Is Hakeem Olajuwon the most Complete all-around player All Time?

[threethehardway]

I wonder if NBA fans get tired of overhyping players from the 90s?


And how does having points, rebounds, blocks and steals make an all-around player?

When we talk about all-around players, the definition of that archetype is a player like LeBron and Scottie Pippen. It's Grant Hill.

It's a guy with size who can run an offense successfully, score and not be exploited on defense.

But of course RealGM is just obsessed with defense and solo stars because most of RealGM started seriously watching the NBA in the 2000s, so a guy who was a black hole gunner on offense, but an elite defensive player and lead his team to two championships is the GOAT All-Around Player.

Hakeem would rather dream shake over 2 players than pass it to an open man.

One of the biggest black holes of all time. He's the GOAT black hole. Worse than Kobe. Worse than Carmelo.

Do you know how much effort it takes to be a black hole from the center position? That's why he had all those moves, gotta get his shot off.

[Wolves21]

He won't have the AST stats but someone I'd throw out yes somewhat as a homer pick as the best all around NBA player would be Kevin Garnett.He's been a league MVP and Defense player of the year and has ten or twelve all nba & all defensive team nominates under his belt.

Yes Hakeem is right up there as well but besides KG think you can make strong cases for the likes of Lebron,Jordan,Kobe,Duncan & Kareem.

[Statlanta]

he didn't have 3pt range and his passing makes Carmelo Anthony look like Jason Kidd.

[druggas]

Well half a player's report card is defense and the other is offense. That's just math, has always been the case. Rebounds and assists are drops in the bucket of this big picture. The two giant items in basketball are offense and defense. There is nothing else.

He's the best defender of all time and no one else in the GOAT convo can sniff first place. That's half his grade. A+.

On offense especially in the playoffs, he rises to almost-Shaq level offensively. That's the other half of his grade. A-.

I can't see how anyone but Jordan can make a case. Jordan's an A- on defense and an A+ on offense. Lebron is not in the same stratosphere defensively so half his report card will be a B+ even if the other half is A+.

Personally yes, I think Hakeem is the best and I don't think there's another player in history other than Jordan who could win back to back titles with Hakeem's routinely sub par supporting cast (thanks to cheap owners).

Wilt was probably averaging double the amount of blocks as Hakeem but they didn't keep track of those stats back then. Nobody will ever be a better defender than Wilt. A Sixer statistician once claimed Wilt had 24 blocks and 11 steals in a single game. That was his famous quadruple double game. The NBA has official records for 112 of Wilt's 1045 games played and in those (he was older btw) he averaged 8.8 blocks per game. Most likely he would have had several steals per game too. Of course he'd have many more when he was younger and in better shape. No matter how you slice it, Wilt trounces any other defender the game has ever and will likely ever see. Wilt of course was the most dominant offensive player in history as well so he's undoubtedly the best two-way player ever. He was the first heliocentric center which Jokic has now perfected and averaged 8 rebounds for a couple of seasons.

It's possible but as you said they didn't keep track so these are all stories not achievements. Personally I do not believe it. My reasoning is that if you're that good a defender and scorer, it makes no sense that his impact on winning was so mediocre compared to the players we're discussing. There are no players in NBA history who are DPOY candidates capable of putting up 30 efficient points who aren't in the historically elite when it comes to wins. Something has to be off.

You're describing a Shaq-like player but a Shaq would win a lot more than he did.

Just because you don't believe it, doesn't make it so.

[Optms]

I would argue Wemby is already there. The dream couldn't shoot 3s.

[bstein14]

By todays standard of being a "complete player" you're looking at being a 3 level scorer, passer, rebounder and defender.

Are you someone who can score inside, score in the midrange, score at the 3 point line, create for your teammates, hit the glass and stop your man down at the other end?

I think even thought LeBron isn't as good on the defensive end , when you think of complete player it starts with him. Better passer and rebounder than MJ.... able to score all over the court, etc.

[dhsilv2]

No and it's frankly dumb to ask. We can start with he's not a top 500 all time level passer. It's a glaring weakness and to be an "all-around" player you need to at least not have a weakness at possibly the most important offensive skill. We can go further that in general a center isn't going to qualify because they can't handle the ball well enough which is just a fundamental core aspect of being an all around great player. Now if you want to change it to qualify it as "among centers" then maybe we can talk there as centers general lack in both those areas.

But no, as the question is laid out. There's no reasonable, logical, or grounded argument for Hakeem.

[dhsilv2]

Well half a player's report card is defense and the other is offense. That's just math, has always been the case. Rebounds and assists are drops in the bucket of this big picture. The two giant items in basketball are offense and defense. There is nothing else.

He's the best defender of all time and no one else in the GOAT convo can sniff first place. That's half his grade. A+.

On offense especially in the playoffs, he rises to almost-Shaq level offensively. That's the other half of his grade. A-.

I can't see how anyone but Jordan can make a case. Jordan's an A- on defense and an A+ on offense. Lebron is not in the same stratosphere defensively so half his report card will be a B+ even if the other half is A+.

Personally yes, I think Hakeem is the best and I don't think there's another player in history other than Jordan who could win back to back titles with Hakeem's routinely sub par supporting cast (thanks to cheap owners).

Wilt was probably averaging double the amount of blocks as Hakeem but they didn't keep track of those stats back then. Nobody will ever be a better defender than Wilt. A Sixer statistician once claimed Wilt had 24 blocks and 11 steals in a single game. That was his famous quadruple double game. The NBA has official records for 112 of Wilt's 1045 games played and in those (he was older btw) he averaged 8.8 blocks per game. Most likely he would have had several steals per game too. Of course he'd have many more when he was younger and in better shape. No matter how you slice it, Wilt trounces any other defender the game has ever and will likely ever see. Wilt of course was the most dominant offensive player in history as well so he's undoubtedly the best two-way player ever. He was the first heliocentric center which Jokic has now perfected and averaged 8 rebounds for a couple of seasons.

It's possible but as you said they didn't keep track so these are all stories not achievements. Personally I do not believe it. My reasoning is that if you're that good a defender and scorer, it makes no sense that his impact on winning was so mediocre compared to the players we're discussing. There are no players in NBA history who are DPOY candidates capable of putting up 30 efficient points who aren't in the historically elite when it comes to wins. Something has to be off.

You're describing a Shaq-like player but a Shaq would win a lot more than he did.

Both things can be true. Wilt did have crazy block and steal numbers, while also not having the impact the box stats might indicate. Now Wilt by any account was an all time great defender. But I think the internet has gone blue in the face explaining for decades now that Wilt's jaw dropping scoring didn't result in elite offense. Just good offense. He wasn't remotely Shaq offensively. Now to be fair to Wilt, some of that might be on his coaches.

Also while wilt didn't win a lot of titles, he was consistently contending against the Celtics. He absolutely was having huge impact on winning. Even if it's not as great as some people would have you believe.

[Ritzo]

2013 LeBron, not only all-around, he's arguably the most complete athlete (physically) also

[og15]

All around is not the same thing as two way player. All around means that one is a high level at all the skillsets required on a basketball court, this would require the player to be (somewhat relative to position) very good (at minimum good) at scoring, passing, ball handling and playmaking, shooting, rebounding, defense.

This biases for wing players to an extent, though not fully, and this biases against guys who can't shoot (eg someone like Wilt, because his shooting skill is poor).

[Stan]

I think OP means two way player. His passing game clearly wasn't even close to consider him the most complete all around player.

[tsherkin]

No, I think the answer to this question is Lebron James for the forseeable future (longer if Wemby never fully gets there).

Lebron James is only in 3 of the 5 major categories All Time and he's played 324 more games than Hakeem Olajuwon.

Right, but Lebron was an All-D level defender and Olajuwon was nothing like Lebron in terms of passing or range, so in terms of actual completeness of game instead of just box score stats, it's Lebron by a country mile. Positional versatility favors Lebron as well; you could never play Olajuwon at either guard spot (and certainly not as a primary ball-handler) but Lebron has played all 5 positions, regularly.

[FrodoBaggins]

LeBron probably. He took the two-way point forward thing Scottie Pippen and Grant Hill pioneered (I think?) to another level. Maybe Flagg can join the club eventually. Led Duke in all five major statistics as the youngest NPOY ever.

[PistolPeteJR]

Nope. He's up there, but not the most. I think that honour goes to LeBron:

#1 in points scored
#1 in minutes played
#3 in games played
#4 in assists
#6 in steals
#7 in defensive rebounds

A DPOY candidate in his prime, one of the greatest IQs in history, one of the best playmakers in history, the SSS standard for discipline and longevity, both mental and physical.

[PistolPeteJR]

All around is not the same thing as two way player. All around means that one is a high level at all the skillsets required on a basketball court, this would require the player to be (somewhat relative to position) very good (at minimum good) at scoring, passing, ball handling and playmaking, shooting, rebounding, defense.

This biases for wing players to an extent, though not fully, and this biases against guys who can't shoot (eg someone like Wilt, because his shooting skill is poor).

It did bias toward wings.

Until Wemby...

[tsherkin]

LeBron probably. He took the two-way point forward thing Scottie Pippen and Grant Hill pioneered (I think?) to another level. Maybe Flagg can join the club eventually. Led Duke in all five major statistics as the youngest NPOY ever.

Depends on how you look at it. Some people say Oscar Robertson would be 6'6 under current measuring standards, and he was certainly an earlier example of a big ball handler.

Then Magic is the next obvious one, because he was 6'8 or so and a primary ball-handler.

Paul Pressey would be another 80s example, under Don Nelson. And then yeah, Pippen and Grant Hill and so forth.

[Whopper_Sr]

Chris Paul

[morosis]

As an admitted Olajuwon fan who watched almost all of his career, I agree with the sentiment that there's a better argument for him as a two-way player than an all-around player. as others have said, the idea of all-around includes things Hakeem did not demonstrate elite proficiency in, like passing.

The arguments about 3PA and such as "holes" in his game dont hold water to me. there were guards in the 90s who didn't shoot 3's with any regularity, and the handful of centers with stretch range at that time were anomalies. I remember watching a game when Sam Perkins was playing C with Seattle, and the commentators would not shut up about his 3 point shooting, because it was that unusual. In a conversation like this the need to keep the era in mind is not so much to adjust stats for pace (although that is legit) but moreso to remind ourselves that there are things that players are asked/expected to do today that they would not have been expected to do in their era. We think the 3 pointer is a normal thing in 2025 but remember the league made the 3 point line shorter back then (1994 to be exact), because the 3 was not a big enough part of the game.

I would also offer a rebuttal to the poster who said Olajuwon could only guard two positions on defense. entirely untrue. he would switch PnR onto guards with some regularity, get low, get on their hip if they went to the basket, and block their shots all the time. his agility, lateral quickness, balance, footwork, and leaping ability were just elite. he was great defensively against just about anybody with any style of game. Unless you were Shaq you couldn't overpower him, you couldn't outquick him, he was so long and had such fast reaction times it was hard to shoot over him, he got so low and had such mobility that it was hard to go around him, just an insane defender.

[LLJ]

A lot of people here are dissing Hakeem's passing, but by the standards of a 90s center, he was a very good passer. He could take most guys one on one down low but when he got doubled he was very good and very quick at getting it out to the outside shooters. In fact those Rockets provided the modern template for a center-based NBA team. Get a C who dominates in the post, and surround him with outside shooters and let him pass it out when doubled. The Shaq-Kobe Lakers followed the same formula. This formula only works if the C is quick enough with reads and is a solid enough passer though, and Hakeem was definitely that. It's only in the last 15 or so years where we started to see more Divac like 5+ apg passing centers in the NBA

The pace was a lot slower in the 90s too, so those 3 apg he averaged in the 90s probably would be about 5apg today, which puts him in the upper half of today's traditional centers in terms of passing ability.

[tsherkin]

A lot of people here are dissing Hakeem's passing, but by the standards of a 90s center, he was a very good passer.

No, not really. He was far worse than Vlade and D-Rob and Daugherty, among others. What you really mean is that he compared favorably to Ewing and Mutombo and Mourning, none of whom could be capably called "good" passers, let alone "very good." And historically, that line gets a lot worse, because we've SEEN "good" and "great" passers out of the pivot. Alvan Adams, Bill Walton, Kareem. Even Wilt and Russ were better passers.

The pace was a lot slower in the 90s too, so those 3 apg he averaged in the 90s probably would be about 5apg today,

That depends heavily on which part of the 90s you're talking about. In 93, for example, it was 96.8. Last year, it was 98.8. Those extra 2 possessions per game weren't dramatically increasing passing stats.