Hakeem over Kobe .. ?

[tpols]

always curious to see those that have Hakeem over Kobe on all time lists .. i know its mostly the bron fam who've been mind****ed into oblivion.. but way i see it:



Kobe

11x All NBA First Team
2x All NBA Second Team
1x All NBA Third Team

4/6 superstar rings divided by attempts


Hakeem

6x All NBA First Team
3x All NBA Second Team
3x All NBA Third Team

2/3 superstar superstar rings divided by attempts




I mean .. yea Hakeem's little run in the mid 90s was insane.. like Dirk's 2011 run repeated twice, but for CAREERS, he just falls way short. I could see 90's guys saying "well, hakeem played in the golden age of centers so it was tougher", but Kobe played in the golden age of swing men, and came out unanimously on top. Hakeem was a shot away from conceding a title to Pat ewing.. and didnt do a whole lot outside a two year span.

others have pointed it out before, but Kobe's post shaq resume stacks up next to hakeem's..



I've never seen anybody hash out there thoughts on this so it'd be nice to get input

[Bigsmoke]

i would draft Hakeem over Kobe without thinking twice

Kobe might have a better career tho with all those years he put in

[TheWinningFam]

Forwards>Guards
10>12th

[Smoke117]

You only have to ask one question:

If you are you starting a team, who do you want, Hakeem Olajuwon or Kobe Bryant?

Anyone who chooses Kobe Bryant knows nothing about basketball. This nonsense that Kobe is somehow greater than Hakeem Olajuwon might be the most cringeworthy notion on ish...and that's saying a lot. No player regardless of position ever carried teams like Olajuwon did...ON BOTH ENDS. Literally all you have to do is start with defense between these two...Dream is the greatest defensive player of the modern era...Kobe was a pretty good defensive sg? The impact difference in this regard is completely laughable...and Hakeem WAS A GREAT FIRST OPTION OFFENSIVELY TOO.

If you think Kobe Bryant is greater than Hakeem Olajuwon you're a ****ing moron and not worth my time, period.

[Young X]

You have to keep in mind, Hakeem Olajuwon wasn't blessed to play for a winning organization like the Lakers so he spent half of his career on mediocre teams without HOF players and coaching alongside of him.

That plays a huge role in team success and accolades. You can't just...not factor it in.

[SouBeachTalents]

It's honestly not that absurd to rank Hakeem over Kobe. Dude played with by FAR the worst supporting cast/coaches of any top 10 player and still matched Kobe in MVP's/FMVP's, with 2 DPOY to boot. Plus Kobe never matched Hakeem's peak in '94 & '95. There are arguments that could be made to rank either player over the other

[tpols]

i would draft Hakeem over Kobe without thinking twice


thats not the logic for career rankings though .. there's a heavy element of circumstance to these rankings. Like, KG as an individual player to me is as good as Kobe or Duncan.. and honestly, Dirk probably is too.. but you never see them crack top 10 or top 15 .. this is due to circumstance that Kobe and Duncan are ranked higher. They had better teams and thus more shots at winning.


So if you're going to put Hakeem over Kobe and use that logic, there's no in between.. Kobe cant be top 12 or whatever the troll is nowadays.. he has to be like .. top 25 if you have hakeem over him because the logic for that would pile on other guys over him as well. but trolls know they cant say that because its too blatant.


career rankings from what i seen always use winning as the primary element.. winning, playoff domination over peers, and longevity are the keys to it. and kobe won more and lasted longer than hakeem.

[Bigsmoke]

You only have to ask one question:

If you are you starting a team, who do you want, Hakeem Olajuwon or Kobe Bryant?

Anyone who chooses Kobe Bryant knows nothing about basketball. This nonsense that Kobe is somehow greater than Hakeem Olajuwon might be the most cringeworthy notion on ish...and that's saying a lot. No player regardless of position ever carried teams like Olajuwon did...ON BOTH ENDS. Literally all you have to do is start with defense between these two...Dream is the greatest defensive player of the modern era...Kobe was a pretty good defensive sg? The impact difference in this regard is completely laughable...and Hakeem WAS A GREAT FIRST OPTION OFFENSIVELY TOO.

If you think Kobe Bryant is greater than Hakeem Olajuwon you're a ****ing moron and not worth my time, period.

Kobe did achieve more and i think there were guys like Bill Walton and Duncan that did some SUPER HEAVY lifting before to get a ring.

[Kblaze8855]

Hakeem won 2 titles. But hes been ranked next to or ahead of guys with more as a basketball player for twenty years. Its clearly not a resume issue. Its largely a basketball issue. Which makes perfect sense to me...but when you say that then people want to get all up in arms as if that means Kobe should be ahead of _____ because they feel he was a superior player and all....and it just goes nowhere.

[Hey Yo]

thats not the logic for career rankings though .. there's a heavy element of circumstance to these rankings. Like, KG as an individual player to me is as good as Kobe or Duncan.. and honestly, Dirk probably is too.. but you never see them crack top 10 or top 15 .. this is due to circumstance that Kobe and Duncan are ranked higher. They had better teams and thus more shots at winning.


So if you're going to put Hakeem over Kobe and use that logic, there's no in between.. Kobe cant be top 12 or whatever the troll is nowadays.. he has to be like .. top 25 if you have hakeem over him because the logic for that would pile on other guys over him as well. but trolls know they cant say that because its too blatant.


career rankings from what i seen always use winning as the primary element.. winning, playoff domination over peers, and longevity are the keys to it. and kobe won more and lasted longer than hakeem.
Finals performance....not the first 3 rounds, is what's judged.

All Kobe kids have is what he did BEFORE the Finals.

[Smoke117]

It's honestly not that absurd to rank Hakeem over Kobe. Dude played with by FAR the worst supporting cast/coaches of any top 10 player and still matched Kobe in MVP's/FMVP's, with 2 DPOY to boot. Plus Kobe never matched Hakeem's peak in '94 & '95. There are arguments that could be made to rank either player over the other

There is no argument to put Kobe Bryant over Hakeem Olajuwon unless you are one of those morons that thinks because he has 5 TEAM championships to Hakeems 2 TEAM championship that means something...Kobe Bryants only claim to being ranked above Olajuwon is that he won more...yeah because he played with much better players and teams throughout his career...If we are defining players by their impact and what they did on the court then it's not even close...Kobe Bryant doesn't come close to impacting the game individually like Hakeem did.

[Kblaze8855]

So if you're going to put Hakeem over Kobe and use that logic, there's no in between.. Kobe cant be top 12 or whatever the troll is nowadays.. he has to be like .. top 25 if you have hakeem over him because the logic for that would pile on other guys over him as well.


That's more or less what I was talking about. The "Oh but then that means....." argument where people make an absurd claim and act like because you said something else you must mean that as well.

Its perfectly reasonable to want Hakeem over Kobe as a player and not think 25 others justify it as well.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

[ArbitraryWater]

Hakeem's led as many title teams as Kobe against far greater odds, and was a rigjob away from possibly threepeating...

I dont really see how you can consider Kobe better, which Kobe version touches any of Hakeem 1992-1995? Or even '89-'95?

Hakeem just better.

[Bigsmoke]

thats not the logic for career rankings though .. there's a heavy element of circumstance to these rankings. Like, KG as an individual player to me is as good as Kobe or Duncan.. and honestly, Dirk probably is too.. but you never see them crack top 10 or top 15 .. this is due to circumstance that Kobe and Duncan are ranked higher. They had better teams and thus more shots at winning.


So if you're going to put Hakeem over Kobe and use that logic, there's no in between.. Kobe cant be top 12 or whatever the troll is nowadays.. he has to be like .. top 25 if you have hakeem over him because the logic for that would pile on other guys over him as well. but trolls know they cant say that because its too blatant.


career rankings from what i seen always use winning as the primary element.. winning, playoff domination over peers, and longevity are the keys to it. and kobe won more and lasted longer than hakeem.

actually u can.

I got Malone over Barkley even tho Barkley was better when comparing peaks.

again, Peak Hakeem > Peak Kobe

but Kobe's career > Hakeem's career

[ArbitraryWater]

The basic ground basis on historical lists are.... who would you pick in a draft?

Its Hakeem... I believe he gives me the far better chance of winning.

I dont have to take Kobe just because he happened to fall in the more fortunate situation, and thus racked up more team accomplishments.

[SouBeachTalents]

The basic ground basis on historical lists are.... who would you pick in a draft?

Its Hakeem... I believe he gives me the far better chance of winning.

I dont have to take Kobe just because he happened to fall in the more fortunate situation, and thus racked up more team accomplishments.

Just curious, where do you rank Russell?

[ArbitraryWater]

That's more or less what I was talking about. The "Oh but then that means....." argument where people make an absurd claim and act like because you said something else you must mean that as well.

Its perfectly reasonable to want Hakeem over Kobe as a player and not think 25 others justify it as well.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

this is true...

as for you tpols, I agree, I do see Dirk on an equal playing level with Kobe, like you do, but Im not afraid to show that in my all time list... people have to wake up to that being reasonable.

[Bigsmoke]

The basic ground basis on historical lists are.... who would you pick in a draft?

Its Hakeem... I believe he gives me the far better chance of winning.

I dont have to take Kobe just because he happened to fall in the more fortunate situation, and thus racked up more team accomplishments.

scoring 33643 points doesn't happened by being some lucky puppy u know

[ArbitraryWater]

Just curious, where do you rank Russell?

Mannnnn.... to this day Im flip flopping on Russell :oldlol: I cant decide... and pretty much the whole top 10 can be mixed up, after the top 5 (for me).... I dont feel comfortable giving a spot on him right now. Maybe 6.

[ArbitraryWater]

scoring 33643 points doesn't happened by being some lucky puppy u know

thx Bigsmoke

way to contribute

[ArbitraryWater]

Hakeem had Jordan, Magic, Bird, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Shaq etc. Like a 3rd of the top 25 players (Ewing top 30), AND had a shit team, he's not getting MVP's with this.

Hakeem averaged something like 30/13/3/3/2 from 1988-1993 in the playoffs. Productive, effective, consistent. Kobe (or even Duncan) is NOT a better basketball player than Hakeem, resume would have me believe he is, though.

[tpols]

That's more or less what I was talking about. The "Oh but then that means....." argument where people make an absurd claim and act like because you said something else you must mean that as well.

Its perfectly reasonable to want Hakeem over Kobe as a player and not think 25 others justify it as well.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.


i'm not following ..

if you use smoke's logic of "Hakeem was just better than Kobe" .. or "who would i rather draft first?" then you could easily list 25 guys over Kobe because all the centers and big guys would get picked first obviously. smoke would probably take kawhi leonard and scottie pippen over Kobe.

Thats has nothing to do with career rankings as theyve been shown on this site though.

[Smoke117]

Hakeem had Jordan, Magic, Bird, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Shaq etc. Like a 3rd of the top 25 players (Ewing top 30), AND had a shit team, he's not getting MVP's with this.

Hakeem averaged something like 30/13/3/3/2 from 1988-1993 in the playoffs. Productive, effective, consistent. Kobe (or even Duncan) is NOT a better basketball player than Hakeem, resume would have me believe he is, though.

Why don't you just altogether stop talking about players you never watched play? You aren't over 20, so shut the hell up.

[ArbitraryWater]

Russell today would be like a 15ppg/15rpg/5apg/5bpg guy...

Rodman/KG hybrid IMO.. could run/jump like an Olympian (he legitemately could have participated at the Olympics, like Wilt).

[Bigsmoke]

thx Bigsmoke

way to contribute

you talking to Kobe like he Robert Horry or something.

the man was an 18x All Star, 3rd All Time in points scored, 33,643 career points scored, and has many other individual accolades.

thats is enough put him ahead of Hakeem

[chazzy]

I dont have to take Kobe just because he happened to fall in the more fortunate situation, and thus racked up more team accomplishments.
Why doesn't this logic apply to guys like Magic and Bird? Shorter careers and played in very fortunate situations. Hakeem was elite on both ends unlike these two and played longer. Give Hakeem their type of support and who knows how much he wins etc etc

Accomplishments do matter at the end of the day. Kobe's got 2 rings as the man and 2 more as an elite top 3 player with great playoff runs. And then another as a top 10 all star. I have him 1 spot ahead of Hakeem despite the accomplishment gap because of how good Hakeem was a player.

[ArbitraryWater]

i'm not following ..

if you use smoke's logic of "Hakeem was just better than Kobe" .. or "who would i rather draft first?" then you could easily list 25 guys over Kobe because all the centers and big guys would get picked first obviously. smoke would probably take kawhi leonard and scottie pippen over Kobe.

Thats has nothing to do with career rankings as theyve been shown on this site though.

thats just your oponion though innit

plus Kblaze probably agrees still... he believes there isnt much of a difference between the 20th best and the 70th best.

[tpols]

Hakeem had Jordan, Magic, Bird, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Shaq etc. Like a 3rd of the top 25 players (Ewing top 30), AND had a shit team, he's not getting MVP's with this.

Hakeem averaged something like 30/13/3/3/2 from 1988-1993 in the playoffs. Productive, effective, consistent. Kobe (or even Duncan) is NOT a better basketball player than Hakeem, resume would have me believe he is, though.


Kobe had Duncan, KG, Dirk, Wade, Paul, Manu, Lebron, Kidd, Nash, etc The 2000s were stacked with superstar top 25 GOAT talent.. it's your boys era that's weak as **** from a superstar perspective lol.

[ArbitraryWater]

Why doesn't this logic apply to guys like Magic and Bird? Shorter careers and played in very fortunate situations. Hakeem was elite on both ends unlike these two and played longer. Give Hakeem their type of support and who knows how much he wins etc etc

Accomplishments do matter at the end of the day. Kobe's got 2 rings as the man and 2 more as an elite top 3 player with great playoff runs. And then another as a top 10 all star. I have him 1 spot ahead of Hakeem despite the accomplishment gap because of how Hakeem was a player.

I know... I wouldnt blame you if you put Hakeem over Bird/Magic, I do currently have him over Magic... he was a bit of a hot head in his early days, I dont think he could have had that Celtics team as ingrained as Bird did... its close playing wise between them, thats the main point for me.

It varies how much accomplishments matter for people from person to person...

Kblaze has made it his career to tell people that just by having his signature on 'titles are overrated' and they are in the way people use them with Kobe.


you talking to Kobe like he Robert Horry or something.

the man was an 18x All Star, 3rd All Time in points scored, 33,643 career points scored, and has many other individual accolades.

thats is enough put him ahead of Hakeem

Yea sry I just based it on who I thought was better

No arbitrary longevity achievement based on career points

[Human Error]

If you think Kobe is better than Hakeem, you are an idiot, and I do not speak to idiots. Sorry.

[tpols]

If you think Kobe is better than Hakeem, you are an idiot, and I do not speak to idiots. Sorry.

*looks at sig*
"proves idiots wrong"


how can you prove an idiot wrong if you dont speak to them? telepathy? dumbass lol ..

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe had Duncan, KG, Dirk, Wade, Paul, Manu, Lebron, Kidd, Nash, etc The 2000s were stacked with superstar top 25 GOAT talent.. it's your boys era that's weak as **** from a superstar perspective lol.

Kobe wasnt even close to another MVP though... never was there a controversy on him not winning. '03 is probably his next best shot, but the 3-9 (was it?) record without Shaq looks bad. But that was like the only other traditional MVP season he had, with perhaps '09... in '10 he already drifted after the ASB.

[ArbitraryWater]

*looks at sig*
"proves idiots wrong"


how can you prove an idiot wrong if you dont speak to them? telepathy? dumbass lol ..

:roll:

[Akrazotile]

thats not the logic for career rankings though.

Yes it is. And it always has been.

For people without an agenda, anyway.

[Hey Yo]

Why doesn't this logic apply to guys like Magic and Bird? Shorter careers and played in very fortunate situations. Hakeem was elite on both ends unlike these two and played longer. Give Hakeem their type of support and who knows how much he wins etc etc

Accomplishments do matter at the end of the day. Kobe's got 2 rings as the man and 2 more as an elite top 3 player with great playoff runs. And then another as a top 10 all star. I have him 1 spot ahead of Hakeem despite the accomplishment gap because of how good Hakeem was a player.
Another reference to what Kobe did BEFORE the Finals to try to save face.

[tpols]

Another reference to what Kobe did BEFORE the Finals to try to save face.

stop side tracking this thread .. Kobe saw more of his competition before the Finals because he played in an era where the west was >> east .. which has been past like 15+ years.. Hakeem played in a more nuetral era.. wasnt much of a difference either way. And Hakeems most noteworthy dominations, like his one over D-Rob occured before the Finals anyways.

just .. stop. it doesnt even make sense what you're poppin up saying with relation to this topic. it's like mindless blurting out of hate from you.

[chazzy]

Another reference to what Kobe did BEFORE the Finals to try to save face.
2001 finals were good after game 1 loss. 2002 were good. He was top 3 both of those seasons. Your point?

[Doranku]

Another reference to what Kobe did BEFORE the Finals to try to save face.

Kobe's finals games during the two years ('01 and '02) that chazzy was referencing:

15/3/5 on 32%
31/8/6 on 48%
32/6/3 on 43%
19/10/9 on 46%
26/12/6 on 40%

22/3/6 on 38%
24/8/3 on 60%
36/6/4 on 61%
25/6/8 on 44%

[Hey Yo]

stop side tracking this thread .. Kobe saw more of his competition before the Finals because he played in an era where the west was >> east .. which has been past like 15+ years.. Hakeem played in a more nuetral era.. wasnt much of a difference either way. And Hakeems most noteworthy dominations, like his one over D-Rob occured before the Finals anyways.

just .. stop. it doesnt even make sense what you're poppin up saying with relation to this topic. it's like mindless blurting out of hate from you.
It's not sidetracking...it's the truth.

KK like yourself and others always bring up "Playoff runs" to try to save face cause he played like shit or was carried in most of his Finals wins.

It makes perfect sense and you know it!

When 0-1 or 0-2 was constantly brought up over the years....did you see "look what James did in round 2 of 2007 or round 2 in 2011?" In his defense?

No you didn't....all haters cared about was....ZERO RANGZ!!!

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe's finals games during the two years ('01 and '02) that chazzy was referencing:

15/3/5 on 32%
31/8/6 on 48%
32/6/3 on 43%
19/10/9 on 46%
26/12/6 on 40%

22/3/6 on 38%
24/8/3 on 60%
36/6/4 on 61%
25/6/8 on 44%

'02 is his best.. is it a surprise his best came in a non competitive sweep? Always the same.. longer the series goes on the more likely his stats are to drop...

[smoovegittar]

Both player are special. But Hakeem, man.........

[smoovegittar]

If you think Kobe is better than Hakeem, you are an idiot, and I do not speak to idiots. Sorry.


You're not speaking..... you're typing.

Rewind.

[PsychoBe]

nobody, aside from trolls, will ever put hakeem over kobe. ever.

[Round Mound]

I watched both of them in their primes. Hakeem was easily better (so was Sir Charles). More dominant and more efficient.

[feyki]

Even Hakeem's before 93 levels were arguably better than Kobe ever was with his amazing defensive capabilities .

And three consecutive years , He was amazing two way player as much as Kareem . Arguably goat prime .

Career wise , arguably top 5 all time . While Kobe has a case for 8th at maximum .

[I<3NBA]

Kobe who?

exactly.

[Chadwin]

No one in the history of the NBA carried a worse team to a title than Hakeem.

[Dragonyeuw]

Even Hakeem's before 93 levels were arguably better than Kobe ever was with his amazing defensive capabilities .

And three consecutive years , He was amazing two way player as much as Kareem . Arguably goat prime .

Career wise , arguably top 5 all time . While Kobe has a case for 8th at maximum .

MJ, Kareem, Duncan, Wilt, Russel, Lebron, Magic, Bird, Shaq all had better careers, so he's not arguably top 5 *career*. In terms of actual on-court prowess, he's a top ten talent IMO.

[feyki]

MJ, Kareem, Duncan, Wilt, Russel, Lebron, Magic, Bird, Shaq all had better careers, so he's not arguably top 5 *career*. In terms of actual on-court prowess, he's a top ten talent IMO.

MJ,Kareem,Russell and Wilt .. Yes . But others are debatable .

For Magic , Magic was almost on his peak days at 86 . But Hakeem played better against him and eliminated Showtime LA by an underdog . Let alone Hakeem's best days .

For Bird , Hakeem had better prime ( 93-95 ) . And better longevity too .

Lebron , Lebron could be surpass him in the future . But career wise , Hakeem has the better career with his 27-12-4-2-4 for 13 playoffs years . Hakeem has the year average as impact and also with two more playoffs years .

Shaq and Duncan , those trio are very close . I have him as 6th , one spot above Shaq and one spot below Duncan .

[West-Side]

Before Kobe retired - 99% of pasters had Kobe above Hakeem.
After Kobe retired - 80% of posters have him outside the top 10 list & 90% have Hakeem above Kobe.

So why even bother discussing these issues on here? It's a bunch of losers swallowing LeBron's jizz and purposely discrediting Kobe because he's the latest superstar to retire that was directly compared to LeBron.

Kobe won more, achieved more, was a more dominant scorer and playmaker. Hakeem was a phenomenal two way player, but his overall resume just doesn't stack up.

Besides Jordan Kobe is the only SG on the list. It's easy to say "I'd draft a centre over a SG". If we're talking about top 10 talent of all time than its pretty obvious you'd draft a centre or PG or PF over a SG unless you're Jordan. So Kobe has a disadvantage there. But after 08' no one really had Hakeem over Kobe. It's his down years after the Achilles injury and LeBron **** suckers on this forum that led Kobe to being so underrated.

I don't take any of this seriously, it's a joke really.
It's LeBron fans mostly trying to underrate Kobe and overrate LeBron, exponentially.