RealGM

Does Kevin Garnett have a good case over Hakeem Olajuwon all time?


I see a lot of KG vs Duncan being close and many believe Duncan is better than Hakeem all time. So how does KG match up with Hakeem all time?

Both have 1 league mvp, 1 DPOY. The difference is Hakeem has 2 finals mvp's as well.

I'm sure you could come up with a case but I don't see KG actually winning out.

The options in the poll are not answers to the question you asked.

The correct answer is - yes, KG has a case over Hakeem if you like impact stats or you're low on Hakeem's '80s years.
Personally, I have Hakeem higher but there's definitely a case for KG depending on criteria.

Of course there is. Don't understand why Hakeem is put on this pedestal above the 2nd tier ATG guys like Malone, Barkley, etc. I have him, KG, and Dirk around the same level.

No he doesn't.

To me Hakeem peaked higher, was better on both ends of the floor and lead a ringless franchise to the title with a weak supporting cast as the man. He was also a much better playoff performer.

I also value performance in the Finals a lot. In that aspect Hakeem smokes KG as Garnett's best performance in his 2 Finals was a mediocre 18/13/3 @ 47%TS playing with Rondo,Allen and Pierce. At the same age Hakeem lead the Rockets to win their 1st title averaging 27/9/4/4 @ 55%TS with a much worse supporting cast.

Unless you value RPM in the RS a lot, I don't see a case for KG at all. To me Hakeem was just in a another tier. KG should be compared to Malone, Dirk, Barkley. Those great players who have no business in a top 10 GOAT list.

I really can't imagine how

Open and shut for me, it's Hakeem.

I'd say he has a mediocre case

They use the defense argument a lot with Garnett but in this case he's up against a guy who is certainly better than him on that end. Hakeem was anchoring top 1-3 defenses in Houston with bad teammates, something Garnett was never able to do until he got Pierce and Allen.

On offense, it's no comparison. I've seen people arguing that Garnett's passing and shooting make him more valuable than Hakeem's volume scoring, but it's not as if prime Hakeem was a slacker as a passer, the whole Houston offense was built around Hakeem's gravity as a 4 out-1 in with shooters spotting up. His volume scoring won championships and it's a far bigger advantage than anything Garnett had.

I have like 6 spots separating them, Hakeem is 11 and Garnett is 17 but there is a bit of a dropoff from 11 to 12 (Hakeem to Oscar).

I wouldn't even label KG a top 3 PF ever much less compare him to a dominant top ATG C.

ardee wrote:They use the defense argument a lot with Garnett but in this case he's up against a guy who is certainly better than him on that end. Hakeem was anchoring top 1-3 defenses in Houston with bad teammates, something Garnett was never able to do until he got Pierce and Allen.

On offense, it's no comparison. I've seen people arguing that Garnett's passing and shooting make him more valuable than Hakeem's volume scoring, but it's not as if prime Hakeem was a slacker as a passer, the whole Houston offense was built around Hakeem's gravity as a 4 out-1 in with shooters spotting up. His volume scoring won championships and it's a far bigger advantage than anything Garnett had.

I have like 6 spots separating them, Hakeem is 11 and Garnett is 17 but there is a bit of a dropoff from 11 to 12 (Hakeem to Oscar).

Pierce and Allen are not the reason for Boston having a good defense. It was the added role players like Rondo, Perkins, Allen, and House.

Ray Allen on: 100.5 Defense
Ray Allen off: 95.9 Defense

Unfortunately, we don't have data for the defense of the Houston Rockets without Hakeem. We do have the defense for Minnesota during KG's tenure, and I can say for certain that those Rockets teams would not have been towards the bottom of the league without Hakeem.

2001: 102.9 (14th), 107.2 (27th)
2002: 104.2 (14th), 108.6 (Last)
2003: 102.4 (10th), 110.9 (Last)
2004: 98.5 (5th), 104.6 (20th)
2005: 106.6 (14th) , 105.3 (12th)
2006: 104.7 (11th), 105.5 (14th)
2007: 106.2 (13th), 112.5 (Last)
2008: 97.3 (1st), 101.4 (1st)
2009: 98.6 (1st), 105.8 (7th)
2010: 102.1 (1st), 106.7 (14th)
2011: 98.1 (1st), 104.4 (7th)

Colbinii wrote:I can say for certain that those Rockets teams would not have been towards the bottom of the league without Hakeem.

How can you say that for certain?

thekdog34 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:I can say for certain that those Rockets teams would not have been towards the bottom of the league without Hakeem.

How can you say that for certain?

1. No player in history has anchored a defense that was last without him and 1st with him
2. The role players that Houston had for much of Hakeems tenure were simply better defensive players
3. They had back-up big men that were good defenders

You can make a case, but i think it's a weak one and emphasizes Kg's passing advantage. I don't see his playmaking as more valuable than Hakeem's scoring edge.

Colbinii wrote:

ardee wrote:They use the defense argument a lot with Garnett but in this case he's up against a guy who is certainly better than him on that end. Hakeem was anchoring top 1-3 defenses in Houston with bad teammates, something Garnett was never able to do until he got Pierce and Allen.

On offense, it's no comparison. I've seen people arguing that Garnett's passing and shooting make him more valuable than Hakeem's volume scoring, but it's not as if prime Hakeem was a slacker as a passer, the whole Houston offense was built around Hakeem's gravity as a 4 out-1 in with shooters spotting up. His volume scoring won championships and it's a far bigger advantage than anything Garnett had.

I have like 6 spots separating them, Hakeem is 11 and Garnett is 17 but there is a bit of a dropoff from 11 to 12 (Hakeem to Oscar).

Pierce and Allen are not the reason for Boston having a good defense. It was the added role players like Rondo, Perkins, Allen, and House.

Ray Allen on: 100.5 Defense
Ray Allen off: 95.9 Defense

Unfortunately, we don't have data for the defense of the Houston Rockets without Hakeem. We do have the defense for Minnesota during KG's tenure, and I can say for certain that those Rockets teams would not have been towards the bottom of the league without Hakeem.

2001: 102.9 (14th), 107.2 (27th)
2002: 104.2 (14th), 108.6 (Last)
2003: 102.4 (10th), 110.9 (Last)
2004: 98.5 (5th), 104.6 (20th)
2005: 106.6 (14th) , 105.3 (12th)
2006: 104.7 (11th), 105.5 (14th)
2007: 106.2 (13th), 112.5 (Last)
2008: 97.3 (1st), 101.4 (1st)
2009: 98.6 (1st), 105.8 (7th)
2010: 102.1 (1st), 106.7 (14th)
2011: 98.1 (1st), 104.4 (7th)

I don't mean Pierce and Allen helped the defense, but they allowed KG to become a defensive specialist by taking more of the offensive load. Garnett was only able to anchor an elite defense under these circumstances, while Hakeem did it while also being the primary offensive creator.

Colbinii wrote:

thekdog34 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:I can say for certain that those Rockets teams would not have been towards the bottom of the league without Hakeem.

How can you say that for certain?

1. No player in history has anchored a defense that was last without him and 1st with him
2. The role players that Houston had for much of Hakeems tenure were simply better defensive players
3. They had back-up big men that were good defenders

The backup Centers for 1994-95:
Eric Riley
Richard Petruska
Zan Tabak

Backup PFs (Bullard and Chilcutt stretch 4s):
Matt Bullard
Earl Cureton
Carl Herrera
Adrian Caldwell
Pete Chilcutt
Charless Jones


About the only good defenders supporting him were Maxwell (replaced by Drexler)and Horry (who was just starting his career). Thorpe perhaps as well, though he was traded before the second championship also. Perhaps Elie was a good wing defender too.

I'm not necessarily he had it worse than Garnett, but he didn't really have much support.

thekdog34 wrote:About the only good defenders supporting him were Maxwell (replaced by Drexler)and Horry (who was just starting his career). Thorpe perhaps as well, though he was traded before the second championship also. Perhaps Elie was a good wing defender too.

Charles Jones was a terrific defender

wojoaderge wrote:

thekdog34 wrote:About the only good defenders supporting him were Maxwell (replaced by Drexler)and Horry (who was just starting his career). Thorpe perhaps as well, though he was traded before the second championship also. Perhaps Elie was a good wing defender too.

Charles Jones was a terrific defender

Yes, but he was 37 when he joined Houston. He barely played.

thekdog34 wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:

thekdog34 wrote:About the only good defenders supporting him were Maxwell (replaced by Drexler)and Horry (who was just starting his career). Thorpe perhaps as well, though he was traded before the second championship also. Perhaps Elie was a good wing defender too.

Charles Jones was a terrific defender

Yes, but he was 37 when he joined Houston. He barely played.

Did a great job on the Admiral in the playoffs though

Colbinii wrote:

ardee wrote:They use the defense argument a lot with Garnett but in this case he's up against a guy who is certainly better than him on that end. Hakeem was anchoring top 1-3 defenses in Houston with bad teammates, something Garnett was never able to do until he got Pierce and Allen.

On offense, it's no comparison. I've seen people arguing that Garnett's passing and shooting make him more valuable than Hakeem's volume scoring, but it's not as if prime Hakeem was a slacker as a passer, the whole Houston offense was built around Hakeem's gravity as a 4 out-1 in with shooters spotting up. His volume scoring won championships and it's a far bigger advantage than anything Garnett had.

I have like 6 spots separating them, Hakeem is 11 and Garnett is 17 but there is a bit of a dropoff from 11 to 12 (Hakeem to Oscar).

Pierce and Allen are not the reason for Boston having a good defense. It was the added role players like Rondo, Perkins, Allen, and House.

Ray Allen on: 100.5 Defense
Ray Allen off: 95.9 Defense

Unfortunately, we don't have data for the defense of the Houston Rockets without Hakeem. We do have the defense for Minnesota during KG's tenure, and I can say for certain that those Rockets teams would not have been towards the bottom of the league without Hakeem.

2001: 102.9 (14th), 107.2 (27th)
2002: 104.2 (14th), 108.6 (Last)
2003: 102.4 (10th), 110.9 (Last)
2004: 98.5 (5th), 104.6 (20th)
2005: 106.6 (14th) , 105.3 (12th)
2006: 104.7 (11th), 105.5 (14th)
2007: 106.2 (13th), 112.5 (Last)
2008: 97.3 (1st), 101.4 (1st)
2009: 98.6 (1st), 105.8 (7th)
2010: 102.1 (1st), 106.7 (14th)
2011: 98.1 (1st), 104.4 (7th)

So he wasn't that impactful defensively in 2005 and 2006, right? If this is the only way to measure defense, KG in 2005 has negative impact defensively. That's not possible for me and that's why I don't believe that these stats show us how impactful he really was.

Hakeem post 1986 anchored top 5 defenses in almost all years until 1995. He didn't have great defensive teammates. Maxwell was good but not really shutdown defender and Jones almost never play. Thorpe was nice, but he wasn't Ho Grant either. Horry didn't play until 1993. Hakeem played with many rosters and his team was always among the best defenses in the league. KG couldn't and didn't do that in Minny, even with decent supporting cast. This team even with him on the floor wasn't in top 10 most of the times.

I think KG has better case offensively than defensively over Hakeem. The Dream is among very best defenders ever and I always KG is a bit overrated compared to other all-time great defenders (like Admiral, Hakeem, Duncan, Thurmond, Mutombo).