Why is Duncan universally consider better than Hakeem?

[soxfan2003]

Peak Hakeem better than peak Duncan but I do see them in the same tier. Duncan aged better and had better longevity. Take your pick with one is more important to you but I do think Duncan was the less selfish teammate.

[90sAllDecade]

Here's a team support mental exercise.

Think about guys like Duncan, Shaq and even Jordan's team support.

A Mt. Rushmore coach: Pops, Phil Jackson, Pat Riley

Usually a second superstar in thier prime or some form of big three in thier prime, not just an older star player.
Manu, Parker, Young Kawhi, Old Robinson, Bowen on defense etc.

Now imagine Hakeem playing with Drexler his whole career with say Larry Brown and a third steady player like Thorpe and shooters. Maybe 04 Pistons with Hakeem's offense instead of Ben Wallace vs Duncan.

Or even switch out Ewing and Starks for Hakeem and Drexler with Riley's 90s Knicks.

If that team met Duncan and others in Hakeem's prime or peak I think it would be replay of other HOF bigs he met in the playoffs personally.

I just don't think Duncan at his best could stop him, as peak Robinson was a better defensive player imo.

[r0drig0lac]

longevity, created one of the best coaches the NBA has ever seen in Pops, successful in all stages of his career.

this


Duncan in his first 8 playoffs (in 2000 he was injured): 4x championships, 3x FMVPs, 2x MVPS, and the "system" was basically to deliver the ball to him on the low post, a top 5-6 in the history.

[_qubik]

Well, I went to check advanced stats and that kind of **** I usually like comparing. Both guys are pretty equal in almost everything. Both guys are very good in advanced stats, in cumulative stats. I pretty much think the only difference is the number of champioships.

I didnt watch Hakeem, but his highlights are dope, I truly think he would dominate todays game doing the exactly same ****. And Duncan is the all time most different star (?) the guy always playing for the team, doing the right things. He was the team, a stabilizing force.

Nice OP, I think its the greatest player comparison I read on GB.

[LarsV8]

He isn't?

[DoctorX]

What Duncan did for the Spurs during the early '00s from '01-'04 was on the same level of what Lebron did for the Cavs during his first stint. During that time period Duncan had 0 all-stars and still managed to win 2 mvps, 1 title, and the Spurs averaged 58 wins per a season. Some will argue Parker and Manu were there during that time period but keep in mind they were just good role players but were not all-star caliber players yet. They didn't become all-star caliber until the '04-'05 season. You have to give Duncan credit for elevating the Spurs level of play and having the maturity to believe in Manu and Parker when they were not proven.

Hakeem on the other hand when he went through his period of not playing with an all-star players melted as a leader. He was very immature and was all about himself and didn't trust his teammates. After '86 the Rockets had no success in the playoffs until the 92-93 season. Hakeem didn't start to mature until the 92-93 season and by then he was 30. Duncan on the other hand was very mature from the beginning.

[GrindCityHustle]

Tony Parker always summed it up best

“That was always our secret weapon, to me: You see this all-world player, this All-NBA First Team, MVP of the Finals, about to be MVP of the league guy, and here he is in practice, willing to be coached like he’s fighting for a spot on the team. It was unreal. And if you think that’s too passive for a star player to be? Well, then you’re not thinking it through on Tim’s level. Because Tim knew the truth: which was that to let himself be coached in this way, you know … that’s true charisma, and that’s true swagger. It’s like he was challenging everyone else in our gym: The best player in the entire league is willing to put his ego aside for the good of this team — are you?”

[Pennebaker]

Timmy had a longer stretch of dominance and won during the primes of Shaq, Kobe and LeBron.

Hakeem could only win when some dude went on vacation.

Maybe that's the answer.

[Lalouie]

if tim was universally considered a center instead of pf, HE WOULD NOT be considered a better basketball player than hakeem. i think there's a lot of questions regarding tim as a 5, or is he a 4,,,,or wtf is he? tim is higher ranked as a 4. for the longest longest time i always considered tim a center and therefore not even in my top20. but then i kept seeing him listed as a pf and top12-15, and so as a player in general, ahead of hakeem.

and when it comes to opinions, "recency" means everything. it's fresher and newer than 10yrs previous. out of sight out of mind and all that.

sas has been influential in many ways other than just what goes on between the lines. hof coach, influential construction of an org. sas has influenced this league in many ways. by comparison, hou was a blip on the screen. the bulls dominated the decade,,,sas was consistently top notch thru two decades

[Lalouie]

,,

[Antinomy]

Also, Hakeem is underrated as a passer, mostly because of the era he played in (i.e., illegal defense rules), but also because he didn't pass well when he was younger. I have to go for a walk now, but when I come back, I'll find a long thread from a couple years ago that contains my (extensive) defense of Hakeem as a passer.

It was much, much easier to pass out of the post in Hakeem’s time.

Rules changed have made defending the post easier now. In the 1980s/1990s with illegal defense rules, defenses HAD to trap hard. Illegal defense rules (mostly) prohibited players from lurking in no-man's land to deny entry passes, swipe at the ball, or clutter those inside-out passing lanes Olajuwon exploited. Help defenders can do all of that today making both posting up AND passing out of the post easier.

That’s what I was gonna say.

Having to see thru & pass over zone-like defenses is much more difficult than the other team being forced to play single coverage or send a telegraphed double team.

[prophet_of_rage]

Hakeem was low maintenance?

It's a good debate, but really you can't go wrong with either players. Low maintenance, GOAT tier big men are hard to come by.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

In 98 probably. I think 94-95 really cloud how selfish Akeem Olajuwon was. I was reading the post defending his passing in the 'hard double' team era as the explanation why he didn't pass but it is flawed because post players like Bird, Barkley, McHale, Magic, Daugherty, Robinson, Jordan were all far more frequent passers out of double teams which always mean someone is open. The post was used to draw the hard double team.

Olajuwon was originally very selfish and his best passing led to his winning.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[brutalitops]

I honestly couldnt split them.

[Winsome Gerbil]

Both players has an argument but I don't know where you got universally better from for either player. Heck Duncan didn't even get talked about much throughout the 00s because a lot of fans around the US labeled him boring.

Many also say Hakeems rings only came from Jordan retiring but they atleast had respect for his style of play liking his foot work and stuff as far as I know. So it can go either way really. I'd personally say they're in the same tier.

I always had them back to back in the rankings, and was unwilling to split them given their similarities and my belief that Duncan got a bit of an artificial boost from being labeled a "power forward" to start his career because he played alongside Admiral. Everything about him was a C though, including his stats, and if he had been called a C I think the parallels between he and Hakeem would have been so self-evident they would just be commonly accepted.

Some of this perception may have been due to the huge nostalgia spike that had people at Duncan's retirement abruptly trying to elevate him to Top 5 GOAT-tier status among guys like Wilt, Russel, and Kareem. But that was uncalled for and will almost certainly fade off as he becomes more of a historical figure to be evaluated like everybody else rather than a darling.

[Egg Nog]

I would put Hakeem above Duncan. It's really really close though.

[King4Day]

I haven't heard of Duncan being significantly better, but if that's the case, it's because so many didn't see Dream play during his prime.

[MrCheerios]

They're in the same tier, but I'd take Hakeem 93-95 over Duncan's best years. While Duncan was god-tier defensively I think Hakeem's defense is getting underrated. He has the edge of Duncan in blocks and steals and was known for being able to cover the perimeter very well for a center. What weakness on defense did he have that Duncan didn't?

[spikeslovechild]

Duncan had elite level defense. Hakeem was good but not at his level.

For that reason I have Duncan slightly ahead. Hakeem was more talented offensively but Duncan got the most out of his skillset

[fanofthegreats]

Duncan just more proven as a franchise anchor. Intangibles, IQ, defense all favor TD.

[MrCheerios]

Duncan had elite level defense. Hakeem was good but not at his level.

For that reason I have Duncan slightly ahead. Hakeem was more talented offensively but Duncan got the most out of his skillset

Olajuwon won DPOY twice. He was elite as well. They were both dominant on both sides of the ball. I don't think there was a significant gap between them in any skill set.