage basically unheard of. like Shaq, except that Olajuwon demanded double teams in the midrange area, not only deep in the paint.

[JordansBulls]

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.

well that's why we're spending days of our lives on this board - to convince people. I'm glad my homerism didn't stop you from being objective analyst and I must say I'm impressed with the way you're able to change your opinions about someone. this is an area where several posters here, including me, are lacking in.

JB, Hakeem was always a vastly better player than Ewing. Hakeem 89-92 was no different from 93-95. the reason why he didn't perform as well was Rockets offensive scheme that let Mad Max and Sleepy Floyd do whatever they wanted. if you looked closer at those years Chaney was epically inept head coach and Rockets had no spacing to speak of. I'll go out on a limb and say that 89-92 Hakeem was at his best but he wasted the years in middle of his physical peak because of idiotic management and coaching.

I agree with JB '91 series couldn't be close. Ewing played so poorly for a reason, Pippen and MJ played great help defense together and 91 Bulls posted one of the best postseason runs of all-time. that series wasn't close whatsoever with Bulls demolishing the Knicks by 20 pts a game. even if you added Hakeem to that team that still might have been a contest.

in 92 though ? you'd have to be crazy not to think Olajuwon wouldn't push the Knicks over the top. that series was already 7-games long and Ewing played well only for his standards. but 22 ppg is a horrible series for Olajuwon. Hakeem AVGED 25.9 ppg in his playoff career (on 57% TS, no less)... that includes his games in 98-02 when he was mostly injured and in the late 30s. it'd be a huge surprise if Bulls could keep Olajuwon under 30 in that series. they had nobody to guard him and he's probably the hardest big man to double team bc of all the fakes.

also comparing Hakeem and Ewing in terms of scoring doesn't make a lot of sense because they didn't face similar defensive attention. Ewing was often left 1 on 1, whereas I haven't seen a playoff series during which Hakeem wouldn't be consistently doubled or tripled. Phil Jackson himself once said nobody demanded more defensive coverage than Olajuwon and I believe it was Riley who seconded that later. watch any quarter in '94 finals or '86 finals and you'll see what I'm talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCAA6BQ0 ... re=related

Hakeem was playing against level of defensive coverage basically unheard of. like Shaq, except that Olajuwon demanded double teams in the midrange area, not only deep in the paint.

Again if Hakeem was better than Ewing in 1992 he would have been on the MVP list in some way. He didn't get any type of vote. There were 17 guys who got points for MVP in 1992 and Hakeem wasn't on the list while Ewing finished 5th that year. Not to mention that Ewing was on 2nd team all nba and Hakeem didn't even make the 3rd team all nba.
Now there is a big difference between making 2nd team all nba and not making an all nba team.And there sure is hell a big difference from finishing 5th in MVP voting and not even being in the top 17 or on the list on it.

Not to mention the Rockets even when having another player make the allstar team failed to even make the playoffs that year.


And I love how you use the Bulls went 7 vs the Knicks, yet the Rockets went the distance soo many times the next few years even with more talent that they barely won. Hell just the following year as a 55 win team in round 1 against a 41 win team the Rockets barely win the deciding game by 4 points and this with Hakeem dominating.
The only reason Bulls/Knicks series was close was due to the physical play and the roughness of the series. They wouldn't play that way with Hakeem there in place of Ewing since Ewing was significantly better than Hakeem in 1992.

[therealbig3]

Hell just the following year as a 55 win team in round 1 against a 41 win team the Rockets barely win the deciding game by 4 points and this with Hakeem dominating.

So you're admitting that Hakeem played great and was dominant, and yet the Rockets barely won? Isn't that more of a testament to the lack of talent that Hakeem played with, rather than something being wrong with Hakeem?

They wouldn't play that way with Hakeem there in place of Ewing since Ewing was significantly better than Hakeem in 1992.

Saying Ewing was significantly better than Hakeem in 92 is an absolute joke. Falling back on Hakeem not getting top 17 in MVP voting is a terrible reason, look at some of the names ahead of Hakeem for the voting, and say with a straight face that they were better. When something subjective blatantly goes against all objective measurements and my common sense, I dismiss the subjective reasoning completely. MVP voting means nothing to me in this comparison, Hakeem was the better player his entire career imo (you can make a case for Ewing in 90 and 92 I guess, but it's definitely debatable).

[prs]

93-94 they win obviously. Doubt they win anything other than that. I think Hakeem is better most years and obviously better at his peak but Ewing isn't far off. Ewing is pretty underrated overall probably because the Knicks were always a solid contender but he never had anything over the top to help him get a championship. I feel his situation is similar to Dirks situation, except now that Dirk has won he won't slip under the radar overall like Ewing does.

[bastillon]

Again if Hakeem was better than Ewing in 1992 he would have been on the MVP list in some way. He didn't get any type of vote. There were 17 guys who got points for MVP in 1992 and Hakeem wasn't on the list while Ewing finished 5th that year. Not to mention that Ewing was on 2nd team all nba and Hakeem didn't even make the 3rd team all nba.
Now there is a big difference between making 2nd team all nba and not making an all nba team.And there sure is hell a big difference from finishing 5th in MVP voting and not even being in the top 17 or on the list on it.

Not to mention the Rockets even when having another player make the allstar team failed to even make the playoffs that year.

I mentioned the reasons why Hakeem was ignored by MVP voters. it had a lot to do with terrible coaching as Hakeem was made the focal point of the offense in the 93 season after Tomjanovich took over for good, and poor supporting cast (40-30 with Hakeem; 2-10 without him, that's a difference between 17 win team and 47 win team) resulting in missed playoffs. now I should also add that there were serious trade talks involving Olajuwon and management accused him of faking injury (see how times changed ? Hakeem would never play for that franchise again if this happened today). given all of the above, I'm not particularly surprised by voters ignoring Hakeem on MVP ballots. Hakeem was a 21/12 big on .500 team in 92. no wonder why he wasn't considered MVP candidate at the time. the problem was not Olajuwon but with their offensive system and supporting cast. once those were in place Houston became a lot better and Olajuwon was regarded as MVP level player. but at the time voters had the right to put him that low.

they were clearly wrong though, as they voted him #2 best in '93 MVP race, basically admitting to have made a mistake. either you can believe there was a guy who came from nowhere as borderline top15 player in the league and suddenly finished higher than pre-retirement MJ on MVP ballot... or you can be more reasonable and see there's no reason not to consider 92 Olajuwon a player of the same caliber as 93 Olajuwon.

if you put Shaq 00 on high post and give him Kapono instead of Rice and JR Smith instead of Kobe, would he be considered an unanimous MVP ? of course not, Lakers would finish at 40 games, miss the playoffs and Shaq's stats would drop drastically playing in a role that doesn't suit him. instead of being shocked I'm picking Hakeem ahead of Ewing, you should consider the circumstances and be shocked how dumb Chaney was. Jordan never had to deal with that type of crap. enjoyed excellent coaching and played with great teammates most of his prime. Olajuwon wasted most of his prime and once he got the chance to do anything in the first place, he was already 30 years old. it's still miraculous he managed to win as much as he did.

so again, Ewing was never close to Olajuwon at any point of their careers. the gap was gigantic as 94 finals showed. defensively Ewing was elite, but Hakeem was just a level higher. offensively Ewing was a legit 20 ppg big man, but Hakeem was a top3 post scorer of all time along with Shaq and Kareem. Ewing was a mediocre passer, Hakeem was a very good one. Hakeem could do everything Ewing could, except better.

and for this comparison to make sense, you shouldn't be comparing 92 Olajuwon unless you plan to utilize him equally "well" as Chaney did. if not, Hakeem 93 was a much better reference point because decent coach knows to play inside-outside with Hakeem, not through mediocre PG and crazy gunner SG. so how good was Olajuwon when properly used ?

26 ppg 13 rpg 3.5 apg 1.8 stl 4.2 blk with 58% TS...and IMPROVED for the playoffs to 26/14/5/2/5 on 57% TS. all-NBA 1st, robbed of MVP (though finished ahead of 93 MJ), won player of the month in january and april. anchored a talent-deficient team to 4 SRS, with 6th best offense and 3rd best defense.the guy played at the level unheard of. Ewing wasn't even in the same league and it was proved once and for all in 94 finals.

so your points were legit, but only assuming Riley wouldn't play inside-outside with Olajuwon. we both know that's not true