MJ picks Robinson over Hakeem in all time starting 5 (‘92 interview)

[LukaTheGOAT]

I know people always point to Hakeem's 93-95 stretch for why he is worthy of being top 10/why he is better than Robinson. However, I think Hakeem demonstrated even before his peak, why he should be ahead of Robinson.

If we look at the time of Hakeem's First Run to A Championship to 1991 (Hakeem was not in the 1992 playoffs), you can already see the profile of a special big.

In the PS:

Hakeem averaged an Inflation Adjusted 26.3 pts per 75 on rTS% of 5.7%.

Backpicks BPM-6.3

BPM-7.5

PER-26.7

WS/48-.229


Now if we look at Robinson during his 6-year peak (91-96 ) we can compare his PS performance to Hakeem's.

From 91-96,

Robinson averaged an Inflation Adjusted 24.5 pts per 75 on rTS% of 2.1%.

Backpicks BPM-5.1

BPM-6.5

PER-24

WS/48-.182

I know people like to default to RS automatically in their minds sometimes, because it is such a larger sample, and therefore is what sticks out, but I think this comparison encapsulates their careers. The very same metrics that unanimously say during the RS that Robinson is multiple tiers ahead of Hakeem, betray him, and go the exact opposite direction when we just look at their PS.

Keep in mind, I haven't included Hakeem's 93-95 years, which would make things more lopsided. My point is Hakeem, was an underrated PS performer even outside his peak years. If Hakeem came up short in 94 and 95, he likely would have gone down in history as a choker, but that really shouldn't be the case. Hakeem generally WAS a level up from Robinson throughout their careers.

Per Thinking Basketball's Backpicks OBPM, Hakeem has one of the largest increases in PS offensive performance ever for the prime span of a player's career...and Robinson has one of the largest declines. Once again, yes, 93-95 Hakeem was great, as this video shows, Hakeem CONSISTENTLY elevated his game in the PS, not just during a couple years in his career.

Watch on YouTube

The final thing, is that I believe my discussion so far, probably underrates Hakeem's defense. 89 and 90 Hakeem is very probably the best defender of the modern era. 93-95 Hakeem turned up his defense in the PS, but a strong argument could be made that his best defensive years were before that period.

I don't think it is very easy to capture the value of man defense, but Hakeem had a notable advantage over Robinson there. In an era, where offense was more likely to be ran through bigs in the post, I think Hakeem's defensive value is that much more than Robinson. In ‘90, Hakeem held All-Star centers to -2.1 points per 36 below their average and -6.4 rTS% below their average. That is ABSURD, and considering he has a good argument as a better rim protector due to quicker leaper, and better help defender due to better horizontal short-area quickness, I think that really moves things in Hakeem's advantage.

If you would like a bigger sample, per Backpicks from 88-94, "Opposing All-Star centers lost nearly 4 points per 36 and more than 5 points of efficiency against him." In comparison Robinson, "From 1990-96, he played 101 games against All-Star centers and held them 1.1 points below their per 36 scoring average and a whopping 5 percentage points below their true shooting efficiency. While those numbers fall just short of the all-time shutdown artists, they are still superb."

Overall, if Hakeem wasn't better than Robinson without the 93-95 stretch, I would be curious to hear; why do the very same metrics that say Robinson is well ahead of Hakeem during the RS, reverse, and have Hakeem clearly ahead of Robinson in the PS? What exactly are they missing? And if you argue that Robinson needed a better playmaker by his side, to truly take advantage of his talents in the PS, you should ask, are you crediting Hakeem enough for not being dependent on a playmaker to thrive against the toughest defense.