Better All Around Player: Tim Duncan vs Hakeem Olajuwon

[dhsilv2]

There are a lot of Hakeem fans everywhere.

The Rockets weren't fast paced either and besides advanced stats account for pace.

Hakeem gets the edge because he was better offensively and defensively. He was simply more naturally gifted at both ends of the floor. It is really that simple. When Olajuwan retired he finished top 10 in scoring, blocks, rebounds and steals - the only player to retire top 10 in those 4 categories.

He is still the all-time leader in blocks by a wide margin.

Not only is he the only center in the top 10 in career steals, he's the only center in the top 20 in steals.

Hakeem is still the only player in history to win MVP, Defensive Player of the Year & Finals MVP in the same season.

Olajuwan recorded more triple doubles than Duncan. More quadruple doubles. He is the only player in history to record 200 blocks and 200 steals in a season. Duncan's career high in steals is 70.

Duncan's career high in blocks is 237. Hakeem's is 376.

We can see clearly now why Olajuwan had 2 DPOY awards to Duncan's 0.

Olajuwan was also a more natural scorer.

Passing wise they were very similar. Remember that Olajuwan was a good passing center too. His career high in assists is higher than Duncan's, in any case (12 to 11).

So the guy was a beast on a level that Tim Duncan never knew.

Look, players are going to go to Hakeem to learn the post from now until he can't move anymore. Nobody is going to pay Tim Duncan to teach them his rigid moves.

You never saw hakeem play did you?

Maybe he watched Hakeem in his best years only. Let' be honest, Hakeem wasn't a great passer by any means when he was younger, but he definitely worked a lot that aspect of his game. And from 93 on he was actually a good passer.

He had guards working extremely hard to make sure they were in direct line on sight with Hakeem's head at all times. The whole system was about making hakeems' passing and court vision and just general awareness of his teammates easier for him. he still wasn't able to setup the offense, he wasn't a strong screener, and while I'm sure someone can find some videos of it, his passing to cutters or finding his 4's on the weak side were all still weak.

Hakeem would truly struggle today when teams can run zones and his head down attack in iso play could be stopped before he made his moves.

Now just raw talent....the guy was insanely talented, but he had huge holes in this game and he more than made up for with his strengths.

[humanrefutation]

It's the Dream.

[thekdog34]

You never saw hakeem play did you?

Maybe he watched Hakeem in his best years only. Let' be honest, Hakeem wasn't a great passer by any means when he was younger, but he definitely worked a lot that aspect of his game. And from 93 on he was actually a good passer.

He had guards working extremely hard to make sure they were in direct line on sight with Hakeem's head at all times. The whole system was about making hakeems' passing and court vision and just general awareness of his teammates easier for him. he still wasn't able to setup the offense, he wasn't a strong screener, and while I'm sure someone can find some videos of it, his passing to cutters or finding his 4's on the weak side were all still weak.

Hakeem would truly struggle today when teams can run zones and his head down attack in iso play could be stopped before he made his moves.

Now just raw talent....the guy was insanely talented, but he had huge holes in this game and he more than made up for with his strengths.

The whole system was about giving Hakeem space and having him create 3pt looks for teammates because he had that kind of gravity. They were one of the best 3pt shooting teams during the championship years and one of the first teams to use a stretch 4 (horry).

Yes passing was his weakest trait, but I think you are way overstating the case. He was not a good passer from the high post or perimeter. He was a very good passer from the post.

When he was in very different systems (with Ralph Sampson in the mid 80s are adjusted to incorporate Barkley) he was still dominant and the team won a lot.

I think of him sort of like Durant. Willing passer and can generally make the right pass, but no one will say they have amazing court vision or show highlights of their passing. He wasn't as good as Duncan or Garnett in passing.

That said he almost always generated good chemistry with teammates and created open looks for them. Watch some of the highlights, he could easily recognize and break double teams.Just't put him in the high post.

[dhsilv2]

Maybe he watched Hakeem in his best years only. Let' be honest, Hakeem wasn't a great passer by any means when he was younger, but he definitely worked a lot that aspect of his game. And from 93 on he was actually a good passer.

He had guards working extremely hard to make sure they were in direct line on sight with Hakeem's head at all times. The whole system was about making hakeems' passing and court vision and just general awareness of his teammates easier for him. he still wasn't able to setup the offense, he wasn't a strong screener, and while I'm sure someone can find some videos of it, his passing to cutters or finding his 4's on the weak side were all still weak.

Hakeem would truly struggle today when teams can run zones and his head down attack in iso play could be stopped before he made his moves.

Now just raw talent....the guy was insanely talented, but he had huge holes in this game and he more than made up for with his strengths.

The whole system was about giving Hakeem space and having him create 3pt looks for teammates because he had that kind of gravity. They were one of the best 3pt shooting teams during the championship years and one of the first teams to use a stretch 4 (horry).

Yes passing was his weakest trait, but I think you are way overstating the case. He was not a good passer from the high post or perimeter. He was a very good passer from the post.

When he was in very different systems (with Ralph Sampson in the mid 80s are adjusted to incorporate Barkley) he was still dominant and the team won a lot.

I think of him sort of like Durant. Willing passer and can generally make the right pass, but no one will say they have amazing court vision or show highlights of their passing. He wasn't as good as Duncan or Garnett in passing.

That said he almost always generated good chemistry with teammates and created open looks for them. Watch some of the highlights, he could easily recognize and break double teams.Just't put him in the high post.

Hakeem late in his career became a willing passer, but his teammates did a LOT to make the "right pass" painfully obvious for him. He still often over dribbled and kept the ball too long. He was never good in any sense of the word as a passer. He was at best passable. He did however create so much gravity that guys like Kenny Smith who could shoot lights out would be left wide open on his side of the court. Anyone ever could have made those types of passes.

Durant isn't a guy I think highly of as a passer, but he's leaps and bounds better than hakeem.

If hakeem has been a good passer, he might have a case for GOAT level discussion. Even more so if he understood off ball movement and spacing when he wasn't the guy with the ball.

[thekdog34]

He had guards working extremely hard to make sure they were in direct line on sight with Hakeem's head at all times. The whole system was about making hakeems' passing and court vision and just general awareness of his teammates easier for him. he still wasn't able to setup the offense, he wasn't a strong screener, and while I'm sure someone can find some videos of it, his passing to cutters or finding his 4's on the weak side were all still weak.

Hakeem would truly struggle today when teams can run zones and his head down attack in iso play could be stopped before he made his moves.

Now just raw talent....the guy was insanely talented, but he had huge holes in this game and he more than made up for with his strengths.

The whole system was about giving Hakeem space and having him create 3pt looks for teammates because he had that kind of gravity. They were one of the best 3pt shooting teams during the championship years and one of the first teams to use a stretch 4 (horry).

Yes passing was his weakest trait, but I think you are way overstating the case. He was not a good passer from the high post or perimeter. He was a very good passer from the post.

When he was in very different systems (with Ralph Sampson in the mid 80s are adjusted to incorporate Barkley) he was still dominant and the team won a lot.

I think of him sort of like Durant. Willing passer and can generally make the right pass, but no one will say they have amazing court vision or show highlights of their passing. He wasn't as good as Duncan or Garnett in passing.

That said he almost always generated good chemistry with teammates and created open looks for them. Watch some of the highlights, he could easily recognize and break double teams.Just't put him in the high post.

Hakeem late in his career became a willing passer, but his teammates did a LOT to make the "right pass" painfully obvious for him. He still often over dribbled and kept the ball too long. He was never good in any sense of the word as a passer. He was at best passable. He did however create so much gravity that guys like Kenny Smith who could shoot lights out would be left wide open on his side of the court. Anyone ever could have made those types of passes.

Durant isn't a guy I think highly of as a passer, but he's leaps and bounds better than hakeem.

If hakeem has been a good passer, he might have a case for GOAT level discussion. Even more so if he understood off ball movement and spacing when he wasn't the guy with the ball.

I disagree with this pretty strongly (except for the gravity part).

Hakeem rarely "over dribbled." How could he? Almost all his possessions were in the post! Please show me a vid of him over dribbling.

And no he did not hold the ball very long. He almost always made an immediate move or an immediate pass depending on what the defense was doing. I'd like to see a vid of him holding the ball too long.

Barkley on the other hand, held the ball and pounded the air out of it. Completely different. The contrast was pretty stark when he went to Houston.

The passing weakness is simply not having great vision.

[dhsilv2]

The whole system was about giving Hakeem space and having him create 3pt looks for teammates because he had that kind of gravity. They were one of the best 3pt shooting teams during the championship years and one of the first teams to use a stretch 4 (horry).

Yes passing was his weakest trait, but I think you are way overstating the case. He was not a good passer from the high post or perimeter. He was a very good passer from the post.

When he was in very different systems (with Ralph Sampson in the mid 80s are adjusted to incorporate Barkley) he was still dominant and the team won a lot.

I think of him sort of like Durant. Willing passer and can generally make the right pass, but no one will say they have amazing court vision or show highlights of their passing. He wasn't as good as Duncan or Garnett in passing.

That said he almost always generated good chemistry with teammates and created open looks for them. Watch some of the highlights, he could easily recognize and break double teams.Just't put him in the high post.

Hakeem late in his career became a willing passer, but his teammates did a LOT to make the "right pass" painfully obvious for him. He still often over dribbled and kept the ball too long. He was never good in any sense of the word as a passer. He was at best passable. He did however create so much gravity that guys like Kenny Smith who could shoot lights out would be left wide open on his side of the court. Anyone ever could have made those types of passes.

Durant isn't a guy I think highly of as a passer, but he's leaps and bounds better than hakeem.

If hakeem has been a good passer, he might have a case for GOAT level discussion. Even more so if he understood off ball movement and spacing when he wasn't the guy with the ball.

I disagree with this pretty strongly (except for the gravity part).

Hakeem rarely "over dribbled." How could he? Almost all his possessions were in the post! Please show me a vid of him over dribbling.

And no he did not hold the ball very long. He almost always made an immediate move or an immediate pass depending on what the defense was doing. I'd like to see a vid of him holding the ball too long.

Barkley on the other hand, held the ball and pounded the air out of it. Completely different. The contrast was pretty stark when he went to Houston.

The passing weakness is simply not having great vision.

Poor vision is the driving issue of his passing, yes. Not sure he was very good at knowing where people were moving either.

Ok nobody did what chuck did, lol.

[Woodsanity]

People are going to rag on me for saying this but I don't think Hakeem had a better peak than 03 Duncan. At best about equal and yes I know Hakeem absolutely wrecked D Rob in the playoffs which was very impressive.

The way I see it:

Offense: Hakeem very slightly, Hakeem had a flashier repertoire and was a better scorer but the gap was not as big as people would think. Duncan was less flashy but almost as effective as a scorer and a better passer and less TO prone.

Defense: Hakeem by a small margin. Both were elite defensive anchors, I can see an argument for Timmy D here even.

Intangibles: Duncan seems to be considered the better leader and never had a bad reputation, this of course is hard to measure.

Longevity: Duncan clearly, he managed to be effective even at an old age. No flashy numbers later but he was still a high impact player.

Accolades: Duncan. Its not fair to use this since Duncan had more favorable circumstances but this always plays a role in ranking players.

Overall: Duncan by a small margin.

[lilroddyb]

I think they are really similar

I think Duncan had a bit higher impact overall but I think Hakeem is more talented but didn't have the right system, teammates or right coaches most of his career imo. If I were starting a franchise today I would take my chances and pick Hakeem

[JordansBulls]

Too close to call but overall would say Hakeem for the fact of the DPOY.

[Gus Fring]

The people who are saying Hakeem easily don't know what they're talking about. I think people are confusing flashiness for versatility. People love the guady stats Hakeem put up but impact wise he was no better than Duncan. People use scoring versatility as a reason Hakeem is better even though per possession he and Duncan both average basically the same amount of points on the same efficiency. In what way could Hakeem score that Duncan couldn't score anyway? Both were elite face up and back down post players, both were athletic and could run the floor, both amazing finshers, both could hit the mid range jumper, both fantastic passing out of the post. I mean it's not like Hakeem was stepping out to the 3 point line, or taking pull-up fadeaways like a guard. I don't see how Hakeem was the more versatile scorer, they were very similar scorers. Impact wise Duncan was just as dominant a player, people just remember the dream shake better. Same thing on defense, people love the blocks and steals but there are no impact stats showing Hakeem was any better than Duncan, in fact as far as anchoring defenses, once you account for longevity Duncan was way better. He's also one of 2 players with over 100 Defensive win shares and is the leader in playoff blocks, so he's got some gaudy stats too.

Anyway, I think Duncan's higher on the all time list. As far as better all around player, the only argument for Hakeem is maybe his absolute peak was better because he still had his athleticism while Duncan lost some of his after his injury. But I don't think there is a gap at all in 3-5 year prime and longevity wise Duncan is better any way you slice it.

Also, Hakeem never played Jordan so idk why people are saying Jordan was getting in the way of him winning titles. At least Duncan beat Shaq and LeBron.

[Gus Fring]

Too close to call but overall would say Hakeem for the fact of the DPOY.

Duncan was clearly a DPOY level defender for many years of his career. Just cause he didn't win the award doesn't mean he couldn't or didn't deserve it some years.

[JordansBulls]

Too close to call but overall would say Hakeem for the fact of the DPOY.

Duncan was clearly a DPOY level defender for many years of his career. Just cause he didn't win the award doesn't mean he couldn't or didn't deserve it some years.

Yeah but he didn't. Hakeem did while being a dPOY level defender for many years of his career.

[Fico92]

Too close to call but overall would say Hakeem for the fact of the DPOY.

Duncan was clearly a DPOY level defender for many years of his career. Just cause he didn't win the award doesn't mean he couldn't or didn't deserve it some years.

Yeah but he didn't. Hakeem did while being a dPOY level defender for many years of his career.

I think we can all agree that MVP award --> DPOY award, no? Two MVP awards, 3 Finals MVP --> 2 DPOY, 1 MVP, 2 Finals MVPs...

[dhsilv2]

Too close to call but overall would say Hakeem for the fact of the DPOY.

Duncan was clearly a DPOY level defender for many years of his career. Just cause he didn't win the award doesn't mean he couldn't or didn't deserve it some years.

Yeah but he didn't. Hakeem did while being a dPOY level defender for many years of his career.

Gasol won DPOY and somehow made second team all defense. The award should mean something but the voters have no idea who plays good or great defense in the league.

[thekdog34]

Hakeem averaged 5 more points per game in the playoffs with higher efficiency. Some of that was role, but I'm not sure Duncan could have increased his scoring and efficiency

[JordansBulls]

Duncan was clearly a DPOY level defender for many years of his career. Just cause he didn't win the award doesn't mean he couldn't or didn't deserve it some years.

Yeah but he didn't. Hakeem did while being a dPOY level defender for many years of his career.

Gasol won DPOY and somehow made second team all defense. The award should mean something but the voters have no idea who plays good or great defense in the league.

Yeah but we are talking about Hakeem and Duncan two good defenders, so when comparing them the DPOY matters.

[andrewww]

Hakeem averaged 5 more points per game in the playoffs with higher efficiency. Some of that was role, but I'm not sure Duncan could have increased his scoring and efficiency

Duncan was asked to increase his volume at times in his playoff career and the results indicate he wasn't able to do so without sacrificing efficiency.

[dhsilv2]

Yeah but he didn't. Hakeem did while being a dPOY level defender for many years of his career.

Gasol won DPOY and somehow made second team all defense. The award should mean something but the voters have no idea who plays good or great defense in the league.

Yeah but we are talking about Hakeem and Duncan two good defenders, so when comparing them the DPOY matters.

Peak to peak I think hakeem was a hair better defensively, but DPOY award is just a bad argument here. Duncan often lost votes because of Bowen which is really silly but those were the times.

[dhsilv2]

Hakeem averaged 5 more points per game in the playoffs with higher efficiency. Some of that was role, but I'm not sure Duncan could have increased his scoring and efficiency

Duncan was asked to increase his volume at times in his playoff career and the results indicate he wasn't able to do so without sacrificing efficiency.

03?

[magicmerl]

Going through the stats, they’re both pretty similar players w/ PER, longevity, etc. Yeah TD has 3 more titles but no MJ to battle. I’d have to say they’re 50/50. But aesthetically speaking, Hakeem’s footwork was so damn smooth, and his blocks were straight-up filthy

How many times did MJ beat Hakeem?