Some 93 Hakeem Hypotheticals

[ceiling raiser]

These questions are all pertaining to Hakeem directly, for the purpose of this thread presume everybody else on the 93 Rockets team performs identically:

1) What does Hakeem have to do differently to beat the Sonics?

2) Would the Rockets beat the Suns? If not, what would he have to do in order to make it to the Finals?

3) Would the Rockets beat the Bulls? If not, what would he have to do in order to win the title?

4) Presume the Rockets beat the Bulls due to Hakeem's elevated performance through (3). How differently do you view Hakeem's legacy?

Again, only Hakeem performs differently here, everything else is unchanged.

[ceiling raiser]

Question (4) isn't necessary I suppose. I posted this on two other forums and that seems to be derailing the threads.

[DrazenForThree]

i cant see anythink hakeem would have been able to do to get by 93 barkley. 93 barkley put his stamp on games like few if any players i have ever seen before. he was on an absolute mission that season. hakeem wasnt standing in his way. hell jordan almost coudlnt stand in his way.

barkley dictated the pace and attitude of games in 93. he stepped on the court that year and he knew he was winning that day and wouldnt allow otherwise. what he did against the sonics was nothing short of remarkable.

he dominated them in the regular season as well. his triple double in their first meeting was insane. he destroyed the offensive glass that game. hakeem was little resistance. they even had hakeem on him for stretches when the suns went small with west at center.

barkley vs the rockets that year

25-17-10-2-2
29-10-8-2-1
17-18-4-1-1

hakeem was a great player. and ive seen some argue his 93 season was better then barkleys, which isnt a bad argument. but anyone who watched that season would be aware of chucks ability to put his stamp on games that year, and how that doesnt show up in the stats. barkley was just on anohter level. guys were forced to react to his play. he was simply more dominant and his will was greater then anyone that season. would have loved to see how that finals would have played out if paxson doesnt hit that 3 after the fluky tip around in game 6 to win it. game 7 in Phx with barkley in straight kill mode vs. jordan in game 7 would have been insane.... that game 6 in general was crazy. Jordan scored EVERY bulls point in the 4th outside of paxsons 3.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

These questions are all pertaining to Hakeem directly, for the purpose of this thread presume everybody else on the 93 Rockets team performs identically:

1) What does Hakeem have to do differently to beat the Sonics?

2) Would the Rockets beat the Suns? If not, what would he have to do in order to make it to the Finals?

3) Would the Rockets beat the Bulls? If not, what would he have to do in order to win the title?

4) Presume the Rockets beat the Bulls due to Hakeem's elevated performance through (3). How differently do you view Hakeem's legacy?

Again, only Hakeem performs differently here, everything else is unchanged.

1) Hope the refs treated Houston better. No seriously I don't know what more he could've done in that series. Defensively that was probably the best series he'd ever had. Offensively the Sonics did their damnedest to limit his touches, doubling 'n even tripling him throughout that series.

2) Play just like he did in '94 and '95 vs. them. That Suns interior 'D was lousy and couldn't stop anyone. KJ was battling injuries and wasn't as good in '93 as he was in '94 and '95. He proved to be more of a matchup nightmare than Chuck himself. And I don't think MVP Chuck woulda got the better of Dream that year. They were awarded a whopping 64 FT's vs. SEA in that game 7 to go to the Finals, doubt that happens vs. HOU.

3) He'd have had to have averaged 33-35ppg 12-13rpg & 55% FG they were still missing some more shooters in Cassell n Elie. I don't think 28-30ppg (which is what I think he'd have averaged) would've been enough. I don't think they'd have won but I think that series would've went 7 games. He was a a big upgrade to Ewing who had a 2-0 lead at one point vs. CHI. But at the same time I don't think MJ's off court antics would've happened and his focus would've been more razor sharp than vs. NY that year as he'd have really wanted to send a message to the guy drafted no.1 ahead of him and that'd given him fits in the reg season. But NO WAY would' he have put 41ppg and had that layup drill he had in the Finals vs. PHX on Hakeem who was at his defensive zenith.

4) What does it matter? He proved in his career he was able to win a title even when Jordan n Pippen were in the league and swept a team that beat them. Is Isiah the GOAT PG because he went through MJ and won 3 straight years? No, basketball is bigger than Jordan, bigger than the Bulls.

[ceiling raiser]

Thanks for the responses so far.

4) What does it matter? He proved in his career he was able to win a title even when Jordan n Pippen were in the league and swept a team that beat them. Is Isiah the GOAT PG because he went through MJ and won 3 straight years? No, basketball is bigger than Jordan, bigger than the Bulls.

It doesn't, I just used the same thread on two other boards and wanted to maintain consistency for responses. It was more of a starter question to solicit responses for (1)-(3). I don't really need that technique here, of course.

[bastillon]

1) Hope the refs treated Houston better. No seriously I don't know what more he could've done in that series. Defensively that was probably the best series he'd ever had. Offensively the Sonics did their damnedest to limit his touches, doubling 'n even tripling him throughout that series.

well he kinda screwed up on the last play. Thorpe was open under the basket and Hakeem was getting doubled off of him. it was a split second decision and passing angle wasn't the best but he could've passed to Thorpe on that play.

but seriously, Rockets should've won that game in 4th quarter when they were being screwed time after time by the refs. Hakeem, to me, had the greatest defensive series I've ever seen. some guys could amaze me, like Walton 77 in the finals or Garnett in 08 finals... but nobody came close to what Hakeem was doing in that series. he was forcing multiple turnovers every game, averaged like 5 blocks a game, changed probably 5-10 more shots, stepped up on pick and rolls, was always there in transition etc. the guy was a MONSTER on defense in that series.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEGvKVNoJ8E[/youtube]

GOAT defense

2) Play just like he did in '94 and '95 vs. them. That Suns interior 'D was lousy and couldn't stop anyone. KJ was battling injuries and wasn't as good in '93 as he was in '94 and '95. He proved to be more of a matchup nightmare than Chuck himself. And I don't think MVP Chuck woulda got the better of Dream that year. They were awarded a whopping 64 FT's vs. SEA in that game 7 to go to the Finals, doubt that happens vs. HOU.

exactly. Rockets had a much bigger trouble with point guards because Kenny was so bad defensively that KJ wouldnt even need a pick and roll beat him off the dribble. and KJ is a guy who could pull up for a jumpshot anytime. given that KJ was coming off an injury in 93 postseason I have no doubt Rockets could win this series. cuz he was the one killing the Rockets in 94-95:

in 94
KJ averaged 27/4/10 @ 53% TS
Chuck averaged 23/13/4 @ 53% TS

in 95
KJ averaged 28/4/9 @ 66% TS
Chuck averaged 22/13/3 @ 54% TS

remember Rockets had the best record in the NBA in the last 50 games (they started 14-16 and finished 41-11 or 25-6 post-ASG for +8.4 pt differential). Hakeem was simply spectacular in the 2nd half of the season. after all-star game he put up 28.4 ppg 13.1 rpg 4.1 apg 2.4 stl 4.1 blk @ 58.3% TS (again, Rockets had a 25-6 record...). this was Hakeem at his best. I've never seen anybody play like that. domination on both ends. would make a huge play on one end and immediately go on the other end to make another huge play.

he had simply video game stretches of play...

Hakeem, from 03/04/93 to 08/05/93 (over a month long stretch to end of first round):

Code: Select all

G    PPG   RPG   APG   BPG   SPG   FG%    FT%  GmSc
17   30.7  14.3  4.4   4.9   2.5   54%    80%  29.3

given how strong Rockets finished the season behind Olajuwon's play, it's hard for me to imagine Suns beating them without healthy KJ. plus Hakeem would be super motivated as Chuck was the MVP. probably we'd witness another 95 WCF. nobody is stopping Hakeem on those Suns and he'd step up and contain Barkley if needed (seen him do that couple times actually).

3) He'd have had to have averaged 33-35ppg 12-13rpg & 55% FG they were still missing some more shooters in Cassell n Elie. I don't think 28-30ppg (which is what I think he'd have averaged) would've been enough. I don't think they'd have won but I think that series would've went 7 games. He was a a big upgrade to Ewing who had a 2-0 lead at one point vs. CHI. But at the same time I don't think MJ's off court antics would've happened and his focus would've been more razor sharp than vs. NY that year as he'd have really wanted to send a message to the guy drafted no.1 ahead of him and that'd given him fits in the reg season. But NO WAY would' he have put 41ppg and had that layup drill he had in the Finals vs. PHX on Hakeem who was at his defensive zenith.

I agree, partly. Rockets were a terrible matchup for Houston. they had their best perimeter defenders assigned to Jordan and Pippen. Bulls on the other hand didn't have anyone who could stop Hakeem. they'd probably swarm him with triple teams like Sonics did but Bulls generally had a lot of trouble with Hakeem even when Rockets weren't good yet. that very year, in 93, Bulls lost both times with a -13 ppg margin. that tells you a lot. there was a game they tried guarding Hakeem straight up, he got hot, and when they started double teaming he'd just shoot a fadeaway and double team didn't even slow him down.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-FbhBM9uvU[/youtube]

if you were ever wondering what GOAT defender looked like, that is exactly what it looks like. anyway, there is definitely a good chance for the Rockets to beat the Bulls that year. they were a tough matchup for the Bulls, finished the year very strong, and Dream was unstoppable on both ends.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

i cant see anythink hakeem would have been able to do to get by 93 barkley. 93 barkley put his stamp on games like few if any players i have ever seen before. he was on an absolute mission that season. hakeem wasnt standing in his way. hell jordan almost coudlnt stand in his way.

barkley dictated the pace and attitude of games in 93. he stepped on the court that year and he knew he was winning that day and wouldnt allow otherwise. what he did against the sonics was nothing short of remarkable.

he dominated them in the regular season as well. his triple double in their first meeting was insane. he destroyed the offensive glass that game. hakeem was little resistance. they even had hakeem on him for stretches when the suns went small with west at center.

barkley vs the rockets that year

25-17-10-2-2
29-10-8-2-1
17-18-4-1-1

hakeem was a great player. and ive seen some argue his 93 season was better then barkleys, which isnt a bad argument. but anyone who watched that season would be aware of chucks ability to put his stamp on games that year, and how that doesnt show up in the stats. barkley was just on anohter level. guys were forced to react to his play. he was simply more dominant and his will was greater then anyone that season. would have loved to see how that finals would have played out if paxson doesnt hit that 3 after the fluky tip around in game 6 to win it. game 7 in Phx with barkley in straight kill mode vs. jordan in game 7 would have been insane.... that game 6 in general was crazy. Jordan scored EVERY bulls point in the 4th outside of paxsons 3.

Hakeem had 24, 29, 30, 32pt games vs. PHX. He was more of a matchup problem for PHX than Barkley was for HOU and that was just the reg season. With their tall frontcourt of Horry-Thorpe-Dream, come playoff time he'd have had a lot more trouble getting his way. Hakeem surely wasn't getting bossed around the way he did to DRob.

From another thread, I just don't see the argument for Chuck that year as MVP. He played 6 fewer games than Dream. He defensive impact wasn't remotely close, he didn't stop anyone from doing whatever they wanted to PHX's interior. Phx was elite w/o Chuck. Hakeem averaged more points, rebs, blks n steals (TOP 10 in all categories) than Chuck. He was the only player to win more than one NBA player of the month award that year. After the All-star game Hakeem was averaging more than 30ppg in addition to winning the DPOY.

[bastillon]

Hakeem had 24, 29, 30, 32pt games vs. PHX. He was more of a matchup problem for PHX than Barkley was for HOU and that was just the reg season. With their tall frontcourt of Horry-Thorpe-Dream, come playoff time he'd have had a lot more trouble getting his way. Hakeem surely wasn't getting bossed around the way he did to DRob.

From another thread, I just don't see the argument for Chuck that year as MVP. He played 6 fewer games than Dream. He defensive impact wasn't remotely close, he didn't stop anyone from doing whatever they wanted to PHX's interior. Phx was elite w/o Chuck. Hakeem averaged more points, rebs, blks n steals (TOP 10 in all categories) than Chuck. He was the only player to win more than one NBA player of the month award that year. After the All-star game Hakeem was averaging more than 30ppg in addition to winning the DPOY.

everything is true except the bolded part. KJ was injured that year and Barkley really stepped up in his absence, also Suns were like 1-5 in those games Barkley missed. I think it played a huge part in giving Barkley the MVP. but you're right in that he has no case over Hakeem.

after ASG Hakeem had a GOAT stretch level of play: 28/13/4/2.5/4 @ 58% TS leading a fairly unimpressive team to 25-6 record and 8.6 pt differential. all that ridiculous offense (how many bigs put up 28/4a/58% TS at that pace? peak Shaq DID NOT) and he was doing it while playing GOAT defense. Barkley was great that year but cmon. not a chance.

[tsherkin]

(how many bigs put up 28/4a/58% TS at that pace? peak Shaq DID NOT)

28/13/4/2.5/4 @ 58% TS

Do you mean actual pace? The 93 Rockets were at 94.4 possessions per game.

Shaq's Magic played at 95.2 in his second season (93-94, the very season after), and he posted 29.3 ppg on 60.5% TS while adding 13.2 rpg. He didn't add the 4 apg but the scoring was definitely there, he was a 120 ORTG player that year.

[DrazenForThree]

i cant see anythink hakeem would have been able to do to get by 93 barkley. 93 barkley put his stamp on games like few if any players i have ever seen before. he was on an absolute mission that season. hakeem wasnt standing in his way. hell jordan almost coudlnt stand in his way.

barkley dictated the pace and attitude of games in 93. he stepped on the court that year and he knew he was winning that day and wouldnt allow otherwise. what he did against the sonics was nothing short of remarkable.

he dominated them in the regular season as well. his triple double in their first meeting was insane. he destroyed the offensive glass that game. hakeem was little resistance. they even had hakeem on him for stretches when the suns went small with west at center.

barkley vs the rockets that year

25-17-10-2-2
29-10-8-2-1
17-18-4-1-1

hakeem was a great player. and ive seen some argue his 93 season was better then barkleys, which isnt a bad argument. but anyone who watched that season would be aware of chucks ability to put his stamp on games that year, and how that doesnt show up in the stats. barkley was just on anohter level. guys were forced to react to his play. he was simply more dominant and his will was greater then anyone that season. would have loved to see how that finals would have played out if paxson doesnt hit that 3 after the fluky tip around in game 6 to win it. game 7 in Phx with barkley in straight kill mode vs. jordan in game 7 would have been insane.... that game 6 in general was crazy. Jordan scored EVERY bulls point in the 4th outside of paxsons 3.

Hakeem had 24, 29, 30, 32pt games vs. PHX. He was more of a matchup problem for PHX than Barkley was for HOU and that was just the reg season. With their tall frontcourt of Horry-Thorpe-Dream, come playoff time he'd have had a lot more trouble getting his way. Hakeem surely wasn't getting bossed around the way he did to DRob.

From another thread, I just don't see the argument for Chuck that year as MVP. He played 6 fewer games than Dream. He defensive impact wasn't remotely close, he didn't stop anyone from doing whatever they wanted to PHX's interior. Phx was elite w/o Chuck. Hakeem averaged more points, rebs, blks n steals (TOP 10 in all categories) than Chuck. He was the only player to win more than one NBA player of the month award that year. After the All-star game Hakeem was averaging more than 30ppg in addition to winning the DPOY.

I think we are refering to 2 different season. me 92-93 and you 93-94. dream was certainly better in 93-94. while still great, hakeem wasnt near as impactful as chuck in 92-93. chuck was godly that year in terms of dominance and putting his stamp on the game.

Barkley was deservedly the MVP that season. you can make an argument stat wise, but watching that season it really isnt close. not jordan, not hakeem, barkley by a wide margin was the most impactful, dominant, and important player that season. PHX would certainly be good without chuck, but with him, they are inches from being a champion. He put that team on his back and carried them to the finals. he single handedly demolished the sonics in one of the best game 7 performances we've seen. he intimidated teams from tipoff and set the tone of the game.

Was hakeem much better defensively? sure. was hakeem great offensively? yes. did hakeem have anywhere near the overall impact and dominance? no. not close really. sometimes its more then advanced stats.

[bastillon]

Do you mean actual pace? The 93 Rockets were at 94.4 possessions per game.

Shaq's Magic played at 95.2 in his second season (93-94, the very season after), and he posted 29.3 ppg on 60.5% TS while adding 13.2 rpg. He didn't add the 4 apg but the scoring was definitely there, he was a 120 ORTG player that year.

I mentioned those assists on purpose. there were many bigs scoring lots of points efficiently. the difference between a 30 ppg scorer and 30 ppg playmaker is huge. but not only Hakeem was a big time scorer, he was actually Rockets only PLAYMAKER. you could go to him every single time down and he'd make something happen. Shaq was never that dynamic, even at his peak, he needed a specific system to tend to his needs as a low post player: lots of re-posts, high lows etc. with Hakeem you'd just throw the ball to him. doesn't matter if he's 18 feet away or 10 feet away (a requirement for Shaq to be effective) because Hakeem was the best faceup center of all-time.

anyway, the only comparable bigs offensively to 93 Hakeem are 00-01 Shaq (29.2 ppg/3.8 apg/57.6% TS), 70-80 Kareem (28.3 ppg/4.5 apg/58.7% TS) and Barkley 89-93 (25.4 ppg/4.3 apg/63.1% TS). Kareem was doing it while playing many more possessions per game but he could've possibly duplicated it in slower pace. Barkley was more efficient but lesser volume. and on top of that, neither of those players were approaching GOAT levels defensively. Hakeem was doing legendary stuff offensively while playing legitimate GOAT defense (not approaching, he was actually on that level).

if you watch 93 Hakeem, especially in the 2nd half of the season, it's amazing how much energy he exerts on both ends. like I said, big block on the defensive end, but still first in transition to score a dunk. turnaround jumpshot on offense, but steals a pass on the fastbreak. then comes back and drills a dream shake. next possession your PG tries to go inside but gets stripped by Dream on the pick and roll, which ignites another break. just an amazing player to watch in his prime. does everything at elite level.

[tsherkin]

I mentioned those assists on purpose. there were many bigs scoring lots of points efficiently. the difference between a 30 ppg scorer and 30 ppg playmaker is huge. but not only Hakeem was a big time scorer, he was actually Rockets only PLAYMAKER. you could go to him every single time down and he'd make something happen. Shaq was never that dynamic, even at his peak, he needed a specific system to tend to his needs as a low post player: lots of re-posts, high lows etc. with Hakeem you'd just throw the ball to him. doesn't matter if he's 18 feet away or 10 feet away (a requirement for Shaq to be effective) because Hakeem was the best faceup center of all-time.

Eh, that's not entirely accurate. Of course, Hakeem had also managed in 93 spent time developing as a passer, just as did Shaq. 2000 Shaq managed a league-best 29.7 ppg with 3.8 apg on 57.8% TS and 115 ORTG at 93.3 possessions per game.

Very similar.

Meantime, while it's true that Olajuwon was a more versatile scorer in terms of location (while, in that season, providing similar levels of efficiency), I think you're overstating the difference in playmaking value by understating the defensive draw of Shaq on the low block.

I don't want to detract from Hakeem because I'm a HUGE fan of his, both aesthetically based on his style of play and for his efficacy as a dominant two-way player, but I think you're underselling Shaq a touch here with the specific way you worded that statement.

[Dipper 13]

the only comparable bigs offensively to 93 Hakeem are 00-01 Shaq (29.2 ppg/3.8 apg/57.6% TS), 70-80 Kareem (28.3 ppg/4.5 apg/58.7% TS) and Barkley 89-93 (25.4 ppg/4.3 apg/63.1% TS).

Also 66-67 Wilt (28.8 ppg/6.5 apg/58.2% TS). During those two seasons he helped improve the Sixers offense by +7.2, and eventually +10.6 in 1967 from before he arrived, when they were primarily a running team keyed by Greer & Costello.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Barkley was deservedly the MVP that season. you can make an argument stat wise, but watching that season it really isnt close. not jordan, not hakeem, barkley by a wide margin was the most impactful, dominant, and important player that season. PHX would certainly be good without chuck, but with him, they are inches from being a champion. He put that team on his back and carried them to the finals. he single handedly demolished the sonics in one of the best game 7 performances we've seen. he intimidated teams from tipoff and set the tone of the game.

Was hakeem much better defensively? sure. was hakeem great offensively? yes. did hakeem have anywhere near the overall impact and dominance? no. not close really. sometimes its more then advanced stats.

No I was rightfully referring to the 92-93 season....Hakeem caused the Suns more problems than Chuck did Houston when they faced that year. Chicago with 3-all-NBA Def selections and NY who often had to resort to thuggery and physical intimidation to do so. Both teams had top3 all time GOAT coaches. And Hakeem was the chief reason the Rockets were alongside them defensively. What he had to work with defensively compared to CHI/NY to bring Houston to that defensive level paled in comparison. He was easily THE most impactful/disruptive defensive force in the NBA in addition to being a top 3 scorer. No team that year relied on one player as much that year to be successful night in n out as the Rockets did.

And i disagree, the Bulls were never remotely close to losing that series....Phoenix was playing catch up for the bulk of those Finals. Other than def rebounding and the odd steal or block Chuck was a liability defensively who couldn't stop anything in the painted area which was where Phoenix hurt the most and which wasn't a problem if you had Hakeem of that year.

[DrazenForThree]

And i disagree, the Bulls were never remotely close to losing that series....Phoenix was playing catch up for the bulk of those Finals.

The suns were 1 point and under 10 seconds from hosting a game 7. id say thats "remotely close" it took an epic MJ 4th quarter and an all-time clutch shot from paxon to prevent that game 7.

[tsherkin]

Just to add to Drazen's point...

Bulls were +5 at the half, +8 after 3... and then dropped only 12 points in the 4th and squeaked out a single-point win. Remember that? Finals record-low 12 points from Chicago. They scored a single point over the first 7 minutes, at which point the Suns were actually up 3, up 4 with under 2:30 to go. Over basically the first 11.5 minutes, the Bulls had managed 7 points. They got 5 in the closing 80 seconds or so on a Jordan layup (marking him having scored all 9 of their points to that point), and then Jordan got doubled and things went pass, pass, pass, Paxson 3-ball with 4 seconds to go. Ho Grant blocked KJ, game over.

That's pretty damned close in my book.

[fatal9]

i cant see anythink hakeem would have been able to do to get by 93 barkley. 93 barkley put his stamp on games like few if any players i have ever seen before. he was on an absolute mission that season. hakeem wasnt standing in his way. hell jordan almost coudlnt stand in his way.

barkley dictated the pace and attitude of games in 93. he stepped on the court that year and he knew he was winning that day and wouldnt allow otherwise. what he did against the sonics was nothing short of remarkable.

he dominated them in the regular season as well. his triple double in their first meeting was insane. he destroyed the offensive glass that game. hakeem was little resistance. they even had hakeem on him for stretches when the suns went small with west at center.

barkley vs the rockets that year

25-17-10-2-2
29-10-8-2-1
17-18-4-1-1

hakeem was a great player. and ive seen some argue his 93 season was better then barkleys, which isnt a bad argument. but anyone who watched that season would be aware of chucks ability to put his stamp on games that year, and how that doesnt show up in the stats. barkley was just on anohter level. guys were forced to react to his play. he was simply more dominant and his will was greater then anyone that season. would have loved to see how that finals would have played out if paxson doesnt hit that 3 after the fluky tip around in game 6 to win it. game 7 in Phx with barkley in straight kill mode vs. jordan in game 7 would have been insane.... that game 6 in general was crazy. Jordan scored EVERY bulls point in the 4th outside of paxsons 3.

This sounds nice in writing and all but Barkley's offensive performance fluctuated a lot, some games he really struggled to make shots. You're defining his playoff run by a couple of performances and forgetting what happened in all the other games. His performance swung wildly on both ends of the extremes. You couldn't depend on him with the kind of game after game consistency that Hakeem and Jordan brought. The problem was his shot selection was sometimes really bad (stubbornly settling for jumpers), could be made even worse if he was frustrated, and his midrange jumper wasn't very consistent, it made him a very erratic scorer, dominant some times, lousy other times. In that playoff run, he had just as many games shooting below 40% (9) as he did shooting above 50% (9), his median TS% was 50.1%, median FG% 42.9% and we all know he wasn't exactly bringing a lot of value defensively. Bringing up a couple of games where he dominated completely ignores the other half of the story. Watch that year's playoff run on a game by game basis, and Barkley's play is downright cringeworthy sometimes. "Putting a stamp on games", as you say, was what the two real MVPs of the league (Jordan and Hakeem) were doing night after night. Barkley wasn't in that league.

[bastillon]

the article exactly answering OPs questions

So, yesterday I was patrolling the blogosphere as I usually do on Mondays during lunch...

Where I stumbled into an article on The Big Lead about the Lakers/Cavs game from Sunday (i.e. Kobe v. LeBron). In the article, there was a backhanded statement about Michael Jordan being "the greatest winner in the modern era." Which I thought was rather presumptuous.

Naturally, I felt compelled to immediately comment that Robert Horry - and not Michael Jordan - is the greatest winner of the modern era. Last I checked 7 rings is more than 6 rings. Seems like simple math to me.

My comment for some reason started a "Robert Horry? Are you kidding me?" level of response from fellow commenters. To which I said, "hell yes, I am serious!"

I do not dispute that Michael Jordan is the greatest NBA player of the modern era. I'm not even sure who else would be in the discussion with him if the modern era is the mid-60s and beyond. But Jordan is NOT the greatest "winner" of the era. Of course, this led some random Bulls fan to post the following comment:

"I point out that if Jordan had not retired twice in the 90’s, the Bulls would have swept that decade."

Yeah, we all know that is b.s. Everyone wants to dilute the awesomeness that is/was the '94 and '95 Houston Rockets back-to-back championship teams. You know, the Heart of a Champion and all that good stuff. Damn I miss Rudy T. Anyway, my counter-argument was this:

"If Kenny Smith could make a f--kin’ jumpshot against Seattle in Game 7 in 1993, the Jordan-era Bulls only two-peat the first time around."

The early to mid-90s Bulls were great, no doubt. But the Rockets were a nightmare matchup for Jordan and Pippen. In 1990/1991 through 1992/1993 (i.e. the first three-peat Bulls teams), the Rockets went 5-1 against Chicago. Yes, Jordan played each game. Mad Max did an admirable job keeping Jordan below his seasonal averages and forcing MJ to take more shots than he normally did. Meanwhile, Pippen (as usual) could not win important games by himself and no one on the Bulls roster could contain Hakeem or Otis Thorpe.

Really, look for yourself:

Game 1 (1991): Rockets 114, Bulls 92
Game 2 (1991): Rockets 100, Bulls 90
Game 3 (1992): Bulls 114, Rockets 100 (dammit!)
Game 4 (1992): Rockets 105, Bulls 102 (Jordan held to 22)
Game 5 (1993): Rockets 110, Bulls 96
Game 6 (1993): Rockets 94, Bulls 83

Rockets were 5-1 versus the intial three-peat era Bulls. And only one of the victories was "close" and could be deemed a toss-up. Like I said, Mad Max could match up with MJ (not "stop" him per se, but just keep him from treating the Rockets like he did LaBradford Smith). Meanwhile, Hakeem would be able to run wild versus the Bulls lack of size and talent in the middle. Then again, NO ONE could stop Hakeem from 1991 through 1995. Or do I need to link to the David Robinson clip again? I think I do.

The problem with the Rockets in the early 1990s was that we matched up *horribly* with the Seattle Supersonics. Gary Payton routinely abused Kenny Smith. Shawn Kemp routinely abused Otis Thorpe, Carl Herrera and whatever other tall body we threw at him. Detlef Schrempf always made clutch shots against us, and so did Derrick McKey. We just had major problems with that one particular team. And yet we somehow extended the series in 1993 to Game 7...

where Kenny Smith somehow failed to remember that his only job was to make open shots. Naturally he missed and sent the game to overtime whereby we'd end up losing. In high school I was asked to write an essay on my "most disappointing moment in life" - Kenny Smith missing that jumpshot was my Moment. I once saw the Jet at a movie theater a few years later and my mom had to prevent me from taunting him about that shot.

Where was I? Oh, yeah, the Bulls. If Kenny somehow makes that shot - the Rockets would have made it to the NBA Finals (please... we'd have beaten Barkley and the Suns just like we ended up doing in '94 and '95). Where we'd have matched up perfectly with the Bulls and been able to stop the first three-peat from ever happening.

1992/1993 Houston Rockets roster:

The 1992/1993 Chicago Bulls roster:

Starting lineups of G: Kenny Smith, G: Mad Max, F: Robert Horry, F: Otis Thorpe, C: Hakeem Olajuwon v. G: BJ Armstrong, G: Michael Jordan, F: Scottie Pippen, F: Horace Grant, C: Bill Cartwright.

It would be an epic matchup. I've already explained how Mad Max would check MJ. Kenny Smith and BJ Armstrong is a wash. Horry scored enough and was athletic enough to stay with Pippen (though Pippen would likely outscore him a little, and out-jackass him by a lot). Otis Thorpe and Horace Grant were basically the same player. And no one could stop Hakeem. Who, oh by the way, SHOULD have been the MVP in 1993. Check the stats.

The only true empirical evidence we have proves that the Rockets were a nightmare matchup for the Chicago Bulls. A 5-1 record with only one close game. The only thing going for the Bulls would be that Sam Cassell would not arrive in Houston until the 1993/1994 season. That's why Jordan retired. He knew the run was inevitably over!


http://www.thedreamshake.com/2008/01/jo ... -wins.html

[Double Clutch]

This is a pretty long post but let me just say that I don't fully agree with the premise of this thread. fpliii, I get what you have in mind in that you're trying to isolate how much an individual's performance could effect/improve team success but I want to say that Hakeem, like all bigs, DOES NOT perform independent of his teammates because he needs the ball delivered to him. Hakeem played great in the playoffs and I've actually seen a lot of people argue his playoff performance this year as to why this wasn't his peak year but I feel they really need to consider that players do not perform in a vacuum and how match ups and circumstances can dictate a player's performance. I'm going to quote part of my post below from a "Was 93 really Hakeem's peak"? thread:

Now, consider his match ups and circumstances in 1993, neither of which are very favorable so for Hakeem to play that well makes his playoffs that year even more impressive to me. As I mentioned earlier, the guard play is crucial to how a center plays as they're often responsible for getting him the ball. The guard play on the 1993 Rockets is fairly suspect with poor back-ups, the fact that Vernon Maxwell was out until game 4 of the Clipper series with a fractured wrist (he'd play with it for the rest of the playoffs) and this is further magnified by the fact that the two teams they were facing excelled in pressure defenses. There is no accurate way to account for how great a team is at pressuring and trapping the ball besides watching the games but two stats that will give you a rough estimation will be steals and turnovers forced. The 1993 Sonics were the #1 team in the league in both steals and turnovers forced. The 1993 Clippers were the #3 team in the league in steals and #4 in turnovers forced so the point I'm getting at is they were BOTH elite and combined with suspect guard play, this can really have a negative impact on a center's production. Kenny Smith was never great at handling pressure, didn't have the creativity and ball handling skills to evade the traps and made bad passes that could get picked off and Vernon Maxwell had erratic ball handling and also did not protect the ball though I think the fractured wrist probably effected that to some extent. With how predictable the 1993 Rockets' were on offense, what this also meant was that time would be taken off the clock with LAC and SEA pressuring the ball and instead of being aggressive and taking advantage of defense still recovering, they would try to run the offense by dumping it to Hakeem with less time on the clock. Some of the Rocket players would also stand still waiting to receive the pass instead of coming up and meeting the pass which would allow the defense to play the passing lanes and either force a deflection or a steal.

Here's an example from game 5 of the 1993 Rockets vs Clippers series where the pressure defense helped Clippers erase a big 4th quarter deficit:

The way the Los Angeles Clippers see it, the Rockets will go as far in the NBA playoffs as Hakeem Olajuwon can take them and as far as their erratic ballhandling will let them go.

The Clippers tried a variety of defensive measures on Olajuwon, but nothing stopped him for long. But the Clippers did employ a pressing defense at times that forced turnovers and kept the ball from getting into Olajuwon's hands.

The Rockets were in control of Saturday's series-ending playoff game with a 16-point lead early in the fourth quarter. But shortly thereafter Clippers coach Larry Brown called for the press, the Rockets went on one of their turnover binges, and the game turned around.

Los Angeles rallied to lead in the final minute before the Rockets recovered to win 84-80 at The Summit.
In the fourth quarter, the Rockets had 11 turnovers and were outscored 24-17.

Clippers guard Lester Conner, who played the final 11 minutes of the game, said: "We had to make something happen to try to scramble the game. We got where we wanted to be and had a chance to go up two (with 1:17 to go) with (Ron) Harper's free throw."

Harper, who had scored on a fast-break drive to give the Clippers an 80-79 lead, missed his chance at a three-point play, and the Rockets' Vernon Maxwell followed with a 3-pointer from the right side that put the Rockets ahead for good.

But what does the victory say for the Rockets? They were pushed to the limit to win this series against a .500 team that was looking forward to being dismantled in the offseason.

"They have a chance to go very far," said Conner, a former Rocket. "But Rudy (Tomjanovich) will have to be figuring out what to do against pressure.

"When they play a better team than we are, I don't know if they'll be able to deal with it (the press). We got a couple of victories with it, and we came within one shot of beating them today. They are beatable."

Forward Kenny Norman said: "I don't think the best team won, but that Olajuwon is unbelievable. I didn't realize he was that good."

Asked if Olajuwon deserves to be the league's Most Valuable Player, Norman said: "I said (Charles) Barkley all year, but I'm wondering now. That man (Olajuwon) is Superman."

Norman, who is not usually an outside shooter, was 2-for-2 on 3-point shots and scored 14 points.

Although he did not play the final 11 minutes of the game, he had no complaints because "Lester and the small lineup got us back in the game."

But there was no stopping the Rockets' big man, Olajuwon, who scored 31 points for the day and went 3-for-4 from the floor in the fourth quarter.

Stanley Roberts, who took turns with Danny Manning trying to guard Olajuwon, said: "He's going to do what it takes to win. There really is no stopping him."

Said Manning: "Hakeem had a great year and a great series. I think he will even play better as the playoffs move on. Defensively, I never was really able to stop him, but then again, there are not many players that have."

- Chron

Clippers were also focused on doubling Hakeem at all times and didn't play him straight up from my memory although I don't count plays where Hakeem makes his move early such as the baseline spin off the catch, turnaround jumper where he can evade the double team etc. Of course, Seattle would take this to another level than the Clippers as they had superior defensive personnel as well as a defensive mastermind in Bob Kloppenburg to create defensive schemes to negate Hakeem's impact as much as possible. Hakeem's numbers in the Seattle series may not stand out but he created a lot of opportunities because how much attention he received. They would also make adjustments throughout the series such as switching defenders, changing the identities of the double teamer, coming from different angles, fronting him and pressuring the ball handler to make it harder for the lob pass and a lot of times they could get away with having a defender on the front and on the back. Seattle would also try to run more and bait Houston into a running game where they tended to forget about Hakeem and the guards tended to chuck up more shots so this was also smart on Seattle's behalf. An example of this below from game 1 of this series:

Lacking alternatives, Karl went to a small lineup, and watched his club run up a 91-77 lead that proved to be too much to overcome with 7:07 remaining in a defensive matchup.

"That's sometimes how good coaches are made," Karl conceded.

Well, looky here. Like spying a dollar bill on the sidewalk, the Sonics may have stumbled across yet another look to toss at Olajuwon, the Rockets' superstar center. Call it the no-look.

Because, in this scheme, Olajuwon doesn't get to look at the ball.

With the smaller unit able to force the tempo, the Sonics ripped off nine unanswered points - the first five from Johnson, the last four from Pierce. The Sonics, as everybody knows, are at their best when things get crazy. The Rockets, on the other hand, have Olajuwon, so playing crazy usually is just plain insane.

"They're kind of an in-between team," Kloppenburg said. "They'll run, if they get the opportunities. But they mostly want the power game."

But there's nothing powerful about turnovers and wild three-pointers, which the Rockets produced when induced into an up-and-down game.

"If they're playing that way," said Johnson, who scored the Sonics' first 11 points of the fourth quarter and finished with 20, "they tend, at times, to forget about Hakeem."

Bingo.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ug=1700685

Hakeem's production when you consider these two aspects is great because I believe you shouldn't penalize a big man if his perimeter players can't get him the ball or if they're being baited into an up and down game and seduced into playing into the opponent's hands although this does show an inherit limitation in a big man's game due to their inability to create offense from the get-go. The above issues are something Hakeem didn't come across in the 1994 or 1995 playoffs with the exception of the 1994 finals to a certain extent. Hakeem also didn't receive much support early on in this series; I remember Hubie Brown stating how he felt Hakeem was essentially playing 1 on 5 in the first two games at Seattle. In general, I think 1993 Hakeem got doubled a bit more than 1994 and 1995 Hakeem did because the 1994 and especially 1995 team had better spacing and shooting which can make your box score stats look weaker.

I'll get to your questions now.

These questions are all pertaining to Hakeem directly, for the purpose of this thread presume everybody else on the 93 Rockets team performs identically:

1) What does Hakeem have to do differently to beat the Sonics?

I think Hakeem did everything he possibly could. If you read my above quoted post, he faced a really tough defense that was hell bent on taking him away from the offense with quick double teaming, Houston's guards were not adept at handling Seattle's SOS pressure defense and the coaching staff didn't really make the necessary adjustments. Like I said, his production would've definitely been better had Houston been able to get him the ball more often.

I know this isn't what you wanted since you're asking what Hakeem could've done differently but I feel they could've established Otis Thorpe more often for instance (check his numbers in the games they won and lost that series). You can run a high-low set with Hakeem being the decoy and delivering the entry pass to Thorpe. Hakeem can be used in more of a jump shooting role in that situation which can also allow him to get more shots up. Hell, they could've made some in-game adjustments more often that specifically relate to Hakeem such as using him to space the floor along the baseline so guards can penetrate and dish, come off curls for foul line jumpers, use him in PnRs, use him in cross screens to get better position down low and score before the double comes, etc. They did make some of the aforementioned adjustments but not on a consistent basis. Obviously, some of these strategies are negated to some extent because of how great Seattle's defense was. For instance, I'm not sure how primarily playing a penetrate and dish style of basketball would've been that effective against Seattle because Houston's guards were a bit erratic, Seattle had great man defenders in guys like McMillan and Payton and their team was great at providing help and making great, quick rotations to recover so they could force you into bad passes/turnovers which would lead to easy offense. With all this said, in game 7, Houston's offense was great. I think they had finally adjusted to Seattle's defense and they played an excellent basketball game from a mental standpoint in the sense that they made smart decisions and did not turn the ball over. Their issue in game 7 was more so their rebounding; Hakeem had 17 boards despite being all over the floor defensively but they still got outrebounded by a significant margin.

I also agree with the posters that stated they faced some unfavorable officiating not only in game 7 (3 bad calls) but also in their last game of the regular season against San Antonio that would've given them home court for the Seattle series.

Call looms big
Several Rockets harkened back to the final game of the regular season after finding out they would be traveling to Seattle for the opener of the second-round series.
In that 82nd game at San Antonio, the Rockets appeared to win in regulation, except that refs Hugh Evans and Ronnie Nunn ruled David Robinson's tip-in came before the final buzzer, tying the game. Television replays seemed to support the Rockets' argument that the tip was late.
Anyway, because of that ruling, the Rockets are hitting the road instead of welcoming the Sonics, who won the home-court advantage in the second round because they owned the tiebreaker against the Rockets. Both teams finished the regular season 55-27.

- Chron

Tomjanovich didn't want to comment on the officiating, even though one member of yesterday's officiating crew, Hugh Evans, has acknowledged making an incorrect call that cost the Rockets a loss to San Antonio in the Houston's final regular-season game.

. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ug=1702705

2) Would the Rockets beat the Suns? If not, what would he have to do in order to make it to the Finals?

I think they could have, no guarantee but it's certainly possible. Houston was probably the best team at limiting Barkley that year due to having a solid initial defender in Otis Thorpe, a decent help defender in Horry who was a good shot blocker, had length and was a good double teamer and of course, the best defender in the league in Hakeem who would always be looking to provide help, serve as an intimidating force in the paint, etc. Some other posters have mentioned how KJ went berserk on Houston (hurt them with dribble penetration and opened up the perimeter game) in the 1994 and 1995 playoffs which was certainly a big reason for those series going to a game 7 but consider that KJ did not play at that level in 1993 due to injuries and a period of adjustment. Houston's PnR defense was also much better this year than in 1995 so that also can't be exploited. Of course, that is negated to some extent by Barkley's presence who was healthy and playing much better in the 1993 playoffs (he was injured in the 1994 and 1995 series) but like I said, Houston is the best equipped team at limiting his production. On the flip side, PHX did not have anybody to contain Hakeem and this is a Hakeem who felt he deserved the MVP that year. You know how he played when he felt he deserved MVP (1995 WCF vs Robinson) so it's a safe bet that he would dominated that PHX frontline. Houston can also exploit Otis Thorpe on Barkley like they did in the 1994 series because Barkley's man defense was suspect (he was voted the worst defender in the league in 1996). It also depends on how well Houston's guards (inconsistent, streaky) play though. They would have to make their open shots and make good decisions on the court such as not being baited into an up and down game which is the pace PHX preferred, they would have to ensure they get the ball to Hakeem with good entry passing etc. This is further magnified by the fact that Houston's bench was awful this year (no Cassell or Elie) so if the starting guards were not having a good night, then you can forget about it.

BTW, if you watch that Hakeem game 7 vs Seattle video bastillon posted, you can hear the reporter talk about how PHX would rather face Seattle since they did not want to face that halfcourt offense led by Hakeem.

You can read an article below on how Barkley talks about how Hakeem's presence bothered him.

Sir Charles says Thorpe overrated as '94 factor
W.H. STICKNEY JR. Staff
TUE 05/09/1995 HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Section Sports, Page 2, 2 STAR Edition

PHOENIX -- The subject put to Phoenix Suns power forward Charles Barkley was the absence of Otis Thorpe in the Rockets' lineup. The response suggested Barkley long ago dismissed the notion Thorpe was an intimidating opponent for one of the NBA's most intimidating forces.

"I really wasn't worried so much about Otis last year as I was about Hakeem (Olajuwon) behind me, in my back," Barkley said Monday after the Suns completed their final workout before hosting the Rockets tonight in Game 1 of the 1995 Western Conference semifinals.

A popular school of thought says the Rockets would still be looking for their first championship if not for the 6-10, 250-pound Thorpe going body-to-body last year -- and more than holding his own -- with Portland's Buck Williams, the Suns' Barkley and Utah's Karl Malone in three West playoff series.

But Barkley scoffs at the notion Thorpe neutralized him to help the Rockets defeat the Suns 4-3 and advance to the West finals.

"Everybody makes a big deal out of Otis," Barkley said. "Otis is a good player, but it's nice to have Hakeem Olajuwon behind you. People make too much of the Otis issue. I don't know why it's like that.

"Their team is fine like it is. They just beat a great Utah team and they didn't have the home-court advantage. People always want to discuss what worked, what didn't work, who had the advantages, who had the disadvantages. There are not that many people who should be voicing their opinion on that kind of stuff.

There's not that many people who've played in the NBA; they really don't know.

"This is going to be a tough series. We're expecting that."

Period.

Done deal.

Forget the Otis Thorpe issue.

So says Sir Charles.

After all, this isn't a time for thrashing out individual matchups. It's a time, said Barkley, for the Suns to continue the work they've started. As he puts it, "We're in the butt-kicking business, and business has been very good lately."

Phoenix opened the playoffs by sweeping aside ex-Rocket Thorpe and his new team, the Portland Trail Blazers, in three straight games.

In the clinching third game, Barkley led all scorers with 47 points, the fifth time he had scored 40 or more in the playoffs. He shot 62 percent (16-for-26) from the field and made a playoff career-high four 3-pointers in eight attempts.

In Game 2, Barkley burned the Blazers for 25 points after having notched game highs of 29 points and 16 rebounds in the Suns' 129-102 victory in the opener.

In fairness to Thorpe, Barkley for much of the time in the series was not his defensive assignment. After being traded from Houston on Valentines' Day for Clyde Drexler, Thorpe was relegated to role player with Portland.

"Last year, Otis played me well," Barkley said. "Otis is a good player. I respect him, but Hakeem is the guy who gave me fits. I felt like I could beat Otis. But every time I'd beat Otis, Hakeem was back there. That has not changed. But I'm feeling better physically and looking forward to this series now."

It is true Barkley entered last year's playoffs with equal zeal but far less mobility than now. Throughout most of the 1993-94 season and all through the '94 playoffs, he was bothered by a bad back. When the Rockets beat the Suns in the seventh game of the Western semifinals, Barkley dragged up and down The Summit floor like a hobbled old man.

In the offseason, he chose alternative methods of rehabilitation and treatment over surgery. "Sometimes, traditional cures just don't work," he said.

Barkley still has regular acupressure treatment on the back. Recently, he's been receiving acupuncture to relieve soreness in his neck.

"I'm a big believer in stuff like that. I'll try anything," he said.

But it wasn't among the cures he tried prior to entering the '94 playoffs.

"You really don't want to have to battle Hakeem Olajuwon and Otis Thorpe unless you're healthy," Barkley said. "And last year, it didn't work out for me. Hopefully, this year it will work out for me. And if it doesn't, hey, that happens."

The job of trying to stop Barkley has now fallen to a Rockets committee chaired by Pete Chilcutt. He will be supported by Chucky Brown and Charles Jones, a pair of Continental Basketball Association refugees.

The three-headed power forward never made an indelible mark against Malone when the Rockets beat the Jazz 3-2 in the first round of this year's playoffs. By halftime of Sunday's decisive 95-91 victory at Salt Lake City, Chilcutt, Brown and Jones each had picked up three fouls trying to stop the Mailman.

Phoenix and Houston have played twice since Drexler left for Portland. Barkley scored 26 points in a 113-102 win over the Rockets at The Summit on March 7 and 34 points in a 99-97 loss at America West Arena 17 days later.

Phoenix coach Paul Westphal says Thorpe's exit hasn't affected the way the Suns prepare to play the Rockets.
"We try to go to Barkley one way or the other, whether they have Thorpe or not," Westphal said. "It might be a little more effective if they don't have him."

At this point in the season, King Kong could put on a Rockets uniform and stand in at power forward, and Barkley would probably be nonplused.

"We're trying to get past where we were last year and the Rockets are trying to get back to where they want to get," Barkley said. "That's the only thing that matters.

"We can't control what happened last year. We don't want to get knocked out in the second round, they want to get back to the championship. That's the only thing that's important."

3) Would the Rockets beat the Bulls? If not, what would he have to do in order to win the title?

This is a hypothetical that I've long wondered about and often discussed in great detail and all I can say is it could go either way. I really don't care about regular season match ups since the playoffs are a whole different ball game (more time for adjustments, game planning, study your opponent etc) but the Rockets were 5-1 vs Chicago during the Bulls' first 3 peat and Chicago actually acknowledged Houston as a very tough match up.

Houston's strength lies in their defense with their scheme built around funneling guys to Hakeem. Unlike say Seattle who had bigs such as Kemp and Perkins to keep Hakeem busy, Chicago does not have a big that can score inside and draw fouls like Kemp could or a big who can stretch the floor as far as Sam can which means you can't really negate Hakeem's defensive impact so he'd be free to help out and roam on defense. You did have someone like Cartwright who could shoot that awkward looking jumper from about 15 and in but those are the type of shots you live with. You also have two very solid initial defenders guarding Pippen and Jordan in Horry and Maxwell, respectively. Maxwell was a tenacious defender, would body up guys well and with the help of Hakeem who would be roaming around, I could see them holding Jordan to right around his averages. Horry had long arms, good instincts, was a great athlete and with the help of Hakeem, I could see them limiting Pippen in the half-court set. Horry actually did get some Pippen comparisons in the mid 90s, Horace Grant actually compared the two after the 1995 finals. Chicago also can't exploit Houston's only major weakness this year (PG defense) since their PGs were primarily spot up shooters in Armstrong and Paxson. Otis Thorpe had some good games vs Chicago in that time period so I think he could be a factor as well and he could potentially outplay Horace Grant. Grant does have some advantages over him such as his mobility, quickness and range on defense but you couldn't count on him to score in the low-post like you could with Thorpe. Going into Thorpe in the low-post can also help reduce the load on Hakeem who most likely will face the brunt of the defensive attention. Houston also had athletes all over the floor (Max, Horry, Thorpe, Hakeem) so they could play a running game but I wouldn't say that would be a good strategy since they could forget about Hakeem at times. Like I said earlier, Houston would have to rely on their starters a lot though since they don't have Sam Cassell or Mario Elie this year meaning their bench was fairly weak. I remember Rudy often went with Scott Brooks and Winston Garland over Kenny and Max in the 4th quarters of the regular season but I don't think that would work with Chicago. Garland is too short vs Jordan which would hurt him on the block and neither could handle Chicago's pressure defense.

Chicago's strength also lies in their defense. The Bulls were known for their vaunted full court pressure defense, their quick double teams and great rotations, how they could totally take teams out of their offense and that could really bother Houston for similar reasons as to why it bothered them vs LAC and SEA that year. Their guards could not handle pressure defense that well, it could take time off the clock leading to rushed/forced shots, it could lead to turnovers leading to easy transition baskets, it could totally take Hakeem out of the offense because he wouldn't get the ball or would be forced to give it up when gets it etc. I do think that Houston might've done better against Chicago in this regard because they would've probably learned to deal better with pressure having dealt with the Clippers and Sonics and they would've made adjustments and learned from their mistakes. I also think as great as Houston's defense was, Chicago would always get some easy baskets generated by the triangle offense as well as their transition game since it's a safe bet they would force Houston into a good number of turnovers. Bulls were also much better at making adjustments whether it's on an in-game (they'd often come out with a different game plan in the second half) or game by game basis due to their superior coaching staff in Phil Jackson and John Bach as opposed to Houston who didn't even make adjustments a whole lot as they liked sticking to their offensive system more often which I feel definitely hurt them vs a team like Seattle.

It could honestly go either way for me. As a side note, you might find these quotes below to be an interesting read:

GOOD MATCHUP: Bulls coach Phil Jackson, by the way, said way back in March 1993 that Houston would be a fun team to play for a title.

"I'd like to play those guys in the finals," Jackson said, after watching film of a Houston game.

Asked why he'd say that, Jackson explained. "It was simply the fact they have always been a great team against us, and Hakeem Olajuwon has always played well against us. Michael (Jordan) had never had a real good game down there. I thought it had all the earmarks of a real good battle."

Jordan was less enthusiastic about such a matchup.

"That's the team we didn't want to face," Jordan said. "Of all the teams, in the three years that we won the championship, Houston was the team we probably most feared because of the matchup at center. We couldn't find a way to contain Olajuwon."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/4641 ... tml?pg=all

Now that the NBA Finals have turned into a near-rout, the inevitable question is whether any team in the NBA could have been tougher on the Chicago Bulls than Phoenix.

Assistant coach John Bach didn't hesitate when asked the question.

"Oh, we've had our troubles with teams," Bach said. "Look at Houston. They've created a lot of problems for us.

"It's not that we don't have problems. We're mortal."

The Rockets won both meetings with the Bulls this season, by 14 points in Chicago and 11 at The Summit. The Rockets have won five of the six meetings in the last three seasons.

- Chron

After all, the Bulls have lost six out of their last eight games against Houston and the last five at the Summit. And just in case anyone needs reminding, those losses were with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen.

So what would cause the Bulls' coach to be optimistic in light of not only those numbers, but also the fact that the 9-0 Rockets are the NBA's hottest team and the Bulls are struggling?

The "one-upmanship" said Jackson, hurt the Bulls. "Michael (Jordan) usually got into it," he said, "and it was usually a Michael-(Hakeem) Olajuwon thing. (They came out in) the same draft year, both of them were MVP players and it basically got to a point where it was not the most successful place for him because Vernon Maxwell is a thorn in our side and it got to be one of those kind of games."

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993 ... en-rockets

The Rockets, in fact, had a 5-1 record vs. Jordan and the Bulls from 1991 through 1993, the span of Chicago's first "three-peat."

After a loss on his home floor at Chicago Stadium in 1993, Jordan said, "We have no answer for the big guy. It's a good thing they won't ever make it to the (NBA) Finals, because I don't think we could beat them."

http://www.chron.com/sports/rockets/art ... 502296.php

4) Presume the Rockets beat the Bulls due to Hakeem's elevated performance through (3). How differently do you view Hakeem's legacy?

Again, only Hakeem performs differently here, everything else is unchanged.

Normally, it wouldn't make much of a difference at all because I don't weigh one series THAT much and I separate individual performance from team success especially knowing that Hakeem was doing everything out there and left practically nothing on the table. With that said, I might put his peak right alongside Jordan especially if Hakeem is the best player on the floor because one thing I have some trouble comparing and analyzing is the impact of a perimeter player vs a big. Right now, I have Hakeem's peak as top 2 behind Jordan (only rank players I've seen). That series could potentially help put that in perspective. Generally, I will say that bigs will have a greater impact defensively while perimeter players have a greater impact offensively and that definitely holds true for a Hakeem/Jordan comparison as well. Perimeter players will have the benefit of creating/initiating offense from the get-go and often getting the chance to control the tempo more often but obviously bigs have a large amount of offense funneled towards them, are often involved in defensive possessions more often, change more shots, take away the easiest shots in the paint etc. I'd like to see their strengths collide and see how much they can do to limit the effectiveness of the other. It would've been a treat watching these two go at it in the finals. Both players at their peaks are essentially flawless and in some ways, mirror images of the other. I remember Horace Grant said, "Hakeem is Michael Jordan playing center." and that's something I agree with in terms of their approach to the game, their mental toughness, their immense skill-level to adapt to a wide variety of situations, their instincts, how well they anticipate the development of plays etc.

The majority would definitely view him differently because a lot of people hold the fact that they didn't face/beat the Bulls against him and the Rockets. He would also get a boost for completing yet another improbable run facing and beating the team with the best record in the league in PHX as well as dethroning the 2 time defending champ in Chicago.