what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives

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

70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 19,172
And1: 14,515
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#21 » by 70sFan » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:53 pm

penbeast0 wrote:I don't think that's unreasonable. In a normal system that revolves around a PG and/or post up center, Draymond isn't the strong playmaker he has become in the Warriors system. Without the playmaking, Draymond isn't close to the offensive player that Marion is even in the pre-Nash Suns (though still a better defender and that's not a slight to Marion who was a great defender).

A DPOY defender who could pass the ball so well is valuable in any system.
Owly
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,795
And1: 2,032
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#22 » by Owly » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:02 pm

70sFan wrote:Shaquille O'Neal got the dunk 90% of the time when he wasn't doubled in the post. People don't realize how few dunks Shaq really got from the post. Usually, he took a right handed hook shots or short fadeaways/one handed push shots. He wasn't more efficient from the block than someone like Kareem or Hakeem and efficiency is not what made him GOAT-level post player.

This kind of depends.

Because I don't think anyone thinks he got 90%. And I can't speak to how he got them.

But he was at least, at the start, a huge outlier volume dunker. IIRC around his arrival the league leaders (or 2nd to him once he arrived) were circa 150s a season, around or slightly under 2 a game and he doubled it.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 24,510
And1: 6,112
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#23 » by penbeast0 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:18 pm

70sFan wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:I don't think that's unreasonable. In a normal system that revolves around a PG and/or post up center, Draymond isn't the strong playmaker he has become in the Warriors system. Without the playmaking, Draymond isn't close to the offensive player that Marion is even in the pre-Nash Suns (though still a better defender and that's not a slight to Marion who was a great defender).

A DPOY defender who could pass the ball so well is valuable in any system.


As is a very good defender who can defend 3 positions, is a great rebounder, finisher, and energy guy like Marion. That isn't a slight to Draymond, I think a lot of Marion. But good passer who doesn't have the ball in his hands much and doesn't shoot well, isn't going to be much of an offensive bonus whereas in Golden State, they take full advantage of Green's skillset in a way many other teams wouldn't.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
ty 4191
Senior
Posts: 595
And1: 267
Joined: Feb 18, 2021
         

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#24 » by ty 4191 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:19 pm

The most overrated and overhyped narrative of all time, on this Forum, at Insidehoops.com, and the entire internet, writ large is:

That either Michael Jordan OR Lebron James is the greatest player that ever lived, and that there is a 0% chance that anyone else was the GOAT.
G35
RealGM
Posts: 20,926
And1: 6,450
Joined: Dec 10, 2005
     

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#25 » by G35 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:38 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
70sFan wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:I don't think that's unreasonable. In a normal system that revolves around a PG and/or post up center, Draymond isn't the strong playmaker he has become in the Warriors system. Without the playmaking, Draymond isn't close to the offensive player that Marion is even in the pre-Nash Suns (though still a better defender and that's not a slight to Marion who was a great defender).

A DPOY defender who could pass the ball so well is valuable in any system.


As is a very good defender who can defend 3 positions, is a great rebounder, finisher, and energy guy like Marion. That isn't a slight to Draymond, I think a lot of Marion. But good passer who doesn't have the ball in his hands much and doesn't shoot well, isn't going to be much of an offensive bonus whereas in Golden State, they take full advantage of Green's skillset in a way many other teams wouldn't.



This is pretty much my take on Draymond's role with the Warriors and I think Marion is very underrated in that he held those Sun's defenses together, while being one of the best energy/hustle players I've ever seen.

Draymond actually played with some high level defensive talent:
Andrew Bogut
Andre Iguodola
Klay Thompson
Shaun Livingston
Kevin Durant
Steve Kerr

Compare that to what Marion had around him:
Amare Stoudemire
Steve Nash
Mike D'Antoni

Amare is, imo, a worse defender than Barkley or say Dirk...he provided no resistance. The only capable defenders on those Suns were Marion and Raja Bell.

I know that Draymond is a phenomenal passer and he is legit great on defense, but I think if swap Marion for Draymond, I don't the Warriors lose that much on defense and gain a whole lot more on offense. Draymond is the one guy you can play off of on the Warriors. He had one year where he shot pretty well, but he has gotten progressively worse shooting.

They are both different kinds of defenders, Marion I think is better man to man, while Draymond is kind of like a shorter, stockier KG where he can read the offense and disrupt what they are doing. But to play that type of defense you need capable defenders at all the positions...which is what Draymond had when the Warriors were at their best.

Jmo.....
I'm so tired of the typical......
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 19,172
And1: 14,515
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#26 » by 70sFan » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:09 pm

Owly wrote:
70sFan wrote:Shaquille O'Neal got the dunk 90% of the time when he wasn't doubled in the post. People don't realize how few dunks Shaq really got from the post. Usually, he took a right handed hook shots or short fadeaways/one handed push shots. He wasn't more efficient from the block than someone like Kareem or Hakeem and efficiency is not what made him GOAT-level post player.

This kind of depends.

Because I don't think anyone thinks he got 90%. And I can't speak to how he got them.

But he was at least, at the start, a huge outlier volume dunker. IIRC around his arrival the league leaders (or 2nd to him once he arrived) were circa 150s a season, around or slightly under 2 a game and he doubled it.

The massive amount of Shaq dunks came from offensive rebounds, inside finishes or transition buckets. So far, I tracked 30 Shaq games from 1999/00 season and 67% of Shaq's post shots are hooks, fadeaways, one handed shots and finger rolls (295 out of 440 post shots I tracked so far). That's two thirds of his post shots and I included lob finishes when Shaq was fronted ect. Majority of the shots I didn't included were not dunks either.

I can't say quickly how many of Shaq's post shots were dunks, but I'd guess it's less than 20%. As I said, over 67% of his post shots came away from the basket. Yet some people believe that Shaq dunked on defenders all the time. I've heard that Shaq would average 40 ppg on 70% today because of "lack of centers". The Shaq myth is massive, because people only remember the highlight plays.
Cavsfansince84
General Manager
Posts: 9,425
And1: 6,880
Joined: Jun 13, 2017
   

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#27 » by Cavsfansince84 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:29 pm

70sFan wrote:The massive amount of Shaq dunks came from offensive rebounds, inside finishes or transition buckets. So far, I tracked 30 Shaq games from 1999/00 season and 67% of Shaq's post shots are hooks, fadeaways, one handed shots and finger rolls (295 out of 440 post shots I tracked so far). That's two thirds of his post shots and I included lob finishes when Shaq was fronted ect. Majority of the shots I didn't included were not dunks either.

I can't say quickly how many of Shaq's post shots were dunks, but I'd guess it's less than 20%. As I said, over 67% of his post shots came away from the basket. Yet some people believe that Shaq dunked on defenders all the time. I've heard that Shaq would average 40 ppg on 70% today because of "lack of centers". The Shaq myth is massive, because people only remember the highlight plays.


Ya, I sort of doubt that a lot of the people who hype up Shaq now or in the last 5 years saw that much of prime Shaq because even though there are plays where he'd just physically overwhelm guys to score or grab an off reb its not like he was doing that every time down the court. He'd be a force no doubt but there's also the question of how much room refs would give him to operate in nowadays. Back then they let him get away with a lot. Partly because he took a lot and partly because he was the biggest star in the league from 99-05 along with Kobe and AI. So the league liked seeing him manhandle guys down low.
User avatar
oaktownwarriors87
RealGM
Posts: 12,253
And1: 3,813
Joined: Mar 01, 2005
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#28 » by oaktownwarriors87 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:57 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:
70sFan wrote:
Texas Chuck wrote:Tim Duncan was a center

Duncan certainly was a center, come on :D


Let's take a look, shall we?

Played with Admiral through 03. Duncan is the PF.
Then 3 years of Rasho. Duncan is clearly the PF.
Then Oberto. Who is shorter than Duncan, but plays a center's game. Something we also see along the way with Malik Rose and later DeJuan Blair. And of course Splitter was only a center.

Did Duncan play center? Of course he did. But so did his peers KG and Dirk yet we never label them a center because they aren't the GOAT PF we need to label something else so our favorite guy can be the GOAT PF. When its all nonsense because no matter what position you call Duncan he was better than both of them as a basketball player.

But Tim Duncan spent the bulk of his prime playing next to a center. So calling him a PF needs to stop being an issue for people.


Tim Duncan was a center. The majority of his minutes, regular season and playoffs, were at center. 4 of 5 of his championships came with him played 50% + of his minutes at center.

Tim Duncan was a center that happened to play next to another great center at the beginning of his career.

LeBron has played more PF than Duncan.LeBron is more of a PF than Duncan.
PockyCandy wrote:Is Ball's shot any more ugly than Curry's? Curry just seems to launch it towards the basket like an 8 year old.
McBubbles
Senior
Posts: 536
And1: 480
Joined: Jun 16, 2020

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#29 » by McBubbles » Tue Nov 23, 2021 11:02 pm

Every narrative about LeBron.

Steph Curry having so much gravity that "even if he doesn't play well on the box score he can't actually have bad games", as if he's the only player that has gravity and no one else warps defences without touching the ball ._. I'm not going to be obtuse and pretend like his isn't unique but the jerking off of it was pretty intense for awhile.

Kevin Garnett's scoring troubles.

MJ's rustiness after coming back from his retirement.

Kobe's "inefficiency".
falcolombardi
Starter
Posts: 2,032
And1: 1,364
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#30 » by falcolombardi » Tue Nov 23, 2021 11:36 pm

McBubbles wrote:Every narrative about LeBron.

Steph Curry having so much gravity that "even if he doesn't play well on the box score he can't actually have bad games", as if he's the only player that has gravity and no one else warps defences without touching the ball ._. I'm not going to be obtuse and pretend like his isn't unique but the jerking off of it was pretty intense for awhile.

Kevin Garnett's scoring troubles.

MJ's rustiness after coming back from his retirement.

Kobe's "inefficiency".


that seems unlikely since some of them are directly opposite of each other negative and positive

which ones do you mean specifically?
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 24,510
And1: 6,112
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#31 » by penbeast0 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 11:36 pm

McBubbles wrote:Every narrative about LeBron.

Steph Curry having so much gravity that "even if he doesn't play well on the box score he can't actually have bad games", as if he's the only player that has gravity and no one else warps defences without touching the ball ._. I'm not going to be obtuse and pretend like his isn't unique but the jerking off of it was pretty intense for awhile.

Kevin Garnett's scoring troubles.

MJ's rustiness after coming back from his retirement.

Kobe's "inefficiency".


I'm assuming you mean MJ's 1st retirement rather than his second one because on the Wiz, he genuinely sucked. Massive usage, not the talent to support it anymore.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
McBubbles
Senior
Posts: 536
And1: 480
Joined: Jun 16, 2020

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#32 » by McBubbles » Wed Nov 24, 2021 6:18 am

falcolombardi wrote:
McBubbles wrote:Every narrative about LeBron.

Steph Curry having so much gravity that "even if he doesn't play well on the box score he can't actually have bad games", as if he's the only player that has gravity and no one else warps defences without touching the ball ._. I'm not going to be obtuse and pretend like his isn't unique but the jerking off of it was pretty intense for awhile.

Kevin Garnett's scoring troubles.

MJ's rustiness after coming back from his retirement.

Kobe's "inefficiency".


that seems unlikely since some of them are directly opposite of each other negative and positive

which ones do you mean specifically?


Genuinely, every narrative about LeBron :lol: positive or negative.

He can take any team to the Finals regardless of conference, he can guard 1-5, he could have won MVP every year.

He limits his team's offensive ceilings with LeBron ball, he needs stacked teams to win, he stopped playing defence in Miami.

Etc.
falcolombardi
Starter
Posts: 2,032
And1: 1,364
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#33 » by falcolombardi » Wed Nov 24, 2021 7:02 am

McBubbles wrote:
falcolombardi wrote:
McBubbles wrote:Every narrative about LeBron.

Steph Curry having so much gravity that "even if he doesn't play well on the box score he can't actually have bad games", as if he's the only player that has gravity and no one else warps defences without touching the ball ._. I'm not going to be obtuse and pretend like his isn't unique but the jerking off of it was pretty intense for awhile.

Kevin Garnett's scoring troubles.

MJ's rustiness after coming back from his retirement.

Kobe's "inefficiency".


that seems unlikely since some of them are directly opposite of each other negative and positive

which ones do you mean specifically?


Genuinely, every narrative about LeBron :lol: positive or negative.

He can take any team to the Finals regardless of conference, he can guard 1-5, he could have won MVP every year.

He limits his team's offensive ceilings with LeBron ball, he needs stacked teams to win, he stopped playing defence in Miami.

Etc.


funnoly enough almost all of those have kernels of truth hidden among the insane hyperbole lol

he can not take any team to the finals in any conference but he can take a ton of moderately talented rosters into at least borderline contender (like the cavs first stint or 2018 version)

he cannot guard 1vs5 for long stretches (let alone full games) but is one of few players who can end up paired with both guards and not being absolutely fuc*ed

he was good enough he may have won a few more mvps with less coasting (which may have had consequences in post season so it is just a hypothetical)

he doesnt limit offensive ceilings overall but is true that his fit in certain rosters/team construction is not óptimal compared to more off ball players

he doesnt need stacked teams to contend but definitely needs talented teams (like everyone else) and needs really talented/stacked teams to beat other stacked/great teams (like everyone else). as always winning a ring is as much about the rivals talent as your own team talent one year contender is another year canon fodder so depending om how strong thw top of the league is, the more talent you need to beat them

he didnt stop playing defense in miami but his defense became less consistent and his defensive effort started waning and coming back depending on the season (also age probably contributing)

all those have some truth.... if you strip the Extreme overreaction ans hyperbole
McBubbles
Senior
Posts: 536
And1: 480
Joined: Jun 16, 2020

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#34 » by McBubbles » Wed Nov 24, 2021 8:31 am

Just thought of another one.

Hakeem's Magic Touch™ I.E, every single player that has a post game having 100% of the credit of said post game's development attributed to their 2 summer workouts with Hakeem lol.
ceiling raiser
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,879
And1: 3,264
Joined: Jan 27, 2013

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#35 » by ceiling raiser » Wed Nov 24, 2021 8:36 am

Super hot take - Peak Shaq as a phenomenon. As someone who lived through the era, I don't remember thinking he was much better before or much better after. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that he was roughly as impactful from 93-99 and 02-05 as he was from 00-01.

Another one - The efficacy of Kareem's skyhook and Kareem's offensive impact as a whole. I increasingly believe he is clearly one level below the best offensive big men all-time (Shaq and Dirk, tbh I can see Jokic here as well), and might be below several others as well (I might take Hakeem's offensive game).

Lastly - Steals are underrated in terms of impacting the game. I think blocks rightly have been viewed as overrated statistics, but steals have an incredible offensive impact as transition possessions are much more effective, and are underrated in terms of defensive contributions. For every successful steal, there are multiple more deflections (I actually would be interested in a study on this). As many know, I am one of the people who values box scores the least on this board, but outside of scoring/turnover data (which has some value if viewed in context), steals are probably the most important individual statistic (rebounds matter as well, but more so on a team level, so regression studies matter here more; assists and blocks I completely ignore).
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 19,172
And1: 14,515
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#36 » by 70sFan » Wed Nov 24, 2021 9:12 am

ceiling raiser wrote:Another one - The efficacy of Kareem's skyhook and Kareem's offensive impact as a whole. I increasingly believe he is clearly one level below the best offensive big men all-time (Shaq and Dirk, tbh I can see Jokic here as well), and might be below several others as well (I might take Hakeem's offensive game)

What do you think - how efficient Kareem's skyhook was in your opinion? I have the data, but I'd like to see your guess at first :wink:

Why do you think Hakeem has a case over Kareem as an offensive player? I just finished tracking prime Kareem games and I did the same with 1993-94 Hakeem a few months ago. I managed to track 35 1993-94 Hakeem games and 33 1971-79 Kareem games (some were incomplete unfortunately). My observations:

- Kareem was a bit more efficient isolation scorer on higher volume,
- Kareem was MUCH better passer, this can't be discussed,
- Kareem drew more defensive attention than Hakeem,
- Kareem had to deal with soft doubles without much spacing around him (lack of illegal defense rules in the 1970s),
- Hakeem was easier to front, which forced him to catch the ball further away from the basket,
- Hakeem was far more reliant on the left block, he didn't play much on the right side,
- Kareem was a better screener, though Hakeem's midrange game made him more dangerous in P&P situations,
- Kareem was more active without the ball and his positioning without the ball was more beneficial to his teammates,
- Kareem was an amazing outlet passer,
- Hakeem was much better shooter.

I don't see any reason to take Hakeem over Jabbar offensively. Seriously, I'd love to hear a compelling argument, but after watching them both under microscope I don't think anyone would be able to convince me. If anyone wants to get more specific data, feel free to ask.

I don't think Shaq was a better offensive player than Jabbar either, but at least his off-ball game, offensive rebounding and ability to draw fouls make it interesting debate. With Hakeem - not so much. Olajuwon has very few minor advantages over Kareem, that's not enough to overcome massive advantage Kareem has in other aspects.
ceiling raiser
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,879
And1: 3,264
Joined: Jan 27, 2013

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#37 » by ceiling raiser » Wed Nov 24, 2021 9:27 am

70sFan wrote:What do you think - how efficient Kareem's skyhook was in your opinion? I have the data, but I'd like to see your guess at first :wink:

My guess is he converted at a .660 TS%. I would be interested in the data if you have it (and appreciate your data/research/footage immensely). If it is appreciably higher I would have to reevaluate my belief.

Why do you think Hakeem has a case over Kareem as an offensive player?

It's almost entirely a matter of how well I think both would translate into the modern game. Hakeem had a power game, deep two shooting range (that could extend to the three), and a finesse guard-esque scoring skillset, which I think would work tremendously today.
- Kareem was a bit more efficient isolation scorer on higher volume,

Does this advantage continue or disappear when adjusted for the playoffs? I also believe the talent differential of supporting casts makes a difference (though obviously with Rudy T Hakeem had better spacing than Kareem ever did)
- Kareem was MUCH better passer, this can't be discussed,

I agree Kareem was better, and Hakeem is the worst passer of the top 10ish all-time greats.
- Kareem drew more defensive attention than Hakeem,

This is hard to tell. The lane was more clogged in the 70s than it was in the late 80s/early 90s, but Hakeem was the sole focus of opposing defenses for some years
- Kareem had to deal with soft doubles without much spacing around him (lack of illegal defense rules in the 1970s),

I don't disagree, however I will note that very few teams exploited the illegal defense rules by placing non-shooters beyond the arc, at least through the early 90s. Hakeem also faced a lot of hard doubles since he was the sole option defensively.
- Hakeem was easier to front, which forced him to catch the ball further away from the basket,

I don't disagree, but Hakeem had superior shooting range.
- Hakeem was far more reliant on the left block, he didn't play much on the right side,

I don't think this is inherently a weakness since he could play inside-out pretty consistently, but any data on this would be interesting.
- Kareem was a better screener, though Hakeem's midrange game made him more dangerous in P&P situations,

I don't disagree, though I wonder how different they were in screening ability.
- Kareem was more active without the ball and his positioning without the ball was more beneficial to his teammates,

I think this is negated by the fact that Hakeem was a superior spot-up shooter, especially from range.
- Kareem was an amazing outlet passer,

Sure, but how many possessions a game does this impact?
- Hakeem was much better shooter.

Agreed.

I don't think Shaq was a better offensive player than Jabbar either, but at least his off-ball game, offensive rebounding and ability to draw fouls make it interesting debate. With Hakeem - not so much. Olajuwon has very few minor advantages over Kareem, that's not enough to overcome massive advantage Kareem has in other aspects.

I actually think offensive rebounding is an overrated aspect of today's game given the prevalence of three-point shooting. As such, I think all-time offensive rebounders such as Shaq, Moses, Wilt would be less impactful today (and again, I judge players based on how they would be in the present league).
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
-Luke-
Junior
Posts: 255
And1: 449
Joined: Feb 21, 2021
Contact:
   

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#38 » by -Luke- » Wed Nov 24, 2021 10:37 am

Losing in the NBA Finals is somehow worse for a players legacy than never reaching the Finals at all.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 19,172
And1: 14,515
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#39 » by 70sFan » Wed Nov 24, 2021 3:04 pm

ceiling raiser wrote:My guess is he converted at a .660 TS%. I would be interested in the data if you have it (and appreciate your data/research/footage immensely). If it is appreciably higher I would have to reevaluate my belief.

I think you overestimate how efficient you can be in isolation :D

My numbers gives 1974-79 Kareem a 56.5 FG% on 9.4 skyhooks per game. With the addition of fouls drawn, it gives us around 58.5 TS%.

Mind you that this is on massive volume and it's a tough shot. No other player reached that level of efficiency from shots taken away from the post on even close volume.

It's almost entirely a matter of how well I think both would translate into the modern game. Hakeem had a power game, deep two shooting range (that could extend to the three), and a finesse guard-esque scoring skillset, which I think would work tremendously today.

Is there any reason to believe that Kareem's game wouldn't translate? I mean, he was a very good ball-hander for his size in an era with restricted ball-handling rules. Kareem also had a power game - he was much better at establishing deep position than Hakeem.

The only concern with Kareem is his long range shooting, but he had the form and they were basically identical FT shooters.


Does this advantage continue or disappear when adjusted for the playoffs?

It doesn't, most of my tracked games are from playoffs anyway.

I also believe the talent differential of supporting casts makes a difference (though obviously with Rudy T Hakeem had better spacing than Kareem ever did)

Kareem had worse talent around him in 1977 and 1978 than Hakeem in 1993 or 1994 - these are the seasons which I have the most games from.

This is hard to tell. The lane was more clogged in the 70s than it was in the late 80s/early 90s, but Hakeem was the sole focus of opposing defenses for some years

I mean, it's always hard to adjust for eras. Kareem faced considerably more soft and hard doubles than Hakeem though, that's not up to debate.

I don't disagree, however I will note that very few teams exploited the illegal defense rules by placing non-shooters beyond the arc, at least through the early 90s. Hakeem also faced a lot of hard doubles since he was the sole option defensively.

This idea of exploiting illegal defense already eixsted in the 1994 and it made Hakeem's life far easier than earlier in his career (of course along with improved spacing).

I don't disagree, but Hakeem had superior shooting range.

It's true, but you don't want Hakeem to take contested midrange jumpers all the time. He's a good shooter, but he's not Dirk from there.

I don't think this is inherently a weakness since he could play inside-out pretty consistently, but any data on this would be interesting.

Sure :)

Hakeem took 73.5% of his post shots from the left block.

Kareem took 59.5% of his post shots from the left block.

I don't disagree, though I wonder how different they were in screening ability.

I can't quantify it unfortunately, it's just my observation.

I think this is negated by the fact that Hakeem was a superior spot-up shooter, especially from range.

Don't think it's that easy, Hakeem ate a lot of space inside due to his positioning.


Sure, but how many possessions a game does this impact?

Not a lot, around 2-3 per game at most. In comparisons like these though, everything should be taken into account.


I actually think offensive rebounding is an overrated aspect of today's game given the prevalence of three-point shooting. As such, I think all-time offensive rebounders such as Shaq, Moses, Wilt would be less impactful today (and again, I judge players based on how they would be in the present league).

If you don't feel strongly about offensive rebounding, then how you can have Shaq ahead of Kareem offensively?
ceiling raiser
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,879
And1: 3,264
Joined: Jan 27, 2013

Re: what do you think are some overblown/exxagerated common narratives 

Post#40 » by ceiling raiser » Wed Nov 24, 2021 3:59 pm

70sFan wrote:I think you overestimate how efficient you can be in isolation :D

My numbers gives 1974-79 Kareem a 56.5 FG% on 9.4 skyhooks per game. With the addition of fouls drawn, it gives us around 58.5 TS%.

Thank you for this data. Does this include a lot of longer range skyhooks? I'm not going to penalize Kareem for shooting from ranges at which jumpers are not incredibly effective. Also, Kareem's lefty hook was less effective, so if you have that breakdown I would be interested.

Based on the figures you provided, it sounds like right-handed skyhooks in and around the post might be a similar efficiency to my estimate.

Is there any reason to believe that Kareem's game wouldn't translate? I mean, he was a very good ball-hander for his size in an era with restricted ball-handling rules. Kareem also had a power game - he was much better at establishing deep position than Hakeem.

I don't disbelieve Kareem would translate. My point is that while within their eras, Hakeem is clearly the inferior scorer, I think Hakeem would translate that much better since this era is tailor made for players like him.

Kareem had worse talent around him in 1977 and 1978 than Hakeem in 1993 or 1994 - these are the seasons which I have the most games from.

Thank you for the context. Your point is taken.

I mean, it's always hard to adjust for eras. Kareem faced considerably more soft and hard doubles than Hakeem though, that's not up to debate.

Soft doubles I don' t disagree. Do you have any data on how often they were hard doubled for context?

This idea of exploiting illegal defense already eixsted in the 1994 and it made Hakeem's life far easier than earlier in his career (of course along with improved spacing).

I think we are arguing two different things. Illegal defense was definitely used, but the Rockets didn't use it with nonshooters. Since our sample is 93 and 94 this point is irrelevant though, I meant more late 80s/early 90s when there wasn't spacing (very few teams exploited illegal defense with nonshooters).

It's true, but you don't want Hakeem to take contested midrange jumpers all the time. He's a good shooter, but he's not Dirk from there.

I wouldn't say he's Dirk, but I think he is comparable to if not superior to other bigs with range. Garnett, Malone seem to be peers, I think?

If you don't feel strongly about offensive rebounding, then how you can have Shaq ahead of Kareem offensively?

(1) Shaq has superior gravity, since posting with position he is probably the closest player to a sure thing scoring. Hakeem and Kareem were doubled, but I can't think of a single starter who would deny him position in the present NBA (I can see Embiid, Nurkic doing a serviceable job).
(2) I believe Shaq and Kareem are similar in terms of passing ability. Both are superior to Hakeem in that regard, obviously.

For the record, despite favoring Shaq/Dirk and possibly Hakeem over him offensively, I think Kareem defensively would be even better in the modern NBA. He had the perfect body and athleticism early in his career, and could conceivably be better than a guy like Garnett on that end.
Now that's the difference between first and last place.

Return to Player Comparisons