micahclay wrote:Not to mention
1. Championship teams more often are better defensively than offensively
2. KG was one of the best offensive players of his generation too, RAPM or not
3. Dominance > versatility, but dominant versatility = ???
4. He is a case study in winner's bias
5. He, along with Duncan, was a case study in portability. He maxed out offensively and defensively in a variety of roles and a variety of team strengths
6. Defenders at peak can affect the game as much as peak offensive players
7. Elite defenders are more scarce than elite offensive players
Not gonna lie man, replace KG's name with Hakeem's and it'd be the same thing.
1. 94 Rockets were 2nd best defensive team in the RS, only beaten by NY's ridiculous -8.8; they came out on top in the Finals when Hakeem shut Ewing down. I can post ElGee's post again if you'd like, but the Rockets were consistently getting better on D with Hakeem in and bad with him out; over Hakeem's 3 year peak the Rockets played 57 playoff games and came out to 7.6 SRS, -2.9 D and +5.5 O - all against talented offenses such as Phoenix (14 games), Utah (10 games), Seattle, and Orlando. Finally, Hakeem's Rockets were almost always an elite defense in his prime. Top 4 for 7 of 8 years.
2. Again, much has been made about the non-boxscore stuff KG brings to the table which isn't wrong, but Hakeem's scoring advantage is enormous and his scoring methods were some of the most resilient of all time. KG couldn't replicate what Hakeem did for the 94/95 Rockets. 31 PPG on 56% TS, that's a good 8-9 PPG above what KG was generally capable of. And overall, it's not as if Hakeem is a slouch on non-box score stuff. Great passer at his best, spaces the floor thanks to his great mid-range jumper (in the 95 Finals he forces Shaq to come away from the rim and Cassell/Clyde take huge advantage)...a lot of the stuff said about KG applies to Hakeem too. KG would be hard-pressed to reach that +5.5 mark as a playoff offensive anchor.
3. Hakeem is the most versatile center ever. Need a guy to score 25-30 PPG, shut down the paint, switch onto perimeter guys, defend PNRs, anchor offenses without crazy talent, score from basically anywhere within 18 feet, destroy HOF competition at the same position? Call Hakeem's number.
4. Hakeem is basically the 80s KG in terms of assessing winner's bias. We had people in this thread with doubts about Hakeem's 87-92 Rockets just like some people had doubts about KG's prime outside like 02-04. There's no reason to believe Hakeem's performance in 1986 was a fluke, so he should be getting the benefit of the doubt for the next few years. Look at the way his team fell apart after 1986, and compare that to how KG's FO shafted him in the early 2000s. Seems similar right? Both teams lost all their talent for nothing.
5. Hakeem started in a Twin Towers setup (again possible since Hakeem was quick enough to play either spot), moved to the sole anchor when Sampson fell apart, played for mediocre teams/coaches, then came right back into contender status with a new system designed completely around him. Again, sounds like KG's narrative apart from the early success - Boston's defensive system was designed around KG's strengths and they dominated, just like Hakeem's Rockets innovated with the 4 out/1 in system and it led to 2 titles.
6/7. Hakeem was DPOY twice (93/94) and probably should've won a third in 1990 over Rodman. His teams were consistently dominant on defense despite not being stacked with defensive talent. Tim Duncan/Wallace were KG's contemporaries whereas D-Rob/Mutombo were Hakeem's. Seems pretty even.
?
