Was Hakeem Olajuwon's post-up game a little overrated?

[f4p]

After watching playoffs since 1980 the answer isn't so simple because of Hakeems personal tree. Heck ì didn't find Drexler as beneficial as could have been but that's neither here nor there. Rewind it back I'm very much in favour of Horry getting more of the pill over Elle/Maxwell/Smith dude was the best passer but also the best shooter and because shooting was of the utmost importance it got divy upped. But now today there isn't a problem

Also it's harder to gauge Jokic vs the rest. Because Hakeems outstanding (frankly GOAT) post man defence, Ewing, DROB and Shaq himself (who showed excellent results routinely). That's a gauntlet of post defenders that matchup perfectly. It's obviously going be harder in 1vs 1 stakes because he cannot just exert physical pressure.

But if answering by this. Jokic from half court in, Shaq in close, Mchale in close Hakeem in between elbow and in. But once again whoever has the ball the majority of time is going to play a huge factor here.

But I'll say it again it isn't as clear with Hakeem due to circumstance. Under Rudy's system he came on leaps and bounds from beginning to his prime. The scoring was already there but the logjam of a system was arse until he took over.

Frankly if you want a hot take it's a stark contrast to Duncan. Because he was so fundementally perfect he didn't go any further up imo. I'll always say if anything older (closer to a person's prime age) is definitely overrated offensively.

At his apex Hakeem was an absolutely awesome. But there are other awesome guys who had physical tools that made the game easier. Shaq's weight. Kareems height and long arms.

I'm not following the Duncan comments or the age thing? I must be reading it wrong or something. What did you mean there?

Oh for Duncan because he started of pretty much at an ATG in his second year he really didn't get better, some post seasons years in more towards his prime years wasn't as great as I expected. Now everyone has has down years/runs but I find Shaq, Hakeem specifically having a more noticeable improvement incline.

Hakeems second season he made the finals by knocking off Showtime. Their regular season and postseason stats (PER, WS48, BPM, TS%) are also very similar, with each leading a few categories and both improving in the playoffs. 2nd year Hakeem is absolutely winning a title with that spurs team and 2nd year Duncan is absolutely not beating the '86 Celtics with that rockets team.

[DCasey91]

At his apex Hakeem was an absolutely awesome. But there are other awesome guys who had physical tools that made the game easier. Shaq's weight. Kareems height and long arms.

I'm not following the Duncan comments or the age thing? I must be reading it wrong or something. What did you mean there?

Oh for Duncan because he started of pretty much at an ATG in his second year he really didn't get better, some post seasons years in more towards his prime years wasn't as great as I expected. Now everyone has has down years/runs but I find Shaq, Hakeem specifically having a more noticeable improvement incline.

Hakeems second season he made the finals by knocking off Showtime. Their regular season and postseason stats (PER, WS48, BPM, TS%) are also very similar, with each leading a few categories and both improving in the playoffs. 2nd year Hakeem is absolutely winning a title with that spurs team and 2nd year Duncan is absolutely not beating the '86 Celtics with that rockets team.

I can't be certain of that as Duncan did rise.... alot in in the 99 playoffs. Of course Hakeem was amazing but systematically its obviously going to different with Hakeem then with Duncan. I don't like putting player X for player Y and saying for absolute certainty not with against an all time team anyway at least. But for 99 in particular yes there is every chance of course it's just unfortunate that the correct things happened after the fact then what it should have been for him.

[SportsGuru08]

Guess what else the selective stats say?

Dwight Howard is also better than Hakeem as a post player, the stats back it up and it isn't close. And a whole other number of bigs as well. I wonder why OP didn't include them. What's the agenda here?

Same with Rudy Gobert.

[FrodoBaggins]

You cited Kevin McHale as a better post player for crying out loud.

Which is a perfectly reasonable stance, given the data and game footage.

So this isn't even about some mythology like suggested. Then you cited Jokic. Just a pointing it out that you are free to discuss it all day long. Just like I am free to think Curry is better than Kobe, Duncan, Shaq based on the criteria and data that I present. It doesn't mean the consensus will ever agree or that it will catch traction.

This seems a tad immature. No player is beyond reproach.

He literally told you that you are free to discuss it. So he’s not saying Hakeem is beyond reproach he’s saying you can discuss it but he has his opinions and doesn’t agree with yours. How is that immature? seems mature and that you’re the one getting upset here

Then address the content & arguments presented. Responding with shock and indignation at the mere thought of someone critiquing Hakeem's post-up game? That's immature. And not productive/of value at all.

[ball_takes23]

Did he have perhaps the greatest peak relative to his average? That would be a fun explorations (obviously we ignore like Kobe and KG's first 2 years and we always ignore those last years when guys are over or pushing 40 as that's noise).

Did he? He averaged 23.5 ppg on 52.6% FG and 56.0% TS in his second season. And he averaged 24+ ppg twice (including 24.8) prior to hitting his peak... which was 26.1, 27.3, 27.8 and 26.9 ppg.

That separation isn't anything special compared to the other guys, even if we constrain ourselves to post players after 79.

Hakeem's peak was notable because he was still the best defensive player in the world at the time he began to peak offensively. its very rare for a players offensive and defensive peaks to coincide.

[FrodoBaggins]

Guess what else the selective stats say?

Dwight Howard is also better than Hakeem as a post player, the stats back it up and it isn't close. And a whole other number of bigs as well. I wonder why OP didn't include them. What's the agenda here?

Same with Rudy Gobert.

I don't think anyone would ever confuse Rudy with being one of the greatest post-up players. Which was obviously the qualifier of the listed players. But you already knew that, because you're being willfully ignorant.

[SportsGuru08]

Guess what else the selective stats say?

Dwight Howard is also better than Hakeem as a post player, the stats back it up and it isn't close. And a whole other number of bigs as well. I wonder why OP didn't include them. What's the agenda here?

Same with Rudy Gobert.

I don't think anyone would ever confuse Rudy with being one of the greatest post-up players. Which was obviously the qualifier of the listed players. But you already knew that, because you're being willfully ignorant.

Don't be obtuse. You were going off percentages, which means you must rank Gobert and Dwight ahead of Hakeem by your criteria.

[FrodoBaggins]

I've always thought it's a major waste if you don't have a talented facilitator to set up your great big man, or at least a scoring wing to draw defensive attention away from them.

In their athletic primes, Olajuwon, Robinson, and Garnett were pretty much on their own in terms of leading the offense. And they had to anchor the defense.

Karl Malone having John Stockton and Shaq having Penny and Kobe had to be a huge advantage. Duncan getting Manu and TP was a big deal.

I'm a big McHale fan. But imagine if Hakeem had played with Larry Bird. He'd get the advantage of Bird's passing and the attention he draws as a scorer. DJ wasn't bad as a facilitator, either.

Hakeem played with great players (Sampson, Drexler, Barkley, Pippen), and he benefited from futuristic four-out spacing, which was further enhanced with the shortening of the three-point line. He had more space than Kareem, Dantley, McHale, and Barkley had to work with under Rudy T, for sure. He just wasn't as adept at working off-ball for advantageous position, and his shot selection wasn't as developed.

[penggemar]

Hakeem's pivot is considered perfect because it was the foundation of his unstoppable Dream Shake. At 250 pounds, he could pivot with incredible power while maintaining perfect balance, spinning one way then immediately reversing direction while keeping his shooting position. What made it special was his handball background before basketball - handball is all about pivoting and faking defenders, so that constant reverse pivoting became second nature to him. His footwork was so impeccable that even double teams couldn't stop him from finding clean shots, and he never got outscored by the three best centers of his era (Ewing, Robinson, Shaq) in 17 total matchups. The Dream Shake worked because his pivot technique was absolutely flawless - it wasn't just a basketball move, it was an art form.

[FrodoBaggins]

Hakeem's pivot is considered perfect because it was the foundation of his unstoppable Dream Shake. At 250 pounds, he could pivot with incredible power while maintaining perfect balance, spinning one way then immediately reversing direction while keeping his shooting position. What made it special was his handball background before basketball - handball is all about pivoting and faking defenders, so that constant reverse pivoting became second nature to him. His footwork was so impeccable that even double teams couldn't stop him from finding clean shots, and he never got outscored by the three best centers of his era (Ewing, Robinson, Shaq) in 17 total matchups. The Dream Shake worked because his pivot technique was absolutely flawless - it wasn't just a basketball move, it was an art form.

Aesthetics are all well and good, but what matters is efficacy, and efficiency plays a large part in that. A maneuver should first and foremost be judged by whether or not the ball goes in the basket, I think we can all agree. There's a clear discrepancy between Olajuwon's perceived undisputed best post-up status in some people's minds and his results compared to the listed post-up greats - the box score correlates: 2PT%, TS%, 2PT+, TS+; the team offense results. It's more than enough evidence to raise serious doubt about that perception.

I've seen some try to make the comparison with Curry and shooting, and I couldn't disagree more. Steph is the all-time FT% leader and has an unmatched argument for three-point shooting when volume, efficiency, and shot quality/context are considered. Hakeem doesn't have anything like that going for him regarding his post-up game. He's got a better argument for defense, to be honest.

I think the issue is that people equate best post moves (largely off aesthetics) with being the best post-up player. But as I said at the beginning of this post, valuing aesthetics over efficacy is stupid. How good is a flashy move if it goes in less than another? I'll take The Sky Hook over The Dream Shake, thanks.

[Onlytimewilltel]

I've always thought it's a major waste if you don't have a talented facilitator to set up your great big man, or at least a scoring wing to draw defensive attention away from them.

In their athletic primes, Olajuwon, Robinson, and Garnett were pretty much on their own in terms of leading the offense. And they had to anchor the defense.

Karl Malone having John Stockton and Shaq having Penny and Kobe had to be a huge advantage. Duncan getting Manu and TP was a big deal.

I'm a big McHale fan. But imagine if Hakeem had played with Larry Bird. He'd get the advantage of Bird's passing and the attention he draws as a scorer. DJ wasn't bad as a facilitator, either.

Hakeem played with great players (Sampson, Drexler, Barkley, Pippen), and he benefited from futuristic four-out spacing, which was further enhanced with the shortening of the three-point line. He had more space than Kareem, Dantley, McHale, and Barkley had to work with under Rudy T, for sure. He just wasn't as adept at working off-ball for advantageous position, and his shot selection wasn't as developed.

[dhsilv2]

That's just when talking stats. The reality is Hakeem's play making was a huge step up...all be it from brain dead Moses Malone level to quality. Still it was a huge leap. It wasn't addressing scoring alone in that comment.

But it wasn't, really. Rudy T made that happen by simplifying the offense. He didn't improve much at reading an offense, he improved at producing assists and was somewhat better at trusting his teammates instead of taking bad shots. That's not really a tectonic shift in playmaking ability.

As the president of "Hakeem was never a great playmaker", I can agree that this was equally on Rudy as it was Hakeem. But, yes I do fully believe it was a tectonic shift to get Hakeem to even look to pass, let alone actually learning to do so before he'd dribbled himself into trouble. I think this just showcases once again the insane power going from truly BAD at something to being functional is. That can be a greater leap than going from good to all time great. And in this case I think it clearly was.

[dhsilv2]

After watching playoffs since 1980 the answer isn't so simple because of Hakeems personal tree. Heck ì didn't find Drexler as beneficial as could have been but that's neither here nor there. Rewind it back I'm very much in favour of Horry getting more of the pill over Elle/Maxwell/Smith dude was the best passer but also the best shooter and because shooting was of the utmost importance it got divy upped. But now today there isn't a problem

Also it's harder to gauge Jokic vs the rest. Because Hakeems outstanding (frankly GOAT) post man defence, Ewing, DROB and Shaq himself (who showed excellent results routinely). That's a gauntlet of post defenders that matchup perfectly. It's obviously going be harder in 1vs 1 stakes because he cannot just exert physical pressure.

But if answering by this. Jokic from half court in, Shaq in close, Mchale in close Hakeem in between elbow and in. But once again whoever has the ball the majority of time is going to play a huge factor here.

But I'll say it again it isn't as clear with Hakeem due to circumstance. Under Rudy's system he came on leaps and bounds from beginning to his prime. The scoring was already there but the logjam of a system was arse until he took over.

Frankly if you want a hot take it's a stark contrast to Duncan. Because he was so fundementally perfect he didn't go any further up imo. I'll always say if anything older (closer to a person's prime age) is definitely overrated offensively.

At his apex Hakeem was an absolutely awesome. But there are other awesome guys who had physical tools that made the game easier. Shaq's weight. Kareems height and long arms.

I'm not following the Duncan comments or the age thing? I must be reading it wrong or something. What did you mean there?

Oh for Duncan because he started of pretty much at an ATG in his second year he really didn't get better, some post seasons years in more towards his prime years wasn't as great as I expected. Now everyone has has down years/runs but I find Shaq, Hakeem specifically having a more noticeable improvement incline.

Duncan significantly improved as a passer from when he came into the league till his peak around 2002-2003. And then from there he added off ball stuff, but I think the foot issue kinda kept us from really seeing what a true apex Duncan in say 2007 could have looked like.

[dhsilv2]

Did he have perhaps the greatest peak relative to his average? That would be a fun explorations (obviously we ignore like Kobe and KG's first 2 years and we always ignore those last years when guys are over or pushing 40 as that's noise).

Did he? He averaged 23.5 ppg on 52.6% FG and 56.0% TS in his second season. And he averaged 24+ ppg twice (including 24.8) prior to hitting his peak... which was 26.1, 27.3, 27.8 and 26.9 ppg.

That separation isn't anything special compared to the other guys, even if we constrain ourselves to post players after 79.

Hakeem's peak was notable because he was still the best defensive player in the world at the time he began to peak offensively. its very rare for a players offensive and defensive peaks to coincide.

Hakeem was significantly better defensively in the late 80's vs his apex 93-95 and he'd dropped off defensively noticeably by the end of that 3 year run.

[chuck_wagon44]

tell the OP to stop hating.

[willywazza]

WOW.

What a blasphemous post.

Mods, do your thing.

[tsherkin]

WOW.

What a blasphemous post.

Mods, do your thing.

There is nothing worthy of moderator attention in this post.

[tsherkin]

I've always thought it's a major waste if you don't have a talented facilitator to set up your great big man, or at least a scoring wing to draw defensive attention away from them.

In their athletic primes, Olajuwon, Robinson, and Garnett were pretty much on their own in terms of leading the offense. And they had to anchor the defense.

Karl Malone having John Stockton and Shaq having Penny and Kobe had to be a huge advantage. Duncan getting Manu and TP was a big deal.

I'm a big McHale fan. But imagine if Hakeem had played with Larry Bird. He'd get the advantage of Bird's passing and the attention he draws as a scorer. DJ wasn't bad as a facilitator, either.

100%.

The power of perimeter initiation is considerable, it just wasn't well-understood at the time. And of course, getting that level of player isn't as easy as just wanting to, after all. But it's absolutely true that perimeter guys have more dynamism to their offense, which opens up other action for the bigs.

[OdomFan]

People rate things based on how they feel about it, and in the case of Hakeem's post play, he was consistent with it, very versatile with it and the results speak for itself. If you ask me he was the overall most skilled Center in the NBA of the 1990s. Great shooter, great at using the post moves to create space between himself and the top defenders to get buckets.

You not sharing an opinion or valuing something as highly as others shouldn't make that thing overrated.

[tsherkin]

People rate things based on how they feel about it, and in the case of Hakeem's post play, he was consistent with it, very versatile with it and the results speak for itself. If you ask me he was the overall most skilled Center in the NBA of the 1990s. Great shooter, great at using the post moves to create space between himself and the top defenders to get buckets.

You not sharing an opinion or valuing something as highly as others shouldn't make that thing overrated.

You not agreeing with the OP also doesn't mean he's wrong. When there's a group of people who believe that a given thing is perhaps spoken of more highly than is appropriate (especially relative to decades of other players who have come since), the discussion is at least worthy to have.