Is Hakeem Olajuwon Overrated?

[Nowitness]

Why is it we rarely mention Hakeem's failures, and only focus on a 2 year period in which he won?

Dude was losing in the first round to teams led by Xavier McDaniels/Dale Ellis and Rolando Blakcman/Derek Harper. The same people who claim Hakeem carried trash to a title in 94 then say he lost because he had trash between 87-94. If he is a top 10 player ever he is carrying scrubs past those teams. LBJ did it several times.

He was an awful teammate before he converted to Islam and was a black hole on offense before 92.

[imdaman99]

Those 2 years puts him up there. He was solid his entire career but to be the best for those 2 years and have every single accolade... plus as you said his conversion to Islam helped him change for the better.

[1987_Lakers]

I agree that his failures get mostly ignored out of any all-time great, people just seem to focus on those 2 years, but I can see why, his peak was nothing short of amazing.

[Phoenix]

It goes to show that there's no linearity in terms of how we rank players. Hakeem's peak was crazy high, and he gets bonus points because he beat his direct contemporaries at the center position. There was no 'but he never played against Ewing, Robinson or Shaq' ( albeit young then) caveats. I remember Hakeem's play well during that run, especially in 95, and there was an inevitability to it. Like, this guy was going to overcome whoever you throw at him.

[SouBeachTalents]

Threads asking if top 10 all time players are underrated or overrated are seriously the worst

[Nowitness]

Threads asking if top 10 all time players are underrated or overrated are seriously the worst

Good thing Hakeem isn't a top 10 player then

[HoopsNY]

Hakeem is one of the most underrated players of all-time. This thread is a joke.

[Nowitness]

Hakeem is one of the most underrated players of all-time. This thread is a joke.

Care to elaborate on his lack of success outside of 3 season? How is a dude who is usually rated between 8-12 based on 3 seasons 'underrated'?

[iamgine]

Why is it we rarely mention Hakeem's failures, and only focus on a 2 year period in which he won?

Dude was losing in the first round to teams led by Xavier McDaniels/Dale Ellis and Rolando Blakcman/Derek Harper. The same people who claim Hakeem carried trash to a title in 94 then say he lost because he had trash between 87-94. If he is a top 10 player ever he is carrying scrubs past those teams. LBJ did it several times.

He was an awful teammate before he converted to Islam and was a black hole on offense before 92.

Those teams were 53 wins and 47 wins team. Young LBJ didn't carry scrubs past that kind of teams several times. Maybe once or twice but that's it. Neither did young Jordan.

[Nowitness]

Those teams were 53 wins and 47 wins team. Young LBJ didn't carry scrubs past that kind of teams several times. Maybe once or twice but that's it. Neither did young Jordan.

2018, LBJ with his next best player as JR Smith beat a 59 win Raptors team and 53 win Celtics team.

In 2007 he beat a 53 win Pistons team.

Hakeem wasn't young tho. He lost in the first round for half a decade straight, then missed the playoffs all between the ages of 24-30.

If he carried scrubs to a title, how couldn't he carry scrubs (he had Otis Thorpe and Sleepy Floyd) past round 1 when the West was weaker than it has ever been?

Only years he won he did so dominating from the 3 point line when the line was shortened.

[iamgine]

2018, LBJ with his next best player as JR Smith beat a 59 win Raptors team and 53 win Celtics team.

In 2007 he beat a 53 win Pistons team.

Hakeem wasn't young tho. He lost in the first round for half a decade straight, then missed the playoffs between the ages of 24-30.

If he carried scrubs to a title, how couldn't he carry scrubs (he had Otis Thorpe and Sleepy Floyd) past round 1 when the West was weaker than it has ever been?

Only years he won he did so dominating from the 3 point line when the line was shortened.

2018 LBJ wasn't young. That's basically like 94 Hakeem.

Ok 2007. Like I said, once or twice.

[Phoenix]

Care to elaborate on his lack of success outside of 3 season? How is a dude who is usually rated between 8-12 based on 3 seasons 'underrated'?

Out of interest, which would you rank higher taking into account team 'success', let's assume Hakeem individually wins the same MVP/DPOY/All-nba accolades:

1) The Rockets between 84 and 98 never lose in the first round, make a handful of conference finals, make 3 finals ( 86, 94, 95) and lose each one.

2) How things actually played out, a handful of early round losses with 2 championships won in 94 and 95

[tpols]

Yes. As you mentioned young Hakeem was poor intangibly (this matters... guys like magic and Bird lift teammates up) and old Hakeem (the one who colluded with Barkley and Pippen) was no longer good.

So he had a two year run where his Finals competition also had trash help ~ John Starks as a 2nd option, and the other had HOF Clyde Drexler going off.

And he did it an era where MJ was retired so all of a sudden teams mustered the courage to win and could play without fear.

[1987_Lakers]

So he had a two year run where his Finals competition also had trash help ~ John Starks as a 2nd option, and the other had HOF Clyde Drexler going off.


Drexler averaged like 20-21 ppg in that playoff run, imagine calling that going off. "But, he had a 120 ORTG" :oldlol:

Also no mentioned of how Orlando's 2nd option Penny outplayed Drexler in the Finals.

[SouBeachTalents]

Yes. As you mentioned young Hakeem was poor intangibly (this matters... guys like magic and Bird lift teammates up) and old Hakeem (the one who colluded with Barkley and Pippen) was no longer good.

So he had a two year run where his Finals competition also had trash help ~ John Starks as a 2nd option, and the other had HOF Clyde Drexler going off.

And he did it an era where MJ was retired so all of a sudden teams mustered the courage to win and could play without fear.
Hakeem was 36 when he played with Barkley & Pippen, and still averaged 19/10 with 3 blocks on 51% and was All-NBA that season, so that's a strange definition of "no longer good".

And Shaq had trash help in the Finals :lol You've for sure hyped that team up before when discussing Jordan's competition, so it's rather inexplicable you'd do a 180 here, 3ball like in fact. And if you claim Drexler went off, so did Penny, who averaged more points and assists in the Finals than Drexler did. And the fact not only John Starks, but Derek Harper outproduced all of Hakeem's teammates by a prety significant margin in the '94 Finals should tell you how historically weak Hakeem's supporting cast was.

[Phoenix]

Yes. As you mentioned young Hakeem was poor intangibly (this matters... guys like magic and Bird lift teammates up) and old Hakeem (the one who colluded with Barkley and Pippen) was no longer good.

So he had a two year run where his Finals competition also had trash help ~ John Starks as a 2nd option, and the other had HOF Clyde Drexler going off.

And he did it an era where MJ was retired so all of a sudden teams mustered the courage to win and could play without fear.

Who was his second option in 94? Thorpe? Mad Max? Hakeem was legit at his apex and his greatness was legitimized in head to head matchups against other historically great centers. I also believe the 95 Rockets win a potential matchup with a Jordan-led Bulls team.

[3ba11]

Why is it we rarely mention Hakeem's failures, and only focus on a 2 year period in which he won?





Hakeem turned into a different player in 94' and 95' that we'd never seen before.. We'd never seen him shoot that much in the playoffs (usage) and we'd never seen his dream shake so polished or dominant.

So what happened in those years?

The alpha lion was gone - that's what happened - only when MJ retired did Hakeem's usage suddenly go through the roof and we saw the "dream shake" in full form like we'd never seen before - we didn't even know who was #2 behind MJ until MJ retired and we saw that Hakeem was "that guy" after MJ.

It raises an interesting question - would lebron similarly "disappear" into the background like Hakeem if MJ was still around?.. in reality, people rarely debate who is #2, so it shouldn't be a surprise that no one really saw it coming with Hakeem

Stephen A. talks about this "king of the hill" effect:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dtsA3L3p49w

[ShawkFactory]

I kind of look at his career in the same way I look at Tmac's if he had more longevity. What if McGrady had a crazy stretch in 07-08 where he scored like 33 a game and led the Magic to 2 straight titles?

The once all-time skilled guy who maybe lacked intangibles or was unlucky is all of a sudden looked at in a completely different light, and absolutely has not only a place in or near the top 10, but is looked at as someone who can compete in a game with anyone at the position ever.

[tpols]

Hakeem was 36 when he played with Barkley & Pippen, and still averaged 19/10 with 3 blocks on 51% and was All-NBA that season, so that's a strange definition of "no longer good".

And Shaq had trash help in the Finals :lol You've for sure hyped that team up before when discussing Jordan's competition, so it's rather inexplicable you'd do a 180 here, 3ball like in fact. And if you claim Drexler went off, so did Penny, who averaged more points and assists in the Finals than Drexler did. And the fact not only John Starks, but Derek Harper outproduced all of Hakeem's teammates by a prety significant margin in the '94 Finals should tell you how historically weak Hakeem's supporting cast was.

I didn't say Shaqs help was bad, that was referring to the Knicks who were no more talented than the Rockets. Starks was their 2nd option all year. And then in 1995 he had Clyde Drexler a top 5 all time SG producing and playing some of his best basketball ever. (nobody ever brings this up)

Kobe achieved the same amount of success (2 rings) in only half his career with Pau Gasol who was nowhere near top 5 PF all time. He wasn't even All NBA in his own era til LA.

Curry led one of the greatest dynasties ever with Klay and Dray who were nowhere near Clyde. And honestly prime Horry => Dray.

Hakeem is nice but people never criticize the 90% of the time he lost. Where as they have put microscopes on guys like Kobe, Curry, and even Lebron.

He has gotten special treatment.

[SouBeachTalents]

I didn't say Shaqs help was bad, that was referring to the Knicks who were no more talented than the Rockets. Starks was their 2nd option all year. And then in 1995 he had Clyde Drexler a top 5 all time SG producing and playing some of his best basketball ever. (nobody ever brings this up)

Kobe achieved the same amount of success (2 rings) in only half his career with Pau Gasol who was nowhere near top 5 PF all time. He wasn't even All NBA in his own era til LA.

Curry led one of the greatest dynasties ever with Klay and Dray who were nowhere near Clyde. And honestly prime Horry => Dray.

Hakeem is nice but people never criticize the 90% of the time he lost. Where as they have put microscopes on guys like Kobe, Curry, and even Lebron.

He has gotten special treatment.
You vastly overstate Drexler's performance :lol He played well, but was no better than a 2000 Kobe or 2012 Wade, all 3 played well, but did not perform at their usual prime form. 21/7/5 is a not the monster playoff run you make it out to be. '09 & '10 Gasol played just as well as Drexler did, and honestly was probably better than he was in 2010. Where they rank all time at their position has literally no relevance to their actual performance.

Of course Hakeem doesn't get the criticism LeBron & Kobe get, he's not nearly as popular or polarizing, but that also applies to Shaq, Duncan, Magic, Bird etc. Imo, Hakeem is definitely more underrated than he is overrated.

[outofstomach]

2018, LBJ with his next best player as JR Smith beat a 59 win Raptors team and 53 win Celtics team.

In 2007 he beat a 53 win Pistons team.

Hakeem wasn't young tho. He lost in the first round for half a decade straight, then missed the playoffs all between the ages of 24-30.

If he carried scrubs to a title, how couldn't he carry scrubs (he had Otis Thorpe and Sleepy Floyd) past round 1 when the West was weaker than it has ever been?

Only years he won he did so dominating from the 3 point line when the line was shortened.

none of those teams he faced in 2018 were formidable

[tpols]

You vastly overstate Drexler's performance :lol He played well, but was no better than a 2000 Kobe or 2012 Wade, all 3 played well, but did not perform at their usual prime form. 21/7/5 is a not the monster playoff run you make it out to be. '09 & '10 Gasol played just as well as Drexler did, and honestly was probably better than he was in 2010. Where they rank all time at their position has literally no relevance to their actual performance.

Of course Hakeem doesn't get the criticism LeBron & Kobe get, he's not nearly as popular or polarizing, but that also applies to Shaq, Duncan, Magic, Bird etc. Imo, Hakeem is definitely more underrated than he is overrated.

There's levels to this shit. Drexler played better than 2000 Kobe quite easily since Kobe was hurt in the Finals and hadn't even entered his prime yet. (2001) Drexler played elite defense, and elite offense throughout the whole run. 2012 Wade was still prime Wade top 5 SG of all time so I don't know what your point is there.

Shaq, Magic and Bird were also right on Kobe and Lebrons level of fame and scrutinization so you lost me there too.

Ultimately, Hakeems losses are never looked at. Only his wins. You can't say this for the majority of the top 10 GOATs.

[warriorfan]

Why is it we rarely mention Hakeem's failures, and only focus on a 2 year period in which he won?

Dude was losing in the first round to teams led by Xavier McDaniels/Dale Ellis and Rolando Blakcman/Derek Harper. The same people who claim Hakeem carried trash to a title in 94 then say he lost because he had trash between 87-94. If he is a top 10 player ever he is carrying scrubs past those teams. LBJ did it several times.

He was an awful teammate before he converted to Islam and was a black hole on offense before 92.

If he’s overrated… Which players do you put in front of him and why?

[Phoenix]

Ultimately, Hakeems losses are never looked at. Only his wins. You can't say this for the majority of the top 10 GOATs.

For at least one of his titles( 94) you could argue he had the least help of the other top 10 GOATS. Who in the top ten is winning chips on the Rockets teams Hakeem had between like 87 and 93?

[Nowitness]

For at least one of his titles( 94) you could argue he had the least help of the other top 10 GOATS. Who in the top ten is winning chips on the Rockets teams Hakeem had between like 87 and 93?

I’d give 03 Duncan the nod over 94 Hakeem.

No one is winning a title with his teams between 87-93, but most of them are not losing to teams led by Dale Ellis and Rolando Blackman. It’s not about him not winning, it’s about the fashion in which he lost. If he is a top 10 player ever he isn’t losing to them with slightly worse help (still had Thorpe and Sleepy). Had he lost to LA each year we wouldn’t care, but losing To them would have been like LBJ losing to teams led by DeRozan or Oladipo. But LBJ beat them with even less help

[Phoenix]

I’d give 03 Duncan the nod over 94 Hakeem.

No one is winning a title with his teams between 87-93, but most of them are not losing to teams led by Dale Ellis and Rolando Blackman. It’s not about him not winning, it’s about the fashion in which he lost. If he is a top 10 player ever he isn’t losing to them with slightly worse help (still had Thorpe and Sleepy). Had he lost to LA each year we wouldn’t care, but losing To them would have been like LBJ losing to teams led by DeRozan or Oladipo. But LBJ beat them with even less help

Maybe not, but whomever fits into that category you likely rank higher on the GOAT list, right? Anywhere from like 9 to 12 IMO is a fair rank though I also generally hate rankings. I have tiers, and for me Hakeem is in the tier with Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan.

[Nowitness]

Maybe not, but whomever fits into that category you likely rank higher on the GOAT list, right? Anywhere from like 9 to 12 IMO is a fair rank though I also generally hate rankings. I have tiers, and for me Hakeem is in the tier with Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan.

I’d agree with the idea of tiers, but Hakeem is not in their tier. As I said 2 years of success and 3 conference finals appearances compared to the 9+ Shaq, Kobe and Duncan had just doesn’t stack up.

I’m not denying his talent, he probably is the most talented player ever, but a legacy built off of 2 seasons just removes him from the elite of the elite. He is in the class of Moses, Dr J, Jerry West, Oscar, Dirk.

[Phoenix]

I’d agree with the idea of tiers, but Hakeem is not in their tier. As I said 2 years of success and 3 conference finals appearances compared to the 9+ Shaq, Kobe and Duncan had just doesn’t stack up.

I’m not denying his talent, he probably is the most talented player ever, but a legacy built off of 2 seasons just removes him from the elite of the elite. He is in the class of Moses, Dr J, Jerry West, Oscar, Dirk.

Kobe was first round fodder in 2006 and 2007 without Shaq or the combined frontcourt of Gasol/Bynum/Odom. Shaq got swept like 4 times. Duncan lost in the first round a couple times as the defending champ. We can pick apart everyone's career if we want to downplay someone to prop up others. Hakeem's one of the best I've ever seen play, he won a back to back outplaying other elite centers of the era. Because he couldn't take a shitty team past Dallas in the first few years of his career before he hit his prime is nitpicky. We all know any version of Hakeem from the 90s and especially 93 to like 96 isn't losing to Rolando Blackman.

Give Hakeem 10 years of Clyde Drexler as a running mate and he'll have more 'team success' outside of those years he won a chip. Or conversely, give Magic Hakeem's 80's squads and let's see him run showtime with that. We, generally speaking, do way too much tearing down of historically great players. There's nuances to how a players career goes beyond how good they are as an individual talent.

[rmt]

Kobe was first round fodder in 2006 and 2007 without Shaq or the combined frontcourt of Gasol/Bynum/Odom. Shaq got swept like 4 times. Duncan lost in the first round a couple times as the defending champ. We can pick apart everyone's career if we want to downplay someone to prop up others. Hakeem's one of the best I've ever seen play, he won a back to back outplaying other elite centers of the era. Because he couldn't take a shitty team past Dallas in the first few years of his career before he hit his prime is nitpicky. We all know any version of Hakeem from the 90s and especially 93 to like 96 isn't losing to Rolando Blackman.

Give Hakeem 10 years of Clyde Drexler as a running mate and he'll have more 'team success' outside of those years he won a chip. Or conversely, give Magic Hakeem's 80's squads and let's see him run showtime with that. We, generally speaking, do way too much tearing down of historically great players. There's nuances to how a players career goes beyond how good they are as an individual talent.

He won back to back when MJ took a break. Do you think he/Houston beat MJ and the Bulls?

[tpols]

For at least one of his titles( 94) you could argue he had the least help of the other top 10 GOATS. Who in the top ten is winning chips on the Rockets teams Hakeem had between like 87 and 93?

As OP has shown, its about how he lost that is ignored. I've seen people shit on Kobe for the 2006 loss where he lost as a 7 seed to a dynasty sun team. People shit on Curry for 2016, and he averaged dominant numbers in every other series. People shit on Lebron for 2015 (including myself) despite missing his 2nd and 3rd options.

Hakeem doesn't get any scrutiny for his losing. And losing to no names as well. Its swept under the rug.

No other GOAT only has two seasons of his career propel him to top 10 all time.

[ShawkFactory]

He won back to back when MJ took a break. Do you think he/Houston beat MJ and the Bulls?

He/Houston never played MJ and the Bulls.

Kind of an unfair assessment to make but I think that 95 team hangs with and even beats the pre-Rodman Bulls without question.

[Phoenix]

He won back to back when MJ took a break. Do you think he/Houston beat MJ and the Bulls?

94 no, 95 I believe so if the Bulls had made it to the finals. I don't believe in asterisking championships for things beyond one's control though. Hakeem beat who was in front of him, so I don't really roll with the 'but no MJ' thing. Same as I don't roll with the 'well the Bulls only won when Birds Celtics/Magics Lakers/Isiah's Pistons got old' schtick.

[tpols]

He won back to back when MJ took a break. Do you think he/Houston beat MJ and the Bulls?

Bingo.

[3ba11]

.
Thread Cliffs


Similar to how no one knew Hakeem was so good or #2 behind MJ until MJ retired, no one would know that Lebron was so good if MJ played at the same time

[Phoenix]

As OP has shown, its about how he lost that is ignored. I've seen people shit on Kobe for the 2006 loss where he lost as a 7 seed to a dynasty sun team. People shit on Curry for 2016, and he averaged dominant numbers in every other series. People shit on Lebron for 2015 (including myself) despite missing his 2nd and 3rd options.

Hakeem doesn't get any scrutiny for his losing. And losing to no names as well. Its swept under the rug.

No other GOAT only has two seasons of his career propel him to top 10 all time.

We're assigning the term 'dynasty' now to teams that win alot of games in an entertaining manner but don't win a chip? No hyperbole detected there.

Hakeem gets flack for his career outside 93-95 when he enjoyed the most success, hence why he's usually ranked bottom of the top ten or just outside it. If he had more success outside of that, and in ISH terms that would mean losing in the 2nd round or conference finals( lesser degree of failure or whatever), he'd be ranked even higher. Very few players actually get to face and beat their immediate positional rivals enroute to chips, and that factors into how people rank him. Is it right or fair? Who's to say when all of this shit is subjective?

[3ba11]

Bingo.


94' Houston legit sucked and just got lucky

But adding Drexler transformed their team because now the Rockets had a guy at 4th option (Horry) that could get prime Pippen stats (18/10 on 55% in the 95' Finals).. So Drexler made the Rockets kind of stacked

[Phoenix]

Bingo.

You say this like it's a foregone conclusion. The 95 Rockets team quite likely beat the Bulls with their paper-thin frontcourt if they get past Orlando and Indiana. Assuming Chicago wins in 94, you're talking a 5 year title run and like 7 years of deep playoff runs going back to when they were losing to Detroit.

[SouBeachTalents]

As OP has shown, its about how he lost that is ignored. I've seen people shit on Kobe for the 2006 loss where he lost as a 7 seed to a dynasty sun team. People shit on Curry for 2016, and he averaged dominant numbers in every other series. People shit on Lebron for 2015 (including myself) despite missing his 2nd and 3rd options.

Hakeem doesn't get any scrutiny for his losing. And losing to no names as well. Its swept under the rug.

No other GOAT only has two seasons of his career propel him to top 10 all time.
Bruh :lol

[Manny98]

He's rated fine

He outplayed, Malone, Barkley, Admiral and Shaq in a single playoff run, one of the most impressive championship runs ever

He beat the 86 Lakers with Magic,Kareem,Worthy and went on to take the 86 Celtics to 6 games in the most underrated finals run ever

His peak is right up there with Duncan,Shaq and Kareem

He's rated just fine, he doesn't really have a GOAT argument but he's comfortably in the tier just below with Kobe,Bird,Shaq, Duncan ect.

[Phoenix]

Bruh :lol

LOL. He couldn't be more obvious with that one. The term 'dyansty' wouldn't have entered the recesses of his mind if it were someone other than Kobe on the losing end.

[SouBeachTalents]

94' Houston legit sucked and just got lucky

But adding Drexler transformed their team because now the Rockets had a guy at 4th option (Horry) that could get prime Pippen stats (18/10 on 55% in the 95' Finals).. So Drexler made the Rockets kind of stacked
Yep, really puts into perspective how weak that era was when teams that “legit sucked” win the title. Shows how unimpressive Jordan’s rings really are

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

People keep talking about that 2 year stretch, but ignore Hakeem's 93 run. Which was in that same tier.

He was absolutely dominant in those playoffs, and a legit MVP candidate in the regular-season.

Hakeem also had KILLER runs in the 80s. So his prime and peak play definitely stack up. If the argument is about career, then I suppose you could make the overrated claim. I wouldn't agree with it, but can see why one would think that. I also agree that Hakeem's losses aren't talked about enough.

[Phoenix]

People keep talking about that 2 year stretch, but ignore Hakeem's 93 run. Which was in that same tier.

He was absolutely dominant in those playoffs, and a legit MVP candidate in the regular-season.

Hakeem also had KILLER runs in the 80s. So his prime and peak play definitely stack up. If the argument is about career, then I suppose you could make the overrated claim. I wouldn't agree with it, but can see why one would think that. I also agree that Hakeem's losses aren't talked about enough.

I think when examining losses, just as we do for wins, the part a player had in the outcome should be examined. Like, if Hakeem personally played well but his team just stuck and lost, should that be held against him? Conversely, did the team lose *because* of his own underperformance? IMHO these are the questions to ask for any of these players.

[Norcaliblunt]

2006 Suns with the bought out contract of Tim Thomas and the trade throw in Boris Diaw at center were a dynasty? Pretty funny stuff yo.

[Phoenix]

2006 Suns with the bought out contract of Tim Thomas and the trade throw in Boris Diaw at center were a dynasty? Pretty funny stuff yo.

It's Tpols talking about Kobe. Shaq was the sidekick and if Kobe lost to a team they had to be the greatest sentient beings ever created.

[ScottieQuitting]

LOL. He couldn't be more obvious with that one. The term 'dyansty' wouldn't have entered the recesses of his mind if it were someone other than Kobe on the losing end.

Yea. How are you a dynasty if you never won a championship? Hell, the Spurs aren’t a dynasty. They never ever went back to back.

[tpols]

94' Houston legit sucked and just got lucky

But adding Drexler transformed their team because now the Rockets had a guy at 4th option (Horry) that could get prime Pippen stats (18/10 on 55% in the 95' Finals).. So Drexler made the Rockets kind of stacked

Tim Duncan said that Robert Horry basically had superstar talent, but horrible work ethic. He was like the regular Joe through out the work week, but could turn it on when it counted.

Those numbers you posted I didn't know but are revealing. So basically Hakeem topped off his repeat with Clyde (Wade) and Horry (Dray... but better).

So Hakeem won a couple titles with what essentially was a super team.

And then people acted like he only carried scrubs.

That's the power of media deception.

[Norcaliblunt]

Tim Duncan said that Robert Horry basically had superstar talent, but horrible work ethic. He was like the regular Joe through out the work week, but could turn it on when it counted.

Those numbers you posted I didn't know but are revealing. So basically Hakeem topped off his repeat with Clyde (Wade) and Horry (Dray... but better).

So Hakeem won a couple titles with what essentially was a super team.

And then people acted like he only carried scrubs.

That's the power of media deception.


The biggest media deception is Kobe Bryant being some goat caliber player. Dude was a complete media creation from childhood all the way to his death. No one even gives a shit about Hakeem. Lol.

[Round Mound]

Hakeem was the 2nd best player in the game after Jordan in the 90's

[Nowitness]

Hakeem was the 2nd best player in the game after Jordan in the 90's

Where do you rank him all time?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I think when examining losses, just as we do for wins, the part a player had in the outcome should be examined. Like, if Hakeem personally played well but his team just stuck and lost, should that be held against him? Conversely, did the team lose *because* of his own underperformance? IMHO these are the questions to ask for any of these players.

That's fair and I dont disagree.

Relative to most of the Top 10 though his bad play doesn't get brought up. And Dream's had subpar series like in '90 vs the Lakers or in '96 vs Seattle; both sweeps.

What I do see: 1-9, 2011, 'Chokerlain', Shaq's sweeps, Kobe shooting his teams out of games etc. Hakeem? He sorta gets the Duncan treatment which is with kid gloves. Maybe its his general, lowkey personality. Who knows? No hate here just an observation.

[SATAN]

Yes. As you mentioned young Hakeem was poor intangibly (this matters... guys like magic and Bird lift teammates up) and old Hakeem (the one who colluded with Barkley and Pippen) was no longer good.

So he had a two year run where his Finals competition also had trash help ~ John Starks as a 2nd option, and the other had HOF Clyde Drexler going off.

And he did it an era where MJ was retired so all of a sudden teams mustered the courage to win and could play without fear.

You are a very weird person.

Anyway, I don't see how he is overrated. His peak was insane. He was a great player. The focus on lists and chips (as if one single player can defeat a whole squad by himself) is silly and toxic.

[warriorfan]

You are a very weird person.

Thanks dr p

[gonzaldo]

Seattle were a bit of bogey team for hakeem, they eliminated him 4 times, who knows what happens if they dont choke in 1995 or if he doesnt bump into them so often...

[Smoke117]

He is a bit. The whole David Robinson thing always comes up, but Big Dave was far, far more impactful during the regular season and in general. When things became a grind in the playoffs Hakeem's post skills shined, but in general he couldn't carry a team to the playoffs the way Robinson did for a decade. Neither had great talent around them, but Robinson would give you 10 more wins.

[Round Mound]

Where do you rank him all time?

Somewhere in the top 10.

[Im Still Ballin]

2018, LBJ with his next best player as JR Smith beat a 59 win Raptors team and 53 win Celtics team.

In 2007 he beat a 53 win Pistons team.

Hakeem wasn't young tho. He lost in the first round for half a decade straight, then missed the playoffs all between the ages of 24-30.

If he carried scrubs to a title, how couldn't he carry scrubs (he had Otis Thorpe and Sleepy Floyd) past round 1 when the West was weaker than it has ever been?

Only years he won he did so dominating from the 3 point line when the line was shortened.

55 wins actually.

Also beat a 48 win Indiana in the first round.

[Phoenix]

That's fair and I dont disagree.

Relative to most of the Top 10 though his bad play doesn't get brought up. And Dream's had subpar series like in '90 vs the Lakers or in '96 vs Seattle; both sweeps.

What I do see: 1-9, 2011, 'Chokerlain', Shaq's sweeps, Kobe shooting his teams out of games etc. Hakeem? He sorta gets the Duncan treatment which is with kid gloves. Maybe its his general, lowkey personality. Who knows? No hate here just an observation.

That would be my best guess. Thing is, if you go back to say 90 or 91 I don't think Hakeem was viewed on *that* level, it was like MJ, Magic, Barkley, Robinson was the hot new talent, Malone, Ewing playing in a major media market getting the buzz. Hakeem was always under the radar and when MJ retired, he took advantage of the Bulls temporary drop-off better than everyone else.

As I said before, if I MJ had never retired I believe the Bulls win in 94 BUT if Grant still leaves anyway for Orlando, I think the combination of natural wear and tear from a 5 year title run takes it toll combined with the Bulls lacking up front. Hakeem with (hypothetically) only one chip ( 95) but with all his other accolades is still at worst a top 15 player, or top 20 if he never won a title. We have guys like Malone and Barkley in the top 20 normally and neither won a chip. And IMHO, when people talk about 'well he never got out of the first round, or never got to the finals' etc etc....... I imagine most great players at this level consider anything short of a championship a failed season, whether they were bounced in the first round or lost in the conference finals.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Why is it we rarely mention Hakeem's failures, and only focus on a 2 year period in which he won?
Because Olajuwon is never mentioned in the GOAT debate and didn't play in an era where idiot message board trolls would say a player sucks any year he didn't win a championship.

[Phoenix]

Because Olajuwon is never mentioned in the GOAT debate and didn't play in an era where idiot message board trolls would say a player sucks any year he didn't win a championship.

This is the way.

[Jasper]

Akeem was learning to play defense the first years of his career , so he was more less a defensive specialist against bigger centers.

I remember before his championship years , he worked his ass off to develop what we know today is some of the best foot work in the history of the league.
MJ studied him and hence the turn around fade jumper was patented by MJ and copied by Kobe.
This was all based on Akeem learning to get a shoot over larger opponents that he initially had issues with.

[HoopsNY]

Tim Duncan said that Robert Horry basically had superstar talent, but horrible work ethic. He was like the regular Joe through out the work week, but could turn it on when it counted.

Those numbers you posted I didn't know but are revealing. So basically Hakeem topped off his repeat with Clyde (Wade) and Horry (Dray... but better).

So Hakeem won a couple titles with what essentially was a super team.

And then people acted like he only carried scrubs.

That's the power of media deception.

Amazing; are you sure you watched Horry in the 1993-94 playoffs and finals? Horry averaged 10/6/4 on a woeful 32/31/61 splits. Yet somehow a second year Horry, who was never an All-Star, let alone All-NBA, was part of a super-team?

The 1994 Knicks had 3 All-Stars (Ewing, Oakley, Starks), and beat a Chicago team with 3 All-Stars (Pippen, Armstrong, Grant). Houston had 1 All-Star in Hakeem. Yet Hakeem's team was a super-team?

The 1995 Magic had Grant (All-Defensive 2nd Team in 1994 and an All-Star/All-Defensive just the year prior), Penny and Shaq (two MVP candidates), and guys like Anderson and Scott who were legit 20 PPG threats before Shaq and Penny arrived.

Yet Hakeem played on a super-team? Unbelievable

[Real Men Wear Green]

Amazing; are you sure you watched Horry in the 1993-94 playoffs and finals? Horry averaged 10/6/4 on a woeful 32/31/61 splits. Yet somehow a second year Horry, who was never an All-Star, let alone All-NBA, was part of a super-team?

The 1994 Knicks had 3 All-Stars (Ewing, Oakley, Starks), and beat a Chicago team with 3 All-Stars (Pippen, Armstrong, Grant). Houston had 1 All-Star in Hakeem. Yet Hakeem's team was a super-team?

The 1995 Magic had Grant (All-Defensive 2nd Team in 1994 and an All-Star/All-Defensive just the year prior), Penny and Shaq (two MVP candidates), and guys like Anderson and Scott who were legit 20 PPG threats before Shaq and Penny arrived.

Yet Hakeem played on a super-team? Unbelievable
tpols has a unique perspective.