Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, trex_8063, Doctor MJ, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Quotatious

Which duo?

Total votes: 27

Posts: 20,295
And1: 5,821
Joined: Dec 10, 2005

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#21 » by G35 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:13 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:
G35 wrote:
HeartBreakKid wrote:
Kobe and David are both isolation players also, they stop being isolation players when they don't need to be.

Olajuwon needs someone to get him the ball when he is in the post - CP3 is good at doing that. Every time Hakeem gets good position he can expect an entry pass without risk of being a turnover. That helps fix up one of post offenses biggest weaknesses.

Not to mention they do not occupy the same place in the court.

Just because Hakeem is not a pick and roll monkey doesn't mean he cannot play with a pass first guy.

Kobe won five titles playing in the triangle.

DRob won two titles playing off of Tim Duncan.

They were isolation players because they had a lack of talent around them, what you would look at is how a player plays next to other great players.

Kobe with Shaq and Pau...how did Shaq and Pau perform?

DRob with Tim Duncan...how did Duncan perform?

That, imo is the testament of a players all around portability...how do you play next to other great players. You can always hypothesize a random pairing but with Kobe and DRob, you actually got to see it and win at the highest level.

CP3 paired with Blake Griffin, Deandre Jordan and a lot of side help i.e. Billups, Reddick, Jamal Crawford with the Clippers

Then he paired with James Harden and we saw how that turned out.

CP3 has had more opportunity to play with star players than a lot of other players, I like CP3 but imo, he did not cash out his chances. I know a lot of people want to point out that Houston almost beat the Warriors but imo, when CP3 lost to the Rockets in 2015 was a bigger loss.

The Clippers should have won, they blew a 15+ point lead, James Harden had a terrible game, and it was Josh Smith, Corey Brewer and Trevor Ariza that brought that Rockets team back. Harden was benched for that 4th quarter where the Clippers could not score.


YAll you're saying is that MVP players teamed with other MVP players and won titles and CP3 did not - therefore, CP3 cannot play with stars and Bryant/Robinson can.

Here is my main point - there is nothing about Robinson or Bryant's style that is more geared toward playing with superstars than most superstars.

If David Robinson had never played with Tim Duncan, 90% of people here would think that they could not play together - because people vastly oversimplify the skill sets of players.

Ditto with Kobe Bryant and Shaq, for what ever reason, people have this idea that Kobe is the ultimate pairing with a big because that's what happened in reality, when there is nothing about Bryant's game that would compliment a big more than any other superstar perimeter player. It's pretty simple, talent in the NBA usually trumps all - fit isn't as important and most superstars can adapt well.

In fact you just pointed out a major weakness in your argument. You cited CP3 and James Harden, people said they could not play together, they most certainly could. If losing to the most stacked team of all time in the 7 game series is your idea of them not being able to play together then that doesn't sound very hollistic, it just seems like you're looking at what teams have championships and what do not without any context.

Blake Griffin and CP3 didn't have many healthy seasons and series together, Blake Griffin wasn't a superstar, Blake Griffin is unique among bigs because of his ball handling ability which is totally different from Duncan/O'Neal/Gasol, The Clippers were a very good team but were never championship favorites or even widely considered for runner up or 3rd place.

The Clippers did not lose because CP3/Griffin could not play together anyway (they could, which is why their offense was elite), it is not the #1 reason, #2 reason or even #3 reason why LAC never won a title and there is plenty of evidence to support that. I could list many reasons why the Clippers didn't win a title and have plenty of hard evidence to support it, in fact some of the reasons are so obvious it would almost be like pointing out the sky is blue.

In other words - most people would not be able to realize that Kobe Bryant could play with O'Neal just fine or ESPECIALLY that Robinson and Duncan can play together if those things hadn't literally happened because most people do not look at finer details, they just look at end results or use confirmation bias. That is exactly why Robinson and Duncan can "fit like a glove", when they do not really compliment each other that much at all - they were good because they're just both incredibly good players and size is a hard thing to deal with. The Lakers championship teams were hard to beat because of their size, having a superstar on the perimeter just made it unfair.

None of those things have much to do with portability. Chris Paul played on one nuclear team and that was the 2018 Rockets, and they nearly beat a team that was way more talented than themselves. Are we really supposed to believe that CP3+Harden can create probably the best team to never win a championship but Chris Paul cannot play with Hakeem Olajuwon? Or vice versa, when Hakeem Olajuwon played in big 3s?

Diagnosing their skill sets and CP3 absolutely could play with Olajuwon, it seems bizarre that someone would think they cannot play together. It makes no sense really, Chris Paul has been involved in top tier offenses with players who have more overlap than him and Olajuwon. On top of this, the only reason why the Barkley/Pippen/Olajuwon rockets didn't win is simply because those players were not in their prime. Basketball is not rocket science, most great players can play with each other very well hence why teams pair superstars with other superstars.

Kobe Bryant and David Robinson are still isolation players. Pointing out that they are only isolation players when they do not have serious star power aside from them....proves my point. Their skill sets on the surface they just look like low portability players. If Chris Paul plays with Lebron James they have a ton of overlap on paper, and guess what - they'd probably win a couple times, and people would say their styles fit perfectly or something like that.

In fact we pretty much saw this happen, James and Wade's skill sets grossly over lap on paper and they still won rings together.

Reality matters more than opinion

Results matter more than opinion

Intentions, desires, beliefs, wants, shoulda/coulda/woulda can all be debated...reality and results cannot.

If the DRob/Duncan pairing failed (like so many other twin tower pairings have failed...most recently AD/Cousins) or if Kobe/Pau had failed like so many other All Star big men and an All Star perimeter pairings (CP3 and Blake Griffin, Embiid and Ben Simmons, Kevin Durant and Westbrook, Kevin Garnett and Billups, Nash and Amare, Nash and Dirk...the list can go on and on...) then you would have a point. If it was just Kobe and Shaq and the Kobe/Pau pairing did not produce a title, then you could say that Kobe did not work with bigs and only with a talent like Shaq.

But Kobe worked with Shaq...Pau...Bynum...all were All Stars and have their best seasons playing alongside Kobe.

If the argument is that success should not be measured only by championships, that is your standard, not everyone's and when it comes to history, very few are going to remember those pairings that do not win titles.

If you want to say results do not matter, we can keep arguing that Lebron does not work well with bigs, despite the fact that he just won a title with AD...with your logic we can say that last season was an outlier and Lebron historically has had issues playing next to bigs.

You can't give the benefit of the doubt (or cast doubt on one player) to one player and not judge other players the same way even when trying to give context. Giving context must be consistent...changing context to fit your desired narrative is disingenuous....
I'm so tired of the typical......
Posts: 2,655
And1: 2,474
Joined: Jun 30, 2019

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#22 » by limbo » Tue Feb 23, 2021 8:20 pm

No-more-rings wrote:Well you made no mention of efficiency in the post i replied to, so that's sort of a separate debate. The league average ts% is at the highest ever and has been on an upward trend since like 2017 or so, that's not because players are more talented necessarily it's likely due to how many more 3s are taken along with enhanced analytics for coaches to get players better shots, etc.

Yes... And you want your team to take more 3s and the guy who is going to make sure your team maximizes their ability to get good open shots from that range is going to be Paul, not Kobe, who was calling his number more often than not.

Also, to be clear we're not just talking about some random guy who scores a ton of points, Kobe's one of the best volume scorers in history, maybe top 5 and certainly top 10.

And with Paul, we are talking about a guy who averaged 22 ppg on better efficiency than Kobe (when Kobe was in his peak, seasons 2008 and 2009), while being a GOAT level playmaker, playing with less talent than Kobe...

So we're not just talking about a random guy...

It's your preference, but again that doesn't really prove to me that volume scorers aren't that important anymore, and Kobe actually was efficient contrary to narrative. He wasn't as efficient as KD or Curry or whoever but that doesn't mean he was less impactful.

Funny you should mention KD, because he is a better volume scorer than Kobe... And despite that, you can find that most CP3 prime years rank ahead of Durant's (unless you're looking at heavily box-score influenced stuff like BSPN RPM, which changes formula every couple of months...and even in those it's fairly close).

Fair to point out that Durant was also super-charged by Westbrook in this scenario... Not that he would struggle without him, but Durant is the type of scorer that fits extremely well with a high level playmaker that can get pressure off of him and he has no problem shooting off the catch, while someone like Kobe was more about dribbling and finding his spots. But these are minor quibbles.

I get where you're coming from, but there's not actually that many playmakers in the current league that was on Paul's level. There's been more and more of a shift towards shoot first for point guards, and it's sort of what the league is about today. If you're to win championships with Paul as your best player he would either need to score more or have someone else score more than him. It's always been that way.

Paul didn't win championships because he (or his 2nd best player) broke down due to injuries. Aside from that, his teams usually weren't good defensively (outside maybe the 2018 Rockets...), nor were they particularly deep... After you got pass the 4th/5th player on the roster, it was mostly humongous garbage that continually lost leads for his teams...

There's no point in arguing this because it's the spectrum is large... If your teammates are unable to hit absolutely anything from the floor, which does happen, then yes, Kobe's extra ''5 ppgz'' will probably come in handy (unless he's shooting 40% from the field score those extra points... there's always a trade-off to consider). Conversely, if your team is doing well and hitting shots, then giving the ball to Kobe so he can go for 33 points on 53%TS doesn't make that much sense... And usually, your team has a higher propensity to hit shots if they get involved early and often and found rhythms...
Posts: 678
And1: 284
Joined: Sep 20, 2015

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#23 » by dygaction » Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:09 pm

henshao wrote:
dygaction wrote:The difference between Robinson and Hakeem is small. Kobe had shown the ability to win championships with Gasol level players.

On the other hand Hakeem has shown the ability to win championships with Kenny Smith level players

Or we can compare Kobe and Hakeem, both had one MVP, won two rings and two FMVPs as the alpha. Kobe had three more rings as the second best player on his team. They are often ranked as 10/11 on GOAT list interchangeably.
Robinson to CP3, DR is a significantly better defender, rebounder, regular season MVP, proven robin with two rings. Paul is a better play maker and that's about it.
Posts: 651
And1: 212
Joined: Oct 29, 2003

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#24 » by jdzimme3 » Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:55 pm

Both duos are tremendous and win multiple titles but I go Kobe/robinson. Most of the reasoning has already been mentioned but I will say that Paul is easily the worst of the four and I think Kobe’s alpha mentality would make him a perfect complement to robinson
Im Your Father
Posts: 371
And1: 149
Joined: Jul 17, 2014

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#25 » by Im Your Father » Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:10 am

sansterre wrote:To my mind Kobe and Robinson are an extremely good fit. D-Rob is basically a way better version of Pau Gasol, a monster rebounding, good passing, decent midrange game, rim-running big who works off-ball and carries a massive load on the defense. I think this would work really well.

The second is really hard to imagine. Hakeem's ball-stopping ISO-post game doesn't necessarily compliment an outstanding point guard. If Hakeem optimized his game around having Paul then I think they'd be a stronger duo, but it requires some imagination to see. Where Kobe and D-Rob we've seen already work, with a worse version of Robinson.

I don't really see the Robinson/Pau comparison, but I agree that Kobe and Admiral fit is excellent fit in terms of skill set and honestly I would think in terms of complimentary personalities as well. I think Kobe (maybe also Wade if he was healthier) is the perfect type of player to cover for Robinson's playoff offensive shortcomings.

Agreed that Paul and Dream could possibly be better, but it seems like a less natural fit on the court and possibly even personality wise with young Hakeem.

ETA: Agree with the sentiment in this thread that both duos win multiple titles assuming reasonable health.
Pro Prospect
Posts: 821
And1: 572
Joined: Dec 13, 2012

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#26 » by wutevahung » Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:38 am

I think both duos have good fit and the talent level is about the same.

I pick Kobe and Robinson because Chris Paul gets injured way to often.
User avatar
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 6,022
And1: 514
Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Location: Pulling at the loose threads of arguments since 2006

Re: Kobe Bryant/David Robinson or Chris Paul/Hakeem Olajuwon 

Post#27 » by rrravenred » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:00 am

Not sure how much I like the fit between D-Rob and Kobe. Think they both need driving lanes and space in the midrange for full offensive effectiveness, also think Kobe CAN have issues deferring to the hot hand (which Robinson is definitely capable of). Defensively, they're extremely solid, and Kobe can be aggressive on Man D with someone of Robinson's calibre backing him up on the interior. Provided Kobe doesn't tunnel-vision, think Robinson could thrive offball, as Kobe was technically a very solid passer, and Robinson is a top-tier finisher.

Hakeem and Paul are the classic inside-out combo, and I think have far more potential offensive synergy. Paul does less on the defensive end than Prime-ish Kobe (ymmv as to where that is) though is less of a diverse scoring threat, making the offense a little more predictable. Paul WOULD get more out of the surrounding cast than Kobe, which would allow for Hakeem having a lower load on the offensive end, requiring fewer dream shakes and more gimme layups.

Both are a very solid championship core, but think I prefer Hakeem / Paul as the slightly surer thing.
ElGee wrote:You, my friend, have shoved those words into my mouth, which is OK because I'm hungry.

Got fallacy?

Return to Player Comparisons